• Publisher: Ubisoft
  • Release Date: Mar 31, 2005
User Score
8.3

Generally favorable reviews- based on 12 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 11 out of 12
  2. Mixed: 0 out of 12
  3. Negative: 1 out of 12

Review this game

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Feb 21, 2012
    9
    Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory is not a game for everyone, and not in the way of most people doing bad, but in the way of everyone wanting to do good. Splinter Cell makes everyone a perfectionist by the time they put down the controller and reap their rewards. For there is not a single game more rewarding than this. I've seriously never played a game in which I wanted to do so good. Playing this game I can play a level over and over again till I beat it without getting caught, without setting an alarm or dying etc. I can do this because the game works, and there is not a single better Stealth game out there. You'll be shooting sticky cameras, hanging from pipes, neutralizing enemies, disabling lights and so on. There is so much to do that the controller is riddled with combos in order to fit the complexity to your finger tips.The game is in Third Person and is all about being a spy and getting through a level without getting caught by your enemies. The enemies are also decently intelligent, and will do well to get your heart racing in moments. The gameplay is very much so slow, and doesn't let you switch things up with a firefight. It's all stealth, all the time. There are multiple places of entry into pretty much every room, and there are loads of ways to take out the enemy. The majority of the time you do better to either sneak around or neutralize them (you get more points this way). Everything is there and everything works perfectly, and it should because unlike Shooters and everything else, things are much more frustrating in a game where you lose whence getting caught once, or so it was in your mind. The Gamecube version looks great, probably the best of the three, but it's not the one worth buying for it doesn't offer the multiplayer experience. Best bets are on buying the Xbox version. The lasting appeal just isn't there for the Gamecube version like it is with the Xbox and PS2 versions. Though the campaign is worth beating multiple times. Oh yeah the story..... It's really really boring, but that's not what this game is about. It's a simple concept, wrapped in Tom Clancy complexity and does absolutely nothing in the way of interesting character development. I saved that for the last because if you want a good or interesting story in gaming, you can find a lot in a lot of other places. This is pure hardcore gameplay at it's finest. Collapse
  2. Feb 21, 2012
    0
    Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory is not a game for everyone, and not in the way of most people doing bad, but in the way of everyone wanting to do good. Splinter Cell makes everyone a perfectionist by the time they put down the controller and reap their rewards. For there is not a single game more rewarding than this. I've seriously never played a game in which I wanted to do so good. Playing this game I can play a level over and over again till I beat it without getting caught, without setting an alarm or dying etc. I can do this because the game works, and there is not a single better Stealth game out there. You'll be shooting sticky cameras, hanging from pipes, neutralizing enemies, disabling lights and so on. There is so much to do that the controller is riddled with combos in order to fit the complexity to your finger tips.The game is in Third Person and is all about being a spy and getting through a level without getting caught by your enemies. The enemies are also decently intelligent, and will do well to get your heart racing in moments. The gameplay is very much so slow, and doesn't let you switch things up with a firefight. It's all stealth, all the time. There are multiple places of entry into pretty much every room, and there are loads of ways to take out the enemy. The majority of the time you do better to either sneak around or neutralize them (you get more points this way). Everything is there and everything works perfectly, and it should because unlike Shooters and everything else, things are much more frustrating in a game where you lose whence getting caught once, or so it was in your mind. The Gamecube version looks great, probably the best of the three, but it's not the one worth buying for it doesn't offer the multiplayer experience. Best bets are on buying the Xbox version. The lasting appeal just isn't there for the Gamecube version like it is with the Xbox and PS2 versions. Though the campaign is worth beating multiple times. Oh yeah the story..... It's really really boring, but that's not what this game is about. It's a simple concept, wrapped in Tom Clancy complexity and does absolutely nothing in the way of interesting character development. I saved that for the last because if you want a good or interesting story in gaming, you can find a lot in a lot of other places. This is pure hardcore gameplay at it's finest. Collapse
Metascore
81

Generally favorable reviews - based on 28 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 23 out of 28
  2. Negative: 0 out of 28
  1. Chaos Theory is the game that the original Splinter Cell was meant to deliver: a tight play experience within a trusty framework, one more of enjoyment than irritation, and a game that's no longer exclusively for fans of repeated reloading. [Apr 2005, p.97]
  2. Despite the inclusion of new gadgets and stunning visuals, the series is starting to decompose; playing the same thing over and over is beginning to wear a little thin. It's a good job the multiplayer experience continues to blossom. [Apr 2005, p.90]
  3. In all things small and epic, from the palpable graininess of the game's predominantly poorly lit environments, to the endlessly thrilling second installment of the spies vs. mercenaries online competitions, Theory does not disappoint. [May 2005, p.44]