PDA

View Full Version : Will you be happy if the next AC is online only like The Division?



RVSage
03-14-2016, 12:35 AM
The division is primarily a mutiplayer game, yes but it has a campaign, that is playable solo. But it requires you online at all times, which may not work with everyone.

What will be your reaction if AC is made online only, like the Division

Personally , I think they should avoid it being online only, yes it can have online elements, but forcing online for a traditional single player game would not work.

rob1990312
03-14-2016, 01:26 AM
if it doesnt affect the solo campaign it wouldnt bother me as long as my connection remained strong but it would be a problem for people with connection issues

ERICATHERINE
03-14-2016, 04:07 PM
if it doesnt affect the solo campaign it wouldnt bother me as long as my connection remained strong but it would be a problem for people with connection issues

I second this. ^-^

cawatrooper9
03-14-2016, 04:13 PM
One of the big factors with Unity's graphical issues was that the game was constantly trying to connect to online, and that took a lot of processing power away from other things. So, historically, this kind of thing has been a train wreck for the series.

Assassins Creed is a single player game. I'm all for innovation, but I stand pretty firm in my insistence that the series not try to reinvent that particular aspect of it. Online content on the side, like the competitive mode in earlier games? Sure, great. Co op? Fine, as long as it doesn't affect the final single player product negatively again. But to base an entire game around multiplayer again just seems like a mistake.

VestigialLlama4
03-14-2016, 05:27 PM
Don't see what special advantages always online will give to AC..

ERICATHERINE
03-14-2016, 05:59 PM
Don't see what special advantages always online will give to AC..

Maybe the possibility of always playing the game in coop if we want. ^-^

Locopells
03-14-2016, 07:00 PM
That's a big 'hell no' - cawatrooper9 states it best.

Jessigirl2013
03-14-2016, 07:50 PM
The division is primarily a mutiplayer game, yes but it has a campaign, that is playable solo. But it requires you online at all times, which may not work with everyone.

What will be your reaction if AC is made online only, like the Division

Personally , I think they should avoid it being online only, yes it can have online elements, but forcing online for a traditional single player game would not work.

Blah....
I agree.
I don't imagine AC being a online game in the way that the division is though...

JWRK
03-15-2016, 12:32 PM
AC2 was always online at launch no ?

Locopells
03-15-2016, 01:39 PM
It required a online connection for DRM reasons yes, but the gameplay was offline.

dxsxhxcx
03-15-2016, 04:00 PM
There's no reason for AC to be always online, every single mechanic built around that (despite Multiplayer that was its own thing) added little to the table, AC' strenght lies (or used to, given its current state) in its story, an always online requirement won't improve this aspect of the game.

Given Ubisoft's recent interviews I'm certain that they'll try though, when they do I hope the stock market shows them, once again, that it's time to stop messing around and fix what really needs to be fixed.

adster01
03-15-2016, 04:51 PM
100000000000% will not buy if online only , i refuse to buy online only games

Sushiglutton
03-15-2016, 05:16 PM
Yeah if online only it's finally over.

ERICATHERINE
03-15-2016, 05:45 PM
AC' strenght lies (or used to, given its current state) in its story...

Speak for yourself. I like every ac story, may it be the one about md or the past days. In fact, ac syndicate is in my top 2 with ac iii in first place. ^-^

fabionasimento
03-15-2016, 08:40 PM
If that happens it is the end of AC for me

dxsxhxcx
03-15-2016, 09:56 PM
Speak for yourself. I like every ac story, may it be the one about md or the past days. In fact, ac syndicate is in my top 2 with ac iii in first place. ^-^

I've never claimed to speak for anyone other than myself. :)

Ureh
03-15-2016, 11:09 PM
Being online like the Division means that the gameplay will be tailored for a multiplayer experience. They'd have to make the world big enough to fit several players which sounds like it's just going to carry a lot of baggage that's designed to occupy/distract those groups of players. While combat will be scaled based on number of players (and other stuff like difficulty, gear, etc) the Division's 3rd pov shooter combat seemed like it was meant for a party based on enemy health, your characters damage, and mission layout (the only 3rd pov shooter I've played that I can compare to Division is the Uncharted series and the latter felt more geared towards single player because you can kill enemies with one headshot, the world is much more linear, and Drake is confirmed to be crazy). For a lot of players I'm guessing they'll feel like Division isn't worth playing if you don't have friends or allies in your party. Not to mention, Online-Only games aren't easily accessed if the community languishes (I've only heard of a handful of console rpgs that survive even several months after release). Most people can probably agree that stealth gameplay should be huge in every AC, and if there's one thing I know about pub games in the Wolfpacks and ACU co-op is that most people aren't stealthy and they rarely use the rooftops (instead go straight to combat or make a brief attempt at stealth but get instantly detected). Obviously everyone will have different preferences, what some people look for in a game is the exact opposite of what others want. I wouldn't be surprised if a huge number of people wouldn't mind AC having those kind of elements. Story and main characters should not be taking a backseat in the AC universe as those are a major part of what kept most of the people coming back.

Also the leveling up, grindy gameplay may not be appropriate for AC, where new gear and abilities are usually introduced in the narrative. I'm not sure if this is true but I've watched around 10 Division gameplay vids (each were 30 min to 1 hr) and most of the players agree that the good gear is more common in the Dark Zone (ie PvP)?

Still I might not be innovative and creative enough to imagine an AC game with a world that feels like it can be truly incorporate all those rpg stuffs and have a bunch of players and still have a neat narrative. I guess I could see certain settings being able to do that? Let's say there's a game set in a period with more ranged weapons, horses, fewer buildings, wide open spaces... maybe then. I dunno... I just wish them the best of luck on whatever they're working on atm.

ERICATHERINE
03-16-2016, 03:03 AM
I've never claimed to speak for anyone other than myself. :)

And you didn't claimed to speak for yourself eather in that paragraph. :p


There's no reason for AC to be always online, every single mechanic built around that (despite Multiplayer that was its own thing) added little to the table, AC' strenght lies (or used to, given its current state) in its story, an always online requirement won't improve this aspect of the game.

SixKeys
03-16-2016, 12:09 PM
AC2 was always online at launch no ?


It required a online connection for DRM reasons yes, but the gameplay was offline.

Yes and no. The online component created a lot of frustrations because the save system depended on it. You could lose a lot of progress if the Ubi servers suddenly went down or you lost your connection. They later fixed it after people complained enough.

That reason alone is enough for me to say 'no' to always online. Ubi don't always seem to test new features properly before rolling them out, online being one of them.

ERICATHERINE
03-16-2016, 06:54 PM
They later fixed it after people complained enough.

I think it's the first time I readed that people complained about it. XD

Jessigirl2013
03-17-2016, 03:04 PM
I think it's the first time I readed that people complained about it. XD

Trust me ... People wouldn't shut up about it.:rolleyes:

ERICATHERINE
03-17-2016, 04:46 PM
Trust me ... People wouldn't shut up about it.:rolleyes:

As much as that? It's hard to understand when comparing to how much people adore ac ii above every other ac games, these days. ^-^

Sushiglutton
03-17-2016, 05:50 PM
Being online like the Division means that the gameplay will be tailored for a multiplayer experience. They'd have to make the world big enough to fit several players which sounds like it's just going to carry a lot of baggage that's designed to occupy/distract those groups of players. While combat will be scaled based on number of players (and other stuff like difficulty, gear, etc) the Division's 3rd pov shooter combat seemed like it was meant for a party based on enemy health, your characters damage, and mission layout (the only 3rd pov shooter I've played that I can compare to Division is the Uncharted series and the latter felt more geared towards single player because you can kill enemies with one headshot, the world is much more linear, and Drake is confirmed to be crazy). For a lot of players I'm guessing they'll feel like Division isn't worth playing if you don't have friends or allies in your party. Not to mention, Online-Only games aren't easily accessed if the community languishes (I've only heard of a handful of console rpgs that survive even several months after release). Most people can probably agree that stealth gameplay should be huge in every AC, and if there's one thing I know about pub games in the Wolfpacks and ACU co-op is that most people aren't stealthy and they rarely use the rooftops (instead go straight to combat or make a brief attempt at stealth but get instantly detected). Obviously everyone will have different preferences, what some people look for in a game is the exact opposite of what others want. I wouldn't be surprised if a huge number of people wouldn't mind AC having those kind of elements. Story and main characters should not be taking a backseat in the AC universe as those are a major part of what kept most of the people coming back.

Also the leveling up, grindy gameplay may not be appropriate for AC, where new gear and abilities are usually introduced in the narrative. I'm not sure if this is true but I've watched around 10 Division gameplay vids (each were 30 min to 1 hr) and most of the players agree that the good gear is more common in the Dark Zone (ie PvP)?

Still I might not be innovative and creative enough to imagine an AC game with a world that feels like it can be truly incorporate all those rpg stuffs and have a bunch of players and still have a neat narrative. I guess I could see certain settings being able to do that? Let's say there's a game set in a period with more ranged weapons, horses, fewer buildings, wide open spaces... maybe then. I dunno... I just wish them the best of luck on whatever they're working on atm.


This post is great and spells out the inherent problems with online focused games. They are designed around a hamster wheel in which you do repetetive standard stuff, collect loot, level up, repeat over and over and over. What I want for AC is a narratvie heavy game with unique and handcrafted experiences based on oh so sweet core mechanics.

Jessigirl2013
03-18-2016, 02:07 PM
As much as that? It's hard to understand when comparing to how much people adore ac ii above every other ac games, these days. ^-^

Yeah, perhaps that's why people made such a big deal out of it.
ACII was a fan favourite by far so the fact than people were restricted to always be online this angered fans who didn't have a stable connection as it would just boot them out the game.

ERICATHERINE
03-18-2016, 03:29 PM
Yeah, perhaps that's why people made such a big deal out of it.
ACII was a fan favourite by far so the fact than people were restricted to always be online this angered fans who didn't have a stable connection as it would just boot them out the game.

Well for me, it's another reason why ac 3 is the best Assassin's creed game made so far. I actualy think that, in a list with every ac games I played, ac ii is in the middle or lower with ac iii at the top followed by syndicate. In that list I also count liberation hd, which is lower than ac ii and ac rogue, which is higher than ac ii. ^-^

Jessigirl2013
03-19-2016, 01:19 PM
Well for me, it's another reason why ac 3 is the best Assassin's creed game made so far. I actualy think that, in a list with every ac games I played, ac ii is in the middle or lower with ac iii at the top followed by syndicate. In that list I also count liberation hd, which is lower than ac ii and ac rogue, which is higher than ac ii. ^-^

Haha cool list.:rolleyes:

I'm with you on ACIII being the best, the only thing that annoys me is the ending and how badly BF followed it up

ERICATHERINE
03-19-2016, 05:42 PM
Haha cool list.:rolleyes:

I'm with you on ACIII being the best, the only thing that annoys me is the ending and how badly BF followed it up

The reason why I put aciii at the top is that (what follows is my opinion) it not only have the best story in the past. It also ave the best md story/gamplay, we were in 3rd person, I really like the final encounter with Haytam AND the one with Charles Lee, for some exemple. ^-^

Jessigirl2013
03-20-2016, 03:16 PM
The reason why I put aciii at the top is that (what follows is my opinion) it not only have the best story in the past. It also ave the best md story/gamplay, we were in 3rd person, I really like the final encounter with Haytam AND the one with Charles Lee, for some exemple. ^-^

I agree the MD parts are one of the reasons its my favourite too.:rolleyes:

I loved how Haytham was introduced, not only that but his character is so good IMO we need more of him in newer games.:rolleyes:

RVSage
03-21-2016, 08:49 AM
I agree the MD parts are one of the reasons its my favourite too.:rolleyes:

I loved how Haytham was introduced, not only that but his character is so good IMO we need more of him in newer games.:rolleyes:

A huge Haytham fan , as well. I loved AC3 plainly because of him, his voice acting was amazing, Adrain Hough nails it. In fact he read the lines of Forsaken , for fans

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FxUCr3eGRqo

ERICATHERINE
03-21-2016, 03:41 PM
A huge Haytham fan , as well. I loved AC3 plainly because of him, his voice acting was amazing, Adrain Hough nails it. In fact he read the lines of Forsaken , for fans

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FxUCr3eGRqo

Hisn't that the Providence (the name of the ship Haytam used to go to America for the first time)? If so, from what I know of that scene, it's not Haytam's journal. It's the book he stole for Reginald Birch, which is about first civ things.

Also, yes, he did a great job, but I think Haytam's french voice was really good too. ^-^

Edit. Forgot to say. When talking about the final encounter with Haytam, I was talking about it that way. ^-^


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OxYeZ0J6yGc

RinoTheBouncer
03-21-2016, 05:10 PM
Not at all.
I think people have to understand that online and multiplayer isn't meant for every game. Some games are meant to be story driven, some games are meant to be a single player-focused experience, giving all the attention to immersive gameplay, and story-telling through cutscenes and well-acted dialogues, recognizable and fully crafted characters and a gradually unfolding atmosphere. Multiplayer and online destroy all that.

The Division is amazing as it is, because it's meant to be that way. It's meant to tell a story, but it's not really all about the story. It's mainly about exploring New York, fighting gangs, leveling up and playing with friends. Levels are amazingly detailed and even side-missions matter greatly, the progression factor and leveling up that require you to play both main and side missions is wonderful, but it's just not Assassin's Creed.

Watch Dogs can use that formula, even though I hope to goes for a more story-driven approach about hacking and conspiracies, more like a modern day AC, than a GTA, but it could borrow the massive world and variety in mission types and designs.

However, an AC game giving us a customizable character with random cutscenes, big levels and little story value with lots of online elements and compulsory connectivity to other players and to the internet gets a big no from me.

I believe single player gaming will never be old-fashioned and it will forever be something special and my main focus when buying a new game. I have no internet connection issues, but I want a game where I can play by myself, as I really don't want to invite anyone else to play, nor do I care about leaderboards and comparing who's doing it better or worse than I am, and I just reject this whole formula for a game like Assassin's Creed.

ERICATHERINE
03-21-2016, 06:04 PM
I'm actually between the 2.

I remeber, back before ac unity. I had a great idea about md. I'm against multiplayer in the past days, but in md, it could work, with my idea.

First of all, we would customize our md characters for not seeing around 10 times the same person. We would control this protag in 3rd person.
Then we could be in one of the Assassins headquarters.
In it we could do things with our friends like exploring the headquarters and finding collectibles.
We could then do missions with or without other people which could give us access to other headquarters or to other part of the old ones. These 2 rewards would give us access to other collectibles. We could have conversations with md characters we already saw in video games like William Miles, Shaun Hastings or Galina Voronina for some exemples or with characters that were only seen in lore from acinitiates.com, like Gavin, Eric Cooper others.
For us to change HQ we ccould have some choices. We use the Alta´r-iito get some conversation and be able to explre the ship (to arrive to the destination we could just go to sleep) or if we don't want to, we could just use a plane like William Rebecca and Shaun did along with Desmond (still in a coma) to go to the grand Temple in America from (I think) Italia.
We could do a mission we already did just like in ac iii, but this time, with a purpose. Help our friend. We could still do it alone, just for fun.
Also, we every md collectibles obtain would give us lore base info in a database. This could make us reconstruct the acinitiates.com database. This could also bring other conversations.
There would also be the return of the email.
In some mission we could fight Templars, in others we could fight the instrument of the first will and in others we could save Assassins from Templars like the sgma team.

Sometimes I wonder if bungie took some of my ideas to create the reef and the tower in destiny.

Isn't it better than what we had in unity and syndicate. ^-^

Mr.GoodKall
03-22-2016, 10:29 PM
NO WAY, Hells nahhh... that will kill the ac franchise for me.. #JustSayNo

ERICATHERINE
03-22-2016, 11:13 PM
NO WAY, Hells nahhh... that will kill the ac franchise for me.. #JustSayNo

Wait, are you answering to the main question of this thread or to my md comment, when saying that? If you answer to my comment, you're the only person who said you liked unity's md more than that from the first time I expressed this idea to now. Unless you just don't like md and are of those people who want it to disapear. Like I said my idea would exclude the need to be connected at all time since we would not need that for the past days. Only for md. :confused:

VernalBreak
03-24-2016, 04:57 AM
It would completely ruin AC. Unity had a great multiplayer but I love Assassin's Creed's open world design that is playable SOLO.