PDA

View Full Version : What would you prefer(Poll)



Conniving_Eagle
06-07-2011, 04:23 PM
Ubisoft said they're going to really work on the multiplayer this time around, and that worries me a little. In Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood, the Singleplayer was shorter than it was in AC2(I know they had side missions, I mean the main SP), and I think it was partly due to Multiplayer. So, what do you guys think Ubisoft should do for Revelations?

Assassin8me
06-07-2011, 04:39 PM
Obviously singleplayer is more important but people are over reacting about the multiplayer taking its place.

I think that both can go hand with hand, and i would love the multiplayer to have singleplayer element (such as advancing in the templar organization)

kriegerdesgottes
06-07-2011, 04:43 PM
I am a little worried about MP getting too much attention but so far it seems that they still know what the heart of the franchise is and who the core AC fans are. If they were really concerned more for MP the amazing trailer and demo we saw yesterday would have shown some MP and not just pure SP all the way which I'm totally cool with. The mp portion didn't even get shown today like it was supposed to which I am also ok with since I don't care about MP.

gsosolidk
06-07-2011, 04:49 PM
Well, AC1 was fully single player, and the graphics on that were beautiful. The story was also very good, the only problem was the repetitiveness. Character development was good. The way you see Altair slowly change throughout the game... Malik too! I also felt a sense of achievement after killing one of my targets.

AC2 had the best character development from all 3 of the AC's, it improved on many things that were wrong with AC1 and the graphics were still really good. The story line was really good too.

ACB was still great, I still love it, but the graphics on some occasions weren't as good, popping happened a lot more than in the other two, and the story line wasn't as good (still good though). Also, I didn't feel as attached to the characters.

This leads me to believe graphics, character development and the storyline do actually suffer from the time given to multiplayer.
I wouldn't really care if multiplayer was completely abolished.

Conniving_Eagle
06-07-2011, 05:47 PM
Originally posted by gsosolidk:
Well, AC1 was fully single player, and the graphics on that were beautiful. The story was also very good, the only problem was the repetitiveness. Character development was good. The way you see Altair slowly change throughout the game... Malik too! I also felt a sense of achievement after killing one of my targets.

AC2 had the best character development from all 3 of the AC's, it improved on many things that were wrong with AC1 and the graphics were still really good. The story line was really good too.

ACB was still great, I still love it, but the graphics on some occasions weren't as good, popping happened a lot more than in the other two, and the story line wasn't as good (still good though). Also, I didn't feel as attached to the characters.

This leads me to believe graphics, character development and the storyline do actually suffer from the time given to multiplayer.
I wouldn't really care if multiplayer was completely abolished.

Ha ha, a man after my own heart. Brother, I feel the same way. While AC:B was still a great game, it was a little disappointing. It was even shorter than AC2 was story mission wise. AC2 is the perfect precedent for a video-game sequel, there should be a picture of it next to 'video-game sequel' in the dictionary.

crash3
06-07-2011, 05:53 PM
the SP is what makes the AC series, the MP is just a bonus. i love the storylines and open worlds

if i want to play brainless multiplayer, ill just play COD