Games: Rate and Discuss

[Dynasty]

Not insulting it it any way, was a decent enough game. The only thing is it failed to grab me as much as the original game. Maybe I just preferred the setting of the original or it could be the at AC2 on the PC has f*cked up mouse controls.
I feel though that Batman was a better game. It was appealed to me a lot more than AC2 did. Sorry.

It couldve been the fact that you felt it was just the first game, but made in a way that the first game should have been made..if that makes sense. So you were subconciously ready to not like it as much.

Batman: AA was new. So fresh. Such a clear cut above any other superhero game ever attempted.

I guarantee the sequel will lose credit as it will be too similar to the first.

Which is..almost always the case.

[Edit] Hmm, I kind of miss B:AA. May have to obtain it again and finish off the platinum.

 

[Sheepo]

EDIT: Can't be arsed arguing, Sheepo wins, even if his views don't match mine.

lol, but I did see the original post.

Ha. Check my original post, I in no way started an argument and was simply expressing my opinion on the game, Yorick took it from there.

I was saying that any continuing argument with you results in you not listening to any actual flaws in your case the other side puts forward. It's happened when I've been doing it and other posters, this time I just can't be arsed to go through all the rigmarole to get to that conclusion. Not to mention I couldn't be arsed reading your wall of text, but that's my own laziness shining through.

Universal critical acclaim from the media, not just gaming which the Bafta shows as well as support from the subject matters own fanbase and a substantial amount of gamers=Quality alot more than the opinions of 3 people on HL2.net=mediocrity.

But seriously, you didn't like the game. Okay, not a problem just don't make it seem like your opinion is fact and nothing else is entertained. The game was a 6/10 for you, okay. For a lot of other people it is very certainly GoTY material and that does not make them wrong to think so just because they happened to like the character design, or didn't think the story was as bad as you did.

We were having an unrelated (albeit dumb) argument on something else entirely, which came about from my review of the game. You came into the thread and posted your opinion of the overall quality of the game, which clearly contradicted the consenus everyone had already reached. You can say whatever you want, but for all practical purposes that is starting an argument. While you didn't call me or anyone else out, you put forth an opposing viewpoint to mine, and an argument came about. I have no problem with this. As you might have gathered, I enjoy arguments. They require thought and generally result in the conflicting parties having a clearer picture of the topic by the end. If you don't want to argue with me, I don't mind. But please, stop provoking arguments and then acting as if I'm some sort of opinion terrorist when I actually go about and want to butt heads.

I have listened to everyone in this thread (well, I've been ignoring Yorick, really) and StarBob and I actually ended up coming to an agreement on... everything we were talking about. I went through your arguments and responded with my own (that was mainly an opinion vs opinion thing), and I would've been happy to keep that up, but you just switched on over to: It's popular.

As I said in my post, I don't agree with what the mainstream game industry considers a good game. If millions of people consider a couple of hours of Batman running around punching and grappling henchmen an achievement, that doesn't make it so.

I did like the game (6/10 is on the better half of the scale). The combat and stealth gameplay was fun and solid, and exploring a lot of the environments was enjoyable. Thought, that doesn't mean I can just ignore the fact that the game probably would've been better if you subtracted the story entirely from the equation. It could've been so better so easily and so much so. It just didn't come near the quality which a high profile game based on Batman in Arkham should. If that weren't the case, I'd probably give it an 8+ or so, but it is.

 

[Asknoone]

That's exactly my point. So why exactly would the game hold such high scores and have so many people praising it if it was just another shitty super hero game or simply mediocre? It would have been consigned to the bin like the rest of them. Like I said, people were waiting to tear this a new one simply because of the bitter taste the super hero genre has left in gamers mouths but the fact it was a decent game is why it was reviewed and received so well. Just because you didn't like it does not mean that it doesn't deserve it's high acclaim. It was a good game and a great super hero game.

It's a little bit silly to have to resort to the "Yeah, well, just because it's received 'high acclaim' doesn't mean it's not a mediocre game!", but it's true. Gaming accolades mean almost nothing to me; the mainstream culture has a very different idea as to what makes a good game and I am not in the least convinced it's worth the paper it's printed on.

What's more, you seem to be making the assumption that because it's a "super-hero" game it operates within certain parameters, and that due to that genres preceding success - or lack thereof - the game is only obligated to take one or two steps toward the established benchmark. Wrong, and fallacious too. They were not constricted by genre and it is certainly inexcusable to judge its merits and deficiencies on that basis alone. A "good game" and a "great super-hero game"? What does that even mean?

In fact I found the character design for the most part to stay true to universe Batman is set (the comics, not The Dark Knight, which should not even enter a conversion about a game based on the comics with regard to aesthetic design) whilst having a darker look to them.

Relative to what comics? You're talking about a literary history of 70 years. The Dark Knight is used as an example because it takes certain themes and ideas prevalent in Batman - elements that can be seen in a whole range of comics - and took them to another level. Why is Arkham Asylum exempt from this? Because it's a soopa hewo game and we don't expect much from that mob of hooligans and degenerates? I don't think so.

I'm sorry you didn't like it but i'm with the majority on this.

Crap. Why didn't I see this before? The majority. Hey, hey - I lose. Disregard everything I said preceding this immediately.

 

[Shift]

Whereas I found the storyline shady, and the voice acting, especially on Batman's part, a bit off, thats generally not why I loved the game. The hand to hand combat system on that has to be one of the best I have played with, and the silent predator sections were a lot of fun despite the fact the goons you were fighting obviously complete retards. The storyline to me was just something I didn't pay much attention to, just something to progress my character forward in the game, but I can see why it would cause some people to degrade their review because the plot certainly wouldn't win any awards, it was very basic and generic really, hence why I never payed much attention to it.

As for it being game of the year? Well that doesn't mean anything really, for instance Apocalypse Now is regarded as the best war film ever made by a lot, or in the top 10 greatest films ever made, and I stand by my opinion that its ridiculously overrated and there are films MILLESSSSS ahead of it in terms of quality. Same goes with games, for instance on here is a MASSIVE hatred of the CoD series but I think its fantastic (until they made MW2 where it just became stupid).

But as Samon said, a game recieving high acclaim, should have no ground in an argument because thats usually based on a consensus of mainstream reviews and votes from mainstream viewers, who generally don't know what they are talking about, the sort of people who thinks Assassin's Creed is amazing, or that Crysis is the best shooter ever. I mean I was surprised and relieved that AA did get game of the year last year because I think it deserved it really (although there wasn't much competition at all), but in a debate on the quality of the game, bringing it up here especially, is a bad idea.

I'm with you stemont in saying its a good game, I think the combat alone gives it a 7/10 for me personally but because once I had mastered it, the satisfaction of clearing out entire rooms of goons without breaking the combat was incredible, but I'm also with others on here, in saying it could have been SO much better in regarding its plot.

 

[stemot]

Oooh, quoted before the edit eh? Like I said, I'm done. Go play something you do like instead.

 

[Asknoone]

I don't think you can justly get away with furthering the discussion, and then subsequently abandoning it. Bad form!

 

[Sheepo]

Go play something you do like instead.

You could atleast read my response, even if you won't reply to it. I feel like if you do, we may be able to prevent this in the future.

 

[Remus]

Command and Conquer 4 - 2/10

One point for being C&C, and another point for having Kane in it.

Apparently this game went under the radar for me. I rented it to see what it was all about and in all honesty this is probably the worst C&C game ever made. No base building, no tiberium collecting, and having to capture control nodes...

A rundown of what this "gem" has to offer:

-No Scrin faction.
-The "epic" units from the previous game vanished into thin air
-Very limited selection of units.
-Only a handful of maps to choose from in skirmish.
-Boring/uninspired gameplay
-Terrible, cringe worthy cutscenes. The nameless commander even has an annoying wife.

At this point I doubt anyone cares about the story anymore, however in my opinion the previous game at least offered solid, fun, gameplay, and plenty of content. So why the hell would anyone want to buy this "bare bones" game after Kane's Wrath?

 

[StarBob]

Command and Conquer 4 - 2/10

It's sad really... a great franchise and it's killing itself. I guess I'll be able to get it on some super-mega steam sale in a couple months then.

 

[Barnz]

C&C died long time ago.

 

[Remus]

While on the subject of C&C

C&C 3 - Tiberium Essence Mod 8/10

Found this mod through youtube and it's great. It basicaly modifies C&C 3 to be more like Tiberian Sun, and in my opinion it succeeds.

-Tiberian Sun music plus new original tracks in a similar style.
-Tiberian Sun screams for the infantry, and gore effects.
-Some familiar buildings and units like the Mammoth MKII, Nod Artillery, hover MLRS, titan, wolverine, RPG tower etc.

Only two things are missing that could've made it better, the random ion storms and mutants in skirmish maps.

Overall I think it makes the game a lot more fun. Highly recommend it.

 

[Adabiviak]

Metro 2033: 7/10 - definitely worth a play, but I'll be pretty bored if I'm replaying this anytime soon.

Plus: Wonderfully creepy, good money system, actual ammo scarcity at times, innovative HUD, fun shoot-em-up when you get to, excellent graphics, good flashlight system.
Minus: Scripted events where you randomly have to "tap Alt" at certain parts, where the only cue is that message on the screen. I wound up tapping Alt throughout cut scenes of this ilk so I wouldn't have to think about it while watching the scene. Non-intuitive game mechanics that aren't explained well except during the reload screens after death. Seemingly random save points, with no quick save.

 

[Sheepo]

Psychonauts 8.5/10

Wow, this game is brilliant. Terrific look, solid and fun gameplay and puzzle solving that flowed pretty well, hilarious and charming storytelling and writing. Easily one of the best all around games I've ever played. Only real complaints are the 'collect arrowheads' bits and the occasional facesmashingly frustrating 'what the **** am I supposed to do here and how... WHY AM I ON FIRE? Oh boy, I get to start from the very beginning" parts, but that's a problem with most all video games really, and there weren't too many here. Also, hands down the funniest game I've ever played.

 

[stemot]

Psychonauts 8.5/10

Wow, this game is brilliant. Terrific look, solid and fun gameplay and puzzle solving that flowed pretty well, hilarious and charming storytelling and writing. Easily one of the best all around games I've ever played. Only real complaints are the 'collect arrowheads' bits and the occasional facesmashingly frustrating 'what the **** am I supposed to do here and how... WHY AM I ON FIRE? Oh boy, I get to start from the very beginning" parts, but that's a problem with most all video games really, and there weren't too many here. Also, hands down the funniest game I've ever played.

I had a few issues with the platform sections playing on M+K but other than that I would agree with your score. Good game, due another run through methinks.

 

[Sheepo]

Yeah, some platforming parts are unnecessarily demanding/unlear on what they want you to do/make you start completely over when you fail to do it/RAGE etc.

 

[Warped]

Battlefield Bad Company 2 7/10

before I get the "I told ya so" speech I was a big fan of the 1st BC game. the dialogue, interesting characters, setting, it was a nice walk in the park. This new campaign was fun, but I died a lot during frustrating moments on Normal mode and there was either too many cutscenes that broke up the action or just too many dull moments in between the action. overall it was fun but if you haven't gotten this game yet, at least rent it for the multiplayer. it did give me about a months worth of fun in that area of the game. also i got about 82% of the trophies in this game and they were a piece of cake to get too

 

[99.vikram]

Real Lives 2010 - 8.5/10

I got this game today and played it for the first time. The interface is sparse, and stays out of your way, though it is a little weird to navigate. The game itself is deceptively simple. At it's core, it is a game based around probability. You start out as a random person in a random country. From there, you guide your avatar through life's myriad choices (if you survive childhood, that is.) But myriad is perhaps the wrong word, because there aren't all that many choices in the game.

What really hooked me into this game is the range of things that can happen to your character, from malaria to getting fired, and all the interesting trivia the game presents along the way. This trivia is almost always related to what you currently trying to do, ensuring you remember it rather than just give up and say "I'll google that, thanks."

For example, as soon as I fired up a game the first few times I realised that a human child has to be really, really lucky to make it to adulthood. If it's not hookworms, it's whooping cough, or even just plain starvation that's hanging over your head in the third world. Another thing I learned: Why Africa produces a disproportionate number of world-class sportsmen. For a kid living in squalor, athletics is pretty much the only leisure activity.

Make no mistake, this is not a challenging game. If you survive the early years and invest right, you almost always die a billionaire. But for some reason I can't explain, this game hooked me immediately and made me care about the life of a shallow and impersonal virtual person. It's like an educational Sims lite, if that makes any sense. Do try it out.

Here's the log of my first game, for the curious.

Noteworthy points:
1. The Manage Business window failed after I became too rich, due to some integer error.
2. My character got sluttier the older she got. That was awesome, and is how I hope to live my life.

 

[the cow says moo]

Real Lives 2010 - 8.5/10

 

[Shakermaker]

My character got sluttier the older she got. That was awesome, and is how I hope to live my life.

lolled +1


Also, that log makes fascinating reading.

 

[Barnz]

Medal of Honor: Pasific Assault (PC) 2/10

I don't know where to start from. This game is horrible. I can't stand it anymore. I left the game after the second level. I can't see a shit in the jungle. It was full of annoying traps. The gameplay simply doesn't work. It's not fun. Ten USA soldiers can't take down a single Japanese, what the hell? I'd rate it one if there wasn't any music.

Yes, it has impressive visuals, but the gameplay is a piece of shit. I think they rushed to release the game, or what?

 

[StarBob]

Medal of Honor: Pasific Assault (PC) 2/10

I don't know where to start from. This game is horrible. I can't stand it anymore. I left the game after the second level. I can't see a shit in the jungle. It was full of annoying traps. The gameplay simply doesn't work. It's not fun. Ten USA soldiers can't take down a single Japanese, what the hell? I'd rate it one if there wasn't any music.

Yes, it has impressive visuals, but the gameplay is a piece of shit. I think they rushed to release the game, or what?

They still make MoH games? wow...

 

[99.vikram]

They still make MoH games? wow...

MoH: PA is a couple of years old IIRC.

 

[stemot]

Medal of Honor: Pasific Assault (PC) 2/10

I don't know where to start from. This game is horrible. I can't stand it anymore. I left the game after the second level. I can't see a shit in the jungle. It was full of annoying traps. The gameplay simply doesn't work. It's not fun. Ten USA soldiers can't take down a single Japanese, what the hell? I'd rate it one if there wasn't any music.

Yes, it has impressive visuals, but the gameplay is a piece of shit. I think they rushed to release the game, or what?

I got to exactly the same place before I turned it in. To go from Allied Assault to this was the start of the downward spiral for this franchise. Hope the new ones pull the series back.

 

[Lucid]

Pacific Assault wasn't nearly that bad.

 

[Barnz]

It was so bad that I wanted to play Cthulhu mod for Half-Life again.

 

[Shift]

FEAR 2 - 2/10

I got about an hour into it and just gave up. The HUD display is disorientating and very annoying and the movement feels as though you are just floating through the air. The gunfights are boring and the environments they take place in are just as boring, WHY they've taken the lean function out I will never know. The parts that are meant to be scary are just laughable frankly. Absolute garbage.

 

[Shift]

Commandos: Behind Enemy Lines - 8/10

Recently brought the collection off stream and have been plouging through them. Just completed the first of the series and I despite the linearity of the game compared to Commandos 2, its still a LOT of fun and very challenging in parts. The levels are varied and the commandos variety gives you a wide selection of choice in terms of how to approach the given objective. When this first came out there was nothing like it, and I can safely say its stood the test of time. It looses a point being inconsistent via steam, the amount of times I've had to reinstall it..

 

[ríomhaire]

BTW, if a fix for anyone having problems with Behind Enemy Lines (Superfast gameplay, lack of sound, not able to save/load).

 

[taviow]

Thank you. I had the game speed problem.

Great game!

 

[Shift]

Splinter Cell: Conviction - 4/10

Whereas at first glance the game, despite loosing most of the mechanics of the old Splinter Cell games (which made them so good), still looked fun and the reviews I read did warrant a try at least, despite having skepticism on whether it would actually be good.

The answer is, no, it isn't good. I purchased this yesterday after trading some games in, played the first few levels and frankly I am rather disheartened to the point where I am considering taking it back tomorrow for something else.

First thing I noticed was the AI has not been addressed from the demo, I was shooting people in the face from behind cover, in plain view of someone across the room and they were none the wiser. The whole flanking motion they put in, whereby you stay in one place of cover and move to the next leaving a silhouette of yourself so that you can flank enemies, backfires horribly. All it shows furthermore is again, just how stupid the enemy guards are. Also I found extremely odd that ALL the guards seemed to wield a flashlight 0_o However I will grant that the AI does get marks in some areas, for instance when they see you exit a window they will come over and look outside on the ledges, however it is only a minor point.

Second of all, whereas the now reinvented HUD (or lack thereof) is cool in some aspects, for instance objectives now showing up on walls or the surrounding scenery as to destroy the whole start menu structure (I suppose to enhance immersion), it does frankly have more flaws than benefits. For instance the screen changing from normal, to black and white when you are in the shadows just gets annoying after a while, for me anyway. Considering the amount of time you spend in the shadows, or the amount of times you pass between light and darkened areas, the screen switches its color palette far too often and it does just become an annoyance. Also since there is no pause menu system anymore you can no longer read emails or various messages that you find, giving you small insights into the goings on with the plot or the level that you are currently on which is a let down.

The third and most important factor is the gameplay itself. I will grant that the cover system is fantastic, one of the best I've seen actually, and the fluidity of the controls are top notch. But its just become another generic action game, trying to balance stealth and action. What gave Splinter Cell an edge before was all the gadgets you had at your disposal, and how, on the hardest difficulty at least, you little or no ammo so had to pick your shots carefully. It gave each scenerio a playground of opportunity, allowing the player to adopt various strategies for dealing with the guards or avoiding them altogether, making sure all bodies were removed from view etc, and generally executing a strategy in a sleek, and stylish manner without being seen was one of the highlights of the previous games.

All of that is gone now. You can basically enter a room, switch between cover and just shoot everyone in the face. You can't move bodies anymore and generally guards barely react to seeing one anyway so that one layer of difficulty removed. The only gadgets you get are the night vision goggles and EMP/FLASH/FRAG grenades, from what I have played and seen anyway. The mark and execute system is pretty cool but again just makes thing easier, plus Fisher has some amazing ability to be able to shoot through solid objects if needs must, using this ability. Overall the entire inventory aspect of the gameplay is gone, and frankly the levels I have played so far have been boring to say the least.

I will try and play more to see if anything changes but I doubt it will. Think this one is definitely going back tomorrow.

 

[stemot]

I'm quite enjoying it so far. I'm over the fact they have taken it in a new direction now, as much as it pissed me off before. Like you said, the ease of movement is something that Splinter Cell games have been needing for a while, and while it's impossible to move a dead body (stupid design idea), you can still avoid body detection by grabbing the said person and dispatching them in the dark. I'm at

Spoiler

Third Echelon

now, and I haven't really been making use of the mark and execute which has made the later levels a little challenging. You also get a few more gadgets etc later in the game.
I also think the interactive interrogation scenes are pretty nice, though I miss the option to do it to lowly guards for shits and giggles.

A few videos from the PC version, careful of spoilers:-

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qO_pPSbbFYA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XmKgdY3_0bo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fOlZlzyTlYo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zxEHXF3Lf5E

 

[jimbo118]

I just finished it and overall was impressed. Alot of neat new ideas tbh. I played Chaos Theory last week and it felt plodding as shit. Will post moar impressions later if I can be arsed.

 

[Absinthe]

I just finished it and overall was impressed. Alot of neat new ideas tbh. I played Chaos Theory last week and it felt plodding as shit. Will post moar impressions later if I can be arsed.

An actual stealth game felt more plodding than this bastardized stealth/action abortion? **** me.

Tempted to post a review of my own, but I think I'd just end up repeating Shift's post. I guess it's a good enough game in its own right, but hey... It's got god damn "SPLINTER CELL" written on the front of the box. I think my colored perception and disappointment with this game is justified!

 

[Krynn72]

Just beat it myself, and I'd say I liked it a little better than shift, but I'd still only rate it 6/10.

I didn't find the AI to be too bad. Better than most games really. I think it was just tweaked to be too easy. All their actions seemed to be pretty advanced, its just that to spot something they had to be really close to it, they gave up searching too quickly, and didnt ever look up. It seems like sound was almost a non-issue. There were several times I just ran up to someone, and they didnt turn around until the split second before I melee-killed them. I think the AI was alright, but it was "balanced" for idiots.

And really thats the biggest problem with the whole game. Its balanced for idiots. Not being able to pick up bodies is pretty much blasphemy in the SC series, and complete BS when enemies can spot the bodies and be alerted. Like Stemot said, you can grab them and move them while they're still alive, but that doesnt cut it most of the time. I didn't like not having control over my movement speed. Having sound not matter didn't make it a big deal, but one of the things I really liked about the older SCs was that you had to control your movement speed to move silently, or run loudly depending on the situation.

The Mark/Execute mechanic makes even the hard difficulty feel like easy mode. It simply breaks the game. I ended up not even using it for most of the game, and when I did it was only when the game threw like 6 enemies at you in a narrow corridor with no room to really move.

Also, Triggered alarm = mission failure again? Seriously? This is the biggest thing that pisses me off about the game. They did this in Pandora Tomorrow and got lots of flack for it. People hated it, and for a reason. But the next game (Chaos Theory) rectified this, and they even went so far as to make a joke about it in the game, thats how bad it was. But these designers apparently didn't even play the game, or at least heed the lessons learned by the old developers, and went ahead and put one of those levels in Conviction. God damn stupid decision. Its an even dumber idea than removing the ability to carry bodies, because THEY ALREADY MADE THE SAME MISTAKE BEFORE. AND THEN FIXED IT AND PUBLICLY RECOGNIZED HOW STUPID IT WAS.

Lambert: Sam, be extra careful on this mission.
Fisher: What, 3 alarms and you'll pull the plug?
Lambert: Be serious Fisher, this isn't a video game!

The game is pretty much dumbed down bullshit, and the only redeeming qualities are the story and Sam's voice acting. And the story is only just 'alright.' I liked the Sam/Sarah/Grim bits, but the overall story is typical save the world bullshit, which splinter cell was never really about. At least not so directly. But whoever voices Sam is one of my favorite voice actors in any game. Grim's not bad either, was pretty cool that I recognized her right away when she called up Sam, even without an introduction.

 

[Stigmata]

Is he still voiced by Michael Ironside? He did the voices in the first three Splinter Cells (and probably Double Agent, not sure though), and was also the man on the phone in the movie Phone Booth. He's p. brilliant in this sort of role.

 

[Absinthe]

Is he still voiced by Michael Ironside? He did the voices in the first three Splinter Cells (and probably Double Agent, not sure though), and was also the man on the phone in the movie Phone Booth. He's p. brilliant in this sort of role.

That is Kiefer Sutherland.

nub

 

[Sheepo]

Just realized that I neglected to mention the worst aspect of Psychonauts: collecting arrowheads.

 

[ríomhaire]

Non so bad at all once you get the arrowhead detector though. Actually, I found looking for the giant arrowheads to be fun. Collecting the small ones at the start sucks though.

 

[15357]

Mass Effect 2 - 10/10

I've never had this much fun with a game since a long long time ago. Combat was certainly an improvement over the first game: it was no longer "point-and-kill" you had to aim somewhat, and was improved especially in the harder difficulties. The cinematics and the atmosphere was faultless. Funny moments, jokes, etc. made the game even better. The game was somewhat like an RPG, but without the grind that makes those games too easy to get bored of. It had several downsides, such as

Spoiler

WHERE IS TALI'S FACE?

and the whole "planetary probe" thing that seemed pointless, but those were negligible.

I'm always a sucker for those games who put the story as the main element. The Avernum/Exile series by Spiderweb Software were very excellent in the same way that ME2 is awesome. In fact, I'd give Avernum 6 a 9/10.

 

[stemot]

Is he still voiced by Michael Ironside? He did the voices in the first three Splinter Cells (and probably Double Agent, not sure though), and was also the man on the phone in the movie Phone Booth. He's p. brilliant in this sort of role.

Yep, still Ironside and TBH it's his best performance yet. He has something to work with on an emotional level in this one which has been lacking from Sams character in the previous games.

I liked the Sam/Sarah/Grim bits.

Yeah, that's what I meant about the story. Your right of course about the main story and it's fascination to jump into bed with MW2's and Bad Company 2's EMP storylines. The story I liked is the more personal story line between Sam and Grim, and the fact that he never really knew his friends at all. I liked the more aggressive, no nonsense, nothing left to lose and broken Sam which made for some interesting emotional scenes.

Gameplay wise I am finding the more I play the game and the better accustomed I get to the intricacies of the new play style the more and more I like it. I especially think the Splinter Cell series has been longing for a little more intuitive movement for Sam that Conviction features.

Like I said, decent enough game and story wise a great follow up, just don't go in expecting it to be the same Splinter Cell games that came before, it's moving on from total stealth.