Being the OP doesn't give you a right to troll everyones responses in the thread, I disagree with most of your posts but chose to express myself in the politest not confrontational way possible.  I highly doubt you were ever going to play the game when you heard it wasn't coming to PS3, everything from that point on was clutching at straws trying to hate on the game, its boring and there is no debate to be had with someone so blinkered and ignorant of others viewpoint when it comes to this game.

As long as you haven't played the game you have no reason to make this thread.

I liked Convictions but I didn't love it like the first and third one. I'm not going to nut hug the game because its on one of my favorite systems, It has major issues when it comes to the series as a whole and thats a problem for some of the fans of the series. The AI is not what they (IGN) said it would be (There are times when the AI would breach a room through a door in a group of four or five, I would throw frag and no joke they would stand there for a second or two before attempting to move and by then its two late). The stealth elements from previous games are almost non existing. No alarms through most of the game, so the challenge of taking this guy out hide his body before this dude comes then take out the lights here to take this guy out without an alarm going off is not there.

The approach I took through most of this game was " Hey I'll just run up on this guy, use him as a shield mark three of four guys then take down the last dude so I can get another three mark and execute for group I run into next." The goggles don't come into play until late in game ( last hour or so) and it allows you to see through walls ( which becomes a problem later because its hard to see cover so I just didn't use them). They changed the whole game compared the first three in the series and that whats so disappointing. It just doesn't feel like Splinter Cell anymore.

I voted Yes, but tbh didn't understand the question or read the op :'(

Just because you can doesn't mean you have to... I watched my friend run and gun all the way through most of the original and in the 3rd it's not much different.  They don't take away your option of stealth they simply give you the option of force and really it's always been there if you wanted it... they had artificial limiters in the first two games but really you could just clear house in the 3rd.  They show you that the current system works in total stealth in the 3rd echelon building when you're sneaking in.  You can play the game just like you use to play the older splinter cell games minus carrying the bodies

You did not post anything constructive though. You didn't post the reason why you have that opinion. I already knew there was the possible answer of "It's change, not revolution", but what I wanted was a unique perspective I cannot get by myself, WHY you believe "It's change, not revolution".

In short, what you posted what the same as saying "I agree" or "I disagree". It's useless, it's redundant, it doesn't add to my knowledge. I added a poll specificly so I can avoid answers like yours.

There is a poll, and there is a thread. The poll is where I go to see where the general consensus is. The thread is where I get the perspectives and insights of that community. You gave me ZERO insight.

And look, you STILL fail to post anything constructive. Post anything for god's sake. Post "There's still Fisher in the game.", "I feel that enough of Fisher's personality is there", "I believe that the game still doesn't allow you to run and gun".

SOMETHING specfic. You could have quoted me and said "I disagree HERE *quote*"

But all you said was:

Games change while some gamers refuse to evolve, its really not such an unusual occurence.

You make the contrary claim that Conviction is an evolution, and you accuse me and the people that agree with me as being against change. Fine, cool. That was the poll. So WHY though? Explain yourself, I don't care if you call me a troll or even a child molestor, just be constructive by providing some actual insight and reasons.

Someone who played the game can copy paste it, and the opinion will be just valid or invalid.

Please, since you have played the game and have more insight than me, it should be easy for you to give me some specific examples that contradict my arguements. Please post that, I don't care if you disagree with me, just don't throw away my entire opinion and discredit because of who I am. Look at the opinion itself, and crticize THAT, not ME.

*waits*

Maybe you would have understand the question if your read the OP and watched the videos that came with it...

Honestly, I designed that question so that it'll force people to actually read my original opinion, and respond to it, positvely or negatively, and most of all, constructively...

>.<

C'mon VGChartz.

But the whole point of stealth is that you're underpowered, that you're unable to use the option of force, but you have to use STEALTH

>.<

Making stealth an option, literally makes it an action game with stealth tacked on, like Uncharted 2.

I believe, in my personal opinion, that a good stealth or survival game MUST underpower the character, and make the option of brute force an extremely tough and undesireable one. If you give the option to allow a player to use force with ease and with little consequence, when the palyer character becomes as or more powerful as the enemies, it becomes primarily an action game. For what incentive is there to play stealthily, other than to get a score or achievement? You can make Uncharted 2 a stealth game then, because you can willingly play purely steathily, but that's a crap definition.

Again,

A stealth game is one in which stealth is the most effective way to handle a situation, and action/force is an extremely inefficient and ineffective way.

Do you disagree with that definition, or do you believe Conviction satisfies that definition?

I would disagree with this.  I do believe, if a game isn't played, the tone and wording of the post needs to be differents.  I don't believe it is appropriate to do a pontificating messages that is close to a troll message.... and I still believe this, even when I MAY do it from time to time.  I do believe one can ask if the tone of Conviction and approach has made Splinter Cell no longer the same type of game it was, and we are into something different.  I don't think posting the series is "dead" is appropriate though.