False Conviction

Sam Returns To 3rd Echelon

Splinter Cell: Conviction, the most recent iteration in the Splinter Cell franchise does some things really well, its mark and execute system empowers the player, the interrogations are cathartic and a good way of sneaking in plot exposition, the use of light both visually and in terms of gamplay is stylish and functional, but it also commits some unforgivable sins whilst undermining the ethos of the IP.

Unforgivable Sins

Splinter Cell Chaos Theory, perhaps the pinnacle of the series was a game of contrast, of chiaroscuro. Light and dark, right and wrong, lethal and non-lethal. The game gave the player the agency to walk the tightrope between these binaries and everything in between, it was the fact it gave the player the choice to do so, coupled with the 'intentionality' as designer Clint Hocking called it, to formulate a plan and then execute in such a way as to manipulate the enemy like a master spy that brought such satisfaction.

Chiaroscuro enhanced by Monochrome

Splinter Cell: Conviction removes the option to be non-lethal.
Perhaps this mirrors the new Sam Fisher who has a new found disregard for life according to the pain he feels for his lost daughter whom he is trying to locate. But it damages the gameplay, which is the cost for this re-imagining that I suppose I could grudgingly chalk up to thematic consistency. So you go through the entire game, murdering anyone in your path, you can clear an area without engaging all enemies but those who spot you, usually must end up dead. So while you play without being given the choice to spare a life, even of people just doing they're job, the bodies pile up.

Bodies

At the end of the game the climactic denouement that takes place in the White House makes a great showdown shootout use of the game's most innovative mechanic, the 'mark and execute', to get you out of a tight spot, no unnecessary boss battle, good start. Then, you corner the villain and he says his piece while you interrogate him in the manner you've come to be accustomed to until button prompts to kill him start to pop up, ignoring these you are finally confronted with an ultimatum.

Kill or Spare.

Decisions

Why is the antagonist whom you've spent the whole game chasing down in order to rescue the member of your family who is most precious to you the one enemy you are able to spare. The one person Sam Fisher most wants to kill in the whole game can be spared. Now that's thematic inconsistency. It's like an insult to the player by giving them a power they should have possessed all along when it no longer matters. To top this off if you choose the non-lethal option and spare his life your accomplice shoots him in the head anyway, your choice as a player matters so little to the game that not only are you not granted the power not to do something (take a life) that when you are, it is a false choice, it is an illusion of an illusion. Its tempting to call that a meta-mirage or something but I think bullshit is more concise and accurate.

Why Ubisoft, Why?!

Well I'm glad I didn't take all those screenshots for nothing. Bring back Clint Hocking please, Sam Fisher misses him.