Pandora Tomorrow
Splinter Cell: Pandora Tomorrow was the 2004 sequel to the successful Tactical Espionage Action game from 2002. Pandora Tomorrow was developed by Ubisoft Shanghai this time around, as opposed to Splinter Cell’s Ubisoft Montreal. Ubi Shanghai was able to take what the first game did and improve upon it, adding more fluid animations for Sam, and a host of new (and welcomed) tools for him to use. A re-mapping of the controls made switching between regularly used gadgets less of a hassle, and the collision detection was largely improved from the original. The maps were opened up a bit and by this time, the developers were finding new ways to squeeze more power out of the Xbox console. Even the PS2 and Gamecube versions received graphical upgrades and new lighting techniques, though they still lacked the design complexity of the Xbox’s missions.
Analysis
Pandora Tomorrow started out well enough for me. Sam’s new range of motion and his handful of new gadgets and abilities almost made the first few missions seem easy. I don’t know if it was just a contrast of having just played the first game, but I had a grin on my face as I opened a door while carrying a body. Such a simple fix that made such a huge difference. Unfortunately, my smile didn’t last very long as I eventually started getting kicked in the nuts in typical Splinter Cell fashion.
Pandora Tomorrow takes the formula you’re familiar with, and turns it up a notch. Sometimes in really cool ways, like a lightning storm that will make you think twice about using your night vision, or having to use your infrared sensors to tell the difference between civilians and terrorists. A train mission in France is one standout in particular. It’s really too bad that these ideas are mixed in with the worst that Splinter Cell’s gameplay has to offer. A lot of times these cool moments are cheapened due to repeated playthroughs caused by the trial and error gameplay or the aggravatingly inconsistent A.I. In some instances, the level design intentionally misleads the gamer into thinking they are supposed to go one way, only to met with failure. The gamer, in this case me, reloads and tries it again, but a bit more carefully. Another alarm, another instant fail. Reload, and try again. This time wait just a little bit longer for the guard to turn away and walk to the other side of the room. Aaaaand, nope. Fail again. Let’s just say “the gamer” rinsed and repeated several more times, failing several more times. It wasn’t until he, in a fit of disbelief and nerd rage, decided to go the other way. Oh, and look at that, Sam snuck right on by without a hitch. Fifteen minutes of playing the same room repeatedly is finally ended with a 5-second traverse by using the opposite walkway. I couldn’t help but feel that the pipe and catwalk that was in the “baited” hallway was there for the simple purpose of having me fail.
That’s not cool, and it wasn’t the only time it happened. This game is littered with trial-and-error rooms, especially in the missions in which a single alarm is failure. There are simply too many points in the game where an insta-fail is guaranteed, until you finally memorize the guards’ movements and work out exactly which terrorists to take out, what order to go in, and when to do it. Depending on the patience of the gamer (of which I have admittedly little) this could lead to progressively sloppier attempts as he or she gets more and more tired of waiting for the opportune moment, and instead tries to create an opportunity that the developers did not intend. As with the first Splinter Cell, there is the illusion of creativity, where you may choose how to dispose of the guard, but the choice of disposing of him, lethally, or non- has already been made for you. You simply have to take this guy out. It’s even worse if there’s a conversation between to guards that you have to sit through before they go their separate ways. More than a few times I chucked a grenade at their feet, knowing full well it would end the mission. Whatever, it was worth it.
Does it hold up?
Again, graphically, sure it holds up. The voice audio is much clearer this time. The lighting is more dramatic, the character models are less blocky, and cutscenes are, well they’re still pretty hideous but not as bad as the first one. The controls are responsive enough, and Sam doesn’t feel nearly as sluggish as he used to. The extra control options, such as the inclusion of the lock pick and the mini camera into the context sensitive door options, made a world of a difference. In the first Splinter Cell you had to manually select and “use” the lock pick or mini cam while standing in front of a door. Couple that with the inability to open a door while carrying a body, and you’ll realize just how cumbersome it was just traveling from one room to another. Thankfully in Pandora Tomorrow, walking through or spying under a doorway is quick and easy. Sam’s pistol is still bizarrely unreliable.
Is it worth going back to?
If you like trial-and-error, or are just a patient, methodical son of a biscuit, you might enjoy Pandora Tomorrow. The story isn’t terrible, and is a bit easier to follow than the first Splinter Cell. There are fewer Russian names to keep track of, which always helps. If you are a retro gamer looking for a challenging, yet do-able stealth action game, you might want to give this one a try.
Conclusion
Pandora Tomorrow improves the first Splinter Cell, but still holds onto a few characteristics that made the original so mind-numbingly infuriating. How much you enjoy each individual mission will depend squarely on how many times you have to reload a checkpoint.
Catch up on the previous entries in the Splinter Cell Re-visited series:
Part 1: Introduction to Splinter Cell
Part 2: Splinter Cell
