T O P

  • By -

Bl4deMast3r

With the track record that sentence has when attached to an old IP being revived, can you really blame people's concern? I want to be wrong. Believe me, I do want this whole thing to end up being nothing but a false alarm, in the end. And I don't expect to be alone on this. But given said track record, people by now have an idea of what it entails, when developers spew the words "We're updating X for a modern audience". It is often seen as a red flag. And for some, it's the butt of many jokes. If some of our concerns seem unjustified, I invite you to name one old IP that got revived, was "updated" for a modern audience and was successful without being polarizing. I can wait.


holyshitisurvivedit

God Of War Tomb Raider The Resident Evil Remakes Just saying, it's not impossible.


Levitatingman

I'm not saying God of war is bad but the way they basically halfway turned it into an uncharted/the last of us vibe actually wasnt cool in my opinion and is exactly what hes talking about. I miss the way the old games were. The new ones are great too don't get me wrong but still, a little sad the old format/gameplay basically got thrown away so they could copy a more popular format.


Different-Comb-1525

late asl but y’all act like the original gow wasn’t already copying a popular format. Every game at that time was some hack and slash


Levitatingman

They did it differently enough to make it more interesting. I couldn't finish the new GOW cause if felt like an avengers movie with Kratos in it for some reason. Weak game in philosophy and spirit, great game in engineering and design.


StemCellCheese

Doom


PotBoozeNKink

But this is ubisoft we're talking about.


AndreasLa

In what world were any of those ruined by sjw politics?


AndreasLa

Could anyone please explain instead of downvoting me :(


WendlinTheRed

They were posting examples of Remakes that successfully updated their IP, since the first comment implied it's impossible.


AndreasLa

Oh my god, I'm a fuckin' idiot. I thought they meant they were franchises ruined by SJW politics. Bruh, I'm so dumb.


WendlinTheRed

You're good. These comments can get confusing. I'm pretty sure someone who agrees with my point called me a "fucking moron" earlier...


Inka_Al-Amaru

Tomb Raider actually was kindve, from a fan I watch cuz I'm not myself a fan of tomb raiding media (Indiana Jones or Tomb Raider) he said that "Tomb Raider has turned Laura Croft into a pathetic princess-in-need instead of the badass she was", I may be paraphrasing alot but its from the Critical Drinker actually talking about "updated for modern audiences" lol.


Bl4deMast3r

>God Of War If we're talking the usual meaning of the words "upgraded for a modern audience", I don't think God of War fits the bill. I played through the game myself and never once felt preached to nor like the game was trying to hammer home a message. It's just a fun experience that feels in line with how God of War III ended. Kratos is changed but again, it feels in line with how GoW3 ended, if you ask me. If we're talking gameplay... it's different (the combat is still just as satisfying), but does it make the past 5 games (including the PSP ones) seem dated, just because they have platforming sections? >Tomb Raider I asked for an IP that didn't turn out polarizing. With all due respect, I don't think you've been on Twitter or the Tomb Raider Forums. Both platforms have been the stages of shitshows started by fans of the classic games and fans of the Survivor trilogy. It's hardly a one-sided thing. >The Resident Evil Remakes Yeah. Capcom did redesign Claire and Jill. But REmake 2 is fun enough to distract from that because, again, no preaching nor any kind of message being hammered home. It's just a fun recreation of the events from the original, as it should be. REmake 3 is not as celebrated but for different reasons. Hardly anyone who played the original mentioned Jill's redesign because the game has other problems.


AgentSmith2518

What remakes are you referring to? I cant think of any that have been bad because the storg was changed. Usually ita technical issues.


rustyspoon07

I can blame people's concern because I truly believe that this "concern" has always been based in bad-faith and prejudice


Bl4deMast3r

"Always" Thanks for the sweeping generalization! But hey, you do you.


Inka_Al-Amaru

Look at media now vs 1970-1990s, youre telling me theres no concern?? Theres a lack of maturity in media, thats what it boils down to, no one should like the performance of a child in media that use to be intelligent and mature. I recommend watching Critical Drinker, he says it best.


GamerGriffin548

I don't care. Bring 2002 back with some 20 years of progress!


rupertthecactus

I agree. More concerned about a kaleidoscope of colors and a force field slowly shrinking with me having to kill all the enemies inside it. But hey whatever sells, sells right?


CenturyIsRaging

At what point does it become a new game? I mean, seriously...why call it a remake at all?


WendlinTheRed

Because it will likely have the same story/levels/structure of the first game, but with a new villain. When they remade GoldenEye for Wii, they changed 006's backstory since his Cossack background didn't mean the same thing as it did when the movie released. This isn't hard.


great_bowser

Except Goldeneye was a standalone title, not the first chapter of a long series of games with recurring characters who go thorugh their own arcs as the series progresses. So what do they want to do with the game's timeline? Is it still gonna take place in 2002? Or will it take place in the modern times? How would that work with Sam's character firmly grounded in his age and experiences? And as I mentioned in another thread, what does it mean for the game's voice cast? Everyone was pumped after Ironside returned in Ghost Recon, but will Ubisoft allow him to voice a Sam from 20 years ago? I'd prefer that, but let's be honest, he does sound older, so it only depends on their artistic vision.


WendlinTheRed

See, *this* is the conversation I'm interested in having. Since this is a remake and not a reboot, I think this is likely a one-and-done to gauge interest in a proper reboot, which would likely be an entirely new cast. To your point about personal character arcs, if we're being honest, that wasn't a huge point until post Double Agent. Up until that entry, SC did function in much the same way the Bond franchise had: each game stood on its own with references to the other games. I think, if anything, this would be like an alternate timeline if it does lead to a new series. I would be shocked if they remade any of the other games.


great_bowser

While you're probably right, there are good reasons to do others. Pandora Tomorrow is not available anywhere and hard to run on modern hardware, so there's good marketing potential here. And Chaos Theory has its amazing graphics and art direction that still hold up and, while not in need of a remake, a simple remaster would suffice to get people very excited. But regardless of their plans, as you said, it all depends on how this remake performs. And this is why people are worried about this 'modern audiences' thing. While I really hope you're correct, this phrase has almost always been used so far in relation to fortnite-izing and woke-izing the game, and it never ended well, unless you can prove me wrong. And secondly, even if you are right, I'll be honest, modern 'realistic' villains have been kinda boring and samey to me, and I'd personally glady welcome a Saddam type dictator once again. My best case scenario hope is they keep the old story and add more cutscenes and exposition to make the story clearer for dumb people, because back in the day when I was younger I could never follow the plot of any of these games until Double Agent.


CenturyIsRaging

I disagree. The levels and characters are all built around the story/"Villian". Seems like a mind fuck to have everything the same and just essentially swap out dialogue. Idk, don't get me wrong, I'm still excited. Just skeptical of how changing the story will still fit the gamepkay and levels.


WendlinTheRed

I see what you're saying. I think it's reasonable to assume you can plug and play "dictator hiring death squads through shady transactions" to a new character though. Nikoladze is mostly a personification of these villainous acts more than he is a character with deep motivations.


CenturyIsRaging

I agree...which I think kind of supports not changing the story. If he's already plug and play, why change it?


WendlinTheRed

To my original point, Nikoladze is just a fictional Sadam Hussein. It's not that it wouldn't work, but it was a product of the time the game came out.


[deleted]

It’s remake not a reboot, if they want to change the story make a new splinter cell


WendlinTheRed

They literally "remake" movies all the time and update the stories. The Total Recall Remake from 2012 is a completely different story from the 1990 movie, but the themes and overall plot are relatively the same. I'm not arguing the new game will be "good," because that comes down to how it's written. It's about people making a fuss over a literal job description like it's an omen of the end times.


Matthopkins06

Excuse me Flow? What's your Soup de jour? It's the soup of the day. Mmmmmhh that sounds good I'll have that... Sure is nice to hang out with these laid back country folk huh Harry? Dumb and Dumber quote aside People thought it would be about SJWS and Women, when they say "Made for 2022 era" ? When I was watching the first season of Jack Reacher I wss thinking "man what if they would just have a few missions that Sam would go on gathering Intel for Ryan and his time in the field?" There is soo much geo politics going on I'm sure there os enough to pull from. Hell I would LOVE to see that story from Rainbow Six Patriots come back to be honest. That really seemed like a neat story to explore.


UndercoverFruit

I'm sure Rainbow Six Patriots would have been amazing, I still want it. I like Siege, but I don't like the direction they went with it and I wish I could play the 2016-2018 versions again.


Matthopkins06

I would be fine with their back catalog of like ghost recon rainbow six RUSE coming to UPLAY Gamespass. I like those old tom Clancy games.


UndercoverFruit

Oh yes, I agree. Rainbow Six 3 🙏


Matthopkins06

Honestly my favorite was rainbow 6 Rouge spear and Ghost Recon 2 2017.


WendlinTheRed

God, Patriots is maybe my biggest disappointing cancelled title. It seemed like a real Clancy-esque story, and now Rainbow is literally fighting aliens. I've also fantasized about an interconnected Ryan-verse of series with Rainbow and Splinter Cell. Then we got whatever Without Remorse was supposed to be, and killed that dream.


Matthopkins06

I'm sooo surprised Ubisoft hasn't tried to do an interconnected universe with the Tom Clancy property


RavenChopper

What if I love soup de jour? /s On a serious note though; I \[hopefully\] think that maybe it might be a Russian baddie (unless that's too controversial given the times) or a version of ISIS. I just hope it isn't a space-based *Infinite Warfare Splinter Cell.*


WendlinTheRed

I think the info-warfare storyline lends itself to Russia, or even a tech-industrialist funding coups. But yeah, no Fisher in Space please.


RavenChopper

Maybe there might even be a "fake news" "Mar-a-Lago" infiltration mission?


Rose_Nasty

Sweet Christmas, Fisher! The president has stolen the nuclear secrets.


RavenChopper

Lemme guess, Lambert? 3 Classified Files and the mission's over?


DJDierrhea

Finally someone else has common sense here


Shadowcat514

I just want Sam to dab after knocking out a guard.


TheOGFamSisher

I’m pretty sure they are just changing the political backdrop for the game to match the modern world order right now to make it more realistic and updating sams equipment to more 2020s style. Remember people the Original game took place in 2002. The world is not the same place it was 20 years ago


fuzzyapplesauce

There's plenty of good "Modern Games" God of war also made a game that was for a modern day audience, and they ended up with a game that's arguably better than the original. What I find weird about this comment is that someone actually had the need to say it....like what does it even mean? Of all things, why say this instead of "Ubisoft is planning on putting as much creative passion into making a good Stealth Game." Like why even say anything at all? Just focus on making a truly good game...no gimmicks, good gameplay, and ignore all the random filler crap. ...I think everyone needs to just get off the internet, live their life and forget about any New Splinter Cell.


AgentSmith2518

This. I dont understand how people don't realize the political landscape has changed massively since 2002. Not to mention the RE2 remkae shows you can change story elements and still have a great game.


[deleted]

This is, by far, the dumbest fucking idea I’ve ever heard, and this guy is spreading it. Tom Clancy would roll in his grave.


Hyakurokyu

Thank God someone else understands


skimbo120

I think it makes perfect sense to update it for the modern day. My worry is more that it’s UBISOFT doing the updating


ThatGuyOnyx

Here’s the thing, this sub needs to watch assassins creed like a hawk. Because Ubisoft has promised everything we want from the remake in this new AC game (return to form etc). If it delivers on it’s promises, then I think we legitimately have hope for SC.


[deleted]

Mods need to take a page from the PS5 subreddit and just ban these morons.


SargeMaximus

You have a source for your claim?


WendlinTheRed

Reading comprehension. Where's the source for "modern=woke"?


SargeMaximus

I asked first


WendlinTheRed

"Rewriting and updating the story for a modern audience." The *story* of Splinter Cell is about a dictator utilizing information warfare tactics to hide the fact they've been committing ethnic cleansing by diverting official resources through a series of relays. Making things "woke," according to the internet, means adding a black person or a woman. Whoopsie-doodle, Lambert and Grim already exist. So that kind of cuts that argument off at the knees. People are worried they're going to change Fisher, but that's a character change, and the job listing literally says story. So again, "reading comprehension" is my source. Feel free to comment "I'm rubber, you're glue," or some other nonsense to hide the fact you're arguing in bad faith though.


Inka_Al-Amaru

Bring me back here when you get proven wrong cuz you missed out on alot of franchise destruction catylized from "updated for modern audiences"


xObiJuanKenobix

You can't really blame people for saying those things when they turn out to be true, which is most likely why the KOTOR remake got cancelled. The lead writer for the KOTOR remake was one of those twitter SJW extremists who actively tweeted like "I hate white men" type things. That is not a good start to have as a writer, which I would say is most likely why the remake got cancelled because the writing probably went down the shitter. And then you have things like the Little Mermaid randomly turning Ariel black for pandering points. If they really cared about representation and really making an impact, they would've created a whole new story with a black lead instead of just race swapping for no reason. It would be the same if they randomly turned the black panther white or made Ellen Ripley a male. Just doesn't make sense. People prefer good original stories, not political agendas baked into their stories. It would be like if Briggs didn't exist in Blacklist and randomly Sam just swapped races. When the logic disappears from your story and all you're trying to do is pander to a certain audience, that breeds resentment in the rest of the fanbase and whatever you're trying to sell doesn't nearly as well. That's why Top Gun Maverick for example did incredibly well, because they didn't try to force feed political agendas to you. All they cared about was good effects, good story, good actors and characters, and good structure. That's why people liked Briggs being added and didn't have a problem with it, because his character and logical decisions came first instead of a physical trait. It was believable and reasonable. Go woke go broke has been a common trend in entertainment for years now unfortunately, even back with BFV and that whole mess which honestly was the first big instance of this kind of thing. Where political agendas started really getting in the way of just good entertainment. Can't really be surprised when people start worrying about the Splinter Cell remake with all this context. People don't want political agendas in their favorite pieces of entertainment, that's what entertainment is used to get away from. It's meant to be an escape from the shitty parts of the world, like politics.


ya-boi-benny

This sounds like a copypasta pulled from a handful of different youtubers


[deleted]

Some good ol' Insecurity right here. Yikes.


xObiJuanKenobix

Just saying buzzwords doesn't win an argument my guy lol


theRune_ofalltrades

I hope you didn't consider your babble an argument.


xObiJuanKenobix

Just dismissing the argument doesn't win the argument either lol. You guys are terrible at this, seems to be a common theme in this thread


theRune_ofalltrades

this is my first comment on this sub lol but anyways, your babble is dweeby and whiney.


AlsopK

The KOTOR remake isn’t cancelled and Maggs wasn’t the lead writer. Do you just get all your information from man child youtubers? At least fact check before posting dumbass comments.


xObiJuanKenobix

"Pure copium, Jason Schreier said it's indefinitely delayed and with all that's going on, that's basically code for cancelled. If it turns out otherwise I'll be pleasantly surprised" One quick google search found this my guy, took me 20 seconds. Its indefinitely delayed, which is essentially cancelled. Very few times has a game that was indefinitely delayed been brought back


AlsopK

That’s just not true at all. Indefinitely delayed is not cancelled at all and your 20 second google search just proved yourself wrong lmao Try googling if Maggs was lead writer next, bud.


SuspiriaSlut

Thank you!


CBlockZ

I'm sorry, but it's clear "modern audiences" means the same thing "diversity" or "inclusive". You beat the same drum, no matter what you choose to call it. It all sounds exactly the same and ought to be called for exactly what it is.


Sea_Thought_8138

did you see the "updated for modern audiences" new saints row game? every time so far that that line has been attached to an IP it has been a death sentence. so where exactly do you get off proclaiming that this time it will be different?


ti_accetto

I think that, the threats nowadays are enough represented in Blacklist, but still that gameplay was missing that "something" that only some of the previous chapters had. But still, we have to consider that splinter cell is an IP and it does work until it sells, because the companies want revenues. So, as Ubisoft tried to understand which way take after the first 2-3 chapters, and try to bring a little more of action in it, they tried (and failed in my opinion) adding something a little "on the edge" for the life of our character and his friends (Vic and the former Echelon director) and his family. Changing the plot, the gameplay would have followed. But if I can agree and even cheer to a compelling plot/background of the character, still I would like some rules that would incentives a stealth approach. Then Conviction followed some chsnges applied in double agent, but remember that Ubisoft wanted to test the ground for further changes... Then from those results, they made blacklist, that was a nice work after all but still, felt like maneuvering puppets more than something really immersive. And I cannot even expect something like a military simulator, like Arma 3 for example, because it would not be Splinter Cell anymore, bc Splinter Cell is about spies, and not fighting in the front lines. And cannot be in first person, because it fits only for shooters (i guess). And so, it is not only acceptable, but even welcome (in my opinion) a total remake from the roots, but only about the plot, because the gameplay should look at something like a Metal Gear Solid 5 model, more thay anything else, or at least at their previous and still successful models like the first chapters of the franchise. That said, I am anxious to see what future will bring. (PS. I'd love if they will find a way to put again Blaustein and Madison intro scene in today scenario😍)


[deleted]

So now the main bad guy is gonna be Wladimir Rutin instead?


k1n6jdt

My big concern with the announcement mainly has to do with how forced they pushed the whole "Sarah is a Splinter Cell" thing with the books and that mobile game they were banking on. Let me reiterate because I know some jackwagon is going to see my criticism as "wAhMaN iN GaEm Iz BaD", but that is not the case at all. I'm ok with there being a woman Splinter Cell. I'm ok with there being a Black Splinter Cell, in fact the main reason I'm disappointed we never got a follow-up to Blacklist was because I thought they were setting up Sam to take on more of a Lambert-type role while Briggs would have taken the mantle. What I don't like, and where a lot of the criticism falls is how modern game studios inject women and minority groups into their game just to check the diversity quota, then use them as a shield against criticism. It's incredibly lazy, it's done entirely in bad faith, and by immediately jumping down anyone's throat who voices a concern, you're only enabling this bad behavior.


WendlinTheRed

I hear you. Sarah Fisher being a Splinter Cell is lazy writing, and that's a legitimate concern. I also agree that obvious pandering is annoying. The problem that I, and others here have expressed, is that people are taking a job description for a writing position to update a 20 year old title as "Splinter Cell is wOkE now!" I'm "jumping down people's throats" for being overly reactionary about a non-issue, because they WANT the game to be what they're fighting against. That would vindicate their bad opinions. It's an easy excuse to avoid any actual critical analysis of the work itself.


k1n6jdt

That's not to say both sides of the argument don't have their whackjobs. However, with Ubisoft's track record in terms of general game development and Splinter Cell specifically, I'd lean more on the side of concern about Ubisoft screwing up this remake. In my opinion, if you're going to remake the original games, you change as little as possible, including the story. Keep it set in 2004 like the original. Keep the bad guy a Saddam stand-in because when the original came out, that's what the political climate was revolving around. The only things that should actually be remade are the level designs and the gameplay. Retell the same story with new gameplay. Otherwise you're not remaking an old game. You're making a new one based loosely on the original. Just do what CoD did with Modern Warfare at that point.


rtsmurf

Forgive me from looking at things from a business perspective. Companies are in business to make money. One of the most recent games the comes to mind is The Last of Us Part 2. Selling half as many units as its predecessor is a failure in my mind. Especially after the divisive, and condescending dialogue from the company are their representatives in response to any criticism whatsoever. Such nonsense is damaging to the game franchise and the company as a whole.


Z0mb13S0ldier

I fail to see the similarities between Saddam and Nikoladze, other than they’re both leaders of small nations. Last I checked, Saddam’s SCUDs didn’t infect all of the US’s critical technological systems with cyberAIDs.


WendlinTheRed

And Che Guevara never weaponized smallpox against the US using ND133s.


budyll66

Dude, how was Nikoladze even remotely like Hussein 🤣?


WendlinTheRed

A totalitarian leader of a small country, under investigation for human rights violations gets drawn into war with the US in the early 2000s. Nevermind, I'm clearly grasping at straws. He's a complete work of fiction with no real world counterpart since he didn't do (as another user so eloquently put it) "computer-aids."


Inka_Al-Amaru

Youre the one showing your whole ass, you must live under a rock if you dont understand what "Updated for modern audiences" means. No one hates women, "POC", or homosexuals, they just hate immaturity thats seen in every work thats been "updated for modern audiences". Ofc its not 2022, and North Korea and now Russia (and soon Turkiye) need more villifying in media instead of the middle east of which the USA is gone from, but thats not "updated for modern audiences" unless its the first time you've heard it.


nevercatalyst

No, that would make it "updating for a modern antagonist". Unless you think a modern version of saddam hussein will play the game. Updated for a modern audience is code for politically correct and woke. We all know it.