I remember being excited for an Ubisoft game

@Macutchi: Honestly, I tend to try and wipe the slate clean with every game so that I can appreciate it on it's own merits rather than fall into the endless trap that comes with comparing games. I find it easier to enjoy each and every game if I start from scratch, otherwise no game would be able to live up to some of the games that would probably sit atop my 'best games' list.

I don't remember 100% what I scored the series, but I believe my scores went like this... SC: 90, SCPT: 95, SCCT: 99, SCDA: 90, SCCon: 85, SCB: 75 I'd have to dig out some of the write ups from my previous site, if I can find them. And for the record I'm usually happy with most games 60 and above, though I do use the FULL scale, not the partial scale GS uses.

Outside of my no Ironside in Blacklist comment, I actually had few complaints on the series in general, with the two I can remember being the original trio of games mostly. The first few games Sam Fisher couldn't use enemy weapons right? Never understood why a super spy couldn't pick those up. The second was whistling to get a guards attention, and the enemy AI would ask "Is that footsteps?" I still make fun of that goof to this day.

i think it's great you can be so open minded and wish i could be but surely you must enjoy specific combinations of gameplay patterns, scenarios and mechanics? and when you find a series that ticks those boxes and it then moves away from the things that first attracted you to it does it not irritate you, even a little bit? despite trying to appreciate it for what it is / has become?

a decline from 99 to 75 in your scoring over a few game period is surely significant even though 75 is not that bad a score. 99 is virtually perfect

Well, I have a habit of making things overly complex. Gameplay is only one of the things I score, and I tend to take an average of 4 categories (graphics sound gameplay and story), then average them out and add a weighted adjustment based on 'fun factor'. I tend to favor a seamless experience and good story over gameplay/mechanics. I'm content with average mechanics as long as they don't interrupt the experience of taking the role of the main character. If anything CT getting a 99 was basically me being fully engaged with the game on every level from start to finish. The game in my mind was as close to perfect as you could get at the time. With BL, it was more that I felt like something wasn't right and the game didn't have that 'fun factor' the others had. In the end I felt it was good, but not great, and scored it appropriately.

i've felt like that about most ubisoft games i've played in recent years tbh but this is encouraging http://www.pcgamer.com/assassins-creed-and-far-cry-may-not-return-for-2017/

That's a scary thought to think.

Child of Light was kind of a good game, very cool artistic direction but I agree, there is clearly a random factor.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCHs66T3dgQRM69OElcVNhqg

And a thought that never will happen.

I thought Blacklist should of had a higher score. I mean it had a few things I didn't like. No Ironside and I felt like Sam looked and sounded to young. Also his supporting characters where blah. I was scared they where pushing the other guy off on us as Sams replacement.

I want to believe that Ubi can take some games and move them forward but every time I see getting to the top of an outpost to open more of the map I just cringe.

Blacklist was the worst pile of Splinter Cell shit ever to come out.

The attempt to make it open world was horrible and it ruined the splinter cell franchise.

So the whole Black and white stealth system and really the lack of stealth from Conviction was better? I mean to each his own I'm not saying you are wrong because we all feel differently, but I wouldn't say Blacklist was the worst

Conviction was strange as well, but it was better than Blacklist.

If they took the gameplay mechanics of Blacklist and the story style from Conviction and put it in one game, they would have a half decent game.