Patrice desilets: "First game is the purest" | Forums

[Assassin_M]

Purest? Yes, I would agree. But just not the best game...

Who ever said it was ? We have been nagging since the first page that purest doesn't mean the best, but people just wont listen. and Im sure that's not what the article means.

[HaSoOoN-MHD]

This could is sort of a corporate move. I mean, he left Ubisoft, no?
And know saying stuff like ''AC1 was the purest'' and what not seem kinda like: ''Yeah, the games I worked on had X and X and X, now I work for THQ, buy their stuff!''

[TheHumanTowel]

This could is sort of a corporate move. I mean, he left Ubisoft, no?
And know saying stuff like ''AC1 was the purest'' and what not seem kinda like: ''Yeah, the games I worked on had X and X and X, now I work for THQ, buy their stuff!''

I think that's quite cynical. Why shouldn't he be allowed to express his thoughts on games he worked on? Especially Assassin's Creed. He basically created it.

[HaSoOoN-MHD]

I am just stating one possibility, not nessecarily true or even what I believe, but just listing it down.

[GLHS]

About the pointlessness of collecting flags in AC1: Patrice once admitted in an interview (http://www.joystiq.com/2009/06/10/in...trice-desilet/) that the flags were completely pointless on purpose. It was his way of commenting on how every game at the time was too much based on achievements and collectables. He put the flags in the game, but collecting them had no purpose to show to people that a game should be about more than achievements.

This is so stupid. That's the dumbest reason to include something. And if that were entirely true, they wouldn't have made achievements for said collectables for the 360 version. I can see something small being added for comedic and easter egg purposes, but to add like 300 collectable flags in a game for no reason other than to mock other games that actually have a purpose for collectables is just absurd. And to have everybody that doesn't get any rewards for them running around like mad to collect them, without properly explaining the supposed comedy behind it is even worse. Most easter eggs are hidden, but well understood by those that find them. That's just a waste of time on the parts of the players, as well as a waste of development time, energy, and creativity on the parts of the developers. They should've used that time and game space to create something useful. Say, more mission types, or more varied dialogue for NPC's and guards, for example.

[AlphaAltair]

I always liked the deep pit in the Kingdom near Acre precisely because they never explained it. What was it? Why was it there? You could choose to completely ignore it or you could take the risk of running into a camp full of guards and Templars just to satisfy your curiosity. In the end all you got was a couple of flags, but the mystery remained. I like to think that was where they found one of the Pieces of Eden, but Altaïr wouldn't have known about it at that point. That's the kind of stuff I miss in the later games, making up your own narrative and feeling like you're picking up clues for something that's not outright explained to you, unraveling the story yourself.

About the pointlessness of collecting flags in AC1: Patrice once admitted in an interview (http://www.joystiq.com/2009/06/10/in...trice-desilet/) that the flags were completely pointless on purpose. It was his way of commenting on how every game at the time was too much based on achievements and collectables. He put the flags in the game, but collecting them had no purpose to show to people that a game should be about more than achievements.

Full sync is another kind of achievement-driven toy. I think it's a lot more rewarding for the player when they tell themselves to perform a mission in a certain way (only use throwing knives, don't kill anyone, kill your target with your bare fists etc.) instead of being limited by the game. I especially hate it when the game tells me to perform the mission in a high-profile way like "kill everyone in the room with melee attacks" when I think it's far more challenging to sneak in unnoticed, poison my target and sneak out before the guards even notice anything. I, as the player, should be in control of my actions. What adds replay value to the game is not doing the mission the same way every time, but creating your own challenges and saying "this is how *I* think a real assassin would do it, hence this is how Altaïr/Ezio/Connor must have done it". The game should reward me for being creative and sometimes coming up with better solutions to a problem than the developers' suggestions, not punish me with 50% sync as if I'm doing something wrong by not following their rigid restrictions.

Makes good sense to me!

As I said earlier AC1 is the THINKING mans AC!

[CrazySN]

I disagree with Patrice. Just because they added more objectives in the second game, didn't mean they gave the players less freedom. There was still plenty more to do with each iteration of Assassin's Creed, and with each added feature, was plenty of more stories for a player to make in the game. I remember spending tons of more hours in AC2 than in AC1, just screwing around, throwing money, having an army of henchmen fighting guards, running around with thieves, etc. There was much less things in AC1 to toy around with, which is why I'm spending so much time praising AC3. In AC3, I'll have much more things to toy around with, like weather, weapons, companions, etc. With that, I can create many more varied stories than I ever could with AC1.

[HaSoOoN-MHD]

Not sure how AC1 is a thinking mans AC...
It still held your hand, sort of
But it did do it much less than the other games.

[GLHS]

I disagree with Patrice. Just because they added more objectives in the second game, didn't mean they gave the players less freedom. There was still plenty more to do with each iteration of Assassin's Creed, and with each added feature, was plenty of more stories for a player to make in the game. I remember spending tons of more hours in AC2 than in AC1, just screwing around, throwing money, having an army of henchmen fighting guards, running around with thieves, etc. There was much less things in AC1 to toy around with, which is why I'm spending so much time praising AC3. In AC3, I'll have much more things to toy around with, like weather, weapons, companions, etc. With that, I can create many more varied stories than I ever could with AC1.

See that's how I feel. If anything, there's less freedom b/c there's less to do and less options. And before anybody gets on my about 100% synch, it's not even about that. That's an added feature that you either can ignore, or fulfill. Nobody even started complaining about it till after AC:R got it's bad rep. So don't start. There's less things to do in AC1 than any other game, and there's many less ways to screw around. So don't use 100% synch as an excuse for less freedom, cuz they even give you an option to not do it, unless you're actually going for it.