PDA

View Full Version : Is it the perfect time to stop the annual release cycle?



VoXngola
12-26-2015, 01:38 PM
Hey folks. I was thinking about the current state of AC and what's been going on around it.

As we all know, there's gonna be tons of stuff for next year. We are getting:

- 2 spin-off games
- 2 comics
- probably a collection of old AC games for current-gen (http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1156526 if you didn't know about it!)
- maybe something about Lydia Frye (if I remember right, Richard Farresse hinted at something in the loomer podcast, correct me if I'm wrong)
- and obviously, the movie of course

Syndicate is a great game. I loved it and it's even in my top 3. But there's no denying that open world games are starting to evolve, while AC still is kind of a "old-style" open world game. Last I heard, it sold more than Unity, atleast when it comes to digital sales, which actually surprised me in a positive way. Still, there wasn't any hype or interest in it. And the AC series is hated a lot nowadays too, with people still complaining about the yearly release schedule.

What if Ubisoft took next year off? They could make a grand comeback in 2017, all things considered. Maybe with a new engine, a new continent as well! Franchise fatigue is getting and more present for a lot of people too. It's the best time if you ask me to just take a break for one year and come back with a bang.

What do you think? Is it a good idea for AC to take a year off this far in? Do you think it's likely?

I just think it would be overkill to release a new game when you look at the line-up to be honest.

ImaginaryRuins
12-26-2015, 01:41 PM
Whether this is the perfect time, not sure, but earlier news concerning Ubisoft's China studio taking heavier part in development already mentioned that annual release is likely to stop, at least in the near future (next year perhaps).

VoXngola
12-26-2015, 01:51 PM
Oh yeah, I forgot to include that too. Thanks for reminding me!
The only negative thing for me would be that I've become accustomed to this practice. So waiting 2 years for the next one would be quite unusual for me but that's just what we'd have to pay I guess, which really isn't much when you think about it.

The movie will quench my thirst anyway. ;)

SixKeys
12-26-2015, 05:49 PM
Oh yeah, I forgot to include that too. Thanks for reminding me!
The only negative thing for me would be that I've become accustomed to this practice. So waiting 2 years for the next one would be quite unusual for me but that's just what we'd have to pay I guess, which really isn't much when you think about it.

The movie will quench my thirst anyway. ;)

It's entirely possible there will be a movie tie-in game next year. Not necessarily one that innovates anything or drives the MD story forward, but if you're dying for an AC game, you'll probably get one.

NAVID4ASSASSIN
12-26-2015, 05:49 PM
nope, i don't want AC to stop annual release and they said before they will continue releasing AC in the next 10 or 20 years, but the thing that makes zero sense to me is why ppl think taking a year off will actually improve the game, because that is not true and different studios are working on each AC game so they don't affect each other,, and the hate that franchise is getting in the past years by so many ppl is not fair because if u compare the two annual titles AC with COD, first one always have a rich history and story to tell every year with more noticeable improvements in every aspect, but COD is they same run and gun every year, but it sales tons of millions of copies because it has multiplayer but AC doesnt, whoever tells if u play the first one u played the other ones too is nothing but a newbie gamer, and at last, stoping at this state will kill the franchise instead and the majority will forget about AC in the next year, plus now that the movie is coming it will be such a good chance to advertise the game even more, so no it is not the right time to stop the franchise at here.

KittyRino
12-26-2015, 06:36 PM
Since there is AC every year,it would be great to pause franchise for 4 years and start making new Prince of Persia game already.
THERE IS AC EVERY YEAR AND THERE IS PEOPLE WHO ARE WAITING 6 YEARS FOR THE NEW PRINCE OF PERSIA GAME!!!!!
so yes it is perfect time to pause AC..

M.ellith.
12-26-2015, 06:57 PM
I love the series, but they seriously should stop making annual releases. I finally want to see a top quality game. I know that they are working on one single game for 2/3/4 years, but looks like it's not enough. Since 2012 the AC games start to be worse than the previous titles (excluding Black Flag, cuz it was one of the best games I've ever played). Ubi should focus more about the story and fixing bugs. Next AC really needs more time in development, especially if they are making a game on the new engine.

Jarek23
12-26-2015, 07:28 PM
These games have 2-3 year dev cycles. Taking a year off will not do a thing.

Sesheenku
12-26-2015, 08:12 PM
It's always the perfect time to stop that frickin' crap.

Sorrosyss
12-26-2015, 08:23 PM
There is no way they won't be releasing a game alongside the movie. Taking longer on a game does not necessarily make it better or more complete. Look at Fallout 4, four years development - literally littered with bugs.

A year is a long time for a franchise these days. Fatigue is often down to a player's tastes, but for everyone who gets tired with the series, a new fan likely comes along. Ubisoft is trying to diversify the brand more and more, and we are getting an almost Marvel type universe now where fans can enjoy comics, books, spin off games and soon a movie - all seemingly interconnected with the games.

Personally I think the annual cycle is fine, as in the case of Syndicate and Unity they were both in development for three years. The issue is that they do not afford enough time to the QA cycles in my view. Brotherhood and Revelations were annual releases, and they were stunning games with few issues. (Hell, Revelations was made in 11 months) Ubisoft can produce a quality game each year, and keep the franchise relevant. They just need to fine tune their timing a little. Whilst the money keeps flowing, things won't change.

crusader_prophet
12-26-2015, 10:29 PM
We already have threads on discussion of annual releases. Please close this thread.

Jarek23
12-26-2015, 10:35 PM
We already have threads on discussion of annual releases. Please close this thread.

You can simply not enter the thread instead of coming in just to be a back seat mod.

Senningiri_GR
12-26-2015, 10:43 PM
Well we have loads of hints that we will have a new game and there is no reason to be asking for non yearly releases. Only that Ubisoft should take their time with no deadlines as there are loads of good features cut from previews games

Actually this is what I think about people talking about annual releases:
https://45.media.tumblr.com/bb0e32c32f39e6bed152caa31c63cc2f/tumblr_mzit19MwPt1toiy4zo1_500.gif
http://25.media.tumblr.com/ab09834512fc5c29a43917f9e711c5fa/tumblr_mfyh9bg0f91qjhya0o1_500.gif

lol

Civona
12-26-2015, 11:18 PM
There is no way they won't be releasing a game alongside the movie. Taking longer on a game does not necessarily make it better or more complete. Look at Fallout 4, four years development - literally littered with bugs.
Read this so you can understand why what you're saying about fallout 4 doesn't apply here: http://www.wired.com/2015/11/fallout-4-bugs/

Unlike Bethesda RPGs, Assassin's Creed is based on a clear and focused idea. You have a character with a specific skillset and abilities, who handles situations in a specific way. The player doesn't get to choose their methods, which means the development team doesn't have to spend years trying to scrape together every possible method a player might choose. Instead the player merely gets to choose how they apply their fixed set of methods.

An Assassins Creed game could use extra time to polish and deepen the existing sandbox and mechanics, as well as better contextualize it within a convincing world. The current yearly churn hurts their ability to do that: even if a game has been in development for 3 years it's needed to keep in mind that it's building off of the game that comes out a year before them, and building things for the game that comes out a year afterward. There needs to be focus, a strong vision, and in general more respect given to how complicated and delicately-balanced the construction of one of these games are.

Call of Duty is a good annualized game. It's good because its gameplay scope is limited to shooting people in the head at medium range. It's a simple concept that has been honed and perfected, and that concept can thus be inserted into various multiplayer maps, campaign environments, and zombie challenge rooms. Simple concepts are suited to annualization, because all you really need to do is create more content.

Assassin's Creed is a high-concept premise. It encapsulates more than a simple action: it's about social systems, varying states of enemy awareness, efficient movement systems and urban navigation, and wrestling with complex philosophies. The fact that it's so much more complex doesn't make it better than a simple corridor shooter, but it means that it's NOT something that anyone has figured out, which means it can't be churned out without exposing its own flaws further.

Assassin's Creed needs a more thoughtful approach. If Ubisoft wants a series they can throw into different time periods without applying any intelligence to it, Far Cry seems like an excellent choice for that.

crusader_prophet
12-27-2015, 02:26 AM
You can simply not enter the thread instead of coming in just to be a back seat mod.

Or I can simply be a back seat mod.

KittyRino
12-27-2015, 11:57 AM
It is perfect time to stop AC every year.
Reason they should take pause for a while,so that other fans get new Prince of Persia game.
AC fans cant wait for 1 year pause but Prince of Persia fans can wait for 6 years now.
There would be no AC without Prince of Persia,so it would be fair to pause AC game and make a new POP game and great one like warrior within.

-AC fans get ac game every year and prince of persia fans must wait for 6 years now.Not fair
-AC forums here have background picture and prince of persia forum dont have backround picture or administrator.Not fair
-Ubisoft facebook page only posts about AC and never about prince of persia.not fair
-AC fans are more important then POP fans-Not fair

So i think that would be fair to pause AC for 5 years and in that time make a new Prince of Persia game.Not only you are waiting for something think about other people too please.
So please UBISOFT pause AC and make us new Prince of Persia game please.

Black_Widow9
12-27-2015, 09:26 PM
Let's stay on topic please and add someone to your ignore list if you no longer wish to see their communications.

@Kitty- I understand what you're saying. I love the Prince of Persia series but..... we have multiple games in development at the same time so taking one away so you can have another isn't how it works. ;)

KittyRino
12-28-2015, 11:47 AM
Let's stay on topic please and add someone to your ignore list if you no longer wish to see their communications.

@Kitty- I understand what you're saying. I love the Prince of Persia series but..... we have multiple games in development at the same time so taking one away so you can have another isn't how it works. ;)

But it would be fair to pause AC for 2 years so that we can get new prince of persia game,i think that would be right thing to do.

cawatrooper9
12-28-2015, 04:21 PM
Call of Duty is a good annualized game.

I had to take a break for a second because of how hard I burst out into laughter.

Seriously, though, you make some decent points- that the games could use some more polish- but where does it end? There has never been a "perfect" game- it doesn't matter how awesome a piece of media is (be it video games, movies, art, comic books, literature, etc) people will find something wrong with it. So, while Ubisoft could spend an extra few weeks working on making NPCs have more flowy hair, and another few weeks working on the accuracy of the sun's trajectory in the sky, another few weeks working on perfecting the shadowing even more... is it really worth it? AC is a huge series, and in a way, they're benefitted far more by having annual releases than by wasting time making games to some imaginary and elusive standard.

Take Fallout 4 again, for instance:

Fallout 3 came out in Fall of 2008, a year after the first AC game and a year before ACII. So, take that into account- are the innovations between Fallout 3 and Fallout 4 as drastic as those between ACII (which still came out a year after FO3) and ACs? We've seen games about several eras, set across the world with multiple protagonists. We've been to Renaissance Italy, Constantinople, fought in the American Revolution, sailed pirate ships, played co op... stopping the annual cycle doesn't guarantee all that much improvement, but it absolutely does rob us of experiences. So no- if you don't want an AC game each year then don't buy one, but don't pretend like the break from an annual cycle will somehow help you get over your bias against the series.

ChrisG91B
12-28-2015, 05:16 PM
I believe it was the perfect time since the end of AC3 or AC4.
And for those wondering on why should they skip a release for a year or two, they obviously focus on quantity over quality and don't really get the purpose of the games.

By having more time to work on a project instead of rushing it out, and bath in money from fanboys like me and you, they will get the chance to reorganize and see what they are doing wrong which results in leaving the majority of the fans dissatisfied!

As much as i love AC, those things going on are way to much to ignore. They only focus on delivering us in different timelines with the same mechanics with no progress to the overall story line (i.e present day), what so ever.
- They became repetitive.
- Way to easy, with the same ridiculous combat mechanics and missions. It's more like a narrative rather than a challenging GAME!
- No respect for the characters. They don't invest all their efforts to make them emotionally connected to you. They are just there as tools to tell the story.
This might sound so cliche but, they managed to do that with Ezio's character so brilliantly. You cared for the present day and for his period at the same time, even though you kind of already new what would result in the end for his timeline in order to get the apple of Eden
- They killed off the present day. I hope you realized that in a 20 hour game or so and 70 euro price tag your overall progress to the real plot of the game was ROUGHLY 3%. We only got a cinematic clip at the end with really bad choreographic structured fight and completely uninteresting villains.

And many many more...
I hope they start listening to their fanbase, and return BACK TO THEIR ROOTS!

cawatrooper9
12-28-2015, 05:43 PM
I'd like to discuss some of these points with you, if you don't mind.



- They became repetitive.

I always find this to be an interesting argument when criticizing a series. People complain about the subjective quality of perceived repetition... but when changes are made, they're either ignored or complained about because they no longer feel like they fit with the series. This is especially ironic in your case because you want them to:

return BACK TO THEIR ROOTS!
Which not only de-prioritizes innovation somewhat, but... well, you realize that the first AC game (the true "roots") is by far the most repetitive, right?



- Way to easy, with the same ridiculous combat mechanics and missions. It's more like a narrative rather than a challenging GAME!
I can see how this can be frustrating for people, and I suppose a difficulty meter wouldn't hurt, but this also just kind of the direction that gaming is going now. Games can be narrative experiences now, and it seems Ubisoft is prioritizing that over the more "gamey" aspects. Since this seems to be a conscious choice, I'm not really sure breaking annualization will fix it. After all, you can give me three years to write a twenty-five page paper on the history of toothpicks, but if I have no intention of doing at all, it doesn't really matter how much time I have, does it?




- No respect for the characters. They don't invest all their efforts to make them emotionally connected to you. They are just there as tools to tell the story.
This might sound so cliche but, they managed to do that with Ezio's character so brilliantly. You cared for the present day and for his period at the same time, even though you kind of already new what would result in the end for his timeline in order to get the apple of Eden
Ezio had three games for himself, and one of them (ACR) was rush in what I believe was just a matter of a few months. If any other character had that many games, we'd feel more of a connection to them, too. Again, I feel this is more of a conscious choice than it is a compromise for time.



- They killed off the present day. I hope you realized that in a 20 hour game or so and 70 euro price tag your overall progress to the real plot of the game was ROUGHLY 3%. We only got a cinematic clip at the end with really bad choreographic structured fight and completely uninteresting villains.

I, too, miss the present day. But I wouldn't say it's been "killed off" rather than simply "not utilized". No bridges have been burned- even Desmond can come to life (with all the sci-fi nonsense in MD, why not?)
In fact, as discussed here (http://forums.ubi.com/showthread.php/1361203-Jack-the-Ripper-DLC-Intel-and-Modern-Day-Potential-Spoilers), it looks like the future might be bright for a more robust MD section in future games.

So yeah, the past few games might not have lived up to your expectations, and that's fine. But if I were you, I'd be campaigning for improving the series to your expectations, rather than pessimistically hoping for its death.

NAVID4ASSASSIN
12-28-2015, 05:56 PM
I seriously can't agree more with all of the posts cawatrooper9 sends on these forums, whenever i read his post it putts a smile on my face of how he defends the series i love so much to death, thanks it feels good to see some ppl show love to AC despite of all of these unfair hates around this franchise these days, i hope AC never ends, not atleast till when im into gaming life.

cawatrooper9
12-28-2015, 06:11 PM
I seriously can't agree more with all of the posts cawatrooper9 sends on these forums, whenever i read his post it putts a smile on my face of how he defends the series i love so much to death, thanks it feels good to see some ppl show love to AC despite of all of these unfair hates around this franchise these days, i hope AC never ends, not atleast till when im into gaming life.

Wow, thanks! I'm honestly really flattered! :)

To be fair, I don't see myself as defending the series- I don't think it needs defending, for the most part. Plus, I do realize that there are areas where the series could improve, and I have no problem with people pointing those out and making constructive suggestions on how the improvements could be implemented- heck, I do it pretty regularly, too.

However, I do think that some of the fallacious and biased claims made so often against the series on here (such as the anti-annualization peanut gallery) need to be debunked, so I may be guilty of doing that every now and then. :p

KittyRino
12-28-2015, 06:17 PM
Spoiled AC fans.

GunnerGalactico
12-28-2015, 06:25 PM
It's true that we had many threads about annual releases, time after time people keep urging Ubi to stop the annualization and we keep getting an AC game every year. I definitely agree with Sorrosyss on the bit about taking a break being the person's choice. If people are burned out or feeling the franchise fatigue, then it is up to them to decide if they want to take a break from AC or not. TBH, I've never purchased an AC game fresh off release since AC4. I've always purchased them 4-7 months after its release, as this gives me a chance to play games from other franchises. When I'm tired of playing them, I then go back to AC. ;)

KittyRino
12-28-2015, 06:27 PM
It's true that we had many threads about annual releases, time after time people keep urging Ubi to stop the annualization and we keep getting an AC game every year. I definitely agree with Sorrosyss on the bit about taking a break being the person's choice. If people are burned out or feeling the franchise fatigue, then it is up to them to decide if they want to take a break from AC or not. TBH, I've never purchased an AC game fresh off release since AC4. I've always purchased them 4-7 months after its release, as this gives me a chance to play games from other franchises. When I'm tired of playing other games, I then go back to AC. ;)

That is like when you put chocolate in front of children and hope that they will not take it. lmao

GunnerGalactico
12-28-2015, 06:29 PM
That is like when you put chocolate in front of children and hope that they will not take it. lmao

You'd be surprised to know that children don't take chocolate when they have a stomach ache. :rolleyes:

KittyRino
12-28-2015, 06:35 PM
But next day thay they would be fine and take the chocolate and I hope they choke on it little AC demons that dont want to give me prince of persia

GunnerGalactico
12-28-2015, 06:38 PM
Careful... the mods are watching us. :cool:

cawatrooper9
12-28-2015, 06:41 PM
But next day thay they would be fine and take the chocolate and I hope they choke on it little AC demons that dont want to give me prince of persia

Oh man, screenshotting to add to a cringeworthy compilation on Imgur. :rolleyes:

This is adorable!

ChrisG91B
12-28-2015, 07:08 PM
I'd like to discuss some of these points with you, if you don't mind.


I always find this to be an interesting argument when criticizing a series. People complain about the subjective quality of perceived repetition... but when changes are made, they're either ignored or complained about because they no longer feel like they fit with the series. This is especially ironic in your case because you want them to:

Which not only de-prioritizes innovation somewhat, but... well, you realize that the first AC game (the true "roots") is by far the most repetitive, right?


I can see how this can be frustrating for people, and I suppose a difficulty meter wouldn't hurt, but this also just kind of the direction that gaming is going now. Games can be narrative experiences now, and it seems Ubisoft is prioritizing that over the more "gamey" aspects. Since this seems to be a conscious choice, I'm not really sure breaking annualization will fix it. After all, you can give me three years to write a twenty-five page paper on the history of toothpicks, but if I have no intention of doing at all, it doesn't really matter how much time I have, does it?



Ezio had three games for himself, and one of them (ACR) was rush in what I believe was just a matter of a few months. If any other character had that many games, we'd feel more of a connection to them, too. Again, I feel this is more of a conscious choice than it is a compromise for time.


I, too, miss the present day. But I wouldn't say it's been "killed off" rather than simply "not utilized". No bridges have been burned- even Desmond can come to life (with all the sci-fi nonsense in MD, why not?)
In fact, as discussed here (http://forums.ubi.com/showthread.php/1361203-Jack-the-Ripper-DLC-Intel-and-Modern-Day-Potential-Spoilers), it looks like the future might be bright for a more robust MD section in future games.

So yeah, the past few games might not have lived up to your expectations, and that's fine. But if I were you, I'd be campaigning for improving the series to your expectations, rather than pessimistically hoping for its death.

Woah i am glad that someone took this seriously. :D

First of all, i feel the urgent need to clarify that in no way my argument wishes to disdain the franchise and certainly NOT demand the death of this series. I love this as much as you do and who knows even more. But also by defending it, which leaves things as they are while working in the same pattern, doesn't necessarily mean that will lead to better days. That applies in mostly everything in our lives.

By saying ''return to their roots'', there are many aspects of the game (apart from repetitiveness) that first touched us which you seem to have forgotten, or simply chose to ignore for the sake of the argument.
- Story
- Setting
- Characters
- Soundtrack
- Narrative
And is certainly not repetitiveness which everyone loved this game in the first place. And hence, by returning to their roots and seeing that ''repetitiveness'' has been there since the day they started might make them take the decision to finally reducing it. That's what innovation is all about.

As for the narratives in gaming. Your are defending Ubisoft for not making a challenging game. That's absurd to say the least.
Take ''The last of us'' for example. It serves the player with a fluid and cohesive story telling as well as a challenging environment. What's so bad in mixing both? That's what games are all about in the first place!
In many games the difficulty is optional. Another addition that could be added to the AC games.

You are right, Ezio had 3 games which gave Ubisoft the opportunity for a better character development. But ask yourself, what started all this?
Assassin's creed 2 was the starting point. Everyone loved it without the game itself having any relation to Ezio prior to AC2. Ezio didn't have any character development PRIOR to AC2, but guess what? When someone reminisces the good old days of AC, returns back to AC2.
And they managed to do that, with just one game. They fixed many stuff from AC1 and they won people's trust by just one game later on which introduced a new character and setting.

Its not the number of games you release to make the player get used to the character. But it's HOW you do it.

As for the present day, you got what i am trying to say, and i am also wishing for a brighter future.
And by saying they killed it off. Think about how it started. In a way we had a say in the present day, by experiencing our character on our own. Now we see the events from a camera.
Yeap, we are the main character and yet we see everything revolve around us by just watching. We are an insignificant initiate used as tool by our ''friends'' which we don't feel any emotional connection whatsoever. And i am pretty sure you felt it too, like any other who praises this franchise.

I didn't post here nor answer to your post just for the sake of the argument. I posted my opinion like everyone else that wishes no less that then positive development of AC.

cawatrooper9
12-28-2015, 09:51 PM
First of all, i feel the urgent need to clarify that in no way my argument wishes to disdain the franchise and certainly NOT demand the death of this series. I love this as much as you do and who knows even more. But also by defending it, which leaves things as they are while working in the same pattern, doesn't necessarily mean that will lead to better days. That applies in mostly everything in our lives.

Fair enough, sorry for getting that confused. It's just that, given the nature of this thread, you might see where I came to that conclusion.


By saying ''return to their roots'', there are many aspects of the game (apart from repetitiveness) that first touched us which you seem to have forgotten, or simply chose to ignore for the sake of the argument.
- Story
- Setting
- Characters
- Soundtrack
- Narrative
And is certainly not repetitiveness which everyone loved this game in the first place. And hence, by returning to their roots and seeing that ''repetitiveness'' has been there since the day they started might make them take the decision to finally reducing it. That's what innovation is all about.

Sure. But unless I've missed something, Syndicate lacks none of these...



As for the narratives in gaming. Your are defending Ubisoft for not making a challenging game. That's absurd to say the least.
Again, I disagree. You're taking your own narrow definition of gaming and trying to apply it across the board.
As I pointed out, games are not what they used to be. Where once beating a game was actually a pretty unique feat (look at stuff like Contra, for instance), not all games are like that anymore. Sure, there are still games defined by their difficulty- Dark Souls, for example- but you unfortunately do not get to define how difficult the devs decide to make their game.



Take ''The last of us'' for example. It serves the player with a fluid and cohesive story telling as well as a challenging environment. What's so bad in mixing both? That's what games are all about in the first place!
In many games the difficulty is optional. Another addition that could be added to the AC games.
Again, I don't think there's anything wrong with it at all- I'm just pointing out that the developers have apparently made a conscious decision to avoid this, as evidenced by the fact that no single game in the series has had varying difficulty levels.

The optional objectives do add a sort of personal challenge that can actually make missions a lot harder, if pursued. I know that this does not appeal to everyone- but as is the case in life. The series is not tailored to people on an individual basis.


You are right, Ezio had 3 games which gave Ubisoft the opportunity for a better character development. But ask yourself, what started all this?
Assassin's creed 2 was the starting point. Everyone loved it without the game itself having any relation to Ezio prior to AC2. Ezio didn't have any character development PRIOR to AC2, but guess what? When someone reminisces the good old days of AC, returns back to AC2.
And they managed to do that, with just one game. They fixed many stuff from AC1 and they won people's trust by just one game later on which introduced a new character and setting.


Its not the number of games you release to make the player get used to the character. But it's HOW you do it.


There was actually a discussion on this recently on these forums, but I'm far too lazy to find it right now (welcome to the forums, by the way! I should have said that earlier! :D)
Anywho, someone in it brought up a good point: if Ezio's story had stopped after the events in the vault under the Vatican, would he be nearly as well liked as he is now? Or would he be just another charismatic male Assassin in a long line of them?

Let's face it, Ezio got three games- sure he's a decent enough character, but he also has so much stopping power because players were exposed to him for about 3X as long. That's bound to make him the most famous (plus, add in the nostalgia factor, since he was only the second Assassin in the series).

No one else has even gotten a chance. No one else has even gotten a second game.
Do people want a protagonist to have a second game? Sure, many do! Connor gets a ton of requests on here. As do Shay, Arno, the Frye twins... basically any of the past protagonists have a following that would love to see a sequel, and most protagonists are popular enough that the game would sell well if it looked promising. As to why Ubisoft ignores this, I don't know- but I can assure you it has absolutely nothing to do with annualization.




As for the present day, you got what i am trying to say, and i am also wishing for a brighter future.
And by saying they killed it off. Think about how it started. In a way we had a say in the present day, by experiencing our character on our own. Now we see the events from a camera.
Yeap, we are the main character and yet we see everything revolve around us by just watching. We are an insignificant initiate used as tool by our ''friends'' which we don't feel any emotional connection whatsoever. And i am pretty sure you felt it too, like any other who praises this franchise.
I'd mostly agree. I think Syndicate's MD was at least much better than Unity's, but it obviously left a lot to be desired. I guess all we can hope for is better MD in the future (and 2016 does indeed look promising!)


I didn't post here nor answer to your post just for the sake of the argument. I posted my opinion like everyone else that wishes no less that then positive development of AC.
Absolutely, and as a member of this community, we truly do appreciate any sort of discussion here! It's great to see people passionate about the series, and forgive me if I read too much into the title of the thread regarding your comment. While I may disagree with some of your criticisms and you may disagree with some of mine, I'm sure we have the same goal in mind- a continually improving series of future Assassins Creed games.