zStrictStyle
They could have released Brotherhood and Revelations as a one huge DLC in 2 years.
They could have released Brotherhood and Revelations as a one huge DLC in 2 years.
yeah but if you remember the first time you beat ac2 did you ever say "yeah ill wait 2 years to know wth happens with this goddess like being"..i dont think so we want it fast and entertainingOriginally Posted by zStrictStyle
I don't know about you but, I did say ''Yeah I'll wait 2 years to know wth happens with this goddess like being'' :P I wasn't expecting another game to come out until 2011 o.o
lol hmm well then i guess... -___- oh well
I think Brotherhood and Revelations could have just been one game. But anyways I remember seeing a video, I think it was a developer diary for Brotherhood, and one of the devs said that Rome was originally planned to be another city in AC2, but they realized that it had so much potential so they gave that city its own game.
Right, which is why at the end of AC2, you just start at some random place and infiltrate that way. They didn't want it to be explorable by that point, b/c they had already realized they were just gonna make another game for it. It think they had the story laid out, but in the very early development, they didn't quite realize how big these games were actually gonna be. So then, AC2 starts comin along and they go "ok, well we'll just throw Rome in as DLC." and then it gets further along and they decide to make sequence 12 and 13 broken so they can introduce DLC, and they realize how big it's gonna be then. And then they just kinda went "Screw it. We can do some much with Rome. Why don't we just end the game in 1499 at the Vault, and have Ezio go back to Rome in a new game, cuz it's gonna be way too much for DLC." As far as AC:R, it was probably the same idea. At first, they thought about making it a hand held game or whatever, but then decided against it and to release it as a console game because of the potential. And considering the amount of continuation of the story, I agree with them. If it were to be just some sort of a side game, we'd all be lost. And they would completely lose out because it offered a way for new MP and a perfect set up for AC3, as well as more DLC. Plus, the introduction of Eagle Sense, which we're gonna need for Desmond in AC3.
Last edited by GLHS; 02-07-2012 at 09:25 AM.
Warning: Female Gamer at Play
Do you have any idea just how much memory that would use on a hard drive? Not to mention the unbearably long download times and the (relatively) bad quality due to the fact that they have to use the older engines. Both for the consumer and for the distributor it's much more beneficial to release them as separate games on discs.
Thank you LordWolv, a.k.a. Isaac500, for the awesome new sig and avatar! They look friggin amazing!
You're wrong! You've always been wrong and you always will be. Also, you're ugly and you don't have any friends!
...or you're right.
"He who conquers himself has won a greater victory than he who conquers a city" - Proverbs
If it`s that way,then why do some people argue Ubisoft did that just for extra cash every year?And also it could have worked.7 long sequences for Brotherhood and 7 for Revelations.Just like AC2.with two main cities:Rome,Constantinople.and the others like Masyaf,Cappadocia.Maybe Rhodes could be a secondary city like Forli in AC2.You see it on the road and you maybe return to it later.It could have been like AC2 with new mechanics,differnet story and locations.
Again, it would be huge. There's no possible way. Plus, that would mean they would have to take out like half the story to make it fit, and then nothing would make sense.
Warning: Female Gamer at Play
exactly, well said
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Acrimonious_Nin
