PDA

View Full Version : How many more AC games do you want/need?



king-hailz
10-15-2015, 04:51 PM
So Assassin's Creed has been around for many years now, we've had many installments, some amazing, some not so amazing. Now I'm wondering about the future, how many more are they going to make, I mean I want them to stop soon, and I don't want it to carry on forever. I honestly want 1 or 2 more games after Syndicate, and not because I hate the games but because I think that'll be enough. I mean they can make games set in a million different time periods but everything needs an end, and I'd rather they end when me and the majority if the fans are still here. I don't know about you guys, but I'm not one if those people that like something and want it to carry on forever, I will never know my take on the assassins creed series until it has an ending. I know they've planned an ending according to Ashraf Ismail but I've also heard Darby say that they are gonna be around for the next 10 or 20 years.

So I guess it's all down to you guys, if you want it forever it will go on for a long time, but if you want to see a good ending soon then maybe you will.

dimbismp
10-15-2015, 05:00 PM
I really like historical open worlds,so i would like it to go on as long as possible.

However,it hurts seeing the effects of the annualisation.So,after ACS,i would like UBI to take a step back,relax and make a detailed plan for the future of the franchise.

If it were up to me,i would like another 4-5 games,which will be released every 3 years.Each game should have a completely different setting and mechanics,however,there should be a strong overrarching plot,having to do with the MD.

TO_M
10-15-2015, 05:11 PM
However,it hurts seeing the effects of the annualisation.So,after ACS,i would like UBI to take a step back,relax and make a detailed plan for the future of the franchise.

entirely different mechanics.

Why would Ubisoft do this? People keep buying the annual mediocrity they churn out so why would they deny themselves that potential revenue? This will only happen if the sales for the annual releases are at such a low level that Ubi will have to reconsider its strategy.

Why should the games have entirely different mechanics? The existing/core mechanics should continually be improved/expanded upon throughout each game, or else you get inconsistent gameplay mechanics over the course of these games.

cawatrooper9
10-15-2015, 05:16 PM
I know it's irresponsible of me, but I'm down for as many games as they're willing to publish, as long as I remain interested. I don't get why people are so desperate for the series to stop. If you don't like it, don't play!

Sushiglutton
10-15-2015, 05:21 PM
If they can make One truly great I'd be more than happy with that.

VestigialLlama4
10-15-2015, 05:25 PM
It depends on whether they have tackled the full potential for the concept of AC. So until they can say that they've done virtually all they can with a concept, there would be a reason to keep it going forward.

There is still a whole amount of unrealized potential in AC. Like:

1) Doing a game with one city in multiple eras, they backed out of that with UNITY but it's a dream worth pursuing nonetheless. You play one bloodline, in different parts of history and can change back and forth in time per will, and you can see a city in multiple eras with Animus, so you can conjure and vanish a city timeline with a button-press, much like the cool render-in videos at the start of AC2 when a new part of the map opens up. Or you know what PD originally planned for "The Real AC3", Desmond moving back and forth via bleeding effect and shifting between Altair-Ezio-Himself and maybe Connor.

2) Multiple protagonists, which they are going forward with Syndicate but are basically doing 3:1 Jacob:Evie in terms of split. So until you get a situation where you have multiple factions intersecting and part of the same overall story, there's still a lot to do. Ideally you should have a huge sprawling game where all three of your protagonists have say 7-9 Sequence Amount of Content which criss-cross each other, each person having their own supporting cast and arc villain and the like. It would be closer to how history really is where almost everyone have their own stories and set of problems but exist in the same space and criss-crossed in all sorts of ways. This is of course the logical development of an open world game.

3) In terms of gameplay, they haven't fully gone deeper into social stealth and general stealth, mainly borrowing ideas from other stealth games rather than develop the original concept to the fullest. Until you can ghost a freeroam of an open world completely and get an achievement for it, AC can't say they have fully realized stealth.

4) Create a fully consistent and meaningful historical open world setting, they've come close with some games of course but there's still a distance they need to go in terms of full immersion and entertaining gameplay. It's actually become less immersive in recent games. Like you know picking up accents, modifying body language, shifting outfits and colours to blend in rather than the usual hood stupidity. Also you know weather was introduced in AC3 and then forgotten about. Weather is a real thing and it should be properly introduced and integrated in an open-world.

I always did feel that AC as a concept was really limitless that they could do almost any kind of game and setting. I still feel that but now I am thinking that it will collapse before it fulfills that ambition. These games are expensive to make, consoles are uncertain things and everything changes really fast. It might be we'll get episodic games, it might be you'll have other historical games, it might be a bunch of things and I think the conventional one-protagonist-one-setting-open world that AC has catered in the past has exhausted itself of options and I think the developers know that as well, so if they can't think of something totally different to do then AC will pretty much end in a year or two. All Ubisoft has to do is find a new IP, Far Cry seems to be standing in the wings.

cawatrooper9
10-15-2015, 05:33 PM
1) Doing a game with one city in multiple eras, they backed out of that with UNITY but it's a dream worth pursuing nonetheless. You play one bloodline, in different parts of history and can change back and forth in time per will, and you can see a city in multiple eras with Animus, so you can conjure and vanish a city timeline with a button-press, much like the cool render-in videos at the start of AC2 when a new part of the map opens up. Or you know what PD originally planned for "The Real AC3", Desmond moving back and forth via bleeding effect and shifting between Altair-Ezio-Himself and maybe Connor.

2) Multiple protagonists, which they are going forward with Syndicate but are basically doing 3:1 Jacob:Evie in terms of split. So until you get a situation where you have multiple factions intersecting and part of the same overall story, there's still a lot to do. Ideally you should have a huge sprawling game where all three of your protagonists have say 7-9 Sequence Amount of Content which criss-cross each other, each person having their own supporting cast and arc villain and the like. It would be closer to how history really is where almost everyone have their own stories and set of problems but exist in the same space and criss-crossed in all sorts of ways. This is of course the logical development of an open world game.



The combination of these two points, in a nonlinear story that switches between eras and a game mechanic that allows switching between eras in free roam, it my dream AC game.

It's an idea so well tailored to the city, it's a shame that so little has been done like it.

dxsxhxcx
10-15-2015, 05:37 PM
I know it's irresponsible of me, but I'm down for as many games as they're willing to publish, as long as I remain interested. I don't get why people are so desperate for the series to stop. If you don't like it, don't play!

I don't think people want to see this franchise gone as much as they want to see it improved, skip a few years won't make a single difference if once we come back, the game still is the mess it's today (and frankly, has been for years), real improvements won't come until they stop the annual releases..

Assassin_M
10-15-2015, 05:39 PM
Why would a history and open world **** like myself want this series to end? There're TONS upon TONS of time periods left unexplored. I still haven't gotten my Egypt yet, damn it. Do I want a couple of years break? Of course. Would I mind a prolonged sabbatical? Nah, I'm for it. But to stop? forever? Heck no. I never understood why fans of a series would want it to end. They'd want it to better, of course, but end? If you don't like it, don't buy, lol.

RVSage
10-15-2015, 05:39 PM
As long as they can provide a consistent story with interesting settings , Ubi should make as many games as they please

cawatrooper9
10-15-2015, 05:41 PM
I don't think people want to see this franchise gone as much as they want to see it improved, skip a few years won't make a single difference if once we come back, the game still is the mess it's today, real improvements won't come until they stop the annual releases..

I understand why people feel that way, as it stands to logic that a rushed project is generally not as high of quality as one nurtured, but I don't think it'll make a difference. First of all, the games are rotated between studios, so it is not an annual process for the developers. Also, one of the most universally praised AC games is Black Flag, and it was released well into the annual cycle. There was only a two year between ACI and II, and while II certainly has its supporters, I have no doubt it would have fared poorly if released today (it still remains one of my least favorite games in the series, but that's beside the point).

strigoi1958
10-15-2015, 05:46 PM
The possibilities are endless.... there are many historical times and interesting people that I'd love to see... if a game is mediocre to 1 or 100 or 1 million..... there are a million newcomers to AC who have not outlived their enjoyment of the game with a blinkered view that everyone else must have...

I've just celebrated my 25th year of playing Ubisoft games :D (since my Amiga days) so 7 years of AC is nothing... as other game series have changed I left when I felt the game was not aimed at me... AC is the only series I have ever seen fans who no longer enjoy the series any more... stay only to try to devalue others enjoyment or to actively encourage others to leave or seek games to be delayed or ended... so sad. :( that time could be used to find and play another game... life should be spent in the pursuit of happiness... not trying to bring others to our own level of sadness.

VestigialLlama4
10-15-2015, 05:48 PM
Why would a history and open world **** like myself want this series to end? There're TONS upon TONS of time periods left unexplored. I still haven't gotten my Egypt yet, damn it. Do I want a couple of years break? Of course. Would I mind a prolonged sabbatical? Nah, I'm for it. But to stop? forever? Heck no. I never understood why fans of a series would want it to end. They'd want it to better, of course, but end? If you don't like it, don't buy, lol.

Exactly, I mean you only want franchises to end when they you do all you can do with it to the point you can repeat yourself, that's the problem Rockstar is facing with GTA, and even Red Dead Redemption, where for all the additional realism, choice mechanic, multiple protagonists they bring in, at core it's the same since GTA 3. You are going to get the same style, same mission style and mechanic and you might get it tweaked better but not something that really feels and plays differently. The only genuinely new thing they did was UNDEAD NIGHTMARE since San Andreas ended.

It's less capable of renewing itself than even Mario or Zelda. Zelda can slap on a new art style and you can get Wind Waker or Twilight Princess.

And AC has more potential than GTA, Mario and Zelda put together.

strigoi1958
10-15-2015, 05:53 PM
And AC has more potential than GTA, Mario and Zelda put together.

This ^^^^

Anyone who spends even 1 hour looking at historical events over the last 400 years should find at least 4 or 5 places they would like to visit if they had a time machine... well we do in AC :D

BananaBlighter
10-15-2015, 05:54 PM
I don't want AC to end anytime soon, though I don't want yearly games either. As VestigialLlama4 went through in detail, the series still has loads of potential but it just seems like they can't innovate of they keep shoving out a game every year. So much stuff that could make the city, the stealth, the combat and the parkour AMAZING, but it just feels like we're never going to get there. Instead of coming up with ideas and then crossing out a few because there's no time before the deadline, the content should be taking priority. Developing is going to be an even slower process if you get half innovations each year instead of a handful every 2-3 years.

cawatrooper9
10-15-2015, 05:55 PM
This ^^^^

Anyone who spends even 1 hour looking at historical events over the last 400 years should find at least 4 or 5 places they would like to visit if they had a time machine... well we do in AC :D

Agreed, and we need not even limit it to 400 years.

strigoi1958
10-15-2015, 06:02 PM
There are many locations I want to visit and even some to which I would like to return. Caribbean, USA, all countries that surround the Mediterranean, (including Altairs origins in another time) England in the middle ages, Greece, Russia, India, Egypt.... so many places with historical landmarks and buildings, a rich choice of famous and infamous people.... the options are endless... so to think of ending a series when it has barely scratched the surface would be foolish.

ze_topazio
10-15-2015, 06:15 PM
38 more games.

strigoi1958
10-15-2015, 06:57 PM
how about exploring with Magellan or Vasco de Gama? Or fighting alongside Leonidas I or Alexander the great while looking over Greece ? the Templar movement spread across Europe and places like Germany and the Teutonic Knights (also Poland and Lithuania) Germany is full of castles and Martin Luther's Ex communication ? a good place to start? Egypt is an abundance of settings, people and events... The Spanish conquistadors in southern America... The Aztecs, The Incas the the Nazca lines in Peru ? why are they there and why were they made so they could only be seen from high up when flight wasn't available to man ? what are the geoglyphs ? why have drawings been found in latin pyramids that depict spacemen ?

there are far too many people, times, events and places to list.... and lots that could be tied in to 1st CIV and MD.

ze_topazio
10-15-2015, 07:01 PM
Vasco da Gama was a Templar.

VestigialLlama4
10-15-2015, 07:06 PM
how about exploring with Magellan or Vasco de Gama? Or fighting alongside Leonidas I or Alexander the great while looking over Greece ? the Templar movement spread across Europe and places like Germany and the Teutonic Knights (also Poland and Lithuania) Germany is full of castles and Martin Luther's Ex communication ? a good place to start? Egypt is an abundance of settings, people and events... The Spanish conquistadors in southern America... The Aztecs, The Incas the the Nazca lines in Peru ? why are they there and why were they made so they could only be seen from high up when flight wasn't available to man ? what are the geoglyphs ? why have drawings been found in latin pyramids that depict spacemen ?

there are far too many people, times, events and places to list.... and lots that could be tied in to 1st CIV and MD.

Germany during the Peasants War would be awesome. Michael Kohlhass, Thomas Muntzer, Gotz von Berlichingen, Gutenberg, Desiderius Erasmus.

But for me Berlin in the 20s would be the key area to visit.

AC's unofficial tagline is "History is our playground" well so far Ubisoft hasn't grown tall enough to try some of the tougher rides and see the cooler attractions.

rileypoole1234
10-15-2015, 07:07 PM
What I would love is a new modern day character on par with Desmond who I loved before they end AC. It could even be his father or Shaun or Rebecca, anyone really. I think what I'd like is a new trilogy like Ezio's with a new modern day character to round out the games, after that they can end it.

It'd also be a dream come true if each game could have fully explorable open worlds in multiple eras each.

VestigialLlama4
10-15-2015, 07:07 PM
Vasco da Gama was a Templar.

He would have to be I think.

Which Portuguese figures of history you think would make good Assassins? Is there someone edgy, subversive or weird you have hidden somewhere?

Toa TAK
10-15-2015, 07:18 PM
I wouldn't want this series to end at all. I love being able to explore historical eras I learn about. As long as they keep mixing things up and keep it interesting both story-wise and gameplay-wise, I have no reason for wanting it to end.

Shiiiet, we still need to explore eras before The American Saga games started cropping up. The leap between ACRevelations to ACIII was so big, we missed out on a lot. We could've fought by Joan of Arc.

VestigialLlama4
10-15-2015, 07:22 PM
Shiiiet, we still need to explore eras before The American Saga games started cropping up. The leap between ACRevelations to ACIII was so big, we missed out on a lot. We could've fought by Joan of Arc.

Joan of Arc was between Altair and Ezio, the Hundred Years War and it was set in France, which they did Unity so nope...

cawatrooper9
10-15-2015, 07:28 PM
Shiiiet, we still need to explore eras before The American Saga games started cropping up. The leap between ACRevelations to ACIII was so big, we missed out on a lot. We could've fought by Joan of Arc.
I agree that we need to go back and cover a lot, but I don't think Joan of Arc is the right path. We've already been to France and seen the Sword of Eden.

Toa TAK
10-15-2015, 07:30 PM
Joan of Arc was between Altair and Ezio, the Hundred Years War and it was set in France, which they did Unity so nope...
Nah, they can still do it. They did Italy twice didn't they? In ACII and ACBrotherhood. I think we can do France again, but expand it and go back to multiple cities.

BananaBlighter
10-15-2015, 07:31 PM
Do you think we'll revisit locations, just in different time periods, such as Tudor England?

Toa TAK
10-15-2015, 07:34 PM
I agree that we need to go back and cover a lot, but I don't think Joan of Arc is the right path. We've already been to France and seen the Sword of Eden.
It's a suggestion, though, I wouldn't mind revisiting a locale so long as the perspective is different. We could change up the identity of the protagonist and it would already change the familiar.

But I see what you guys mean. Though, personally, after Unity's dreadful plot and waste of the Revolution, I wouldn't mind going back there--so long as they do it right. Like I said earlier, we can do AC games forever, just keep it interesting and fresh.

cawatrooper9
10-15-2015, 07:43 PM
It's a suggestion, though, I wouldn't mind revisiting a locale so long as the perspective is different. We could change up the identity of the protagonist and it would already change the familiar.

But I see what you guys mean. Though, personally, after Unity's dreadful plot and waste of the Revolution, I wouldn't mind going back there--so long as they do it right. Like I said earlier, we can do AC games forever, just keep it interesting and fresh.

Sure, I don't think there's a complete and absolute need to avoid using locations again- heck, Rogue did it with New York in roughly the same time period as ACIII- but I'd much rather see several years between recycled locations. However, with how much AC likes to recycle assets, this may not be realistic.

strigoi1958
10-15-2015, 08:46 PM
What I would love is a new modern day character on par with Desmond who I loved before they end AC. It could even be his father or Shaun or Rebecca, anyone really. I think what I'd like is a new trilogy like Ezio's with a new modern day character to round out the games, after that they can end it.

It'd also be a dream come true if each game could have fully explorable open worlds in multiple eras each.

Yes I too have asked about multiple eras in 1 game.... tracking an artefact through time and the world until we search for it in MD... it would tie the whole game together for me while opening up many many possibilities.

booty_fiend
10-15-2015, 08:55 PM
i would rather see UBISOFT stop making ac games and let another more competent company take up the reigns.

strigoi1958
10-15-2015, 09:00 PM
Easy just buy a few billion Ubisoft shares then make them stop.... or I believe if you turn off your pc for a year and sit in a corner and concentrate really hard then the power of thought can do it... that's the cheapest way... try that ;)

booty_fiend
10-15-2015, 09:06 PM
Easy just buy a few billion Ubisoft shares then make them stop.... or I believe if you turn off your pc for a year and sit in a corner and concentrate really hard then the power of thought can do it... that's the cheapest way... try that ;)
no thanks.

HDinHB
10-15-2015, 09:13 PM
Why would a history and open world **** like myself want this series to end? There're TONS upon TONS of time periods left unexplored. I still haven't gotten my Egypt yet, damn it. Do I want a couple of years break? Of course. Would I mind a prolonged sabbatical? Nah, I'm for it. But to stop? forever? Heck no. I never understood why fans of a series would want it to end. They'd want it to better, of course, but end? If you don't like it, don't buy, lol.

Sometimes you are completely correct.

rileypoole1234
10-15-2015, 09:27 PM
Yes I too have asked about multiple eras in 1 game.... tracking an artefact through time and the world until we search for it in MD... it would tie the whole game together for me while opening up many many possibilities.

I agree. With the Helix rift missions in Unity and the Medieval section at the beginning it seems as though Ubi could be moving towards that... One can only hope.

SixKeys
10-15-2015, 09:34 PM
Victorian London has always been my one dream location for the series. Now that I'm finally getting it, I don't know how long I'll still stick around. Depends on if they manage to pique my interest.

TBH I wish AC would have stopped long ago, when it was still on top of its game. But it's not gonna happen until the sales numbers drop significantly. I'll probably just bow out at some point.

VestigialLlama4
10-15-2015, 09:51 PM
Do you think we'll revisit locations, just in different time periods, such as Tudor England?

Well Ubisoft right now want to basically spread wide rather than dive deep into a single period. So the time being is that they will basicaly "one place one time". Like they made UNITY because they wanted to do Paris and initially it was going to be Paris through the Ages in different points in time, it was not intended to be about the French Revolution in particular but finally they decided to make a conventional open world and fans had asked for the French Revolution setting. So with UNITY, you see them trying to (sigh...pun alert) have their cake and eat it too. They want to please fans by giving them a French Revolution setting and please themselves by recreating Paris and then using Time Anomalies and Jacques de Molay prologue to include morsels of their original idea.

I wish we could go back and do different periods though. I mean GTA keeps making games on the same Los Angeles and New York copies so Ubisoft can revisit settings and places. They did that with Rogue, where you went to New York in the 1750s, rather than you know a later period like the Gangs of New York era when the city was actually interesting.

Elizabethan London would be almost an entirely different city and place than Victorian London so it would essentially be its own game. There are also monuments and buildings in the Elizabethan Era that did not survive into the Victorian times. The Whitehall Palace, bigger than Versailles, existed then and it burnt in a fire in the 1600s. You also needless to save have an amazing historical cast and a lot of fascinating events. You would have naval, because Elizabeth legalized privateering to raise cash, so that means you can sail with Walter Raleigh and Francis Drake (who would be voiced by Nolan North of course). You have the Irish Pirate Lady Grace O'Malley. Likewise you have the sailing of the Mayflower in this time. If you do the late Elizabethan early Jacobean era you can chronicle events like the translation of the King James Bible, the Gunpowder Plot (Guy Fawkes himself), the arrival of Pocahontas to the Court of King James I (as seen in the movie The New World). You have Shakespeare, you have Christopher Marlowe (definitely an Assassin), Ben Jonson, Thomas Kyd, Francis Bacon, John Dee (who showed up a lot in the Project Legacy stuff) and others.

It would be worth it do an English Trilogy, say exploring England and London in different eras to see how it changed.

m4r-k7
10-15-2015, 11:10 PM
I want the series to continue for a very long time but I want a game every 3 years xD

ACZanius
10-15-2015, 11:29 PM
I don't want it to end but i want it to be glorious, jaw dropping, doesn't play safe, better and bigger than ever before

Locopells
10-16-2015, 12:25 AM
Well Ubisoft right now want to basically spread wide rather than dive deep into a single period. So the time being is that they will basicaly "one place one time". Like they made UNITY because they wanted to do Paris and initially it was going to be Paris through the Ages in different points in time, it was not intended to be about the French Revolution in particular but finally they decided to make a conventional open world and fans had asked for the French Revolution setting. So with UNITY, you see them trying to (sigh...pun alert) have their cake and eat it too. They want to please fans by giving them a French Revolution setting and please themselves by recreating Paris and then using Time Anomalies and Jacques de Molay prologue to include morsels of their original idea.

I wish we could go back and do different periods though. I mean GTA keeps making games on the same Los Angeles and New York copies so Ubisoft can revisit settings and places. They did that with Rogue, where you went to New York in the 1750s, rather than you know a later period like the Gangs of New York era when the city was actually interesting.

Elizabethan London would be almost an entirely different city and place than Victorian London so it would essentially be its own game. There are also monuments and buildings in the Elizabethan Era that did not survive into the Victorian times. The Whitehall Palace, bigger than Versailles, existed then and it burnt in a fire in the 1600s. You also needless to save have an amazing historical cast and a lot of fascinating events. You would have naval, because Elizabeth legalized privateering to raise cash, so that means you can sail with Walter Raleigh and Francis Drake (who would be voiced by Nolan North of course). You have the Irish Pirate Lady Grace O'Malley. Likewise you have the sailing of the Mayflower in this time. If you do the late Elizabethan early Jacobean era you can chronicle events like the translation of the King James Bible, the Gunpowder Plot (Guy Fawkes himself), the arrival of Pocahontas to the Court of King James I (as seen in the movie The New World). You have Shakespeare, you have Christopher Marlowe (definitely an Assassin), Ben Jonson, Thomas Kyd, Francis Bacon, John Dee (who showed up a lot in the Project Legacy stuff) and others.

It would be worth it do an English Trilogy, say exploring England and London in different eras to see how it changed.

Heck yeah - as you've pointed out, London was largely wiped out by the Great Fire of 1666 (imagine seeing that in a game...), so it would be a totally different city. Also been hankering after a English Civil War AC for a while now, as I don't think that's even been done in a game. In short, anything in the Tudor and Stewart periods would lend itself well to the AC universe.

Namikaze_17
10-16-2015, 04:43 AM
Why do you care about how many more games people want or need?

king-hailz
10-16-2015, 08:15 AM
Why do you care about how many more games people want or need?

Well because the amount we get all come down to if people want it, and I guess they do so there will be many many more AC games.

Also the reason I'd rather it end then me just leave the series is because I want an end to the story, but I guess I'm not gonna get that... Honestly I'm sticking till next year but if that doesn't do something drastic (which I'm about 90% sure it wont) I'm leaving...

booty_fiend
10-16-2015, 08:43 AM
Why do you care about how many more games people want or need?
it is an issue of utmost importance

lothario-da-be
10-16-2015, 11:24 AM
I really don't want the ac franchise to end. The rate at wich Ubi pumps out these games though, is way too fast. One game every 2-3 years would make every release more worthwhile and they won't have to stop because of the franchise fatigue that already hit lots of AC fans, including me.

Jessigirl2013
10-16-2015, 06:14 PM
When I clicked on NEVER in the poll I expected to be the only one.:rolleyes:

I think I should take this opportunity to say that I LOVE AC!:rolleyes:

Sometimes my posts can seem rather negative at times but its just sharing my opinions with other like-minded people.:rolleyes:

As long as they keep the MD Story going and keep the game in 3rd person, I'll be glad If it continues.

Journey93
10-16-2015, 08:39 PM
I want AC to go on for a long time (just like I want more GTA's, Fallouts etc.) BUT I do want them to stop with this annual bs and instead go more to Rockstars/Bethesda's direction and make an AC game only after a few years.

Its getting tiresome. I really hope Syndicate's sales go down, so maybe Ubisoft will finally act smart.


The possibilities are endless.... there are many historical times and interesting people that I'd love to see... if a game is mediocre to 1 or 100 or 1 million..... there are a million newcomers to AC who have not outlived their enjoyment of the game with a blinkered view that everyone else must have...

I've just celebrated my 25th year of playing Ubisoft games :D (since my Amiga days) so 7 years of AC is nothing... as other game series have changed I left when I felt the game was not aimed at me... AC is the only series I have ever seen fans who no longer enjoy the series any more... stay only to try to devalue others enjoyment or to actively encourage others to leave or seek games to be delayed or ended... so sad. :( that time could be used to find and play another game... life should be spent in the pursuit of happiness... not trying to bring others to our own level of sadness.

People complain because they care about the series. I mean what do you expect? This is a discussion forum not a fanboy one (what you seem to want) where everyone just loves AC and supports Ubisoft no matter the **** they pull.

And AC is certainly not the only series where fans complain, have you ever been on any other gaming forum or reddit etc.? Doesn't seem like it.

strigoi1958
10-16-2015, 09:20 PM
People complain because they care about the series. I mean what do you expect? This is a discussion forum not a fanboy one (what you seem to want) where everyone just loves AC and supports Ubisoft no matter the **** they pull.

And AC is certainly not the only series where fans complain, have you ever been on any other gaming forum or reddit etc.? Doesn't seem like it.

They don't... they care about what THEY want for the series... not the series.... get it right.!

People who say I WANT the series to end do not have the best interest of the 10 million buyers of the game... they feel hurt that the series is not how they thought it should have gone.

People who say I WANT the series to be delayed a few years because I THINK it is best for the series (even though the game after Syndicate is probably 80% finished and they have no idea how that affects the Ubisofts employees and even if a break would improve it) plus again they don't speak for the buyers of the game including all who are new to the series and are not jaded.

Thanks for saying FANBOY as soon as anyone resorts to a personal attack it means they are trying to weaken my argument by infering my opinion is less than theirs also it is only FANBOYS who make demands of a company or game series... nobody else cares.

People here complain because they DO care but not for what is the best for everyone... just their own selfish choices.. I have no problem with that because I understand that other people havee alternative views but some people here cannot even entertain that millions of people play and enjoy AC every year and would even enjoy it twice each year... simply because they don't want to think that there is the slightest possibility that their view is not that of the majority.

Ubisoft makes the games we can choose to buy and play them or not.... I doubt anything written by the 0.0001% of the people who buy the game and happen upon the forum, has any bearing upon the games.

Answer this.... how would you have liked it if after AC or AC2 people came here and said stop the series or you had to wait for 5 years for ACB ?

SixKeys
10-16-2015, 10:36 PM
Answer this.... how would you have liked it if after AC or AC2 people came here and said stop the series or you had to wait for 5 years for ACB ?

I would have waited 5 years for the next game after AC2. Not for ACB, that would have been ridiculous since they're almost the same game, but AC3 proper. It would have been painful, but I would have been delirious with excitement for just how big and different the next instalment must be if they need 5 whole years to make it. I would have had confidence that it would be relatively bug-free and that Desmond would have gotten the ending he deserved, with a fantastic merger of history and modern day in his final adventure.

Nowadays we can't expect big changes anymore. Not the huge transitions we had between AC1-AC2 and AC2-AC3, anyway. We know they're absolutely determined to hit that annual release date, whether the game is ready or not.

strigoi1958
10-16-2015, 10:57 PM
Ac3 was proper for me... It doesn't follow that the 3 games in between were all bad ... Also what if after a 5 year wait absolutely everything you love about ac was completely removed.... All the people behind the thing you love were let go by Ubisoft ? Would it still be a "proper"AC 3 ? Or would the millions who want to just play a game every year have suffered ac withdrawal only for you to find the wait made no difference ?

It is only worth delaying if a few people get their ideal game... There is no thought for others at all...

SixKeys
10-16-2015, 11:08 PM
Ac3 was proper for me... It doesn't follow that the 3 games in between were all bad ... Also what if after a 5 year wait absolutely everything you love about ac was completely removed.... All the people behind the thing you love were let go by Ubisoft ? Would it still be a "proper"AC 3 ? Or would the millions who want to just play a game every year have suffered ac withdrawal only for you to find the wait made no difference

That's exactly what happened to me with AC3. I waited for 3 years for a grand finale and could barely recognize the game as AC when it finally came out. I daresay it was at least in part because they had two other games to prepare at the same time, namely ACB and ACR. If those two hadn't been in the picture, AC3 might have turned out great.

strigoi1958
10-16-2015, 11:28 PM
Or worse....

It is always easier to assume that had things changed in our lives that they would always be for the better....

I wonder how many prince of persia fans would happily take a new game now... Regardless of whether it was 75% of what they hoped a new game would have ?

When i read some of the posts here i can understand where people are coming from.... They are devout almost fanatical in their quest for more and more ac which is commendable.. They read ac books and blogs, they watch videos and interviews with prominent people, they start forums, facebook pages, they do podcasts and twitch shows.... It gives them an insight and perhaps a feeling of what is ideal.. It probably has made them a little over exposed to the game and no longer view it with the same appetite... Which is a shame.

SixKeys
10-16-2015, 11:37 PM
Or worse....

How could it have turned worse? Without other games requiring Ubi's attention, without devs having to be shifted around from project to project, without resources being redirected towards other games, AC3 would have had all of that to itself. That's no guarantee it would have turned out better, but there's no way it would have done worse with all that.

Journey93
10-16-2015, 11:49 PM
They don't... they care about what THEY want for the series... not the series.... get it right.!

People who say I WANT the series to end do not have the best interest of the 10 million buyers of the game... they feel hurt that the series is not how they thought it should have gone.

People who say I WANT the series to be delayed a few years because I THINK it is best for the series (even though the game after Syndicate is probably 80% finished and they have no idea how that affects the Ubisofts employees and even if a break would improve it) plus again they don't speak for the buyers of the game including all who are new to the series and are not jaded.

Thanks for saying FANBOY as soon as anyone resorts to a personal attack it means they are trying to weaken my argument by infering my opinion is less than theirs also it is only FANBOYS who make demands of a company or game series... nobody else cares.

People here complain because they DO care but not for what is the best for everyone... just their own selfish choices.. I have no problem with that because I understand that other people havee alternative views but some people here cannot even entertain that millions of people play and enjoy AC every year and would even enjoy it twice each year... simply because they don't want to think that there is the slightest possibility that their view is not that of the majority.

Ubisoft makes the games we can choose to buy and play them or not.... I doubt anything written by the 0.0001% of the people who buy the game and happen upon the forum, has any bearing upon the games.

Answer this.... how would you have liked it if after AC or AC2 people came here and said stop the series or you had to wait for 5 years for ACB ?

How is that selfish? Its called providing feedback. You just want everyone to shut up and be asskissers of Ubisoft. If people complain about AC and say that it should take a break, they are saying that because they care about the series and are fans. Its in their right as fans who bought previous games.

Everyone understands that many still enjoy AC (look at the sales for previous games) but so what? Since this is a discussion forum people should be allowed to express their opinion freely. NO ONE is speaking for the majority (where did you get that from?) here and of course Ubisoft probably doesn't care what the fans here think, so what? Should we just stop posting and criticizing?

I gotta say you make some silly arguments.

Also like @SixKeys already said obviously waiting 5 years for Brotherhood would be silly. It was basically an expansion pack (love the game though). 5 years waiting for AC3 (a better version of it, not the mess we got) would have been ok.
And hell it doesn't have to be 5 years, but at least 3 or something like that.

Annual releases are bad for the series, that much is clear.


Ac3 was proper for me... It doesn't follow that the 3 games in between were all bad ... Also what if after a 5 year wait absolutely everything you love about ac was completely removed.... All the people behind the thing you love were let go by Ubisoft ? Would it still be a "proper"AC 3 ? Or would the millions who want to just play a game every year have suffered ac withdrawal only for you to find the wait made no difference ?

It is only worth delaying if a few people get their ideal game... There is no thought for others at all...

lol if anyone here thinks they speak for the majority, its you. "No thought for others"? "Suffered" ? Dude its a game, if AC3 would have been delayed most would have been fine with it.
Don't be silly and overdramatic. It seems more like you yourself like getting annual AC's and people criticizing that pisses you off and you come up with some bs excuses like people don't care about other players.

Mr.Black24
10-17-2015, 12:00 AM
In all utter seriousness, I don't mind how long it goes as long as there is no more loose ends, proper closures the story as a whole and for characters, such as Aveline, Connor, Shay, Arno, and if they do the same awful treatment for these two, Jacob and Evie. I hate loose ends more than anything. Like see here, the AC Lore and its characters are huge and immersive that can be compared to the likes of the Harry Potter and The Song of Ice and Fire, a.k.a Game of Thrones series. Now imagine if J.K Rowling or George R.R Martin stopped right before the final book of each of their respective series, right when it gets to its pinnacle of the climax, for the setting, the characters, the collective lore itself, and suddenly drops this

"Nah, I want you guys to make an ending for yourselves, it will be fun! Bye!"

People will rage beyond rage, and you can care or not about these two series, but one cannot deny that its has a huge following that has its own devoted fans, and there is a huge collective group that will feel the same for the AC series if it goes like this, like it did for an unfortunate someone.....

However, I do fear that eventually the series will outlive itself, and that it will come to a rushed and inconclusive, conclusion. The lack of closure for the characters is already nacious enough, but it will be beyond catastrophic if the series ends in a way like it did for the Desmond arc in AC3, perhaps even worse.

Assassin_M
10-17-2015, 12:02 AM
you come up with some bs excuses like people don't care about other players.
It's not really BS when there ARE people who want the series to end. Naturally, no one cares about others. People give opinions and criticism to what suits them. The way he put the post across is indeed a tad dramatic, but it's true. You do it, I do it, everyone does it. Do you think about what could happen to Ubisoft as a company if they stop yearly releases? Or the employees working on the games? Of course not, nobody does. And that's perfectly fine. Yearly releases have obviously made fans get burned out. I'm not the least bit excited about Syndicate, this has been the fastest passing of time to an AC release for me.

So don't get your panties in a twist, everything he said is truth.

strigoi1958
10-17-2015, 12:05 AM
@sixkeys it only fits YOUR ideal if you believe a 5 year wait would have made ac3 better... And even then... Better for who ?

I'm asking ... Consider the alternative... Ac3 was stripped of things you love.. Ubisoft laid of important ac staff and millions of fans had to go without a game for years in vain...

Assassin_M
10-17-2015, 12:07 AM
Once again, time doesn't solve all problems. Look at Witcher, it's been in development for over 5 years and to this day, it's still kind of a mess. I lost my New Game+ save because the new patch destroyed it basically.

strigoi1958
10-17-2015, 12:10 AM
This year millions of game players will reach an age where they can buy and play ac ... Who are we to dictate that they should be denied seeing the game with the same awe that we saw it when we first played... Because we are fed up ?

VoXngola
10-17-2015, 12:12 AM
This year millions of game players will reach an age where they can buy and play ac ... Who are we to dictate that they should be denied seeing the game with the same awe that we saw it when we first played... Because we are fed up ?
This made me cry

SixKeys
10-17-2015, 12:13 AM
@sixkeys it only fits YOUR ideal if you believe a 5 year wait would have made ac3 better... And even then... Better for who ?

I'm asking ... Consider the alternative... Ac3 was stripped of things you love.. Ubisoft laid of important ac staff and millions of fans had to go without a game for years in vain...

Again, you haven't explained how directing more resources towards AC3 would have made the game worse. Here's the alternative you're asking me to consider: AC3 wouldn't have been stripped of anything, it most likely would have been able to deliver all the things we were promised. The Great Fire of New York, canoes, freeroam sailing etc. They were still selling those things to us at E3, a few months before the game's release. Had they been allowed to delay, they would have been able to finish those things. But no, they HAD to meet that release date or else Ubi wouldn't have had an AC game in 2012.

Again, no-one can guarantee that the game would have been fantastic even with all that extra attention, but at least it would have been given its best shot. It would have had all the resources it needed and been allowed to deliver exactly the product the devs had planned. As it is, they had to make a lot of compromises and had less time to iron out bugs, resulting in an unfinished, lacklustre game.

Assassin_M
10-17-2015, 12:17 AM
The Great Fire of New York, canoes, freeroam sailing etc. They were still selling those things to us at E3, a few months before the game's release. Had they been allowed to delay, they would have been able to finish those things.
There's really no guarantee of that, since we don't know if time had a hand in why these features were dropped. It could have been the limitations of the last gen systems.

strigoi1958
10-17-2015, 12:51 AM
All I'm saying is... We are all entitled to our opinion and i truly respect everones.

But as some people have invested so much effort into ac and made it an important part of their lives... They are not willing to let go and would rather have ac break up with them.... Even if it means affecting others.

Even this poll shows that people vote never more than the other options combined... Not that it proves anything.

@VoXngola thanks for understanding... I still remember the first time AC started up on my pc... It was amazing... I am jealous of new AC fans getting that first play.... There are still many great things in AC but nothing compares to that first moment. ;)

booty_fiend
10-17-2015, 12:52 AM
Because we are fed up ?
precisely.


There's really no guarantee of that, since we don't know if time had a hand in why these features were dropped. It could have been the limitations of the last gen systems.
woah, damage control.

strigoi1958
10-17-2015, 01:01 AM
precisely.

WE being the 4 people on this poll and probably a insignificant number who think they know best for ac fans, ubisoft and probably the world... ;) thanks for pointing that out.

Assassin_M
10-17-2015, 01:06 AM
woah, damage control.
No, it's called knowing the ins and outs of game development.

booty_fiend
10-17-2015, 01:11 AM
No, it's called knowing the ins and outs of game development.
you mean damage control.

bitebug2003
10-17-2015, 01:13 AM
Pre-emptive advisory.

Don't start bickering please.

Thanks

Assassin_M
10-17-2015, 01:15 AM
you mean damage control.
How about you try being informed instead of opinionated? Hmm? It'd be good for your health.

Mr.Black24
10-17-2015, 02:37 AM
Once again, time doesn't solve all problems. Look at Witcher, it's been in development for over 5 years and to this day, it's still kind of a mess. I lost my New Game+ save because the new patch destroyed it basically.
Is it really that bad? I thought of getting it myself, but this is the first I hear of something being wrong with it. I hear nothing but praise for the game. Then again, I am a newbie so, I'm not sure.

I will add though while time by itself will not solve all problems, I agreem however also I agree with Sixkeys with one thing, is that without distractions, and more focus on AC3, it would be much better than the one that exists today. Obviously it wouldn't be the most perfect thing ever since slice bread that will make you fries, but the quality will be far better.

True, there are huge factors to consider of course such as if the team actually continues on giving care and attention on creating the game for the length of time to completion. However even with setbacks, I don't see it being worse, if these needs are met at least with consistency. Lets look at Aliens Colonial Marines for example, that game had been in different forms of development from 2001, before the PS3 was even a thing. Different think tanks clashing, lack of money, money stolen to make Borderlands, and neglecting the game will cause it to be an awful crap storm that came to be in 2013. 12 YEARS this game was in development and it came out as the most disappointing game within game history, nothing looked like the E3 demo, and why is that? Because they admitted that they rushed 6 months to make the game, scrapping the old one for resource reasons, outsourcing them to damm Borderlands, lying to Sega and 2K that everything is fine, firing their own staff to conserve money, and shifting the game to outside developers.

Its not time by itself that will solve everything, however its how one might use it that makes the difference. And from what it seems, The Witcher wasn't entirely had its time taken well. Very well, but not well enough that it causes new game saves to be deleted, which is a huge ouchie for it.

I wanted to add that how AC4 is a good example on learning from their mistakes and successes of AC3, but people argue so much on it like how the combat is too easy, the story sucks, and stupid reasons like "too much naval", ect, that I'm having a hard time figuring out a better example of a game to support my cards.

ShoryukenMan
10-17-2015, 02:48 AM
I want this Juno arc to completely end. Wrap everything up, then reboot. AC can go on forever, but I want this story to get it's conclusion so I can hop off. I just got a really bad feeling about this series as time goes on.

@_M I'm not sure if it was the limitations of the console since Black Flag had free roam sailing and I can't imagine Canoes being much different from using one of those boats in AC2. But, I'm not a dev so I'm highly ignorant of these things.

strigoi1958
10-17-2015, 03:40 AM
@mrblack24

As ac3 was amazing for me... It didn't require anything else.
A delay may have changed the game but that doesn't guarantee those changes would have satisfied people who didn't like ac3 AND even if those changes did satisfy them... What about the people who might not have liked the changes... Or would their preference not count as long as some got what they wanted ?

No matter what.. Nobody including ubi can make 100% of people happy 100% of the time... And it doesn't matter how long it takes.

Journey93
10-17-2015, 04:32 AM
This year millions of game players will reach an age where they can buy and play ac ... Who are we to dictate that they should be denied seeing the game with the same awe that we saw it when we first played... Because we are fed up ?

lol this guy

Assassin_M
10-17-2015, 04:52 AM
lol this guy
Can't you either reply respectfully or not at all? Why do you have to start fights?

strigoi1958
10-17-2015, 05:35 AM
lol this guy

That's another time you've failed to acknowledge other people may have other views and tried to devalue my point by trying to devalue me...
It isn't me being made to look foolish by your posts. :(

Assassin_M
10-17-2015, 06:08 AM
Is it really that bad? I thought of getting it myself, but this is the first I hear of something being wrong with it. I hear nothing but praise for the game. Then again, I am a newbie so, I'm not sure.
It wasn't as bad pre-patch. Just the usual frame rate drops, clunky controls and locked out quests. It's to be expected with such a HUGE patch. No idea who made that decision to have the patch be so big.


without distractions, and more focus on AC3, it would be much better than the one that exists today.
I really doubt lack of distractions would have made AC III better. We've had great games with the annual cycle like Brotherhood and Black Flag and naturally, they had the same distractions.


Its not time by itself that will solve everything, however its how one might use it that makes the difference.
Then it's not really about how much time, but rather about what they prioritize and what direction they take with all the elements of their games. I mean, these games are not developed in one year.


And from what it seems, The Witcher wasn't entirely had its time taken well. Very well, but not well enough that it causes new game saves to be deleted, which is a huge ouchie for it.
You don't think 5 years is enough time? :p There's money to be made, investors to satisfy, publisher contracts. 5 years is a pretty long time. **** happens during game development. Witcher is a big game, i'm not really dissing the game. I realize the reasons this is happening and why the patch is so problematic. This just shows that time is not really a factor. No matter how much time AC III was given, it wouldn't have changed Revere's awful ride, it wouldn't have changed Connor's characterization for some people, it wouldn't have changed the handling of Modern Day, it just wouldn't have solved all these problems that have nothing to do with time.

VestigialLlama4
10-17-2015, 06:51 AM
That's another time you've failed to acknowledge other people may have other views and tried to devalue my point by trying to devalue me...
It isn't me being made to look foolish by your posts. :(

Exactly. Most people like to project their entitlements without looking from other people's perspectives.

I mean I have been pretty vocal about my dislike for Unity but I can see why many people did like it and I am glad that it made Ubisoft a profit because the people who created Paris put a lot of effort that deserved rewarding even if the story and open-world design let them down. I am only argued because I want them to do better and live up to their best games and fulfill their potential.

Mr.Black24
10-18-2015, 12:57 AM
It wasn't as bad pre-patch. Just the usual frame rate drops, clunky controls and locked out quests. It's to be expected with such a HUGE patch. No idea who made that decision to have the patch be so big. Ahhhh I see. Ironic that patches that are meant to fix up holes, create new ones lol.



I really doubt lack of distractions would have made AC III better. We've had great games with the annual cycle like Brotherhood and Black Flag and naturally, they had the same distractions. Well to be fair, they did recycle assets that help save time and money. ACIII was built on something entirely new, which would have taken a much more amount of time to build and set a strong foundation on. Look at Rogue, while the setting and characters are different, a huge chunk of the core gameplay was used from Black Flag to create the game, which definitely sped up time to completion. Its too bad though that some story elements had to be removed for time constraints, but in the end, it came out ok.



Then it's not really about how much time, but rather about what they prioritize and what direction they take with all the elements of their games. I mean, these games are not developed in one year. Agreed, as I used Aliens: Colonial Marines as an example of this point on my last post.



You don't think 5 years is enough time? :p There's money to be made, investors to satisfy, publisher contracts. 5 years is a pretty long time. **** happens during game development. Witcher is a big game, i'm not really dissing the game. I realize the reasons this is happening and why the patch is so problematic. This just shows that time is not really a factor. No matter how much time AC III was given, it wouldn't have changed Revere's awful ride, it wouldn't have changed Connor's characterization for some people, it wouldn't have changed the handling of Modern Day, it just wouldn't have solved all these problems that have nothing to do with time.

Its not that 5 years wasn't enough, if that's what you got from me rather if you reread carefully again, what I mean is that they had 5 years, but haven't used the time wisely. Kind of like the teacher gives you a 5 paragraph essay on whatever topic that is due in two months, which is plenty for an essay, at least it should be within the 90s average grade and not a low B or C by the time its due.

Well as for things like Revere's ride for example, if they looked at it a bit longer, the possibility of them going "....nah, this sounds dumb" could have been. Truthfully not a guarantee, but the chances of it at least increases. Modern Day could have been a bit more enjoyable to play as, especially since your playing as a skilled "Ultimate" Assassin, as they described him going to be for the game, and well....it wasn't that one bit. More ideas for Connor's characterization could have blossomed during the time of development. I mean you said so yourself, things change in videogame development almost constantly in production, even in the half way point.

AdultShotaro
10-18-2015, 01:12 AM
First off. Long time no see. Second. Give me Feudal Japan or Modern Day and I'm done.

ze_topazio
10-18-2015, 03:02 AM
First off. Long time no see.


Second. Give me Feudal Japan

Ubisoft: NO


or Modern Day

Ubisoft: NO


and I'm done.

Ubisoft: NO

kosmoscreed
10-18-2015, 04:53 AM
There is no reason to stop if the games are good and people buy them, but at this rate, one game per year, or even more, I fear they will run out of ideas or cool history moments to make the games. I think they need to stop now to rethink what to do with the franchise, they can't go like this, we need fresh ideas, we need more polished games.

VestigialLlama4
10-18-2015, 05:39 AM
You don't think 5 years is enough time? :p There's money to be made, investors to satisfy, publisher contracts. 5 years is a pretty long time. **** happens during game development. Witcher is a big game, i'm not really dissing the game. I realize the reasons this is happening and why the patch is so problematic. This just shows that time is not really a factor. No matter how much time AC III was given, it wouldn't have changed Revere's awful ride, it wouldn't have changed Connor's characterization for some people, it wouldn't have changed the handling of Modern Day, it just wouldn't have solved all these problems that have nothing to do with time.

I am reminded of games like Daikatana that had this long, royal, development time and then crashed and burned. All the innovations it was supposed to do was obsolete because Half Life 1 came out at that time. Of course a new IP is different from an established label. I am quite sure if Half Life 3, MIA for nearly 10 years came out tomorrow, it would do well but I doubt if it would be liked if it was merely the same kind of game as the last episode. Taking more time means that you dont keep up with the changes in what is after all a very young and constantly changing industry.

Arkham Knight was developed for slightly less than the same time amount of time it took for Unity, and while it had problems, it wasn't as much of a disaster as Unity was, at least the PS4 and Xbox One worked. I would say that the issue could be more in terms of organization, like if the writers and developers are overseen or if the game was excessively tinkered and the like.

Black Flag was made in what slightly more than a year, Revelations was made in 11 months, Brotherhood was a story DLC and leftover from AC2 made into a bigger game.

Perhaps if AC2 had more time then there wouldn't be need for Brotherhood then, but then we wouldn't have Brotherhood's distinct open world gameplay either would we?

Ureh
10-18-2015, 09:51 AM
They may make AC games for a thousand years but we will not stop playing them. We realise the road is long, that we may never see its end, but we will play all the ACs nonetheless.

There's still so much that AC can do, places to visit, templars/assassins to kill. Maybe release them every 2.5 years instead, if the devs think it'll help.

andreycvetov
10-18-2015, 12:28 PM
I would really want them to end it now . Stop for a couple of years , maybe 3 .Then release a superb game in , with a great story that sets the frachise on the right path .And after that , end the series with 2 or 3 games maximum .

SofaJockey
10-18-2015, 02:33 PM
How long is a piece of string?

RobertMcSassin
10-18-2015, 03:45 PM
How many games?... o-O ...

All of them...

Should they stop for a little while to regroup and recharge?...Possibly...Probably, even...

But as I've yet to play an AC that I haven't really enjoyed, at least for the most part...(Sure, there were aspects of Unity I wasn't entirely sold on...And I'm not as big a fan of Black Flag as some are...But I still finished them and found them much enjoyable...*Shrug*...)...So I'm not going to complain if they - the games' yearly schedule - continue in the way they have...

strigoi1958
10-19-2015, 02:31 AM
I think most people who want the game to end are heavily invested into the md 1st civ story line... I wouldn't be so bold as to suggest that a few may have developed an almost unhealthy obsession with it that they no longer enjoy it but cannot let go off ac and would prefer to have ac let go of them by either concluding the md story or by ending the series...
But it sometimes feels very close to that.

To some people the rest of the game is unimportant.... Anyone who says differently is not a true fan... And all future ac games will always be bad unless there is a playable md with juno minerva etc... I don't mind if md is in or out but everyone should get something they like in the game.

I can understand people not liking something.... I just cannot understand the rationality behind wanting something taken away from everyone who does like it just because one or some don't. :( that view borders on spite.

this post is in no way meant to cause offence and is not aimed at anyone.

ACZanius
10-19-2015, 06:32 AM
I think most people who want the game to end are heavily invested into the md 1st civ story line... I wouldn't be so bold as to suggest that a few may have developed an almost unhealthy obsession with it that they no longer enjoy it but cannot let go off ac and would prefer to have ac let go of them by either concluding the md story or by ending the series...
But it sometimes feels very close to that.

To some people the rest of the game is unimportant.... Anyone who says differently is not a true fan... And all future ac games will always be bad unless there is a playable md with juno minerva etc... I don't mind if md is in or out but everyone should get something they like in the game.

I can understand people not liking something.... I just cannot understand the rationality behind wanting something taken away from everyone who does like it just because one or some don't. :( that view borders on spite.

this post is in no way meant to cause offence and is not aimed at anyone.


i truly believe they have the people, resources and skill to please everyone, no matter what happens and recent (1 day old news about syndicate MD) i will always believe they can build/create the ultimate Assassin's Creed game, that blows everyone away, where modern day and historical part connect so hard together it's like race against time. they can make modern day so epic and sick people who always found it a chore would love it, if you want make it modern day exciting and epic YOU HAVE TO MAKE IT exciting and epic.

I miss Patrice Desilets formula, the man himself, then again i played all of them including chronicles (lol), Assassin's Creed is never bad game, it's good, legit, decent, the decline was there but never was AC game that was horrible aside technical stuff. I despise Unity and hatred i have for that game knows no bounds haha lame filler story, stupid ending, almost non existent MD but if there is one thing they always nail perfect it is CITY, THE ARCHITECTURE, ATMOSPHERE, THE AMAZING ****ING DETAIL in this case Paris, voice acting, always just superb, the actors always do crazy amazing job and of course the beautiful engine that is Anvil Engine, the environment and with that graphics.


With that said, Assassin's Creed is so much more than that, whatever happens with games i will always love the LORE/STORY/CHARACTERS

RegeRoka
12-27-2015, 04:12 PM
I'm going to be a patriot here: I want a game in the era of the Ottoman-Hungarian war. When Hungary was the only fastness, the only obstacle for the ottomans to get their hands on Europe. I can see the assassins fitting in. But that's not going to happen.
I would like to see AC in some smaller countries, not just in the leading powers territory (Russia included). It's much harder, I know, but I would like to see it someday.

Sesheenku
12-28-2015, 02:42 AM
I'm just starting to think this is just the same as Final Fantasy, you're gonna like some, you're gonna hate some but you get some fun out of it and some of them are genuinely decent/good/great games.

Let 'em go as long as they feel like. If they wanna be the FF of Open World Action go for it I say.

Unity showed me the light if you will. I'm not gonna like every AC I play but if I can play more like Unity then I'll be pleased personally.

EaglePrince25
12-28-2015, 07:44 AM
I don't know about never, but i'll say the same as a few others have: There hasn't been a single AC game that I didn't enjoy. Some are obviously better than others, which is unavoidable when dealing with multiple games, some main characters are better than others, but i've liked them all. I think that there are changes they should make to the current formula, such as the yearly release, but at the moment I don't feel that the franchise needs to end within the next few years.

RegeRoka
12-28-2015, 12:13 PM
@EaglePrince25 knows what's going on.

cawatrooper9
12-28-2015, 04:12 PM
I don't know about never, but i'll say the same as a few others have: There hasn't been a single AC game that I didn't enjoy. Some are obviously better than others, which is unavoidable when dealing with multiple games, some main characters are better than others, but i've liked them all. I think that there are changes they should make to the current formula, such as the yearly release, but at the moment I don't feel that the franchise needs to end within the next few years.

Exactly. If people don't want more games, they can stop buying them- but there's no reason for them to wish ill for those of us who still enjoy them.

crusader_prophet
12-28-2015, 05:23 PM
I love the total domination of "NEVER" option in this poll. Personally, I do not want the AC franchise to end because it has not realized it's potential and the ultimate vision yet. Even after it does, I am sure it could be rebooted. However, I would like the franchise to take a break to alleviate the fatigue, do some rethinking of the narrative arc, designate one studio for its development instead of multiple studios, not be crunched by time so much and let the artists and engineers do the work they want to do to completion. UbiSoft needs to look at other IPs to rely on as their steady annual revenue stream. But no I hope AC never ends, and continues to innovate in big leaps over the coming years. It has yet to beat the Star Wars franchise :P

cawatrooper9
12-28-2015, 05:31 PM
I love the total domination of "NEVER" option in this poll. Personally, I do not want the AC franchise to end because it has not realized it's potential and the ultimate vision yet. Even after it does, I am sure it could be rebooted.

Agreed. If I ever fall out of love with the series, I will stop following it- but I won't wish for it to end. Why would I, if it doesn't affect me?

I used to love the Call of Duty series (I know, I know... :p) but even though I stopped buying their games, I don't mind that they still have annual releases. I'm glad for the people who still enjoy those games (even though, from my perspective, they have awful taste).

Jarek23
12-28-2015, 09:31 PM
For the amount of historical time periods and locations that I still personally want to visit, it would be a long long time before the series would end. Not to mention all the time periods I get to visit not knowing I wanted to.

I'd be happy with this series going on for a really long time.

Sales will determine that though.

KingL0c4l
12-30-2015, 06:27 AM
The last two games didn't spark my interest. And I'm just starting on Ac2. I'd want them to stop so I could breath in their hard work. The countless hours going over each individual game is going to be a handful.

cawatrooper9
12-30-2015, 03:39 PM
The last two games didn't spark my interest. And I'm just starting on Ac2. I'd want them to stop so I could breath in their hard work. The countless hours going over each individual game is going to be a handful.

You realize that you personally could take a year off, right?

Ziiimmie
11-27-2016, 03:07 PM
honestly, im hoping for a solid 3/4 more titles that include the following:

a Japan/China setting
a concise modern day section in all 3/4 games that tie up loose ends and are fan-fair for the dedicated followers of that part of the game
wow critics and fans a like
and finally finish off with a powerful strong ending

a few handheld/small projects in the middle and a good amount of comics/novels then yeah have it all wrapped up in 4/3 years would be smart

joshoolhorst
11-27-2016, 04:22 PM
One or two more games IMHO I want them just to finish up the Juno arc and have some change in it. I think I am so infested in AC that I just want it to leave me because I can't leave it (well Unity made that almost happen untill I saw the movie trailer and saw everything in it why I love AC)
There is so much AC now and story wise speaking they really need to close things and don't leave things open for the next 6 or 7 years like Eve.
If Ubisoft wants this franchise to life for another ten years I am glad they choice to not bring out a game this year and so other people having fun with it.
This is just way to hard to describe for me personally because I am sooo infested.

RinoTheBouncer
11-27-2016, 10:21 PM
Well in short, NEVER.

But here's the thing. If the game is gonna continue like Unity and Syndicate, as small, self-contained stories with each game adding 0.00000001 to the over-arching narrative, then I really hope they conclude it fast and with a satisfactory conclusion after say 2-3 games. But if we go back to trilogies like Desmond and Ezio, and large arcs where each one focuses on a set of characters and a main plot line then then next arc is also related but focuses on something else after the previous arc told us everything we're expecting to learn from it, then let's go for eternity, because there's unlimited room for innovation.

The series will definitely run out of cool sets if the main focus is just "hey, let's take you to the next well-known set you've read about in your history book". But if there's a strong plot that keeps everyone hooked like a T.V. shot PLUS the great gameplay, characters, mechanics and graphics, then I'm pretty sure any setting will be good enough for people. At least for me. I don't mind modern day, ancient history, near or distant future, renaissance, back to Altair, Ezio and Connor, WWI or WWII. I really don't mind. I mean of course, I'd be the happiest if we get Sumerian, Ancient Egyptian, Modern Day and First Civ. settings before any others, but if there's a strong story like that of Desmond and a game with characters and events that truly keep me interested like I Desmond's Saga, then I totally wouldn't mind wherever they go, because by then, the story will keep me hooked and the setting we head towards will be justified by the story, not the desire to go for the next mainstream location.