Alby_da_Wolf on 25 April 2013
| Akvod said: Splinter Cell was simple. Just stay in the shadows and don't get seen. I have big issues with their "options" approach. I strongly believe that good stealth and horror games need to make the player WEAKER than the enemies. There's just absolutely no suspense or incentive to play stealthy if you can just go around guns blazing. Extrinsic incentives for stealthy gameplay like points or unlocks just make the game feel like a chore. It doesn't give you a sense that you went through a challenge, and that you somehow BEAT the game. Instead, you just feel like you completed an "achievement" or met the requirements to get some points. It's awesome when you're in a tight spot, and manage to stealth away in Splinter Cell. It's awesome getting that feeling of panic when you screw up. There's better ways to give more "options" in Splinter Cell. Make the maps less linear, and add multiple ways to maneuver around the map. Add some randomization with the AI placement/patrols, as well as behavior. Not fucking let people auto target enemies. |
I totally agree! That's what made the first two Thief so good, while the third, although not bad, is inferior, both due to the maps split in parts (unwanted "gift" of making it also for XB1, that hadn't enough RAM) and to the "spamming" of rare arrows in the hub levels, making missions easier, as Garret can always start them with his quiver maxed out, not to mention the climbing gloves making things easier than the rope arrows.
