PDA

View Full Version : Rogue = worth it? Rogue vs. Unity?



similarly
03-09-2015, 02:59 AM
Console users, since you've already had access to Rogue for some time, I'd like to know your thoughts.

How is Rogue? How does it compare to Unity?

Rogue is coming out on PC in a couple of days.

I loved Black Flag. It's perhaps my favorite of the series.

However, I honestly had very few problems with Unity. My experiences were mostly positive on PC, and many problems and gripes I had before have been fixed by patches etc.

So: those who've played rogue ... would you recommend it?

JustPlainQuirky
03-09-2015, 03:02 AM
Rogue has better gameplay than AC3 and better AC-related story than ACIV.

But it is not better than either two overall.

I would recommend it if you love naval and/or AC storylines

If you prefer classic but innovative AC land gameplay and dont care for good story then Unity is for you.

Namikaze_17
03-09-2015, 03:18 AM
Rogue has better gameplay than AC3 and better AC-related story than ACIV.

But it is not better than either two overall.

I would recommend it if you love naval and/or AC storylines

If you prefer classic but innovative AC land gameplay and dont care for good story then Unity is for you.

I saw what you did there. ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

Hans684
03-09-2015, 05:32 AM
It's worth more than Unity's story, Unity has relevance of a handheld game.

VestigialLlama4
03-09-2015, 09:07 AM
How is Rogue? How does it compare to Unity?

UNITY is a failure and disaster of a game, and ROGUE is an amiable mediocrity. I have greater respect for failures than I do for mediocrities.

Replay AC3 and BLACK FLAG, they are better games and ROGUE adds nothing to it, nor does it show us anything new.

UNITY with all the bugs fixed is okay to play once as a used-game and it has a decent first half. Both games are the total nadir and pits of the Franchise.


I loved Black Flag. It's perhaps my favorite of the series.

It's always better to replay the game that got things right than simply get more of the same just because it has similar gameplay. If you like BLACK FLAG replay it rather than buy ROGUE. Rogue has sailing but gone is the sense of high seas adventure and derring do, and genuine warmth that made the sailing in Ac3 and Black Flag sparkle.


Rogue has better gameplay than AC3

That is pure BS. Not one mission in ROGUE compares to AC3 at its best, the tree-running and Frontier in AC3 are far more beautiful natural landscapes than ROGUE or Black Flag, and the combat in AC3 is better than it.

Fatal-Feit
03-09-2015, 09:50 AM
What are you asking? If you should pick up the game or which is the better between the two? In both story and gameplay, Unity triumphs. But that isn't to say Rogue isn't a good game. I've beaten it twice and is just finishing my third playthrough today. It's still a great AC game, courtesy of Black Flag's engine and mechanics.

If you want a comparison between Rogue and its predecessors (3&4):

Rogue has the worse story. Probably one of the worse in the franchise, IMO. As a fanboy, I quite like it, but I'm open to admit it's fanfic material at best. A parody of both Black Flag and 3. In all criteria, it doesn't match up. Hell, AC3 and even Black Flag are the better Templar sympathizer games. Rogue, for the most part, was a reverse Borgia.

But story doesn't always make the game, and that's where Rogue shines the most. Its gameplay, graphics, and aesthetics are essentially Black Flag's (which was a brilliant AC with better gameplay than 3's), but with a twist. Since you're no longer sided with the Assassins, the gameplay takes advantage of that and gives you some new and innovative mechanics & side missions. i.e - a radar to track nearby stalkers (Assassins) & Assassin Interception which is a reverse contract that tasks you with protecting the targets instead of eliminating them

The graphics are beautiful, especially on PC (wink). It's not as graphically intensive as Black Flag or 3, but it's pretty enough. It also has a good port so if the lack of options for anti-aliasing bothers you, 2k/4k shouldn't be a problem. I'm running the game at 4k resolution w/ 60fps on my 970.

If you're coming from Unity, Rogue really isn't that bad.

http://oi61.tinypic.com/2s7fl9f.jpghttp://oi57.tinypic.com/6yclxk.jpghttp://i.imgur.com/JHs6Pd4.jpg

SofaJockey
03-09-2015, 11:41 AM
Rogue is basically Black Flag II.
The game mechanics are a polished version of Black Flag.

The story is mildly interesting.

But I didn't enjoy playing a Templar for plot reasons.

Of the two games I enjoyed Unity more.

EaglePrince25
03-09-2015, 11:58 AM
Black Flag ll is a good way to put it, with some things lost or changed to suit the main character being a Templar, and the different region the story is focused in. Overall it's still a very good game, and as a story I enjoyed it more than Unity. If you had few problems with Unity I doubt you'll have any with Rogue.

The_Kiwi_
03-09-2015, 02:06 PM
Rogue has better gameplay than AC3 and better AC-related story than ACIV.

But it is not better than either two overall.

I would recommend it if you love naval and/or AC storylines

If you prefer classic but innovative AC land gameplay and dont care for good story then Unity is for you.

That's pretty much 100% true
But I'd say give more praise to Rogue

Megas_Doux
03-09-2015, 03:31 PM
Rogue is a poor´s man AC IV on a way duller setting.........






That is pure BS. Not one mission in ROGUE compares to AC3 at its best, the tree-running and Frontier in AC3 are far more beautiful natural landscapes than ROGUE or Black Flag, and the combat in AC3 is better than it.

However I have to agree with her, the ASSASSINATIONS in AC III are embarrasing and uber cringe worthy, linear and boring stuff in which ONLY three of them are open. Rogue fares better in that regard......

VestigialLlama4
03-09-2015, 04:02 PM
However I have to agree with her, the ASSASSINATIONS in AC III are embarrasing and uber cringe worthy, linear and boring stuff in which ONLY three of them are open. Rogue fares better in that regard......

How? Which Assassination Mission has the care and details the Bunker Hill and Johnson assassinations do? They are all pretty lame ones. Yeah they are open but then an anthill is open too.

Shahkulu101
03-09-2015, 04:48 PM
How? Which Assassination Mission has the care and details the Bunker Hill and Johnson assassinations do? They are all pretty lame ones. Yeah they are open but then an anthill is open too.

Bunker Hill is totally linear. The Johnson one I agree with.

Even then, 3 or 4 assassinations that are nothing but QTE's is inexcusably bad design.

VestigialLlama4
03-09-2015, 04:59 PM
Even then, 3 or 4 assassinations that are nothing but QTE's is inexcusably bad design.

A well made QTE is still superior to a dull open-mission anyday. And besides, aside from the Lawrence Washington mission(which was decent though hardly special), the Assassination missions in ROGUE are just as linear. Most unforgivably the part where you hunt the Assassins themselves.

Shahkulu101
03-09-2015, 05:15 PM
A well made QTE is still superior to a dull open-mission anyday. And besides, aside from the Lawrence Washington mission(which was decent though hardly special), the Assassination missions in ROGUE are just as linear. Most unforgivably the part where you hunt the Assassins themselves.

Well made QTE? Not sure those exist. And I disagree, reducing an assassination mission to one button press is the worst of the worst. Even if it's open but poor at least there's some player agency. I'd even prefer a totally linear assassination because at least we're doing something.

But yes I agree that Rogue's assassination missions weren't very good. Especially Adewale and Kesogawasse - there's literally no way to get to them undetected because the script has other things in mind.

Megas_Doux
03-09-2015, 05:22 PM
A well made QTE is still superior to a dull open-mission anyday. And besides, aside from the Lawrence Washington mission(which was decent though hardly special), the Assassination missions in ROGUE are just as linear. Most unforgivably the part where you hunt the Assassins themselves.

LOL

Like the QTE´s in AC III were "well made" to begin with.......In fact QTE´s are considered the cheapest kind of gameplay by many out there and not only in this franchise.

And If my memory doesn´t betray me, we are playing ASSASSINS CREED, an open world sandbox with some "stealth" elements. Which basically means that the majority of assassinations SHOULD be open. I welcome action oriented stuff, not necessary QTE´s because of the reasons I stated above .You know, well done action in the likes of Al Mualim, Cesare Borgia and such. I´m not saying Rogue is good in that regard, but nothing "beats" what AC III did in terms of its mission design, for it was a complete ATROCITY......

VestigialLlama4
03-09-2015, 05:36 PM
Well made QTE? Not sure those exist.

IIRC, the only QTEs in AC3 is Haytham (which is bad design I won't deny) and Thomas Hickey (and only marginal because it was a cinematic slow-motion action scene but I guess it counts). Charles Lee was Chased and killed over drinks, Church was killed in a cutscene. Nicholas Biddle died in a Captain versus Captain sword duel (which was sort of cool).

It is true that the final half of the game(when Haytham and Connor meet) become linear, but it's still got missions that are better than ROGUE for certain.

SixKeys
03-09-2015, 05:37 PM
A well made QTE is still superior to a dull open-mission anyday.

Lol no.

GunnerGalactico
03-09-2015, 05:45 PM
A well made QTE is still superior to a dull open-mission anyday. And besides, aside from the Lawrence Washington mission(which was decent though hardly special), the Assassination missions in ROGUE are just as linear. Most unforgivably the part where you hunt the Assassins themselves.

I guess you are in the minority here. Gameplay wise, Rogue does trump AC3. QTE's was one of the things I really disliked about AC3 and they really defeat the purpose of executing assassinations.

VestigialLlama4
03-09-2015, 06:15 PM
Gameplay wise, Rogue does trump AC3.

1) The Parkour in AC3 in the Natural environments are way better than Black Flag and Rogue. They streamlined it for Black Flag and made the Tree pathways really obvious (and ugly) whereas in AC3 it feels more organic and alive. It's also far more beautiful there than in ROGUE. In Black Flag its okay because most of the landmass is tiny and surrounded by water. In Rogue you have this mix of Land and Sea which is not very well done at all. The reason is because of the open-world sailing which does take away space for natural environment. It's a compromise and I respect that in AC3 but I don't in ROGUE. You can compare it to the Prologue of AC3 where Haytham moves through the forest in the Braddock Mission and that's much richer and better done.

2) The "Assassination missions" in ROGUE are linear events too but it lacks the cinematic and emotional element that made it work in AC3. The Hope Jensen AC mission is essentially a remixed version of Connor's chase of Thomas Hickey through New York and the Charles Lee mission at the Docks (it even ends there) with some nice poison element added. The Final mission, the one in France, is also a linear event though it forces you to go through rather easy social stealth too, but then that moment has to be scripted as well (and to provide an Old Gen Render of Versailles to give them an unearned pat on the back for the upgrade in Next-Gen). None of them is close to the Battlefield Assassination of Bunker Hill or any of the Fort missions in the Frontier. The fact is the best of Rogue comes close to the missions in the Bonfire DLC, many of them being more open than the story missions, but it doesn't come remotely close to any of the better games at its best.


I guess you are in the minority here.

I am no more a minority here than anybody else on this board.

Namikaze_17
03-09-2015, 06:42 PM
Lol no.

So short in words, but vicious in context...

Hans684
03-09-2015, 08:13 PM
Well made QTE? Not sure those exist. And I disagree, reducing an assassination mission to one button press is the worst of the worst. Even if it's open but poor at least there's some player agency. I'd even prefer a totally linear assassination because at least we're doing something.

But yes I agree that Rogue's assassination missions weren't very good. Especially Adewale - there's literally no way to get to them undetected because the script has other things in mind.

Actually you can stealth assassinate Adéwalé after the chase when he argues with Haytham.

GunnerGalactico
03-09-2015, 08:51 PM
1)The Parkour in AC3 in the Natural environments are way better than Black Flag and Rogue. They streamlined it for Black Flag and made the Tree pathways really obvious (and ugly) whereas in AC3 it feels more organic and alive. It's also far more beautiful there than in ROGUE. In Black Flag its okay because most of the landmass is tiny and surrounded by water. In Rogue you have this mix of Land and Sea which is not very well done at all. The reason is because of the open-world sailing which does take away space for natural environment. It's a compromise and I respect that in AC3 but I don't in ROGUE. You can compare it to the Prologue of AC3 where Haytham moves through the forest in the Braddock Mission and that's much richer and better done.

]2) The "Assassination missions" in ROGUE are linear events too but it lacks the cinematic and emotional element that made it work in AC3. The Hope Jensen AC mission is essentially a remixed version of Connor's chase of Thomas Hickey through New York and the Charles Lee mission at the Docks (it even ends there) with some nice poison element added. The Final mission, the one in France, is also a linear event though it forces you to go through rather easy social stealth too, but then that moment has to be scripted as well (and to provide an Old Gen Render of Versailles to give them an unearned pat on the back for the upgrade in Next-Gen). None of them is close to the Battlefield Assassination of Bunker Hill or any of the Fort missions in the Frontier. The fact is the best of Rogue comes close to the missions in the Bonfire DLC, many of them being more open than the story missions, but it doesn't come remotely close to any of the better games at its best.

The lack of cinematic elements seems to be your own personal gripe. It also kinda sounds like you have double standards. The main missions in Rogue were not as linear as AC3's. I can't take you seriously if you are comparing the main assassination missions in Rogue to the fort missions in AC3, which are just side missions btw. For a short game, Rogue at least had better side content than AC3 but not better than in AC4.


I am no more a minority here than anybody else on this board.

Really, you sure about that? :rolleyes:

SirSionis
03-09-2015, 08:52 PM
Rogue has the worse story. Probably one of the worse in the franchise, IMO. As a fanboy, I quite like it, but I'm open to admit it's fanfic material at best. A parody of both Black Flag and 3. In all criteria, it doesn't match up. Hell, AC3 and even Black Flag are the better Templar sympathizer games. Rogue, for the most part, was a reverse Borgia.

Disagree on the reverse Borgia thing.Unlike the Borgias,Colonial Assassins have good intentions.Liam is a good example of that.He always thinks he is doing the right thing,as he tells Shay.But their methods aren't the most...peaceful.That's what,I think,Rogue shows.Assassins can use nefarious methods,just like the Templars,and can be wrong(Achilles not listening to Shay).And why it doesn't match up?

Tyrhydion
03-09-2015, 09:10 PM
Rogue is superglitchy. I got trapped in icebergs, rocks, trees or under my ship several times. Or when I was on a whale hunt mission, the whale didn't show up. I fought a royal naval convoy too close to main mission location, so when I tried to enter the wealthy wreck, the main mission tried to come up instead, but actually the game froze at that point.

The sidemissions and collectibles are plenty and bloat up the game, although they do absolutely nothing for the main story. The optional objectives don't show up, so you only learn at the end of the mission which optionals you missed. This bothered me the most, because you don't get a chance to cancel the mission and reload from the last checkpoint when you missed. Unlike in Black Flag there is no failure alert.

It was quite impressive how the storyline connected every AC from AC III to AC Unity and that there were three world maps do discover and a couple of extra locations like Lisbon and Paris. The parcouring was a real challenge and I approve of it.

What killed me in the end was when the game revealed whose murderer Shay actually was. And I thought he was a good guy :(

Fatal-Feit
03-09-2015, 10:09 PM
Disagree on the reverse Borgia thing.Unlike the Borgias,Colonial Assassins have good intentions.Liam is a good example of that.He always thinks he is doing the right thing,as he tells Shay.But their methods aren't the most...peaceful.

Both the Borgia and the Colonial Assassins pre-3 had good intentions, but were lost in their ambitions for power and control. The Borgia wanted to unite Europe and the Colonial Assassins wanted to strengthen their cause. Liam, as a matter of fact, is a good example of this. Like Rodrigo Borgia, he believes what they were doing was right. Gullible to the PoE, but kept his ambition dead set on finding it, even despite Shay's disapproval and warning, only to realize they were wrong. He murders under a cause that had lost its way.

The Assassins train and support gangs that terrorize a city, are lost in their ambitions w/ no redeeming morally grey quality (let's be honest, it's black and white no matter how you look at it), and it doesn't help that Rogue dropped the philosophical discussions.


That's what,I think,Rogue shows.Assassins can use nefarious methods,just like the Templars,and can be wrong(Achilles not listening to Shay).

This is the problem w/ Rogue's story. To show that the Assassins aren't perfect? Um, let's forget AC1, R, 3, IV ever happened then... But no, seriously, Rogue does a poorest job of it.

The only way it can stand on its own two feet, which it barely does, are if you've played the other titles. Besides the butchering of past characters, the story is rhetorical. Its selling point is making you believe its morally grey, when it's not. The Assassins are in the wrong, there's no doubt about it. They are as lost in their ambitions as the Borgia and should be brought down before they destroy the world. It doesn't matter what role Shay is in, whether Assassin or Templar, he is in the right. He's the hero. The only internal conflict is having to murder his old colleagues, but they're trying to destroy the world. That's it. There's no conflict in philosophy, no morally grey decisions, no questioning of the Assassin's Creed, it's just stopping the Brotherhood before they cause more destruction. The Templar just happens to be his means of doing do. Unless the only other AC games you've played are 2 and Brotherhood, Rogue literally offers nothing. It simply flipped the table. Nothing else.


And why it doesn't match up?

Because AC3 and Black Flag didn't throw the protagonists into a situation that asked them save the world via siding with the Templars. No, it did something more meaningful. They showed us the philosophy, the Creed, of the Templars. While Rogue is trying too hard to white-knight the Templars and represent how much they ''care'' (ehuehuehuehue, George Monro), the other games aren't afraid to make both sides look bad. They give us questions of morality. Who was right and who was wrong? Was William Johnson in the right for threatening the natives? And was Connor wrong for killing him?

While the last two titles are drowning in internal conflicts, Rogue, at its best, makes us feel somewhat bad for killing Shay's old friends.

SirSionis
03-09-2015, 10:13 PM
What killed me in the end was when the game revealed whose murderer Shay actually was. And I thought he was a good guy :(

I think I don't understand what are you saying...he is all the game assassinating guards and assassins,but suddenly,just in the end of the game,he is a murderer?

EaglePrince25
03-09-2015, 11:04 PM
What killed me in the end was when the game revealed whose murderer Shay actually was. And I thought he was a good guy :(

How does he come off any different at the end though? He's doing the same thing he's spent the entire game doing, murdering somebody (Which is what Assassin's and Templar's alike do anyways lol) This one being with the express purpose of retreiving the box from Assassin hands, to make sure the same thing doesn't happen all over again.

JustPlainQuirky
03-09-2015, 11:50 PM
I dunno what the conversation is but I read "Well made QTE" and spilled my drink laughing



http://oi61.tinypic.com/2s7fl9f.jpg


http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/facebook/000/591/926/700.jpg

wvstolzing
03-10-2015, 12:04 AM
I dunno what the conversation is but I read "Well made QTE" and spilled my drink laughing

Not sure if it qualifies as a QTE, but Michael's yoga 'scene' in GTAV was pretty 'well made' -- it gave me a good laugh. I wonder how it will translate to KB&M; what they did with the analog sticks was brilliant.

JustPlainQuirky
03-10-2015, 12:06 AM
I remember playing that. it wasnt QTE's at all. It was instruction following, yes. But it didnt require reflex timing rather it was a test of how many buttons you can hold down still at the same time without getting a hand cramp.

But yes it was amusing.

SirSionis
03-10-2015, 12:34 AM
Both the Borgia and the Colonial Assassins pre-3 had good intentions, but were lost in their ambitions for power and control. The Borgia wanted to unite Europe and the Colonial Assassins wanted to strengthen their cause. Liam, as a matter of fact, is a good example of this. Like Rodrigo Borgia, he believes what they were doing was right. Gullible to the PoE, but kept his ambition dead set on finding it, even despite Shay's disapproval and warning, only to realize they were wrong. He murders under a cause that had lost its way.

Liam was blind-following the Assassins,and only saw Shay as a traitor.He let his emotions got the best of him,as he showed when he tried to shoot Shay.
I can see that with Rodrigo(until the end of the game,maybe)but that's the only case with the Borgias.Vieri was a spoiled,cruel and only wanted aprovation.And most of the other templars were driven by revenge(the Pazzi conspirators), or were working for money(Orsi brothers) or power(Grimaldi,Silvio and Marco,specially the first two,when they were arguing).Dante Moro was...well,he wasn't aware.And I can,maybe,make a exception with Emilio,since,in his final words,he said that he only wanted to unite,and maybe Lucrezia,in her words in the castle,when Ezio freed Caterina.Cesare was driven by power and ambition.


The Assassins train and support gangs that terrorize a city, are lost in their ambitions w/ no redeeming morally grey quality (let's be honest, it's black and white no matter how you look at it), and it doesn't help that Rogue dropped the philosophical discussions.

They did terrorize the city?Le Chasseur said in his final words that they were using the poison against authorities(killing guards...nothing new in a AC game).Only Monro says that they were going to use it against innocents,and I think that's because he sees the guards as innocents.The Finnegan's son was a Templar,and all the targets on the interceptions were,in the most part,working with templars or were against them.






The only way it can stand on its own two feet, which it barely does, are if you've played the other titles. Besides the butchering of past characters, the story is rhetorical. Its selling point is making you believe its morally grey, when it's not. The Assassins are in the wrong, there's no doubt about it. They are as lost in their ambitions as the Borgia and should be brought down before they destroy the world. It doesn't matter what role Shay is in, whether Assassin or Templar, he is in the right. He's the hero. The only internal conflict is having to murder his old colleagues, but they're trying to destroy the world. That's it. There's no conflict in philosophy, no morally grey decisions, no questioning of the Assassin's Creed, it's just stopping the Brotherhood before they cause more destruction. The Templar just happens to be his means of doing do. Unless the only other AC games you've played are 2 and Brotherhood, Rogue literally offers nothing. It simply flipped the table. Nothing else.

When they butcher past characters?Achilles,for example,in AC3,almost never said ''I'm wrong''(only near the end of the game)and Rogue also shows that.It shows why Achilles is alone in the Homestead,and why he let the Templars end with the Brotherhood.He make a big mistake.And the big mistake shows in Rogue.
I can't say nothing special about Adéwale,since I haven't played Freedom Cry,and also,his motives doesn't show too much in his final words.
Haytham is doing what he believes right,like in AC3.



Because AC3 and Black Flag didn't throw the protagonists into a situation that asked them save the world via siding with the Templars. No, it did something more meaningful. They showed us the philosophy, the Creed, of the Templars. While Rogue is trying too hard to white-knight the Templars and represent how much they ''care'' (ehuehuehuehue, George Monro), the other games aren't afraid to make both sides look bad. They give us questions of morality. Who was right and who was wrong? Was William Johnson in the right for threatening the natives? And was Connor wrong for killing him?

Liam was blind following the Asassins and he never does anything ''questionable'',with the only exception of letting his feelings about Shay's ''betrayal'' get the best of him on sequence 6.He did because he thinks it's the right thing.
Keesegowase was killing natives because they,as one of the bandits mentioned,were working with the British,their enemies.
Hope's poison were for the authorities,her bandits threatened the Finnegans because his son was a Templar,and most of the targets of the interceptions were working against the Assassins.
AC Rogue offers a new perspective.The perspective of the Templars.

Ignacio_796
03-10-2015, 01:32 AM
I have to say this: Rogue, in concept, is more ambitious than Unity....

Let me explain : Rogue main addition is to play as a Templar, in other words, it tries to be the first ''Templars Creed'' (or Templars Order...). You're no longer playing as an agile, unbeateble Assassins, you're a templar, you create plots against your enemies, you manipulate the politic system, you're not fighting by your own against hordes of enemies, you command armies. You hide from the ones that tries to murder you, you dont have any possibility against an Assassins in hand-to-hand combat, because that's not what you are made for: your objective is to transform the city and hoard power. That's why you are a templar.

You don't sail across the sea in search of loot, you dont board random vessels because is fun, you are not a pirate. You don't hide in the rooftops waiting for your prey, you don't hide in the crowds. You are not a walking armory, you dont fight alone and definitely you dont infiltrate in forts doing parkour. Because these are traits of the Assassins.

Yes, Shay has the techniques of the Assassins because he was one of them before joining the Order (which does not explain why he does harpooning or sailing, things implemented in Black Flag as part of the pirate experience), but that corroborates the evidence: Rogue in the execution is not a Templars Order (or Creed or whatever...). Is Black Flag with a templar gimmick. Creating a true Templars game is not as simple as saying: ''The main character is a templar ¡Done!'' It requires a change of mentality, a revamp of the original concept with new mechanics that replace the old ones ¡It could have been the beginning of a new series of games!
A game story (and experience, in general); is not only presented with the scripts, but also with the features of gameplay and mechanics that it has, implemented along with the narrative to create something new.
If you make me do the same thing again, you're charging me a full price game that tries to be different, but it isn't, is the same experience as before.

Ultimately, that's the problem I have with Ubi, they fill their games of different franchises with the same side-activites (viewpoints, forts...etc), and the same formula (stealth, exploration and combat). It does not feel right to play Watch Dogs (per example), and after 1 hour say: ''I have seen this before''...
That's the problem with Rogue. It is not the duration, or the recycle animations, is the lack of features that make you feel like you are in a real Templar experience..
Maybe its because the time constrains that the devs had to create an old generation game, maybe its because the only porpose of Rogue existance is to follow the success of the Naval elements of BF that were so popular among the casual players of the franchise which are the majority of the potential customers. Because, if we see Rogue just as a fun entertaiment, it might be a good product. If we see the narrative as a separated element, it may be decent, if we see the gamplay in the same way, it is good... the problem is when we see the game as a whole along with his ambitions.

PD: sorry for typos or any other monstrosity contained in this post...

Fatal-Feit
03-10-2015, 02:07 AM
Liam was blind-following the Assassins,and only saw Shay as a traitor.He let his emotions got the best of him,as he showed when he tried to shoot Shay.
I can see that with Rodrigo(until the end of the game,maybe)but that's the only case with the Borgias.Vieri was a spoiled,cruel and only wanted aprovation.And most of the other templars were driven by revenge(the Pazzi conspirators), or were working for money(Orsi brothers) or power(Grimaldi,Silvio and Marco,specially the first two,when they were arguing).Dante Moro was...well,he wasn't aware.And I can,maybe,make a exception with Emilio,since,in his final words,he said that he only wanted to unite,and maybe Lucrezia,in her words in the castle,when Ezio freed Caterina.Cesare was driven by power and ambition.

Precisely. The Assassins in Rogue are no better. Achilles was driven by revenge and everyone else had an equally poor excuse for their actions (or even a lack of one, admittedly). They were all lost in their ambitions for the PoE, neglecting Shay's warnings.


They did terrorize the city?Le Chasseur said in his final words that they were using the poison against authorities(killing guards...nothing new in a AC game).Only Monro says that they were going to use it against innocents,and I think that's because he sees the guards as innocents.The Finnegan's son was a Templar,and all the targets on the interceptions were,in the most part,working with templars or were against them.

NY was a wreck because of the gangs that the Assassins supported. They harassed & harmed the civilians, making them pay a fee for protection they didn't need, and it was up to Shay to remedy the damage. That's an interesting theory you have with Monro, but I doubt that's the case. Guards have never been considered innocents in AC. Even the pirates minding their own business in that one mission of AC3 was not considered an innocent. Many of the targets in the Assassin interception missions were civilians, and many trying to mind their own business. i.e - attempting to kill a blacksmith because he refused to arm the Brotherhood


When they butcher past characters?Achilles,for example,in AC3,almost never said ''I'm wrong''(only near the end of the game)and Rogue also shows that.It shows why Achilles is alone in the Homestead,and why he let the Templars end with the Brotherhood.He make a big mistake.And the big mistake shows in Rogue.
I can't say nothing special about Adéwale,since I haven't played Freedom Cry,and also,his motives doesn't show too much in his final words.
Haytham is doing what he believes right,like in AC3.

To start off, they completely misrepresented William Johnson. He went from a calm and collected, well-respected Templar to generic Templar #4568 following the traditional yell-at-the-subordinate-that-bring-bad-news cliche. Combine that an entirely different face sculpt and VA.

Adewale became an Assassin because he wanted to support a noble cause. Alongside the injustice of slavery, he has witnessed and supported Edward's pirate endeavors that have brought damage and destruction upon people and wanted to make amends. Freedom Cry shows us that Adewale isn't a blind follower and discovered he shouldn't lose himself to revenge/ambition. It goes against his character to support the Assassins in Rogue, especially with the methods they practice in NY. The white room also damned his character. I hated it.

They got Benjamin Franklin right. He had more importance in Rogue and didn't feel completely shoved into the narrative. Moving on:

Achilles was a bad antagonist. Besides the completely different VA and drastically younger character model, was his character consistent w/ AC3's? Yes, by your description, but he sucked as an antagonist. He was worse than Cesare Borgia. Achilles lost all of his charm and unlike Brotherhood that had an epic dual, everything was leading up to an anti-climatic cutscene. W/ Rogue, there was little to no saving grace for Achilles' character. He was blinded by grief and remained dull & one dimensional throughout the game. Rogue sucked the life out of him.

Speaking of sucking the life out of a character, Haytham was dull. What made Haytham such an interesting and compelling character in AC3 was gone in Rogue. His character was literally 1-dimensional. It was all srs business w/ him. There was no interesting dynamic w/ him and Shay or in-depth lectures about the Templar philosophy, etc. The compelling dynamics and conversations he had w/ Connor like on the rooftops was nowhere to be seen in Rogue. The story teases us every now and then like during the kill after the interrogation scene & side conversation about his hidden blade [insertlenny], but they only proved how uninteresting his character was in Rogue. I don't even want to get started on Adewale's white room. They didn't butcher Haytham, but they did a good job of making me not care about one of my favorite Assassin's Creed character of all time.


Liam was blind following the Asassins and he never does anything ''questionable'',with the only exception of letting his feelings about Shay's ''betrayal'' get the best of him on sequence 6.He did because he thinks it's the right thing.
Keesegowase was killing natives because they,as one of the bandits mentioned,were working with the British,their enemies.
Hope's poison were for the authorities,her bandits threatened the Finnegans because his son was a Templar,and most of the targets of the interceptions were working against the Assassins.
AC Rogue offers a new perspective.The perspective of the Templars.

Everything you described wasn't compelling or morally grey in the least. I mean philosophical situations. Eliminating forces that are against your cause is something we've all seen a million times before. Literally, you can just swap the names of the two order and nothing would change in Rogue. The perspective of the Templars aren't new, and it certainly wasn't its best in Rogue. Play AC1, AC3, and Black Flag. They did a better job of giving us the perspective of a Templar.


*snip*

I don't believe it's the gameplay (which I thought was great) that was the problem. It's the narrative, IMO. Rogue's story is rhetorical. It doesn't make you question the Assassin's Creed or sympathize w/ the Templars' philosophy. Hell, there was non of that and that's the problem. Rogue's story is black and white. There's no good to the Colonial Assassins, they're blinded by their ambitions and you have to stop them to save the world. The Templars just happens to be your means of doing so.

similarly
03-10-2015, 03:51 AM
Just want to say a big thank you to everyone who gave opinions here. I've read them all and they've given me a lot to think about. I love the AC series. I have 'em all, though I have only played a little bit of AC1, AC2, and ACB. Probably I'll go back and finish those and wait until Rogue goes on sale.

I have plenty to keep me busy until then. I've barely started Watch Dogs and Far Cry4.

JustPlainQuirky
03-10-2015, 03:52 AM
Solution

>discard Watch_Dogs, it is terrible
>Trade in Far Cry 4 for the vastly superior Far Cry 3
>use your spare cash to buy Rogue and then laugh at all the unsold Unity copies on store shelves
>???
>Profit

Fatal-Feit
03-10-2015, 04:54 AM
Just want to say a big thank you to everyone who gave opinions here. I've read them all and they've given me a lot to think about. I love the AC series. I have 'em all, though I have only played a little bit of AC1, AC2, and ACB. Probably I'll go back and finish those and wait until Rogue goes on sale.

I have plenty to keep me busy until then. I've barely started Watch Dogs and Far Cry4.

Good choice. Rogue at 20$ sounds fair. You're better off with Watch_Dogs and Far Cry 4 for now.

SirSionis
03-10-2015, 05:34 PM
Precisely. The Assassins in Rogue are no better. Achilles was driven by revenge and everyone else had an equally poor excuse for their actions (or even a lack of one, admittedly). They were all lost in their ambitions for the PoE, neglecting Shay's warnings.

They were blind followers,and they followed Achilles,but he was wrong.I thought Achilles didn't want to let the Templars take another PoE?


NY was a wreck because of the gangs that the Assassins supported. They harassed & harmed the civilians, making them pay a fee for protection they didn't need, and it was up to Shay to remedy the damage. That's an interesting theory you have with Monro, but I doubt that's the case. Guards have never been considered innocents in AC. Even the pirates minding their own business in that one mission of AC3 was not considered an innocent. Many of the targets in the Assassin interception missions were civilians, and many trying to mind their own business. i.e - attempting to kill a blacksmith because he refused to arm the Brotherhood

They did?where is that mentioned?
Guards aren't considered innocents by the Assassins,but why they aren't?they are just doing their work.Also,Monro was working for the British.That's why I think that.He even said that ''he gave his life to the British and his soul to the Father of Understanding''.And yes,they were civillians,but they were against the Assassins.And it's not the first time the Assassins killed civillians that were against them(the interrogation targets in AC1).




To start off, they completely misrepresented William Johnson. He went from a calm and collected, well-respected Templar to generic Templar #4568 following the traditional yell-at-the-subordinate-that-bring-bad-news cliche. Combine that an entirely different face sculpt and VA.

I agree on that one.I didn't liked William Jonson in Rogue.


Adewale became an Assassin because he wanted to support a noble cause. Alongside the injustice of slavery, he has witnessed and supported Edward's pirate endeavors that have brought damage and destruction upon people and wanted to make amends. Freedom Cry shows us that Adewale isn't a blind follower and discovered he shouldn't lose himself to revenge/ambition. It goes against his character to support the Assassins in Rogue, especially with the methods they practice in NY. The white room also damned his character. I hated it.

Well,I haven't played Freedom Cry so...I can't say anything.


They got Benjamin Franklin right. He had more importance in Rogue and didn't feel completely shoved into the narrative.

Then,not all the characters were ''butchered'',right?


Achilles was a bad antagonist. Besides the completely different VA and drastically younger character model, was his character consistent w/ AC3's? Yes, by your description, but he sucked as an antagonist. He was worse than Cesare Borgia. Achilles lost all of his charm and unlike Brotherhood that had an epic dual, everything was leading up to an anti-climatic cutscene. W/ Rogue, there was little to no saving grace for Achilles' character. He was blinded by grief and remained dull & one dimensional throughout the game. Rogue sucked the life out of him.

Probably he did lost his charm,but it was consistent.But I also would liked to see more of Achilles motives.Specially that moment when he lost Abigail and Connor.


Speaking of sucking the life out of a character, Haytham was dull. What made Haytham such an interesting and compelling character in AC3 was gone in Rogue. His character was literally 1-dimensional. It was all srs business w/ him. There was no interesting dynamic w/ him and Shay or in-depth lectures about the Templar philosophy, etc. The compelling dynamics and conversations he had w/ Connor like on the rooftops was nowhere to be seen in Rogue. The story teases us every now and then like during the kill after the interrogation scene & side conversation about his hidden blade [insertlenny], but they only proved how uninteresting his character was in Rogue. I don't even want to get started on Adewale's white room. They didn't butcher Haytham, but they did a good job of making me not care about one of my favorite Assassin's Creed character of all time.

I also didn't liked Haytham,but it makes sense.Their relationship was just...professional,like others users have said.It's not the same in AC3.He was trying to make Connor understand his motives,and he was his son.The relationship is different.



Everything you described wasn't compelling or morally grey in the least. I mean philosophical situations. Eliminating forces that are against your cause is something we've all seen a million times before. Literally, you can just swap the names of the two order and nothing would change in Rogue. The perspective of the Templars aren't new, and it certainly wasn't its best in Rogue. Play AC1, AC3, and Black Flag. They did a better job of giving us the perspective of a Templar.

I was just trying to show that the Assassins had motives behind those acts.Just that.Also,maybe it wasn't the perspective,but you do play as a Templar.That's what I was saying.It's the first time that you play more than just a little part of the game(AC3)as a Templar.I mean,there are assassins stalking you every time...



I don't believe it's the gameplay (which I thought was great) that was the problem. It's the narrative, IMO. Rogue's story is rhetorical. It doesn't make you question the Assassin's Creed or sympathize w/ the Templars' philosophy. Hell, there was non of that and that's the problem. Rogue's story is black and white. There's no good to the Colonial Assassins, they're blinded by their ambitions and you have to stop them to save the world. The Templars just happens to be your means of doing so.

The Assassins only followed Achilles.Blind followers,like I said earlier,and...that final scene with Achilles locked at his homestead,and knowing what happened(after),IMO,shows that it's not that black and white.Achilles lets the Brotherhood die because he knows he was wrong.

topeira1980
03-10-2015, 07:42 PM
opinions are like butt holes - everyone got one.

well, MY personal butt hole is that after playing just 2 hours of rogue at a friend's house and after completing AC:U at home i see no reason to get play rogue.
rogue, for me, felt a lot like AC3 and ACIV, which is what everyone said. i didnt like those games. they are heavily scripted with , what i would call, outdated mechanics and graphics.
AC:Rogue looks worse than ACIV because it's a port from the 360\ps3, unlike ACIV that was created for PC and XB1\PS4 with more care.
also i hated the combat in AC3 and ACIV, where i felt i could kill everyone much more easily than acting like the stealthy assassin the franchise wants me to.

AC:U feels like the older AC games made anew. next gen graphics and next gen mechanics. better parkour, better stealth and combat... well, combat is different. there is a survey here on what combat system from past AC games people think is best. the majority pointed at ACU. this isnt true for EVERYONE but to me it does. i loved ACU's combat way more than AC3 and ACIV , which felt to me like a simplified combat system that gives options yet lack depth and sophistication. Unity has a simple combat , yet it requires more from the player therefor feels more satisfying, and makes you really think about using gadgets, stealth and even running away.
AC:U also has costumization, which no other AC had to such extent, and i loved it.
AC:U also has co-op but im not a co-op kind of guy so it was fun playing with a friend a few times, i preferred doing co-op missions alone more :P

about story - each his own. i wasnt a big fan of ACU's story but it didnt retracted much from my enjoyment, but i dont give that much importance to story in games. i give importance to gameplay.
didnt play rogue to see its story through. all i saw was AC3\IV again, which i didnt care for, with all of it's problems and no big steps forward in terms of gameplay, so i didnt bother.

so if you loved ACIV and wanted more of that than rogue is for you, i guess.
if you are looking for a next get AC:Brotherhood only harder than AC:U is for you.

Farlander1991
03-10-2015, 10:51 PM
I've been thinking about the nature of 'falling from grace' stories, and the nature of them in the AC universe. We have two factions, the light side and the dark side. Yeah, in AC it's a bit more complicated than that, shades of gray and all that stuff, but Assassins are essentially the lighter shade of gray and the Templars are the darker shade of gray. That's just how it has been ever since AC1.

The thing is, when it comes to 'fall from grace'... You essentially have a person who must become an *******. In simple terms. Like, yeah, not all Templars are inherently bad or with bad intentions or stuff like that, but after so many games, they're essentially the *******s of the series. But, unless there's a redemption story planned (or if we want to sympathize with the character), this must not look like becoming an *******, because from their perspective they're not going from the lighter side to the darker, but from the darker to the lighter. In essence, what they're going through IS the redemption story from their perspective.

But it's also very tricky in terms of AC lore, because, Assassins and Templars have quite a lot in common. Shay in the beginning of the game questions a lot of Assassin principles, and rightly so, however... Templars wouldn't have been much different, really. They do a lot of questionable things as well, sometimes even exactly like the Assassins. So what do you do? You make the side you leave from *******s, even if we're used to them not being such. The thing is, it may be cliche, but ultimately, that would be the reason why most people change their views of life, or kinds of groups they hang out with. I mean... it happens all around in life, really.

And in games.

Lucy became a Templar. Why? Because William was an *******.
Copernicus left Templars. Why? Because Cesare was an *******.

We have Vali cel Tradat. Vlad the Impaler, a Templar in the AC lore, wasn't the nicest of guys, but he fought for independence and order of his country, strengthening its position, making the economic situation better, getting rid of crimes and etc. Also, no more Ottoman rule reigning over the country thanks to him. What then happens? Assassins do an assholish thing and help the Ottomans to defeat the Templar, ironically also ruining the very thing they're fighting for (Wallachia goes back under Ottoman control and people become not so free). So Vali joined the Templars. Cause the Assassins were *******s. Ultimately... if you don't think the group you're with are *******s, at least in some way, why would you leave them for another group? (though, to be fair, Shay really only thinks that Achilles is an *******, but everybody else follows him, so...)

So I don't know. This is not, like, a defense of Rogue, or anything, just a contemplation on these kind of stories, and how these kind of things happen. And, I actually think now that the memory reading thing from ACU could really benefit Rogue. Because, with it, you could show the Assassin perspective, that they're not really *******s. But there still should've been something that would keep him on the Templar side.

I don't know. Just throwing out some things I'm thinking about, this is not even an 'opinion', just contemplation.

SirSionis
03-11-2015, 10:58 PM
So I don't know. This is not, like, a defense of Rogue, or anything, just a contemplation on these kind of stories, and how these kind of things happen. And, I actually think now that the memory reading thing from ACU could really benefit Rogue. Because, with it, you could show the Assassin perspective, that they're not really *******s. But there still should've been something that would keep him on the Templar side.

Yeah.I would also like that.Liam's perspective or Achilles perspective.I mean,the final words didn't help.Keseegowase,Liam,Hope,Chevalier (Adewale?) let their feelings get the best of them.Specially Keseegowase.

Megas_Doux
03-11-2015, 11:27 PM
After having played Rogue for a while is my least favorite game in the series. The acting is on amateur levels, the story seems like fan-fiction and really don´t get the fuss of some here about Shay either, although I might know. The gameplay is a poor man´s version of AC IV in a way duller setting, which prompts me to say that Rogue´s NY although better designed for parkour than its AC III version, feels even more lackluster in my book. Speaking of which cannot emphasize how GREEDY is to have the SAME freaking city just 15 years before. I like having SOME rural areas, in fact I miss those in Unity, but making a whole game based on those again????? Please not again.....

Regarding the reviews, and performance aside, well Rogue has naval and the same old baby tier combat difficulty, so.......



PD In less important stuff, the graphics are REALLY subpar, AC IV and even AC III are way better than Rogue and I´ve played those three on the same PC.

JustPlainQuirky
03-12-2015, 12:03 AM
reading the steam reviews to Rogue.

All positive. Even optimization.

And they complimented the story.

https://31.media.tumblr.com/0891b29eb1426e247581d15f062f7008/tumblr_mk8g6ohUz11s99a3eo1_250.gif

Ubisoft, have you picked up on the signs yet?

edit:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B_2iOW0UIAA8U2n.png

omigosh lmfao

Xstantin
03-12-2015, 12:06 AM
^Compliments to the story. Isn't it like the most fan-fictiony one oO

JustPlainQuirky
03-12-2015, 12:08 AM
Yeah it is. Shay is a Gary Stu IMO.

But compared to black flag, its much more openly Assassin/templar related.

And compared to Unity it's christ on earth.

if it was a standalone without side release of Unity it would get much more flack

Farlander1991
03-12-2015, 12:45 AM
I'm playing Rogue right now, and... after Unity it's kinda... I don't know. Settlements feel empty, parkour's uncomfortable, and the combat system... But I think it's not just that. I'm pretty sure if I go back to Black Flag, for example, I'll still be able to enjoy the game.

One thing about Black Flag is that the game had some exceptionally well level and mission design, which took advantage of everything the game has to offer. If you compare for example assassinations of Laurens Prins and Lawrence Washington (heh, two Lawrences) that happen in fairly similar settings, Prins just wins.

And it's not that Rogue mission design is bad, I wouldn't call it that, because overall I still enjoy it (though the most fun I've had so far was with the first Assassination Interception mission that I got), but it doesn't get to the level of BF. And I guess the problem is simple. It's time. Black Flag clearly had more time to develop (Darby said pre-production started after Revelations at the end of 2011, so they had two years in total, with time to flesh out and polish levels and locations).

JustPlainQuirky
03-12-2015, 12:50 AM
both black flag and rogue had terrible on-land gameplay

Farlander1991
03-12-2015, 12:53 AM
both black flag and rogue had terrible on-land gameplay

Well, they've got the same mechanics which aren't the best, but Black Flag makes a better use of them. Heck, Black Flag made even tailing missions correct, and that was my least favourite type of missions every since AC2 that I actually enjoyed in Black Flag, and that's all due to the level design (and the addition of tagging too, though, which is not level design, but a smart choice nonetheless :p ). Routes, guard placement, their patrols, etc. etc. etc.

JustPlainQuirky
03-12-2015, 12:55 AM
it was tailing missions galore in black flag

didnt find a single one of them fun

but i guess it depends on the person

Farlander1991
03-12-2015, 01:02 AM
it was tailing missions galore in black flag

If we're speaking side-quests, then those have barely any tailing at all, and if we speak main campaign, BF's main campaign is very well balanced in a sense that there's really pretty much the same amount of each goal type in missions in total (i.e. tailing, infiltration, assassination, combat, naval combat, etc.), and the missions never have only one goal type as well (so there's that too). Trust me, I've looked a lot into Black Flag (especially when working on the stealth viability sheet), there's not more tailing than other actions in the campaign :p Heck, tailing has actually the short end of the stick in a sense that there's somewhat less of it than other goal types (not by much, cause as I said there's relatively the same amount overall, but it's still not as prominent).

wvstolzing
03-12-2015, 01:14 AM
How about the new naval weaponry in Rogue? Is it a pointless gimmick, or does it improve upon AC4's naval warfare in any way?

Megas_Doux
03-12-2015, 02:53 AM
I'm playing Rogue right now, and... after Unity it's kinda... I don't know. Settlements feel empty, parkour's uncomfortable, and the combat system... But I think it's not just that. I'm pretty sure if I go back to Black Flag, for example, I'll still be able to enjoy the game.

.

The following is about gameplay:
}
There is huge chunk of people that loves naval to the detriment of land gameplay. Angry joe and Total biscuit for instance have said they want Ubi to transform AC into a FULL action oriented naval simulator. and they are not alone.....

At this point, I think Unity was destined to be a stilborn, even if its launch would have been normal. It was more focused, gameplay wise, into BEING an assassin instead of the "historical GTA", we know which approach is more popular. Then we to have to take into consideration that even though still easy regarding combat by any means, it poses somewhat of a challenge at times, mostly comparing it to the previous games and we also know that 85% of this fan base wants to be this invincible demigod capable of killing waves and waves of enemies without any effort whatsoever since the beginning of the game.

Sadly, thanks to its disastrous launch, we will never know for sure the true reception of this "assassinish" approach. What I´m afraid is that Ubi might end up abandoning the things I liked in Unity because the bad sales/critics.


PD having spent more time with it, Rogue is the DULLEST AC to date aside Liberation.....Poor man´s AC IV by all accounts.

JustPlainQuirky
03-12-2015, 03:01 AM
people who want AC to go full naval are freakin idiots

i love cynical brit but thats nonsense bothers me to no end

thats not assassins creed anymore at that point

ask for a spin off but jesus christ

thats like asking mario to be an fps because one of the games has a first person mode

Namikaze_17
03-12-2015, 03:12 AM
85% of this fan base wants to be this invincible demigod capable of killing waves and waves of enemies without any effort whatsoever since the beginning of the game.


https://youtu.be/91bdQuFJPcw

JustPlainQuirky
03-12-2015, 03:16 AM
https://youtu.be/91bdQuFJPcw

for some reason i thought you were linking a clip to bijuu mode naruto

Namikaze_17
03-12-2015, 03:17 AM
for some reason i thought you were linking a clip to bijuu mode naruto

How come?

JustPlainQuirky
03-12-2015, 03:18 AM
How come?

"85% of this fan base wants to be this invincible demigod capable of killing waves and waves of enemies without any effort whatsoever"

^^^narutoforums in a nutshell

Namikaze_17
03-12-2015, 03:33 AM
"85% of this fan base wants to be this invincible demigod capable of killing waves and waves of enemies without any effort whatsoever"

^^^narutoforums in a nutshell

Ah, I see. :rolleyes:

And the irony is really in the title than the song actually...

AssassinHMS
03-12-2015, 03:49 AM
There is huge chunk of people that loves naval to the detriment of land gameplay. Angry joe and Total biscuit for instance have said they want Ubi to transform AC into a FULL action oriented naval simulator. and they are not alone.....
The worst part is that they couldn’t care less about the core mechanics, whether they’re “ok” or a piece of ****, it’s all the same to them. Angry Joe pretty much admitted he found AC's core to be boring and unworthy of being improved.
If they aren’t satisfied with the core of a game then they shouldn’t be playing the freaking game. Complaining about how they would prefer if the core was changed and that naval became the star of the gameplay is ridiculous. You shouldn’t ask artists to do what suits your taste, that’s not how art works, business on the other hand.





85% of this fan base wants to be this invincible demigod capable of killing waves and waves of enemies without any effort whatsoever since the beginning of the game.

Poor taste is no rarity, unfortunately.

Mr.Black24
03-12-2015, 04:10 AM
The worst part is that they couldn’t care less about the core mechanics, whether they’re “ok” or a piece of ****, it’s all the same to them. Angry Joe pretty much admitted he found AC's core to be boring and unworthy of being improved.
If they aren’t satisfied with the core of a game then they shouldn’t be playing the freaking game. Complaining about how they would prefer if the core was changed and that naval became the star of the gameplay is ridiculous. You shouldn’t ask for artists to do what you want, that’s not how art works, business on the other hand.






Poor taste is no rarity, unfortunately.
And that is the problem right there. When Ubisoft listens to these kinds of people, we get a crappy quality game. These people will not let us have anything good.

AssassinHMS
03-12-2015, 04:32 AM
And that is the problem right there. When Ubisoft listens to these kinds of people, we get a crappy quality game. These people will not let us have anything good.
I can understand them though, they’re simply saying what they feel. They want naval, they want to decimate entire armies…most don’t even realize it’s not their place to ask.
Ubisoft could, of course, do what they think is best for Assassin’s Creed regardless of the market’s demands but that’s not how business works.
And that’s why Assassin’s Creed is “doomed”.

There’s no one really to blame here…things are what they are.

VestigialLlama4
03-12-2015, 05:08 AM
Ubisoft could, of course, do what they think is best for Assassin’s Creed regardless of the market’s demands but that’s not how business works.

Ubisoft did that until BLACK FLAG, it was UNITY that started listening to market demand.

Megas_Doux
03-12-2015, 05:27 AM
Ubisoft did that until BLACK FLAG, it was UNITY that started listening to market demand.

Ubi, through its annual cycle, is trying to please everybody. However, due to the respective time constraints is not succeeding. By the time Unity was released 7 years from the first game had passed, not having a crouch bottom was an embarrassment for a franchise that calls itself "stealth" and also 1:1 buildings had to happen. The previous difficulty of combat was atrociously easy and still is to certain extent. Unity SHOULD have delayed and Rogue SHOULD not even exist...... But again, naval is pretty popular and many are looking for it.

Don´t get me wrong, I had and still have a great time with AC IV and its pirate stuff. However I saw it as a "one hit wonder" a welcome exception, not a future trend in which an ENTIRE game or even the franchise is based. As I said, I prefer having strong core mechanics first and THEN other stuff, not the opposite. Thing is Ubi tries to include secondary mechanics in order to mask the shame of yearly releases and thus we got the underdeveloped hunting, den defense and the acclaimed naval.

VestigialLlama4
03-12-2015, 05:42 AM
Ubi, through its annual cycle, is trying to please everybody. However, due to the respective time constraints is not succeeding. By the time Unity was released 7 years from the first game had passed, not having a crouch bottom was an embarrassment for a franchise that calls itself "stealth" and also 1:1 buildings had to happen.

See they put in a stupid and unnecessary (and un-needed) crouched button simply to satisfy fans who wanted a "crouch button" solely so people can feel like they are playing like all the other boring Thief knock-off stealth games instead. They also make combat pointlessly elaborate but still ridiculously easy. I don't see why these are considered any steps forward or any innovations.

I mean Assassin's Creed, like the Arkham games or DISHONORED are fast-paced stealth games, where the majority of gameplay isn't spent crouching behind a crate and waiting for a torchlight to pass you by, which after a while gets pretty damn boring and makes all stealth games similar. So you want a crouch button and move around like an overgrown blue turtle in well-lit interiors even if the only way to avoid detection is destroy the guards before they attack alarm bells...go ahead its Christmas for you stealth nostalgists. A crouch button has no place in social stealth anyway.


The previous difficulty of combat was atrociously easy and still is to certain extent. Unity SHOULD have delayed and Rogue SHOULD not even exist...... But again, naval is pretty popular and many are looking for it.

I agree with that. After AC3 came out, a lot of fans identified with Haytham, white dude who wants to bring order in America, and so they decided to give ROGUE an entire game for the whiteboy crowd even if the story is atrocious and the characters are bad. I mean its a mediocre game of little ambition while UNITY is a messy failure with stupid ideas, but I prefer messy failures to mediocrities any day.

I don't know why fans are getting hung about the naval thing. Ubisoft is obviously making a pirate spin-off and the AC games will never support is as more than a side feature. Some people have complaints about UNITY that are legitimate you know, most people hate it not because they want a naval simulator, they hate it because it fails to achieve every single thing it set out to do.

AssassinHMS
03-12-2015, 05:54 AM
Ubisoft did that until BLACK FLAG, it was UNITY that started listening to market demand.

So am I to understand people never wanted naval or the baby tier combat?
So Black Flag was a rebellious act where Ubisoft didn’t bring back the already acclaimed features of AC3, introduced sea exploration, because people weren’t talking about how much they wanted a pirate themed game, and made sure the core mechanics would keep gaining dust since all they wanted was a good Assassin simulator??

And AC2 was also proof that Ubisoft couldn’t care less about the market’s ramblings, like when they decided to make an on-rails, story driven game with much more action and linearity, all at the expense of the original concept brought by AC1.
Of course ACB was also revolutionary. Not only they stuck with the same protagonist (that the market hated), they revolutionized the gameplay (that the market never praised) by adding levers to the parkour formula and chain kills to the combat. Heck, the last thing the market wanted was more of the same but with easier and faster paced combat.
And don’t even get me started on ACR. The last thing the market wished for was a team up of Ezio and Altair. And that gameplay…with all the over-the-top action and linear missions…yeah they hated it.


Yep, everyone was up for a “shipless” AC that focused on the core and offered a more challenging combat system.
No wonder Unity was so well received, despite all the glitches.



Better stealth, challenging combat and less automatic parkour, that's what the market always says!

VestigialLlama4
03-12-2015, 06:12 AM
So am I to understand people never wanted naval or the baby tier combat?

No they didn't want or ask for it. That was a pleasant surprise when they saw it in AC3 and Ubisoft developed that on their own, exactly as you said. They didn't want a game set in Revolutionary America either, a setting that took many people aback when it was announced, I remember well.

UNITY deliberately went to Revolutionary France which was a longterm fan request and now they'll go Victorian London, another fan-request and after that China/Japan, another-fan request.


So Black Flag was a rebellious act where Ubisoft didn’t bring back the already acclaimed features of AC3, introduced sea exploration, because people weren’t talking about how much they wanted a pirate themed game, and made sure the core mechanics would keep gaining dust since all they wanted was a good Assassin simulator??

I remember the run-up to the announcement of Black Flag well. No one expected a Pirate game, least of all wanted it, everyone expected a game in the usual choices (Revolutionary France, American Civil War, A connor sequel, London, Japan and whatnot). Including me. I didn't think a pirate game fit well with Assassin's Creed and the like. It was a pleasant surprise when it came out and proved to be so good.


Yep, everyone was up for a “shipless” AC that focused on the core and offered a more challenging combat system.
No wonder Unity was so well received, despite all the glitches.

UNITY wasn't well recieved because it was a poor game simply. However much you think that it went "Back to the Core", it's not a patch on AC1, by its own limited criteria its a terrible failure and it has none of the virtues of the more linear games.


Better stealth, challenging combat and less automatic parkour, that's what the market always says!

Well, its not "Better Stealth", it's not "challenging combat" and while the parkour is less automatic, 1/3 is a very poor showing for such an expensive game on a brand-new expensive console which moreover asked for absurdly high graphic specifications and ended up being a glitch fest (and remaining one).

AssassinHMS
03-12-2015, 06:49 AM
No they didn't want or ask for it. That was a pleasant surprise when they saw it in AC3 and Ubisoft developed that on their own, exactly as you said. They didn't want a game set in Revolutionary America either, a setting that took many people aback when it was announced, I remember well.

UNITY deliberately went to Revolutionary France which was a longterm fan request and now they'll go Victorian London, another fan-request and after that China/Japan, another-fan request.
I remember the run-up to the announcement of Black Flag well. No one expected a Pirate game, least of all wanted it, everyone expected a game in the usual choices (Revolutionary France, American Civil War, A connor sequel, London, Japan and whatnot). Including me. I didn't think a pirate game fit well with Assassin's Creed and the like. It was a pleasant surprise when it came out and proved to be so good.
UNITY wasn't well recieved because it was a poor game simply. However much you think that it went "Back to the Core", it's not a patch on AC1, by its own limited criteria its a terrible failure and it has none of the virtues of the more linear games.
Well, its not "Better Stealth", it's not "challenging combat" and while the parkour is less automatic, 1/3 is a very poor showing for such an expensive game on a brand-new expensive console which moreover asked for absurdly high graphic specifications and ended up being a glitch fest (and remaining one).



You call naval a “pleasant surprise”, but that isn't true at all, reguarding the case I listed, Black Flag.
People wanted open world naval gameplay and AC4 gave them that. The market loved it in AC3 and wanted to see more of it and Ubisoft made their wish come true.
Once they saw the trailers, everyone was licking Ubisoft’s boots.


You said Unity was the first AC game where Ubisoft listened to the market.

I already made my point about AC2 and the others so I won’t repeat them but those games were clearly answers to the feedback Ubisoft got.
And Unity is, in some ways, in line with the market’s demands, I’m not denying that. Just don’t tell me the other titles were any better.
AC2, ACB and ACR were obviously made with the market’s interests in mind. AC3 was too (the linearity, the over-the-top action, the one man army concept, etc.) but it took more risks than the others.
Unity did go against the market’s wishes in a few ways. No naval for example, slightly more challenging combat (which started so many threads here…), more complex stealth, etc.
And I’m not saying stealth in Unity is better in every single way but it evolved and became more complex (which it desperately needed).Is it unpolished? Yes, but at least it’s nowhere near the wreck it was in Black Flag and the same can be said about Unity's combat system.
As far as the market is concerned, stealth can just stay the same **** it was since AC2.

The market does NOT care about AC’s core mechanics. They want easy-peasy combat, automatic parkour and decadent stealth so that other features like naval can shine and replace the current core.
The fact Unity’s devs decided to do the opposite shows they had some of the game’s interests in mind, even if the execution wasn’t the best.


So this statement:

Ubisoft did that until BLACK FLAG, it was UNITY that started listening to market demand.
Is far from the truth.

The_Kiwi_
03-12-2015, 07:05 AM
Rogue is definitely worth the purchase, I don't regret it
I had more fun playing Rogue than I did Unity
Rogue felt more like an Assassin's Creed game should

Farlander1991
03-12-2015, 08:06 AM
}
There is huge chunk of people that loves naval to the detriment of land gameplay. Angry joe and Total biscuit for instance have said they want Ubi to transform AC into a FULL action oriented naval simulator. and they are not alone.....


While I don't agree with TotalBiscuit, I can see where he's coming from. TotalBiscuit is a person who really liked AC2 (and AC multiplayer introduced with Brotherhood, btw), and then after that has seen essentially pretty much the same game with unpolished mechanics and a different gimmick, and he's not wrong, you know. Even Unity that has updated core mechanics is not exactly polished (even without the technical issues), and while we as fans can see how ACU is not the same game as everything since AC2, to the person whose job is to play ****tons of games it might not be noticeable with the limited time to look at the game, not to mention with all the technical difficulties.

One of the reasons TB likes ACIV and naval is because, well, naval is damn well polished, better than the core mechanics of the game. So not only it was something new and different, it was something well done and enjoyable to play. I'm actually curious what he'll think of Rogue, btw. Cause it's essentially the same thing as Black Flag, only not as good, and usually he doesn't appreciate these kinds of things.

VestigialLlama4
03-12-2015, 10:21 AM
You call naval a “pleasant surprise”, but that isn't true at all, reguarding the case I listed, Black Flag.
People wanted open world naval gameplay and AC4 gave them that. The market loved it in AC3 and wanted to see more of it and Ubisoft made their wish come true.

BLACK FLAG went into developing during the final phase of AC3 development before the release, because they anticipated that it was a chance to make the definitive pirate game. They did that without any fan poll whatsoever but went on instinct alone.


Once they saw the trailers, everyone was licking Ubisoft’s boots.

Everyone was licking boots after they saw the Unity trailers too, because the French Revolution is a cool setting and still is, people were excited about climbing ancient monuments again (which AC3 and Black Flag daringly went away from by focusing on natural landscapes and environments, though Black Flag is far inferior in that respect to AC3's gorgeous Frontier) and hoped for more Tomb Missions. How people reacted to trailers doesn't mean anything. Most people were surprised at playing Pirate Grandpa because the setting was totally unexpected and you know, I didn't care for Black Flag until the game came out. I didn't even pre-order it, I played it two months after its release.

Why do you think so many people are upset about UNITY? Because they know that Ubisoft had everything to make a good game and they still messed it up big time?


And I’m not saying stealth in Unity is better in every single way but it evolved and became more complex (which it desperately needed).Is it unpolished? Yes, but at least it’s nowhere near the wreck it was in Black Flag and the same can be said about Unity's combat system.

Actually, the stealth system in BLACK FLAG is quite good. I played it recently and nearly always did a stealth run in the plantation thefts. You also had these jungle missions (where you move from one part of the island into an interior) which were both linear and open at the same time, linear in that you keep going forward but open, in that there are many options to incapacitate guards in the field as you trudge through (Tulum is especially great in that regard). In terms of stealth in open air environments, Black Flag is a triumph. In any case UNITY's stealth owes quite a bit to Black Flag, the addition of the Alarm Bells, that ugly Eagle Sense where you have Red Gloworm Guards behind walls (which totally destroys the art design) and the High Angle Roof Sniper, all of those are Black Flag innovations.


The fact Unity’s devs decided to do the opposite shows they had some of the game’s interests in mind, even if the execution wasn’t the best.

I don't think Unity's devs cared about anything. The whole product is so lifeless, they wanted a very simplified formula with which to continue churning out games. So you had a very bland Ezio clone, you have these atrocious English accents, poor storytelling. The art directors obviously had a lot more passion in building the Paris monuments but aside from that there's nothing. The only reason they returned to the AC1 core is simply because it was simplest and most basic for them to do in the window to put out a Next-Gen game, and the stealth is far inferior to AC1 anyway and it ignores many of the additions and good things in the earlier games out of blinkered thinking.

Besides its plainly clear that they had no pride in their product and are ashamed of it. Since the launch of the game, there has not been a single interview or comment by any of the development team, not by the writers or by anyone, not even for the DLC release, which is shocking compared to the releases for AC3 (where Hutchinson and Corey May defended many of their decisions and explained their logic because they actually did care for their work) and Black Flag.


Is far from the truth.

Ah, nothing is true... In all fairness, I think both our issues about the games come from the same place. With ROGUE and UNITY you can see the Franchise approaching production like a poorly treated dog in a Pavlovian experiment. I mean annualization by and itself is not a problem and it can and has produced good games. The worst part of annualization is the leverage given to snap judgments which leads to very poor initiative. The marketing sees immediate reactions and goes to one extreme or another because of response to poor stimulus and so on. ROGUE has zero reasons for existing for instance. It brings precisely nothing to the Franchise, totally cannibalizing the assets of previous games, produces no new gameplay and its naval element is totally boring. If people want more Black Flag, play Black Flag again, or even replay AC3's naval missions.

I agree that UNITY's focus on stealth, combat and Parkour and improving that was a great idea, but I will not agree that Ubisoft's focus on that makes them deserve any special points or favor. Especially when the mission design is so poor. In AC1, every target was a mini-movie of its own and in a short time each one of them held the stage and made an impression and that connection and bond with the target, is what made those games great. UNITY at best is like Period HITMAN (it even brings in a disguise element from that games, another poorly executed and implemented good idea).

ShootRawGuy
03-12-2015, 08:35 PM
I am not even sure I will finish Rogue. It is just boring! Fights are just to easy :/
I would also say Unity!

Tyrhydion
03-20-2015, 10:56 PM
These glitches really make the game a terrible experience. I am trying for two days now to achieve the optional objective of killing Kasegawase with the puckle gun, which is awfully hard. But when I make it, I don't the optional objective checked :mad: And I can't reload from last checkpoint but have to start the memory all over again......

worst experience ever

The_Kiwi_
03-20-2015, 11:47 PM
These glitches really make the game a terrible experience. I am trying for two days now to achieve the optional objective of killing Kasegawase with the puckle gun, which is awfully hard. But when I make it, I don't the optional objective checked :mad: And I can't reload from last checkpoint but have to start the memory all over again......

worst experience ever

What glitches?
I saw no glitches in Rogue
I got that mission 100% second try after realising that the puckle guns are throughout the fort, not just on the ship

Farlander1991
03-21-2015, 10:52 AM
I had that puckle gun glitch too, it was a pain in the *** to target the dude properly, and when I finally killed him with a puckle gun it didn't count.

Also Rogue has a pretty frequent case of objects not appearing on the map which forces reloads. Lawrence Washington didn't appear, had to reload, there was one pidgeon that didn't appear, had to leave location and get there again (reloading and fast traveling to the same place didn't work for that), and there was an assassination interception when one guy didn't spawn, there was a settlement where one of the goals was to kill a particular sniper, and he didn't exist, and a bunch of other times this happened.

Defalt221
03-21-2015, 11:02 AM
Console users, since you've already had access to Rogue for some time, I'd like to know your thoughts.

How is Rogue? How does it compare to Unity?

Rogue is coming out on PC in a couple of days.

I loved Black Flag. It's perhaps my favorite of the series.

However, I honestly had very few problems with Unity. My experiences were mostly positive on PC, and many problems and gripes I had before have been fixed by patches etc.

So: those who've played rogue ... would you recommend it?

Yes. Rogue does a lot of things great:
1)Completes the Kenway saga
2)Hacking E mails and audiograph reveals what William Miles' been doing. Therefore the modern story progresses a bit. Unity doesn't. The ending of Unity is a kick in the teeth.
3)You get to know why Achilles became so cynical,depressed and broken in AC3 and what really happened to the brotherhood esp Adewale (predictable).
4)You get to know what happens to the precursor box.
5)Naval gameplay is slightly expanded.

The_Kiwi_
03-21-2015, 11:51 AM
Yes. Rogue does a lot of things great:
1)Completes the Kenway saga
2)Hacking E mails and audiograph reveals what William Miles' been doing. Therefore the modern story progresses a bit. Unity doesn't. The ending of Unity is a kick in the teeth.
3)You get to know why Achilles became so cynical,depressed and broken in AC3 and what really happened to the brotherhood esp Adewale (predictable).
4)You get to know what happens to the precursor box.
5)Naval gameplay is slightly expanded.

This sums it up almost perfectly
But I'd like to add that the protagonist is a sexy Irish Templar
Which makes him the best protag by default

Jackdaw951
04-10-2015, 04:30 PM
Yes! I finally bought this. $20 Amazon sale, and I had more than that left in a gift card from Christmas, so it was time. On the one hand, it doesn't feel as polished as Black Flag, but on the other, there are more fun things to do out on the waters. Icebergs in particular bring on a smile. Blow one up, and it crashes down, creating a colossal ripple ring that rocks the ship and damages smaller craft. The Morrigan feels more like an RC toy than a full-sized ship, and that's unfortunate. It's too responsive, too quick to move and maneuver. But on the whole, I'm addicted to the naval life again, seeking plunder and improvements for my craft. The story so far remains a background distraction. I'm just going through enough of it to open up the gameplay..

Mr.Black24
04-10-2015, 05:50 PM
Yes. Rogue does a lot of things great:
1)Completes the Kenway saga

No it didn't.

The_Kiwi_
04-10-2015, 11:48 PM
Yes! I finally bought this. $20 Amazon sale, and I had more than that left in a gift card from Christmas, so it was time. On the one hand, it doesn't feel as polished as Black Flag, but on the other, there are more fun things to do out on the waters. Icebergs in particular bring on a smile. Blow one up, and it crashes down, creating a colossal ripple ring that rocks the ship and damages smaller craft. The Morrigan feels more like an RC toy than a full-sized ship, and that's unfortunate. It's too responsive, too quick to move and maneuver. But on the whole, I'm addicted to the naval life again, seeking plunder and improvements for my craft. The story so far remains a background distraction. I'm just going through enough of it to open up the gameplay..

That was done on purpose
It has a shallower draft and tighter controls for river navigation
It responds to controls better because a ship that shape and size should
Its as realistic as it gets

SixKeys
04-11-2015, 12:05 AM
I had that puckle gun glitch too, it was a pain in the *** to target the dude properly, and when I finally killed him with a puckle gun it didn't count.


This happened to me too. I was very confused as I was sure I got the guy, yet it didn't register. Didn't run into the other problems mentioned yet.

Jackdaw951
04-11-2015, 02:20 PM
That was done on purpose
It has a shallower draft and tighter controls for river navigation
It responds to controls better because a ship that shape and size should
Its as realistic as it gets

"Realistic" is the wrong word. A ship this size and length with 34 cannon, 40 crew, mortars and 4 carronades up front, and all that ammo would have a horrible polar moment of inertia. Changing direction would be a lot more difficult than this. I'm ignoring the huge ice-splitting blade up front too. For that to work, and not get crushed on first use, it would have to be massively heavy, and its placement would pull the whole ship under, nose first, the moment it left dry dock.

I think "credible" is a better word, and it would be more so if the ship didn't feel light as a dinghy.

I guess New York is the reason some complain about a reused location? Well, it's new to me, since I skipped AC 3 altogether (the only major AC I've missed). The renovation activities were a surprise. I didn't expect that. The stalkers were unexpected too. That adds a whole new level to the combat. I've also been rammed and boarded a couple of times. Ha! Turnaround is fair play. Love it so far. I'm just now into Sequence 3. And Amazon sent me the "limited edition" unexpectedly, so I did that quickie Fort de Sable thing, and got my Templar swag on display.

Mr_Shade
04-12-2015, 11:54 AM
Some interesting debate in here...

pacmanate
04-12-2015, 02:03 PM
I think Rogue is definitely worth it, but I don't think Rogue is better than Unity and vice versa.

Rogue Pros - Great story, nice spin on side missions, quantity of side missions not overwhelming, interesting precursor sites
Rogue Cons - Reused settings, Reused Assets (Others could include for some: Too similar fighting animations, same parkour mechanics)

Unity Pros - New parkour, murder mysteries (Could count graphics, not really fair though),
Unity Cons - Not as strong a story as Rogue (my opinion), too many side missions, too many chests, equipment locked behind other media, glitches

Thats not to say Unity's story sucked, it just wasn't as good as Rogues. Also noticed how in my opinion that what one game did "right", the other failed in?

CyrussNP
04-15-2015, 07:23 AM
AC Rogue is definitely worth getting if you're any kind of Assassins Creed fan. The story by itself is worth the price of admission. It's a great tie up of the loose threads in AC 3 (mainly the question of what happened to the Brotherhood prior to AC 3). The gameplay as someone pointed out is very similar to AC IV though in my opinion it's even better than AC IV. The ship battles are faster and the inclusion of the ice ram and icebergs add another element to naval combat that makes it much more exciting. Also on land you have to deal with a new type of enemy that will stalk you and can take you out if you're not careful. Also taking over enemy forts is a bit more exciting since there are captain level enemies who will use stealth to try to take you out when they sense your presence. All in all the gameplay is an improvement to AC IV in every respect. It's still easy but due to the new enemy types there's at least a slight challenge (something completely absent in AC 3 and AC IV).

I won't even compare it to AC 3 though since that game IMO was boring gameplay wise.

My biggest gripes against AC Rogue is that it's too short. It feels like somewhere around the halfway point everything is rushed to its conclusion. Also there is no diving bell (well it kind of makes sense since you're either at a river or in the frozen North Atlantic). Hunting feels more repetitive for some reason even though there are more animals to hunt (and it's made obsolete anyway since you can just buy the skins for your upgrades). This is the third time Ubisoft had an interesting story and characters and then rushed through it (like AC Liberation and Freedom cry before it) completely wasting the opportunity they had to make an even more epic game.

If you enjoyed AC 3's story and AC IV's gameplay, you'll really like AC Rogue.