PDA

View Full Version : Does this series need a hard reboot?



LoyalACFan
07-22-2015, 12:43 AM
I've been thinking about this quite a bit while reading this forum over the past couple of months. Nobody really seems satisfied with the series in its current form; the games have been incredibly hit-and-miss, but the problem is that one person's hit is another person's miss (best examples being AC3 and Unity; the series has been so schizophrenic in its approach that nobody seems to like the entire franchise anymore, just certain games here and there). There doesn't seem to be a coherent artistic vision behind the series anymore, and every time it changes direction, it becomes increasingly polarizing. I'm starting to think more and more that if they want to maintain the quality of the series, Ubisoft needs to just cut their losses and go back to square one. Strike out everything up to this point as a separate canon, and with the increased budget and advanced technology at their hands today, deliver on the incredibly ambitious vision of the first game.

This has to do with both the lore and the mechanics, which I don't really have the time to go into in detail, but the lore is horrendously cluttered as it is (Pieces of Eden have completely lost their allure after apparently every single Assassin in history came into contact with one of them) and the mechanics have never really been exceptional, probably largely due to the yearly release cycle that doesn't really allow much time to naturally evolve and adapt.

VoXngola
07-22-2015, 01:18 AM
I've been thinking about this for a long time as well. Considering that the franchise turned into something which it wasn't supposed to turn into (Patrice, trilogy, yadda yadda) and the annual release dates not giving the franchise the oppurtunity to take a deep breath once in a while, a reboot would be not only fitting but amazing as well.

Ubisoft needs to rip all these documents apart. I'm really, really, REALLY tired of Ubisoft's open world formula that's been in AC and all of their open world games recently. You do raise a good point, I must admit, with the polarizing and all. The gameplay and design formula is stale and tiresome. The lore is beyond salvation because of Ubisoft's greed and Patrice not getting his way.

It's a wish that I guess will never come true, but just how awesome would it be if Ubisoft just stopped releasing AC annually and took a break for a couple of years and then came back with a COMPLETE reboot of the franchise. The franchise just feels..I don't know, it's just tiring. And I don't want to feel this way when it comes to AC. It needs to be killed and brought back in a different way. I think we can all agree that there's definitely talent at Ubisoft and a lot of creative minds exist there. If only they had the time and were tasked to do this.

ze_topazio
07-22-2015, 01:18 AM
Let Ninja Theory handle that.

AC: Assassin's Creed

My name is Altair


No, I don't like reboots, if a series is a mess and is going downhill just take a deep breath, plan things better and take it in a new and better direction, rebooting is just an easy way of keep on milking a famous brand.

I-Like-Pie45
07-22-2015, 01:19 AM
just do what zelda does

every new game is a reboot

dimbismp
07-22-2015, 01:42 AM
Well,right now the franchise has fallen behind in terms of gameplay in comparison to other AAA titles.In the meanwhile,the overrarching plot has become so complicated and unfocused that they decided to abandon it almost completely.The thing is that the standalone stories are not that great and rewarding to keep me buying AC year after year...

So,i agree that the series need some kind of reboot.Well the thing is that this "reboot" doesn't need to be as drastic like a reboot of a 20 years old franchise.Here is how i would like it to be done:
-The series stop for now(all the following dates are under the assumption that after ACS they stop)
-The devs take aa break for 1-2 years.In this period they obviously won't be working,they just going to take a step back and look to the bigger image,which things they did right,which wrong etc
-Around early 2017,a team is created consisting of both old and new guys.These guys should be working in as few studios as possible to avoid frustration.
-They work on the game for as much as they like,they create a new engine and they design everything on scratch.In the meanwhile the writers,think about the general plot of the entire series.When the game is ready,and only then,Ubi reveals the game.
-Obviously no previous characters should appear in the games IMO.There should be obviously a MD,which should be the main reason to drive us forward.As more games come out,the MD should become more and more important,which will result in the final game being MD only.There should also be some PoE and TOWCB,but to a lesser and more mysterious way than the current AC.
-Finally,the franchise shouldn't obviously be annual(there should be at least 2-3 years between the games).The devs should be aware from the beggining about the amount of games that will be released and the general plotline.Ideally there should be like 4-6 games.In each game we get completely new protagonist,time period,mechanics etc.Each protagonist should have his own story,but in some way all these stories should have something in common,tied to the overrarching narrative.

So in conclusion that's how i would like it to happen:
2015:ACS (ending of the current AC franchise)
.
.
.
(let's say)2020:Ancient Greeks or Romans or Egyptians
2023:The Crusades or Medieval Europe
2026:Asia settin
2029:The american revolution or The french revolution or The napolean wars or The industrial revolution
2032:1st Civ game
2035:Final MD game

Obviously,it is almost impossible for a franchise to span 20 years with just 6 games,but a man can dream

LoyalACFan
07-22-2015, 02:20 AM
Obviously,it is almost impossible for a franchise to span 20 years with just 6 games,but a man can dream

Metal Gear Solid did it :)

VestigialLlama4
07-22-2015, 04:07 AM
At this point, a reboot will only make things worse.

Altair1789
07-22-2015, 04:19 AM
The only change they need now is allowing devs to make their own deadlines

kosmoscreed
07-22-2015, 06:21 AM
Probably yes, Unity was not enough, gameplay needs to be refined and refreshed even more, they need to keep the core but get off the "copy & paste" nature of the franchise, the fatigue in players is real, too many games in very few years. .Story needs to be reset and make the real world story interesting again.

steveeire
07-22-2015, 11:26 AM
I would say yes but what the franchise mostly needs is a 4-5 year period without any games.

lothario-da-be
07-22-2015, 12:14 PM
Unity felt pretty much as a reboot to me, any AC game that doesn't have any ties with previous games and overhauled gameplay would feel like a reboot.
Not that a reboot can save this franchise anyway.

Sushiglutton
07-22-2015, 12:35 PM
Some of my favourite games of all times are the result of talented studios taking their established franchises and putting a new spin on them. Best example is probably ND's "dark Uncharted" the Last Of Us. At its foundation it's the same cover based TPS with a bit of sneaking, character banter and cinematic moments you'd expect from ND. But the new gritty feel changes everything and elevates the experience. Other great examples are "GTA with horses" (Red Dead), Remedy's move from film noir to Stephen King (Alan Wake) and finally, but not least "open world Prince Of Persia" (and we all know that one...)!


Imo it's time for Ubisoft to shed skin once more. Just get rid of AC for the moment. It doesn't have to die (none of the franchises above are dead (I hope)), but take a looong vacation. Instead, as I have argued before, Ubisoft should make another historical franchise with no strings attached to AC. Much of the tech can easily be transformed into new projects, so no need to start from scratch.


There are plenty of time periods they could do and/or historical/mythological characters like Marco Polo, Robin Hood, Odysseus and so on. Just throw off the AC-shackles and run free :D!

Sorrosyss
07-22-2015, 01:01 PM
This is a difficult one to decide upon. The trouble with reboots is how far should it go? I mean, if it changes the game so fundamentally that it is not the same in any way, would it warrant still being part of the franchise? There are similar elements that run through the AC series that remind you of what you are playing, be it viewpoints, hidden blades, hoods etc. If those were suddenly gone, I feel it would alienate a lot of the longer term fans.

I suppose that is how Ubisoft views it as well. Each year they get a decent amount of sales, so "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" comes to mind.

Looking at the games industry as a whole, there is a very definite shift to the open world genre now. Most of the big games of E3 were that very genre. As such, AC has a much larger competition that it once did. Hell, even Ubisoft's catalog is increasing with more and more open world games - Division and the new Ghost Recon immediately spring to mind. Indeed, more and more games are going for drop in/drop out campaigns to encourage more multiplayer options. If Ubisoft were to deploy a proper online world to AC, it might be attractive enough to more casual players to jump in, especially if one can make your own character. In those type of games though, the narrative ultimately suffers.

In terms of the narrative driven games, the genres that really do well are RPGs - like Dragon Age and Witcher. AC is by no means an RPG, but it does share some elements. In my view, if they want to improve the story substancially, that's the kind of genre that AC should aim for. But again, it would not be the same game series that we know now.

If you directly compare Unity to AC1, there has been some staggering improvements, mainly in the graphics since that first game. I cannot deny the series has improved over time in some areas, but then in others, such as the story, it's really fallen down for me. I feel last year was a bit of an anomaly, as they overstretched themselves trying to put out two games. It will be interesting to see what Syndicate can deliver. Personally I'm hoping that they removed multiplayer to add more depth to it for next year.

Then there is the release schedule. For me, I find the year wait too long as it is. But then I play a lot of MMOs where you expect and receive consistent content all year round. I totally understand how some people would be sick of the sight of it all the time, and indeed if you look at the comments on any articles these days, there are usually non fans calling AC the new COD, or that they wish the franchise would die already. It's debatable many ways, I can appreciate. But when you have things like Mario and Zelda going for thirty years, I see no issue in AC carrying on way into the future. So long as there is the passion and sales from fans, I'm sure they will continue with the yearly release.

So, TLDR, I think the series has certainly improved in a lot of areas in the past decade, but there are some areas that they definitely need to look at strongly - namely story. In this I think they should continue as they are. But if they were to reboot the franchise, I would like to see some kind of online RPG element to push forward both the narrative and rival the "living worlds" that their open world rivals are now putting out to the market.

I'll concede this though, if they did want to overhaul things, next year would be a prime time to do it with the movie coming out. I could see a lot of new fans coming to the franchise from that side of things for sure.

Farlander1991
07-22-2015, 01:04 PM
The biggest problem is that AC lacks competition. Even if we get a reboot with perfect core mechanics and stuff like that, eventually things may start getting pretty hairy, because, well... competition is good. Business-wise and creatively. If there's no competition you start getting a blurry eye on the things you do, and also maybe you're more willing to cut some corners there and there, because, hey, you have monopoly on the field so it wouldn't really hurt the brand or the game.

Uncharted had to compete with the successful and popular reboot of Tomb Raider in the mid-2000s. Tomb Raider, then, had to compete with Uncharted. And now the new Uncharted games have to compete with Tomb Raider. In the end we have great games all around.

AC, whilst having both pretty damn great and amazing games as well as pretty mediocre, doesn't have any competition in form of a historical open-world action/adventure. So while the devs to try to make the best game they can obviously, competition is what would REALLY drive the series forward. Games like Shadow of Mordor aren't really a direct competition to AC, they provide different experiences and therefore aren't necessarily battling for each-others audiences.

dxsxhxcx
07-22-2015, 01:13 PM
a reboot won't save this franchise if Ubisoft doesn't change its approach towards it...

for a reboot to work (IMO) they need to:

- take the MD sequences seriously or completely remove it: this doesn't mean more screen time for the MD, but they should make each sequence matter and do their best to provide an entertaining experience, what doesn't necessarily mean copy and paste the experience we have with the historical portion of the game into a modern setting, MD (IMO) is all about narrative and immersion, if you can't provide a similar experience as we have with the historical portion (be it linear or not), fine, but don't try too hard like you did with AC3;

- take their heads out of their asses¹ and do something about combat's difficulty: Don't want to make the combat challenging for everyone? That's fine, just give difficulty options for those who want to challenge themselves, the animus shouldn't be a excuse to don't do that and there are MANY ways to justify difficulty settings in the game, so no reason to be lazy here;

- take their heads out of their asses² and do something about the core gameplay (navigation, stealth, combat): I think that by now any other developer in the world would've already figure out how to provide a solid experience off of these 3 pillars and then expand from it, but (IMO) Ubisoft has been struggling with it from day 1, it's time to stop trying to reinvent the wheel with every new game and begin working with what you have, something that should've been done after AC1;

- STOP with the annual releases: when CD Projekt RED can achieve what they've achieved with The Witcher 3 working for about 3 years in the game with a little more than 200 people, there's no excuse for Ubisoft with its dozens of studios around the world (something that they really love to brag about!), claiming to be working in each game for more than 2 or 3 years, to screw up with everything (especially with the lore) like they've been doing, this business model is clearly damaging this franchise, so STOP!


“If we think we've ended up with a 70 percent Assassin's Creed game, we're not going to ship it... ...That damages the brand. I’m not going to give you the names of products, because you know them as well as I do (YES, Assassin's Creed!), but if you start to make games at 70 percent, even with a big brand, eventually people are going to change their mind about that brand.” - Detoc

the_don7684
07-22-2015, 01:26 PM
The series is definitely going through some growing pains. Ubi, hopefully, will get it figured out.

VestigialLlama4
07-22-2015, 01:26 PM
Some of my favourite games of all times are the result of talented studios taking their established franchises and putting a new spin on them.

I agree.


Imo it's time for Ubisoft to shed skin once more. Just get rid of AC for the moment. It doesn't have to die (none of the franchises above are dead (I hope)), but take a looong vacation. Instead, as I have argued before, Ubisoft should make another historical franchise with no strings attached to AC. Much of the tech can easily be transformed into new projects, so no need to start from scratch.

Patrice Desilets was planning to do just that, with 1666, he called it the next "Assassin's Creed", a second evolution away from AC, just as AC was one from Sands of Time. He made AC when he researched the Asasiyun for bad guys for a new POP game and then decided they needed their own game. And now he's doing Ancestors which is taking the whole genetic memory concept and reliving the past of Animus MD to its logical conclusion.

I wouldn't be surprised if WATCH_DOGS was, partially, an attempt at an AC spinoff. Since that development was underway during AC3, I wonder if it siphoned energies away from the MD of the AC games. Personally I feel they should have gone further, migrated the MD of AC into Watch_Dogs, under a new brand name, include William Miles, Otso Berg and Erudito there with a casual-friendly story (where you meet Miles and others but aren't told anything about Assassins and Templars aside from some winks and lore there for newcomers) and boom, you have a shared universe. If they had worked harder on the concept and turned out a good game they might have had something. As it is, WATCH_DOGS is a good tech-demo with assets on hand for them to reuse into quick MD Missions in the future. Darby McDevitt did say that fans wanting a modern day AC should look at Watch_Dogs.


There are plenty of time periods they could do and/or historical/mythological characters like Marco Polo, Robin Hood, Odysseus and so on. Just throw off the AC-shackles and run free :D!

Ubisoft generally keep their eggs in one basket. So when AC caught traction, Prince of Persia died (well all the games after Sands of Time sucked and the concept was limited to start with). They try again with Watch_Dogs and it sold well but wasn't really liked much. Far Cry 3 and Far Cry 4 have become their next flagship brand (albeit one created by CRYSIS). I am also pretty sure that someone in Ubisoft is making an open-world sailing IP, especially after Unity's disaster.

Investment wise it makes sense. AAA games are expensive products and having to build two or three AAA games for multiple brands is tough. Also there is the creative one, I think ubisoft's corporate heads genuinely do like Assassin's Creed as a franchise and brand. They certainly do treat it differently than others. So it might be that they see it as a chance to mint out open-worlds charting out the history of the world over ten years and like kids in a lego box are out of control.

Sushiglutton
07-22-2015, 03:50 PM
The main reason I want a new IP is that AC has now become a burden and something that dilutes everything it touches. It's impossible to make a game that feels fresh while wearing the AC overcoat. The fans demand too many features to be kept.

Let's, as an example, say you want to make an Egypt game. Perhaps you want to have something about building pyramids, traveling the Nile, chariots, hieroglyphs and so on. You are starting to develop a concept you feel excited about. Then comes all the boring demands: "Who are you gonna assassinate, it's called Assassin's Creed you know?". "Where are all the synchronization points?". "He can't be dressed as an Egyptian actually was, where's the hood????". "The set of possible missions are: assassination, chase/tackle, eavesdropping, stalking, run while things are blowing up. You need to construct the campaign from those building blocks."

And suddenly all excitment is gone....



a reboot won't save this franchise if Ubisoft doesn't change its approach towards it...

This is super important! And to add to your list I would say the way they fill their open worlds needs to change drastically.



Patrice Desilets was planning to do just that, with 1666, he called it the next "Assassin's Creed", a second evolution away from AC, just as AC was one from Sands of Time.

Yeah Patrice knew what was up. To reinvent the action adventure-OW genre a new IP is needed. Otherwise all your inventions will be overshadowed by the AC rubble. That's why people thought AC3, one of the most inventive AAA games in recent memory, felt stale. It wasn't for lack of new ideas, it was because of all the old ones still present.

I haven't played WD (one look at the icon filled map and I was like "nope"), but from what I understand it def seems inspired by what a MD AC game could have been like.



Ubisoft generally keep their eggs in one basket. So when AC caught traction, Prince of Persia died (well all the games after Sands of Time sucked and the concept was limited to start with). They try again with Watch_Dogs and it sold well but wasn't really liked much. Far Cry 3 and Far Cry 4 have become their next flagship brand (albeit one created by CRYSIS). I am also pretty sure that someone in Ubisoft is making an open-world sailing IP, especially after Unity's disaster.

Investment wise it makes sense. AAA games are expensive products and having to build two or three AAA games for multiple brands is tough. Also there is the creative one, I think ubisoft's corporate heads genuinely do like Assassin's Creed as a franchise and brand. They certainly do treat it differently than others. So it might be that they see it as a chance to mint out open-worlds charting out the history of the world over ten years and like kids in a lego box are out of control.


I also have hope for a sailing game spin-off. It may even be this one: (http://www.vg247.com/2015/05/13/ubisoft-teases-new-aaa-game-announcement-coming-later-this-year/).

It's def expensive to create new IPs, but every now and then you need to take a chance. The AC brand is very tarnished. It doesn't stand for quality, it stands for assembly line made mediocrity and broken promises. As I said in another thread I think people would have been way more excited for Syndicate had it not been an AC game. When a brand has negative connotations it may be the perfect time to try something new?

Farlander1991
07-22-2015, 03:57 PM
"Who are you gonna assassinate, it's called Assassin's Creed you know?". "Where are all the synchronization points?". "He can't be dressed as an Egyptian actually was, where's the hood????".

There's a very simple solution to that. To hell with fans :p Here's the thing with fans, they complain if you don't change anything and they complain if you do change something, because different groups are attracted to different things.

People complain about ACIV being the most un-AC-like game, while in my opinion that it was the most AssassinsCreedy-game overall ever since AC1, even though technically it did a lot of things differently stylistically than most of the games before it.

It's not really a problem with the brand itself, as it is the problem of devs trying to make everybody happy. You can't make everybody happy, so just make a game that you want to make. And, honestly, ACIV to me feels like, at least for the most part, a game that the devs wanted to make. The lore and the history and the personal story, everything is interconnected there so well, and yeah, a lot of people complain about the game, but so what, whatever, they don't like it, ok, but the devs made a very quality and well-crafted game because they knew what they wanted to make and they had a certain goal and they didn't try to keep things in (be it stylistic or otherwise) just for the sake of it.

Sushiglutton
07-22-2015, 04:05 PM
There's a very simple solution to that. To hell with fans :p Here's the thing with fans, they complain if you don't change anything and they complain if you don't change something, because different groups are attracted to different things.

People complain about ACIV being the most un-AC-like game, while in my opinion that it was the most AssassinsCreedy-game overall ever since AC1, even though technically it did a lot of things differently stylistically than most of the games before it.

It's not really a problem with the brand itself, as it is the problem of devs trying to make everybody happy. You can't make everybody happy, so just make a game that you want to make. And, honestly, ACIV to me feels like, at least for the most part, a game that the devs wanted to make. The lore and the history and the personal story, everything is interconnected there so well, and yeah, a lot of people complain about the game, but so what, whatever, they don't like it, ok, but the devs made a very quality and well-crafted game because they knew what they wanted to make and they had a certain goal and they didn't try to keep things in (be it stylistic or otherwise) just for the sake of it.


They should market the next game as "a middle finger to the fans", I'd def buy that :D!

As I have said before I believe AC4 would have been miles better without AC, even though I still liked it. I don't feel the slowly-walking-around-the-office was interconnected that well with the pirate-theme :p.

Here's hoping Ash got to make a pirate spin-off game with Darby!

VestigialLlama4
07-22-2015, 04:15 PM
There's a very simple solution to that. To hell with fans :p Here's the thing with fans, they complain if you don't change anything and they complain if you don't change something, because different groups are attracted to different things.

People complain about ACIV being the most un-AC-like game, while in my opinion that it was the most AssassinsCreedy-game overall ever since AC1, even though technically it did a lot of things differently stylistically than most of the games before it.

It's not really a problem with the brand itself, as it is the problem of devs trying to make everybody happy. You can't make everybody happy, so just make a game that you want to make. And, honestly, ACIV to me feels like, at least for the most part, a game that the devs wanted to make. The lore and the history and the personal story, everything is interconnected there so well, and yeah, a lot of people complain about the game, but so what, whatever, they don't like it, ok, but the devs made a very quality and well-crafted game because they knew what they wanted to make and they had a certain goal and they didn't try to keep things in (be it stylistic or otherwise) just for the sake of it.

Just wanted to say, I totally agree with this.

Ultimately, Assassin's Creed is about a bunch of things than simply "Viewpoints/Assassination Missions" and so. The title is "Assassin's Creed" not Creed of the Assassin. The emphasis is on "Nothing is true. Everything is Permitted", so I am in all favour of them using the AC umbrella to do many different kind of games.

Hans684
07-22-2015, 04:15 PM
Technically a reboot can be an Alternate Reality(Calculations), so a "reboot" didn't need to make everything before it non-canon. So in terms of AC's current lore the original series before the hypothetical reboot can still be canon. The reboot itself would be no different than the "what if?" that The Tyranny Of King Washington is but grounded to history like the original series, so I'm not against a "reboot" unless it makes everything about the series before that non-canon. If everything becomes non-canon all we have done will be for nothing.

dxsxhxcx
07-22-2015, 04:29 PM
Technically a reboot can be an Alternate Reality(Calculations), so a "reboot" didn't need to make everything before it non-canon. So in terms of AC's current lore the original series before the hypothetical reboot can still be canon. The reboot itself would be no different than the "what if?" that The Tyranny Of King Washington is but grounded to history like the original series, so I'm not against a "reboot" unless it makes everything about the series before that non-canon. If everything becomes non-canon all we have done will be for nothing.

lore-wise I don't think a reboot would or should make much difference, the whole problem is how they've been handling the story, this approach is what should be affected by a reboot.

lore-wise a reboot could start right after the current events are finished or show us the perspective of other assassins (or Templars, in a similar fashion to AC1) as the events of Desmond saga are happening, culminating into both old (Rebbeca, William, Shaun, etc) and new (the new MD protagonist and crew) joining forces or the old crew at least being mentioned here and there...

VestigialLlama4
07-22-2015, 04:36 PM
If I were to do a Reboot of AC, I would mostly change the Modern Day and it would be similar to the approach taken in Black Flag. Have the protagonist be a total outsider, maybe a historian or investigator type who uses the Animus and find out that the past is shaped by Assassins and Templars, that tells a secret history of the world. Rather than have the MD Assassins and MD Templars featured in the game, I'd have them be subtle at first and then slowly bring them forward. You would also wonder if the MD Assassins and MD Templars are in fact the true Assassins and true Templars (rather than some new organization taking old names), and also it would be genuinely ambgiuous than the false ambiguity the games present.

In AC1, Desmond was a Modern Assassin from the get-go and he initially assumes his parents were cultists and hippies. Then he finds out the Templars are real and they are jerks who will kill him when they are done with him. So no ambiguity there. But then again, Patrice Desilets, never intended the Templars to be anything other than bad guys. To him the Assassins were always the engine, the interest and the focus of the stories.

Shahkulu101
07-22-2015, 05:32 PM
No it needs a hard boot, to kick it out of existence.

For 3-4 years so that we aren't fatigued, but actually begging them to release a new one. There should be no locked-in deadlines, so that the developers take as much time as they need.

Xstantin
07-22-2015, 06:44 PM
maybe a break, but it seems people been saying it for years

m4r-k7
07-22-2015, 08:30 PM
Its in desperate need for a break rather than a reboot. A reboot would make no sense after the amount of lore and crap they have been through (in terms of the narrative).
I would like them to take a break for 3 - 4 years and come back with a game set in China / Japan / Egypt.

If it were up to me I would do this. They are alienating so many people in their fanbase with promises that aren't delivered to a high standard. The series has and always will have tons and tons of potential, which many of their old games achieved. In the mean time a remastered collection of AC 1 - AC 3 would be welcome, so that we get some AC on our new consoles and they continue making some money from the franchise.

A chance for a reboot has already been missed. A reboot would have worked if they made AC 3 the end of the series and came back at the start of this new gen with a whole reboot of the series.

LieutenantRex
07-22-2015, 08:40 PM
It needs a boot up the behind, then a boot in the grave, and then a boot engraved in the tombstone. This series died long ago; I just stick around to see the latest catastrophes.

Matknapers18
07-22-2015, 10:38 PM
No it needs a hard boot, to kick it out of existence.

For 3-4 years so that we aren't fatigued, but actually begging them to release a new one. There should be no locked-in deadlines, so that the developers take as much time as they need.

This would be ideal for me personally. No AC for the next 4-6 years and then a complete reboot. The franchise is in shambles right now, severely in both mechanics and lore.

Give the developers plenty of time to re-assess their perspective on the future of Assassin's Creed, and enough time for us to recover from fatigue and somewhat forget about the series. Most would disagree seeing that we are on an 'Assassins Creed' forum but that is just my personal preference.

dxsxhxcx
07-22-2015, 11:08 PM
This would be ideal for me personally. No AC for the next 4-6 years and then a complete reboot. The franchise is in shambles right now, severely in both mechanics and lore. Give the developers plenty of time to re-assess their perspective on the future of Assassin's Creed, and enough time for us to recover from fatigue and somewhat forget about the series. Most would disagree seeing that we are on an 'Assassins Creed' forum but that is just my personal preference. Don't be so surprised if a good portion of the forum members end up agreeing with you.. IMO AC has completely lost its spark with ACU after I realized the MD will "never" be what it used to be during the Desmond saga, rendering meaningless the historical portion of the game for me, because I was supposed to care about the Modern Days story, something I find very hard to do without a proper protagonist to connect with. I prefer to see the MD gone than as it is in AC4 or ACU. It isn't ideal, but IMO it would be much better than what we got from AC4 onwards.

SixKeys
07-23-2015, 12:46 AM
I don't want a reboot, I want the series to die when it still has a shred of dignity left.

Seriously.

So many great things remain great because they quit while they were ahead. AC is well past that point, it's turning into the X-Files or Simpsons in the sense that even the creators don't seem to have much passion for the brand anymore, the plots are getting increasingly contrived and the whole thing has turned into as much of a joke as CoD.

I still follow the series because I've been involved in the fandom for so long, but these days I enjoy the community more than the actual games. If they announced tomorrow that Syndicate will be the last AC game, I wouldn't cry over it. I would simply hope that the last game went out with a bang rather than a fizzle.

VoXngola
07-23-2015, 02:52 AM
^This is basically me.

I can't leave. For me AC died long ago, and AC3 just made it more apparent to me. Yet I still follow. I still go to the subreddit. I still visit the forums to lurk and occasionally post. I still look forward to their E3's. But if AC just ended, I wouldn't feel a lot of sadness. That sadness happened years ago when I finished AC3. If it ended now, I'd just go "finally". But even now, I can't let go. I need to know where it goes, because I want to see this journey to the end.

It either stops or gets a complete reboot like I posted earlier. If I look back right now at all the years AC has been with me, I can safely say that it's dragged on for far too long with its current state.

The_Kiwi_
07-23-2015, 03:55 AM
Other:
I just feel like the games have gone down the wrong path
But just because something loses its path, it doesn't mean it's lost forever
It just needs to regain focus on one storyline with one direction
Not a bunch of individual stories just because of interesting time periods

steveeire
07-23-2015, 04:28 AM
^This is basically me.

I can't leave. For me AC died long ago, and AC3 just made it more apparent to me. Yet I still follow. I still go to the subreddit. I still visit the forums to lurk and occasionally post. I still look forward to their E3's. But if AC just ended, I wouldn't feel a lot of sadness. That sadness happened years ago when I finished AC3. If it ended now, I'd just go "finally". But even now, I can't let go. I need to know where it goes, because I want to see this journey to the end.

It either stops or gets a complete reboot like I posted earlier. If I look back right now at all the years AC has been with me, I can safely say that it's dragged on for far too long with its current state.
I was like that, I thought AC3 was the final nail in the coffin, then just when I thought I was out...they pull me back in with Black Flag, although after Unity it may be time to get out for good.

EmbodyingSeven5
07-23-2015, 04:45 AM
A reset sounds nice actually. Have Ubi plan an epic series of new AC games with good and coherent stories without all the cluttered lore..

Mr.Black24
07-23-2015, 05:24 AM
Other:
I just feel like the games have gone down the wrong path
But just because something loses its path, it doesn't mean it's lost forever
It just needs to regain focus on one storyline with one direction
Not a bunch of individual stories just because of interesting time periods
Agreed. If its broken, fix it! You don't blow up the leaky pipe just because its busted. Well in this case, the water is gushing out not too fast....but not to slow either, wetting the floor, but the carpet isn't totally ruined yet.

Plus I agree with the fact that individual stories need either focus one nailing it right one the first shot, or give the person a sequel. A sequel for anyone after Ezio would be welcome at this point. It really struck me after finishing Arkham knight how much more impactful a story can be when it follows characters for multiple entries. But for whatever reason, most characters since (possible excluding Edward) have been incredibly stagnant in their own games. If it takes multiple games for these guys to get the evolution of a character across then I really want them to do that. Like for example, when you compare Ezio's ACII and Connor's ACIII. they had similar character growth, with Connor's being significantly more. At the end, both characters realize their errors, and move on to being something better. Unlike Connor, we got to see Ezio act upon them, hence why everyone loves him more, saying that he is a wise mentor that gone through so much and they miss him.

Its like with Desmond too, everyone hated him at first, but after ACIII, people started to realize what he had been going through, and started to appreciate him more. Coupled with the fact that the MD's story seems like it has no idea on where its going, many see him even more, and miss him even more. Whiny or not, at least Desmond's story had a form of direction.

Just pump back actual attention to the world and the characters in it, and people will be behind you again. #ubiplz

Farlander1991
07-23-2015, 09:17 AM
They should market the next game as "a middle finger to the fans", I'd def buy that :D!

As I have said before I believe AC4 would have been miles better without AC, even though I still liked it. I don't feel the slowly-walking-around-the-office was interconnected that well with the pirate-theme :p.

Here's hoping Ash got to make a pirate spin-off game with Darby!

First-person modern day aside, how exactly AC brand damages AC4 in your opinion?

Sushiglutton
07-23-2015, 08:40 PM
First-person modern day aside, how exactly AC brand damages AC4 in your opinion?

A few reasons.



Tired mission tropes. Chase, tailing, eavesdropping etc made much of the onland gameplay feel tired. It's hilarious and also scary btw that Ubi has color coded their various mission types.
The thing interesting me most was the rise and fall of Nassasu and its various characters. Unfortunately the story focused a lot on some glass skull and a sage.
Tired combat. AC4 needed a kickass combat systsem for the boarding gameplay to really fly. AC was not the franchise to deliver it.
Too many characters. The need to supply the missions with targets meant too many villains. Not enough of my favourites like Blackbeard, James Kidd and Benjamin Hornigold.
Animus fragments, chests, hiring dancers, buying art yada yada. All this nonsense that just made the game a little bit less exciting.

dxsxhxcx
07-23-2015, 09:14 PM
A few reasons.


Tired combat. AC4 needed a kickass combat systsem for the boarding gameplay to really fly. AC was not the franchise to deliver it.
Animus fragments, chests, hiring dancers, buying art yada yada. All this nonsense that just made the game a little bit less exciting.



these two wouldn't change with a new IP, but I think the story, some mechanics and mission design would certainly benefit from not having any ties to AC.

EmptyCrustacean
07-23-2015, 09:48 PM
I don't want a reboot, I want the series to die when it still has a shred of dignity left.

Seriously.

So many great things remain great because they quit while they were ahead. AC is well past that point, it's turning into the X-Files or Simpsons in the sense that even the creators don't seem to have much passion for the brand anymore, the plots are getting increasingly contrived and the whole thing has turned into as much of a joke as CoD.

I still follow the series because I've been involved in the fandom for so long, but these days I enjoy the community more than the actual games. If they announced tomorrow that Syndicate will be the last AC game, I wouldn't cry over it. I would simply hope that the last game went out with a bang rather than a fizzle.

But i thought you like Unity?

GunnerGalactico
07-23-2015, 09:50 PM
Well, I don't think that AC should laid to rest just yet. One of the biggest reasons why this series has burnt out is because of the annualization. They just don't allow the fans a chance to breathe or enjoy the MP for a good 2 or 3 years. The last time I was that excited for an AC game was back then in 2009, and that was 2 years after the release of AC1. The stories are becoming uninteresting with uninspiring plotlines ie: Rogue and Unity.

Modern day is also another factor in the decline of the series. After Desmond's death in AC3, MD has lost all significance to me. I just hated playing as a floating tablet in AC4. I also do not like the Helix at all. I prefer it if we got a new third person protagonist and went back to the Animus. To me, AC was about having a person witness and live their ancestor's memory, and not as some random Joe in a home entertainment system. If they can fix all of those, this series can be salvaged.

Farlander1991
07-24-2015, 08:59 AM
Tired mission tropes. Chase, tailing, eavesdropping etc made much of the onland gameplay feel tired

AC4 has the best designed missions of that type in the entire franchise (and by best I don't mean that they're just better than in previous games, but that they're actually GOOD). I guess if you've played every game in the series than those indeed may become tiring.


It's hilarious and also scary btw that Ubi has color coded their various mission types.

They didn't color code their mission types. They did color code some goals, but those are VERY vague. There's target that needs to be killed, target that doesn't need to be killed (and that can apply to, well, ANYTHING) and a general goal location. I know you like talking about 'assembly-lining', but that's not one of those things :p


The thing interesting me most was the rise and fall of Nassasu and its various characters. Unfortunately the story focused a lot on some glass skull and a sage.

Not IP-related. The focus of the story in AC was Edward's character, so a MacGuffin was needed to drive that character forward. If a non-AC AC4 would've had the same focus in the story, then there'd still be a MacGuffin of some kind, be it an Aztec treasure, or some buried treasure, or, well, some treasure of unimaginable wealth (ok, well, as long as we'd still have the character arc like Edward's). Though I also disagree about what you call the focus of the story, that's not the focus at all. Edward's the focus.


Tired combat. AC4 needed a kickass combat systsem for the boarding gameplay to really fly. AC was not the franchise to deliver it.

Not IP-related. A non-AC IP might have had not a good combat system as well.


Too many characters. The need to supply the missions with targets meant too many villains. Not enough of my favourites like Blackbeard, James Kidd and Benjamin Hornigold.

I've made a sheet once that shows which characters appear (https://docs.google.com/a/stanislavcostiuc.com/spreadsheets/d/11n-VhIwjkfq-1SoNl6ClHEfoKFbboE96sUk1xlhQQsA/edit?usp=drive_web) or are mentioned when in some of the AC games. Look at it and tell me AC4 has too many characters :p I already said this once, but I think AC4 has one of the best-crafted narratives in the series (and among most games as well), and there's just enough characters and they appear for exactly the amount of time they need.

There is, however, an issue, in that AC4 is also an open-world game, and the side things support only Edward's character, and don't do anything with the side-characters from the main narrative. So while AC4 story is told in a pretty much perfect way when looked at as a linear story in a game where levels would go one after another, lack of some pillars in side-missions distills it somewhat.

However, this is a problem that's also not related to IP.


Animus fragments, chests, hiring dancers, buying art yada yada. All this nonsense that just made the game a little bit less exciting.

Yeah, sorry, also not-IP related. :p That's pretty much the plague of most open-world games.

SixKeys
07-24-2015, 12:32 PM
I like AC4's land gameplay and I think it works just fine as an AC game, but I can see where Sushi is coming from. I agree with him that there was too little time devoted to develop the side characters, especially Blackbeard and some of the targets. In a non-AC-related pirate game, the time we spent walking around the Abstergo office could have been used to focus more on the historical characters. They had to make room for modern day stuff because it's important to AC lore fans, but a different game without the brand weighing it down wouldn't have had to worry about that at all.

I can see what Sushi means about combat as well. True, it's possible that a non-AC pirate game would also have had bad combat, but the fact is, they used the AC engine as basis for everything in Black Flag. And it's the AC combat system in particular that has always been broken. Other Ubi games manage to do better with their respective systems, like Watch Dogs or Splinter Cell. AC4 had to be built around the same broken mechanics that have weighed the series down for years. Had this been a new IP, they probably would have revamped the combat system from the ground up.

You claim the overabundance of collectables isn't IP-related but I have to disagree. AC is definitely one of the worst offenders among open world games. Hiring dancers is definitely unique to the franchise, and it was a feature they really should have retired with the Ezio games.

rrebe
07-24-2015, 03:39 PM
A reboot? I don't think that a reboot is necessary, yet anyway, maybe some day in the future. What it needs is to slow down, take a breath, skip a year or two and come back up fresh and well rested with interesting new ideas.

RVSage
07-24-2015, 05:29 PM
It does not need a reboot... It just needs to get back on track with respective to lore.. and story line.. I dont mind yearly releases.. As long as they maintain cohesiveness... The series lost that big time with unity

VestigialLlama4
07-24-2015, 05:38 PM
A reboot? I don't think that a reboot is necessary, yet anyway, maybe some day in the future. What it needs is to slow down, take a breath, skip a year or two and come back up fresh and well rested with interesting new ideas.

Well to be honest, Ubisoft from a corporate perspective can't do that. AC is their bread and butter and they have a huge staff at Montreal (which got a lot of tax breaks and cuts so as to employ local talent) that they need to keep employed. To Employ them you need to give them something to do, to do that they need to convince shareholds, to convince shareholders they have to produce results and as such annualization is born. Ubisoft has become really big and they can't go to being small since the video game market is small and oversaturation of IPs by a single developer divides and dilutes profits.

Until they have a spanking new IP to get behind and feel excited about, AC will be their place to hang their hat on. Annualization itself does not have to be a problem. You can theoretically plan out saying "Working Title" will be our next big leap, meantime put out these slightly extended DLC with quirky experimental gimmicks each year and do a good job. That was the plan until AC3 and Black Flag. This is essentially the classic Hollywood idea, you have A movies and B movies. A movies are big expensive productions for which you build huge sets, get new costumes and locales. B-movies are cheap genre pieces (often different genre productions than the A movies) that reuse the sets and extras of the A movie to do something different. So AC2 and AC3 are the A-movies, Brotherhood, Revelations and Black Flag are the B movies and just like in Hollywood, there are cases where the B movies can be more interesting than the A movies.

Now with Unity and Syndicate, its year-by-year and there's no big leap promised. Its just going to be one disposable thing after another and that's a bad way to do it. Its essentially making A movies with a B movie mentality.

RA503
07-24-2015, 08:41 PM
A reboot will send the series to the underworld for good like Castlevania and Prince of Persia,the Tomb Raiders games post reboot are good but the series is not mega hyped like was in its former era...( I say the same thing for Resident Evil fans)

Can someone still doubt that reboot don't work for videogames ?

Remember,Iron Man 2 and 3 are mediocre movies but that worth the trip because have marvel's heavy canon behind this, without that will be a entirely disposable thing like DC'S Greem Lanter movie,the same apply to unity...

I forget... Mortal Kombat is the only reboot that is gone well,but remember that they not delete the lore,only restart the series with a in-universe justification...(like crisis in infinite earths and flashpoint...)

D.I.D.
07-24-2015, 11:58 PM
I've voted "other" because of this:

Most of AC's problems come up in two ways -

It's got a story that tried to work via secrets and urgency, but the wheels fell off once it became clear that it would never end
It's got gameplay which is so vastly improved over earlier versions that people cry out for remasters all the time, while also requiring a great deal of work to get it better for the immediate sequel

So, maybe we should stop worrying about it. Yes, it needs a hard reboot, but do you really want a reboot into another endless series? Might as well let it rattle forward in its entertaining if slightly ramshackle way for now, and when it can't do that anymore then it will be the ideal time for a reboot. At that point, you could have a reboot with a strict limit - say, five games - and get the writing done first. That way you could get a reboot that takes the best from whatever's gone before, and discards the worst of it. You could ensure that the historical story feeds the modern day and vice versa, and keep that interplay tight. That final cycle might be the definitive AC set that stands the test of time.

SpiritOfNevaeh
07-25-2015, 12:09 AM
I used to believe that they should do a reboot long time ago.

But now, after they've put so much into the series itself, I don't think it a good idea.

It's hard to say really.

Tomb Raider had a good reboot, but a reboot doesnt solve ALL company franchise problems, if any exist.

I guess it just depends?

itsamea-mario
07-25-2015, 03:45 AM
I'd say yes, but like, it's a bit soon right?
And not really worth it i don't think, the lore is pretty cluttered sure, but i do think there is enough room to make some great games.
Maybe more than a reboot they need to just take a moment, give it a rest, put some time into building something amazing as opposed to churning out a million games a year.

It's a big universe, they have a massive amount of scope for new settings and stories, they can essentially reboot it without necessarily retconning everything, just end the current story-line or whatever is going on in the games now and start a new one, in the same universe.

DSD27
07-25-2015, 05:40 PM
I played all AC games and Unity is my favorite, ( IV and Brotherhood were my favorites before ) so I don't think they're getting worse, I think they're getting better,
They need to improve the gameplay mechanics, like when you don't want to jump and he jumps, etc, I think that's the biggest problem.

EmptyCrustacean
07-25-2015, 05:44 PM
It's not too late. This series is still salvageable and the brand is in tact enough that it can afford at least 2 more hits before Ubisoft need to consider throwing it away.

itsamea-mario
07-25-2015, 06:05 PM
I played all AC games and Unity is my favorite, ( IV and Brotherhood were my favorites before ) so I don't think they're getting worse, I think they're getting better,
They need to improve the gameplay mechanics, like when you don't want to jump and he jumps, etc, I think that's the biggest problem.

Poor unfortunate soul.

DSD27
07-25-2015, 06:09 PM
Poor unfortunate soul.

I'm just not like some people that say AC games now suck just because they're not the same exact game (AC II) every year.

VestigialLlama4
07-25-2015, 06:11 PM
I'm just not like some people that say AC games now suck just because they're not the same exact game (AC II) every year.

Well UNITY is deliberately a AC2-ripoff.

EmptyCrustacean
07-25-2015, 06:12 PM
I'm just not like some people that say AC games now suck just because they're not the same exact game (AC II) every year.

Nobody criticises AC because they're not AC2 they've grown to dislike it because the quality isn't as good.

DSD27
07-25-2015, 06:19 PM
Well UNITY is deliberately a AC2-ripoff.

just because young Ezio and young Arno look alike and ( S P O I L E R ) the girl dies ?
people complained that IV was a pirates game and not assassin's, bla bla bla, I think the series was getting boring (because it was always the same) and IV brought some fresh air. For those who complained, Unity is now a "true ASASSIN'S" game again. And we have the multiplayer missions that are great and the game cealrly evolved.

VestigialLlama4
07-25-2015, 06:29 PM
just because young Ezio and young Arno look alike and ( S P O I L E R ) the girl dies ?

They don't look "alike", they look exactly the same. Arno is Next-Gen Ezio.
http://40.media.tumblr.com/e89a96231a1083e77fa84beb044f7d07/tumblr_ncwdcthzTG1tv8xxoo1_1280.jpg

It was also the fact the main Templar guy wears a conical hood and gloats about his Evil Plan and attends a public execution, the fact that the Templars are as one-dimensional as AC2.

Arno is deliberately coded to be the "Next Ezio", including having a name with the same four letters (and Arno also being the name of the River of Florence). It doesn't try to imitate the two qualities that made AC2 great, actual liking and respect for history, good characterization and amazing supporting cast.


people complained that IV was a pirates game and not assassin's, bla bla bla,

It was a pirates game and that's what made it an Assassin's Creed game. This is a series that can go anywhere and be any kind of game.

DSD27
07-25-2015, 06:38 PM
Also I don't think Arno and Ezio look anywhere alike considering there's a HUGE age gap between them being "young".
I liked Unitys story missions/graphics and that's it. Everything else was bloatware and lag. and bugs .... lots and lots of bugs.

I played like 60 hours already and I never had any problems or real bugs. Just small enviromment weird things, but that happens in every AC game and most games.


They don't look "alike", they look exactly the same. Arno is Next-Gen Ezio.
http://40.media.tumblr.com/e89a96231a1083e77fa84beb044f7d07/tumblr_ncwdcthzTG1tv8xxoo1_1280.jpg

It was also the fact the main Templar guy wears a conical hood and gloats about his Evil Plan and attends a public execution, the fact that the Templars are as one-dimensional as AC2.

Arno is deliberately coded to be the "Next Ezio", including having a name with the same four letters (and Arno also being the name of the River of Florence). It doesn't try to imitate the two qualities that made AC2 great, actual liking and respect for history, good characterization and amazing supporting cast.



It was a pirates game and that's what made it an Assassin's Creed game. This is a series that can go anywhere and be any kind of game.

yeah I already thought about all that...
Agree :)

Dead1y-Derri
07-25-2015, 07:05 PM
In terms of present day story I've found its become difficult to understand the series ever since Desmond died by in AC3, I understood AC3 but then I failed to understand any of the modern day stuff after that, mostly because I feel the game has delivered the story in such a way that you've got to be interested in reading emails and voice clips. I feel that they need to bring a character again for the present day stuff so you can understand exactly what's going on story wise to explain the lore and narrative better.

In terms of gameplay I feel the last title, Unity, while gave a better parkour system, everything else was pretty plain and nothing too new was added to really shape up gameplay. I found the Assassination sandbox missions to be interesting but also fatal to the story because everything had to move along so slowly and not really explain things very well because you were always setting yourself up for the assassination which left little chance for twists or turns of any significance.

In previous creed games you'd often have to assassinate unexpectedly and sometimes they'd throw a twist in which would prevent you from assassinating your target, so the story would be much more interesting. In turn by introducing sandbox assassinations they've kept the story quite linear which was how AC1 kind of played out, you'd do your information gathering missions followed by a much more sandbox style of assassination and that a good portion of the game. You were doing the same thing over and over.

GunnerGalactico
07-25-2015, 07:32 PM
I had a game breaking bug which wrecked my save file after sequence 8 and had to start from the beginning. Which was annoying after I had completed nearly all of the side missions and secondary objectives. Also the amount of times I have (AND STILL) get stuck next to objects and stuck in the air, and being forced to restart the game is a joke. :mad:

I know what that's like. :nonchalance:

DSD27
07-25-2015, 07:57 PM
I had a game breaking bug which wrecked my save file after sequence 8 and had to start from the beginning. Which was annoying after I had completed nearly all of the side missions and secondary objectives. Also the amount of times I have (AND STILL) get stuck next to objects and stuck in the air, and being forced to restart the game is a joke. :mad:

I've also fallen through the floor multiple times. And the lag ..... :( .... the lag.

That happened to me in AC IV. Always backup your saves... I use Razer Cortex to backup my saves automatically with OneDrive or Dropbox.
I never had any of those other problems, but I only started to play this game this month, I waited for all the patches and stuff to come out, and I have more time and beter pc during the summer because I'm at home :D

DSD27
07-25-2015, 08:18 PM
It wasn't the save.



For what you said I think it was the save. If you had another copy of the save file in another place, you could have replace it and deleted the wrecked one.
Its very easy to find where uplay stores the saves, go there everyday and make a copy to another location. That way you can always return to them if the "original" gets corrupted, instead of having to star from the beginning.

The_Kiwi_
07-25-2015, 11:26 PM
Considering that Unity and probably Syndicate have almost completely ignored past games and lore, would a reboot be much different in that respect?

SixKeys
07-26-2015, 12:07 AM
Considering that Unity and probably Syndicate have almost completely ignored past games and lore, would a reboot be much different in that respect?

If there will ever be a reboot, I'm 99% sure they will simply pretend the Animus never existed and completely forgo MD.

Black_Widow9
07-26-2015, 01:48 AM
True but I'm terrible at backing up :p
Also considering I payed full price for a game. After waiting for patches more than 4 months after launch, I expected it to work and not needing to backup saves
Hi Jessigirl,

You said you did contact Support but did you follow these steps?
https://support.ubi.com/en-US/FAQ/9/4043/how-do-i-delete-my-save-file-in-assassins-creed-unity/kA030000000ej5QCAQ

Please make sure you also read the *Note* for tips so you aren't having to delete your save game in circles.

RinoTheBouncer
07-26-2015, 09:46 AM
I don't think a reboot can do the franchise any good. Having a fragmented, non-canonical or two canon story is the worst thing ever.

The franchise may be suffering from a fragmented story now, but that's something that can be fixed. They can tie up the loose ends with one or two games and then start with a whole new case, without having to axe the one before it.

Improve the modern day experience, give it a real protagonist and strong, continuous story with some good missions, long or short, but in 3rd person and on-point. Make the historical story go hand-in-hand with the issues of the modern day story. Let us have a good reason to go into the Animus. Not testing a game or being told by unknown people through webcam to find something, only to be told that it's no good in the end.

Let's go back to Abstergo Industries or move to some big Assassin hideout, perhaps the Altair II ship or the Norwegian base or any place where the Assassins feel like a big deal, and start the whole thing from there. Perhaps go on short, linear missions to assassinate someone or steal something from Templars..etc. and let the historical story actually give us something that we'll use in modern day, whether it's a location of an item or general information about our allies and enemies..etc.

Let the historical story have more than just exploring a beautiful city with amazing monuments and well-known figures, and some new mechanics. Let the story make us feel like the Assassins and Templars are everything. That they're the big deal, that something big is going on.

That's how the games can be perfect without the need for a reboot that acts like our most cherished AC experiences never happened, only to start with a new slate with new mistakes and disappointments. I've seen other franchises reboot themselves and I wish they stayed with their messy old state than the abomination they've become.

I know Ubisoft will never disappoint, so this isn't a feedback, this is more of a suggestion of how to improve the story instead of having to reboot it.

DA SHIZZLE IG
07-27-2015, 03:05 AM
Let Ninja Theory handle that.

AC: Assassin's Creed

My name is Altair


No, I don't like reboots, if a series is a mess and is going downhill just take a deep breath, plan things better and take it in a new and better direction, rebooting is just an easy way of keep on milking a famous brand.
/THREAD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Shot out to spiderman and fantastic 4

AC is in a position to pull a terminator lol. Absolutely no need for a reboot, that wont do nothing but start the series back over again. We already too deep into the story for that too happen. We are pretty much at the end of the story now. Like why would I want to get to the end and never finish it? Then drop a reboot lol that's like a big kick in the nuts to everybody who's been with it all these years(and all that wasted money too).

steveeire
07-27-2015, 03:17 AM
Reboots and remakes can be awesome too, some of the best films around are remakes and or reboots, Scarface, The Fly, The Departed, Casino Royale, Batman Begins and Star Trek < all remakes or reboots, and going by the trailers the new Fantastic 4 looks awesome.

Mr.Black24
07-27-2015, 03:41 AM
Reboots and remakes can be awesome too, some of the best films around are remakes and or reboots, Scarface, The Fly, The Departed, Casino Royale, Batman Begins and Star Trek < all remakes or reboots, and going by the trailers the new Fantastic 4 looks awesome. See the thing is that these reboots worked well for these films since they had different writers, directors, and producers behind it. However, at the end of the day, its Ubisoft that has its hands on the AC "reboot". Still the same people, still the same writers, directors, ect.

Nothing is going to get fixed, they'll just go down the same path again. FIx what is broken instead. Besides why abandon ship? You think the Wright Brothers gave up just because each design they made to make an airplane fly didn't work within various tries? No, they looked at what they did right, learned from what they did wrong, improve on each aspect and made history by taking off into the sky.

And you know why they done this?

Innovation and Passion.

Something that Ubisoft boasts about having, yet I see none of this at all! :rolleyes:

Where is the risk taking Ubisoft?
Where is the innovation Ubisoft?

I keep seeing brash and charismatic characters for the past 3 games now, cluttered and unfinished lore, no type of improvement on Modern Day, and unpolished game launches, which rather shows me you are losing your edge.

Like guys, I still have faith in you, but please don't let us down now.

Don't end up like.....Gearbox and Randy Pitchford.......UUUUUGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!

Speaking of which, I found a neat article that talked about the productions of Revelations and how the team feared that annualization will put pressure on making these games, and oh how right they are: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/113643-Developer-Assassins-Creeds-12-Month-Development-Time-is-Ideal

steveeire
07-27-2015, 03:55 AM
I'm not saying reboot it, I'm just saying there are reboots that are awesome. I would prefer them to get there act together and create a strong storyline for MD to run through all the games.

RinoTheBouncer
07-27-2015, 08:26 AM
HELL YES !!!!! ;)

I agree we need a new protagonist ( ESPECIALLY IN THIRD PERSON)
And its great to see someone else who understands that the modern day story is what drives the past gameplay;)
I also love the interaction between characters in AC games. Something that games after ACIII have lost as we instead play as a mute. <--- In BF, Rogue and Unity I personally would of preferred playing as a research analyst or random person in third person with a voice. At least then it would be interesting to see how they reacted to parts of the plot. Playing as a mute was so odd considering in past games the protagonist actually talked :p

I would LOVE if ubi took this feedback on board,;)

I also agree that although I was disappointed about Unity's lack of modern day, It made up for it with Arnos story and the setting of Paris.

Thank you!

LoyalACFan
07-28-2015, 11:39 PM
Doubt it would be "rebooted" as such because UBI has probably trade marked it or whatever.

I also doubt Ubi will admit that they have let the modern day story go to s***.

JUST SORT IT OUT UBI!

The trademark wouldn't matter if Ubisoft rebooted it themselves or outsourced it to a third-party studio and acted solely as publisher. In fact, they've already rebooted Prince of Persia once, even though they seem to have just given up on it again (probably because of AC's wild financial success).

Steng02
07-29-2015, 05:10 PM
I think that the series is getting away from what it was supposed to be. Even though the parkour level that the assassins already have is unrealistic, it's getting even more unbelievable with Unity. And also all the main characters in the new games are becoming like those annoying ladies that work at town hall and try to go around fixing every problem they see. And thats not what an assassin in this series is supposed to be like, they're supposed to stay out of the way and just eliminate there Templar targets, which hasn't happened sence the first few games (Altair and Ezio). I mean when i play the new games, I don't feel like an Altair or an Ezio, i feel like a blood thirsty badass that goes around and kills every single enemy that he sees just because he can. This series definitely needs a reboot.