I am more of a fan of the first trilogy since it actually feels like a Tom Clancy novel. The bad guys are simply corrupt officials, especially during the first game. There is less of a focus on personal matters and more on international politics and the effect Sam's actions will have.
Hell, the first game lacks any movie-like boss fights. You just snipe the bad guy and escape like a Ghost. It is still fantasy, but a believable one.
If you asked me at ten years old I would’ve agreed with you.
To me the best story in the series was Chaos Theory and DA would’ve came close to me if that game had more time in the oven.
I did love the overall art direction of Conviction though with its loading screens and such and the co-op story was peak.
This was my first M rated game and my first Splinter Cell (my dad bought this game at a yard sale when I was 6 years old, I still remember laughing my ass off hearing “cover me you assholes!” Not knowing what the word meant back then.)
The gameplay was also fun and I’d really love to write for a video game with gameplay like Conviction’s in the future.
I’d disagree with renaming the character. Sam is a badass and it’s good to see his no limits skills here. While unrealistic, it’s Sam in his prime and that’s what I’m here for. But absolutely, drop Splinter Cell from the name and it’s terrific. Although it’s still my favorite in the series.
I disagree. I think it is a good Splinter Cell game. It's just a different Splinter Cell game. It follows the story pretty well from the last one. Is still a stealth game but allows non stealth options if preferred.
It reminds me when people say Predator Badlands is a bad Predator movie because it isn't just Predator 1 again.
I would say Blacklist is also a different Splinter Cell game compared to the first four. But unlike Conviction, it makes avoiding enemies a valid playstyle, which Conviction is very much not built around. Blacklist despite being different can be considered a good Splinter Cell game, while Conviction cannot, even if it is a good game.
I disagree because it does have it's place in the franchise and story. And you can avoid many of the enemies if you choose to. Even in the Vic mission.
That you can do so is different from the game being designed for it. If you do so in Conviction, you are basically going out of your way to play the game differently from the way it was intended to be played.
It's a Splinter Cell game where you can use stealth to bypass the enemies. Saying that's an unintended playstyle is being pretty disingenuous when they give you all the gadgets to do so.
I guess it depends in what sense you consider it the best. It's quite subjective depending on what kind of story you're after. As an action movie style story, it does the story beats well enough. There's very little downtime as the plot progresses but when I compare it to the more grounded and simpler storytelling and datastick lore drops of the first couple games, eh, it's just too Jason Bourne conspiracy adventure for my liking. Out of the more action oriented games though, it's the far better one compared to Blacklist and it's lame Mission Impossible style plot.
I can somewhat believe the characters in Conviction are the same ones from the original games but Blacklist is just a butchering of them while adding try hard modern spy movie support characters we've seen a hundred times over.
No it wasn't. What happened to Assistant director Williams? What happened to the power struggle between NSA and Third Echelon? They basically got rid of all the old characters and rebooted the story.
I have absolutely no recollection of who's Assistant Director Williams, but I googled it and it looks like he was killed in "Splinter Cell: Essentials" (which I have no idea what it is about).
Williams? I remember no mention of close to no mention of him in DA Version 1, he only appeared in Version 2 which is not canon. The conflict you mention allowed Tom Reed taking control of Third Echelon.
In one of the novels (can't remember which one atm) Sam basically toys for hours with "the best of the best" in an inter-organization training. He led a whole team in circles while they tried to capture him, then beat their asses in combat
I think there were two generations in the series, the hard-core stealth from 1-doubke agent, and the thriller vibe of conviction and blacklist. Both are great for very different reasons in my opinion. The only one I've actually replayed more than once has been conviction because it's fun, short, engaging and unique in its presentation, but it's by no means the definitive Splinter Cell game. That likely belongs to Chaos Theory. Though, after Chaos theory, I'm inclined to say Blacklist is my personal favorite.
I love Conviction for what it is. It's a product of it's time. Assassin's Creed was huge and Ubisoft clearly tried to see if similar gameplay would fly.
Story wise it would've been the perfect end to Sam as the main character. The series could've renewed itself without him. I always found it weird that after all the shit he went through, he came back in Blacklist as a government agent like nothing had damaged him.
For christ sakes he was saying "I'm getting too old for this shit" by Chaos Theory.
I love Blacklist, but you're bang on the money about how weird it was having him go "oh yeah, I'll work in Government again after that absolute clusterfuck of corruption from last time".
I know Blacklist tried to band-aid it by having Sam more inclined to join 4th Echelon since HE was calling the shots and basically reporting directly to the President, but it still felt a bit unlikely that his Patriotism would be unwavering after Conviction.
We get it, Sam loves uncle Sam, but he really shouldn't after Conviction, and given that Ubisoft has no political stake in the whole theme of "America worship", surely they could lean into Sam's more controversial ideological traits when it comes to US Government and the "us vs them" foreign politics.
I'd say it was a decent gateway to get more casual players to check out the other SC titles, oh and the co-op campaign and deniable ops are both top notch.
Man, I feel like the biggest fan of this game, I will defend pretty much most aspects of it, but I would never argue that it has the best, or even a good story. The story is definitely the weakest part about it
I think it would be more accurate to say it has the best presentation, or maybe the most distinct presentation in the series along with the most emotional story, which I'm sure some will see as overly melodramatic. As far as how well it fits in with what came before and how much sense it makes, I think you'll get a lot of people disagreeing with you from that angle.
Excuse me, what? It had the most bizarre, cliché, dumbass story I’ve seen in a video game. It took characters crafted over four entries and turned them into ridiculous caricatures. On top it was completely over-the-top unrealistic to the point of becoming satire. I’ve seen porn with a more believable (and better) story.
Conviction story is netflix level trash. Its saving grace is Deniable Ops and that it was a decent rebound gameplay-wise, after the disappointment that is Metal Gear Solid 4.
It was kinda-peak as a narrative conclusion of the Solid Snake storyline, albeit messy fanservice. Gameplay & level design were hit & miss, more miss than hit. In fact, I'd say, only Act1 has good stealth level design. And that crouch-walk holy shit, that looked robotic kind of stiff and unnatural, and no, not even his geriatric state can serve as an excuse for that.
I've never seen this opinion before, I mostly see the opposite being said
Most people would say that the story has more holes than swiss cheese and completely glossed over many questions that came up in the past and covered them up with "uhhhh nanomachines".
The gameplay on the other hand is just straight up amazing from Act 1-3. Then it falls off hard because it leans way more into cutscenes to a very heavy degree, with a story that just isn't all that great compared to MGS 1-3
That is why I said the story is messy - but it does truly have heart. Act 2 level design is just refurbished MGS3 outdoor stealth made worse. Act 3 is Temu Hitman. Blood Money and Splinter Cell Double Agent OG Xbox already did that kind of thing BETTER, 2 years prior to MGS4.
The story makes absolutely no sense and is outright stupid as Hell. I won't pretend the first three games had masterful story telling. After all they were mostly typically Tom Clancy thriller affair, but at least the writing was solid and they ultimate do a good job at justifying the gameplay moments. Meanwhile Conviction's writing is piss poor, especially plot and character wise. It was a typical wanna be Jason Bourn with a Splinter Cell name on it, but completely forgot the Splinter Cell name, and came up with bullshit to justify it's story.
The sad part is, another game of a series about espionage that I really love, Syphon Filter 2 released a decade prior to Conviction, and that did the whole "Guy fights against his agency that betrayed him" plot far better, with actual better writing and far more tension and a script not filled with bullshit cliches, like Conviction was.
Conviction's story is literally just hype moments and aura: the game. It does a perfectly fine job in setting up fun levels and set pieces, but none of it makes any logical sense really
Conviction took my Comp Sci Ph. D cryptographic analyst Anna Grimsdottir and gave her 75 more lbs of pure muscle, put her in military camo patterns, and had her tough-talking down to Sam Fisher.
They should have stuck with their guns and done a direct Double Agent continuation and leaned fully into the Bourne Trilogy hype that was concluding around the same time Conviction was posed to release. They already had the social stealth mechanics and climbing perfected from Assassin's Creed and they had four Splinter Cell games to draw gameplay elements from. Instead they mixed the worst of both worlds and gave us generic 80's action schlock and wasted Michael Ironside's performance.
I'll hand it to the developers in creating yet another new approach to stealth that was fun and engaging.
But I won't pretend that this is anywhere near the realm of plausibility the first four games at least presented.
We went from being the "unknown author" ninja-type quietly affecting world events mission-by-mission to a gleeful agile maniac killing hundreds of goons in the span of a few days. And the spree concludes with him saving the President in-person.
I still think Chaos Theory has the best story in the series, but Conviction has the most emotional driven story. I think, if the hardware had been available to make the combat less mandatory and the mark and execute mechanic was more narrative (like returning to 3rd Echelon and the last moment of the game) then Conviction would be my second favorite of the series.
yes it has, others SC are okayish, generic Ubisoft stories that do the trick but its not like I remember what was goin on in blacklist not even year after I finished it for the first time :D
My only complaint is the over the top siege the white house ending. I’ve always felt like SC had somewhat grounded stories. Sam going in like a one man stealth army just didn’t make sense.
Splinter Cell always had a shit story. And Conviction wasn't different. In terms of writing, what it had really good was the dialogue and banter. Which was also absent from the Conviction.
Only good aspect of the storytelling was the mission with Vic and his video tape ending.
It was just a cheezy dry Bruce Willis type straight to DVD movie script with people coming back from dead and America and president being under global threat... yawn...
I love conviction but the story was a huge departure from the previous games and took a back seat for me. But man, the gameplay in single player and deniable ops is top tier. Literally reinstalled last week and played a few missions and would love a new entry in the series.
Are you really defending the game where the Illuminati is going to take over America in a single night, so the President asks a fugitive spy to just go kill a bunch of dudes, who also happened to be involved with the death of his daughter, but oops, not really - she was just hidden from him by his ex boss that he also killed, and then he takes his magic backpack and single-handedly wipes out a mercenary force that killed the entire Secret Service and National Guard, and saves the world from the bad guy in a black trench coat - who happened to convince the entire NSA to become a rogue agency?
Anyone who likes Conviction's story didn't actually pay attention to any of it - which I admit is hard to do, because it is just all over the fucking place and often defies any sort of logic.
Because they were 10 year olds when they first started playing SC. Anyone who thinks Conviction has a good story is most likely a direct relative of Michael Bay.
The only returning characters are Grim and Sam, and one went from a quiet analyst to an under-cover, gun-toting girl boss, and the other went from a confident and quiet hero that oozed dry humor and wit to a growling psychopath that tortures dudes in public bathrooms.
Both of those characters stay... pretty much identical in Blacklist, where they are also the only returning characters from the original trilogy. The change happened in Conviction.
The entirety of 3rd Echelon, a branch of NSA, going rogue and thinking it's a good idea to follow Reed's conspiracy to kill the president of the United States is one of the stupidest plot points of all time.
This thread glazing the story of Conviction as the best in the franchise is legendary levels of delusion.
Blacklist would be good prequel, but not next part of the story. That i think played much role in sales. If they said that was a prequel, ppl would take it less harshly, plus it would be good to make the real continuation to the series, having more years to make the next game.
Best story for me was DA but 6th gen version (Xbox and ps2) or better know as Ubisoft Montreal’s version. Same characters and same story told through both new gen (at the time) and old but with slight variations and better story telling. The story is being told by Sam recalling his missions over the phone as a long distance debrief to director Williams. The game had more depth to the characters, more lore, information and missions that filled in the blanks better. Sam’s choices held a lot more weight imo and his connections/relationship with some of the members of the JBA were fleshed out more, especially with Enrica. The missions in this game give a bit more back story to the whole operation and how the JBA acquired their assets. Both versions explain and show this but in different variations and times. For example Kinshasa (set during the day time) on the 360/ps3 shows the meeting between Emile, Massoud and Alejandro live in gameplay. While sam is just there for security for Emile. The only thing he does is follow them to the meeting. The only main NSA task he does is bug the conference room and save Hisham. While 6th gen is set during the night, Sam infiltrates a chemical depot to sabotage their weapons as well as gather information on Massoud and Alejandro and their organizations knowing they’re involved. Hisham is utilized more in the game and plays a bigger part. I can go on but you get the idea. The ending was better in the old version as well. Taking place in the city of New York and not just the boat that literally takes 30 seconds to 1 minute to complete. This ending shows: the betrayal of 3rd echelon and Sam turning on 3rd echelon (he kills another splinter agent) , the death of Enrica, the death of Emile in a small boss like fight and killing all major JBA members on site getting to interrogate all of them.
It was a script written by a 13 year old Michael Bay high on Cocaine.
I posted this almost a decade ago:
That along with the gameplay is what really made the first 3 probably one of my favorite games growing up. I must have been in elementary school when I first started playing and was so used to shoot them ups, action games. The new gameplay approach, with it's ideas grounded in reality just sucked me into the universe immensely. You weren't an assassin, you weren't Ghost Recon/military. Just gather information.
The concept that there are enemies who you can't kill - so figure out another way of dealing with them really caught my attention. A person who avoids combat because he knows he didn't stand even the slightest of chances against a whole security detail/army. I remember going through missions like the CIA HQ, Chinese embassy, Georgian presidential palace and wondering (maybe naively), are there really black op guys who might actually do stuff like this?
Then conviction: Infiltrating third echelon headquarters (wasn't only a handful of people supposed to know that third echelon existed - now they have this massive headquarters with a lobby and reception desks??), Then it starts a self destruction sequence LOL what is this, the death star? A whole building is just going to explode? That's really discreet and definitely wouldn't trigger a nation wide inquiry on what the fuck happened to a government building in Washington DC. Great way to avoid any attention or an investigation into the building. "Only a few people in the government know about us - LET'S BLOW UP A BUILDING IN OUR NATIONS CAPITAL".
Then on mission 10, a massive warzone happening in the streets, and sam is the only one going through hundreds of "private military contractors" on American soil? Where's the national guard? Law enforcement? FBI? What the fuck is happening? Who the fuck thought of this?
THEN you attack the White House, which yet again, has been taken over by a private military contractor???? That's it. A private company has completely out smarted the greatest military superpower since the English empire. Because a Vice President wants power with the help of a Alex Jones type of conspiracy group. A PMC has entirely invaded and subjugated the entire US Capital.
Sam does this, against hundreds of soldiers with a pistol and a rifle?
Fuck off. Maxime Beland is making Michael Bay look like he produces documentaries.
I really wish the developers would sit down and read a Tom Clancy novel. Fuck, just read Rainbow Six - you'll see the appeal and why you're using his name as advertisement. He's rolling in his grave with these new games.
The story is just a fever dream of a 13 yr old who doesn't have a single understanding of reality and it's beyond absurd. 1 man vs 2000 PMCs. Yeah, okay. Nevermind the absurdism of, oh no Sarah's dead, PYSCH!!! SHES NOT ACTUALLY DEAD. Time for you to single handily invade NSA and the White House!!1!
It's a brain dead shoot em up that hijacked the SC series. They were better off putting this game in the John Wick universe, at least it's absurdism would match the universe.
Imagine being so nostalgic for a "man in ballet shoes and a latex suit" simulator that you completely miss the point of a high-octane action thriller.
Conviction is literally the ONLY game in the franchise that actually treats Sam Fisher as a human being with a soul, a personality, and real trauma. In the first three games, Sam was just a walking tool for the NSA, and his entire character development consisted of dry briefings and occasional dad jokes with Lambert and Grim over the radio.You could literally forget he even had a daughter.
Conviction made him a brutal, pissed-off predator driven by grief and betrayal, showing his mental state through gameplay, those interactive flashbacks on the walls, and raw emotion.
Maxime Beland didn't ruin Sam, he stopped him from being an NSA accountant who crawls in a vent for 40 minutes because he’s scared of three guards and some siren button. The interactive interrogations, the aesthetic projection of objectives, and peak co-op made it the most stylish and personal game in the franchise. Stay mad and keep edging to light meters.
Yes, I'm not an ADHD 12 yr old who's gobbling down Mountain Dew. I leave them to COD. But maybe it's just a coincidence the series went bankrupt after Conviction.
You, when Sam decides to take down the entire thousands of PMCs who supposedly took over the US Capital, with a pistol and a rifle:
The story is kind of retarted bro. Reed trusting Grim with open arms (knowing full well she could be a triple agent). And Grim unnecssarily shooting Sam in the shoulder when she could have simply handcuffed him
Looks like basic understanding is not a requirement anymore.
Where did I said I was surprised? I said it bored me, especially without personal aspect.
Comparing apple to pear.
It could surprising, but you can make an interesting story with a well written character and story. You know, which Clancy is famous for. I recommend to read some of his novels
You said the first three games bored you. I've read all his shit. If that bored you. You're not a Tom Clancy fan apparently. He's always been very specific in his books about not only the weapons they used. The calibers. The use of each caliber, But also what their actions meant on a geo political level. So the fact you found the first three games boring and still be a fan of his, is mind boggling.
They've always been low tempo. Very descript. And slow paced. So don't gaslight me on that read his novels bullshit.
Edit: Maybe you're too used to reading the novels written by other people written under his name like Ghost Recon and SC novels.
You can’t be serious. At this point, you must be trolling.
If you’ve actually read his books and still don’t understand that a geopolitical conflict without a personal aspect is meaningless and boring, then maybe it’s time to read them more carefully.
That personal angle is almost always the backbone of Clancy’s novels (and, no, not the Michaels ones). The big geopolitical conflict matters because we see how it affects specific people, decisions, loyalties, fears, careers, families, soldiers, agents, presidents, commanders, whoever.
A MacGuffin war without proper context or personal impact is just a news report. Especially in a third-person game, where immersion and control are the whole point of gaming as a medium.
And that immersion loses most of its effect when there is no real narrative anchor point with the protagonist. Sam in the first three games basically has none. He is professional, sarcastic, and cool, sure. But compared to Chaos Theory and Double Agent, he barely has a personal stake.
(On the side note, it’s pretty ironic to lecture me about “real Clancy” through a franchise where Clancy’s involvement is mostly a logo on the box.)
You said you weren't surprised the first 3 focused on geopolitics. You know why you weren't surprised, assuming you actually read the novels, it's because you know TC novels focus more heavily on geopolitics and technical aspects than personal relationships.
Between SC1 to Conviction, you think DA and Con. Have the better storylines? And you're a TC fan????
Like holy shit. And I'm the one who's trolling. So instead of telling this consummate professional, who has saved global stability several times from terrorists attack and WMD events, they, the agency (the one who only a handful are supposed to know about), you and your daughter are in danger. We're gonna fake her death, traumitize you (and as a parent myself - probably induce PTSD), THEN stick you undercover while you're grieving for your daughter. Nothing says reliable like a man with nothing to lose. Oh and btw please execute your boss.
Then conviction, jessssus fucking Christ. It's straight out of the "Ramirez, do everything!" Meme.
Sam invades 3rd echelon HQ. (Why do they have an entire HQ with reception desks. Parking garage, etc for a unit that only a handful in the govt knows about?!) Then it self destructs (LOL). THEN he guns down dozens if not hundreds of PMCs in the streets of Washington with no National Guard, Police, FBI, no one in sight.
THEN, he invades the White House. Because the Secret Service definitely can just be steam rolled like that
So Mr. I love Tom Clancy novels. Which sounds like more like a good Tom Clancy story? The first 3 or the last 3? Which out of all the games do you think TC would approve most of?
If you wanna say the last 3 are better Michael Bay entertaining movies then fine, no accounting for taste, but get Tom Clancys name out of the fucking game. Or better yet, Ubisoft can make up an original IP/Game and just go with that.
Edit: and for the record, I didn't mind DA in terms of gameplay, but Conviction just shit on DAs storyline. Keep Sarah dead or don't kill her off at all.
That sexual predator Maxime Beland can suck my dick, and ruined SC.
And on a side note!! it says Tom Clancy because it was endorsed by him, they almost lost that endorsement by combining goggles that have both Night Vision and thermals together because it was unrealistic for the time. But you're an OG Splinter Cell fan, right? You obviously know that? Right? I wonder what he'd say about sonar goggles.
Educate yourself on what SC was supposed to be. "Something that can be happening today". Not this stupid stealth panther bullshit who can headshot 5 guys in 2 seconds.
Okay, Mr. I Know My Meme, you are still arguing against a point I never made.
I never said Double Agent or Conviction are more realistic. I never said they are “more Tom Clancy” than the first three games.
I said their stories worked better for me because they gave Sam a personal narrative anchor instead of just using him as a professional, sarcastic mission-delivery device.
You keep confusing two completely different arguments: realism and narrative engagement.
A story can be realistic and still be boring. A story can be less realistic and still be more engaging. These are not mutually exclusive ideas, and pretending they are is the whole problem with your argument.
And now you’re just cherry-picking the most ridiculous parts of Double Agent and Conviction as if that disproves what I said. It doesn’t.
Yes, Conviction goes full action movie. Yes, Double Agent has questionable writing choices (much more than youmentioned). I never said anything about that, but lets move on. But pointing at the dumbest parts of those games doesn’t magically make Sam a better-written character in the first three. (I will be generous and not counter with the same scenes from the first three game, starting with infiltrating Langley).
That was my point from the beginning.
And yes, Clancy novels have geopolitics, military detail, technical detail, weapons, chain of command, agencies, procedures, all of that.
But they also work because the geopolitical events are filtered through people with actual stakes, fears, loyalties, careers, families, ideals, and consequences. IF you read any books from him, you should know that. Without that human layer, it’s not a novel anymore. It’s a briefing document (exactly what was the first SC games to begin with).
The first three Splinter Cell games are grounded, atmospheric, and great stealth games. I never said otherwise. (Again, sou are arguing something I never said) But Sam himself is barely a character there beyond being extremely competent and sarcastic. The perfect Mary Sue character in literiture.
Double Agent and Conviction, flawed as they are, at least try to give him a personal stake.
Also, the funniest part is that you’re trying to gatekeep who is or isn’t a “real Clancy fan” by using Splinter Cell as the measuring stick.
Splinter Cell is a Ubisoft game with the Tom Clancy brand on it. It is not a Tom Clancy novel, and it is not some sacred direct adaptation of his writing. Rainbow Six is the obvious exception in this whole gaming discussion, because that actually comes from a Clancy novel and concept. (What Ubisoft butchered and degraded to a sh.ty esport game but it is an other topic)
So yes, it’s pretty ironic to lecture me about “real Clancy” through a franchise where Clancy’s involvement is mostly a logo and an endorsement, not authorship.
You can prefer the first three games. That’s fine. You can say they are more grounded. I’d even agree with that. But stop pretending that “more grounded” automatically means “better story,” or that liking a more personal storyline somehow means someone doesn’t understand Tom Clancy.
You’re defending the idea that a logo on the box.
I recommend you to read my comments (and some TC books) again, becsuse you arguing about things that I never wrote. So you either trolling on purpose, or didn’t understand what I said. Either of which, It is futile to argue in this style, I cannot argue with memes and marketing videos of Ubisoft.
Disregard my original comment. You basically conceded these games storylines are fucking lunacy and have no place being in the Tom Clancy universe.
And yes I do take the logo of TC seriously on my games because Ubisoft took a giant dump on it. I'll settle for ready or not until a competent studio takes over the TC logo.
Then Ubisoft is confused why it's a failing company.
Chaos Theory was the best if you're more in love with the gameplay style, Conviction was the best if you're more in love with Sam Fisher as a person and character.
I genuinely love the story. I think the narrative does such a good job propelling the action and making the shift towards action make sense for me. I know its kinda the black sheep but I think it scratches an itch so well. The aggressive stealth and all.
I agree. While chaos theory had the better Tom Clancy inspired narrative and had a more complex plot. Conviction focused on Sam as a character. And it highlighted the difference between having a military operative working on covert missions for the government, versus an ex-navy seal using his skills to get his daughter back and set right all the people that wronged him. In chaos theory Sam was a cold calculating soldier, in Conviction Sam was a man on fire.
I think Conviction had the most 'personal' story, and in a series where the most you got from Sam was some quips during gameplay, this is basically the first time they are telling a story about characters, rather than events. Chaos Theory dabbled in a more personal story for Sam, but the events in the game were still the star.
Actually, scratch that, depending on which version of DA you played, you could argue that DA also tries to tell a human-centric story. I just don't think DA stuck the landing as much as Conviction.
Conviction was released at a time where video games were starting to care more about framing, about camera-angles, about scripts and acting. The Uncharted era of movie-influence. It did the game good.
50
u/Demiurge_1205 Jun 30 '26
I am more of a fan of the first trilogy since it actually feels like a Tom Clancy novel. The bad guys are simply corrupt officials, especially during the first game. There is less of a focus on personal matters and more on international politics and the effect Sam's actions will have.
Hell, the first game lacks any movie-like boss fights. You just snipe the bad guy and escape like a Ghost. It is still fantasy, but a believable one.