Really. Seems like a miscast to me. I don't mind Ironside being replaced but seriously they couldn't find anyone else?
shareProbably one of the most random decisions ever made. I know they're trying to de-age Sam Fisher to make him more appealing... but this? Rubbish.
---
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RdlM2VZujOc&feature=related
WORD!
sharei was just asking the same qestion
Bond James Bond
it's not going to make me want to play the game any less. well maybe a tiny bit less, Ironside is far too recognizable and iconic and it's impossible to have that not grow on you after 4 games or so.
but still reason given to people is that Ubisoft "..wanted to make the voice acting and motion capture look as close to each other as possible". That sounds like a serious load of bullsh't to me. No gamer is that discerning, to sacrifice what most games usually don't succeed in, a character so beloved and recognizable based on recognizable voice and dialogue alone. There has to be other circumstances or this is one of the dumbest decisions for a franchise from a creative and business standpoint.
If what i've read is not BS(maybe someone here can correct me), it's not a secret that Ironside didn't like voicing Fisher, he's said he hates violence and did it for the money. But he sounds just as full of sh't as Ubisoft then, considering much of his work has always been loaded with violence. His salaries must be fat or his integrity paper-thin.
So, this is 2 years later... Late, I know...
Ironside was actually involved throughout the production of Blacklist. He can be seen working WITH Johnson on set while they were shooting the performance capture for the cutscenes.
Generally speaking, I was also initially upset that Johnson was replacing Ironside, but he's grown on me. I played Blacklist a second time and quite liked Johnson's performance. That coupled with the fact that Ironside was still involved makes it okay for me personally.