Skuirell, you're not even trying to hide the fact that you're twelve years old, are you? 

Your just proving my point. Most of the game, you don't even get to see snow. The game starts out in the same creepy hallways we are all familiar with on an abandoned flotilla above the planet. And the miniboss? He doesn't exist in an area even remotely like the one we fought him in. I remember from a dev blog that you actually fight him in a room with virtually no light, firing at glowing yellow spots while he tears you apart. Again, the enemy cram... It was spliced together man... Every area with an enemy served a purpose to showcase a new or polished mechanic. The very first necro? The way the snow hides necros. Consider it more of a... tech demo than an actual gameplay demo. Like I said, do your homework before you try to be a self-entitled gamer crying foul.Skuirrel

Oh I've done my homework. I've seen the full game as a matter of fact and guess what? It's not much better. But that wasn't even really my point. My point is that the demo is what the developers want us to think of the game, and that it indicates the direction they've chosen for it. If the demo is not a proper representation of the game, then that's the developers fault for giving us a false impression.

Conviction did it

Glad to see people taking the demo so seriously. Not like it was spliced together level to showcase the new features instead of being a showcase of the pacing of the game. People should really learn to read something besides crappy, biased forum post for their information.Skuirrel

In the demo

1. The environments had zero atmosphere. They look pretty, but how are wide open spaces in broad daylight scary? Light and openess create comfort, since human beings are naturally afraid of darkness and cramped spaces. The environment in the demo is literally the exact opposite of what a true horror game should try to achieve. The blinding snow is a cool concept, but it doesn't really add anything.
2. The enemies were no longer creepy or intimidating. I don't have a fear of glowy-eyed eskimos with pick axes, and soldiers/necros with guns are definitely a step back. The mini boss in the level was just...not impressive or intimidating in any way design-wise. The necros don't even look like necros, they're just completely lame looking and are impossible to be afraid of.
3. There was no tension. Every 5 seconds another group of enemies appeared. The more you see of something, the less scary it is, and you see these enemies ALL THE TIME. The people behind this game don't get the idea of buildup and payoff. When you're mowing down so many enemies all the time, they lack presence and you become numb to them, they're just another hoard of foes that have no chance to match you. The new roll and cover abilities just make Isaac even MORE powerful than everyone else, which is a big no-no for horror. The protoganist should always be the weakest character in a horror game, only surviving by sheer witt and resourcefulness.

You're right, this is just a demo, a small slice of the game, but do you know what demos are for? To show what the rest of the game is going to be like. THIS is what the developers wanted our first impressions to be, and by creating the demo the way they have, they're telling us THIS is what the game is like. People have a right to complain based on demos. Besides, people have the full game and you can watch videos of it online and, yes, the full game IS like the demo.

People are saying the game is not scary because...the game is just not scary. There's no tension, atmosphere, nothing. It's basically the Resident Evil 5/6 of the franchise, but at least RE got 4 good games in (to be fair, DS3 isn't as outright awful of a game as RE6 is, but man is it a dissapointment). The second game certainly had it's action moments, and yeah they were kind of annoying, but in that game they were merely there to break up large segments of tense and atmospheric sections. In DS3, they make up almost the whole game. They basically just remade Uncharted 2.

I like the idea of Sam leading Fourth Echelon, but it's really time for him to quit field work. They showed with Archer and Kestral that they can make new characters that are still interesting. This game should have had you play as a new Splinter Cell recruit, with Sam filling the same role that Lambert had in the other games (that way they would even be able to keep Ironside, and it makes more sense than a near 60-year-old man who's the LEADER OF THE WHOLE ORGANIZATION doing field work)

It's less dumbed down than Conviction was, so at least there's progress (I like the idea of Sam leading his own division, although it's weird that the head of Fourth Echelon would be doing field work). I just wonder how it's going to work.

The only level that is really all that bad is Run for Your Life. It's basically just padding with no assassinations, fun segments or set pieces, or any story purpose to keep it enjoyable. It's without a doubt the worst level in the game, but I feel like people are basing the whole game off that segment. If you remove that level, the rest of the game is actually pretty good.

Alright, I appreciate your opinion.  I don't actually care about the story at all, unless they are shoving it down our throats.  Replayability is huge for me and so is the option to assasinate your target in a variety of ways.  I feel like I am getting a lot of different opinions on variation.  Some people are saying it is linear and some make it sound like Blood Money, with all of the different kill possibilites.

 

I suppose I don't mind if some of the game is pushing me forward as lond as there are some sandbox style levels that allow me to do what I want.  I got SA on every level of Blood Money, but I also enjoyed going in and mowing down crowds of people and trying to run for it.

 

I also heard there is no upgrading weapons, I really liked choosing specific weapons once I had completed the game.  I could go back to the original levels where I had to strangle some people and instead took out my sniper rifle and took them out at a distance.  Sometimes it sounds like the contracts mode is the only part that really resembles Blood Money.  Is contracts mode any good, or is it a good idea that doesn't really come together and feel like Blood Money?

gatsbythepig

Well first off, it is linear in some parts and open in others. The assassinations are open-ended areas, while the normal stealth missions are pretty linear. And some weapons can be upgraded but a lot of them can't. Agency weapons and the silverballers are the only ones that can be upgraded (which is rather odd to be honest). Contracts mode is pretty good, but the quality of the contract depends on the one who made it obviously. There are a lot of non-target NPCs with their own patterns and trying to match the creator's conditions can be a fun challenge.

The game is still a great game, but it often takes away focus on its strong points and puts focus on its weaker ones. For example, the assassinations are all still as great as ever with plenty of creative ways to take down targets, but there are a lot of straight stealth segments in between that, while most are still enjoyable, are definitely not the game's strong point and it's kind of baffling as to why they made so many of them. Same goes with the story. You have this great parallel between 47 and Victoria, with 47 empathizing with the pain she's gone through and even seeing a reflection of himself in her, but the game drops that almost immediately and instead chooses to focus on lazy, poorly written villain characters that aren't interesting and come off as kind of embarassing. It's still a great game, but it could have been a superb game with a little more focus. However, the replay value is through the charts, with fun challenges and an excellent Contracts Mode. I've played all the other titles and I can promise you will enjoy it if you can set aside any bias you may have. I'd give it an 8.