PDA

View Full Version : Assassin's Creed as an open world game



UKassassinsfan
03-15-2015, 05:13 PM
So I hadn't played assassins creed for a few months since completing unity. During that time I've been play other open world games e.g. Skyrim, GTA and dragon age. I think what I find the biggest difference is how the world is filled. I don't mean with people or buildings because unity would trump any other game. However the random events, side activities and quests really set them apart IMO. In the other games the random events are all incredibly fun and diverse, whilst in assassins creed we "find identical chest cos I need 100%' and personally I find it boring, it's never anything that makes me want to break the story really. I found the murder mysteries and a few of the contracts slightly more appealing in unity because it was something fresh but still the gameplay becomes stale in assssins creed outside the story IMO. Any thoughts or ideas on how to change this guys? Or maybe you completely disagree

JustPlainQuirky
03-15-2015, 05:16 PM
I agree how they handle open world needs work.

black flag did a great job with diving bells and hunting by sea...and legendary ships

ac3 did well with hunting by land and homestead missions. and naval adventure missions.

i havent played brotherhood side missions but i heard good things about that too

less collectables, more story heavy and/or gameplay heavy sidequests pls

UKassassinsfan
03-15-2015, 05:23 PM
Yeah I agree with you, and whilst I enjoyed the hunting etc in the Kenway games i found that they got quickly repetitive, every encounter soon feels very much the same with the side quests. Seems to be a ubisoft thing, if you look at watchdogs the random events were so repetitive.
I would also like to see more story heavy side quests.

JustPlainQuirky
03-15-2015, 05:27 PM
I would also like to see more story heavy side quests.

This x10000

Story-heavy sidequests give me life

reason I love majora's mask soooo much

RADAR__4077
03-15-2015, 06:22 PM
That is what I love about skyrim.

200hrs in and I am still finding new quests and gear. The quests have variety and something that seems very minor may not be.

You can find an item or overhear a conversation and it could be a little one-and-done mission, or the beginning of a 4 hour story.

Then there are completely optional aspects of the game that you can spend hours on.
Idk how much time I have spent upgrading my smithing and enchanting skill then make all kinds of armor and weapons to be used with different skills. And building a house and filling it with supplies, trophies, and crafting stations.

The combat is a little clunky at times, but the amount of content makes it a great game. Because it is more than grabbing chests for money that you will quickly run out of things to buy with, and the quests have at least a short conversation that gives you a reason for your task.

Megas_Doux
03-15-2015, 06:31 PM
AC has never live up to its TRUE potential. The core mechanics are weak and the only good open worlds have been ACB and mostly AC IV, the latter because of the nature of the setting.

VestigialLlama4
03-15-2015, 06:44 PM
AC has never live up to its TRUE potential. The core mechanics are weak and the only good open worlds have been ACB and mostly AC IV, the latter because of the nature of the setting.

The problems with AC not being a good open world has more to do, I would argue with the limitations of an open-world genre. The fact is games are never really open-world, the activities and your ability to interact in it has only a few variations and while a good game might give a broad illusion of open-ness, it's ultimately limited, and after a while all open-world games feel and look the same. So if AC is not like other open-world games that is a point in favor.

What I like about AC is that it has this amazing historical metaphor, and the Parkour and climbing means that every height and low point can be covered by foot, you can climb almost anything and go anywhere. That was fairly revolutionary. The games made architecture the real subject in a way earlier games didn't. And in AC3 they tried to give that curiosity to the natural world and I wish they went further with that. The great part is that the open-world has a strong attraction and theme to the character, and that needs a strong story (which is where Unity fails). You have to have a connection to the world around you and be interested in society.

AC3 for me is overall my favorite open-world purely for the Frontier, that is a setting which has more ways to interact with an environment than any other area in the franchise, you can hunt, you can climb, you can traverse trees and in terms of environment you have mountains, hills, crags, hillsides, treetops, smalltowns, valleys and rivers. You have small towns and general stores for trade. The random activities there (Raid a Convoy) make sense in story, it has amazing Fort missions and also the Hunting Club as side activities. You can even ride horses if you want.

Megas_Doux
03-15-2015, 07:00 PM
The frontier is beautiful, but I find it empty. If you make a comparison with Red Dead Redemptionīs one, it pales greatly in terms of gameplay and acitivites. Hunting is the most obvious example of overall boringness....

I take AC IV because sailing to the high seas is pretty rich activity in itself, you can choose if you want to just sink a ship, or board it. Then we have the forts, plantations that refill and the underwater levels. Problem is that AC IVīs setting is the most unique in the franchise and Ubi nailed the open world part of AC because of it, replicate that is basically impossible.

Fatal-Feit
03-15-2015, 07:38 PM
I take AC IV because sailing to the high seas is pretty rich activity in itself, you can choose if you want to just sink a ship, or board it. Then we have the forts, plantations that refill and the underwater levels. Problem is that AC IVīs setting is the most unique in the franchise and Ubi nailed the open world part of AC because of it, replicate that is basically impossible.

Rogue did a fair job of it. :p

80% of the content are the same, I know, but the new additions like supply camps, Assassin Hideouts, hunting quests, etc deserve some shoutouts.

VestigialLlama4
03-15-2015, 07:39 PM
The frontier is beautiful, but I find it empty. If you make a comparison with Red Dead Redemptionīs one, it pales greatly in terms of gameplay and acitivites.

I actually disagree with that. Red Dead Redemption is what, mostly shooting around animals, then robbing banks or trains (if you want to have poor Karma, which clashes with the story they are telling about Marston) or nabbing outlaws and hogtying them. Or collecting some flowers, I don't see how that's interesting. The horse mechanics are incontestably superior however and to me, taming a horse and riding it is where the game really comes alive and where AC3 failed, but then Parkour is a more important pillar than horse-riding for AC3 whereas Parkour is just not an option for GTA-Red Dead.

For me Red Dead Redemption is most interesting in the opening section with Bonnie MacFarlane's ranch (and later John's family ranch) but everything else is pretty bad, and you know those sections are most like the Homestead in AC3. In terms of landscape, Red Dead Redemption goes wide rather than deep. So you have four or five sections based on landscapes from western movies (and not the good ones). AC3 goes deep, giving you the New England landscape and coast.



I take AC IV because sailing to the high seas is pretty rich activity in itself, you can choose if you want to just sink a ship, or board it. Then we have the forts, plantations that refill and the underwater levels. Problem is that AC IVīs setting is the most unique in the franchise and Ubi nailed the open world part of AC because of it, replicate that is basically impossible.

Well they don't have to replicate, they simply have to look at a period and collect possibilities and find a way to work their story in. The French Revolution setting of UNITY could have been an amazing game because it has an incredibly rich setting, and they could have created an awesome open world without relying on Naval.