PDA

View Full Version : 10 things that need to be brought back in Victory.



Kiltraki
01-28-2015, 10:59 AM
http://whatculture.com/gaming/assassins-creed-victory-10-missing-unity-features-that-must-return.php/1

Pretty simple really. List some things you want returned in Victory or AC in general. The article is a good read for those interested.

Some of the changes I disagree. The guy comes off as a bit of a casual.

I feel like these are cool concepts, but were implemented poorly in the past.

This could be rectified with a difficulty slider though.

Ichrukia56
01-28-2015, 11:27 AM
Agreed very interesting :)

Farlander1991
01-28-2015, 01:34 PM
Half of those suggestions ask to bring back the broken OP things that Unity has finally got rid of. ACU combat, alongside AC1 combat if not for the dreadful counter-attack, are the most adequate and balanced combat systems in the series.

Shahkulu101
01-28-2015, 01:59 PM
Half of those suggestions ask to bring back the broken OP things that Unity has finally got rid of. ACU combat, alongside AC1 combat if not for the dreadful counter-attack, are the most adequate and balanced combat systems in the series.

Thanks for informing me, now I don't need to put myself through it. So many people just don't want to see the series improve.

RinoTheBouncer
01-28-2015, 02:13 PM
I couldn't agree more, especially about the present day sections.

dxsxhxcx
01-28-2015, 03:03 PM
Half of those suggestions ask to bring back the broken OP things that Unity has finally got rid of. ACU combat, alongside AC1 combat if not for the dreadful counter-attack, are the most adequate and balanced combat systems in the series.

Batman Arkham has a counter and "kill"streak system that work.. if they made the guards more agressive, 1HKO counters only available when the enemy's health is below 20% or less and killstreaks be lethal using the same parameters as counters I think we could have a more fluid and balanced combat system..

what Ubisoft needs to do is copy and paste Batman Arkham combat system and modify it accordingly to work with swords and other lethal weapons...

auditorevita
01-28-2015, 03:06 PM
ACU combat, alongside AC1 combat if not for the dreadful counter-attack, are the most adequate and balanced combat systems in the series.

http://static.tumblr.com/1d62948a7d776b6535a69afcf2814c59/vyo7gg5/1hCndn0wu/tumblr_static_8qid5dltygow4cw8swk8s4o0c.gif

Farlander1991
01-28-2015, 04:15 PM
Batman Arkham has a counter and "kill"streak system that work.. if they made the guards more agressive, 1HKO counters only available when the enemy's health is below 20% or less and killstreaks be lethal using the same parameters as counters I think we could have a more fluid and balanced combat system..

what Ubisoft needs to do is copy and paste Batman Arkham combat system and modify it accordingly to work with swords and other lethal weapons...

Batman Arkham Asylum is a very simplistic system at its core that gets fun for two reasons:
1) Combo bar that not only opens up more powerful abilities but as a player you instinctively want to fill it up as big as possible (therefore doing perfect runs).
2) A huge variety of gadgets you can easily use in combat with a very varying effect.

A few things like a less aggressive enemy AI and a couple less archetypes aside, AC3 is actually a pretty good copy of the Batman's system core, and represents very well what happens with the combat in a more realistic weapon-based setting with no arcady elements from Arkham. I.e. it doesn't transfer itself properly. IMO for a Batman-like system to work properly and be balanced in a historical realistic setting, there should be some fundamental differences in the core, which, well, then would make it not that similar to Batman, lol.


http://static.tumblr.com/1d62948a7d776b6535a69afcf2814c59/vyo7gg5/1hCndn0wu/tumblr_static_8qid5dltygow4cw8swk8s4o0c.gif

Instead of putting a facepalming .gif you could try argumenting why you disagree and why you don't think that way, which would lead to me argumenting my thoughts in more detail and why I think the way I do, and we'd have a proper cool and intelligent discussion. But you apparently don't want to do that. (I know I'm being kind of an *** and I apologize, but I just really want to have normal discussions back on these forums instead of a ****fest that's all over the place here in different threads, and .gifs like that don't help at all)

Fatal-Feit
01-28-2015, 04:58 PM
Whistling perhaps, MD debatable, Enemy Guard Types ARE a thing in Unity (WDF?), everything else I don't want.

@ Farlander - As far as adequate and balancing goes for the franchise, I would say:

Unity/1
3/R
IV/RO
2/B

3 and R has the right ideas (with being Arkham-esque), but they weren't executed very well.

rprkjj
01-28-2015, 05:27 PM
What makes Arkham stealth work is the guns. If they could incorporate a more AC3 style combat system with tweaked versions of the existing snipers I'd be more interested to see them go back, if said sniper tweaks can gimp the combat in the right way. As evidenced by AC4, it was the mission design and psychic AI that held AC3 back as a good stealth game. Unity's combat is probably my favorite from an overall design standpoint, but AC3's had the best looking. It had issues like sound cutting out when you got an execution, and it seemed to be overridden with effects to make it seem more fun when it just looked more cheesy imo. Lot's of slow-mo, motion blur, sound effects, etc.

brotersinarms
01-28-2015, 05:47 PM
Yeah, i'm sorry to say i think that games gonna bomb. Victorian England? They couldn't think of a better time period? I'll pass on that one. A Viking or other time period would have been interesting. I just have to scratch my head on why they came out with this one. At least come with a Connor, Shay, Haytham, Aveline game for current gen (or last gen, whatever they call it these days).

Xstantin
01-28-2015, 06:02 PM
Yeah, i'm sorry to say i think that games gonna bomb. Victorian England? They couldn't think of a better time period? I'll pass on that one. A Viking or other time period would have been interesting.

So what is exactly wrong with Victorian England besides your preference for Vikings etc.? It was the lead in one of the older polls for future locations here iirc.

brotersinarms
01-28-2015, 06:16 PM
Well i think as far as sales (and this is just my opinion), people tend to be fascinated in the war periods, be it the American or French Revolutions etc. The Crusades started the Franchise. I mean a case can be made about the "Rennaissance" being succesful (i personally passed on AC2, Brotherhood etc up until 3 being i just found it boring), but i think, the Viking period did about just as well on the Poll you cite.

I think it would have been something more exciting. Other than "tailing" Uncle Scrooge, i really don't know what the game in that time period could offer. Just not my bag i guess, and given the Unity flop, i would think you want to get into something more exciting to get players back.

Fatal-Feit
01-28-2015, 06:35 PM
^ These games aren't planned and made within a year or two.

brotersinarms
01-28-2015, 06:50 PM
Right, well the thing i find fascinating, and what's drawn me to Assassins Creed games, is that they cover war periods, that really no other video game offers. I can only wish Rockstar Games would come out with subject matter that Assassins Creed offers. I mean it can be a Line Fight during the Revolutions or Civil War era's, or Viking or Romans conquering areas. I mean you don't find these things on Consoles.

I think with the Victorian Era (a peaceful era at that), they blew a huge opportunity to get into these other exciting areas. Again, it's my own view and opinion, and i'll pass on this one, but its quite possible many others will as well.

Megas_Doux
01-28-2015, 06:52 PM
Complaints of Unity´s combat being too hard??????

Nothing new under the sun..........

Shahkulu101
01-28-2015, 07:28 PM
Just read it, agree about whistling but the rest is ****ing depressing.

He claims there are no enemy archetypes, which is flat out wrong. According to the writer counters (perfect parries) are nigh impossible, yeah okay - and the rest is just him wanting super OP things back like kill streaks so he can kill like a God.

If Ubisoft listen to these people and revert back to the old systems, I'm gone.

Fatal-Feit
01-28-2015, 08:10 PM
Just read it, agree about whistling but the rest is ****ing depressing.

He claims there are no enemy archetypes, which is flat out wrong. According to the writer counters (perfect parries) are nigh impossible, yeah okay - and the rest is just him wanting super OP things back like kill streaks so he can kill like a God.

If Ubisoft listen to these people and revert back to the old systems, I'm gone.

My thoughts exactly.

SixKeys
01-28-2015, 08:47 PM
10. Double counters

No. Too OP.


9. Whistling distractions

Maybe. I think cherry bombs are fine, but they don't always lure enemies where you want them. They need to pick just one distraction tool and stick with it, we don't need several.


8. Disarming guards/Picking up weapons/Bare-handed combat

I don't understand why these three are lumped together. They all serve different functions. I say no to disarming (it was too easy in past games), no to picking up weapons (it's pointless) and yes to hand-to-hand combat.


7. Enemy counter-attack markers

No need for counter markers if countering isn't part of the combat system. In any case, Unity's system works fine. I've never had problems with enemies not telegraphing me their next move. The only problem is the responsiveness of the controls which leaves something to be desired.


6. Animus/Present-day sections

Oh, NOW they want the Animus back. :rolleyes: Before AC4 every single professional reviewer was b*tching about how boring all the MD stuff was. Now we've had two games with minimal MD distractions and suddenly they're all "ohhh, things used to be so much better in my day".
Don't get me wrong, I agree - good MD needs to come back (I don't care in what form, just make it good). But with this issue, it seems the devs just can't win no matter what they do.


5. Counter-branching attacks

Confusingly worded. I think they're basically complaining that a lot of the old moves are no longer there. To an extent I can agree, but at the same time, there were a lot of completely useless ones. How many people ever used side-step, taunt or sand-in-the-face? I prefer the approach of having enough cool moves to make combat challenging and elegant, but I'm not as enamored of the much-praised Batman games' combat system as many other people. IMO the Arkham games rely too much on memorizing button combos. Every big fight scene quickly turns into an eleaborate Mortal Kombat finishing move.
I do miss abilities like throwing enemies against breakable objects, AC1 style (not AC3 where you had to be close to a specific interactive object). What the article doesn't seem to take into account is that a lot of the old design choices were tied to the puppeteering system - one button for hands, one for legs, etc. For years game reviewers cried out for simplification of the puppeteer concept, and now it has been streamlined, but they're still not happy.


4. Enemy guard types

As Fatal-Feit pointed out, enemy guard types have been in every game, including Unity. It's like the author didn't even play the game.


3. Chain-kills/Bullet shields

Two more OP features. Hell no to chain kills. Human shield might be okay, but TBH it was always a hassle to pull off.


2. Throwing axes and double-handed weapons

Still exist in Unity as far as I'm aware. I'm pretty sure spears and rifles are double-handed weapons. Maybe there aren't heavy axes, because you know why? NOBODY IN 19TH CENTURY FRANCE WAS USING THEM.


1. Fight animation and on-time sound effects

Pretty much the only point I fully agree with. Why they put it as #1 is a bit baffling as IMO it's a minor quibble rather than a glaring issue. But since the rest of the article doesn't make much sense either, I suppose it fits.