Splinter cells

victor

victor

Antediluvian as Feck
Orderite
I love the Splinter cell games. I love them so much I can replay them dozen of times, and still have fun. I played through the entire series without killing any guards. I'm really looking forward to Splinter cell 4. The whole Tom Clancy atmosphere is nice, but what I love the most is the gameplay. It would fit in anywhere, in any setting. WW2, fantasy, burglary, even post-apocalyptic. In fact, I would love to see a post-apocalyptic stealth game. The whole genre needs more games, in my opinion. Not many good ones out there.
 
Bug-riddled and very little acrobatics. I didn't think it was that much about Stealth.
 
I'm playing through the first one right now. Had it for a long time but never finished it, don't know why.

I'd love to try the co-op mode from the Chaos Theory.
 
It's awesome, especially on console (a lot of lag and communication problems on PC, unless you LAN). If only there were more than four levels. I hope the 4th game will have plenty.
 
The Overseer said:
Bug-riddled and very little acrobatics. I didn't think it was that much about Stealth.
Click to expand...

Not about stealth.... :shock: Really? no seriously... really?

Cheers
Sven
 
The Overseer said:
Not compared to Splinter cell.
Click to expand...

You have no idea what you are talking about I am afraid. I played through Splinter Cell only once or twice playing the sneaky monkey. Try doing that in Thief. Thief also is based a lot more upon wit, quick thinking and like what Bog sends rather then just a simple, stupid rail of a stealth game.
 
I have always loved the Splinter Cell games, ever since the first was released all those years ago on the Xbox... Everytime I play it, even the original, it sends chills up my spine how detailed and almost realistic it is...

Hopefully any further installments of the game do not change the sense that Splinter Cell originally had.

But Thief is also a great game, but I still see Splinter Cell as the better of the two.
 
Still, they are apparently two subgenres:

Splinter Cell is "Get in, get out and kthxbye"

Thief is "Get in, get everything that's worth something and ain't nailed down, glued and taped to the wall, sneak out"

Besides, it's a lot harder in Thief I to accomplish a mission succesfully than in Splinter Cell.

Oh, and non-linear design of levels. In Thief you can pretty much take any route to finish each stage of the story. SC? Well...

Besides, "OMGGeorgiaWantsToTakeOverZeWorld!!!111!!" plot is worse than "Trickster/Mechanists/Gamall want to fuck up world real bad".
 
In my head, Thief wins it. In my opinion, Garret is deffinitely a cooler character. I love the atmposphere of the city, and enjoyed getting a small glimpse of it through the "hub" system in the third game.

Thief has also managed to be a decent horror game. Hell, look at the hammerite ghosts, or the ShaleBridge Cradle.

As Mikael said, the levels, while not to open, are deffinitely more non-linear, then that of Splinter Cell, which is simply on rails.
 
I do agree with both of you here, with the whole 'linearness' of SC, but I do like it more IMO, as it is set in an environment that is somewhat more realistic than Thief... But I do enjoy both games, SC moreso.
 
The latest Splinter cell game does offer you more options. I really couldn't get over the randomness of the AI in Thief 3. Either way, I enjoy Splinter cell more.
 
Why must the world be realistic. I have always found the world of Thief to be an excellent, urban landscape, with the right balance of technology, fantasy, and horror.
 
I remember playing the first Splinter Cell and chuckling at a line in Grinko's profile ("war crimes that would make Milosevic blush") and a conversation between a couple of Chinese soldiers (where one soldier tried to convince the other that McDonald's is the perfect terrorist network).

Those were the only memorable moment in the entire game. The plot was pathetic (which is not all that surprising, seeing as it's a Tom Clancy game), but it was the utter linearity that killed the game for me.
 
I don't see why linearity is necessarily a bad thing. I like an open-ended RPG, but action games need a faster pace.
 
The Overseer said:
I don't see why linearity is necessarily a bad thing. I like an open-ended RPG, but action games need a faster pace.
Click to expand...
Non-linearity doesn't need to affect game pace, unless the player is of the sort that spends five minutes contemplating each choice.

But that's beside the point, since Splinter Cell is a stealth game and hence slow-paced by definition.
 
It gave you a lot more choices, so you could complete missions more easily. Also, there were more darker places, in my opinion. The missions in Korea and Japan weren't that easy, though.
 
Also, in the majority of the missions, you could kill all your enemies. throughout the entire game, i used about 6 sticky shockers, 4 ring air foils and 2 sticky cameras, and 1 gas gernade. In the first 2 games i was always running out of LTL rounds.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top