Publicada: 24 de dezembro
I played the Splinter Cell series from the beginning, and this is almost categorically not Splinter Cell.
The narrative, I feel, is a failure, but it's a failure that began with the principle plot point in Double Agent (the apparent death of Sam's daughter, Sarah)—which Ubisoft was understandably obligated to resolve in Conviction. While I can say I mostly enjoyed DA, Sam himself started to become too wrapped up in the story. What made the first three games so eerie and interesting is that there were functionally two narratives: there was the geo-political narrative unfolding throughout each game, that we, as Sam, watched silently from the shadows, almost literally like a ghost, in which we were observers and not actors; and then there was the dark narrative in which we crept through the darkness, drifting from scene to scene in the larger picture. These two narratives, in each of the first four games, would in the end combine, as Sam stepped out of the shadows, finally, to assassinate someone. It was a slow burn—and that was Splinter Cell as I knew it.
In Conviction, this distinction has disappeared. There is only one narrative, and it's focused on Sam. Creeping in the shadows is only the precursor to the inevitable high-octane action that each sequence is designed around. You could play through Chaos Theory, the pinnacle of the Splinter Cell series, literally without being seen; this play style was not only accomodated; it was encouraged. But I guess casual gamers didn't have the patience or the interest to invest into another slow burn Splinter Cell.
I haven't played Blacklist, but prior to its release I would have pegged Conviction as the death of the series.