The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
Please vote in the Forum Structure Poll. Polling will close at 2PM EST on January 21, 2025.
[Doing it wrONg] Chaos Theory, percentiles, linearity and you.
Flippy_D
Digital ConquistadorLondonRegistered User regular
Digital ConquistadorLondonRegistered User regular
"I put it to you that you would enjoy this game more if they didn't show you those numbers, and that's fucked up".
My name is Flippy, and I'm a perfectionist.
If I'm not winning, I get annoyed. It's a bad character flaw, but nonetheless it's there. Most of the time it's not a problem in games, because unless you plain give up, you will win. Eventually. But sometimes, it causes... issues.
Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory.
I quite enjoyed the first Splinter Cell, and SCCT got fairly glowing reviews. So what the hey. I get ahold of it and start playing.
Massive disappointment. Why? Because there is an inherent and irreconcilable problem with the damn thing.
Let me first get this set down clear: I can't allow myself to knowingly fuck up. Right? Bear that in mind.
At the end of each mission, you get a round-up, much like in Hitman, of how well you did. And there's a percentage. The best outcome, is, naturally, 100%. That's fine. Hitman has Silent Assassin, right? Well, there is a bit of a problem: 100 individual percentiles means there are (theoretically at least) 100 little ways to fuck up. In reality it's a bit more leniant. But anyway, the main fact is that your success is quanitfied, very obviously and unequivocally.
I do not want to see that number if it's not 100.
Again, that's fine. I play, and I score the 100s, and feel pretty pleased about that...
... until I realise that, hang on a moment, I'm not having that much fun playing this. It's repetitious in extremis. And why's that? Because there's only one thing that will work.
- Put out the lights
- Split up the guards
- Grab
- Interrogate
- Knock out
And you just do this over and over again because there are no other viable options. You can knock people out with an airfoil to the head every now and again, and very occasionally a sticky shocker is useful, but really you're going to be repeating the above process ad nauseum, because although the game designers give you a lot of tools, almost none of them are worth it. For example:
I'm crouched in a corner having snuck into a missile base. Three guards are here. It's a cramped room and I'm reluctant to start dicking around as there seems to be a small margin for error. So I take a look at my stuff - all this equipment I've had no need of - and find I have some knockout gas for my launcher attachment. Perfect. I lob it at the feet of the guards.... and nothing happens.
See, turns out the cannister has a timer on it. It takes a couple of seconds to blow. A couple of seconds that is plenty of time for the alarm to be raised.
I'll cut to the chase: the issue is that one cannot, simultaneously, play openly and get 100%. This seems like a terrible design flaw to me. You have to either avoid guards (made impossible much of the time), or do the darkness-sneaky-grab-KO. Over and over. And over.
Is this my problem for not being able to enjoy the game unless I get 100%, or am I right to accuse the game of double standards - or at least inconsiderate development?
It seems pretty clear that I should loosen up, right?
I'd just like to counter though, with that greatest of games, and still the very best stealth game that exists:
Hitman: Blood Money
Featuring:
- Multiple ways to get Silent Assassin!
- Mix-and-match approaches to levels!
- A variety of equipment that is actually useful!
- A scoring system that still allows you to play how you like!
etc.
Whilst Hitman exists, is it really that unreasonable for me to be disappointed with Splinter Cell, where I'm forced to approach every encounter in the one, workable method?
Flippy_D on
0
Posts
Keep in mind.. Splinter Cells are sneaking games and thus should not reward your for being un-sneaky. If you don't like what's involved, you should play something else. On that note, I agree with you that it does get repetitive after a while and the trial and error sucks.
That brings you down to 95%. Good luck enjoying this thread
(Please do not gift. My game bank is already full.)
I'm not saying don't try for the best--I'm saying don't let some limited scoring system tell you what the best is.
how does that make you feel
I think you are looking into this a bit too much.
skate, halo 3
Not... not really? It's a grade on a 1-100 scale and you have to fulfill a set of parameters in order to get 100. 100% = success = the right way to do it. Who makes that decision? The developer.
Maybe I misunderstand you.
This is the part I disagree with.
Beating the level = success
the right way to do it = however you want to, it's supposed to be fun.
skate, halo 3
As of yet I have still not gotten a single S-rank. I feel horrible.
On-topic: I had the same problem, in fact I never finished the game because I could never be happy when I screwed up. I did play and finish co-op with a friend; that was fun, like really fun. Sadly the co-op was way way too short.
I just felt joy whenever I got a score above 90% as long as I was having fun
As of yet I have still not gotten a single S-rank. I feel horrible.
On-topic: I had the same problem, in fact I never finished the game because I could never be happy when I screwed up. I did play and finish co-op with a friend; that was fun, like really fun. Sadly the co-op was way way too short.
Wha? The other Splinter Cell games may be quite linear but Chaos Theory usually gives you options. Most levels have a at least a few alternate paths. Some objectives can be completed in more than 1 way and you have secondary objectives that can be completed right away or saved for a later mission. You also have a choice of different loadouts to fit your playstyle. It's not that linear as far as stealth games go.
Battle.net: Fireflash#1425
Steam Friend code: 45386507