Splinter Cell Blacklist didn't sell well. Ironside backlash?

http://www.computerandvideogames.com/433979/splinter-cell-blacklist-and-rayman-legends-have-underperformed-according-to-ubisoft-exec/?cid=OTC-RSS&attr=CVG-General-RSS

It appears that Splinter Cell Blacklist didn't meet sales expectations, which is surprising considering the general amount of praise it received. This has got me wondering: why was this the first Splinter Cell game to fail its sales target? Could it be that a lot of old school SC fans who still bought Conviction decided to skip this one? If so, why? Could it be the gameplay? I doubt it, since from what I hear it went back to pure stealth. I know I lost all interest in the game when I saw they replaced Michael Ironside with a generic-sounding nobody. Could this be fan backlash for that reason? Is this what "voting with your wallet" looks like?

If that's the case here's hoping for a return of the "real" Sam Fisher in the next Splinter cell Game?

It's not just Ironside, Blacklist managed to receive praise just for not being Conviction. If they want Splinter Cell fans to buy in to the series again they'll have to start making Splinter Cell games again. The last one I've seen was Double Agent in 2006

It could be any number of issues. But I think many were able to anticipate the direction Blacklist would be heading. It's a game that cannot make up it's mind. Some great level design and solid pacing give way to predictable and often times degrading action setpieces near the end of every mission. These moments stain what could otherwise be a fantastic stealth game. They added the ability for the player to hide bodies but give no incentive to do so. It's a mechanic put in place to appease fans but fails to understand the reason and necessity behind it. This could be made the case for the entire damn game.

The Paladin was nice in theory but executed poorly. Instead of creating an immersive and seamless gameplay experience it often drags down the space between missions with long loading screens, stereotypical characters who belong in Michael Bay's Transformers movies and repetitive cutscenes interspersed between each mission. A clumsy menu system and no ability to start a new game without deleting your save file and starting fresh. So you're left to guess which levels to play in what order.

It's a game that claims you can play it without ever killing an enemy but forces you to kill any number of enemies over the course of your experience, it just doesn't count those towards your score. Now the scoring system is rather shallow giving you not a rating but points that are transferred into in-game money for the player to spend on upgrades. I don't know how many times they are going to **** this up but stealth games need legitimate ratings systems in place.

Add on the inconsistent and at times poor visuals, bugs and game breaking glitches (I had my save file damaged while playing the final mission which forced me to restart the game even after patches) and you have a fairly poor excuse for a Splinter Cell game. It's a game that tries to appeal to everybody but ends up losing its identity. At least Conviction was consistent in tone and theme.

It's a poor first attempt from Ubisoft Toronto and only further hurts my faith in the series.

I think Blacklist is a good game, but I think they had a hard time trying to come up with a singular focus and instead tried a bit too hard to please everybody. I also believe that yes, Ironisde not being in it had a lot to do with it. Ubisoft made the greatest mistake when it came to that. They should have kept Ironside in, had this Eric Johnson do all the moves for Sam, and I think sales would have skyrocketed to a whole new level if they did that. But they didn't because they think that having a young actor who can do all the moves would sell.

Fucking wrong Ubi! Try again...

Most of SC fans (like me) are very conservative in terms of the gaming and they don't want the change the series went thorught and prefer to remain with the basics (first 4 games). I think the disappointment from SCC and few videos from SCB made people think the series will never go back to its roots

hey, its got co-op. Im happy

Three words: Grand Theft Auto.

Release any games around that time. You are f***ed. Not even Pokemon (save for Japan) could beat it.

Same deal with Rayman too.

Except Kiefer Sutherland is objectively an improvement over Hayter. I was pissed off too when they announced it, but this will likely increase the quality of the acting.

Also, MGS has other things going for it other than the main character's personality, while Splinter Cell, yes, has arguably the best stealth gameplay since Thief 2, but was kept interesting mainly by the charismatic protagonist.

Eh, I think he's ok. Surely more professional than Hayter, if anything he sounds too young (a recurring theme these days)

It's a shame because it is truly a great game a big evolution for the series in a lot of ways. I didn't even notice it wasn't Ironside after an hour into the game honestly. I would consider it another AAA entry into the series. A lot of people complain about SplinterCell but I find the games amazing.

Software sales have been down the whole year. Many people dont give a shit about last gen games. Nearly every game this year from God of War to Gears of War has been a sales disappointment.

Releasing yet another Splinter Cell game that looks exactly the same as the other SP games was always going to be a tough sell.

Splinter Cell simply isn't the big deal it used to be. This is the near future of Assassin's Creed as well, count on it.

Splinter Blacklist was without a doubt the worst splinter cell game ever made, and it had multiple problems, one of them trying to be a "multiplayer/coop-game within the singleplayer experience" which was just bad, the story was also ludicrous and changing voiceactor and making him younger was just a poor poor poor poor decision.

Also they tried to move away from conviction which funny enough was one of the best selling splinter cell games (If not the best selling), so not only didn't they catch the old splinter cell fans they also managed to alienate everyone who liked Conviction.

So all in all it was a poor attempt and despite me being glad it didn´t sell because Blacklist is a piss poor game, i am sad if it kills the franchise.

You're right because people can only buy 1 game a year.....

It was a bounce back title.. I don't think everyone bought into it after the let down that SC Conviction was. They next title will have more success, especially if they bring Ironside back...as much as I enjoyed Blacklist, that really didn't sit well with me.

I like Michael Ironside a lot. But personally, I lost interest in the Splinter Cell series a long time ago. The latest one is but a link in the chain of Splinter Cell games I've just had no desire to play. Nothing wrong with them really. I just kind of stopped wanting a stealth game to play. It is a fun mechanic, sometimes, but centering an entire game around sneaking about... it just gets old after a while. I'm more of a Run up and shoot 'em in the FACE kinda gamer anyway.

Plus Batman kinda nails stealth and action all in one. And you get to be Batman. BATMAN!

@ dvader654 "I think he is great but not for a role in a video game."

What are you on about ? This is not like Heavy Rain or Mass Effect or Bastion where an actors performance is gona have an interactive element in it. He's perfect for video games specifically because his performance won't be all that different from voicing for an animated movie. Admit it, just don't like him.

Doubtful that Ironside had anything to do with it. It just didn't look all that appealing or exciting.

I'll play it when it hits $20.

@ dvader654

He's a professional, give the man some credit. Besides I still maintain not a single aspect of his performance requires video game experience besides the Motion Capture, which I believe he can do very well. besides he doesn't need to care. He'l still do his best. Do you remember his Perfomance in phonebooth ?

Agreed. Didn't expect much going in, but was pleasantly surprised by just how good it was. Real return to form for the series.

And yet this game is what probably will kill the franchise :) So nice return to form.

@ dvader654

Well hot damn ! Why didn't you say that in the 1st place ? You gave me the impression it mattered.

Dude. Watch. Better. Television.

Eh. One less than spectacular sales performance won't kill the franchise. At most, it'll likely go dark for a couple years or so.

It came out at a pretty bad time, had way too much to buy in the month of Aug/Sept

Doubtful? You shouldn't be. Ironside is the one of the key reasons, if not one of the main reasons or even THE MAIN REASON ITSELF why Splinter Cell is such a huge hit. When it was announced that Eric Johnson would be taking over the role, both in mo-cap performance and in voice, that pretty much sealed the deal for a lot of fans. People are that pissed about Ironside not being in the game and rightly so.

I agree here, removing Ironside from being Sam was a big mistake and a lot of fans got angry and got them turned away from the game even more.

The new actor does a good job, but its not sam and it feels wrong

(Sorry about the late reply. I just received notification you responded to my message and I most have overlooked it)

But yes. It is doubtful. And I would have to disagree that I think Ironside is a huge reason for Splinter Cell's success. I rarely heard anyone mention him or even care until they announced he would no longer be Sam Fisher.

Do I think he did an excellent job as Fisher? Absolutely. Do I think it was a mistake to remove him from the series? Yes I do. Still, I think most of the outrage is limited to a vocal minority. I know quite a few people that are playing the game, all have played the rest in the series, and not a one cares about the new voice actor. These are the same people that just don't care about major recasts in movies, or people that eat up a particular band even if they completely change their sound or lineup.

I do think it sucks for die hard fans and it was a complete mistake to drop Ironside, but I simply do not believe the main reason it sold poorly was due to Ironside's absence.

Ubisoft didn't make a strong enough dedication with advertizing the game. They put out a lot of trailers before the game came out, but nothing really to build hype or excitement for the game. It's a big shame too, I think Blacklist is probably the best Splinter Cell game ever created.

Yeah, I don't get where all the hate comes from. This game feels more like a Splinter Cell game to me than the last two entries (the last one I beat was Chaos Theory). Boo, they got rid of Ironside but I'm fine doing without his creepy "O" noise that he'd make whenever he used a healthkit. The return of dark environments is great, the Ghost/Panther/Assault rating system is neat, and the overall stealth mechanic feels strong to me. I also like the idea of doing side missions to pay for better gear. I'm indifferent on the co-op multiplayer, but I'm thrilled that they brought back Spies vs Mercs because that was one of my absolute favorite multiplayer experiences on the original Xbox.

Only gripes I have are some long load times, a REALLY buggy cloud save system (exacerbated by the fact that the game doesn't have an opening menu if it doesn't detect an existing save), the fact that checkpoint progress does not persist between game sessions (no game should punish gamers for having a life), and the fact that some of the side missions are action-heavy "arcade"-style missions where you just mow down wave after wave of bad guy.

-Byshop

So if i don't agree that changing the voice actor of Sam was not a mistake i am just a pain? What kind of response is that?

I dont care what actor they used for Sam, changing the VA was a mistake especially when they are trying to move the franchise in a new direction , because for some people Sam was Ironside and even tho Eric Johnson is decent, its not Sam.

Ubisoft messed up and they did it from changing the title from convictions route to the new VA.

And yes i know people on this forum think Conviction was bad , but it is one of the best selling Splinter cell titles out there.

@ Jacanuk

So they changed actors, big whoop. Its nothing to complain about. They can go ahead and change the gender and species of the protagonist, it will still be a splintercell game. They have better things to do than reassure fans about whos playing who.

Well, you can say big whoop.

But when a game sells under a million copies total as a AAA title especially when its a franchise like Splinter Cell, its not a small failure its a giant failure. So i think it speaks volumes about everything they did wrong which also included changing the VA, and btw they couldn't change Sam to a woman and still have a splinter cell game, that would be a whole other game.

That would be like changing Lara to Lars. And still run around calling it a Tomb Raider game.

The horde mode missions felt out of place, I agree. Seemed more geared toward assault-style play rather than a stealthy approach. I mean, I was able to make it work, but they weren't very fun. That and the atrocious load times are about the only major issues I had with it. Everything else was typical Splinter Cell fare. Felt like a proper successor to Chaos Theory in terms of gameplay.

They found a nice balance between making the game accessible without completely sacrificing the core of the franchise. Was nice to finally be able to play Spies vs. Mercs as well. Didn't have any of my consoles hooked up online back when that mode was introduced, so I missed the boat on it the first time around. Terrific mode. Lot of fun.

Its a good game. Im keeping it, and plan to go though the main story again sometime soon.

Plus spies vs mercs is one of my fav online experiences.

I enjoyed Blacklist, but Ironside's absence was a gaping hole. The new guy doesn't quite have the stuff.

Yeah, it's not like they were dealbreakers since they were completely optional (at least so far, I haven't beaten the game yet). The updates to Spies vs Mercs seems interesting but the gadgets might be a tad overpowered, but even if that aspect is less balanced there's a "classic" mode that basically gives each side the same loadout they had in the original game.

Honestly, I didn't even find the game all that easy until I got some halfway decent equipment and stopped caring about getting non-lethal takedowns on the majority of the baddies. Once you get a silenced assault rifle with a double-sized clip and an ACOG scope then things get pretty easy, but again I haven't beaten the game. Plus going back and going for Ghost style on previous missions will be fun.

-Byshop

@ Jacanuk

Only people like you would define games using arbitrary things like gender and voice actors and throw up your arms and scream "I told you so" when the game doesn't sell well. Tomb Raider raids tombs, and Splinter Cell splinters cells. Only if those things change, then you can say its an entirely different game. Untill that happens, goes easy on the drama.

i'm a huge fan of the first three games - they're up there with my favourite of all time (big stealth fan) - but i really didn't like the path ubisoft chose to go down with the last two games. they were far too streamlined and simplified, no doubt an attempt to broaden the game's appeal but all that seemed to achieve was to annoy the die-hard fans of the early games. i passed on blacklst for these reasons, although ironside's omission did factor into my decision and was just further proof of the detachment from the earlier games.

i'll probably pick it up in a steam sale somewhere down the line

Ahh we are going down that road. but i am not surprised, only you could turn this from Splinter Cell to gender roles.... What about just ignoring a discussion next time?

Actually, had they incorporated Last Stand into it and replaced the Horde mode version of it in Blacklist, then I think it would have been a little better. Also, it was designed for co-op and not solo. Trust me on that, I've gone through at least five rounds on my own before I was taken down.

@ Jacanuk

I'm bored. Your analysis, of video game's identity amuse me. Ofcourse this is the internet, when you put anything out there, expect it to be challanged. Besides, I'm one of the few that believe Ironside's contribution lends very little to the game's identity, partly because I bevieve things like this contribute very little to gaming in general.

So what you're saying is actually "i am trolling" ? because you know that a VA can contribute to a game and can become a big part of the game for some people.

But i don't mind being challenged , after all why else be on a forum if it wasn't to expand your horisont and be challenged