PDA

View Full Version : Unity vs Syndicate



dimbismp
10-15-2016, 12:29 AM
I think that the other thread was relatively successful,so i wager that we could have another one.

So, ACU vs ACS...

http://www.readyuplive.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/20141112123447-acu_31.jpg

VS

https://cdn.destructoid.com//ul/315655-AAC1.jpg

In retrospect, i think that Unity is better Syndicate. Both have flawed stories, but i'd take a grounded story over an AC comedy every day of the week. Stealth and Parkour are almost the same,but i think that they were more meaningful and offered more opportunities to the player in ACU. Also,ACU's hard combat is obviously better than ACS's cheap copy of the Arkham formula. Paris and London are both great,but i prefer Paris. So:

Story and Characters: ACU > ACS
Gameplay: ACU >= ACS
Open World ACS > ACU
Setting: ACU > ACS
Winner:ACU




(I actually created the exact same thread many months ago.But this is kinda different,as hopefully the fans can compare the games with a more clear mind. Plus, if this thread gets attention too,this may end up becoming a mini AC-Tournament)

TheHumanTowel
10-15-2016, 01:49 AM
Having played them both only recently I much prefer Unity. I've never been so bored playing an AC game than I have playing Syndicate. A directionless limp story with two characters with no motivation. The most repetitive and one-note side-content since AC1. The inclusion of the grappling hook and carriages make traversing London a chore, can't parkour for more than 10 seconds. I gave up halfway through which I've never done before for an AC game.

Unity on the other hand gains points for actually trying and having some ambition. And two years on with most of the glaring performance issues fixed I think it's actually a pretty great AC game. I've not finished it but the story's a bit weak. After a great opening it loses steam with Arno just assassinating whoever and forgetting about building on the character relationships established. The setting is incredible though. Paris feels so vibrant and alive. I don't understand how London in ACS feels so lifeless in comparison given it was released a year later. I really enjoyed the gameplay improvements and AC finally having something resembling a proper stealth system.

Overall I'd say Syndicate is the worst game in the series while Unity is one of the better ones.

SixKeys
10-15-2016, 03:16 AM
I'll have to go with Syndicate, though it's not a major gap. Both have some solid assassinations. Unity's graphics blow Syndicate out of the water, but they also contributed to the performance issues. People complained about Paris stories, but Syndicate has a larger amount of crappy side quests, including all of D!ckens and Darwin and most of Marx. All of the DLC was worse than Unity's (not that Dead Kings was great either). Unity has by far better customization and no messing about with stupid invisibility skills and whatnot. The amount of walled-off content was really obnoxious at launch which left a bad taste, but by now most of it has been fixed (though hunting for sync points during co-op is still annoying). Unity did many things right gameplay-wise, especially in the stealth department. It's definitely the more challenging game.

What makes Syndicate the winner for me is that I simply had more fun with missions like fight clubs, boroughs, kidnappings (yes, I liked them) and child liberations. The activities in London have a better loop than Unity's since you have at least some plot-related reason to keep doing the same activities. Arno never seemed connected to the people's struggles during the Revolution so we didn't really have a reason to care (although heists were awesome). Victorian era is my favorite historical time period so I felt more connected to London than Paris. The story wins over Unity by having more entertaining protagonists and not taking itself super seriously. I absolutely love playing as Evie. Modern day was slightly better than Unity's, at least we got to check in with Rebecca and Shaun. And the time rift was more interesting this time since we got to play as Lydia for an extended period of time and freely explore WW1 London.

RVSage
10-15-2016, 08:18 PM
Let us see


AC Unity

Pros

1. Magnificent graphics, Not beaten in my perspective by any other open world game(Witcher 3 comes really close)

2. Detailed world, with interiors and horrendous number of NPCs, a world that feels alive

3. Fantastic combat mechanics , that needed some fin tuning for speed

4. Loads of customisation, I for one loved the Co-op heists and missions (That parkour course in one of the co-ops my all time favorite Parkour missions) . Yes they were buggy initially

Cons

1. Even today people troll the fail in performance and glitches, half baked product

2. A generic love/revenge/redemption story with under developed characters

3. No progression in over reaching plot

4. DLC was below par


AC Syndicate

1. Stable and scalable performance, less bugs

2. Beautiful world, with more mechanics like carriages, trains.

3. Memorable side missions (Not stories of ****ens, Darwin) like train heist, defense, fight clubs

4. Dual characters, a female lead who was well written , who was not objectified. Memorable Character

5. Personally, I liked the JTR DLC, it was not perfect, certainly rate it better than dead kings

6. More progression in over reaching plot

Cons

1. Less impressive graphics, NPCs, interiors compared to unity.

2. Story not a big improvement over Unity

3. The main Male character, was not as strong as the Female lead, over brash and not funny, even if he was intended to be the same

4. Side stories , were absolute waste Darwin, ****ens, Marx, Elizabeth) were all wasted opportunities.



Overall as a product ACS wins, but only marginally

Pandassin
10-15-2016, 09:23 PM
I prefer Syndicate. The only things about Unity that win me over are the graphics and co-op (and also that cake easter egg :P)

The only thing that bugs me about Syndicate is the removal of co-op. It would have worked out a lot better since one player could be Jacob, the other Evie. Considering that the other twin just sits in the train, it would have been cool if they could be taken over by another player and actually be useful.

Farlander1991
10-16-2016, 05:18 PM
Just like in case with Revelations vs. Brotherhood, as much as it pains me... I have to go with Syndicate.

Don't get me wrong:
ACU core mechanics > ACS core mechanics
Paris > London
ACU Crowds > ACS Crowds
ACU Graphics > ACS Graphics
ACU tone > ACS tone

That said, as I pointed out in my 'Disunity of Unity' blog post, Unity has all the great elements, but it puts them together into a very cohesive mess.

ACS, on the other hand, while may not have all the great elements, it puts them all into one very enjoyable (though to be honest, not as cohesive as Brotherhood sometimes) experience.

So I would say ACS is the better game, even though I do have a lot of soft spots for Unity and personally like a lot of the things that it does and that I consider better than Syndicate.

And, personally speaking, I would say that ACS is my top 3 AC game (sharing its spot with Brotherhood), so it's AC4 > AC1 > ACS/ACB

Xstantin
10-17-2016, 01:51 AM
Unity wins for me

Unity
Story wise, graphics, art direction (better characters designs imo), combat, movement

Syndicate
Soundtrack, slightly better modern day, cleaner hud iirc, and that's about it for me :/

cawatrooper9
10-17-2016, 03:55 PM
Syndicate, easy choice for me.

I had fun playing Syndicate. So much of Unity just seems like a frustrating chore.

Also, sure, Unity had better graphics- but the city was actually pretty boring. With its supposedly worse graphics, Syndicate blew me away. I've spent hours messing around on the Thames, and it's still one of my favorite locations in any AC game- and even then, other sections of the city were interesting and unique.

AnimusLover
10-17-2016, 06:01 PM
I've played both and recently did a playthrough again to see if my feelings remained the same. Without a doubt, Syndicate is better.

Syndicate is what Unity is trying to be. I won't talk about Unity's bugs as I feel that often distracts people from the real problem with the game which is that it's incredibly dull.

Even worse is when you try to go from Syndicate to Unity. Man, is it tough playing a lesser version of a later instalment. Syndicate does everything better with perhaps the exception of parkour which I find a bit too automated and floaty. I also appreciate that Unity is more challenging. But take, for instance, the murder mysteries/dreadful crimes - both the same concept but the way it is presenfed to us in the two games is very different. Syndicate puts more effort in the characters' motives, their methods and resources and the way Arthur Doyle talks to you after every one just makes it feel more real. They are each so memorable and meticulously constructed. It's the most heart and soul this franchise has shown in years. The resolution of it is also very clever.

The city of Paris may be graphically more impressive as are the facial models and motion capture but the actual city itself is far less memorable than London. All the buildings in Unity look the same. The world is also lifeless - so many NPCs on screen at one time all essentially doing the same thing, they never feel real. Syndicate's NPCs were more varied in behaviour whether they were working, playing songs, arguing.

Unity's map is horrible - cluttered from the moment you open it with meaningless collectibles, most of which are locked behind locks which are locked behind skill points which are locked behind campaign missions and multiplayer... The game has no clue how to come up with creative ways to obtain those collectibles so it just locks them under the false pretence of being 'hard'. Syndicate has far less collectibles because it challenges you to come up with other ways to make money through its actual missions which are more fun to play.

The Nomad app. Oh my God. That is the worst idea in any AC game, hands down, and when you find out the reward for completing such pointlessly long and meaningless tasks is just one star level missions it really makes you question how/why some of these devs have jobs. Funny fact: on my second playthrough all the nomad missions were automatically completed as Ubisoft cancelled the app so for a good 2 minutes I kept hearing "pings!" to signal that the missions were complete. Te he.

Syndicate also has better characters and yes while they are underdeveloped, they are much nore defined than Arno and Elise. Arno's lack of personality is made worse by the excessive customisation, turning him into a mere avatar rather than a person with his own identity. The different outfits and weapons in Syndicate always felt like something Jacob and Evie would wear; not something the player would wear.

His romance with Elise could have been potentially very interesting if they had actually explored the problems of an Assassin and a Templar being in love. How messy it would be to balance love with competing philosophies as strong as that of the Brotherhood and the Order. This inevitably would have led to a betrayal thus making one of the character's unlikeable. So instead, they eliminated all internal conflict making it clear that Arno would choose Elise no matter what. This rendered the premise pointless made worse by the fact that Arno had no interest in being an Assassin and only used it as a means to his revenge. The fact that his targets just happened to be Templars was convenient to keep with tradition but the thought that they could have been Assassins and he still would have went after them makes me shake my head.
Syndicate is more respectful of the Brotherhood. Evie is an Assassin hardcore but even Jacob, despite his disagreements with some of its teachings, has a a desire to be master and he is interested in taking out Templars because he believes they are bad people; not because of personal vendettas. You actually see just how much of an Assassin he is when he refuses to kill children to get to Starrick (stay your blade from the flesh of an innocent) unlike Arno who allowed a man's foot to be cut off in order to follow a trail.
We also know that Jacob goes on to mature as a person and train other Assassins in the ways of the Creed. We have no such intel with Arno. In fact, Dead Kings suggests the opposite.

Arno's complete disregard for the creed made the Assassin element of the game poinltess much like its historical setting - which really could have happened in any time period. The game never takes full advantage of its historical characters and the way they are presented to us is lazy. Syndicate does this much better with ****ens, Bell and Marx in the form of cinematic cut scenes and little winks. The ****ens missions were atmospheric and fun and helped by the fact that we get more of Jacob and Evie's personality by seeing how they respond to them. For some reason, Arno rarely talks during the Paris story missions which are repetitive, boring and copied and pasted. And British accents in France? Um, ok.

Syndicate has many problems (the entire gang/rooks element is a failure) but to compare it to a game that was trying to do all the things it did and failed at them makes the answer pretty obvious.

ninja4hire10
10-18-2016, 12:04 AM
Syndicate gave me a lot to enjoy, especially the setting, fight clubs, and dual protags; but for me, Unity wins. The visuals ace AC:S in every way, the harder combat makes for a more challenging and thoughtful game, and while I like Jacob and Evie better than Arno, the supporting cast to me is much, much better.

It DID take me a little while to warm to Unity, as I was doing double-duty playing ACR at the time, but now as I play through it a second time, I truly see what a brilliant game Unity is.

phoenix-force411
10-18-2016, 12:41 AM
The parkour system is syndicate is complete crap which makes the game 75% dull, because that's a core mechanic that makes the games feel unique. Parkour is too safe which makes the pacing of actually travelling from building to building slow. I play Unity more, because it has a lot of replay value despite having a mediocre story. Better customization and a parkour that doesn't play entirely safe. London is huge, but it does feel wasted on a story like Syndicate. I like the story, but it's not good enough to justify wasting such a popular setting.

SpiritOfNevaeh
10-18-2016, 01:23 AM
Even though the French Revolution was meant to be a bigger event than the Industrial one, I gotta go with Syndicate on this one.

Lysette88
10-18-2016, 12:55 PM
To me the winner is Syndicate - graphic-wise I clearly prefer the looks of victorian London over revolutionary Paris. London feels alive, while I could not say the same about Paris. To just put in a lot of NPCs is not making it more alive, especially not, if these NPCs talk french (which might be immersive for someone who understands the language, but is alienating all who do not). So to me Paris feels like an empty shell to navigate in, where the crowds are either an obstacle or a hiding spot - and nothing else sadly enough. What a difference in Syndicate, where the city is fun to explore even outside of missions. Ubisoft did a good job which providing a lot of interesting conversations between random NPCs, which did not repeat too often. London was fun to explore or just walk down the streets and alleys and see what will happen. In Unity I did not get this feeling of being really there, the graphics are too cartoonish, crowds horrible repetitive and the blueish tint is not helping with it. Crowds appear rather pointless, if they would not be there, it would not be a loss in most locations. Huge crowds do not make a city more alive, if these NPC are just standing around, complaining and looking alike. They need tasks to do and say something interesting in english - not french.

Unity has the stronger mission design, I will give it that, and as well more stealth gameplay, but overall I am enjoying Syndicate a lot more - and so my choice is clearly Syndicate.

Edit: To be fair I have to say, that I lived for a year in London and it is my favorite metropolis - so I might be biased towards London.

Lysette88
10-18-2016, 03:45 PM
I've played both and recently did a playthrough again to see if my feelings remained the same. Without a doubt, Syndicate is better.

Syndicate is what Unity is trying to be. I won't talk about Unity's bugs as I feel that often distracts people from the real problem with the game which is that it's incredibly dull.

Even worse is when you try to go from Syndicate to Unity. Man, is it tough playing a lesser version of a later instalment. Syndicate does everything better with perhaps the exception of parkour which I find a bit too automated and floaty. I also appreciate that Unity is more challenging. But take, for instance, the murder mysteries/dreadful crimes - both the same concept but the way it is presenfed to us in the two games is very different. Syndicate puts more effort in the characters' motives, their methods and resources and the way Arthur Doyle talks to you after every one just makes it feel more real. They are each so memorable and meticulously constructed. It's the most heart and soul this franchise has shown in years. The resolution of it is also very clever.

The city of Paris may be graphically more impressive as are the facial models and motion capture but the actual city itself is far less memorable than London. All the buildings in Unity look the same. The world is also lifeless - so many NPCs on screen at one time all essentially doing the same thing, they never feel real. Syndicate's NPCs were more varied in behaviour whether they were working, playing songs, arguing.

Unity's map is horrible - cluttered from the moment you open it with meaningless collectibles, most of which are locked behind locks which are locked behind skill points which are locked behind campaign missions and multiplayer... The game has no clue how to come up with creative ways to obtain those collectibles so it just locks them under the false pretence of being 'hard'. Syndicate has far less collectibles because it challenges you to come up with other ways to make money through its actual missions which are more fun to play.

The Nomad app. Oh my God. That is the worst idea in any AC game, hands down, and when you find out the reward for completing such pointlessly long and meaningless tasks is just one star level missions it really makes you question how/why some of these devs have jobs. Funny fact: on my second playthrough all the nomad missions were automatically completed as Ubisoft cancelled the app so for a good 2 minutes I kept hearing "pings!" to signal that the missions were complete. Te he.

Syndicate also has better characters and yes while they are underdeveloped, they are much nore defined than Arno and Elise. Arno's lack of personality is made worse by the excessive customisation, turning him into a mere avatar rather than a person with his own identity. The different outfits and weapons in Syndicate always felt like something Jacob and Evie would wear; not something the player would wear.

His romance with Elise could have been potentially very interesting if they had actually explored the problems of an Assassin and a Templar being in love. How messy it would be to balance love with competing philosophies as strong as that of the Brotherhood and the Order. This inevitably would have led to a betrayal thus making one of the character's unlikeable. So instead, they eliminated all internal conflict making it clear that Arno would choose Elise no matter what. This rendered the premise pointless made worse by the fact that Arno had no interest in being an Assassin and only used it as a means to his revenge. The fact that his targets just happened to be Templars was convenient to keep with tradition but the thought that they could have been Assassins and he still would have went after them makes me shake my head.
Syndicate is more respectful of the Brotherhood. Evie is an Assassin hardcore but even Jacob, despite his disagreements with some of its teachings, has a a desire to be master and he is interested in taking out Templars because he believes they are bad people; not because of personal vendettas. You actually see just how much of an Assassin he is when he refuses to kill children to get to Starrick (stay your blade from the flesh of an innocent) unlike Arno who allowed a man's foot to be cut off in order to follow a trail.
We also know that Jacob goes on to mature as a person and train other Assassins in the ways of the Creed. We have no such intel with Arno. In fact, Dead Kings suggests the opposite.

Arno's complete disregard for the creed made the Assassin element of the game poinltess much like its historical setting - which really could have happened in any time period. The game never takes full advantage of its historical characters and the way they are presented to us is lazy. Syndicate does this much better with ****ens, Bell and Marx in the form of cinematic cut scenes and little winks. The ****ens missions were atmospheric and fun and helped by the fact that we get more of Jacob and Evie's personality by seeing how they respond to them. For some reason, Arno rarely talks during the Paris story missions which are repetitive, boring and copied and pasted. And British accents in France? Um, ok.

Syndicate has many problems (the entire gang/rooks element is a failure) but to compare it to a game that was trying to do all the things it did and failed at them makes the answer pretty obvious.

Whilst I agree with most of your review of both games, my opinion about the gang/rooks part differs from yours - I found this an interesting part of the game and it had quite some effect on gameplay as well - Rooks could help with a lot of random and as well with regular missions to take over boroughs and if the gang was enough upgraded, you could basically roam around without to be permanently bullied by blighters and you could shift the presence of Rooks in the boroughs to be dominant and carriages of the Growler type driven by Rooks were pretty much everywhere available, what made kidnapping missions a lot easier.

As far as collectibles in Syndicate go, there are plenty of those - hundreds - so I would not say those are less than in Unity, some boroughs have 60 normal chests among all the other collectibles. There is relative peace in the city, if the gang has been upgraded enough. You could explore London on foot instead on the roof tops, what I enjoyed quite a lot - given that any conflict which is started somewhere between your Rooks and Blighters was a reason for the police to hold you accountable for it - what could lead to exiting fights with the police or the royal guards. I think that Syndicate takes itself less serious, and that is why the combat is like it is in Syndicate - it is fun in the first place and part of the lore in just second place.

I was as well fond of having Jacob and Evie as twin siblings in the game - Jacob is quite good in the beginning, whereas I preferred Evie in the later game - she basically outsmarts and outfights Jacob with her marvelous stealth abilities and her throwing knife mastery with double the amount of knives available to her - she is a real power house of destruction in the later game. So both characters have their peak times in different states of the game and it is good to have both available.

cawatrooper9
10-18-2016, 05:09 PM
Whilst I agree with most of your review of both games, my opinion about the gang/rooks part differs from yours - I found this an interesting part of the game and it had quite some effect on gameplay as well - Rooks could help with a lot of random and as well with regular missions to take over boroughs and if the gang was enough upgraded, you could basically roam around without to be permanently bullied by blighters and you could shift the presence of Rooks in the boroughs to be dominant and carriages of the Growler type driven by Rooks were pretty much everywhere available, what made kidnapping missions a lot easier.

I liked the Rooks too- they were a decent addition to the game, and I often put them to good and strategic use- somewhat like the mercs/thieves in previous games, but more personalized. The problem is that, as customizable as they were (and honestly, even that could have been better) they had little bearing on the story after their creation. Once the Rooks are formed, they're basically just props- you rarely hear about them at all, outside of maybe Roth's sequence. Don't get me wrong, I think ACB, ACR, and ACIII struggle with this with their recruit system, too.

Instead of recruits, though, consider the way factions are represented in ACB. Over the course of the game, Ezio works with each faction at some point or another. It would have been nice to have missions "with" your Rooks, maybe even learning several of their names. So no, saying the entire thing was a "failure" is ludicrous, but it certainly could have been much better.

AnimusLover
10-18-2016, 11:08 PM
Whilst I agree with most of your review of both games, my opinion about the gang/rooks part differs from yours - I found this an interesting part of the game and it had quite some effect on gameplay as well - Rooks could help with a lot of random and as well with regular missions to take over boroughs and if the gang was enough upgraded, you could basically roam around without to be permanently bullied by blighters and you could shift the presence of Rooks in the boroughs to be dominant and carriages of the Growler type driven by Rooks were pretty much everywhere available, what made kidnapping missions a lot easier.

I didn't like the rooks because they were throwaway and disposable. Firstly, it was an old mechanic with a new skin - it's literally the Brotherhood mechanic of being able to call in a favour from your recruits but the devs behave as if it's some new innovation. The entire gang element of Jacob's story is very underdeveloped and used merely in the gameplay aspects. In Brotherhood, we get to form a bond with our recruits - the upgrade system for their skills and gear is slower and more intricate as opposed to "rooks now have level 10 training". In Brotherhood you form a bond with your recruits through managing their upgrades and skills and so when they die there's a real sense of loss. The game even allows you to pay your respects. It's also quite punishing as it means you have to start again from scratch with a new recruit to get them to max level so there's actual consequence, making the game more challenging. Even the way you recruit them in Brotherhood has a bit more heart i.e. through saving them from the guards. In Syndicate you can shoot your rook in the head when they annoy you and there's no consequence for that. The game treats them like scum.


As far as collectibles in Syndicate go, there are plenty of those - hundreds - so I would not say those are less than in Unity, some boroughs have 60 normal chests among all the other collectibles. There is relative peace in the city, if the gang has been upgraded enough. You could explore London on foot instead on the roof tops, what I enjoyed quite a lot - given that any conflict which is started somewhere between your Rooks and Blighters was a reason for the police to hold you accountable for it - what could lead to exiting fights with the police or the royal guards. I think that Syndicate takes itself less serious, and that is why the combat is like it is in Syndicate - it is fun in the first place and part of the lore in just second place.

There were loads but nowhere near the amount Unity had. They were also spread out with a bit more thought, placed in areas you wanted to go because there were missions there and you don't have to complete the main missions in order to get the skill points to open them. Unity's collectibles feel like not much thought went into them; they're just spammed across the map endlessly to compensate for a lack of variation in gameplayer. Quantity is not quality.

Lysette88
10-19-2016, 12:53 AM
@AnimusLover

I found the less controlled approach on a broader base (where you do not know all the Rooks) quite interesting. Once the Rooks were upgraded to level 5, there was a time of peace in the eastern boroughs (Whitechapel, City of London, Southwark and Lambeth), because there was some kind of equivalence in strength between Blighters and Rooks, both gangs were not too common on the streets and it was quite peaceful there; for a while. There was conflict, but it was not that often visible on the streets. A while later, with the increase of presence of the Rooks and their further progression, it has a destabilizing effect on the boroughs, there is much more conflict, which leads in the eastern boroughs to more peace - Rooks are basically policing the area - but it destabilizes the western boroughs, because now, where the Rooks are mainly level 7-9, they cause trouble in The Strand and Westminster and these boroughs see more crime until the player has liberated these boroughs and the sheer dominance of the Rooks in these boroughs creates relative safety again.

Nevertheless there is permanent potential to conflict between Rooks and Blighters due to the sheer amount of Rooks which are now present in boroughs. This basically leads to that they bully the remaining blighters and there is a real need now to finally liberate all boroughs, what is done quickly, because nearly everywhere are enough Rooks present, that shooting a halocinogenic dart into a blighter forces aggression status on all Rooks nearby, they rush to the mission location and take care of most of the enemies by their sheer amount,. As long as just Rooks are exposed in a mission with an alarm bell, the alarm isn't raised, so by strategically placing Rooks nearby, one can basically let them do most of the mission. This helps especially with hijack and cargo escort missions, the sheer density of presence of the rooks is making these missions relatively safe to do - one halocinogenic dart and all Rooks nearby will step in and help out.

crash_1232015
10-23-2016, 10:37 PM
Storyline: ACS
Combat: ACU
Parkour: ACS
Stealth: Even
Location: Even
Graphics: Even
Time Period: ACU

Both games massive pros and cons but both even in my opinion (wish I hadnt clicked ACS on the poll choice now!)

Lysette88
10-26-2016, 03:16 AM
Storyline: ACS
Combat: ACU
Parkour: ACS
Stealth: Even
Location: Even
Graphics: Even
Time Period: ACU

Both games massive pros and cons but both even in my opinion (wish I hadnt clicked ACS on the poll choice now!)

When you take into account, that micro-transactions in Unity had a negative influence on game play, because some of the items were deliberately priced so high, that more people are likely to buy something from the cash shop, then your original vote is the more correct one. The influence of micro-transactions in Syndicate is minor, but it had a major influence on the design of the game in Unity. If we accept that, we will not get good games in future, but games, which will be less and less fun to play.

AnimusLover
10-27-2016, 01:37 AM
When you take into account, that micro-transactions in Unity had a negative influence on game play, because some of the items were deliberately priced so high, that more people are likely to buy something from the cash shop, then your original vote is the more correct one. The influence of micro-transactions in Syndicate is minor, but it had a major influence on the design of the game in Unity. If we accept that, we will not get good games in future, but games, which will be less and less fun to play.

Agreed although I like the fact that the prices were so high because it's more of a challenge . What I didn't like was all the locked treasure boxes that you couldn't open until you progressed within the main campaign to unlock skill points. That felt micro transaction driven.

Farlander1991
10-27-2016, 09:14 AM
Agreed although I like the fact that the prices were so high because it's more of a challenge . What I didn't like was all the locked treasure boxes that you couldn't open until you progressed within the main campaign to unlock skill points. That felt micro transaction driven.

How so? It's a standard exploration mechanic present in games for decades now. (Plus, it's quite possible to open level 3 chests with level 1 lock-picking skills, opened a bunch of them like that). RPGs especially.

AnimusLover
10-27-2016, 01:28 PM
How so? It's a standard exploration mechanic present in games for decades now. (Plus, it's quite possible to open level 3 chests with level 1 lock-picking skills, opened a bunch of them like that). RPGs especially.

It has that weird up down scrolly thing and harder ones means you need to make several attempts... which means more lock picks... which you can't get unless you have the money to upgrade lockpick capacity. So in the end you end up wasting more money in order to unlock money which is counterproductive.

ERICATHERINE
10-27-2016, 03:39 PM
How so? It's a standard exploration mechanic present in games for decades now. (Plus, it's quite possible to open level 3 chests with level 1 lock-picking skills, opened a bunch of them like that). RPGs especially.

It was way better in ac iii. ^-^

Lysette88
10-27-2016, 07:27 PM
It has that weird up down scrolly thing and harder ones means you need to make several attempts... which means more lock picks... which you can't get unless you have the money to upgrade lockpick capacity. So in the end you end up wasting more money in order to unlock money which is counterproductive.

Well, you do not even have to finish sequence 3 in Unity to have 19 lock picks using the Sans Culotte belt - I think those are 19, but I could be wrong. I opened doors and chests with it early on - if you do not make more than 5-6 mistakes per cylinder, you can open pretty much everything, what you can access at that early level. I broke about 2-3 lock picks per cylinder with just lock pick level 1, so this is a viable way to go for those doors and chests as well, if you have the Sans Culotte belt.

Whilst the argument, that you might get less money from the chest, than lock picks will cost you, is a valid one, you have to see that practice makes perfect. If you do not train your skill in opening these chests and doors, you will not become a master in it - the in game skills help with it, but you can do it as well without them, if you practice enough.

Farlander1991
10-27-2016, 08:31 PM
It has that weird up down scrolly thing and harder ones means you need to make several attempts... which means more lock picks... which you can't get unless you have the money to upgrade lockpick capacity. So in the end you end up wasting more money in order to unlock money which is counterproductive.

Yeah, but once again, this kind of thing has been present in games for decades, first in RPGs mostly - where different chests have different difficulty and if your skill is lower they're harder to open (and then seeping in to other games as genres became more and more mixed). That, and with lock picks being relatively cheap (honestly, I don't remember ever having trouble with money to get lock picks), that's hardly a mechanic pushing for micro-transactions by any means.

ERICATHERINE
10-27-2016, 10:22 PM
Yeah, but once again, this kind of thing has been present in games for decades, first in RPGs mostly - where different chests have different difficulty and if your skill is lower they're harder to open (and then seeping in to other games as genres became more and more mixed). That, and with lock picks being relatively cheap (honestly, I don't remember ever having trouble with money to get lock picks), that's hardly a mechanic pushing for micro-transactions by any means.

Well when comparing unity's lockpick system to ac3 or syndicate it's by far the worst.

Lysette88
10-28-2016, 12:30 AM
On the bright side of it - you can open chests and doors with just having level 1 in lockpicking - whereas in Syndicate for example, you will need the 2nd perk for most locked doors and if you do not have it, you cannot even try to open it.

ERICATHERINE
10-28-2016, 01:29 AM
On the bright side of it - you can open chests and doors with just having level 1 in lockpicking - whereas in Syndicate for example, you will need the 2nd perk for most locked doors and if you do not have it, you cannot even try to open it.

But you can get those perks, very easily, for a cheap price and very soon in the game. Plus, if you took the special key while doing the Assassination mission in the asylum, you keep it for the rest of the game, if I remember correctly, which mean you probably won't have to buy the "lockpick the doors" perk, if you didn't have it yet. ^-^

Edit. I forgot to say it save you the time time to go buy the lockpicking objects and the money you use to buy those. ^-^

SixKeys
10-28-2016, 02:32 PM
Well when comparing unity's lockpick system to ac3 or syndicate it's by far the worst.

Nah, AC3's was the worst.

ERICATHERINE
10-28-2016, 05:58 PM
Nah, AC3's was the worst.

Not from my point of view. I think it's the best. ^-^

SixKeys
10-28-2016, 06:18 PM
Yeah, but once again, this kind of thing has been present in games for decades, first in RPGs mostly - where different chests have different difficulty and if your skill is lower they're harder to open (and then seeping in to other games as genres became more and more mixed). That, and with lock picks being relatively cheap (honestly, I don't remember ever having trouble with money to get lock picks), that's hardly a mechanic pushing for micro-transactions by any means.

I can see where AnimusLover is coming from. AC4 introduced the "time saver packs" and I can't remember if they were in Unity but if not, they were almost certainly at least planned. Unity had such an absurd amount of chests, with tons of exclusive and high-level gear locked behind them that I can't help but think it was deliberate to encourage people to buy time saver packs.

ERICATHERINE
10-28-2016, 06:42 PM
I can see where AnimusLover is coming from. AC4 introduced the "time saver packs" and I can't remember if they were in Unity but if not, they were almost certainly at least planned. Unity had such an absurd amount of chests, with tons of exclusive and high-level gear locked behind them that I can't help but think it was deliberate to encourage people to buy time saver packs.

I can comfirm there is/was no time saver pack. ^-^

HDinHB
10-28-2016, 08:31 PM
How so? It's a standard exploration mechanic present in games for decades now. (Plus, it's quite possible to open level 3 chests with level 1 lock-picking skills, opened a bunch of them like that). RPGs especially.

Your skill level should have increased faster when picking higher level chests, especially when you are lower level than the chest.


It was way better in ac iii. ^-^

AC4 had the most efficient lock picking: boot.



Whilst the argument, that you might get less money from the chest, than lock picks will cost you, is a valid one, you have to see that practice makes perfect. If you do not train your skill in opening these chests and doors, you will not become a master in it - the in game skills help with it, but you can do it as well without them, if you practice enough.

They should have included a few lock picks in at least some of the chests.


I can comfirm there is/was no time saver pack. ^-^

You might be misremembering or thinking of something else--the time savers in Black Flag were more extensive IIRC. Unity had "time savers" you could buy using helix credits--maps to various items. I think you could earn enough credits in game to pay for most, if not all, of the maps. I had almost forgotten about all the different currencies in that game.

http://help.support.ubi.com/images/ACU/Exclusive%20Content/ACUEstoreULC.jpg

http://media.gamerevolution.com/images/misc/ACUnityPayToWin.jpg



http://i.imgur.com/opk4S1Y.png

AnimusLover
10-28-2016, 10:30 PM
Well, you do not even have to finish sequence 3 in Unity to have 19 lock picks using the Sans Culotte belt - I think those are 19, but I could be wrong. I opened doors and chests with it early on - if you do not make more than 5-6 mistakes per cylinder, you can open pretty much everything, what you can access at that early level. I broke about 2-3 lock picks per cylinder with just lock pick level 1, so this is a viable way to go for those doors and chests as well, if you have the Sans Culotte belt.

Whilst the argument, that you might get less money from the chest, than lock picks will cost you, is a valid one, you have to see that practice makes perfect. If you do not train your skill in opening these chests and doors, you will not become a master in it - the in game skills help with it, but you can do it as well without them, if you practice enough.

Yes, but the actual lockpick mechanic, as in the scrolly up and down thing, is dull even when you are suitably skilled. I did manage to crack some of the ones that were above my skill level and then I got bored. That's why I didn't bother with the rest despite having a large lockpick ammo upgrade before sequence 3. It's ok to do something really boring when it's easy because it's over quickly. It's another to do something boring that requires doing it over and over again.

Skyrim does this so much better. The lockpicking in Skyrim is harder but Bethesda manages to make lock picking challenging and fun because it actually requires you to use your brain rather than lizard quick timing. Unity's lockpicking feels lazy, like a deliberate pasted in chore in order to make the player get fed up of the boredom and give in to microtransactions. The fact that a notification pops on screen encouraging you to upgrade your lockpicking before you attempt it makes me even more suspicious...


Yeah, but once again, this kind of thing has been present in games for decades, first in RPGs mostly - where different chests have different difficulty and if your skill is lower they're harder to open (and then seeping in to other games as genres became more and more mixed). That, and with lock picks being relatively cheap (honestly, I don't remember ever having trouble with money to get lock picks), that's hardly a mechanic pushing for micro-transactions by any means.

See my thoughts regarding Skyrim above and the last quote in my post.


Your skill level should have increased faster when picking higher level chests, especially when you are lower level than the chest.

Exactly. Except this isn't the case in Unity. Skill points are locked behind missions (and multiplayer!) not, well, skill. To bring this back on topic, Syndicate solved this problem by rewarding players for certain executions with skill points - even though the executions were too easy to perform so perhaps weren't as satisfying.

SixKeys
10-29-2016, 12:38 AM
Exactly. Except this isn't the case in Unity. Skill points are locked behind missions (and multiplayer!) not, well, skill. To bring this back on topic, Syndicate solved this problem by rewarding players for certain executions with skill points - even though the executions were too easy to perform so perhaps weren't as satisfying.

"Locked behind multiplayer" is kind of a moot point since you could do all the co-op missions solo.

Also, didn't Unity have some kind of reward system too where you could earn points by doing challenges, like double assassinations and controlled descent combos?

AnimusLover
10-29-2016, 01:10 AM
"Locked behind multiplayer" is kind of a moot point since you could do all the co-op missions solo.

Yeah, but why would you do that? The missions have been designed and structured in a way that more than one person is supposed to play it. Also, it's more fun with other people. My point is you shouldn't lock SP content behind MP. That's just... no. Actually, there is one co op mission which I can't imagine someone could do alone. I think it's the one with the flags and the time limit...


Also, didn't Unity have some kind of reward system too where you could earn points by doing challenges, like double assassinations and controlled descent combos?

I knew someone would mention this. Yes, the creed points which told you whether you were an "Assassin or a "Legend" (cringe). They could also be spent on gear. But they weren't skill points and you couldn't use them to get the lock picking upgrade, for instance.

Sorrosyss
10-29-2016, 01:12 AM
Easily Syndicate. Unity is, and remains the weakest entry for me from a story standpoint. Though I fully concede it's by far the most graphically and technically impressive. I still can't forgive the state it launched in, and the damage it did to the franchise's reputation.

Lysette88
10-29-2016, 01:27 AM
Easily Syndicate. Unity is, and remains the weakest entry for me from a story standpoint. Though I fully concede it's by far the most graphically and technically impressive. I still can't forgive the state it launched in, and the damage it did to the franchise's reputation.

Graphics are most of the time a question of personal taste - I for one like Syndicate graphics a whole lot more. Just look at how well the wave patterns are done on the Thames, when ships go by for example. You see the wake and the bow waves. Unity is impressive, no doubt about this, but Syndicate had the harder task with it's graphics and they did it very well.

ERICATHERINE
10-29-2016, 02:00 AM
You might be misremembering or thinking of something else--the time savers in Black Flag were more extensive IIRC. Unity had "time savers" you could buy using helix credits--maps to various items. I think you could earn enough credits in game to pay for most, if not all, of the maps. I had almost forgotten about all the different currencies in that game.

http://help.support.ubi.com/images/ACU/Exclusive%20Content/ACUEstoreULC.jpg

http://media.gamerevolution.com/images/misc/ACUnityPayToWin.jpg



http://i.imgur.com/opk4S1Y.png

Wow. You just maked me learn something about an ac game I owned for years and that I completed to 100%. That's pretty rare. Thanks. ^-^

ERICATHERINE
10-29-2016, 02:14 AM
Actually, there is one co op mission which I can't imagine someone could do alone. I think it's the one with the flags and the time limit...

I actually did it from the begining to the end, alone, not only one time, but twice. You just have to try and try again until you succeed. Also, you can get every skill points of that coop mission, that are collectibles, instead of rewards for completing it, right from the start. To get them, all I have to do is to start that coop mission and go to their locations without having to do what the mission tell me to do. ^-^

SixKeys
10-29-2016, 03:29 AM
Yeah, but why would you do that? The missions have been designed and structured in a way that more than one person is supposed to play it. Also, it's more fun with other people. My point is you shouldn't lock SP content behind MP. That's just... no. Actually, there is one co op mission which I can't imagine someone could do alone. I think it's the one with the flags and the time limit...

It's actually a lot of fun to do them on your own. More fun than with other people, actually, unless you have a group of people who know how to organize and communicate. Doing solo heists is one of the best parts about Unity because they can be truly challenging.

AnimusLover
10-29-2016, 03:35 AM
I actually did it from the begining to the end, alone, not only one time, but twice. You just have to try and try again until you succeed. Also, you can get every skill points of that coop mission, that are collectibles, instead of rewards for completing it, right from the start. To get them, all I have to do is to start that coop mission and go to their locations without having to do what the mission tell me to do. ^-^

I have never attempted to do any of the co op missions alone because I wanted the full co op experience (that is what Ubisoft promoted heavily after all even though it turned out to be BS) but I remember playing that mission with some people online wondering how anyone could do this alone and thanking my lucky stars that I had PS+ that year. Garbage mission.

AnimusLover
10-29-2016, 04:12 AM
It's actually a lot of fun to do them on your own. More fun than with other people, actually, unless you have a group of people who know how to organize and communicate. Doing solo heists is one of the best parts about Unity because they can be truly challenging.

Each to their own. i enjoy the teamwork aspect of it all and thankfully most of the people i encountered online were sensible and good at stealth. Also I have to admit it's fun showing off my skills to others. :D
I only had one bad experience where a pad mashing lizard at level 2 kept ruining the mission by getting killed. Would not stick with me and kept getting into combat and dying. I embarrassed him by quitting after the third time and playing with someone else.

ERICATHERINE
10-29-2016, 06:28 AM
I have never attempted to do any of the co op missions alone because I wanted the full co op experience (that is what Ubisoft promoted heavily after all even though it turned out to be BS) but I remember playing that mission with some people online wondering how anyone could do this alone and thanking my lucky stars that I had PS+ that year. Garbage mission.

I actually did every coop missions at least one time, in solo. Those were the most challenging missions I ever did, which maked them way more fun than many, if not all, the other missions of unity. For those missions I couldn't just barge in and use brut force. I had to use my brain in a way that would make me a group of players all by myself. That's the part I liked the most and since I always considered myself as a great tactician I wanted to live up to that. I even wanted to figure everything out by myself and so, each time I did a coop mission for the first time, I did it in solo. Maybe I didn't always finished the missions in one try, but I still did them all in solo and without watching any video. From my point of view, unity had the best multiplayer ever made for an ac game. There was a story instead of points. You can do everything in solo if you want. It wasn't a pvp mode where it's not the player with the most skill, instead of the best weapons, who win. There is no need for cheaters to cheat. That's why I like the coop missions of unity way better than any other multiplayer game. Look at the division or destiny for exemple. Even if the division can be playedin single player, you can't win every single missions in solo. As for destiny look at this video and you'll understand what I mean.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PARhvUpzU1w

If after that you tell that nobody cheat on pvp in destiny, I just won't believe you. ^-^

cravex02
10-29-2016, 01:32 PM
Syndicate was better BUT, I played the openworld as Evie, but then the game forced me to play MR bland :( only down points of that game Evie was the better character and didn't get to show it off bar 1-2 missions if that!

SixKeys
10-29-2016, 02:36 PM
Each to their own. i enjoy the teamwork aspect of it all and thankfully most of the people i encountered online were sensible and good at stealth. Also I have to admit it's fun showing off my skills to others. :D
I only had one bad experience where a pad mashing lizard at level 2 kept ruining the mission by getting killed. Would not stick with me and kept getting into combat and dying. I embarrassed him by quitting after the third time and playing with someone else.

I found it annoying that if you're playing with other people and there's some escort-type mission involved, the player who gets to the NPC first can trigger the next checkpoint before the others are ready. There was one where you had to protect the woman who was leading the Women's March, and you get ambushed at a certain checkpoint by a large group of enemies. You need some time for everyone to prepare - restock ammo, take positions - because it can be a pretty chaotic fight, but there was always at least one person who rushed ahead to that checkpoint, triggering the fight while the rest of us were still a mile behind, so by the time we got there, either the NPC, the Leeroy or both were dead or dying. That's why I prefer playing solo.

ERICATHERINE
10-29-2016, 04:09 PM
Syndicate was better BUT, I played the openworld as Evie, but then the game forced me to play MR bland :( only down points of that game Evie was the better character and didn't get to show it off bar 1-2 missions if that!

Maybe, but we can control her in every missions of the Jack the ripper dlc, except for the 3 Jack missions. ^-^

Ureh
10-29-2016, 08:56 PM
I found it annoying that if you're playing with other people and there's some escort-type mission involved, the player who gets to the NPC first can trigger the next checkpoint before the others are ready. There was one where you had to protect the woman who was leading the Women's March, and you get ambushed at a certain checkpoint by a large group of enemies. You need some time for everyone to prepare - restock ammo, take positions - because it can be a pretty chaotic fight, but there was always at least one person who rushed ahead to that checkpoint, triggering the fight while the rest of us were still a mile behind, so by the time we got there, either the NPC, the Leeroy or both were dead or dying. That's why I prefer playing solo.

I like to stick to the rooftops for that part and use smoke bombs. Mericourt and her friend won't be incapacitated by the smokescreen, allowing them to make their way to the gates without bloodshed.

AnimusLover
10-30-2016, 04:52 PM
I found it annoying that if you're playing with other people and there's some escort-type mission involved, the player who gets to the NPC first can trigger the next checkpoint before the others are ready. There was one where you had to protect the woman who was leading the Women's March, and you get ambushed at a certain checkpoint by a large group of enemies. You need some time for everyone to prepare - restock ammo, take positions - because it can be a pretty chaotic fight, but there was always at least one person who rushed ahead to that checkpoint, triggering the fight while the rest of us were still a mile behind, so by the time we got there, either the NPC, the Leeroy or both were dead or dying. That's why I prefer playing solo.

I don't remember that being an issue, I do remember that mission crashing several times though.
That said, it's Ubisoft's fault for not making it so that all players have to reach the checkpoint in order for the fight to trigger.
I remember Alex Amancio once saying that the problem with co op is that everyone wants to be the star and so they tailored the missions to accomodate that.
I think that's why you have all the sync points hidden in them when they shouldn't be - the co op can't commit to being total multiplayer, it has to have SP elements in there.
I have to admit I have abandoned my team mates in order to grab sync points. I mean, you have to eventually. But generally I behaved, as did my team mates.