"My name is Eric Johnson, and I'll be your Sam Fisher for tonight's Splinter Cell." Click to expand...

Okay, so I made that line up, Eric Johnson never said that.What I wanted to say though, is there always seems to be some amount of contempt for replacing Michael Ironside. Some of it lies with Ubisoft, but I feel it is unfair for anyone to direct their ire at Eric Johnson, at least at prior to us witnessing his performance in its entirety. As much as we have heard, he seems like a good fit for the role. Remember, this is not simply voice acting; performance capture is relatively new. Whether or not we completely see the merits of it (perhaps other than what we got in Far Cry 3), remains to be seen. It might even become the new 'it' thing for next generation game production. There is also some anger directed at this because, well simply put, trying to "make it more cinematic" is generally interpreted (and carried out) as video games trying to chase Hollywood. But then again, the brand itself lies somewhere on the AAA scale where this is expected from the general audience, even if its history shows otherwise. But that's enough talk about production, because it is almost a certainty when it is a large publisher/developer aiming for a big audience, which Blacklist falls into.Eric Johnson seems like they did make a good choice for a performance actor. Again, I think people shouldn't completely reach a verdict until we've had a full chance to see how he did, although I don't know if they have anything in Blacklist that will compare to Michael Mando's Vaas in Far Cry 3. Although now we get to see performance capture in full, especially in scenes in the Paladin (playable hub), so maybe it will be able to capture the nuance that might be harder to do with traditional methods of cutscene design, whereas it suggests that cutscenes in Blacklist might be able to capture the nuance of what you might see on a stage production. Everyone speaking about Johnson seem to be very enthusiastic about his performance, even if we apparently haven't caught much of a glimpse of it yet. Much more surprising is that they have shown he is very devoted to the role in that he is very precise about the training afforded by stunt director Kevin Secours. Needless to say, Secours seems like the "what if Sam Fisher were real", because the guy seems to simply knows enough to fill a thousand and one "1001 ways to kill a man" guides. In interviews/press previews with outlets, he will let himself get choked out - like actual fucking unconscicous - and Johnson comes over and easily revives him. If that alone isn't telling then I don't know what to say that would convince you the very least Johnson is putting in his hours.Eric Johnson himself has also worked with Michael Ironside, so at least there is that first degree of separation, which I think is fantastic given that Ironside was almost like a mentor when Johnson wanted to pursue acting. Now he is acting as a mentor again to give Johnson a good framework with which he can develop his version of Sam Fisher. Personally, I don't think we'll see much deviation here, or too much of a spin. Johnson has said on the record he has played the games (but let's not go into 'but what if he sucks at it' territory), so he has a clear idea of what he was heading into and what kind of performance he needs to provide, even if he will unfairly catch criticisms for not being Michael Ironside.Then there is the issue of what actually happened or why Michael Ironside left Splinter Cell at all. There will be theories about money and corporate greediness or general animosity but it's probably simpler than that. Perhaps it is just almost completely true: what we have been told more or less was what transpired, and we should forget about any grand conspiracy on the matter. From even short interviews, you can tell Michael Ironside had a specific vision for Sam Fisher, especially since the first game. He didn't want someone who was too 2-dimensional or gung-ho at every opportunity and took the chance to have them refashion Sam Fisher as more of a grizzled veteran and just somewhat worn out old man. It was said that by Double Agent that Michael Ironside wanted to leave the role anyway, seeing as it was almost inevitable the franchise was going to continue. When you look at the franchise, it just seemingly gets more convoluted, or at least Sam Fisher and his team end up getting more involved. Maybe that's not what Michael Ironside wanted for Sam Fisher, a character he described as, "a weapon that the government has used one too many times".For all the ire that Conviction drew from the stealth gaming community, it actually was the thing that caused Michael Ironside to come back to the role. For those unfamiliar with the premise of Conviction, it dealt with Sam Fisher in a new way; he was off the grid, no government support, he did not trust anyone. Now it was finally what Michael Ironside wanted to persue: the weapon that had been fired one too many times was now completely unloosed and working on more on instinct than information and intelligence in his earpiece. For Ironside, it probably completes the arc that started and developed (at a glacial rate) until Double Agent and climaxing at it's climax - which was later retconned to Sam Fisher being forced to kill his friend and handler, Irving Lambert - and concluding with a Sam Fisher wayward from the experience and reaching some sense of emotional satisfaction by discovering his daughter was in fact alive and thwarting the forces that kept him on the run for three years. It's a bit to take in, but it sounds like a complete story, almost a trilogy with a satisfying arc.Perhaps that's why Michael Ironside didn't feel like he needed to return to Splinter Cell any longer. He felt like the suggestions he came up with nearly over ten years ago reached an emotional conclusion for what could've theoretically amounted to just another 2-dimensional character that spit out jingoisms and would allow itself to be perverted more than fans would even care. For those unfamiliar, other, old Tom Clancy licensed franchises such as Rainbow Six and Ghost Recon made their debuts and cemented their niche in the 90s and early 2000s. They were fairly cerebral, slightly more open form games than what they have been transformed in the seventh console generation. Nowadays those franchises mostly amount to mostly a cover shooter with a slight geopolitical tinge to it but aping Gears of War with some slight tactical features that feel rather dumbed down. It's not worth arguing over gameplay, but the characters that could be found in those Tom Clancy games (not talking about the novels here) never amounted to very much. Literally, as they don't seem to be very memorable any time past when the plot expires from memory. Maybe in an alternate timeline, Sam Fisher was just not as iconic or memorable because there was no Michael Ironside to take up the role, and he just simply got lost in the revolving door of Tom Clancy protagonists.So maybe Sam Fisher himself saved the series from it's certain "death", death being considered as what even older venerated franchises to 'chasing the Gears of War/Call of Duty dragon'. It's not hard to argue that Sam Fisher and Splinter Cell may have fallen into that trap with the initial reveal of Conviction taking a social stealth premise, drawing more inspiration from Hitman or Ubi's own Assassin's Creed franchises, than traditional 'sneaky' fare. Needless to say, Conviction found its way back to becoming somewhat more of a "sneaky" stealth game than its original inception. For what amounts to blasphemy amongst its core followers, Conviction was probably more satisfying work for Michael Ironside. But maybe just because of how much of an icon Sam Fisher is as a "video game character" and of that respective franchise, Conviction returns to Sam instead of telling us another story of another Splinter Cell (not counting Conviction's co-op) with maybe the obligatory one or two Sam Fisher references during dialogue.But that brings us to Blacklist. Dubbed to be a revival of the franchise and drawing gameplay philosophy from its older games, it still features Sam Fisher. But not Michael Ironside as Sam Fisher. Perhaps, I would argue, that is for the best. The arc that Michael Ironside seemed to nudge Sam Fisher into reached its conclusion. But like most media, just because one character arc is finished doesn't mean it's over. The new premise of Blacklist sounds like any typical geopolitical terror fare, but there is still some emphasis on character development. Sam Fisher returns, but not because he got bored of playing golf all day; Blacklist is what thrusts him back into the wet suit and the goggles that the fans have been clamouring for, but definitely not because Sam Fisher wants it. Perhaps by the end of Blacklist, he will, but where do we go from there? Blacklist will be the journey of Sam Fisher of that weapon that's been fired once too many, but now he is now in charge. Sam Fisher was almost always a solo operator and never took to being the center of attention, remaining to stay in the periphery (we're talking about his personality more so than the skillset). We've seen the story many times, an individual being thrust into a position of leadership when he or she isn't quite sure if they can take up that mantle, but they somehow rise to the occasion; along the way we see clashing personalities discover one another's roles to play on the team. Perhaps that story needs to be told with motion capture. Perhaps Michael Ironside didn't see that as his arc to play, as this signals a course change back to Sam Fisher as a military asset. From a gamer's perspective, it sounds like the easiest decision to make because that informs gameplay closer to where Chaos Theory was and not where Conviction went. But for Michael Ironside, it tells him the character is headed back into the uneasy waters he had hoped Sam Fisher would leave behind, something he clearly did not want. Perhaps Ironside saw the inevitability of the decision and decided to bow out gracefully. He probably wasn't going to change any minds, especially not with fan opinion, improving technology and a general change in the gaming industry that they could leave Sam Fisher alone for any amount of time before bringing him back.I would argue it is now extremely hard to divorce Sam Fisher and Splinter Cell from one another now. Fans will argue the specifics such as retiring him to a handler role, and I will say that maybe Sam Fisher probably will never want that for himself. He's been burned too many times on the field because as important as his job was, intelligence was still need-to-know and he had no real choice in the matter. Blacklist places him both in the field and with everything at his fingertips. Maybe the solution is to make him ageless. Pushing the James Bond angle might be too early or too out there (making "Sam Fisher" more of a codename wouldn't help, in my opinion). Perhaps when we see another actor transition, we can look back at Splinter Cell and see it as such, with Michael Ironside as the Sean Connery of Sam Fishers in Splinter Cells, but not today. http://www.cinemablend.com/games/Interviews-With-Michael-Ironside-Reveal-Why-He-Playing-Sam-Fisher-Blacklist-47673.html (even if the video is a bit of a parody)(yes I wrote this)