Whilst bored during Easter break, I began watching my sister playing Tom Clancy's Splinter Cell on her PSX2, and let's just say that for someone who is extremely unkeen on censorship of any form at all, I was disgusted.
The heart of my issue is the story, or lack thereof, and the methods required to achieve the game's goals. Basically, your task is to go into various Evil Dudes'? facilities to prevent "something" from happening. To do this, you are required not to alert attention to yourself. Of course, we all know that the best way to do this is find enemy units who are facing the other way and head shotify them before they turn around and, maybe, see you.
As you've probably gathered, the concept doesn't exactly warm with me. "See that guy over there? Kill him with one shot, fool. Then achieve the specious goals we only mention in the manual, which we hardly expect anyone to read, but is there so we don't get grilled by fundies." Ok, there are a few storyesque elements within the game, but they're simply colour, and do very little to justify the vital god given task.
In addition to the poor basis for killing people who presumably have no idea you are there, the way the game play is dull as hell. Typical console style interactive movie fare. Sneak up on sucker, nullify his/her life, get the secret code, open the locked door, rinse, repeat*.
I apologise to fans of the book, and Clancy's work in general, though feel the need to tell you all that his work hardly appeals to me, but can see that it would to a few groups of people.
-Cob
*C will take me to court for the "rinse, repeat" which I've stolen from the current poll on his great Site o' Fun. I await the lawsuit with baited breath. It'll beat the hell out of my current CS assignment.
I really enjoyed Splinter Cell. I played through it trying to kill as few people as possible. In fact I only recall one place in the game where it was absolutely necessary to kill someone to move forward.
I found the sneaky game play to be a great change of pace from standard shooters, and the nonlethal tactics available to you to be much more fun than the hacking, slashing, puncturing, impaling, eviscerating and decapitating that goes on in most military-themed tactical video games.
I really enjoyed Splinter Cell. I played through it trying to
kill as few people as possible. In fact I only recall one place
in the game where it was absolutely necessary to kill someone to
move forward.
Time to get back to fully researching something prior to slamming it, I guess. I'll have to play through the game myself and revise my thoughts.
I really enjoyed Splinter Cell. I played through it trying to
kill as few people as possible. In fact I only recall one place
in the game where it was absolutely necessary to kill someone to
move forward.
I found the sneaky game play to be a great change of pace from
standard shooters, and the nonlethal tactics available to you to
be much more fun than the hacking, slashing, puncturing,
impaling, eviscerating and decapitating that goes on in most
military-themed tactical video games.
Sounds similar to Deus Ex. You can choose to be stealthy and incapacitate rather than kill, or if you're a sick mofo, you can get all the explosives and heavy weapons you can and kill anything that moves.
Whilst bored during Easter break, I began watching my sister
playing Tom Clancy's Splinter Cell on her PSX2, and let's just
say that for someone who is extremely unkeen on censorship of
any form at all, I was disgusted.
The heart of my issue is the story, or lack thereof, and the
methods required to achieve the game's goals. Basically, your
task is to go into various Evil Dudes'? facilities to prevent
"something" from happening. To do this, you are
required not to alert attention to yourself. Of course, we all
know that the best way to do this is find enemy units who are
facing the other way and head shotify them before they turn
around and, maybe, see you.
As you've probably gathered, the concept doesn't exactly warm
with me. "See that guy over there? Kill him with one shot,
fool. Then achieve the specious goals we only mention in the
manual, which we hardly expect anyone to read, but is there so
we don't get grilled by fundies." Ok, there are a few
storyesque elements within the game, but they're simply colour,
and do very little to justify the vital god given task.
In addition to the poor basis for killing people who presumably
have no idea you are there, the way the game play is dull as
hell. Typical console style interactive movie fare. Sneak up on
sucker, nullify his/her life, get the secret code, open the
locked door, rinse, repeat*.
I apologise to fans of the book, and Clancy's work in general,
though feel the need to tell you all that his work hardly
appeals to me, but can see that it would to a few groups of
people.
-Cob
*C will take me to court for the "rinse, repeat" which
I've stolen from the current poll on his great Site o' Fun . I
await the lawsuit with baited breath. It'll beat the hell out of
my current CS assignment.
There are a number of missions where you aren't allowed to kill anyone or it ends. For example, infiltrating the CIA (or some organization like that) to gather intelligence. Although, there's nothing like zooming in on the bad guys with the sniper scope. They are, after all, BAD GUYS.
Comments
The heart of my issue is the story, or lack thereof, and the methods required to achieve the game's goals. Basically, your task is to go into various Evil Dudes'? facilities to prevent "something" from happening. To do this, you are required not to alert attention to yourself. Of course, we all know that the best way to do this is find enemy units who are facing the other way and head shotify them before they turn around and, maybe, see you.
As you've probably gathered, the concept doesn't exactly warm with me. "See that guy over there? Kill him with one shot, fool. Then achieve the specious goals we only mention in the manual, which we hardly expect anyone to read, but is there so we don't get grilled by fundies." Ok, there are a few storyesque elements within the game, but they're simply colour, and do very little to justify the vital god given task.
In addition to the poor basis for killing people who presumably have no idea you are there, the way the game play is dull as hell. Typical console style interactive movie fare. Sneak up on sucker, nullify his/her life, get the secret code, open the locked door, rinse, repeat*.
I apologise to fans of the book, and Clancy's work in general, though feel the need to tell you all that his work hardly appeals to me, but can see that it would to a few groups of people.
-Cob
*C will take me to court for the "rinse, repeat" which I've stolen from the current poll on his great Site o' Fun. I await the lawsuit with baited breath. It'll beat the hell out of my current CS assignment.
I really enjoyed Splinter Cell. I played through it trying to kill as few people as possible. In fact I only recall one place in the game where it was absolutely necessary to kill someone to move forward.
I found the sneaky game play to be a great change of pace from standard shooters, and the nonlethal tactics available to you to be much more fun than the hacking, slashing, puncturing, impaling, eviscerating and decapitating that goes on in most military-themed tactical video games.
Time to get back to fully researching something prior to slamming it, I guess. I'll have to play through the game myself and revise my thoughts.
-Cob
Sounds similar to Deus Ex. You can choose to be stealthy and incapacitate rather than kill, or if you're a sick mofo, you can get all the explosives and heavy weapons you can and kill anything that moves.
--
Chief
There are a number of missions where you aren't allowed to kill anyone or it ends. For example, infiltrating the CIA (or some organization like that) to gather intelligence. Although, there's nothing like zooming in on the bad guys with the sniper scope. They are, after all, BAD GUYS.
Marius