Spoilers for the upcoming Splinter Cell blacklist
The news that Ubisoft is remaking the original Splinter Cell, rather than continuing the story after the latest installment (Blacklist), was, for me, a disappointment. It's like waiting 10 years for the next installment of A Song of Ice and Fire, only to find that George RR Martin is rewriting the first one (in fact, he wouldn't let it pass).
On the 2013 blacklist, we let protagonist Sam Fisher prepare to interview Majid Sadiq, the former MI6 agent turned engineer faction leader. It was a post-credits scene, which generally hints that, well, our hero is coming back (at least that's why audiences just sit back to watch the credits after a Marvel movie, much to the chagrin of the theater staff). But, eight years later, the story of Sam Fisher remains, in my opinion, unfinished.
However, there have been glimmers of hope over the years that the story would continue. In May 2019, Ubisoft creative director Julian Gerighty released a new game that changed the social media background to an image of Splinter Cell, suggesting a new main entry was finally in the works. Frustratingly, nothing of substance came of it, and over the years the closest we could get back into Fisher's glasses was his appearance as a playable character in Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon and Rainbox Six Siege. about the upcoming Splinter Cell VR game). While these guest spots certainly aren't the new game I'm hoping for, they have hinted that a Splinter Cell revival is happening, one that will hopefully end with a new entry in the mainline series.
But it seems that dream is still a long way off, as Ubisoft announced in December 2021 that it was indeed making a new Splinter Cell but instead of a new main entry, a new version of the original is in development.
Now that doesn't necessarily mean that a main Splinter Cell game is totally irrelevant, but repeating a classic, rather than taking Sam Fisher into a new era with an entirely new game, probably won't make the series break out of it. .shade as dramatically as it deserves, unless there are some pretty drastic changes.
Redefining stealth
Touted as a rival to Metal Gear Solid 2, Splinter Cell changed stealth gaming as we knew it when it released in 2002. Set in the near future of 2004, the original Splinter Cell had the world's modern day infiltration tropes. It was (night-vision goggles, silenced pistols) and a story focused, obviously, on preventing WWIII.
Critics of the time praised its evolution from the stealth action genre; for example, light and shadow were the focus of the game. Sam (with his now iconic night vision goggles) was throwing lights to obscure an alley, as the AI's vision was affected in the dark. It sounds simple, but it hadn't been done like this before - we could shoot lights in Metal Gear Solid 2, but it didn't really affect the enemy's sight. In Splinter Cell, the guards would notice the broken light and investigate, so we had to weigh that risk in our tactics. It redefined stealth play and showed how playing with light and shadow can dramatically improve the game.
We can see the influence of this development in the major stealth games that came immediately after Splinter Cell; from ridiculous shaded safe areas in Manhunt to dark camo and face paint in Metal Gear Solid 3.
Today, stealth is everywhere; From The Last of Us to Hitman, Assassin's Creed, and Untitled Goose Game, it's hard to find an action game without some sort of stealth mechanic; even bombardier Nathan Drake leaned more towards neck braking in Uncharted 4. In 2002, however, it was new and exciting, and that was part of Splinter Cell's appeal. It's hard to imagine a linear stealth in the 2020s with the same impact. To break ground on this kind of ground with the remake, Ubisoft needs to look at existing games, Metal Gear Solid 5 in particular, and add a new ingredient. Hacking, for example (much of the early games), could be widely spread with modern technology.
Rebuild a classic
When something is remade, be it a movie or a game, the idea is to recreate an old idea using newer methods. Maybe it's because the original didn't reach its potential. Overall though, and I hate being cynical, it's because the original was perfect and you can make money by repeating a classic. Classic works of art remind us of when we first experienced them, and nostalgia plays an important role in our culture, especially video game culture, but getting that nostalgia back can be a tricky business.
"The limitations of the original Splinter Cell - the jerky aiming, the unstable and unreliable sneak attacks - are what gave it its challenge. These clunky old mechanics have a certain charm and a lot of nostalgia, even if they are frustrating at times."
When remakes don't work, they risk tarnishing the memory of a classic. For example, the Metal Gear Solid remake, The Twin Snakes, on the GameCube completely shattered the original game mechanics. In the original Metal Gear Solid, we couldn't aim our usual first-person guns or grab a ledge. Giving us those abilities in the remake (using the Metal Gear Solid 2 engine) allowed us to hold on to gateways to hide from already scarce enemies and shoot bosses in the head to take them down in no time. But it was too easy. The restrictions on the original PlayStation made Metal Gear Solid difficult and fun - removing those restrictions diluted the formula rather than improved it.
Splinter Cell has a lot in common with Metal Gear Solid and it is a cause for concern. A modern engine risks touching up the charm of the original. For example, in Splinter Cell, I often wondered whether to attack once for a stealth attack or two. It's hard to say which weirdly specific hit area Sam is closest to: two hits for a forward attack, one for a back. This "problem" would be fixed in a remake, which is a farce. The limitations of the original Splinter Cell - uneven aiming, shaky and unreliable stealth attacks - are what gave it its challenge. These clunky old mechanics have a certain charm and a lot of nostalgia, if frustrating at times.
But that doesn't mean recess can't work. Last year's Final Fantasy 7 remake was nothing like the original, rather it was a tribute, replacing turn-based combat with live combat and extending what was a small chapter of the original title into a full game. It was a whole new sight, showing Midgar like we've never seen it before. And (SPOILER ALERT), it's technically a sequel.
We know that the Splinter Cell remake will also be made from scratch, so I pray that Ubisoft will be inspired by Square Enix's recreation of Final Fantasy 7 Remake. Rather than a fancy clone like the Crash Bandicoot N. Sane trilogy, we could take a look at 2004 through the eyes of a Sam Fisher with new dimensions. A remake of this classic game could see Ubisoft add three times the size of maps, new (perhaps more advanced) weapons, and some surprising plot points, all while taking advantage of the latest technology and hardware to create an experience. new age (as did the original). Of course, that may not be for all fans, but it would help Splinter Cell feel fresh 20 years later.
What were the fans waiting for?
While a Splinter Cell remake wasn't quite the announcement I was hoping for, a quick look at the comments on YouTube and Twitter shows me just how excited fans of Sam Fisher are. There is a rumor surrounding the use of the Snowdrop engine, which is used to develop Avatar: Frontiers of Pandora, with some fans already expecting Pandora Tomorrow and Chaos Theory to receive the same treatment.
Who am I to ignore the happiness of others? Also, maybe there is still a sequel to Blacklist in the works? A main entrance to Splinter Cell in an open world that continues the saga? I'm not going to hold my breath, but for now, I'll be thankful that this announcement has nothing to do with VR, and will dust off my PS2.