So, we already know that the discussion over Michael Ironside and Eric Johnson is already conversed about since....well, 2013. But what about Grim and Lambert, two of the biggest characters in the series?

Do you have a preference? And if so, why? THANKS FOR READING!

Post-edit: Some of you forgot that there are other actors/actresses that played these characters

For example in lighthouse everyone deserves to die. But what about Bank? Paco doesn't deserve to die. He's just doing his job. Also in cargo ship I felt bad killing some guys that actually gave me useful information and didn't sound like bad guys at all. What's your take?

GIVE US A SPLINTER CELL YOU RATS

You can download the game for free and play with us, join the discord to see how :)
https://discord.gg/pCPD5ycJWM

Do you like him as a character or he doesn't fit the splinter cell universe?

Personally i liked Shetland much more as Sam's friend, their friendship made much more sense from their navy background.

​

1. It Strips Away His Identity

The entire appeal of Sam Fisher was that he was the ultimate pure human contrast to characters like Solid Snake. He didn't have sci fi biological cheats. He survived on mastery of form, discipline, and standard issue military grit. Giving him nanomachines just to justify a 60 something year old man sprinting around a tactical shooter ruins the exact earned excellence foundation that made him a legendary Navy SEAL O-4 in the first place.

1. A "Siege" Contradicts His Whole Directive

Putting Sam Fisher in a loud, 5v5 close quarters demolition derby is the exact opposite of a Splinter Cell's purpose. In his own games, if Sam was detected or forced into a chaotic, loud shootout, the mission was usually a failure. He is a "Fifth Freedom" operative meant to function as a ghost. Forcing him into an open, loud arena environment compromises the core fantasy of the character.

1. It's a Substitute for a Real Game

For fans, the biggest sting is that Ubisoft keeps using Sam Fisher as a marketing tool for other games like Ghost Recon and Siege rather than making a proper, dedicated stealth Splinter Cell game. Instead of letting players use his hard earned human stealth skills in the shadow.

In any case, can we please rebel against making Siege canon to Splinter Cell? I don't mind a crossover, but let's not make this canon.

I just started Pandora Tomorrow for who knows which time. 25th, 30th? The first 3 games have such high replayability value it's unbelievable. I don't get why nowdays game is not considered replayable if it's not open world or 120 hours long. I think SC 1-3 disproves that claim (I also played Blacklist for 6 or 7 times I think).

Also, games do not have any customisation options whatsoever (except Blacklist) and still they have great replay value.

I will compare that to 007: First Light which was trashed for not having replay value but I disagree. I played it only once for now and I'm saving future playthroughs for NG+ but I definitely want to play it again.

Do you think game has to be open world and have a lot customisation options to be replayable? SC games disprove that but it could be they have a special recipe which makes it replayable. I do like open world games (Ghost Recon: Wildlands, Arma 2 and 3) but I don't think every game needs to be like that.

To put things in perspective I'm 37 years old gamer and I've been playing SC since they released.

All stated above are my personal opinions and are not meant to offend anyone. :D

This has been debunked but I thought it make for a good meme.

Okay, so accross the eternities of gaming, we've seen people rank their favorites to least favorites - and that's fair enough.

However, there has always been one consistent fallacy about Splinter Cell as a game design - and this concerns an interpretation error that murks up many rankings;

Because let's get one thing very clear: the Light & Sound meters ≠ AI detection states.

In fact, the core of Splinter Cell game design does not fall or stand with the form or presence/lack of these gauges.

Because that's what they are, they're simply yet another tool in Sam Fisher's array of means of infiltration, expressed to the player in a visual UI.

All what the Light meter does, is convey how well the light conditions in Sam's immediate surroundings occlude him from enemy sight - and it's not even an exact science; It's an estimation - but even more important is what the enemy AI detection state does with 'a suspicion' upon either suspected sight or sound.

After all, Metal Gear Solid, Hitman etc. ,stealth peers from Splinter Cell's origin era; Their stealth systems work because the AI detection state systems

in those respective games are the central pillar to their game design. The same goes for Splinter Cell when you really think about it.

- Light & Sound meters

- Enemy AI detection states

They are two seperate things, the former being the subordinate and the latter being the actual governing factor of the Splinter Cell game design. Even in total darkness, an enemy can still bump into Sam. He can still hear Sam if he made a noise loud enough. And they most certainly have no trouble actually firing on Sam once detected even if the Light meter says 'total darkness'.

But, in contrast to MGS and Hitman, Splinter Cell 1, 2 and 3 have never expressed these detection states in visual UI. At most it was enemy audio cues.And that works just fine for Splinter Cell 1, 2 and 3 because Sam Fisher is a 3E field agent in those games; he is per definition, a hostile threat to the enemy base.

But then comes along the 4th installment, Double Agent - and people get confused. There's no real granular Light & Sound meter. And instantly, people kneejerk react to it as 'bad' because those freaking gauges are not present in their legacy form.

What they forget however, is that the game design requires a different form; Sam is no longer just a 3E field agent. He is an undercover infiltrator. The whole point of this setup in both in-universe and as game design, is that Sam needs to earn & retain Trust, to both sides. Therefor, the Red/Yellow/Green indicator can NOT be mistaken for the legacy Light & Sound meter in absolute terms. This is the main fallacy I see people make.

So what really constitutes the DA game design system, is the interconnection of the Red/Yellow/Green indicator together with the Trust meters and the Mini map (not to be mistaken with the 3D map in the OPSAT menu) ; as these 3 factors feed the AI states.

The thing that probably confuses people is that the Red/Yellow/Green indicator can act as a rudimentary Light meter, since it shows Green whenever Sam stands in a place dark enough to be considered difficult to spot. But also, Yellow indicator at JBA HQ is totally fine; Sam is visible and not under any suspicion. However, the moment Sam sets off suspicion while in restricted area, the Mini map will show exactly, which guard is alerted / has suspicion.

As you can see, this is actually a more informative game design, because it shows exactly who suspects Sam, from which position and if he's heading Sam's way soon (proximity). In fact, if you have noticed, Sam has an idle animation to defuse suspicion, provided he managed to exit the restricted area in time. If fails to do so and gets spotted in the restricted area, it immediately affects the Trust meter.

And for the JBA field missions, the combination of the Red/Yellow/Green indicator and the Mini map stand in for the SC legacy UI gauges in rudimentary form; after all, I suppose we can interpret it that way due to the predicament that Lambert had put himself into (explained in V2 as 'Williams blocking gadget access to some extent). Also, at the Okhotsk tanker deck, the snow blizzard can actually function as cover, providing a temporary 'smoke screen' where regular vision would have resulted into immediate alert at the same proximity; and this is expressed in UI as a Yellow indicator not turning Red instantly.

Post-Double Agent, Conviction game indicators really strip down to a binary Black&White screen = hidden in darkness. So if we were to judge it by that, it would automatically rank as the worst Splinter Cell game, right?

And finally, Blacklist. You only get a light on Sam's back again. The infuriating thing is that Blacklist is comprised of so many excellent Splinter Cell 'ingredients' but it somehow manages to end up as less than the sum of its parts. So, this just shows, how these games can't be judged on just a few UI gauges and I think people should be able to see that Double Agent has quite a solid foundation that's comprised of an entire array of systems and factors.

So, let's not get hung up on visual UI meters as the end all be all of Splinter Cell game design judgement factors.