Ubisoft To Merge Tom Clancy Games

SlappingOysters writes "In an interview with Gameplayer, Tom Clancy's EndWar Lead AI Programmer Vinh-Dieu Lam spoke in detail about plans to tie all the different Clancy franchises together into one big game experience in the near future. Among other things, he had this to say: ' ... with EndWar, the meta-campaign side of it is a standalone server so you can feed things into this system so it can basically generate any sort of mission. So its missions generate for EndWar at the moment, but there is no reason why we cannot generate missions from the other franchises. This is where we are looking at tying together the different franchises. So maybe in the next EndWar you will need to attack Paris, but before you can, it may generate some sort of Splinter Cell recon mission, or a Ghost Recon mission or things like that. But that is the direction we are looking at.'"

Re:

[Anonymous Coward]

Hang on -- that looks like an unsolicited commercial message. Stop advertising your services on Slashdot.

Huh...

[Etrias]

Oh, they were different?

I can't decide wether this is good or not.

[carlvlad]

I can't decide whether this is good or not. On one hand we'll be able to experience different type of game play in one game, but on the other hand I'm not quite sure of the quality as the I have a nagging feeling that the missions available will be quite repetitive.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Bad summary

[WDot]

TFA article implies that the Tom Clancy franchises (presumably Rainbow Six, Splinter Cell, Ghost Recon, HAWX, and Endwar) will stay separate franchises, but future editions will tie into one overarching storyline. It also implies that Endwar will be a sort of hub where the other games' events can be affected.

There's a lot of ideas and BS being thrown around and not a lot of hard fact, but I'm supposing the idea is that owners of multiple Tom Clancy games (the latest versions of course) will be able to deepen the story modes of their games by having events in say, Splinter Cell, be input into Endwar, triggering a mission to happen slightly differently in Rainbow Six.

Example? Well, (and this is just speculation), your Splinter Cell character assassinates the evil despot of ClancyClicheTerroristastan, but doesn't quite make the job as clean and quiet as he should have. The capital city erupts into riots and violence. Endwar takes this input and feeds it to Rainbow Six, telling your Rainbow Six team that that covert hostage rescue mission isn't going to be so hush-hush anymore.

I suppose if you're really into Clancy single-player modes and have copious amounts of money, this could be quite a cool toy for you. Hopefully there's something there for the multiplayer fiends and those that aren't willing to shell out $300 for the ultimate Clancyverse.

Re:

[Mobkey]

I didn't read the article of course, but by what you're saying this could be just an easier way to write the plot. Instead of needing 4 different types of terrorists etc, you have one for all of the games, with Sam Fischer appearing as a cameo in a Rainbow 6 cutscene. I've only ever played the Splinter Cell games so I'm just waiting for that emo Sam to come back so I can sneak around.

Remember Janes World at War?

[Cruciform]

It's gotta be 8 to 10 years ago, but does anyone else remember the plans for Janes World at War? Tying in 688 Attack Sub, Longbow, Abrams, and other titles so that you could go online in a world theatre and use the sim that you bought to play that role.

I was so pumped for it and then it just seemed to fizzle and die before it got out of the concept/PR stage.

I don't know if I'd have the patience to be a sub driver these days, but back then the thought of jumping in game and altering the outcome of the war with my own nuclear sub was pretty darn appealing :)

Re:

[Xuranova]

I defintely remember and was very let down when I had to accept it was never going happen. :(

My goal to see a massive soviet tank rush into eastern Europe from a 1st person perspective might never be realized. :(

Re:

[michaelhood]

My goal to see a massive soviet tank rush into eastern Europe from a 1st person perspective might never be realized. :(

No, but given the current geopolitical climate you might get to experience it from a 3rd-person perspective, yet.

Re:

[Renraku]

One of the main reasons it got down, supposedly, was that their forces would be too split.

Imagine if you had to have 5 games, and those 5 games had to tie-in to each other. That means the server/client software must be compatible between all games and versions, and that each 'world' must be persistent. It also means that things are probably going to be unbalanced. Who wants to be forced to play Tom Clancy's Infantry and Tank Divisions when they can play Tom Clancy's Mobile Rapesquad and Gunship? We know

Re:

[Norwell Bob]

On a related yarn, I can recall when Falcon 3.0 was going to be linkable with F/A-18, Mig-29, whatever Spectrum Holobyte's tank game was, and A-10 (which, much to my frustration, never got released)...

That never happened either, as I recall... would have been damn cool though.

Also, Falcon 4.0 was a grave disappointment after the copious time I spent playing 3.0 Microprose used to put out some good flight sims, too, but F4 was just so buggy.

Heh... remember how long Falcon 3.0 took to be released?

Riiight..

[Shabadage]

Because we love having to swap discs every ten minutes!

HAWX already due to tie the lore together.

[Xest]

HAWX, the arcade-style flightsim that's coming out under the Tom Clancy brand is due to include Ghost Teams, Rainbow teams and such apparently, so there were already plans to bring the Tom Clancy universe together before this at least.