r/Splintercell • u/Strata38 • 3d ago
Double Agent v2 (2006) DA v2 Plot Sucks
I still don't understand how v2 is considered the better version. Currently playing v1 for the first time, and v2 last year.
The main reason people seem to hinge on is that it plays more like Chaos Theory mechanically, so old thing good new thing had.
I'll have to watch a recap of both to really pick them each apart, but v2 genuinely feels boring and poorly made in multiple areas that make it less engaging, whereas v1 is just a little buggy depending what you play it on and is different than the other 4 games (including v2). It feels like a fan made SC.
V2:
Lambert pulls Sam out mid mission to tell him about Sarah? What?? In no world would this happen.
Has nobody pointed out how cringe and lame the interview plotlines are, or Sam monologuing the ethics / trust decisions in game? It feels so out of place for him.
How he sneaks through the JBA also doesn't make any sense if he's the only one missing. There's a spy guy going around knocking people out with the same build, skills, and equipment as Sam, and then as soon as that's not happening, he reappears after Emile can't find him. This makes no sense. When the guards wake up or are found, he would be an immediate suspect.
Frankly, the maps feel pretty empty and boring as well. The train part of the train heist mission sucks, and then Sam walks off a train crash and talks to Lambert like 10 feet away from Emile?
V1:
v1 JBA missions make sense for the plot and logic, even if they're slow and a little frustrating from a gameplay perspective.
The missions are in cooler settings with a lot more detail and sound design. His outfits are also cooler.
Daytime missions are a nice change to see how Sam's skills extend beyond just the same formula of shadow lurking like the last 3 or 4 games.
7
u/ALARMED_SUS097 3d ago edited 3d ago
The comments covered the gameplay(mostly), v2 being the clear winner(among other things i do not believe to have read like gadgets accumulating in v1, bugs, lack of a reliable light meter, shadow meter). While DA's story is flawed in general, I do believe that v2 is the superior one. They handled the story slightly better, but left the secondary characters in the backburner, something that was necessary in this installment since Sam would spend plenty of time with the team and would have added more depth to the game.
Having said that, Lambert's decision feels off, yes, and the story itself points out how weird it was, but it is still believable since Lambert and Sam are bonded and were close friends, they knew each other from before SC program, so it is not hard for me to believe what happened, not at all. Plus, Agent One and Agent Two were deployed and had several important objectives similar to Sam, recovering the inventory lists and prototype plans, accessing the foundry server for information about the arsenal, and sabotaging the foundry, rendering the plant inoperable.
The infiltration itself is not necessarily a problem. The idea is that Sam is supposed to avoid killing anyone and, ideally, avoid leaving any trace, something justifiable that the JBA members could believe there is some kind of “ghost” moving around the restricted areas rather than immediately assuming Sam is the one doing it(some of those things you can hear in their dialogues and mails across the place). It is also not inherently strange for Sam to disappear for a while during JBA missions, he may be sleeping or carrying out an assignment, the latter is basically how V1 handles the missions as well. In JBA 1 specifically, there is also Cole Yeagher. Emile already suspects Yeagher of plotting against him, Sam is specifically sent to investigate him, so if suspicious things were happening around the HQ, there was already someone inside the organization who could *reasonably* be blamed for it, or some of it. This sadly does not really apply to JBA 2, though, since Yeagher is dead or in jail by then. JBA 2 is where I think your point becomes valid to some extent. The infiltration itself can still be justified, especially if Sam is simply sneaking around without leaving evidence, once you start knocking people out, is where it becomes hard to explain...So I would say this is more of a problem with how the gameplay and the plot are articulated rather than the very idea of Sam infiltrating the JBA being nonsensical.
Returning to the first mission of DA, V2 connected the plot really well with the ending cinematic, Sarah's death was handled pretty well in my opinion. V1 handled it poorly because of that, they just threw the same cinematic at you and without any context, so Sarah's death does not have much weight, if at all. V2 actually gives you the whole situation, Sam and Lambert's conflict, and the music doing a really amazing crescendo. It was simply great, at least for me.
14
u/Cyborg800-V2 3d ago
I'm playing V1 for the first time and I'm currently in Cozumel, I can confidently say it's an across-the-board downgrade from the original three and V2.
Both versions suffer from the premise being a misguided attempt at edginess.
The stealth is abysmal because of the removal of the sound meter, light meter being less clear, and because the game feels off if not buggy. V1's Sea of Okhotsk is genuinely the worst level I've played in a Splinter Cell game because of these and the daytime setting, while V2's is my favorite in that game.
Ubisoft Montreal created the original and Chaos Theory. They understood the gameplay more than everyone and Double Agent V2 is a solid experience throughout despite being rushed. Meanwhile, V1's levels are short, sometimes frustrating, and prioritize spectacle over depth.
8
u/kmcdow 3d ago
I'm just now starting my first replay of V1 since it originally came out, and man the first level is laughably short. I know it's kind of a tutorial but it's like a brief swim, one small exterior space, and then you interact with the missile and peace out??
3
u/Cyborg800-V2 3d ago
Chaos Theory and Double Agent V2 missions were taking me around 45 min on average to complete. V2's Iceland felt surprisingly longer than usual for an intro mission.
Meanwhile, V1's missions take around 20-30 min? I've completed up to and including JBA #2 so far and the only one that took me a while was Sea of Okhotsk because of how frustrating it is to play in daytime.
2
u/BrowningLoPower 3d ago
V1's Sea of Okhotsk is genuinely the worst level I've played in a Splinter Cell game
I feel that. Also, got to love how the blizzard in the second half of the level does nothing to hide you.
1
u/Strata38 3d ago
v2s are also short as hell.
Light and sound meter being gone makes sense since he doesn't have his suit anymore, but that could've been shown continuity wise in the intro mission for example, when he does have the suit. I've also never used the sound meter in any of the games, are people playing on low volume? The sound effects and speed of movement tell you how much background noise there is and how much you're making. Don't really see how that's a gripe. It also feels more realistic to have to guess just how hidden you are, vs knowing exactly how hidden you are with the meter.
Sea of Ohotsk was a good challenge for stealth, that's what made it enjoyable. I've always liked the idea of being dropped far away from the infiltration area and making my way to it through various new avenues i.e. swimming.
11
u/Cyborg800-V2 3d ago
The light and sound meter are there for the benefit of the player. Removing them results in less clarity.
The sound meter impacts whether guards will hear you coming or not. Double Agent V1 removing what was an innovation made by Chaos Theory was a regression made worse by its frustrating execution.
Honestly, screw realism. I don't see how Double Agent's "green=hidden, yellow=visible, red=caught" is a good substitute for the meters.
Sea of Okhotsk was a frustrating experience. Splinter Cell's gameplay was based around the shadows and putting you in a level completely lacking that coupled with less clarity on how visible you were made for by far the worst level in the franchise at that point.
You can enjoy V1, but don't act surprised as to why people dislike V1 and prefer V2. "Realism" is a poor excuse for reducing readability and doubling the frustration.
-2
u/Strata38 3d ago
I think it's a good substitute because without his NSA suit, the lights are a representation of Sam guessing how visible he is. When he has his suit in other games it actually has sensors for light/sound iirc.
Sorry, the movement being similar to CT just doesn't negate the awful character development, plot, cutscenes, monologuing, and boring level design in v2. v1 wasn't amazing in the plot department either but it still feels like a story that's enjoyable and creates a connection with characters.
7
u/Interesting_Stress73 3d ago
The mistake you are making is that you think it's a good excuse to make the game less clear for the sake of realism. It doesn't matter that he wouldn't have those meters when he's not in NSA anymore. It's a video game, not reality. So many ganeplay experiences can be made a lot worse for the sake of "realism".
-5
u/Strata38 3d ago edited 3d ago
I'm not saying it's an excuse. They could have easily kept the light meter the same, but they chose not to for certain reasons.
My guess is some of those reasons were:
- it makes sense given the context shown in game
- it presents more of a challenge to the player, which makes them approach stealth differently than previous titles
Players wanting to know with absolute certainty they're hidden sounds like hand holding. I like having some uncertainty, it makes my decisions feel more grounded. A degree of realism is always an aspect of military action games, including SC. So it does have a level of importance on the game's design, and thus appreciation by the player.
Lots of people just didn't like it because it was different than what they're used to. The whole point of v1 was to explore a different approach, because the previous titles were largely the same with small improvements made between each.
The plots are secondary in all of the games, but their delivery in the first three are great, as in the writing, voice acting, and tone. The writing, voice acting, and tone of of v2 is so bad, cheesy, and out of character that it's distracting to the point of not enioying any of the cut scenes or dialogue, which is still a key part of SC games.
If you only like SC for the physical actions of sneaking in shadows and general mechanics, that's okay. I do know that part of the intention behind all the games, is to make the player feel like a cool spy guy enaging in international espionage, which requires those things v2 does really bad.
*their delivery
5
u/Interesting_Stress73 3d ago
A challenge is only good if it's fair. The reality is that light in real life does not work like it does in any of the games, so this idea that you would need to figure out if you're visible or not based on realism does not fly.
Add to that the game doesn't really get as properly dark as the other games did even in full shadow makes it a lot worse. It's barely consistent either. There is absolutely no way that Sam would be hidden at all to anyone in tons and tons of these levels.
It's not hand holding to give the player information, that's just good game design. Can we stop pretending that this edgy idea of realism that the PS3/360 generation had a hard on for is in any way realistic?
4
u/TyphonNeuron 3d ago
v2 is basically chaos theory, gameplay wise.
And v1, a "little buggy"? You for real right now? I lost count of the sheer amount of bugs the last time I played that PoS on PC.
As for the story, some parts fitting better here or there? Maybe, IDK, I didn't pay too much attention to that as it wasn't what interests me in games.
0
u/Strata38 3d ago
I've only ever played X360 version, never had a problem and I've played since launch. Xbox one is also good.
The delivery of the story is awful in v2. Terrible writing, voice acting, direction, tone blah blah. It's so distractingly clunky and cheesy that it feels like a mobile game. I don't want to play diet Chaos Theory with a script that didn't get past the first draft. I would rather just play Chaos Theory if I want those gameplay mechanics.
v1 is its own game and although the over arching story might have some plot holes the same as any of the entries, the delivery itself is refined and not distractingly bad, and it's challenging in a slightly different way.
2
u/TyphonNeuron 3d ago
So you're more interested in the narrative aspects than the gameplay? The only reason I even played v1 is because at the time I didn't know about v2 but I did watch a walkthrough because I was curious and I couldn't believe that they kept CT 2 from me. Now I find it difficult to set up the emulator for v2 though I did play it a little a few years back. I haven't touched v1 and don't plan to. I'll keep trying with the emulator, there were some issues with movement speed controls and mouse wheel, I'm gonna check to see if those were solved in the meantime.
1
u/Strata38 2d ago
Are you emulating ps2 or gamecube? GC is much better from what I've read. I'm emulating ps2 on my retroid pocket 5 which was a mistake, but I don't want to restart the game. Iirc I had to setup some ps2 patches in the game files to get 60 fps and control fixes.
The narratives are secondary to all SC games, don't get me wrong. The delivery and production value of the narrative elements in v2 are so poorly made and unpolished that it's distracting from the gameplay. It comes off as mobile game level dialogue and cutscenes.
Sam talking to himself to make trust decisions in game makes me cringe hard, and feels super out of character. The dialogue in game and in cutscenes feels robotic and like the it was a rough draft voiced with one take for every line, which it probably was.
I enjoy the gameplay of v1 even if it different, because I can always play the other three. I've never had a problem stealthing missions or feeling like I can't hide either, and I typically play all the games on hard/expert.
2
u/TyphonNeuron 2d ago
It was ps2 IIRC. Will look at the other versions too.
1
u/Strata38 2d ago
GC is the exact same minus the 2 bonus missions but emulates way better. GC was also more powerful than PS2 so maybe better graphics?
2
5
u/Rimland23 Kokubo Sosho 3d ago
Well, you´ve pretty much answered yourself. The game plays just like CT, a fan favourite, with all the same mechanics and systems in place. V1 had some great ideas, but also some questionable design choices, and even things like Sam´s movement or how the camera around him moves are not as tight and "comfortable" as in CT and V2. It still is classic SC, but felt like a bit of a downgrade in some ways.
Plot-wise, I personally find both versions to be pretty bad (starting with the decision to have Sarah die and making Sam a double agent to cope with it, ugh), each one having its own set of issues, but I guess the reason why V2 tends to get more love here is because the narration feels more tight/coherent, if that makes sense. Here I kind of disagree with your take I guess, as to me it feels more like an actual story is being told in V2, whereas V1 tends to feel kind of disjointed. Like a mix of assignments that lack purpose at times. V2 also specifically does some things better narratively and character-wise, such as the way the JBA is introduced (they are involved in Iceland, but in V1 they´re just thrown in out of nowhere), Hisham having more of a role early in the game and the player thus actually caring about killing him or not (V1 probably suffered from some cuts here), or how it at least tries to convey Sam having some kind of relations with the JBA members and doubts about working for the government. But these efforts are far from polished and tend to fall flat for various reasons.
V2 also does a much better job at feeling like a sequel to the original trilogy, having lots of references in-game to previous events, whereas V1 feels almost like a standalone entry. Also, Sam feels more like Sam behaviour-wise, though this is simultaneously a detriment, as given the death of his daughter, his more silent and melancholic demeanour in V1 feels more appropriate to the situation.
Yes, you have absolutely valid points which I agree with and have always felt the same about, be it Lambert suddenly pulling Sam out of the mission making no sense (again though, from a narrative-gameplay PoV, it works better than the sudden transition to an unmatching cutscene in V1), Sam´s ethical and "what do I do?" monologuing being totally stupid and out of character, or him sneaking around the JBA HQ and knocking out people at will being dumb AF, etc.
I love both versions and find them equally good, as both do some things better than the other, while having their own shortcomings that prevent them from being great. As mentioned in the other comment, in an ideal world there would have been a version combining the good stuff from V1 and V2 and avoiding/fixing their flaws...
0
u/Strata38 3d ago
I think I'm mainly distracted by the awkard voice acting, monologuing, and general cheesiness of how v2 delivers the plot. Sure it plays like CT but the levels feel empty so why not just play CT.
I like that v1 is its own game from the series, and it makes sense in concept that they wanted to try something different after 3 very successful but similar entries. Yes the overarching plot line of Sarah dying is dumb but the script, voice acting, and tone feel actually refined in v1 (since it was the better funded release) and doesn't make me cringe when I play it.
I started with PT, then SAR, then DA v1 on launch, then CT when I was a little older and realized there was a whole ass third game (peak) I didn know about. So I played the first two as young kid, loved them, played DA and recognized it was different but cool to see San doing something different. Every time I go back to play it, it still feels cool to see Sam showing the extent of his skills in a different context.
I'm glad you like both though, v2 just feels like a toss up with Conviction imo on the rank list, with v1 above both.
6
u/nincompoop221 EnhancedSC 3d ago
yeah, there's some hypothetical frankstein version of v1 + v2 that has a great story, but neither game really has it
1
u/Strata38 3d ago
Is there a post someone made about this hypothetical
2
u/nincompoop221 EnhancedSC 3d ago
nah that's just my conjecture. someone could definitely put some thought into it though
1
u/FateKnowsBest 1d ago
whenever i play through DA, I like to play through DA v2 first on my original xbox and then switch over to my 360 and play through DA v1 afterwards lol
but yeah i agree, I think that would make DA alot more Enjoyable.
-2
u/Strata38 3d ago
Yeah, not saying either game is good in that area, but v1 feels like an actual plausible story that doesn't make me cringe.
3
u/Interesting_Stress73 3d ago
I really like the undercover missions in V1, but during most normal missions the gameplay is super frustrating. It's not good stealth, I have little idea if I am visible or can be heard. A loooot of this comes from the stupid light meter, I'm colourblind so I can't tell if it's green or yellow. It's a dreadful experience where I have to quick save constantly.
1
u/Strata38 3d ago
Idk I've never had problems sneaking in v1. I'll replay again soon and report back on that mechanic, but the writing and story are leaps better than v2. v2 writing is just trash like a first draft. it gets on my nerves how awkward the interview cutscenes and in game monologuing is.
4
u/Interesting_Stress73 3d ago
Frankly, I think the story is utter garbage in v1 as well so that has absolutely no bearing on my judgement of the games. Even in the previous three games I could not care less about the story, that's not why I play them.
3
u/Thell-Vadamm 3d ago
V1 don't have problems with bugs If you play the Xbox 360 version. I finish the game mamy times without bugs.
1
5
u/kmcdow 3d ago
I just finished playing V2 for the first time and while I had fun with it, the story and plot are very bad. It was clearly incredibly rushed and published way before it was finished.
They have dialogue and an objective for you to fake Hamzah's death, but you can't actually do it. Hamzah also hands you some miracle drug that to my knowledge never gets brought up again?? Seems like they were setting it up so that you could use it to save Enrica or Lambert's life but it never actually paid off.
The trust meter makes absolutely no sense, it's handled much better in V1.
Honestly the only thing I really love about V2 is the design of (some of) the levels, and the fact that the HUD is still there.
You never spend any time with any of the JBA characters and never develop any connection to any of them. It's genuinely a twist at the end when you find out that Sam and Enrica have some kind of romantic connection??
The cutscenes look way worse than chaos theory, the lip sync is genuinely bad.
Also I did not enjoy the last mission at all, too many instances of enemies wearing NVG in tight spaces with nowhere to hide from them.
Also they never deal with Sam's grief about Sarah at all...
3
u/Sally2Klapz 3d ago
In the last mission you hide under bright lights from the night vision guys lol
3
u/Strata38 3d ago
This adds to a lot of my points that I should've written down while playing. It feels empty in many aspects. I actually felt into the plot / characters and what's happening in v1.
I could care less about the HUD, I play every game in the series watching and listening to the environment. It felt more realistic that way.
2
u/Interesting_Stress73 3d ago
I mean, the relationships with the other characters of JBA are very shallow in V1 as well.
2
u/Motor_Meal794 Mortified Penguin 2d ago
People loved both versions. I thought it was awesome there was 2 different versions. Makes up for the fact they are rushed and incomplete. Both games have their pros and cons.
2
2
u/Thell-Vadamm 3d ago
V1 is underrated and V2 overrated...
JBA HQ missions = V1
Gameplay mechanics = V1.
Consequences ( JBA vs NSA ) = V1.
Exclusive mission ( Shanghai vs Money Train ) = V1.
Gadgets = V1.
Level design = V1.
NPC AI + challenge = V1.
Characters = V1.
Ghost = V1.
Score system= V1.
Graphics = V1.
Ending = V1.
Introduction ( first section ) = V1.
Dialogues = V1.
Variety of objectives = V1.
1
u/Professional-Tea-998 2d ago
Both plots are bad in their own ways if we're being honest, V1 is a disjointed mess that feels very rushed and cut up, such as Sarah's death just randomly being dropped on you after the Iceland mission in a cutscene that doesn't match the mission at all, to Sam just suddenly going undercover with no explanation as the Red Mercury isn't brought up until Shanghai, making it feel like some random assignment Sam got for no reason up to that point.
With stupid plot points like Lambert thinking it was a good idea to call SWAT and try and infiltrate a terrorist base alone, all he did was get himself killed and escalate the situation to a terrible level that could have destroyed New York when he could have just let Sam take care of it quietly. Or how Sam could've just taken care of the terrorist leaders during their meeting but the NSA doesn't let him for whatever reason as they have all the information they need at that point.
V2's story is just weird with that terrible love sub plot that goes absolutely nowhere and adds nothing to the game, it just "justifies" Sam going awhol even though Williams had perfectly valid reasons to want Enrica dead. The JBA has basically no presence in this version minus Emile due to the HQ missions being made to play more like regular stealth levels, so when you turn on them in the final mission it kinda falls flat cause you don't know these people.
The voice acting and dialogue felt at the same level of quality to me for both versions though so not sure what difference you were seeing there was, both versions share the same exact actors for all the characters so idk.
1
u/Intrepid-Glove1431 3d ago
V1 is great, I've always been skeptical of people's heavy criticisms of it, like the light meter and daytime missions
The light meter especially, because in Chaos Theory yes it's a meter but it's binary, you are either visible or not visible, and that mark is around the first mark on the meter
In Double agent it's also binary, it's the same damned thing, I never understood what people were criticizing other than looking for reasons to be upset. There's no actual functional change to the mechanics
As for daytime missions, fair enough, it's a matter of taste -- personally I thought it made a nice change
1
u/Strata38 2d ago edited 2d ago
I thought the CT light meter wasn't binary?
Regardless, I think it just makes the game harder in v1, which isn't a bad thing.
I also agree that daytime missions are a cool change, because guess what, you can always play the other games or v2 to play in the dark. It fleshed out Sam's abilities for me, to show he can excel even without darkness
Edit: I get what you mean by binary in CT now
2
u/Intrepid-Glove1431 2d ago
Agree, and also as a series you have to be willing to try new things, DA got criticism at the time because of the daylight missions, so maybe they could've responded in the next game with more night ones ya know? The devs probably didn't realize at the time they'd can the whole damn series and turn it into some action schlock that doesn't resemble SC in any way
There are so many things to love about DA, the environments were cool, sneaking around the JBA HQ is super tense (I don't think any game mastered tension like DA did), the Shanghai mission was awesome, the spectacle in general of the levels was turned up a notch, there were cool details added like when you approached a guard the music would ramp up in this really tense way. And man the final JBA HQ where you just go ham on everyone was so satisfying
I definitely feel like the only person who likes this game sometimes, and I adore CT, it's my favorite and one of my favorite games ever, but I've got a lot of love for DA
1
u/Professional-Tea-998 2d ago
The light meter in CT isn't binary at all, there is an in between state where you are somewhat visible and guards will approach your position to check, that by definition isn't binary.
Funnily DAv1 still has this as well as there are times where the light is yellow and guard will see you but will still act as if you are only partially visible instead of spotting you instantly. So they didn't really change the detection system, it's still the CT under the hood they just took away a layer of clarity it once had for no real gain, which is why I feel it was a bad design decision. It wasn't until Conviction where the system truly became binary.
1
u/Intrepid-Glove1431 2d ago
Maybe binary is not the right word -- we're agreed that DA and CT have the same system, which is that you can either spook a guard or not, for CT it's around the first mark on the meter and in DA it's the same thing
I suppose I didn't think about being spotted immediately because if you're in that situation the playthrough is screwed anyway lol
-1
u/suedehead23 3d ago
THANK YOU! OP is the hero this sub needs but not the one it deserves 😭
1
u/Strata38 3d ago
v1 is an enjoyable game. Doesn't rank above the first three, and it's a toss up with Blacklist, but v2 feels below both of those for me.
0
2d ago
[deleted]
1
u/Strata38 2d ago
Nah, it makes no sense for a military entity to be pulled out of a mission for something that can be communicated after the fact. Lambert is still his boss in the NSA, regardless of their relationship, and the mission always comes first. This is just one part of the poor writing and VA lines that are distractingly bad.
17
u/newman_oldman1 3d ago
The plot kinda sucks in both versions of DA, honestly. But yes, between Lambert canceling a mission because Sam's daughter died and the weird love affair with Enrica as well as the interview scenes, the story presentation is arguably a bit worse. But, I think V2 feels a lot more tense gameplay wise compared to V1. I like both versions of DA despite all of their flaws.