PDA

View Full Version : A serious issue with the Franchise



shobhit7777777
08-26-2011, 06:14 AM
The franchise as a whole has not seen ANY major evolution in the core gameplay since the second game. A suprising amount of stale and unimaginative elements like "Exotic Gameplay" have crept in, and the core mechanics and basic issues have been left unaddressed. Each new instalment adds new mechanics (Territory control, Notoriety, Brotherhood, Dens, Bombs etc.) but NONE addresses the most basic issues at hand. The Enemy AI is still smart as a squirrel, the Social interactions need massive work, the ability to remove armour and affect our ability to blend, Freedom in mission planning and execution etc. I keep expecting these issues to be take care of with each instalment but I am constantly disappointed. How can the devs leave something like AI out? Not only are they thick as bricks, they lack any aural sensitivity and have the FOV of a SPOON. As a Stealthy player this murders the immersion (pun intended) and the gameplay. Or when I blend with a group of Potato Sacks and suddenly become COMPLETELY invisible. As a game about an Assassin and Social Stealth (A heavily touted feature in the first game...in fact it's USP) the mechanics are VERY underwhelming. Instead of these we get "Exotic" gameplay, Seriously who in the hell thought that driving a tank through a corridor shooting pre-positioned mooks would be a good idea? Is this a mobile game? Where is the creativity? the innovation?

I see the developers talking about 'Bomb crafting' 'Assassin's Dens' and all which is cool but what about basic needs that allow the core mechanics to evolve?
Ubi, Keep developing the Bombs, the Hooks and the Dens...it adds value but NOT at the expense of more important and game affecting mechanics...which are needed in the first place.

It's like the devs have a massive list of 'Must Have/Cool ****' and try to keep shoehorning it into every successive title...without regard to the already established gameplay mechanics, which suffer due to a lack of polish. Disjointed gameplay mechanics.

On a positive note. I love how the bomb crafting allows for a lot of Stealthy tactics....plus the Assassin's Dens seems like a very cool idea (See a natural progression of an existing mechanic, fully fleshed=more awesome)

eagleforlife1
08-26-2011, 06:17 AM
I agree with everything you say, although I don't like the idea of the bombs. We're basically playing as Batman now. What I would like to see is a cover system; that would really add to the stealth of the franchise.

misterB2001
08-26-2011, 06:31 AM
Havent you kind of answered your own question? Brotherhood & Revelations are pretty much side games to keep us entertained until AC3.

They are going to surely save all of their best ideas/improvements for AC3?

shobhit7777777
08-26-2011, 06:53 AM
@MisterB

Havent you kind of answered your own question? Brotherhood & Revelations are pretty much side games to keep us entertained until AC3.

They are going to surely save all of their best ideas/improvements for AC3?

Revelations is the Fourth title in the series, regardless of the absence of the 'IV' it has undergone MASSIVE development, they recreated a whole new city and citizens and a plethora of new mechanics, yet still the basics are left out. If the ability to remove armour (a super simple request) is being saved by Ubi for the true 'III' game then I think Ubi is lacking in creativity.

So, ACR is less of a sidegame and more of a complete game in it's own right and even after 4 releases we are still suffering with aforementioned issues....I could let it slide till Brohood, but Revelations was a massive disapointment and made me question Ubi's sanity. Why not fix the minor yet important issues?

And even if we do consider them 'side-games' shouldn't THEY have made the minor additions and leave the big stuff like Brotherhood and Bombs for the true 'III' game?

I see a pattern of creating new mechanics without fleshing the existing ones out. It's like I said, the devs have a looooong list and want to cram it all in...which although is pretty cool does detract from the gameplay.

ham_vet001
08-26-2011, 07:00 AM
Originally posted by shobhit7777777:
@MisterB
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Havent you kind of answered your own question? Brotherhood & Revelations are pretty much side games to keep us entertained until AC3.

They are going to surely save all of their best ideas/improvements for AC3?

Revelations is the Fourth title in the series, regardless of the absence of the 'IV' it has undergone MASSIVE development, they recreated a whole new city and citizens and a plethora of new mechanics, yet still the basics are left out. If the ability to remove armour (a super simple request) is being saved by Ubi for the true 'III' game then I think Ubi is lacking in creativity.

So, ACR is less of a sidegame and more of a complete game in it's own right and even after 4 releases we are still suffering with aforementioned issues....I could let it slide till Brohood, but Revelations was a massive disapointment and made me question Ubi's sanity. Why not fix the minor yet important issues?

And even if we do consider them 'side-games' shouldn't THEY have made the minor additions and leave the big stuff like Brotherhood and Bombs for the true 'III' game?

I see a pattern of creating new mechanics without fleshing the existing ones out. It's like I said, the devs have a looooong list and want to cram it all in...which although is pretty cool does detract from the gameplay. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Revelations a disappointment? You've played it already?

shobhit7777777
08-26-2011, 07:07 AM
@Ham_vet

Revelations a disappointment? You've played it already?

No I haven't, but the lack of the aforementioned tweaks is certainly a major disappointment...as I expected Ubi to fix them at least by the 4th title.

P.S

Please dont make 'Quote pyramids' its bad practice. Just quote the relevant bit. Makes the replies easier to read and keeps the threads smaller.

ham_vet001
08-26-2011, 08:16 AM
OK well judging by your first post you feel the game is meant to be primarily a stealth game, since that's what you like. But the devs seem to want the franchise to be a mix of open combat, stealth and tomb-raider style exploration. So the stealth elements of the game won't get as much attention and fine-tuning as you would want.

misterB2001
08-26-2011, 08:22 AM
They have to include some upgrades yes, they will add things like bomb crafting and the brotherhood to see if it works and tweak it here and there, but anything game changing, out of this world stuff will be kept back for AC3. (imo)

shobhit7777777
08-26-2011, 08:36 AM
@Ham_Vet

OK well judging by your first post you feel the game is meant to be primarily a stealth game, since that's what you like. But the devs seem to want the franchise to be a mix of open combat, stealth and tomb-raider style exploration. So the stealth elements of the game won't get as much attention and fine-tuning as you would want.

Well, the first game certainly tried to be a stealth game or pretended to be one.
Personal playstyle notwithstanding, the pillar that the game was built on player freedom, social stealth and freerunning. The devs have focused on completely new mechanics which is fine as long as they keep tweaking/evolving the existing ones.
AC as a franchise is inherently a stealthy one...and the issues with AI and realism are glaring, but have not been addressed.

And the very fact that I feel the devs are trying to steer the ship into strange waters seems like a schizophrenic feature-creeping development method.

Stealth needs to be fleshed out more, the AI for both combat and stealth needs to be revamped....and crowds (one of the key aspects of the game) need to be entirely reworked...and this could have been done in instalments over the 3 games but so far zilch. Now maybe ACR is doing something new, but I doubt it given the fact that a majority of the focus is towards crafting, dens and the hook...all cool but tell me one thing does this take precedence over enemy AI and crowd interactions in a game like 'Assassin's Creed' given it's roots?

A lil OT:
Another example of Schizo design. There are certain missions where Stealth is forced on...a major facepalm in a game like AC where player freedom should be given primacy...on top of that you have half baked mechanics which make the whole stealth exercise either a joke or a frustrating, blood boiling event. The AI makes the stealth a joke (killing a rooftop archer, standing next to his corpse and the nearest guards is only slightly suspicious)and the detection parameters is there SOLELY to make stealth 'seem' hard enough. The designers tried to get away with the obvious flaws by using the ol punishing trial and error methods.
When people said 'More Stealth' it doesn't mean you shoehorn in insta-fail missions. You add more mechanics and subsequently make the AI more intelligent.

@MisterB

They have to include some upgrades yes, they will add things like bomb crafting and the brotherhood to see if it works and tweak it here and there, but anything game changing, out of this world stuff will be kept back for AC3. (imo)

Upgrades?

Dude, no offense, but the 'upgrades' you mention are fully blown features and touted as such.
Dens, Brotherhood, Crafting, hook blade etc. Add Brotherhoods contributions and you have a proper sequel. These are massive mechanics and could very well have been saved for the next game (glad they didn't) but what about realism/immersion breaking flaws like I mentioned? shouldn't they have been fixed? Don't you feel that simply adding a tweak to the armour system (not even make it affect stealth rating) is a viable and doable option for the 'Side games'?

kriegerdesgottes
08-26-2011, 02:04 PM
See I don't know where people are getting this AC is supposed to be a stealth game crap from. It's simply not true. The first game was a revolution because of FREEDOM. That's what the games are about. You can be aggressive, stealthy, or play however you want. In the first game you could sneak in through rafters, blend in with priests or kill everyone (my personal favorite). It's not 100% stealth.

Serrachio
08-26-2011, 02:21 PM
Originally posted by kriegerdesgotte:
See I don't know where people are getting this AC is supposed to be a stealth game crap from. It's simply not true. The first game was a revolution because of FREEDOM. That's what the games are about. You can be aggressive, stealthy, or play however you want. In the first game you could sneak in through rafters, blend in with priests or kill everyone (my personal favorite). It's not 100% stealth.

It's all well and fine to say "Players should be allowed the freedom to play as they like" but so far, AC has taken a turn for "Kill the *bleep* out of everything as aggressively as you can" under the guise of being a stealthly assassin.

I'm not saying that players should not play as aggressive as they like, but if they're going to be obvious, why is it that the guards seem oblivious?

I'd like the challenge of sneaking to kill my targets reintroduced into the game, but the way the AI guards are so dumb now makes it kind of silly that I can kill them so easily.

It's all well and good to feel like a badass because you can slaughter all the guards that come after you, but after a while, it kind of gets to the point that it seems too easy.

One thing I'd like to see though is the ability to counter without a lock on. If I've pulled my sword out and I'm ready to fight, it seems a little odd that a guard can damage me, even while I have myself in the counter position, all because I hadn't locked onto something.

Calvarok
08-26-2011, 02:24 PM
The already established gameplay mechanics are, #1, fine, and #2, actually being improved with Revelations. The hookblade for faster free-running and ways to escape enemies. But actually, if you look at AC1 to AC2, the enemy AI has come a long way in being more convincing. Even from AC2 to ACB, the guards have had a lot of new behaviours added.

I don't see anything wrong with the way enemies reacted in the gamescom trailer. We DON'T know what their FOV for this game is, and their limited FOV is perhaps their only problem.

As for a cover system, in AC, a wall or edge of a building IS your cover system. You can move around it to avoid being seen, you can do takedowns from it, and everything. A cover system for normal objects would encourage them to design missions so that you have to take cover behind normal objects, instead of using the buildings and rooftops.

AC's core gameplay works very well. When you are in a crowd of people, most people will not notice that you don't belong, expecially if they're not actively looking for you. The guards are smart enough to search all the surrounding crowds when they're actively looking for you. and if they're just on guard duty, then it's not unusual to think that the guy with the crossbow in the middle of the cardinals in their bodyguard. Bodyguards were very common in Renaissance times, because muggers and thiefs were VERY common in Rennaisance cities.

And the thing is, yes, blending should technically only work if you're facing into the circle and acting like the rest of the people in the circle. and yes, I would like some animations that Ezio uses to assure the people in the circle and outside that he belongs. And yes, it would be great if guards had a longer FoV and searched more hide spots, and if they could look up to the roof and see you standing there if you shoot one of their friends from above with a crossbow or gun.

But there are three big things:
#1, we've asked for these features a lot, and Ubisoft takes player's opinions into account for everything they add.
#2, we have no indication that these features are NOT in Revelations.
#3, guard AI HAS gotten better with every game. In AC1 you could kill a guard in low profile in front of another guard, and as long as he was in the "yellow with black dot" state, he would not notice that a blade had just penetrated that entire guard's body.

In AC2, guards were not fooled by that, but their senses were actually TOO heightened, in that they automatically detected you if you threw a knife, before the knife even got to them.

Brotherhood toned them back a bunch, and now they only detect you when they realistically would be able to. Except for the thing about being too high for their FOV and shooting their buddy.

But hopefully, that will be fixed in Revelations.

And Exotic gameplay was about a missions type. A mission type where you play through an interactive set-piece after a stealth bit. And they were all really fun.

Assassin recruits, ability to assassinate from and to a horse, lifts, the crossbow, further locking distance, and other things were what Brotherhood brought to the core gameplay of AC.

If you want an example of a stagnant game series, look no further than Call of duty.

SupremeCaptain
08-26-2011, 02:32 PM
I'd LOVE a cover system.

Calvarok
08-26-2011, 02:46 PM
Originally posted by Serrachio:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by kriegerdesgotte:
See I don't know where people are getting this AC is supposed to be a stealth game crap from. It's simply not true. The first game was a revolution because of FREEDOM. That's what the games are about. You can be aggressive, stealthy, or play however you want. In the first game you could sneak in through rafters, blend in with priests or kill everyone (my personal favorite). It's not 100% stealth.

It's all well and fine to say "Players should be allowed the freedom to play as they like" but so far, AC has taken a turn for "Kill the *bleep* out of everything as aggressively as you can" under the guise of being a stealthly assassin.

I'm not saying that players should not play as aggressive as they like, but if they're going to be obvious, why is it that the guards seem oblivious?

I'd like the challenge of sneaking to kill my targets reintroduced into the game, but the way the AI guards are so dumb now makes it kind of silly that I can kill them so easily.

It's all well and good to feel like a badass because you can slaughter all the guards that come after you, but after a while, it kind of gets to the point that it seems too easy.

One thing I'd like to see though is the ability to counter without a lock on. If I've pulled my sword out and I'm ready to fight, it seems a little odd that a guard can damage me, even while I have myself in the counter position, all because I hadn't locked onto something. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Again, the guard AI was MUCH stupider in AC1.
They literally stopped paying attention to the fight to give you an opportunity to instant kill them.

Giving more choice to the player is great, and I think that they're trying to give more challenge to the player as well. The first guards you fight in the game are obviously not going to be where you find that challenge. I think everyone should just wait and see what new enemy moves they have for the better guys. everyone remembers that you could literally button mash the easiest enemies in AC1, right?

And some enemies will have bombs, as seen in the trailer, although I think they rightly decided to not force the player to deal with that type of enemy gameplay right in the first mission.

Playing stealthily in Revelations sounds like so much more fun. The game designers can rely on the fact that you KNOW the guard patrol paths with Eagle Sense, so they can make things more difficult to match it. And if you're discoverd, they can make a whole bucnh of guards pour out to attack, depending on wether this is a mission where it's vital to the story to are stealthy, or not.

I know a lot of people complain about Brotherhood being less stealthy, but there are quite a few missions where you must think more creatively than AC1 or 2. The thing is that Brotherhood stealth relied heavily on scripting. From what they've been talking a bout and showing, they want to move away from so much scripting.

Do you see how many ways there are to get through the gamescom demo? that village we go through is quite big, and has lots of alleyways and paths. You are being given something that you can tackle however you feel like, within the first hour of gameplay. Can the same be said about AC1? If ACR keeps it up with escalating the mechanics the player has, and then introduces enemy counterparts to those, and when both are done, just starts ramping up difficulty, it will be the best pace and best period AC game ever.


I saw nothing in what the AI did that was stupid. A guard was looking out over his post, Ezio silently walked up and killed him. Another was guarding the wagon, same thing. The patrol that ezio spotted earlier comes over, possibly thinking that he's trying to shirk his duties by sleeping, or possibly thinking the Assassin has entered. Either way, the logical thing to do is go check, instead of alerting the whole fortress for nothing. The trap bomb goes off when they get too close. The nearby guards are separated from the area by a thick stone wall, so it is likely they heard nothing, although the bomb sounded decently loud from up close. Whatever the case, we DON'T KNOW because Ezio moves on really quickly, and it's possible they moved over.

The distraction bomb: bombs are still a relatively new technology, and the guards are obviously curious. they move over, hoping to get a better look at whoever threw it, but they see nothing. when the bend down to inspect it, Ezio moves out of the shadows (which his robes actually blend in well with, in the bluish, snowy night) and sneaks past them, running with a limp, but quietly.

A guard spots him from an unconfirmed distance away, (We have no SSI in the trailer, we don't know) and then gets very suspicious when he gets closer. Ezio breaks in a run and the chase is on. Ezio throws a caltrop bomb behind him, and the guard understandably is in pain and unable to run on for a bit, since his feet have been pierced with SPIKES. Then Ezio gets inside the fortress, lobs two bombs at guard groups to take them out quickly, and heals up. (you'll notice that Ezio can only carry 5 bombs at a time. that means he can only use them 3 more times in a mission. For a more advanced mission with more guards, he's be out of them pretty fast, yes?)

He climbs the roof, and the rooftop guard hears him running across. before he can shoot him, however, he does a leap of faith.

From then on, the AI's work is done. It's a linear sequence of climbing and a stab of Leandros. It is possible in the full game that Leandros will actually fight Ezio, and it is obvious that he and Ezio will have a little talk after he's stabbed, but it was cut out of the demo in interest of time and avoiding too many spoilers.

luckyto
08-26-2011, 03:05 PM
The AI was not dumber in AC1. At least if I stand there with my sword drawn, guards react. In Brotherhood, I have literally pulled out a dagger and walked up next to a guard, and stood there, sword drawn in the middle of their conversation. Frankly, unless I'm 100% notorious, I can't even tell that the guards are alive.

I know the example you mention, but similar issues in combat occur in both ACB and AC2.

Also, I wouldn't classify COD as a failure. Yes, people everywhere complain that it is stale; but they fork out that money every year. Part of what has been working for that franchise is that they have stuck to their successful recipe. I really think it is better for a franchise to weather complaints about no change, than change and lose what audiences like initially.

Whereas AC is very much in danger of steering itself completely off course. I've said before and again, ACB was the first title in the series that left me both very frustrated with in-mission limitations (not optional ones) and bored with a monotonous and overpowering combat system. If I didn't deeply love the previous titles, I doubt I would give Ubisoft a second chance.

To the OP, I value stealth as well. But AC is not an "all stealth" game and never has been. It has always been - in my mind - both, you choose which way you want to play. That said, the pendulum has swung too far in the pointless category. The only reason to bother with stealth is for the personal fun of it. When Assassin's Creed games have been most successful is when stealth is optional but rewarded: Charge in against stiff opposition for fun, or take the long but easy path of no resistance.

Calvarok
08-26-2011, 03:08 PM
Originally posted by luckyto:
The AI was not dumber in AC1. At least if I stand there with my sword drawn, guards react. In Brotherhood, I have literally pulled out a dagger and walked up next to a guard, and stood there, sword drawn in the middle of their conversation. Frankly, unless I'm 100% notorious, I can't even tell that the guards are alive.

I know the example you mention, but similar issues in combat occur in both ACB and AC2.

Also, I wouldn't classify COD as a failure. Yes, people everywhere complain that it is stale; but they fork out that money every year. Part of what has been working for that franchise is that they have stuck to their successful recipe. I really think it is better for a franchise to weather complaints about no change, than change and lose what audiences like initially.

Whereas AC is very much in danger of steering itself completely off course. I've said before and again, ACB was the first title in the series that left me both very frustrated with in-mission limitations (not optional ones) and bored with a monotonous and overpowering combat system. If I didn't deeply love the previous titles, I doubt I would give Ubisoft a second chance.

To the OP, I value stealth as well. But AC is not an "all stealth" game and never has been. It has always been - in my mind - both, you choose which way you want to play. That said, the pendulum has swung too far in the pointless category. The only reason to bother with stealth is for the personal fun of it.

In regards to that specific thing, I think the guards need work. They added civilian reactions to drawn weaponry, but not for guards. That needs to be fixed, yes.

But in regards to being able to actually kill in front of them, guards were increidbly dense in AC1.

luckyto
08-26-2011, 03:18 PM
I do admit - I've see times in AC1 where I low profile assassinate a guard standing right next to another guard (at a doorway) and the one not even notice. But I have, just as many times, been caught.

If guards had their swords drawn in AC, you had best not even get close to them or within eyesight. Guards in Brotherhood seem almost totally oblivious. I have to kill one to even get a reaction. If you are at 25% notoriety (aka wanted posters), then they should perk up and notice you when you are in view. At 100%, they should have extra patrols actively searching for you and chase you on sight (which would force you to blend.)

I've always loved how guards will comment on you "looking familiar" when they start to watch you. An audible clue and a turned head that forces me to react and change course is fun. I really want to see that improved. If they did that and increase the guard populations, I would be totally happy. I don't need bombs, nice, but I don't need them.

dchil279
08-26-2011, 03:22 PM
Originally posted by misterB2001:
Havent you kind of answered your own question? Brotherhood & Revelations are pretty much side games to keep us entertained until AC3.

They are going to surely save all of their best ideas/improvements for AC3?
I want to kill someone whenever I see something like this on these forums....

As for the OP I agree with you.

shobhit7777777
08-26-2011, 03:49 PM
@Calvarok

The already established gameplay mechanics are, #1, fine, and #2, actually being improved with Revelations. The hookblade for faster free-running and ways to escape enemies. But actually, if you look at AC1 to AC2, the enemy AI has come a long way in being more convincing. Even from AC2 to ACB, the guards have had a lot of new behaviours added.

No, sadly they are not. The AI despite the many tweaks is still horrendously underwhelming. I'm sorry but if I can get away with murdering a dude in plain sight of his pal 50 feet away on a rooftop no less, I call 'Dumb AI'. The entire franchise has been plagued with it and after 4 games..this is inexcusable. I can understand moronic guards till the second game, but the feature not being addressed in the following titles?... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif


AC's core gameplay works very well. When you are in a crowd of people, most people will not notice that you don't belong, expecially if they're not actively looking for you. The guards are smart enough to search all the surrounding crowds when they're actively looking for you. and if they're just on guard duty, then it's not unusual to think that the guy with the crossbow in the middle of the cardinals in their bodyguard. Bodyguards were very common in Renaissance times, because muggers and thiefs were VERY common in Rennaisance cities.

Again, I disagree. The crowd mechanic introduced in AC2 has been left alone....and while an awesome addition it now needs a rework. The minor flaws have become glaring chinks in the armour. In AC2 you felt 'great now I can actually blend' but realised the unrealistic nature of it, but you let it slide as you see how in the next game this can be improved upon...again Zilch. The devs need to get rid of the immersion breaking groups of five on scripted paths, the way they react as Ezio joins their group, the way Guards react to Ezio blending within them. The entire Social Stealth system is outdated, unrealistic and immersion breaking.

Oh an bodyguards would not wear flourishing robes and expensive armour. Ezio is dressed like an Uber Nobleman. What about the times where he just disappears in a crowd of brown/gray clad people?


And Exotic gameplay was about a missions type. A mission type where you play through an interactive set-piece after a stealth bit. And they were all really fun.


But was it worth the development time and effort which could have been spent on an armour removal system? or a better Notoriety mechanic? or better AI?

the "Exotic" gameplay was unimaginative drivel IMO. You fly a bomber and bomb towers... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif compared to the core gameplay of AC when you follow targets, gain info, scale towers, assassinate, poison, use distractions, blend in. The Core gameplay of AC is fresh and full of potential...why not tap it? But nope...here's a greek fire..go on ye lil Arsonist! Wow! How fun and refreshing..not to mention innovative.


I hope Revelations rectifies the problems but I doubt it.


To the OP, I value stealth as well. But AC is not an "all stealth" game and never has been. It has always been - in my mind - both, you choose which way you want to play. That said, the pendulum has swung too far in the pointless category. The only reason to bother with stealth is for the personal fun of it. When Assassin's Creed games have been most successful is when stealth is optional but rewarded: Charge in against stiff opposition for fun, or take the long but easy path of no resistance.


I understand that it is not a stealth game (as I stated earlier...it is about PLAYER FREEDOM http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif) but the fact remains, a majority of the people including me enjoy the fantasy of being a stealthy assassin. The issues are not just related to stealth alone. The Crowd too needs a lot of the work and subsequently the notoriety, add to that the growing importance of "Exotic Gameplay" which IMO is a leech on Ubi's limited resources.
Also when we consider the first game it has all the mechanics to be a stealth game and the combat could be punishing. So it is fair to say that AC started out as a Stealth game and then opened up to a Stealth/Action/Adventure title as the combat system was fully realised. I don't mind the combat being worked on...it is a core part of the game, but at least show the stealth some love http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

kriegerdesgottes
08-26-2011, 03:50 PM
I agree lol, Ubisoft does not and has never viewed Brotherhood or Revelations as "side games" and nor should we. They have only said they save the numbers I, II, III, for new ancestors. That is all they have said regarding the games. They have however been very clear that Brotherhood and revelations are " full" and "Big" AC games.

misterB2001
08-26-2011, 03:56 PM
Originally posted by dchil279:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by misterB2001:
Havent you kind of answered your own question? Brotherhood & Revelations are pretty much side games to keep us entertained until AC3.

They are going to surely save all of their best ideas/improvements for AC3?
I want to kill someone whenever someone says something like this on these forums....

As for the OP I agree with you. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>you want to kill me for having a different opinion to yours?

Wow.

shobhit7777777
08-26-2011, 04:02 PM
@MisterB

you want to kill me for having a different opinion to yours?

Wow

I'm sure he/she didn't mean it http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Lets keep it cordial guys....and On topic.

misterB2001
08-26-2011, 04:09 PM
probably not, but it looks much worse written down than it would in a normal conversation....

luckyto
08-26-2011, 04:11 PM
We are Assassins... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

E-Zekiel
08-26-2011, 04:20 PM
While I don't disagree with your points, OP, I don't really see why it's an issue, myself? I feel that the core mechanics are solid and enjoy them thoroughly. I really do.

The only thing I could think of was something already said in the thread - some cover-based stealth. Mind you, I don't want EVERYTHING to revolve around cover-based actions, because then I might as well be playing a third person shooter, and while I don't dislike them, it's just not Assassin's Creed. In a small sense you can do SOME cover (holding R1 and pressing X without moving to duck) but beyond that there isn't really a lot of variety with it.

dchil279
08-26-2011, 04:30 PM
Originally posted by misterB2001:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by dchil279:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by misterB2001:
Havent you kind of answered your own question? Brotherhood & Revelations are pretty much side games to keep us entertained until AC3.

They are going to surely save all of their best ideas/improvements for AC3?
I want to kill someone whenever someone says something like this on these forums....

As for the OP I agree with you. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>you want to kill me for having a different opinion to yours?

Wow. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
no. I said "I want to kill someone..." which in the english language can be used to exaggerate one's anger. But I do apologize if you felt I threatened you.

Calvarok
08-26-2011, 06:43 PM
I think some people might have not understood me, and I think I forgot to plainly sate it in my giant paragraph posts, but I realize that there are problems with the way the game works right now.

However, I think that the majority of these problems do not exist ans an intrinisc fault of the core gameplay systems. The blend system as is, is not as imerssive as it could be. But with a few minor tweaks to it, it would work fine. If blend groups with people who looked nothing like you merely slowed guard detection (enough for it to actually help you out) and blend groups with hooded people of similar hued clothing made you invisible, then the system would work. Without redesigning it, or doing anything major. If Ubi goes and makes a complicated blending system, where every individual person between you and the guard's field of view at any given point in time is calculated, Ubisoft #1, would not be able to optimize that system to stay within the required disk space, and #2, would have been neglecting things that actually do need a revamp.

I agree that AC isn't perfect, but I think that whenever Ubisoft can work within the established mechanics to fix the problem, they should. All of that just leads to a more streamlined development process, which leads to more bug fixes, testing, polishing, and well rounded content.

And blending as a system works far better than AC1's groupless blending. You're not allowed to talk about immersion-breaking without explaining how guards are supposed to be fooled by someone with a big knife on his back, blades in his belt, and a sword in his side, pretending to be a PRIEST, when priests have taken a vow to not carry weapons. At least it was considered normal for nobles and civilians to have weapons in the Renaissance.

But yeah, I understand that the OP probably didn't like that part of AC1, and is focusing on how ACB's system wasn't that great either.

As I said, I think the system works just fine, with a few tweaks.

Just like the combat would work fine, if some enemies could not be damaged by killstreaks or counters until their health was low enough.
And combat would feel more intense if guard's animations for combo attacks showed them defending against you, but just barely, instead of them getting blood spurts without their armor even being torn, and if killstreak animations showed the guard trying to attack, but Ezio using that against him. (Most of the killstreak animations show the guard raising their hands and saying no instead of defending themselves)

Half the problem with combat is the way it is percieved. If it looked more like the guards took initiative, it would seem like they did.

Animuses
08-26-2011, 09:41 PM
People still judging the demo as if it were the final game... No comment.

Serrachio
08-26-2011, 10:02 PM
Originally posted by Animuses:
People still judging the demo as if it were the final game... No comment.

Which is what allows fixes to be made to remove inconsistencies and minor errors.

Calvarok
08-26-2011, 10:22 PM
Originally posted by Serrachio:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Animuses:
People still judging the demo as if it were the final game... No comment.

Which is what allows fixes to be made to remove inconsistencies and minor errors. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Well, not really. Pointing out problems helps, but burying that under paragraphs of Ubihate and moping makes you more difficult to take seriously and read, and for the community managers who read almost every post every day, well, they will not react well to that.

I love reading threads about constructive criticism, but most threads being made these days are anything but.

kriegerdesgottes
08-26-2011, 10:49 PM
I like how much you assume you know exactly what's actually going on at Ubisoft and exactly what all is going on in the AC franchise. And if people don't complain about the things that bother them about the franchise, then the developers will not know how strongly we feel about one thing or another. They aren't going to necessarily blow us all off for being angry at something. That is ridiculous. Ubisoft is one of the best companies at listening to their fan base. I am fairly sure they don't just throw out the angry ones and only read the "docile" posts lol. Ridiculous.

Calvarok
08-26-2011, 10:55 PM
Originally posted by kriegerdesgotte:
I like how much you assume you know exactly what's actually going on at Ubisoft and exactly what all is going on in the AC franchise. And if people don't complain about the things that bother them about the franchise, then the developers will not know how strongly we feel about one thing or another. They aren't going to necessarily blow us all off for being angry at something. That is ridiculous. Ubisoft is one of the best companies at listening to their fan base. I am fairly sure they don't just throw out the angry ones and only read the "docile" posts lol. Ridiculous.
Well I know that they probably read whatever they see, but an angrily worded one is harder to understand, and the anger doesn't make they idea seem any better. I'm not speaking as if I know what Ubisoft does, but I know that any human who is insulted doesn't relay information or ideas faster because of it. Ubisoft is paid to do it, so it's not like they'll delay, but still, it doesn't help the community, it doesn't help anything, if you lose your composure instead of clearly stating what you want changed or added.

Is it really too much to ask? I love this forum when everyone is speaking logically and rationally, and debates where everyone puts a lot of thought into both sides and doesn't just try to make their side win. I think we'd give ubi much more valuble info if we were more polite to each other and them.

Animuses
08-26-2011, 10:57 PM
Originally posted by kriegerdesgotte:
I like how much you assume you know exactly what's actually going on at Ubisoft and exactly what all is going on in the AC franchise.
I laughed because it's true.

kriegerdesgottes
08-26-2011, 10:57 PM
Originally posted by Calvarok:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by kriegerdesgotte:
I like how much you assume you know exactly what's actually going on at Ubisoft and exactly what all is going on in the AC franchise. And if people don't complain about the things that bother them about the franchise, then the developers will not know how strongly we feel about one thing or another. They aren't going to necessarily blow us all off for being angry at something. That is ridiculous. Ubisoft is one of the best companies at listening to their fan base. I am fairly sure they don't just throw out the angry ones and only read the "docile" posts lol. Ridiculous.
Well I know that they probably read whatever they see, but an angrily worded one is harder to understand, and the anger doesn't make they idea seem any better. I'm not speaking as if I know what Ubisoft does, but I know that any human who is insulted doesn't relay information or ideas faster because of it. Ubisoft is paid to do it, so it's not like they'll delay, but still, it doesn't help the community, it doesn't help anything, if you lose your composure instead of clearly stating what you want changed or added.

Is it really too much to ask? I love this forum when everyone is speaking logically and rationally, and debates where everyone puts a lot of thought into both sides and doesn't just try to make their side win. I think we'd give ubi much more valuble info if we were more polite to each other and them. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well I can certainly agree with that. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

CRUDFACE
08-27-2011, 02:50 AM
Originally posted by eagleforlife1:
I agree with everything you say, although I don't like the idea of the bombs. We're basically playing as Batman now. What I would like to see is a cover system; that would really add to the stealth of the franchise.

nah, I kill like a hundred guards per hour. Batman killed nobody, or at least tries not to. But I'm just joking with yah dude. Personally, I think I could over allot of things as long as Ezio put on civilian clothes and stuff when not on main assassin missions. just looks stupid walking down the street while the guards are on the look out for an assassin...and my base has a flag on it to...screw it, I'm gonna play Deus Ex for a while.

Lol, that one has a cover system, but Ac has a good cover system with line of site and the ability to blend, right?

shobhit7777777
08-27-2011, 05:26 AM
@Calvarok

As I said, I think the system works just fine, with a few tweaks.

Tweaks which should have been implemented much earlier.

See, you see this as an attack against Ubi, like a hate letter from a stealth fanboy....it is not. It is simply a complaint, regarding the non-evolution of critical mechanics of the game.

It's been 4 games in and we still have the same social stealth system and AI issues (I'm assuming so for Revelations as we have no new info on the crowds)

We are satisfied with driving tanks, bombing factories and cool looking combos when a large part of the game has been shunned by the devs.
I enjoy the combat and the free running, love it in fact but the game feels ridiculously cheap when it comes to sneaking about. Even player freedom in approach is taken away, replaced by scripted assassination/encounters.
There is asymmetry here, more focus on Michael Bay than Michael Mann.

I'm not calling out the gameplay, as you have mistakenly assumed, I'm calling out the disparity in the development of Action, Social and Stealth gameplay loops.


If Ubi goes and makes a complicated blending system, where every individual person between you and the guard's field of view at any given point in time is calculated, Ubisoft #1, would not be able to optimize that system to stay within the required disk space, and #2, would have been neglecting things that actually do need a revamp.

Solution:

1. Use smaller mobile groups
2. Calculate visibility by drawing line from guard's FOV to Ezio's Core (Centre). If the line is unobstructed for more than 5 seconds, guards are suspicious, their FOV adjusts to keep Ezio in sight longer. 10 seconds they get alerted and follow to investigate
3. Add weightage to armour and weaponry...affecting time taken

This is just an ad-hoc solution, I'm sure Ubi will do a million times better. Given the density of guards and their range of vision, this would be a relatively easy task and not as process intensive as you'd think.


And blending as a system works far better than AC1's groupless blending. You're not allowed to talk about immersion-breaking without explaining how guards are supposed to be fooled by someone with a big knife on his back, blades in his belt, and a sword in his side, pretending to be a PRIEST, when priests have taken a vow to not carry weapons. At least it was considered normal for nobles and civilians to have weapons in the Renaissance.

But yeah, I understand that the OP probably didn't like that part of AC1, and is focusing on how ACB's system wasn't that great either.

I give credit where it is due, I really liked the blending in AC2, it was a great solution but now it needs a revamp. I don't see a natural progression/evolution of such an important mechanic.
Plus you are right, I wasn't too keen on the 'Walking Tank Priest' but since the concept was so fresh I let it go....and that is exactly why the AC2 blend was awesome, it innovated and built upon on a pre-existing game mechanic...progression.


Well, not really. Pointing out problems helps, but burying that under paragraphs of Ubihate and moping makes you more difficult to take seriously and read, and for the community managers who read almost every post every day, well, they will not react well to that

Well, I completely agree with you there, but don't you think that it is high time that we point out the state of stagnation that half the game is in? How outdated the game feels when you play it a certain way? The glaring faults with the AI?
Sorry, but sometimes 'strongly worded' gets the message across better.

LightRey
08-27-2011, 05:47 AM
Originally posted by shobhit7777777:
@Calvarok
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">As I said, I think the system works just fine, with a few tweaks.

Tweaks which should have been implemented much earlier.

See, you see this as an attack against Ubi, like a hate letter from a stealth fanboy....it is not. It is simply a complaint, regarding the non-evolution of critical mechanics of the game.

It's been 4 games in and we still have the same social stealth system and AI issues (I'm assuming so for Revelations as we have no new info on the crowds)

We are satisfied with driving tanks, bombing factories and cool looking combos when a large part of the game has been shunned by the devs.
I enjoy the combat and the free running, love it in fact but the game feels ridiculously cheap when it comes to sneaking about. Even player freedom in approach is taken away, replaced by scripted assassination/encounters.
There is asymmetry here, more focus on Michael Bay than Michael Mann.

I'm not calling out the gameplay, as you have mistakenly assumed, I'm calling out the disparity in the development of Action, Social and Stealth gameplay loops.


If Ubi goes and makes a complicated blending system, where every individual person between you and the guard's field of view at any given point in time is calculated, Ubisoft #1, would not be able to optimize that system to stay within the required disk space, and #2, would have been neglecting things that actually do need a revamp.

Solution:

1. Use smaller mobile groups
2. Calculate visibility by drawing line from guard's FOV to Ezio's Core (Centre). If the line is unobstructed for more than 5 seconds, guards are suspicious, their FOV adjusts to keep Ezio in sight longer. 10 seconds they get alerted and follow to investigate
3. Add weightage to armour and weaponry...affecting time taken

This is just an ad-hoc solution, I'm sure Ubi will do a million times better. Given the density of guards and their range of vision, this would be a relatively easy task and not as process intensive as you'd think.


And blending as a system works far better than AC1's groupless blending. You're not allowed to talk about immersion-breaking without explaining how guards are supposed to be fooled by someone with a big knife on his back, blades in his belt, and a sword in his side, pretending to be a PRIEST, when priests have taken a vow to not carry weapons. At least it was considered normal for nobles and civilians to have weapons in the Renaissance.

But yeah, I understand that the OP probably didn't like that part of AC1, and is focusing on how ACB's system wasn't that great either.

I give credit where it is due, I really liked the blending in AC2, it was a great solution but now it needs a revamp. I don't see a natural progression/evolution of such an important mechanic.
Plus you are right, I wasn't too keen on the 'Walking Tank Priest' but since the concept was so fresh I let it go....and that is exactly why the AC2 blend was awesome, it innovated and built upon on a pre-existing game mechanic...progression.


Well, not really. Pointing out problems helps, but burying that under paragraphs of Ubihate and moping makes you more difficult to take seriously and read, and for the community managers who read almost every post every day, well, they will not react well to that

Well, I completely agree with you there, but don't you think that it is high time that we point out the state of stagnation that half the game is in? How outdated the game feels when you play it a certain way? The glaring faults with the AI?
Sorry, but sometimes 'strongly worded' gets the message across better. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I think some of your suggested solutions would take up a lot of CPU.

Black_Widow9
08-27-2011, 12:39 PM
Originally posted by kriegerdesgotte:
if people don't complain about the things that bother them about the franchise, then the developers will not know how strongly we feel about one thing or another. They aren't going to necessarily blow us all off for being angry at something. That is ridiculous. Ubisoft is one of the best companies at listening to their fan base. I am fairly sure they don't just throw out the angry ones and only read the "docile" posts

This is so true. Unless we are personally attacked which doesn't happen very often, we don't take it that way. As Forum Managers we want to help get you answers and pass along your Feedback to the Developers who read the Forums as well. We definitely want your Feedback and ask for it often.
The problem with creating so many threads like this is that they get lost and then any Feedback you had is unaccounted for. This is why we create specific Topics for Feedback so we can check them daily to pass along the information. Also posting in a clear, concise and constructive way is the best way to get your message across. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif
That being said, please post in them accordingly.
Thanks

<span class="ev_code_RED">Topic Closed</span>