@eli150: Go play Chaos Theory for a bit and then put in one of the newer games like Blacklist and you'll see what I mean on slow speed. You could creep forward inch by inch in the old games and in the new games your slowest speed is a brisk crouch walk.

For me, the movement in the older games was a big part of the immersion. The movement and general game mechanics in Blacklist annoyed me. It didn't feel like proper Splinter Cell to me. It felt like it was always pushing me to move faster and play more action oiriented.

I fell in love with the ultra methodical slow stealth of the original games and I feel like they've abandoned that to some degree.

I don't mind them making Sam more action capable if that's how someone wants to play but I'd appreciate it if I could still have the mechanics that made the originals so great.

I think MGSV is a pretty good example of how you can have both play styles available and make them enjoyable for different players.

"When you create a game, you have to make sure you will come with something that will be different enough from what you did before," Guillemot said. "Last time we did a Splinter Cell, we had lots of pressure from all the fans saying, 'Don't change it; don't do this; don't do that."

Well, yeah. You guys stripped away many of the stealth elements that made the series a success in the first place. I don't mind you making Sam more action capable but you don't have to abandon what many people loved about the original games.

Give us the ultra slow movement, environmental stealth mechanics, and more gadgets. Lean into that instead of just evolving it into another generic cover based shooter.

Sorry Eurogamer, but games do not require some sort of political/social "message" to be good. Just like not all films need to have some deep cultural messaging. Sometimes creators just want something to be good ole fashion escapism.

@Barighm: Great was probably too strong of a word but there was a time yeeaaarrs ago that they put out quality stuff and I don't recall having any animosity towards them at that time. However, it definitely seems that in the last 10 - 15 years or so, they have just gotten so much worse. Once they started buying and killing off great developers I really began to realize that they were really harming gaming on a whole. It's really sad that they have developed such a myopic and detached view of the game industry. It wouldn't be so bad if they were smaller and didn't have so many great IPs, including Star Wars, in their control. Unfortunately, the things they do have a pretty big impact on the industry. I do hope that they fail hard, so at the very least they can reevaluate how they treat their audience.

Well it looks like EA shot themselves in the foot with this stupid staggered launch. Even if the day one patch magically fixes most of the problems, a lot of damage has already been done. EA has completely lost their mind and are so out of touch with the gaming community. I'm not sure if they will ever be a great publisher again.

I totally support the LGBTQ community and hope that they get better representation in media, but I don't think Ubi did anything wrong here. Tell me if I'm wrong, but in the world of AC, you can only tap into a direct ancestor right? So in order for that to happen, that ancestor would have to have children, right?

The way I look at it, you get to live a specific portion of this character's life. In that time you can choose to make them whatever you want. However, just like their past, their future is already written. No matter how you decide to play your character, they are going to eventually have children.

I guess Ubi should have clarified that at best, your character would be bi.

@Thanatos2k:

I knew it was bad that they only have released two games but this really puts it into perspective. How does a whole new Star Wars trilogy come and go without a single accompanying good Star Wars game?

Ok, this is driving me crazy. There was nothing wrong with Tiana. The animators did not deserve to be called out as racists. Look at this and tell me what I'm missing, because it looks like the same character to me: https://cdn.pbrd.co/images/HFyYXim.jpg

@jski: It's been a while but I remember making a number of choices in FO3 and FONV. Hell, one of the first things you do in FO3 is deciding whether or not you are going to blow up Megaton. There were also far more interesting scenarios present that from a storytelling perspective were far more engaging.

My time in FO4 has been, go clear out these enemies... or go find this item and clear out enemies. Nothing has really surprised me or sent me down some interesting narrative path. I know exactly what to expect from every mission. Kill everything and collect loot. That just doesn't do it for me.

I've tried getting back into it about 3 times already and it bored me to tears each time. I loved and beat FO3 and FONV multiple times but just can't get into FO4. I think it's the story and lack of any real role playing that makes me lose interest so fast.

I never feel like I am making any meaningful choices and all the missions are essentially "go and kill things". The story telling in this game is pretty bland and I can only run around killing things for so long.

I can appreciate what they did well, but I would like to see Bethesda start focusing more on good storytelling and role playing. It worries me to see them put less emphasis on these things since there are so few really great western rpgs. They got the gameplay down, now give me a story I can care about and want to engage in.