PDA

View Full Version : This similarity among Assassin's Creed, Far Cry and Watch Dogs should stop...



Defalt221
04-10-2015, 06:06 PM
I don't know if anyone else noticed but these three games have so many similarities but it's fairly obvious and makes them feel repetitive to a slight extent and destroy the purpose of exploration:
-The radio towers/view points/CtOS towers when conquered unlocks new missions, side quests, boring collectibles etc.
-The outposts/Templar forts (or Assassin headquarters)/CtOS control centres when conquered removes danger of enemies roaming around that region opens up new side quests and etc.
-The side missions are marked on the map so that players can go and start them with a press 'E' to begin side quests instead of making them random and automatically triggered (I don't mean those small random fights between npcs but those big side quests). Why can't these work differently.
-Story missions have to be started seperately and the side missions NOT integrated into them. Like the early GTA games as if this is the only formula of open world games.
Ubisoft should stop this formulaic trend. It feels bland and makes the point of exploration and discovering pointtless. Do you agree?

D.I.D.
04-10-2015, 06:08 PM
You forgot The Crew. It's also a map/waypoint/tower thing, and it looks very much as though The Division will be too.

I'm not totally against it, myself. I quite like that method of progression, but it's certainly become too much of a house style for Ubisoft and there's a lot of talk out there from people bemoaning the similarity.

Markaccus
04-10-2015, 06:30 PM
Open world games. Where you can do as much or as little as you want. I would be unsure how else they could display the available choices. Unless they get rid of a lot of content, but that would mean big open world fans (like me) may stop playing them.

pirate1802
04-10-2015, 07:37 PM
^They can have you discover quests by talking to random people, like in the RPGs, but I guess that would be too far out of ubi's comfort zone. So all side activities need to be formulaic and neatly fitting into categories (racing/challenges/wave shootouts; thinking mostly of the Farcry games here.)

Jexx21
04-10-2015, 10:07 PM
^They can have you discover quests by talking to random people, like in the RPGs, but I guess that would be too far out of ubi's comfort zone. So all side activities need to be formulaic and neatly fitting into categories (racing/challenges/wave shootouts; thinking mostly of the Farcry games here.)

most games are like this though

VestigialLlama4
04-10-2015, 10:30 PM
Personally if they have some common interface touches than I don't see what the fuss is. You look at Rockstar games, there are a lot of similarities and common interface between GTA, Bully and RDR. As long as the games are essentially different - Watch_Dogs is a hacking GTA clone, Far Cry is FPS, Assassin's Creed is Historical Adventure/Stealth/Acton/Combat/Puzzle Sandbox - than why bother.

Just changing the interface for the sake of changing is not very smart. It should have an aesthetic or gameplay purpose.

LoyalACFan
04-11-2015, 02:35 AM
I don't really have an issue with the similarities as long as they're well-justified within their own game. Like viewpoints for example, in AC they're supposed to give you a bird's eye view of the city so you can pick out all the important locations. Fair enough. But the same mechanic in Watch_Dogs (ctOS towers or whatever) felt contrived as hell. "So, hacking this cell tower is going to reveal the location of a dead body for me to scan and solve a mystery? Erm... okay."

I haven't really played Far Cry much, but from what I understand the "viewpoints" are radio towers that disrupt your enemy's broadcasts. Does this reveal map icons or something? Not sure what the justification is.

Also what Llama said about Rockstar games.

Defalt221
04-11-2015, 07:25 AM
Open world games. Where you can do as much or as little as you want. I would be unsure how else they could display the available choices. Unless they get rid of a lot of content, but that would mean big open world fans (like me) may stop playing them.

Like not showing how many quests you have left to 100% the game or how many story missions left so that you don't know when the story ends. The side missions should work like this: You talk to an NPC and he tells you about some strange criminal activity going in X city. Then the game tell you to look out for it. NOT PLACE A MARKER THAT LEADS TO 'X' location. This is where the database comes into play and you have to use your knowledge of the open world you explored to search that area. You are supposed to be immersed into historical world that the artists worked so hard to create. Instead in these games you follow a marker or a mini map that makes gamers stare it 70% of the time than where you're actually going. (I crashed into vehicles in Far Cry 3 and Watch Dogs many times because of that) Open world is supposed to be that. Not just an unimaginably HUGE map with linear activitis that make no use of the concept of open world expect seamlessness and big open spaces. Batman handles side missions and story missions far better.

LoyalACFan
04-11-2015, 08:05 AM
Batman handles side missions and story missions far better.

Eh... I'm not sure Batman really nailed side content either. They made an effort to justify why Batman knew where all this stuff was happening (his hi-tech scanners and Alfred/Oracle's field management) but it still boiled down to just running up to a map marker and pressing X. Plus, since there was no differentiation between actual missions in Arkham City as it was supposed to take place over a single night, there was also the weirdness of having Batman running around the city with a deadly poison slowly killing him while wasting time hunting Riddler trophies.

lostboy233
04-11-2015, 08:18 AM
I agree, its a little too much handholding and removes a lot of the incentive to explore. I kept wanting to find hidden missons etc (which would be a reason to explore every corner of the open world).

But I would say unity started moving away from this with murder mysteries you had to locate basef on vidocq's clues and the enigmas. Both relied on you exploring and knowing a place rather than just going to a marker and hitting E...

LoyalACFan
04-11-2015, 08:29 AM
I agree, its a little too much handholding and removes a lot of the incentive to explore. I kept wanting to find hidden missons etc (which would be a reason to explore every corner of the open world).

But I would say unity started moving away from this with murder mysteries you had to locate basef on vidocq's clues and the enigmas. Both relied on you exploring and knowing a place rather than just going to a marker and hitting E...

I thought the enigmas were awful, honestly. Some of them were doable if you were observant enough, but the more obscure ones were freaking ridiculous. If the whole point of including missions like these is to immerse the players in their surroundings, then don't make them so unbelievably specific and trivial that you need to spend hours poring over database entries or have a PhD in French history to figure them out. Having to go to the internet and look things up is pretty much the least immersive thing you can do when playing a game.

Defalt221
04-11-2015, 12:22 PM
I thought the enigmas were awful, honestly. Some of them were doable if you were observant enough, but the more obscure ones were freaking ridiculous. If the whole point of including missions like these is to immerse the players in their surroundings, then don't make them so unbelievably specific and trivial that you need to spend hours poring over database entries or have a PhD in French history to figure them out. Having to go to the internet and look things up is pretty much the least immersive thing you can do when playing a game.

Yes but if the mission objective said "Go kill X target hiding inside the Saint Chapelle" instead of "Go kill x target over there (points with a large red marker on screen lying on Saint Chapelle)" that's be more immersive don't you think? Because then you'd have to know at least the name and building location (Or look it up in the map if you can't find it) and this makes the game fun.

Markaccus
04-11-2015, 01:31 PM
Ok. Having taken sime points on board. If these games all started doing it the "speak to npcs" way, then they would still be copying each other. If AC stuck with viewpoints, far cry went 50/50 (i think radio towers to reveal the map is important in far cry because we are usually in a back-water low-tech area), I have not played watch dogs but that sounds like iy would suit the npc method, would people be happy that they were not the same?

lostboy233
04-11-2015, 09:09 PM
I thought the enigmas were awful, honestly. Some of them were doable if you were observant enough, but the more obscure ones were freaking ridiculous. If the whole point of including missions like these is to immerse the players in their surroundings, then don't make them so unbelievably specific and trivial that you need to spend hours poring over database entries or have a PhD in French history to figure them out. Having to go to the internet and look things up is pretty much the least immersive thing you can do when playing a game.

Ok fair enough, some were really obscure, but the concept was (for me) a big leap forward in ubisoft games. Instesd of being waaay too easy and holding my hand all the way it honestly challenged me. I do appreciate going to google is immersion breaking, but it felt rewarding. Each to their own...

EmbodyingSeven5
04-12-2015, 04:21 PM
Personally if they have some common interface touches than I don't see what the fuss is. You look at Rockstar games, there are a lot of similarities and common interface between GTA, Bully and RDR. As long as the games are essentially different - Watch_Dogs is a hacking GTA clone, Far Cry is FPS, Assassin's Creed is Historical Adventure/Stealth/Acton/Combat/Puzzle Sandbox - than why bother.

Just changing the interface for the sake of changing is not very smart. It should have an aesthetic or gameplay purpose.

agree on that.

Frankie_Drums
04-12-2015, 06:49 PM
OP, you'll get a kick out of this, it expands on everything you said in your first post:

http://games.on.net/2014/06/ubisoft-game-the-review/

LoyalACFan
04-13-2015, 06:29 AM
Yes but if the mission objective said "Go kill X target hiding inside the Saint Chapelle" instead of "Go kill x target over there (points with a large red marker on screen lying on Saint Chapelle)" that's be more immersive don't you think? Because then you'd have to know at least the name and building location (Or look it up in the map if you can't find it) and this makes the game fun.

IMO they already have the solution to this; search zones. Instead of just placing a marker right on your target's head, you're given a marker that leads you to the edge of one of those green search zones on the minimap to give you the general location instead of showing you exactly where to go. Granted, Eagle Vision (particularly the new see-through-walls kind) sort of spoils it, but the concept is there.

Defalt221
04-13-2015, 12:44 PM
IMO they already have the solution to this; search zones. Instead of just placing a marker right on your target's head, you're given a marker that leads you to the edge of one of those green search zones on the minimap to give you the general location instead of showing you exactly where to go. Granted, Eagle Vision (particularly the new see-through-walls kind) sort of spoils it, but the concept is there.

But 4 some reason I always end up staring at the mini map again and again.