Haze, Splinter Cell Delayed

What with Assassin's Creed being one of the best selling new IPs ever, Ubisoft probably didn't think much of having to push back the release of Haze until next year. They've also moved the next chapter in Sam Fisher's story, Conviction, to an unspecified date in the 2008-2009 fiscal calendar. "The announcement came as part of its official first half financial results, showing sales up 52 percent to 261 million ($372.86 million), and profits up nearly 12% to 30.6 million euros ($44.8 million) ... the company [also] announced Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six Vegas 2 due for release some time in the same quarter as Haze."

cmon ubisoft

[loafula]

how about another new prince of persia game?

Re:

[king-manic]

how about another new prince of persia game?

Prince of persia 4: 3 didn't suck, please forgive us for 2!

Re:

[twistedsymphony]

I'm a bit confused over your comment.

POP4 was "Sands of Time" which actually won game of the year when it came out

POP5 was "Warrior Within" which was IMO a mediocre title

POP6 was "The Two Thrones" which I never bothered to play as it looked too much like POP5

Then of course there are spin offs such as: "Battles of Prince of Persia" for the DS, "Rival Swords" for the Wii, and the "Prince of Persia Classic" which is a remake of the original with updated graphics for Xbox Live Arcade.

so technica

Re:

[LKM]

gp meant: Please buy POP7; POP6 was not crap, so please forgive us the crappy POP5 (using your version numbers).

Oh Jade...

[Anonymous Coward]

What with Assassin's Creed being one of the best selling new IPs ever...

Oh Jade, your game feels soooo gooood....

Utter Bullshit

[Farakin]

I have to wait for Splinter Cell because they had a good year? What about the consumers and fans here? sometimes, capitalism sucks, but only when I can't get what I want.

Re:

[xarien]

No, you have to wait until next year because they had a good year and can afford to spend more money to polish a game, which equates to you getting a better game. Do you really think developers sit on their hands while a game is "delayed?"

Best Selling Suck

[Seumas]

I'm sure the fanboys will mark me as a troll, but as someone who eagerly anticipated Assassin's Creed, forked out the $65 for it and then sat right down to play it -- it doesn't deserve all the hype.

It looks pretty good. It has a couple interesting gameplay mechanics. But the story is terrible. They could have done away with all of the "your ancestor's memory lives in your DNA and we're going to stick you in a machine that sends your brain back in time to re-enact your ancestor's life". They could have added more content, too. The entire game consists of three things: Climbing high things to see new parts of the map, fighting a few guards to save citizens (who are ALWAYS in trouble for theft and the citizen saving is always 100% the same), pick pocketing (again, pointless and always exactly the same) one or two interrogations (you punch a guy a few times -- always the same) and then assassinating the "final boss".

Not only is the game utterly boring (because it is so repetitive), but even the main character (Altair) says it's boring when he's talking to the head assassin guy who takes all of Altair's weapons and special abilities away in the beginning. If your fictitious game character thinks the game is boring, then how the hell do you think the player feels?!

I wanted to love this game so damn much, but there just isn't enough actual variety and content to it. And while every game entails some degree of repetition, Assassin's Creed has to be right up there with Pac-Man -- only without all the fun. I won't be buying the other two games in the trilogy unless I get them at used prices and even then, only if I have absolutely nothing else left to play and am so utterly bored that doing the same three or four things a few hundred times just to see the long, drawn-out blab-blab-blab cut-scenes (seriously, it's like fucking Dragon Ball Z or something).

Re:

[DDLKermit007]

Well to each their own. It's largely a sandbox game, and many miss that easily. Most of the reviewers who give the game low marks can't figure that out. For many people that's also not what they want.

Re:

[Seumas]

I would say Assassin's Creed is exactly the *opposite* of a sandbox game. There are literally only three or four parts to the game and every instance of each part is always exactly the same. Unless you can get some sort of thrill for countless hours by hopping around roof tops to engage in pointless fights with the same guards you've fought a thousand times.

You can't pick-pocket or interrogate at will. These are only to be performed on a few specific targets.

There are a couple dozen citizens to save in each

Re:

[Liquidrage]

I've actually enjoyed this game quite a bit. I mean, COD4 basically consists of one thing. Shooting people. Over and over. And yet it doesnt get the repeptitive label.

Sure, you climb a lot. But they aren't all cookie cutter climbs. There's several very large eagle's nests in the mid to late game that are actually quite the challenge to figure out how to get up. You're free to figure out how to attack targets. The game has as much freedom as any action game I've ever played. I think too many people just w

Re:

[MBraynard]

I think you would enjoy COD4 if you put it on the Veteran setting. You really have to use your brain to figure out how to get through some of the scenarios. The solutions to the helicopter pilot rescue and the end of flashback mission where you have to carry the pilot were particularly challenging.

Taking out the helicopter from the Church in the flashback mission was also a challenge.

I'm taking a pass on Assasin's Creed, though.

Re:

[Seumas]

Call of Duty is not repetitive in the same way that Assassin's Creed is. Repetition doesn't have to be boring, but in Assassin's Creed, it is. Assassin's Creed says "look at these few things you can do -- aren't they rad?! So rad that we're going to make you do them 800 times! Yay!".

Call of Duty breaks things up. Introduces different strategies and tactics. Very different environments and goals . . . and while I wouldn't play it a second time, there was no point in the whole playthrough that I felt I was ju

Re:

[fimbulvetr]

LOL, 30 or so in one fight. That is correct, up until you realize that you fight one guard at a time while the others stand and watch. Never before have played such a monotonous game. It was a wrectched experience and not worth the gas to drive to the store to pick it up.

Re:

[the_fat_kid]

- The entire game consists of three things: Climbing high things to see new parts of the map, fighting a few guards to save citizens (who are ALWAYS in trouble for theft and the citizen saving is always 100% the same), pick pocketing (again, pointless and always exactly the same) one or two interrogations (you punch a guy a few times -- always the same) and then assassinating the "final boss". -

that is 5 things. by my count. not that you weren't dissapointed, just that 5 is more than 3.

Re:

[Tim Browse]

that is 5 things. by my count. not that you weren't dissapointed, just that 5 is more than 3.

Isn't the game set around the time of The Crusades?

"The entire game consists of five things."
"Three, Sir!"

Re:

[Sciros]

That's the sort of review the game has been getting a lot of places. I'm fairly certain it's accurate, as well.

Now, if all the criticism was about "omg game too hard" and "ugh camera too fast for me eyes" then I would have bought it in a heartbeat because Ninja Gaiden ruled. But clearly this is no Ninja Gaiden.

Anyway thanks for the post; solid criticism is rare these days and it helps me decide whether to consider buying a game or not.

Re:

[Seumas]

The one thing the game does well is the fighting. It's very smooth and the transitions are amazing. It's exciting to fight four or five or eight people at a time and be able to hack one guy, slash another with your blade's return, shove a third and then chop the first guy through his chest.

But it is definitely not "hard" and it's very difficult to die in a large fight. The reason this game is such a let-down is that you can see there is such a potentially rich world and a wealth of toys you could be playing

Re:

[Sciros]

Oh give me a break A.Coward, do you seriously think a rubbish storyline to *explain* a lifebar is better than a decent story and a typical "video game lifebar"? That's a terrible tradeoff. Also mashing up Indiana Jones with anything makes it worse, let alone a turd like The Matrix. Not sure how you actually relate that to Assassin's Creed.

breaking the naming convention

[u8i9o0]

I'm a fan of the Splinter Cell series.

However, I'm less surprised by a delay than I am the title: "Splinter Cell: Conviction".

What ever happened to Splinter Cell: Adjective Noun [penny-arcade.com]? :)

Or is it because

[jamie(really)]

games written on engines developed for the PC just suck ass on the PS3?

THANK YOU

[Khuffie]

Any news of a delay is appreciated. I'm glad Smash Bros. got delayed. Over the last couple of weeks, I got assassin's creed, call of duty, super mario galaxy, mass effect, wii zapper, and my sister ordered me Guitar Hero 3. Not only am I broke, but I barely have enough time to play. :p Not to mention games like Uncharted: Drake's Adventure and Ratchet and Clank that I had to pass by. This is ridiculous though. Publishers need to realize that people buy games at times other than Christmas too