Splinter Cell: Conviction's lost features

By Wesley Yin-Poole Published 14 December, 2010

Why a "true realistic" difficulty never made it.

Ubisoft Montreal has revealed why some hardcore stealth features failed to make it into April's Xbox 360 and PC game Splinter Cell: Conviction.

Some Splinter Cell fans complained that the game steered too far from the core stealth gameplay seen in previous titles in the series. In a post-mortem written by Ubisoft Montreal's Patrick Redding, Alex Parizeau and Maxime Beland for Gamasutra, the development team agreed with this assessment – and explained it.

Conviction, first revealed in 2007, began life as such a notable departure from previous games in the series that Ubisoft "felt one of its key franchises was in potential jeopardy".

It suffered a high profile delay to give the team a chance to implement features existing fans of the series had come to expect from Splinter Cell – effectively the development team started from scratch. But due to time constraints it proved impossible to effectively implement them all.

"Many features that are a given in a Splinter Cell game, such as dynamic lighting, two-handed weapon firing, and gadget management literally needed to be recoded from scratch," the team said.

"Any new mechanics needed to sit on top of these must-have features, putting further pressure on the timetable and creating considerable bug risk.

"For example, the black and white filter that tells the player they are hidden from nearby AI was functionally dependent on the restoration of the light and shadow system. It was impossible to make changes to ambient lighting or the nuances of shadow gradation without impacting the logic of the black and white filter, which made it harder to debug and prevented us from giving the effect the degree of visual polish we wanted.

"Unfortunately there wasn't time to rebuild everything. Analog movement speed was abandoned in favour of a simplified run-walk system. The ability to pick up and hide dead bodies was never recreated, nor was lock picking, nor the full variety of door-entry mechanics."

Conviction was designed as a more accessible, less punishing stealth game that would broaden Splinter Cell's audience. This meant the loss of some core features long-term fans had come to expect from the series, such as the ability to move dead enemies and the use of a knife for close quarter kills.

"Stealth games in general occupy a relatively narrow niche, and Ubisoft needed to expand the franchise's appeal or risk it falling between the cracks, pleasing no one," the team revealed.

"Earlier chapters in the Splinter Cell series had emphasized a fairly punishing model of stealth play that required painstaking observation and concealment, and which generally ended badly if the enemies' suspicions were ever aroused to the point of violence.

"Opening the series up to new players who were wary of its reputation meant devising completely new mechanics and streamlining much of the complexity from the original systems. Unfortunately, some much-appreciated features - like the ability to move dead enemies, or use a knife for close-quarters kills - fell by the wayside because they were never included in the original design requirements, and there wasn't sufficient time left to reintegrate them and polish them to the standard of the earlier games.

"Among other things, the compounding development pressures left the team without enough time to implement and polish a true 'realistic-hardcore' difficulty setting that would have better satisfied the desire of some players to tackle the game in a more traditional way."

Simon Parkin turned up a 7/10 in Eurogamer's Splinter Cell: Conviction review.

"Where once players were free to tackle Splinter Cell's enemies in myriad, improvised ways, now the options are more limited, traded for an upped tempo that's more Arkham Asylum than Metal Gear," he wrote. "At its best, Conviction is played as a high-stakes puzzle game, taut and thrilling when everything is going your way. But when cover is broken, the floodlights go up to reveal a mediocre shooter. Perhaps the greatest irony of all is that Splinter Cell: Conviction appears brightest in the dark."

A sixth game in the series is currently in production at Ubisoft's Jade Raymond=managed Toronto studio.

Picture of Wesley.

About Wesley Yin-Poole

Wesley is Eurogamer's news editor. He likes news, interviews, and more news. He also likes Street Fighter more than anyone can get him to shut up about it.

Read more articles from Wesley by visiting the Wesley Yin-Poole archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (39) Latest comment 1 year ago

Comments for this article are now closed, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • jag10 #1 1 year ago

    everyone knows who the stealth king is.

  • AcidSnake #2 1 year ago

    @Beemoh:
    Indeed, he was just here and now all I see is this oversized box...

  • Peew971 #3 1 year ago

    Conviction was definitely the worst of the series, even Double Agent wasn't that bad. I'm willing to give the series a last chance though.

  • glottis0 #4 1 year ago

    I think Ubisoft are talking bollocks - if they'd made the game actually good, it could've easily sold 2.5 million. Accessible doesn't mean "drop all the deep mechanics and features" - it means "make it so non-nerds can learn to play".

    Look at Civ 5 or the new WoW patch - both made their respective games more accessible without breaking them horribly.

  • Haloboy #5 1 year ago

    And yet it still turned out completely inferior to Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory. CT Spy Vs Merc mode was beyond amazing.

  • matrim83 #6 1 year ago

    That was surprisingly honest. I hope they move back towards the old games with the next one. Or at least find a path that lets both the new comers and the old fans enjoy the game.

  • bad09 #7 1 year ago

    On this one I'm almost glad Ubi infected it with their sales killing DRM stopping me buying this. I only read about the black and white when hiding thing recently, what a stupid thing to do and as a SC fan I'm glad I didn't pay for this game (double agent was bad enough), was gonna pick it up when I've finished my 2nd hand AC2 but I'm not even gonna bother with a second hand version of SC.

  • SteveHolt #8 1 year ago

    It was a great game IMO. A bad splinter cell maybe, but a great game nonetheless.

  • AtomicBanana Verified Level Designer, Playground Games #9 1 year ago

    I liked all the previous games, and I liked this. It was brave to reinvent it from the ground up, and the core of the stealth gameplay in this was good, they had perhaps just gone slightly too far. The UI in this one is still fantastic, many games could learn a lot from it. Add in a few of the more complex features, up the difficulty a little, and the next one will be awesome.

  • Spekingur #10 1 year ago

    I liked this one. Felt more like a Jason Bourne game though.

  • coolbritannia #11 1 year ago

    The original xbox Splinter Cells were far superior to Metal Gear in terms of stealth and realism, I've gone off the series as it got further and further from it's roots.

  • Shinetop #12 1 year ago

    Very honest, I like that. I can understand that Ubi wants the game to appeal to a broader series, I just wish they could have done it by making the stealth more accessible instead of dropping the stealth altogether, like glottis0 said.

    Also their choice of "must have features" is weird. Dynamic lighting and two handed firing are must-have, but hiding bodies and lockpicking wasn't? Seems like an excuse they came up with before he gives the real reason: Ubi didn't want stealth. It's pretty obvious from the entire game: it focuses entirely on brutally beating people through mirrors and against bathroom sinks. That's not a stealth game where there was no time to recreate enough stealth features: that's an action game, plain and simple.

    Oh well, maybe the next one will be good again, but I doubt it. Apparently it sold pretty well and rare complaints here about the lack of stealth were often met with a barrage of "what u talking about its still splinter cell coz fisher is in it". So apparently it worked for a lot of people that weren't me.

    And besides, as jag10 said, we all know who the stealth king is. And we'll probably see him again in Thief 4. :p

  • Wash #13 1 year ago

    I actually enjoyed it immensely, didnt have the impact of the first couple of splinter cells, but from a story/presentation point of view i thought it was more engaging :\

    Now if they could mix that with the original xbox titles i'd be happy to purchase.

  • coomber #14 1 year ago

    The black and white 'feature' was the worst thing about the game. It was so badly done, it made it harder for you to see enemies when it was meant to just make it harder for them to see you. It was still an OK game but it was the worst in the series.

    As for it being designed to encourage new people to play the game...I found it the hardest of the lot.

  • arcam #15 1 year ago

    Splinter Cell is a sad story. Another franchise ruined by the need to make everything more broadly appealing.

  • nuanimal #16 1 year ago

    "Many features that are a given in a Splinter Cell game, such as dynamic lighting, two-handed weapon firing, and gadget management literally needed to be recoded from scratch,"

    Am I reading that right? Which Splinter Cell game had dual-wielding of weapons!?

  • Jay-ITFC #17 1 year ago

    I must have been one of the few that really enjoyed Conviction (and that's coming from someone who has played every Splinter Cell before it). Sure it was less stealthy than previous games but the change felt like a breath of fresh air. The campaign was short but enjoyable and co-op was so good that me and a mate bought the DLC instantly.
    Edited by Jay-ITFC at 14/12/10 @ 10:06

  • TVoJ #18 1 year ago

    Well I for one am glad. I really liked Conviction. The previous games never appealed to me (any I didn't own an Xbox Orig) but with this being a little broader it sucked me in. So much so I have now read the first novel also. I am now a bona-fide Sam Fisher Fan. Thank you Ubisoft........for once.

  • coolbritannia #19 1 year ago

    'Am I reading that right? Which Splinter Cell game had dual-wielding of weapons!? ' I think he's referring to the uber rifle you could wield in the first games, needing two hands to hold it.

  • Power_n_Glory #20 1 year ago

    I thought the new game was pretty good but could have done with a much harder difficulty level. The shooting mechanics weren’t great and when you got into a fire fight it wasn’t all that fun. Staying in the shadows, stalking enemies and trying to take out multiple enemies quickly and quietly were fun and challenging. I loved the Government building level with the cameras. That was fun. But only if you try to sneak past enemies without being seen and avoid the duck and cover GOW style shoot outs. The game sucks if you play it like that.

    If they wanted to take the more action packed approach, they should have improved the enemy shot detection and rag doll physics. Sort of like Max Payne.

    Can’t wait to see what they do with the next game. I had fun with this one and hope they don’t abandon everything. I liked the controls and feel of the new Sam Fisher.

  • Raciend #21 1 year ago

    "April's Xbox 360 exclusive Splinter Cell: Conviction. " What? I am pretty sure this game is on the PERSONAL COMPUTER. Damn consoletards ^^ A game can not be a platform exclusive when it is also to be found on another platfrom, can it?

  • Armoured_Gideon #22 1 year ago

    It was the fact that I wasn't immediately shot down by wolf-eared, eagle-eyed soldiers from half a building away if I so much as even sniffed that drew me to this game. It was perfect for me, the optimal mix of stealth and action.

    It also got rid of that most annoying (for me) Splinter Cell convention: "Here's an array of amazing guns. Don't fire any of them."

  • ChthonicEcho #23 1 year ago

    "Ubisoft Montreal has revealed why some hardcore stealth features failed to make it into April's Xbox 360 exclusive Splinter Cell: Conviction."

    Except, y'know, it also came out on PC.

  • The-Bodybuilder #24 1 year ago

    They should've stuck with the original concept they had for conviction.
    Instead they just made it stuck in no-mans land; not like the previous SCs, yet not that different from it, just a very watered-down version.

  • arcam #25 1 year ago

    Even Microsoft advertise Splinter Cell Conviction as an Xbox 360 exclusive. There is no point in trying to hold back the tide by pointing out the actual definition of exclusive. To EG, MS, fanboys etc, the Xbox/PS war is all that matters and so in that context, if you've prevented your rival from getting a game, it is an exclusive.

  • Centrifugal #26 1 year ago

    Well I really enjoyed it, and it was one of my favourite games of 2010. It was a little short and I wish it had been stealthier, but I still enjoyed it all very much.

  • Shinetop #27 1 year ago

    t also got rid of that most annoying (for me) Splinter Cell convention: "Here's an array of amazing guns. Don't fire any of them."

    They could've done that by simply getting rid of the guns.

  • SAMagic #28 1 year ago

    Really, what glottis0 said.

    "Conviction was designed as a more accessible, less punishing stealth game that would broaden Splinter Cell's audience. This meant the loss of some core features long-term fans had come to expect from the series, such as the ability to move dead enemies and the use of a knife for close quarter kills."
    Less punishing is perfectly fine and is probably more dependent on level design, but removing features that had been in the other games? That's rubbish.

    If we're talking about appealing to some COD-loving moron, then they'll buy all-out action games like COD. They won't be satisfied by a game that's very mixed up between being stealth and action ('Aww yeah I'm in the dark gonna getcha Mr Guard BOOM DIE DIE DIE DIE'). Mixing those elements is fine, but Conviction seemed to be hesitant in what it was trying to be.

    A bit of a simplification, but you get my point.

  • Vin #29 1 year ago

    I've still not recovered from that awful DC chase scene.

  • Bogie19th #30 1 year ago

    Sam Fisher is and always be the stealth king. Booya!

  • BuddyChrist #31 1 year ago

    New idea for a game! There'll be a spy, but he won't be a sneaky spy (that'd be pants), we won't have gadgets (because chuck Norris don't need no gadgets!), and he won't be officially a spy... Because he's rogue.... And retired.
    All you need to know is that it's personal.

    They took enough spy out of it to actually sound more like Arnie's film Commando

  • RedSparrows #32 1 year ago

    bring back spies vs mercs. NOW.

  • SlackMaster #33 1 year ago

    Personally I think Conviction was the best in the series. Double Agent was awful, and the series was beginning to become stale. I enjoyed the campaign and the fact the game was more fluid. The original series was too punishing and almost in a hitman style of play required you to do things in a very linier way.

    I know stealth die hard fans don't like Conviction but I feel it has a more balanced style of play that allows you to be more reactive to your current situation and doesn't punish you for making a kill if necessary. Although stealth makes your life a lot easier it gives you the option to break cover and even set traps by doing so and using the last known location feature. If you get spotted then things can become a lot more difficult so I'm not sure quite what some people moan about.

    There are some great stealth tricks in there too like the activating of car alarms or the use of a mirror under doors etc. The co-op campaign was also excellent but would have been great if they had local play as well. I also liked the black and white stealth indicator. The graphical effect looked nice and it was a lot more obvious when you were out of sight rather than having to look at a little meter in the corner of the screen. I had no difficult seeing the enemy when it changed black and white either.

    Personally I hope they don't change the new style too much as although the original series had its place during the time the first two games were released it really lost its appeal from Chaos theory onwards for me.
    Edited by SlackMaster at 14/12/10 @ 12:50

  • TAKEL12 #34 1 year ago

    Huh? It's just a box

  • TVoJ #35 1 year ago

    It did have local co-op play. Thats how I played it.

  • mega7ech #36 1 year ago

    Confirms what I guessed had happened in its troubled development period and I'll stick by what I said in the review thread. My opinion of course but fingers crossed for the next SP.

  • Bluetooth #37 1 year ago

    It was a great game, and far more forgiving then the old Splinter Cells. I wish they would keep Sam's face the same though, all that botox is bad for him.

  • EthanWoods #38 1 year ago

    I liked the idea of it, but they should have known to not include mandatory firefights (and that includes sections where unless you know what you're doing immediately to avoid it, you're going to face a gun battle).

    I would have liked a proper improvisation system too; instead Sam just ends up with his old high-tech gear, and the PEC system just made things worse. In fact, it essentially broke the Mark and Execute mechanic, which was actually a pretty good idea - just not when you've got 4 tags and only 5 guys in a room anyway.

  • waggy79 #39 1 year ago

    I preferred Conviction to any other SC game. I guess i just prefer 'enjoying' games rather than being punished. Each to their own though.
    Edited by waggy79 at 14/12/10 @ 20:10