PDA

View Full Version : Stamina bar



bladencrowd
08-02-2009, 09:29 AM
I think adding a stamina bar would really improve the realism of the game. It's to unrealistic to have some dude running non-stop full pelt for miles and miles. You should be forced into a jog or walk after a while of running from the guards and constantly blocking their hits. It's stupid that you can block a strong attack from any soldier until they grab or guard break you. Instead of fighting 20 guards with ease you should straining to stay alive. Walking, sitting on benches, going to a street doctor should be ways to get stamina back. Having a stamina bar would cause a player to actually make realistic choices in the game.

ScytheOfGrim
08-02-2009, 09:37 AM
Straining to stay alive shouldn't be introduced by handicapping you, it should exist through intelligent NPC's.

bladencrowd
08-02-2009, 09:54 AM
When I saw the E3 demo the fighting still seemed to easy, even with more intelligent NPC's. To make it harder and more realistic they should add a stamina bar.

ScytheOfGrim
08-02-2009, 10:05 AM
Originally posted by bladencrowd:
When I saw the E3 demo the fighting still seemed to easy, even with more intelligent NPC's. To make it harder and more realistic they should add a stamina bar.

What you saw at the E3 demo is irrelevant, not because it was just a demo, but because you said "they should".

When, in fact, that's an option, and a very cheap one at that that is nothing more than an easy way out.
What they should do (in pretty much every game) is make it harder through more intelligent NPC's.

Never handicap the player; give the computer more potential.

Iskander_Estel
08-02-2009, 10:07 AM
i think there is no need for that...
if your good at playing you dont run and jump all over the city for 20 minutes...
and some strong hit damage you even if you cover .

at the end the Sync bar is a disguise for a stamina bar.

bladencrowd
08-02-2009, 10:07 AM
So your saying that a stamina bar should have no affect on combat.

Xm3buX
08-02-2009, 10:51 AM
A stamina bar is a bad idea I think, who cares if it makes it more realistic.

There is a machine that can read your ancestors memory through your DNA in this game, if you want realism, I don't think this game is for you.

Danvish
08-02-2009, 10:56 AM
Originally posted by bladencrowd:
So your saying that a stamina bar should have no affect on combat.

Considering Altair and now Ezio is probably in tip top shape (we know Altair was, and give
Ezio few weeks to train as an assassins and I'm sure he'll be too) then it's quite normal they'll be able to run more than just 10 secs. (in COD, i.e, it was so stupid. As a soldier, I can tell you that we're trained to run fast for much more than just 15 secs, and we carrey 40 kgs of equipment/ammunition/weapons.) So actually, most of the time a stamina bar makes the game less realistic in my opinion.

thekyle0
08-02-2009, 11:04 AM
The demo looked easy because they didn't put all the combat features in it. They wanted to make the demo easy so that the people showcasing the demo could make it look good. It was more of a marketing play then trying to show more difficulty. Also, he only fought 3 guards. It shouldn't be that hard for a master assassin to win a fight with 3 mediocre guards. I completely agree with ScytheOfGrim. Handicapping the player is a lazy way to increase the difficulty. Difficulty in Assassin's creed comes from having to plan your options and choosing the best course.

iPlayyx
08-02-2009, 11:11 AM
nope i dont think it should be added, may be realistic but thats y people who make games dont make it to realistic because the game could suck if you add it in, well i know stamia is a good idea, but i dont think it should be added because when running from enemies it wud be a pain to be forced into a jog everytime,but if it is added it wont ruin the game i just think it would be annoying to stop and take a breath every now and then

bladencrowd
08-02-2009, 11:12 AM
Ok then, the sync bar is good for combat and such, but still for running there should be some limit. Unless Ezio is unbelievable shape he shouldn't be able to run from one end of a city to another.

iPlayyx
08-02-2009, 11:17 AM
ok well put it this way,there is no actually limit to a person can sprint for, every1 pushs there limits at some point in there life.i agree running for miles is unrealistic but its wa makes the game good if you took that away it wouldnt really improve the gameplay but would improve the reality of the game, so which would you weather have ?

a game which is already very realistic with graphics,historic accuracy and fighting or...
a game which is full realistic and lacks gameplay? it may not be a big deal with the running but would be annoying to go to a jog while running away from an assassination

AetosEagle
08-02-2009, 11:21 AM
Originally posted by bladencrowd:
Ok then, the sync bar is good for combat and such, but still for running there should be some limit. Unless Ezio is unbelievable shape he shouldn't be able to run from one end of a city to another.

Dude, have you ever heard of marathons? Running the whole length of a city as massive as London, without stopping. Army marines run for AGES with tons of equipment strapped to their back. Ezio would be in an amazing state to be an assassin, otherwise he wouldn't fit the bill. Stamina bars are for old games like GTA: SA and stuff. And plus, the Animus would rule out any possibility of running out of energy, since it's not real, just replaying of a memory. Memories don't get exhausted. The roadside doctor is a different story though, since if your player gets stabbed in the arm, it would be MEGA unrealistic for him to run along like nothing has happened.

Who agrees with me?

thekyle0
08-02-2009, 11:28 AM
^________ http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif________^
'''''''''^join me here^'''''''''

Excelent point dude.

My opinion is that not all games are about being as realistic as possible. Patrice talks in the interviews about finding the perfect balance between immersion and fun. I think they draw the line for immersion at a stamina bar.

iPlayyx
08-02-2009, 11:29 AM
ya mate you make a point, but in marathons there all jogging for about 20 miles maybe more, sprinting is completely different to jogging, no 1 is physicly fit enough to sprint for 20 miles hell not even 10miles ( ok well maye 10 http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif )

yanisaGod
08-02-2009, 11:30 AM
why would you want a stamina bar, i mean would you really want to start running and then 5 minutes later have to stop?

I'm the world best assassin, i kill entire armies with my bare hands, but every ten seconds i have to stop running because i'm tired.

I am EZIO the bad *** freedom and justice phantom, I kill entire armies, i bring my enemies to there knees. I am an ASSASSIN.AND I FOLLOW THE CREED!!!!!!!

NOW THAT'S MORE LIKE IT.

bladencrowd
08-02-2009, 11:43 AM
Getting second thoughts on making the discussion http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif.
Anyways, AetosEagle pretty much destroyed whatever I had to say http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif . The game is played in the Animus so it's based on keeping memories in sync (not dying, killing innocents etc. ). At least the injury mode is in the game.

AetosEagle
08-02-2009, 11:58 AM
I think, bladencrowd, the stamina would fit into the game, with Desmond. If he ever started to run around and stuff, MAYBE it would be useful there. But not with Ezio. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Kaxen6
08-02-2009, 12:13 PM
Bleh. I'm not fond of stamina bars. It interrupts the flow of the game with arbitrary set limit.

>_> I only like 'realism' when it is fun.

Sarcross
08-02-2009, 12:57 PM
Comic?**crossed fingers**

Danvish
08-02-2009, 12:59 PM
Originally posted by Kaxen6:
Bleh. I'm not fond of stamina bars. It interrupts the flow of the game with arbitrary set limit.

>_> I only like 'realism' when it is fun.

Lol, that's how they should make Real life. Real only when they are fun.

Cpt_Yanni
08-02-2009, 03:04 PM
The E3 demo was built in the way that a member of the team "trained" on it so he wouldn't reveal to much new moves and they made the combat "easy" for the demo so it wouldn't take too much time when they showed the demo...

The stamina bar isn't necessary i think...

Edengoth
08-02-2009, 03:16 PM
Originally posted by Danvish:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Kaxen6:
Bleh. I'm not fond of stamina bars. It interrupts the flow of the game with arbitrary set limit.

>_> I only like 'realism' when it is fun.

Lol, that's how they should make Real life. Real only when they are fun. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'll take the Yahtzee quote on this one. "Yeah, it's realistic, but you know what else is realistic? Working at a dead-end job for 40 years, dying of a crippling facial cancer alone and unloved, forgotten within a decade, but you don't see anyone making a game about that, now do you?"
:P

godsmack_darius
08-02-2009, 03:18 PM
Well, for you no, their could be, you havnt bought it or heard of it

And stamina bar would be kinda weird, the chases wouldnt be as fun lol

thekyle0
08-02-2009, 04:59 PM
Originally posted by Edengoth:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Danvish:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Kaxen6:
Bleh. I'm not fond of stamina bars. It interrupts the flow of the game with arbitrary set limit.

>_> I only like 'realism' when it is fun.

Lol, that's how they should make Real life. Real only when they are fun. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'll take the Yahtzee quote on this one. "Yeah, it's realistic, but you know what else is realistic? Working at a dead-end job for 40 years, dying of a crippling facial cancer alone and unloved, forgotten within a decade, but you don't see anyone making a game about that, now do you?"
:P </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I think they called that one Heroine Hero.

EmperorxZurg
08-02-2009, 05:03 PM
lol, u can never catch that dragon d**n it!

thekyle0
08-02-2009, 05:12 PM
I always passed out playing that game and woke up by an empty rabbit suit. I don't know why.

SWJS
08-02-2009, 05:27 PM
Originally posted by ScytheOfGrim:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by bladencrowd:
When I saw the E3 demo the fighting still seemed to easy, even with more intelligent NPC's. To make it harder and more realistic they should add a stamina bar.

What you saw at the E3 demo is irrelevant, not because it was just a demo, but because you said "they should".

When, in fact, that's an option, and a very cheap one at that that is nothing more than an easy way out.
What they should do (in pretty much every game) is make it harder through more intelligent NPC's.

Never handicap the player; give the computer more potential. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>I agree with Grim here. Crippling the player isn't fair to the player. I myself play games to relieve stress and have fun. Stamina meters are just one of the many horrible things to add in a game.

I agree with making the NPCs more dangerous. But NEVER make NPCs gang up on the Player. It isn't fair and brings frustration. Make NPCs smart enough to use the player character's weaknesses against them and severely hurt them if they make themselves open to such strikes. 20 against one isn't a fair fight, and when all 20 attack at once, the PC has very little chance for survival.

True, it would have been smarter for soldiers and guards to attack at once, but guards REALLY attacked one by one back then. Guards and soldiers believed in honor, and attacking unfairly in a one-on-one duel was seen as unhonorable. It was also natural for soldiers to yeild to their enemy when they knew they had no chance of winning. As such, AC was made more realistic by these features.

I say AC2 is fine the way it is.

thekyle0
08-02-2009, 06:03 PM
uuuhhh. How can you say AC2 is fine the way it is when we don't really know how it is?

Even if it was historically accurate for guards to attack one at a time, I didn't like it. I don't think anybody liked it in the end. It makes things repetetive because that eliminates the excitement from the game. If you know that you can fight 20 enemies at once and win then what's the point of avoiding exposure? AC1 didn't fulfill it's potential because it lacked a need for strategy in fights. Here's my rant to explain why that is.

In AC1, if you became exposed, you could run and hide, or stand and fight. The fighting most commonly ended up with using counters until every enemy was dead, or running away. As Patrice said, "Some players will find a way to play that works and they will only use that approach from then on." This fact lead a lot of the gameplay in AC1 to become repetative. What I would do personally is try to make the fights more realistic. Instead of letting them surround me I would lead them to a narrow alley where it would make sense for them to attack me one at a time since they could only fit in the alley single file. Other times I would go to a roof-top and attack them as they tried to climb over the ledge. If the drop was far enough they were killed pretty quickly. But, not all players had the same idea to make the game more diverse. In AC2, by having the enemies attack in unison, they drive the player to learn the strategies that I used to stay alive in combat. But, not all players want to adjust completely. Maybe a compromise could solve the problem and satisfy everyone's demands.
Ex: for the first 10 or 15 seconds of combat or the until the first couple guards are killed, the guards won't really take the fight seriously. But once they realize how capable Ezio is, they will start to attack in unison. This would be the time to adapt and adopt a new strategy. Run for your life. Either hide, or find the narrow alley, the high ground, or anywhere that gives you the advantage.

A scenario like this improves the game because it ties other main features of the game to the fighting system. It requires the player to use the free running engine in their fighting strategy. It also requires the player to plan how they will fight rather then always using the same strategy.

Bottom line, by having the AI do something as simple as coordinating their attacks, the game is expanded to provide a much more open combat experience.

EmperorxZurg
08-02-2009, 06:35 PM
totally, Ubi should take a note from Kyle on that

Ureh
08-02-2009, 08:30 PM
I hope when Ezio is platforming the buildings that he isn't affected by stamina. It would be terrible if he was mid-jump from one roof to another then his stamina ran out and he fell on top of a few people.

Edengoth
08-02-2009, 09:17 PM
Originally posted by Ureh:
It would be terrible if he was mid-jump from one roof to another then his stamina ran out and he fell on top of a few people.
Hey, they said they tried to make him able to assassinate from ANHYWHERE, this time. Maybe that includes crashing down on someone from 10 stories up. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

SWJS
08-02-2009, 10:31 PM
Originally posted by thekyle0:
uuuhhh. How can you say AC2 is fine the way it is when we don't really know how it is?

Even if it was historically accurate for guards to attack one at a time, I didn't like it. I don't think anybody liked it in the end. It makes things repetetive because that eliminates the excitement from the game. If you know that you can fight 20 enemies at once and win then what's the point of avoiding exposure? AC1 didn't fulfill it's potential because it lacked a need for strategy in fights. Here's my rant to explain why that is.

In AC1, if you became exposed, you could run and hide, or stand and fight. The fighting most commonly ended up with using counters until every enemy was dead, or running away. As Patrice said, "Some players will find a way to play that works and they will only use that approach from then on." This fact lead a lot of the gameplay in AC1 to become repetative. What I would do personally is try to make the fights more realistic. Instead of letting them surround me I would lead them to a narrow alley where it would make sense for them to attack me one at a time since they could only fit in the alley single file. Other times I would go to a roof-top and attack them as they tried to climb over the ledge. If the drop was far enough they were killed pretty quickly. But, not all players had the same idea to make the game more diverse. In AC2, by having the enemies attack in unison, they drive the player to learn the strategies that I used to stay alive in combat. But, not all players want to adjust completely. Maybe a compromise could solve the problem and satisfy everyone's demands.
Ex: for the first 10 or 15 seconds of combat or the until the first couple guards are killed, the guards won't really take the fight seriously. But once they realize how capable Ezio is, they will start to attack in unison. This would be the time to adapt and adopt a new strategy. Run for your life. Either hide, or find the narrow alley, the high ground, or anywhere that gives you the advantage.

A scenario like this improves the game because it ties other main features of the game to the fighting system. It requires the player to use the free running engine in their fighting strategy. It also requires the player to plan how they will fight rather then always using the same strategy.

Bottom line, by having the AI do something as simple as coordinating their attacks, the game is expanded to provide a much more open combat experience. I liked it, because it was accurate and didn't make the game frustrating to play, because really, AC was the only game I've played where enemies didn't knock you down and gang up on you until you died. I can say I'm fine with AC2 because I KNOW Ubisoft has worked their butts off to fix issues with the first game and make ACII the best experience yet. However, I don't feel any better about Patrice's statement, as the way I always played AC was fight and run away if there were too many guards. Those ways are now gone and I'll most likely be screaming at my TV until I find a way to play AC2 without dying every five minutes. I'm also displeased with how much the fans are complaining about things in AC2. The devs break their butts and fix the things that everyone hated about AC, and they still find something to complain about. Dev diaries this, swimming that, AI this, I hate Ezio that. Honestly, I love the AC series because it's fun, original, has a great story, the counter kills are amazing and brutal, and lets me stab ugly guys with swords. I appreciate the work Ubisoft and it's employees do to make games like AC for us, so at this point I really couldn't care if they made Ezio have rocket farts to fly around with, I'd still play it, I'd still have fun, and I'd still like it.

Okay, maybe that last metaphor there was just a bit too ludicrous, but it's true. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/shady.gif

Edengoth
08-02-2009, 11:01 PM
Wow, that was quite the Magnum Opus of a post there.
I agree. But somehow I think it's all just the tension from the hype. I think the forums will be overflowing with love once ACII is actually released.

Danvish
08-03-2009, 01:26 AM
Originally posted by EzioTheAssassin:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by thekyle0:
uuuhhh. How can you say AC2 is fine the way it is when we don't really know how it is?

Even if it was historically accurate for guards to attack one at a time, I didn't like it. I don't think anybody liked it in the end. It makes things repetetive because that eliminates the excitement from the game. If you know that you can fight 20 enemies at once and win then what's the point of avoiding exposure? AC1 didn't fulfill it's potential because it lacked a need for strategy in fights. Here's my rant to explain why that is.

In AC1, if you became exposed, you could run and hide, or stand and fight. The fighting most commonly ended up with using counters until every enemy was dead, or running away. As Patrice said, "Some players will find a way to play that works and they will only use that approach from then on." This fact lead a lot of the gameplay in AC1 to become repetative. What I would do personally is try to make the fights more realistic. Instead of letting them surround me I would lead them to a narrow alley where it would make sense for them to attack me one at a time since they could only fit in the alley single file. Other times I would go to a roof-top and attack them as they tried to climb over the ledge. If the drop was far enough they were killed pretty quickly. But, not all players had the same idea to make the game more diverse. In AC2, by having the enemies attack in unison, they drive the player to learn the strategies that I used to stay alive in combat. But, not all players want to adjust completely. Maybe a compromise could solve the problem and satisfy everyone's demands.
Ex: for the first 10 or 15 seconds of combat or the until the first couple guards are killed, the guards won't really take the fight seriously. But once they realize how capable Ezio is, they will start to attack in unison. This would be the time to adapt and adopt a new strategy. Run for your life. Either hide, or find the narrow alley, the high ground, or anywhere that gives you the advantage.

A scenario like this improves the game because it ties other main features of the game to the fighting system. It requires the player to use the free running engine in their fighting strategy. It also requires the player to plan how they will fight rather then always using the same strategy.

Bottom line, by having the AI do something as simple as coordinating their attacks, the game is expanded to provide a much more open combat experience. I liked it, because it was accurate and didn't make the game frustrating to play, because really, AC was the only game I've played where enemies didn't knock you down and gang up on you until you died. I can say I'm fine with AC2 because I KNOW Ubisoft has worked their butts off to fix issues with the first game and make ACII the best experience yet. However, I don't feel any better about Patrice's statement, as the way I always played AC was fight and run away if there were too many guards. Those ways are now gone and I'll most likely be screaming at my TV until I find a way to play AC2 without dying every five minutes. I'm also displeased with how much the fans are complaining about things in AC2. The devs break their butts and fix the things that everyone hated about AC, and they still find something to complain about. Dev diaries this, swimming that, AI this, I hate Ezio that. Honestly, I love the AC series because it's fun, original, has a great story, the counter kills are amazing and brutal, and lets me stab ugly guys with swords. I appreciate the work Ubisoft and it's employees do to make games like AC for us, so at this point I really couldn't care if they made Ezio have rocket farts to fly around with, I'd still play it, I'd still have fun, and I'd still like it.

Okay, maybe that last metaphor there was just a bit too ludicrous, but it's true. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/shady.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Look dude, people are complaining because people pay good money to play this game. I think almost everyone in this forum has a legitimit copy of AC that he paid with his hard-earned money. As long as people pay for this games, it's their right to complain.

Beside that, I don't think anyone here is really complaining, it's more like "raising up possibilities or having opinions on stuff that are supposed to be in the game". Again, I think almost anyone here WILL buy ACII, so they have the right to complain.

Anyway Kyl0, I agree with every word you said, everytime I play the game I'm trying to do it with something I didn't use in the past (different strategies, different weapon, etc.)
What I think would really solve this problem is difficulties levels. Like in the low one, the guards will wait and attack in their turn, in the higher ones, however, you'll have to find more strategies.

Xanatos2007
08-03-2009, 01:40 AM
I just hope they give the player better options for planning. I know it's all based on memories where everything is 'as it happened', but I liked reviewing my investigation notes in AC1 and coming up with the best way to reach my target. Going along the wall like a Ninja in William's citadel, sneaking around the docks to get at Sibrand, pinpointing Jubair's exact location using my map and data gathered during investigations, I was dissapointed that there wasn't more of it. They should make the actual assassinations harder I think, I found escaping waaaaay too easy (heck, most of the investigations were harder than the actual mission). You didn't even really need to view ANY of your notes to complete the game.

So yeah, more thinking required. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/typing.gif

Danvish
08-03-2009, 01:52 AM
Originally posted by Xanatos2007:
I just hope they give the player better options for planning. I know it's all based on memories where everything is 'as it happened', but I liked reviewing my investigation notes in AC1 and coming up with the best way to reach my target. Going along the wall like a Ninja in William's citadel, sneaking around the docks to get at Sibrand, pinpointing Jubair's exact location using my map and data gathered during investigations, I was dissapointed that there wasn't more of it. They should make the actual assassinations harder I think, I found escaping waaaaay too easy (heck, most of the investigations were harder than the actual mission). You didn't even really need to view ANY of your notes to complete the game.

So yeah, more thinking required. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/typing.gif

You could review your notes?.. how?..

Edengoth
08-03-2009, 02:05 AM
Open the menu, click on memory log, and scroll through the memories. Some of them have attachments and some of those attachments are maps.

obliviondoll
08-03-2009, 05:14 AM
I agree with the people saying a stamina bar is a bad idea.

I also agree with the people saying someone who bought the game has a right to complain. Freedom of speech and all that. Of course, that means people who think complaining about the game is stupid also have the right to complain about the people complaining about the game. For the same reason.

And people like me have the right to read it all and laugh at the lot of it. Then post something which makes someone else laugh at me.

bladencrowd
08-03-2009, 07:13 AM
@ EziotheAssassin

I'm not one of those people who need a "perfect" AC2. It was just a idea that I thought would improve the realism in the gameplay (yes yes I know it wouldn't http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif) but don't accuse me of being a complainer.

SWJS
08-03-2009, 09:20 AM
Originally posted by bladencrowd:
@ EziotheAssassin

I'm not one of those people who need a "perfect" AC2. It was just a idea that I thought would improve the realism in the gameplay (yes yes I know it wouldn't http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif) but don't accuse me of being a complainer. Oh no, my comment wasn't directed at you. I'm not accusing you at all. Your question was actually logical. It would seem as though a stamina bar would be a good addition to a series like Assassin's Creed, but there are also disatvantages, such as it messing up the parkour. Giving Desmond the ability to sprint, but giving the stamina bar to him, would make more sense. Altair and Ezio did things like Parkour on a regular basis. Desmond didn't. So it can still be a feature to add. After all, Ezio isn't our only assassin to play as, remember?


Originally posted by obliviondoll:
I also agree with the people saying someone who bought the game has a right to complain. Freedom of speech and all that. Of course, that means people who think complaining about the game is stupid also have the right to complain about the people complaining about the game. For the same reason.

And people like me have the right to read it all and laugh at the lot of it. Good point. I actually laughed when I read that, because since it IS true, Danvish really burned himself trying to make a point. But I do it all the time. I have the burn scars to prove it. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif


Originally posted by Danvish:
Look dude, people are complaining because people pay good money to play this game. I think almost everyone in this forum has a legitimit copy of AC that he paid with his hard-earned money. As long as people pay for this games, it's their right to complain.

Beside that, I don't think anyone here is really complaining, it's more like "raising up possibilities or having opinions on stuff that are supposed to be in the game". Again, I think almost anyone here WILL buy ACII, so they have the right to complain.

Anyway Kyl0, I agree with every word you said, everytime I play the game I'm trying to do it with something I didn't use in the past (different strategies, different weapon, etc.)
What I think would really solve this problem is difficulties levels. Like in the low one, the guards will wait and attack in their turn, in the higher ones, however, you'll have to find more strategies.
If you complain about it, why would you buy it? And if what you buy doesn't satisfy you, you can return it and get your money returned to you. Why complain when you can just return it for your money back? Paying for it doesn't really invoke the right to complain. You have the right to complain. You can complain because you don't have enough money to get it in the first place. I do it all the time. We complain because we are human. Not all people enjoy hearing complaints, since many of us work to satisfy the consumer. However, feedback, whether negative or positive, can be a great asset in perfecting your goal. And Ubisoft has done just this. They listened to US, heard our complaints, and then began working on correcting them. And now, in a few short months, we'll have the answers to all our problems. My point is, Ubisoft has taken the time to make AC ten times better. Why would we want to alter it any further?

Naturally it's fine to speculate and such. It's what keeps forums like this alive and what makes them enjoyable to visit. But a lot of us are coming on hoping Ubi will listen to us and make ACII what we want it to be. Ubi already has enough on their plate. They're developing more games than ACII, and the ACII team is already working to make a product to please us. I just think we should stick to speculating, let them produce the game, give out more info over the course of the next four months, and enjoy the awesomeness ACII will become. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Now, in the matter of a stamina bar, it IS a good idea, but it would be better suited for Desmond, for reasons I mentioned earlier in this post. It would probably ruin the parkour in Renaissance Italy, but it can still be a good feature if used in the right place. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Danvish
08-03-2009, 11:47 AM
Well, have I said anywhere I'M complaining?
I didn't, cause personaly, I don't like to complain and I think the 1st game was a very very good game, and I do believe the 2nd game will be even better than that.
Point is mate, as long as you paid for something, you have the right to complain for it, going into details, not many stores will refund you.
But speaking generaly again, if someone who bought the game, thinks they should have done things otherwise, it's their right to, don't you agree?

Maybe using the word "complain" is a bit harsh, I liked what you said "good/bad feedback".

and I don't really think I've burnt myself, I try not to http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Xanatos2007
08-03-2009, 09:42 PM
Who says Desmond can't do Parkour? Just because he spends most of his time in AC1 lying down doesn't mean he doesn't know how to run, he just has nowhere to run to. And I can't imagine him practicing kong vaults over the Animus in his spare time.

Well, maybe I can. Kaxen?

thekyle0
08-04-2009, 07:47 AM
The Animus looks like it's better for speed vaults.