Splinter Cell vs MGS

[sieanr]

Morgyn said:
Splinter Cell, the original was an awesome game. Not better than MGS, but probably better than MGS2.

The rest of the splintercell series has dropped in my opinion, the last on the 360 was frankly poor, then again I thought MGS3 was weak too.

Personally I don't hold out on either being any good =P

I'm going to echo this sentiment.

MGS was very cool and revolutionary, but the series has just been dropping since. Someone said the games felt contrived, and thats exactly what has happened. The original did have an over the top sort of story and some other ridiculousness, but that was forgivable. But since then the story has only gotten worse and the cutscenes even more inane. Basically the series has fallen victim to a sense of self importance.

SC has been decreasing in quality as Ubi tries to cash in off its franchise. It hasn't done enough to keep the quality of the titles up or to make the series unique. It also has been weak in the story department, although it has the Tom Clancy name attached. But the one thing the series absolutely nailed was co-op and online. Both of those things expanded the stealth action genre and worked very well. The online in this series is something konami should take notes from.

Both franchises have fallen victim to different demons, and I don't hold out that great of a hope for either. I think the stealth genre needs a new ip to reinvent the genre and really bring it into the next gen. I have to say that I think MGS4 is heading in the right direction by making it take place in an active war zone. This could really change things, but the same was said about outdoor environments in MGS3 and that turned out to be nothing more than choose the right camo. Also Assassins Creed did some interesting things with stealth gameplay, but that didn't work out nearly as well as it could have.