PDA

View Full Version : is assassins creed dead



lordfrederik
08-25-2011, 04:12 AM
since ac1 assassins creed has lost it's bad *** game play no killing civilians claymores helicopter battles and tomb raider style tombs crap main stream multi-player ubi has kinda kill assassins creed in my eyes why should my opinion matter well i have brought every assassins creed in special edition and done 100% of off-line trophies and play about 40 different games a year so i know a good game also ubi is now focusing on climbing well as we found out in brink CLIMBING DOSE NOT MAKE A GOOD GAME

LightRey
08-25-2011, 04:15 AM
3 things:

1. Use punctuation marks.

2. AC is more popular than ever, so even if you don't like it, it's most certainly not dead.

3. Go rant someplace else.

Xanatos2007
08-25-2011, 04:42 AM
AC is still very much alive, although I personally feel that it's dead inside (having little or nothing to do with "Assassins" or a "Creed").

Assassin_M
08-25-2011, 05:22 AM
Originally posted by lordfrederik:
since ac1 assassins creed has lost it's bad *** game play no killing civilians claymores helicopter battles and tomb raider style tombs crap main stream multi-player ubi has kinda kill assassins creed in my eyes why should my opinion matter well i have brought every assassins creed in special edition and done 100% of off-line trophies and play about 40 different games a year so i know a good game also ubi is now focusing on climbing well as we found out in brink CLIMBING DOSE NOT MAKE A GOOD GAME
You are not a true AC fan, go play GTA.

Ioder
08-25-2011, 05:32 AM
Originally posted by lordfrederik:
since ac1 assassins creed has lost it's bad *** game play no killing civilians claymores helicopter battles and tomb raider style tombs crap main stream multi-player ubi has kinda kill assassins creed in my eyes why should my opinion matter well i have brought every assassins creed in special edition and done 100% of off-line trophies and play about 40 different games a year so i know a good game also ubi is now focusing on climbing well as we found out in brink CLIMBING DOSE NOT MAKE A GOOD GAME
Do you even understand what Assassin's Creed is? You can buy and waste as much money as you want a year, that doesn't change the fact that your an idiot.
EDIT: Did you really mention helicopter battles up there? Where the hell do you see a helicopter in ANY Assassin's Creed game. Have you ever actually played the series?

persiateddy95
08-25-2011, 06:03 AM
I think he means there are no Helicopter battles in AC and he wants that.

...

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

...

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

Ioder
08-25-2011, 06:05 AM
Originally posted by persiateddy95:
I think he means there are no Helicopter battles in AC and he wants that.

...

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

...

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif
He wants helicopter battles but he says climbing ruined the game. What is with this player base.

redcheetah7
08-25-2011, 06:17 AM
animus hack in a huey

...yeah that'd work out well

SniperPri
08-25-2011, 06:25 AM
Not sure if trolling, or just stupid... Seriously: climbing was a part of AC1 as well. They just evolved it in ze other games.

I beg of you... Please, please, please return to FPS games.

GET TO THE CHOPPA!!!!

Rakudaton
08-25-2011, 06:54 AM
Personally I miss the "assassin sim" aspect of AC, and am sad that there are no longer investigative missions.

That said, I still love the AC series and look forward with great anticipation to ACR and -- in particular -- AC3.

OP, punctuation -- and moderation -- are your friends.

Xanatos2007
08-25-2011, 07:07 AM
Originally posted by Rakudaton:
OP, punctuation -- and moderation -- are your friends.
*looks at OP's post*

Apparently not. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

Grandmaster_Z
08-25-2011, 07:33 AM
rip AC1...

Calvarok
08-25-2011, 10:30 AM
"claymores helicopter battles"
to the second one, I think I can safely say that you're talking out a certain end of your body.

To the first one, if you pay attention to the bomb-crafting screen, it explains the way that trap bombs work, and it actually is quite simple and makes sense for that time period. Also, they did actually have bombs then.

And I don't think that assassin's creed is dead in terms of popularity or content. It's never just been about getting contracts to kill someone, and doing so. It's been about the overarching story, and the Assassin's struggle to adapt while still keeping their creed intact.

Sure, the assassinations are fun. But the main goal of the game should never again just be to kill several people. That made the actual story of AC1 shine less.

Also what the heck are you talking about regarding climbing? Assassin's Creed has ALWAYS focused on climbing, and made it better with each game. Fluid movement controls can help a game become better.

EDIT: Also this thread will be locked.

ProdiGurl
08-25-2011, 10:58 AM
Originally posted by Ioder:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by persiateddy95:
I think he means there are no Helicopter battles in AC and he wants that.

...

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

...

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif
He wants helicopter battles but he says climbing ruined the game. What is with this player base. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I realize I'm only a month new to AC . . but these are the kinds of buffoons you just pray Ubi isn't listening to for the next AC installments.

LightRey
08-25-2011, 11:00 AM
Originally posted by Calvarok:
"claymores helicopter battles"
to the second one, I think I can safely say that you're talking out a certain end of your body.

To the first one, if you pay attention to the bomb-crafting screen, it explains the way that trap bombs work, and it actually is quite simple and makes sense for that time period. Also, they did actually have bombs then.

And I don't think that assassin's creed is dead in terms of popularity or content. It's never just been about getting contracts to kill someone, and doing so. It's been about the overarching story, and the Assassin's struggle to adapt while still keeping their creed intact.

Sure, the assassinations are fun. But the main goal of the game should never again just be to kill several people. That made the actual story of AC1 shine less.

Also what the heck are you talking about regarding climbing? Assassin's Creed has ALWAYS focused on climbing, and made it better with each game. Fluid movement controls can help a game become better.

EDIT: Also this thread will be locked.
Well said.

JJTHoukes
08-25-2011, 11:24 AM
Originally posted by lordfrederik:
since ac1 assassins creed has lost it's bad *** game play no killing civilians claymores helicopter battles and tomb raider style tombs crap main stream multi-player ubi has kinda kill assassins creed in my eyes why should my opinion matter well i have brought every assassins creed in special edition and done 100% of off-line trophies and play about 40 different games a year so i know a good game also ubi is now focusing on climbing well as we found out in brink CLIMBING DOSE NOT MAKE A GOOD GAME

A translation, for those that need one.

Ever since Assassin's Creed 1, the franchise has lost it's magic.
We can no longer kill civilians, we can suddenly plant claymores, and we have helicopter battles.
<UL TYPE=SQUARE> (Which, I assume, refers to Leonardo's flying machine. In AC:B, this became what could be compared to a helicopter battle.)[/list]
It has become almost like a tomb raider game, which in my opinion isn't a good game. The multiplayer is too mainstream.

In my opinion, Ubisoft has ruined the franchise.

Why would my opinion matter, you might wonder?
Because I have bought every single Assassin's Creed game, the special editions, even.
I've completed them all to their full 100% and have also earned all possible trophies.
I also play nearly 40 different videogames a year, so I know a good game when I see one.

I am also of opinion that Ubisoft now focuses too much on the climbing.
As some of you might've found out by playing "Brink", climbing does not make a good game.

Ioder
08-25-2011, 11:28 AM
Originally posted by ThyMolizzo:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by lordfrederik:
since ac1 assassins creed has lost it's bad *** game play no killing civilians claymores helicopter battles and tomb raider style tombs crap main stream multi-player ubi has kinda kill assassins creed in my eyes why should my opinion matter well i have brought every assassins creed in special edition and done 100% of off-line trophies and play about 40 different games a year so i know a good game also ubi is now focusing on climbing well as we found out in brink CLIMBING DOSE NOT MAKE A GOOD GAME

A translation, for those that need one.

Ever since Assassin's Creed 1, the franchise has lost it's magic.
We can no longer kill civilians, we can suddenly plant claymores, and we have helicopter battles.
<UL TYPE=SQUARE> (Which, I assume, refers to Leonardo's flying machine. In AC:B, this became what could be compared to a helicopter battle.)[/list]
It has become almost like a tomb raider game, which in my opinion isn't a good game. The multiplayer is too mainstream.

In my opinion, Ubisoft has ruined the franchise.

Why would my opinion matter, you might wonder?
Because I have bought every single Assassin's Creed game, the special editions, even.
I've completed them all to their full 100% and have also earned all possible trophies.
I also play nearly 40 different videogames a year, so I know a good game when I see one.

I am also of opinion that Ubisoft now focuses too much on the climbing.
As some of you might've found out by playing "Brink", climbing does not make a good game. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Thank you for the translation, but it still is a pathetic complaint.

Blind2Society
08-25-2011, 11:37 AM
Originally posted by lordfrederik:
why should my opinion matter well i have brought every assassins creed in special edition and done 100% of off-line trophies and play about 40 different games a year so i know a good game
I disagree with your entire post but this most of all.

GunnarGunderson
08-25-2011, 12:25 PM
Originally posted by persiateddy95:
I think he means there are no Helicopter battles in AC and he wants that.

...

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

...

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif
I think he's being satirical since Ubisoft has kind thrown stealth out the window

D.I.D.
08-25-2011, 12:48 PM
Originally posted by BradKinn:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by persiateddy95:
I think he means there are no Helicopter battles in AC and he wants that.

...

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

...

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif
I think he's being satirical since Ubisoft has kind thrown stealth out the window </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

This is a strange assertion if it's based on AC:B, where being seen could completely destroy many missions and only allow 50% sync on others.

Granted, if you didn't follow full sync many missions were ridiculously easy and you could just march in and kill everyone (or use some other blunt tactic), but it still felt like the stealth game was there to me, if you chose to play it that way.

So are people basing this idea from the games that have gone before, or their impressions of the unreleased one?

LightRey
08-25-2011, 01:22 PM
Originally posted by BradKinn:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by persiateddy95:
I think he means there are no Helicopter battles in AC and he wants that.

...

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

...

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif
I think he's being satirical since Ubisoft has kind thrown stealth out the window </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
From what I've read I don't think he has the mental capacity for being satirical.

LieutenantJojo
08-25-2011, 01:44 PM
WTF is this ****?

It was never possible to kill civilians without losing some health/synchronization. And that's kinda the point of the 'Creed', you shall not kill the innocent.

And there is too much climbing? I hope you're not saying that the free running sucks, because that's pretty much what makes the AC games so much fun... If you mean that there is too much platforming (tombs, lairs of Romulus, ...), then I might understand you, though, personally, I like it.

Calvarok
08-25-2011, 02:07 PM
Brotherhood didn't throw stealth out the window, it pretty much just tells you when you have to stealth, when you can choose to or not, and when you have to be in open conflict. All the interviews about Revelations, they emphasise players CHOOSING stealth or combat. Which hopefully means that neither option is going to be enforced as much as it is in brotherhood.

Of course, things like the war machines are the forcing conspicuousness that everyone's talking about, but I kinda like it. And it should be noted that it forces stealth immediately before it. Ezio has to take things so carefully, but then he manages to get the bigger stick, and take out Templars in a more efficient way. It just feels good to suddenly be more powerful than the army you just snuck past. If that's not a reward for a stealth well done, I don't know what is.

LightRey
08-25-2011, 03:25 PM
Originally posted by LieutenantJojo:
WTF is this ****?

It was never possible to kill civilians without losing some health/synchronization. And that's kinda the point of the 'Creed', you shall not kill the innocent.

And there is too much climbing? I hope you're not saying that the free running sucks, because that's pretty much what makes the AC games so much fun... If you mean that there is too much platforming (tombs, lairs of Romulus, ...), then I might understand you, though, personally, I like it.
In AC1 it's possible to kill civilians without losing synchronization after you've finished the game.

kriegerdesgottes
08-25-2011, 03:31 PM
Originally posted by lordfrederik:
since ac1 assassins creed has lost it's bad *** game play no killing civilians claymores helicopter battles and tomb raider style tombs crap main stream multi-player ubi has kinda kill assassins creed in my eyes why should my opinion matter well i have brought every assassins creed in special edition and done 100% of off-line trophies and play about 40 different games a year so i know a good game also ubi is now focusing on climbing well as we found out in brink CLIMBING DOSE NOT MAKE A GOOD GAME

No, I don't know how much longer it has with the yearly rendition thing going on but none of the things you listed is in any way an issue for me and so far Ubisoft has done the best job they can making the games great even with the ridiculous development time they're given.

lordfrederik
08-25-2011, 04:17 PM
okay i have read most of your reply's. first yes i was being satirical, also i don't mean just go out and kill, what i mean is that after you finish the game like in ac1 you can kill every one but you lose health earlier if you do so. i believe this is a better system, as the double assassination can sometimes cause a de-sync when you lock onto a guard and hit a civilian also the creed has gone. the creed only is mention once in a silly scene in ac2. and yes i don't like the idea of hundreds of gadgets.the reason i mention running is the annoying tomb missions yes i do love stealth but in ACB your often forced which is not so fun and finally lightrey if your angry go rage somewhere else cause what i'am trying to do is get a bit more fun in ACR

Blind2Society
08-25-2011, 04:51 PM
Ok now that you have clarified a bit I have a better understanding.

I disagree with you about the gadgets, I rather enjoyed them. Also I couldn't care less about killing civilians. The only issue I have is when chasing a locked target on foot and you hit the assassinate button and kill a civi instead.

I also disagree about climbing and free running. That is one of the pillars of the game and an enjoyable one at that. For the tombs, I liked them a lot. I just wish they were more complex and not time restricted for exploring purposes.

As for the creed, there is an explanation, at least in my estimation. Remember, Ezio never really knew the creed. His father died before he could teach Ezio the creed and the ways of the assassin. Either that or the original creed has been lost and diluted over hundreds of years. Now in Revelations Ezio is returning to Masyaf to learn the history of the Assassins and what he is fighting for. There he will learn of the creed and how Altair saw the assassin order.

Oh yes, and the tripwire bombs are a cool idea but have no place in multiplayer in my opinion.

shobhit7777777
08-25-2011, 05:06 PM
@All

Although I disagree with a lot of the points of the OP I still get the main sentiment behind the post and in fact do support it.

The thing is AC meant different things to different people. For me it was always about the open ended gameplay of BEING an Assassin, for a majority it was more about the plot and the narrative (something I don't MUCH care about due to the fact that I'm not too keen on conspiracy theories). The OP is from my side of the fence, albeit an extremist who enjoys a bit arson here and there.
Leaving this aside, I would like to point out that as a 'Gameplay' man I really enjoy the new content like tombs, platforming, the badass combat (I love the combat...however easy it may be) the Brotherhood mechanics etc. BUT the fact remains that the other side of the gameplay loop- OBSERVE-PLAN-STRIKE-VANISH has taken a dip.

Mission freedom has given way to designer based choices for a narrative purpose.
Gameplay like flying on a Machine, driving a tank is NOT what makes AC a cool game and this hurts the other aspects of the game which should have been SIMULTANEOUSLY developed like 'Social Stealth', Better AI, more Stealth options, freedom to plan and approach your mission etc.

Basically, the cool aspects of the first game, the idea of being an Assassin were not developed fully and instead more focus was put on 'Cinematic' moments (see Leonardo missions) which in all honesty felt terribly camp.

What I have a beef about is symmetry and balance in gameplay. The realistic, gritty feel of the first game has given way to an increasingly implausible world full of conspiracies and crypts and tombs, where our intrepid hero swings around on ropes and flies on primitive aircraft.
The game is missing substance.
The aspect of being a lone Assassin, carrying out the kills in YOUR way wrapped in an intriguing yet grounded plot,the self-doubt inducing conversations with the targets is what made me enjoy the first game...maybe Ubi should revise the game and add what worked...maybe make it a bit less arcadey.

Calvarok
08-25-2011, 05:08 PM
Well honestly, Ezio never breaks the creed if he can help it. He only breaks the one "don't be seen" and that's because some of his greatest tests have been in environments where he has to risk being seen and fighting, or escaping.

Stuff like the last Lair of Romulous or the guard in the Mercato de Triano can be explained away as him trying to get the guard or cardinal to lead him to the secret location. And in both cases, it works.

But I agree, he was never told specifically that he had to be unseen at all times, and Uncle Mario's Assassin order was a little more on the brash side. But such was the nature of their surroundings. It worked to some degree, but not until Ezio can and started assassinating people in stealthy ways did it start to work out. In Brotherhood, Ezio was more of a general in a city-wide war, who also assassinated important members of the other side.

It's important to remember that the Masyaf Assassins went into obvious battle more often than Ezio's order does. Most Assassins then were not like Altair, but soldiers, trained to be normal soldiers, for the most part.

People seem to forget that, since we never see them do anything, most of the Masyaf "assassins" are just guards. The real assassins serve a similar purpose to Ezio in Brotherhood. They fight in the war, and also eliminate certain targets.

In many respects, Ezio's order is far more similar to the Masyaf one. And actually more stealthy.

Remember that Altair changed a lot of the ways the Assassin's worked after AC1. A lot of the things that people get so worked up about Ezio doing were made acceptable after the game. It's a little weird that some fans hang on Al Mualim's every word as if there's no way he could be full of crap, considering he was revealed to be worse than the Templars.

rob.davies2014
08-25-2011, 05:09 PM
Originally posted by lordfrederik:
should AC3 be more about violence and combat than a ***** and climbing and being kind

Did you just call our Ezio a *****?! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif
You sir, are out of your mind. Could you dive from the top of the Santa Maria Novella? Could you cripple the influence of one of the most powerful and corrupt families ever over Renaissance Rome? Would you be willing to kill for your beliefs? Would you risk your life to save others? As for his altruism, I think it makes him one of the most endearing video game characters we've ever known.
According to the devs there are three pillars at the core of Assassin's Creed. Combat is one of them, free-running and stealth are the others.
If you ask me, it's not combat that we're in shortage of!

Calvarok
08-25-2011, 06:38 PM
Originally posted by RussellSparrow:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by lordfrederik:
should AC3 be more about violence and combat than a ***** and climbing and being kind

Did you just call our Ezio a *****?! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif
You sir, are out of your mind. Could you dive from the top of the Santa Maria Novella? Could you cripple the influence of one of the most powerful and corrupt families ever over Renaissance Rome? Would you be willing to kill for your beliefs? Would you risk your life to save others? As for his altruism, I think it makes him one of the most endearing video game characters we've ever known.
According to the devs there are three pillars at the core of Assassin's Creed. Combat is one of them, free-running and stealth are the others.
If you ask me, it's not combat that we're in shortage of! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
And in real life, Combat is the hardest of those three.

So Ezio is not a *****. He's just been going through a time in the middle of his life where agressive force is nessesary, and now that he's fully matured and in his prime, he's going back to choosing how he wants to do things.

beatledude210
08-25-2011, 10:17 PM
Originally posted by SniperPri:
Not sure if trolling, or just stupid... Seriously: climbing was a part of AC1 as well. They just evolved it in ze other games.

I beg of you... Please, please, please return to FPS games.

GET TO THE CHOPPA!!!!


Lol, genius!

beatledude210
08-25-2011, 10:27 PM
About the whole Mario not talking about tenants of the creed thing, he states in Ac2 that the creed is not as strict as it used to be, but they still have the same goal.

LightRey
08-25-2011, 11:01 PM
Originally posted by beatledude210:
About the whole Mario not talking about tenants of the creed thing, he states in Ac2 that the creed is not as strict as it used to be, but they still have the same goal.
Alta´r also states the same in the Codex I believe.

Calvarok
08-25-2011, 11:09 PM
Yeppers. He does say that the Assassins must be more stealthy in regards to not having a giant fortress, but secret guilds, but in all fairness, Mario never read any of the codex pages until Ezio collected them. And by then, Monteriggoni had been in his family for years. There was no good reason to abandon it. UNTIL CESARE CAME *Dun dun dunn*

But yeah, Ezio's pretty much structured the Brotherhood the way Altair wanted it: it encompasses most of the powerful countries in the world, and each guild can function separately from the others. if one is destroyed, the other guilds can send agents to rebuild it.

And the Templars are doing much the same thing, it seems like there will always be someone ready to step into the shoes of Grandmaster. Except the Templars actively manipulate and control whatever seat of power they can find, while the Assassins seem to like to make agreements and terms with the establishment, while not revealing what organization they are. (not that the Templars DO reveal it, or anything.)