PDA

View Full Version : Where is Stealth, where is the Creed and where is the Challenge?



Rea1SamF1sher
06-07-2011, 03:08 PM
I know it's just one mission we saw, but AC claims to be an open world game, but how is it an open world game if it doesn't give you the freedom to do the mission the way you want? What is the point to have a Social Stealth System included which played a big role when you remember the credo, the Creed? Why do they make the comat in ACR even more easier then it already is? This are the points I think are the biggest flaws since Brotherhood. I am not worried that they will fail to provide good Soundtrack and Story. But what's up with the core of the game?

Rea1SamF1sher
06-07-2011, 03:08 PM
I know it's just one mission we saw, but AC claims to be an open world game, but how is it an open world game if it doesn't give you the freedom to do the mission the way you want? What is the point to have a Social Stealth System included which played a big role when you remember the credo, the Creed? Why do they make the comat in ACR even more easier then it already is? This are the points I think are the biggest flaws since Brotherhood. I am not worried that they will fail to provide good Soundtrack and Story. But what's up with the core of the game?

notafanboy
06-07-2011, 03:18 PM
there are 2 things they need to work on,combat and stealth.thatīs what the AC series i lacking right now

rain89c
06-07-2011, 03:21 PM
Graphics are getting old.
AC3 better use a new improved engine.
ACR looks exactly the same as ACB/II.

Bruno_Berg
06-07-2011, 03:33 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by rain89c:
Graphics are getting old.
AC3 better use a new improved engine.
ACR looks exactly the same as ACB/II. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Getting old? They still look good so I'd say, no, it's not getting old.

Also, another thread about the difficulty? Seriously, don't you guys think there are enough threads about that already?

oOAltairOo
06-07-2011, 03:34 PM
I couldn't agree with you more TS.
I don't mind being able to do a mission in a combat oriented way. But the freedom in missions, and the stealth seems to be dying in AC.. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

oOAltairOo
06-07-2011, 03:36 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Bruno_Berg:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by rain89c:
Graphics are getting old.
AC3 better use a new improved engine.
ACR looks exactly the same as ACB/II. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Getting old? They still look good so I'd say, no, it's not getting old.

Also, another thread about the difficulty? Seriously, don't you guys think there are enough threads about that already? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It's an important matter! I believe it is good that the forum people voices their opinions http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/metal.gif

Rea1SamF1sher
06-07-2011, 03:41 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Bruno_Berg:
Getting old? They still look good so I'd say, no, it's not getting old. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Why not, because it should be able to run on a 5 year old console? I am sure they will have a new engine for AC3 or at least a much more improved one.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Also, another thread about the difficulty? Seriously, don't you guys think there are enough threads about that already? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I haven't seen one yet!

I only see threads at the top which don't discuss the most important issue of the series.

Bruno_Berg
06-07-2011, 03:42 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by oOAltairOo:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Bruno_Berg:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by rain89c:
Graphics are getting old.
AC3 better use a new improved engine.
ACR looks exactly the same as ACB/II. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Getting old? They still look good so I'd say, no, it's not getting old.

Also, another thread about the difficulty? Seriously, don't you guys think there are enough threads about that already? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It's an important matter! I believe it is good that the forum people voices their opinions http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/metal.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
It's an important matter, for some people. You have to keep in mind that not everyone thinks like you. That shouldn't be a reason not to express your thoughts, of course not, but it's also no reason to create the same thread 200 times.

Personally I don't care much about the difficulty, I like these games something fierce and yes, they're not perfect, but difficulty isn't the biggest issue for me. Different difficulty levels could be a good thing though, I suppose.

Bruno_Berg
06-07-2011, 03:43 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Andre202:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Bruno_Berg:
Getting old? They still look good so I'd say, no, it's not getting old.[QUOTE]
Why not, because it should be able to run on a 5 year old console? I am sure they will have a new engine for AC3 or at least a much more improved one.

[QUOTE]Also, another thread about the difficulty? Seriously, don't you guys think there are enough threads about that already? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I haven't seen one yet!

I only see threads at the top which don't discuss the most important issue of the series. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Haha, you're a funny guy! I take it you're joking since 1 out of 3 threads is about / ends up in whining about the difficulty.

Rea1SamF1sher
06-07-2011, 03:47 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Bruno_Berg:
Haha, you're a funny guy! I take it you're joking since 1 out of 3 threads is about / ends up in whining about the difficulty. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
If you can read, it's not just about difficulty!

It's about Stealth, Creed and Challenge!!!

Bruno_Berg
06-07-2011, 03:55 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Andre202:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Bruno_Berg:
Haha, you're a funny guy! I take it you're joking since 1 out of 3 threads is about / ends up in whining about the difficulty. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
If you can read, it's not just about difficulty!

It's about Stealth, Creed and Challenge!!! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The fact remains though, there are ****loads of threads just like it. Now I've bashed on that enough, I'm going to leave you to your thread.

Rea1SamF1sher
06-07-2011, 04:05 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by oOAltairOo:
I don't mind being able to do a mission in a combat oriented way. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I haven't a problem with that too, but as said there are some things missing which were in the first game.

kriegerdesgottes
06-07-2011, 04:56 PM
I don't have a problem with the combat or the stealth in the game nor have I ever even with the first two. I don't understand the complaint at all and I keep seeing these threads pop up. If you want to sneak into a fortress you can, in fact in the special missions in ACB if you got caught one time you had to start ALL OVER again from the beginning when some people just like to go in Rambo style and kill everyone. How is that not stealthy? in fact it's too damn stealthy and downright annoying. and the combat has always been fun and there is a way to be good at it by sidestepping and knowing how to dodge and counter or you can just stand there and swing/counter and then complain it's not challenging enough because you aren't playing it correctly.

EscoBlades
06-07-2011, 05:03 PM
So many people harp on about engines without actually understanding what they are, what they do and how a game is built around them.

The Anvil engine that powers the Assassin's Creed series is highly robust, and has been updated with each new game. Graphics, lighting, sound and the multiplayer portion have all been improved and updated.

Not quite sure where you got your conclusion from @rain89c

Rea1SamF1sher
06-07-2011, 05:15 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by kriegerdesgotte:
I don't have a problem with the combat or the stealth in the game nor have I ever even with the first two. I don't understand the complaint at all and I keep seeing these threads pop up. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Why?

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">If you want to sneak into a fortress you can, in fact in the special missions in ACB if you got caught one time you had to start ALL OVER again from the beginning when some people just like to go in Rambo style and kill everyone. How is that not stealthy? in fact it's too damn stealthy and downright annoying. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
You think it's annoying to play stealthy in these special missions, because you are forced not to get detected otherwise you would restart the mission? What about the missions where you are forced into fights, where the missions are scripted? What about the people who want to play the way they could in AC1, where you are able to avoid fights and detection in a lot of sections? People are asking for freedom in a mission, doing it the way you want it. It's an open world game so it should offer that. The Creed, the credo has a deep meaning for the Assassins in AC1, you don't see that in the next AC titles. The Credo had a meaning and Social Stealth was the focus. I have nothing against the option to go all out rambo but why not improving these systems, instead of limiting them by having scripted missions?

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">and the combat has always been fun and there is a way to be good at it by sidestepping and knowing how to dodge and counter </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
In the first title it was much more satisfying to win a battle. You need to have the right timing to dogde or to counter or anything. Now there is no real timing required anymore. It's pretty easy and the NPCs aren't as aggressive as in the first title. They searched for much longer, where people could actually say it was annoying though.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">or you can just stand there and swing/counter and then complain it's not challenging enough because you aren't playing it correctly. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Why does it mean you aren't playing correctly? It's the game that should give you the challenge, you shouldn't make up challenges for yourself to make the game more challenging.

I am just curious, are you also active on the German Ubi forums?

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by EscoBlades:
Not quite sure where you got your conclusion from @rain89c </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I think it comes from the fact, that current gen is at it's end and we need new consoles. Even Ubi asks for them.

crash3
06-07-2011, 05:43 PM
from th E3 gameplay demo i though that:

1. Graphics are improved, much better than AC2 and ACB
2. Constantinople looks very lively/bustling with people which is good for social interaction
3. Was a bit disappointed with the fact that all the guards ezio came across were totally owned by him no matter what weapons or armour they had
4.im liking the hooked blade moves
5. will we be able to do slow motion fighting like in the demo?
6. cinematics were better integrated into the gameplay, there didnt appear to be any annoying loading screens which were a big flaw in ACB

overall i think the game looks much improved but we are yet to see how combat overall has been improved. i really hope combat is more challenging in ACR to make it more exciting

i want to be able to repeat missions coz they are genuinely challenging to do, not because i want to get 100% sync or something annoying like that

souNdwAve89
06-07-2011, 05:55 PM
Hey guys, I agree with most of the things said in this game.

I wish they brought back the elements of AC1 such as eavesdropping, interrogation, etc. Why? It had a more assassin feel. It FORCES the player to go out and find civilians that had the whereabouts of your next target.

The enemy AI needs to be improved... I was happy when they said that AC:B had more aggressive AI, but then they had the execution game mechanic that made killing faster and easier. The AI in AC1 was way harder because they grab you and throw you down fast unlike in AC:B when they grab you and just stand there. The AI in AC1 also deflected your attacks more and didn't run away a lot when they got scared.

As for stealth, it depends how the player does the mission. I bet you that A LOT of players would just run into the mission and just kill the target. They don't bother to kill off any surrounding guards. Whenever I play any of the AC games, I try to be like an assassin and study the position of the guards and kill them if needed. Hopefully AC:R has more stealth related parts, but I doubt it...

crash3
06-07-2011, 06:03 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by souNdwAve89:
Hey guys, I agree with most of the things said in this game.

I wish they brought back the elements of AC1 such as eavesdropping, interrogation, etc. Why? It had a more assassin feel. It FORCES the player to go out and find civilians that had the whereabouts of your next target.

The enemy AI needs to be improved... I was happy when they said that AC:B had more aggressive AI, but then they had the execution game mechanic that made killing faster and easier. The AI in AC1 was way harder because they grab you and throw you down fast unlike in AC:B when they grab you and just stand there. The AI in AC1 also deflected your attacks more and didn't run away a lot when they got scared.

As for stealth, it depends how the player does the mission. I bet you that A LOT of players would just run into the mission and just kill the target. They don't bother to kill off any surrounding guards. Whenever I play any of the AC games, I try to be like an assassin and study the position of the guards and kill them if needed. Hopefully AC:R has more stealth related parts, but I doubt it... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

i get mean, i think its safe to say that the vast majority of us have been commenting on these forums, asking for a more challenging game so we have to be more stealthy, combat is harder and enemy AI is smarter. but in the E3 demo we didnt really see any of that, we saw beter graphics and some nice hooked blade and bomb features but that was it really

i hope theres gonna be some surprise video released in the future showing full on combat if it has in fact been improved but again like you said-"i doubt it"

souNdwAve89
06-07-2011, 06:47 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by crash3:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by souNdwAve89:
Hey guys, I agree with most of the things said in this game.

I wish they brought back the elements of AC1 such as eavesdropping, interrogation, etc. Why? It had a more assassin feel. It FORCES the player to go out and find civilians that had the whereabouts of your next target.

The enemy AI needs to be improved... I was happy when they said that AC:B had more aggressive AI, but then they had the execution game mechanic that made killing faster and easier. The AI in AC1 was way harder because they grab you and throw you down fast unlike in AC:B when they grab you and just stand there. The AI in AC1 also deflected your attacks more and didn't run away a lot when they got scared.

As for stealth, it depends how the player does the mission. I bet you that A LOT of players would just run into the mission and just kill the target. They don't bother to kill off any surrounding guards. Whenever I play any of the AC games, I try to be like an assassin and study the position of the guards and kill them if needed. Hopefully AC:R has more stealth related parts, but I doubt it... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

i get mean, i think its safe to say that the vast majority of us have been commenting on these forums, asking for a more challenging game so we have to be more stealthy, combat is harder and enemy AI is smarter. but in the E3 demo we didnt really see any of that, we saw beter graphics and some nice hooked blade and bomb features but that was it really

i hope theres gonna be some surprise video released in the future showing full on combat if it has in fact been improved but again like you said-"i doubt it" </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, I didn't mean to be negative by any means. It's just disappointing when a Ubisoft rep says things like that are listening to the community when the things we want are not implemented.

I'm sure we will see more videos of AC:R since there was a ton of them when Brotherhood was about to be released.

Rea1SamF1sher
06-07-2011, 06:50 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by crash3:
i hope theres gonna be some surprise video released in the future showing full on combat if it has in fact been improved but again like you said-"i doubt it" </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I doubt it will be more challenging too. It will be improved, but not in the means of having something at least as challenging as AC1. It will be improved in the variation of how Ezio kills his enemies. But maybe we are wrong and they have a difficulty system, I hope I am wrong, but as you I doubt it.

kriegerdesgottes
06-07-2011, 07:11 PM
I agree there should be more freedom to play the way you want to like there was in ACI because it's just not acceptable to stop someone from playing because they got caught by one guard who happened to walk by and then start you from the beginning when you were so far. Yeah that's infuriating but to sit there after that and say "oh there's no stealth in AC anymore" is ridiculous. They just need to make it again so that there are no penalties for playing the way you want to play and not make you redo everything. Saying oh you didn't get the stupid 100% synch thing I can half way tolerate but having to start all over again is not cool.

twenty_glyphs
06-07-2011, 07:54 PM
I wouldn't get too worked up over this demo's mission freedom. First of all, they're trying to show this off as an epic sequence to impress the general public, not necessarily our community. Second of all, if you have to run across some boats to reach a moving one that's leaving, how many routes do you expect to be able to take? Third, there likely is no requirement for Ezio to start the mission by throwing a bomb at those 2 guards. I think the EscoBlades interview mentioned that the gypsies standing right next to those guards were hired to distract them in the demo he saw. You could likely sneak behind them as well.

I don't know how much mission freedom some people think we had in the first game. Your target was still in a predetermined location and would behave in a predetermined way, such as summoning guards to fight or trying to run away. You had fewer ways to sneak into places and get past guards because you didn't have smoke bombs or factions, only scholars and killing another guard near a guard post.

I think the feeling of freedom really came from the investigations, which gave you the info you needed to plan your assassination. That info is completely gone now, so there's no way to plan an assassination and you just have to improvise and experiment if you want to get creative. I prefer having the information beforehand like the first game. I don't know how that could get brought back, since so many people complained about the investigations and they've opted to make the missions more linear with way markers you have to pass. I do agree that many of the final assassinations have become very scripted because they became story set pieces instead of assassination missions.

Darklarik
06-07-2011, 08:14 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by rain89c:
Graphics are getting old.
AC3 better use a new improved engine.
ACR looks exactly the same as ACB/II. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
The graphics engine is new. Get your eyes fixed bud.

But in terms of gameplay, challenge, and above all stealth, yah the game has certainly let itself go....

Conniving_Eagle
06-07-2011, 08:15 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by kriegerdesgotte:
I don't have a problem with the combat or the stealth in the game nor have I ever even with the first two. I don't understand the complaint at all and I keep seeing these threads pop up. If you want to sneak into a fortress you can, in fact in the special missions in ACB if you got caught one time you had to start ALL OVER again from the beginning when some people just like to go in Rambo style and kill everyone. How is that not stealthy? in fact it's too damn stealthy and downright annoying. and the combat has always been fun and there is a way to be good at it by sidestepping and knowing how to dodge and counter or you can just stand there and swing/counter and then complain it's not challenging enough because you aren't playing it correctly. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

They need to change combat, though. Read my thread "How to Revolutionize the Combat System"

thyevi
06-08-2011, 03:17 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by twenty_glyphs:
I think the feeling of freedom really came from the investigations, which gave you the info you needed to plan your assassination. That info is completely gone now, so there's no way to plan an assassination and you just have to improvise and experiment if you want to get creative. I prefer having the information beforehand like the first game. I don't know how that could get brought back, since so many people complained about the investigations and they've opted to make the missions more linear with way markers you have to pass. I do agree that many of the final assassinations have become very scripted because they became story set pieces instead of assassination missions. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Investigation and information gathering missions don't have to be repetitive. The missions in Venice were a good example of that. But the Banker mission in brotherhood was a complete improvisation mission that came out of nowhere. Who was this banker? The brother of Cesare? How does he relates to Cesare? The first game would've handled that mission with proper investigation before attempting the assassination.

lukaszep
06-08-2011, 04:02 AM
They chose to show that part of the game at E3 for a reason. When they have to compete with games like Battlefield 3 and Ghost Recon, in their small time slow why would they show eavesdropping? E3 is a huge business oppurtunity and they need to show something as compelling as possible, which is what they did. Anyway we already know that it's an open world, and in some missions, they use set pieces to make it more cinematic, and it works well. If they didn't have more linear levels everyone would complain and ask for more variety, they're just trying to please everyone.
Although i do wish they would bring back eavesdropping, and i did start to get worried AC was losing it's stealth elements, i've been reassured by the improved eagle vision. Anyway at the end of the day, in the open levels and side missions, it's up to you whether you want to be stealthy or not. You don't have to run around on the streets killing guards, and you don't have to interact with the guards on rooftops.

crash3
06-08-2011, 06:06 AM
From the E3 demo I think the graphics have been improved quite a bit since ACB and certinly since AC2

Constantinople looks more lively which could improve social interaction, i liked how the beginning of the demo zoomed in on normal people instead of going straight to ezio

the cinematics seem better intergratd into the gameplay without disrupting the sequnce of events, i really hope ACR doesnt have so many loading screens like ACB had

Ezios and the other assassins outfits look so much better, they look more discreet than the white robes

Ezio wasnt wearing as much armour which is good as too much armour ruins the outfit

i was disappointed that ezio was owning every single guard he came across and he was still killing guards with one counter of the hidden/hooked blade no matter what weapons or armour the different guards had

i was annoyed that the other assassins and the guards were simply taking turns in bashing each other with their weapons, there didnt appear to be much skillful fighting, i thought that might have been improved since ACB

i liked the bomb throwing and the variety of hooked blade moves

overall i think from what we saw in the demo, many aspects of the game have been improved but we didnt really see anything of stealth or combat which were the two largest aspects of the game that most of us wanted improving/made more challenging

Grandmaster_Z
06-08-2011, 07:32 AM
the demo had more explosions than COD, and crappy prince of persia type platforming. its so different from AC1, pretty sad..

shobhit7777777
06-08-2011, 10:08 AM
Agree with the topic starter

The game became derailed towards AC2's end.....the narrative took prominence over gameplay. The first game was all about the 'Art of Assassinaion' ans feeling 'The power of an Assassin'. The gameplay reflected it.
The second game became bigger in scope and narrative and added some cool and excellent stealth mechanics and combat system....but still felt a bit lacking in terms of open-endedness of the missions..due to lack of investigations and and forced swordfights.
ACB really dropped the ball by adding NOTHING in terms of core gameplay for Stealth and made combat even EASIER!!

And now Revelations is focussing on a Hook blade and Bombs with beefed up Borgia tower mechanics and brotherhood system.

While ALL the additions are awesome..they still should not take precedence over the core gameplay of STEALTH and COMBAT.
We have been requesting a Disguise/Armor customization mechanic since ages, a crouching ability and smarter AI...these are things that immerse us into the fantasy of an Assassin.

Allow us freedom to approach our missions & Add
more stealth mechanics

and please for god's sake get rid of the cheesy and gimicky "Exotic Gameplay" sequences...they are not cool and are really mediocre...devote that time on more useful things please

NOTE: I am really excited about the new features (hook blade, bombs etc.) and am really looking forward to seeing the Assassin Dens in action...the whole idea of a covert Templar Assassin war is awesome http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

xCr0wnedNorris
06-08-2011, 10:19 AM
I will say this once because, to be honest, this is getting annoying. Challenge yourself, don't ask the game to challenge you. You want to play stealthy? Play stealthy. Yeah there are a couple of missions where you have to fight people but if it was all stealth, there would be no point for a combat system. You want to make the game more challenging? Make it challenging yourself. Play through the whole game using only the single hidden blade, don't use execution streaks or the counter kill ability. Play with the only HUD being the mini-map. Don't get any armor and don't use medicine. You have freedom to play this game however you want to. Stop playing it the same way over and over and say that you have no freedom.

Mic_92
06-08-2011, 10:29 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by xCr0wnedNorris:
I will say this once because, to be honest, this is getting annoying. Challenge yourself, don't ask the game to challenge you. You want to play stealthy? Play stealthy. Yeah there are a couple of missions where you have to fight people but if it was all stealth, there would be no point for a combat system. You want to make the game more challenging? Make it challenging yourself. Play through the whole game using only the single hidden blade, don't use execution streaks or the counter kill ability. Play with the only HUD being the mini-map. Don't get any armor and don't use medicine. You have freedom to play this game however you want to. Stop playing it the same way over and over and say that you have no freedom. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Owned.

And seriously though, it's just one memory and they probably showed that one in particular at E3 to appeal to a wider audience.

You can't tell me all the missions in ACB were like the villa attack.

I think I'll stop visiting forums of games I like. The people are annoying, always whining about something.

WAAAAAH I can't spend hours doing the same investigations over and over again, waaaah I have less freedom during the assassinations (altough there was usually about only two different ways to kill the targets in AC1), waaaaah Ezio's face looks different and he has no cape, waaaaah there are some linear missions, waaaah Ezio's outfit is now black.

Just grow up. I've never seen people complain so much.

iN3krO
06-08-2011, 10:40 AM
Well, anything helping my cause and my ideas are wellcome... i remember when no1 cared about it and i started spamming the forum...

Who talks about the graphics... man, the game most important things is the gameplay and story... if they can have it without lack of graphics than it's ok but if they don't than it's better they make worse graphics and improve story/gameplay...

For those who says stealthy is not good i must disagree... Stealthy was what have really improved... Blending with the crowd, walk with them without having to push any buttons, elevators, crossbow, ziplines... The notoriety system sounded good when i was introduced to it at the start of the game but than it became boring cuz it's too much unreally...

Now, the combat, at Ac2 we got some changes...
Goods:
-Combo with hands
-Double Hidden Blade
-Poison

Bad:
-New hidden blade ssystem
-Guards AI dumbed down
-Removed the ShortBlade + Throwing Knife Combo

Neutral:
-Bombs
-Gun

AcB had a big improvement:
Good:
-Guards "AI" improved ("AI" cuz it's just some pre-made values and not really AI)ī
-Gun with Sword + ShortBlade with Throwing Knife

Bad:
-Thowing Darts
-Multi-Knifes

Umbalanced:
-Gun
-Killstreaks

As you can see, in my opinion, the combat was improved in somethings and got worst with the others... However, there is still one thing bad with the combat system (hidden blade) and 2 things Umbalanced (i'm talking about major important things, there may be more things)...
Fixing those 3 things and making REAL AI like Ac1 was would be much better...

And some of my suggestion are already being spread by crash3 :P
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by xCr0wnedNorris:
I will say this once because, to be honest, this is getting annoying. Challenge yourself, don't ask the game to challenge you. You want to play stealthy? Play stealthy. Yeah there are a couple of missions where you have to fight people but if it was all stealth, there would be no point for a combat system. You want to make the game more challenging? Make it challenging yourself. Play through the whole game using only the single hidden blade, don't use execution streaks or the counter kill ability. Play with the only HUD being the mini-map. Don't get any armor and don't use medicine. You have freedom to play this game however you want to. Stop playing it the same way over and over and say that you have no freedom. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'm sure you are some ******ed kid that never played old GOOD games... They were challenging and good...

I can add challening but i want to test my abilities too, when ac1 was released i was stealthy as ****, why? cuz if i went thought an agresive way i would be ripped off...

And it was exatly like in the real life -.-''

Now the game is too PoP, too much fantasy (aside from the story)

Rea1SamF1sher
06-08-2011, 10:56 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by kriegerdesgotte:
I agree there should be more freedom to play the way you want to like there was in ACI because it's just not acceptable to stop someone from playing because they got caught by one guard who happened to walk by and then start you from the beginning when you were so far. Yeah that's infuriating but to sit there after that and say "oh there's no stealth in AC anymore" is ridiculous. They just need to make it again so that there are no penalties for playing the way you want to play and not make you redo everything. Saying oh you didn't get the stupid 100% synch thing I can half way tolerate but having to start all over again is not cool. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
You are annoyed by the missions that forces you to play stealth but you ignore the fact that there are a lot more situations where you are forced into swordfights. Having freedom in doing the missions the way you want them to do, would be good for the ones who don't want to be forced to play stealthy and especially for the one who don't want to play rambo style.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by xCr0wnedNorris:
I will say this once because, to be honest, this is getting annoying. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Yeah I kind of understand that it is much more enjoyable to play a game where you don't die and almost always win.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Challenge yourself, don't ask the game to challenge you. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
That's part of the game to challenge you!

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">You want to play stealthy? Play stealthy. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
How when you are forced into fights?

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Yeah there are a couple of missions where you have to fight people but if it was all stealth, there would be no point for a combat system. You want to make the game more challenging? Make it challenging yourself. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
It's not just a couple of missions where you are forced into fights. Making a game challenging for yourself is kind of a weak argument. How would it look like anyway? One time spotted restart mission? Only use your hands in Combat?

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Play through the whole game using only the single hidden blade, don't use execution streaks or the counter kill ability. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
You have always two hidden blades, how can I use only on of them? But it would be easy to fight back anyway, with the combat system we have now. I have nothing against these killstreaks but they are to easy to do them.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Play with the only HUD being the mini-map. Don't get any armor and don't use medicine. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Doesn't change the easy combat at all. Whether you fight with or without armor and medicine. The NPC still take to much time to fight back, AC1 NPCs were much more aggressive and searched much longer for you.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">You have freedom to play this game however you want to. Stop playing it the same way over and over and say that you have no freedom. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
How about having no scripted missions? I have tried to do the missions as stealthy as possible but in many areas I was forced to get into a fight. There is something behind it when a lot of people think there isn't as much freedom anymore as in the first title. I am not the only one who is thinking that way. Maybe you just don't see it because the scripted segments fit your playstyle.

fox_634
06-08-2011, 11:22 AM
Why are people wining about there not being any freedom in revelations... Seriously we have only seen 7minutes of gameplay. I think Ubisoft had chosen this mission because it's pretty impressive with all the flames and the running from ship to ship etc etc. I wasn't that charmed by it though.. I would have prefered a stealth assasination vid.

xCr0wnedNorris
06-08-2011, 11:25 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Andre202:
That's part of the game to challenge you! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Since when have videogames had the sole purpose of challenging people? Never. Games are supposed to be fun. So once again, you want a challenge from a game? Challenge yourself.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">How when you are forced into fights? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
You seem to have forgotten that I mentioned that some missions are like that. (Keyword being some.) I know not every mission can't be playing with absolute freedom, but the suggestions that're being offered will reduce said amount of freedom and force people into playing stealthy.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">It's not just a couple of missions where you are forced into fights. Making a game challenging for yourself is kind of a weak argument. How would it look like anyway? One time spotted restart mission? Only use your hands in Combat? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
See the above, I know there are a few mission that're scripted, but you still have multiple choices on how you want to play them out. You want examples? Because I'm happy to oblige.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">You have always two hidden blades, how can I use only on of them? But it would be easy to fight back anyway, with the combat system we have now. I have nothing against these killstreaks but they are to easy to do them. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Have you played the game? Yes you start out with two, but you lose the second one in the first sequence. Also, did you read the rest of my suggestions? I was offering a way to make it challenging by not using some of those combat mechanics.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Doesn't change the easy combat at all. Whether you fight with or without armor and medicine. The NPC still take to much time to fight back, AC1 NPCs were much more aggressive and searched much longer for you. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
It changes it to some degree. You don't have the indicator telling you they're about to attack (which I believe some people wanted to get rid of anyways so there's a solution for them). You don't know how much health you have, you can't regenerate health. Also, running away from a fight? That's part of the freedom I was talking about.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">How about having no scripted missions? I have tried to do the missions as stealthy as possible but in many areas I was forced to get into a fight. There is something behind it when a lot of people think there isn't as much freedom anymore as in the first title. I am not the only one who is thinking that way. Maybe you just don't see it because the scripted segments fit your playstyle. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
So wait, you want the game to be challenging by restricting the ability to go Rambo on everybody, yet you're against scripted missions or missions that make you play a certain way because it makes restrictions on your freedom? Because it certainly seems like that's what you're saying.

AMuppetMatt
06-08-2011, 11:31 AM
1. 'Always be discrete'

Last time I checked blowing up a f***ing tower was not discrete... hang on... YEP 9/11 got global news coverage, so blowing up towers is not something that people overlook.

Whilst I know this is an E3 vid so probably the most action packed example of least discrete action in an action apple, I feel that as the AC series has developed this tenant has been forgotten. My fingers are well and truly crossed that this is realised again to some extent in Revelations.

How is this done I hear you ask?
Well as mentioned by someone else (Daniel I BELIEVE?) the actual stealth aspects of the game are OK, it's just there's very little point in using them because you can mow down effectively any and every guard without batting an eyelid. So, if we make combat harder (challenge) we encourage people to blend with the crowd (Stealth) and as such implementing the idea of being discrete (Creed)... thus solving every problem in this thread. If people want to go in like Rambo then they can. If people want to go stealthy then they have more of a reward/incentive to do so. Everybody wins.


Whose betting Ubi ***** this up?

ThaWhistle
06-08-2011, 11:48 AM
the trend in media is big, explodey, flashy, etc. stealthy, discrete, thinky type stuff is a dead or dying breed. Remember the last movie that people accused of being intellectualy stimulating? inception? that only had stuff htat made you think crammed inbetween collosal explosions. Who remembers the original ghost recon? a mission could take you an hour, and ya might not EVER reload during one. the new ones? stealth is a pretext to getting into a massive firefight. I only played te demo for splinter cell, but think about that, the first one was almost all hide in shadows, the more recent one I seem to remember a whole lot more shooting and explosions in the videos.


what was the best selling video game last year? call of duty black ops. ACB was around number 8 I think. why? because even with its changing gameplay and additional explosions, its still catering to a niche market. It seems like this series is slowly moving away from a niche market filling a specific type of gameplay and somewhat rapidly shifting to a mainstream run and gun/stab game where stealth is ONLY in a few missions to make ya feel like it is important.


I stopped having high expectations for this series after I got a quarter way through brotherhood. its a cash cow the same as call of duty now. the only game at E3 that I'm really excited about is BF3, because it looks like its raising the bar, and it is DIRECTLY challenging COD, which has become stagnant since the original modern warfare. AC is atleast changing things and adding features, but it is not the same series that we started out with 4 years ago.

Even with the slight disappointment I have in this series, I'm still going to buy any game they make, because the one thing that has mercifully carried over from game to game is the story quality.

PhiIs1618033
06-08-2011, 11:56 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by twenty_glyphs:
I wouldn't get too worked up over this demo's mission freedom. First of all, they're trying to show this off as an epic sequence to impress the general public, not necessarily our community. Second of all, if you have to run across some boats to reach a moving one that's leaving, how many routes do you expect to be able to take? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Every other sequence that was like that in the AC franchise had exactly one route. I'm usually pretty good at spotting freerunning paths, but I didn't see any alternative paths.


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Third, there likely is no requirement for Ezio to start the mission by throwing a bomb at those 2 guards. I think the EscoBlades interview mentioned that the gypsies standing right next to those guards were hired to distract them in the demo he saw. You could likely sneak behind them as well. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
What really annoys me is that in a lot of cases, you can just jump past them, across some water or something.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">
I don't know how much mission freedom some people think we had in the first game. Your target was still in a predetermined location and would behave in a predetermined way, such as summoning guards to fight or trying to run away. You had fewer ways to sneak into places and get past guards because you didn't have smoke bombs or factions, only scholars and killing another guard near a guard post.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Without mission markers or other crap, you could go whatever way you wanted. There's a shortcut to get to the top of the Castello, but the damn game won't let you take it during the Castello Crasher mission because you've got to go through the mission marker.
Also, how many times have you played the assassinations? Because I remember getting to Majd Addin in quite a few ways. Like, at least five basic routes and that's only after the cutscene. Add to that completing the assassination and escaping, amount of preparation. Problem is, I can't do most this stuff in AC2 or AC:B because I've got no clue where I'm going.
You got information about which way to escape, and you could run out of the front door if you wanted, then use the whole city to escape. Currently, it's a get out of the area thing, or just scripted. Oh, you killed him. Let's make all his guards and the body disappear! Yeah, nice challenge.


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Mic_92:
(altough there was usually about only two different ways to kill the targets in AC1) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
You haven't played the game much, have you?

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by xCr0wnedNorris:
Stop playing it the same way over and over and say that you have no freedom. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
We've got much less freedom.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by xCr0wnedNorris:
Since when have videogames had the sole purpose of challenging people? Never. Games are supposed to be fun. So once again, you want a challenge from a game? Challenge yourself. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
No. That's not how it works. Something is only fun for a very short period if it's not challenging. That period just isn't long enough to get acquainted with the mechanics properly so you can set up your own challenges. If the game is challenging, on the other hand, I keep playing until I master it, then build my own challenges. A lot of people do this. Check out thehiddenblade.com. For example, do you remember the informer missions where you had to assassinate people without being seen? We know the mechanics, so why not add a challenge to that? Kill every target in high profile.
I can make a game challenging for myself, but not until I know how the mechanics work.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">You seem to have forgotten that I mentioned that some missions are like that. (Keyword being some.) I know not every mission can't be playing with absolute freedom, but the suggestions that're being offered will reduce said amount of freedom and force people into playing stealthy. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Words like 'some' and 'a lot' have different meanings to different people, but I'd say there was an assload of scripted fighting in AC:B. AC1 only had the final missions scripted out.

Grandmaster_Z
06-08-2011, 12:07 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ThaWhistle:
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

good post

xCr0wnedNorris
06-08-2011, 02:13 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by daniel_gervide:

I'm sure you are some ******ed kid that never played old GOOD games... They were challenging and good...

I can add challening but i want to test my abilities too, when ac1 was released i was stealthy as ****, why? cuz if i went thought an agresive way i would be ripped off... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Yes, because insulting my intellegence will get you anywhere in this disagreement. Also, good games are simply matters of opinion. For example, you don't like Chess, therefore you classify it as a bad game. But someone else out there likes Chess, therefore they classify it as a good game. Tell me what you consider to be good games and I'll tell you if I've played them (odds are I have). Also here's a statement you made that really interests me.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I can add challening but i want to test my abilities too </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
So you're saying that you can add challenge to it (which is what I was originally stating you should do if you want a challenge) but you don't want to because you want to test your abilities? Isn't that what a challenge does? It appears as though you aren't comprehending what I was getting across in my original post. Throughout most of the missions in AC:B, you have an extremely large amount of variety in terms of what you can do in that mission. What you do in that mission is entirely up to you. You can run in guns blazing or you can approach your target stealthily without alerting them to your presence. What Ubisoft is trying to do for this game is give players the option to choose how they want to do it. If you want to do it a certain way, set goals for yourself and try to achieve them. Other people paid their money to play this game, they should be able to play it how they want to.

Rea1SamF1sher
06-08-2011, 02:33 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by xCr0wnedNorris:
Since when have videogames had the sole purpose of challenging people? Never. Games are supposed to be fun. So once again, you want a challenge from a game? Challenge yourself.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>
You are joking, are you? Challenge was always part of a game to keep you playing the game. In a progress of a game the game almost always became more difficult. Simple example are the Mario games. The boss fights always get more and more difficult. So killing a boss always feels rewarding and keeps you playing the game and continue exploring the next section of the game.

On another note, I never said the sole purpose of a videogame is to challenge people, but that's a part what a game should do. Why are games fun? There are a lot of ways to achieve fun with a game but there is always the rewarding feeling that keeps us getting back and back again. Winning is rewarding, coming through a difficult level is rewarding and in party games like Mario Party you can even share this feeling with your friends. Challenge is a big part in giving you this feeling. If you think that's not a part of game, well then you obviously missed a lot of them.

PhiIs1618033... said also something very important about that.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">You seem to have forgotten that I mentioned that some missions are like that. (Keyword being some.) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I already said it's not just some missions. 5 of 6 Romulus missions have sections where it throws you into scripted segments where you need to fight or are not able to go stealthy. There are a lot more.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I know not every mission can't be playing with absolute freedom, but the suggestions that're being offered will reduce said amount of freedom and force people into playing stealthy. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Or it will force people to actually have some "skill" to fight against a group of soldiers. The freedom would be there, but it seems people would be to frustrated to learn to fight better. In Assassin's Creed it's actually about Social Stealth, so it should emphasis this gameplay element and make combat more difficult. This doesn't mean at all you are not free to choose to go rambo or stealth. Believe it or not but going rambo and surviving it when combat is more challenging would feel much more rewarding and you would really feel like you are the badass, not the character you are playing.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">See the above, I know there are a few mission that're scripted, but you still have multiple choices on how you want to play them out. You want examples? Because I'm happy to oblige. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I don't need any examples. I have played them all, so I very well know there are multiple ways to the missions. But the progression of the series goes torwards action. You see that in the games and even in the Trailers. Where it's more badass to fight an army then, to Prepare, Assassinate and Vanish. Almost the same as in Aggro Stealth in SCC: Prepare, Execute and Vanish. By going torwards this direction, missions are more and more scripted and therefore doesn't give you as much freedom as you had in the first title. The only issue AC1 had was variation. There was really nothing wrong with the AI and the difficulty in combat. It was really the right middle way.

In the demo they showed to us, you were again forced into fights. There would be possibilities to prevent the fights though if it wasn't scripted.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Have you played the game? Yes you start out with two, but you lose the second one in the first sequence. Also, did you read the rest of my suggestions? I was offering a way to make it challenging by not using some of those combat mechanics. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Yes, I know. I almost only used the hidden blade, whether I had just one (at the beginning) or two.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">It changes it to some degree. You don't have the indicator telling you they're about to attack (which I believe some people wanted to get rid of anyways so there's a solution for them). You don't know how much health you have, you can't regenerate health. Also, running away from a fight? That's part of the freedom I was talking about. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Well I will try it out. But that's again making the challenge for yourself. I am curious why I wouldn't know how much health I would have. Even without armor the game shows how much health you have.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">So wait, you want the game to be challenging by restricting the ability to go Rambo on everybody, yet you're against scripted missions or missions that make you play a certain way because it makes restrictions on your freedom? Because it certainly seems like that's what you're saying. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I never said, making the game more challenging by restricting the ability to go Rambo. Priority is freedom in the whole mission. Whether you play Stealth or Rambo, I play both depends on how I want to play. But often I am forced eitherway to play Rambo or to play Stealth (which isn't forced as much as Rambo).

You can run away from a fight, but when you just run away, they are faster then you and it gets difficult to lose line of sight to be able to hide in the crowd. This provokes the player to fight the group because it's easy to fight them anyway. When you do freerunning and climb on the buildings, you lose them really fast because they don't search as much for you as they did in the first game. But the point is, why should I run when it's easy to kill 10 guys in 5 seconds anyway?

xCr0wnedNorris
06-08-2011, 03:20 PM
I'm not sure how much clearer I can say it when you're asking for something that's always been in the game. It's up to you to utilize it. Why would you run when you can just kill them easily? Because you WANT to. When have you ever been forced into using an execution streak? When have you ever been forced to use things like the gun, crossbow, or poison darts in fights? When have you been forced to kick guards to break their defense? The answer to all of those is never. Just because you can use those mechanics doesn't mean you absolutely have to 100% of the time. You say you advocate as much freedom to play how you want as possible, yet you go to the near opposite of the spectrum and try to take out mechanics that allow people to play how they want to. Guess what? There are people out there who enjoy taking out 50 people like it's nothing. There're people who enjoy huge explosions and fast paced action. Assassin's Creed is trying to give everybody the choice of playing how they want, don't try to take that away.

oOAltairOo
06-08-2011, 03:37 PM
I don't have a problem with them implementing new stuff that makes the game easier, but some of us wants more of a challenge, and i believe we should be remembered too i the development of the game. Like adding some sort of difficulty setting, or giving us the option to un-equip armor and weapons would be great.

xCr0wnedNorris
06-08-2011, 03:47 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by oOAltairOo:
I don't have a problem with them implementing new stuff that makes the game easier, but some of us wants more of a challenge, and i believe we should be remembered too i the development of the game. Like adding some sort of difficulty setting, or giving us the option to un-equip armor and weapons would be great. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I concur.

iN3krO
06-08-2011, 03:51 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by xCr0wnedNorris:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by daniel_gervide:

I'm sure you are some ******ed kid that never played old GOOD games... They were challenging and good...

I can add challening but i want to test my abilities too, when ac1 was released i was stealthy as ****, why? cuz if i went thought an agresive way i would be ripped off... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Yes, because insulting my intellegence will get you anywhere in this disagreement. Also, good games are simply matters of opinion. For example, you don't like Chess, therefore you classify it as a bad game. But someone else out there likes Chess, therefore they classify it as a good game. Tell me what you consider to be good games and I'll tell you if I've played them (odds are I have). Also here's a statement you made that really interests me.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I can add challening but i want to test my abilities too </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
So you're saying that you can add challenge to it (which is what I was originally stating you should do if you want a challenge) but you don't want to because you want to test your abilities? Isn't that what a challenge does? It appears as though you aren't comprehending what I was getting across in my original post. Throughout most of the missions in AC:B, you have an extremely large amount of variety in terms of what you can do in that mission. What you do in that mission is entirely up to you. You can run in guns blazing or you can approach your target stealthily without alerting them to your presence. What Ubisoft is trying to do for this game is give players the option to choose how they want to do it. If you want to do it a certain way, set goals for yourself and try to achieve them. Other people paid their money to play this game, they should be able to play it how they want to. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I paid Ac1 to play it as i want and i can.. someppl paid Ac1 to play it as they want and they can't... diffrence? I'm skill and they are not...

I don't test my abilities cuz even without weapons at all and without armor i could do AcB... is that challenge? LOOOL... challenge was Ac1... after beating the game normal, only with shortblade + hidden blade, only with hidden blade and than with all weapons but without HUD at all and without looking at the map i think i did everything i could do to add challenging to the game.. however i don't see how would i add chalenging to Ac2 and Brotherhood, maybe cuz THERE IS NO CHALLENGE!

xCr0wnedNorris
06-08-2011, 04:03 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by daniel_gervide:
I paid Ac1 to play it as i want and i can.. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
That's great, now let other people play it how they want to. Not everybody thinks the same as you and not everybody has the same interests.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I don't test my abilities cuz even without weapons at all and without armor i could do AcB... is that challenge? LOOOL... challenge was Ac1... after beating the game normal, only with shortblade + hidden blade, only with hidden blade and than with all weapons but without HUD at all and without looking at the map i think i did everything i could do to add challenging to the game.. however i don't see how would i add chalenging to Ac2 and Brotherhood, maybe cuz THERE IS NO CHALLENGE! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

None of the Assassin's Creed games were particularly challenging, the fighting in Assassin's Creed 1 just took longer. The games can be as hard as you can make it. Don't like a game mechanic? Don't use it. Don't like fights? Don't start them. Think the game is too easy? YOU make it harder by setting restrictions on yourself.

iN3krO
06-08-2011, 04:05 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by xCr0wnedNorris:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by daniel_gervide:
I paid Ac1 to play it as i want and i can.. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
That's great, now let other people play it how they want to. Not everybody thinks the same as you and not everybody has the same interests.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I don't test my abilities cuz even without weapons at all and without armor i could do AcB... is that challenge? LOOOL... challenge was Ac1... after beating the game normal, only with shortblade + hidden blade, only with hidden blade and than with all weapons but without HUD at all and without looking at the map i think i did everything i could do to add challenging to the game.. however i don't see how would i add chalenging to Ac2 and Brotherhood, maybe cuz THERE IS NO CHALLENGE! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

None of the Assassin's Creed games were particularly challenging, the fighting in Assassin's Creed 1 just took longer. The games can be as hard as you can make it. Don't like a game mechanic? Don't use it. Don't like fights? Don't start them. Think the game is too easy? YOU make it harder by setting restrictions on yourself. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ac1 was not for everybody... ubisoft described it as A NEW TYPE OF GAME if i can recall it well, if not go for the first thread of this forum...

However, ac2/Brotherhood wasn't that UNIQUE, it was more for the big market and that's why the game was dumbed down...

oOAltairOo
06-08-2011, 04:11 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by xCr0wnedNorris:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by oOAltairOo:
I don't have a problem with them implementing new stuff that makes the game easier, but some of us wants more of a challenge, and i believe we should be remembered too i the development of the game. Like adding some sort of difficulty setting, or giving us the option to un-equip armor and weapons would be great. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I concur. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Happy to hear it http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/partyhat.gif

xCr0wnedNorris
06-08-2011, 04:24 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by daniel_gervide:

Ac1 was not for everybody... ubisoft described it as A NEW TYPE OF GAME if i can recall it well, if not go for the first thread of this forum...

However, ac2/Brotherhood wasn't that UNIQUE, it was more for the big market and that's why the game was dumbed down... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Well of course it wasn't unique anymore, the gameplay and story for those games was mostly based off of their prequels (a.k.a. Assassin's Creed 1). They can't change everything about the game and still call it a proper sequel, things have to be similar in some ways.

Rea1SamF1sher
06-08-2011, 04:47 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by xCr0wnedNorris:
I'm not sure how much clearer I can say it when you're asking for something that's always been in the game. It's up to you to utilize it. Why would you run when you can just kill them easily? Because you WANT to. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
When the guards are hunting you and one of them is always getting behind you to hit you with his weapon and you are not able to lose line of sight because of that. That's not a situation where I would say I want to fight them, but get rid of them. Did I want to fight the group? NO. Was there another possibility to get rid of them? Maybe, when you are in the town and are able to climb or you have smoke bomb to distract them. But what if you don't want to use the bomb, but want to get rid of the guards by running or even by riding a horse (while other guards hunt you with a horse)? The easiest way would be to fight them. Do I want to fight them? Again, NO. Do I want to get rid of them. Yes. Just because I do something in the game doesn't mean I really wanted to do that. The same goes for the end of Brotherhood. I didn't want to push the button to go forward, but I have too so the story continues. But in this case it's about the story not the gameplay.

Anyway it's actually about the mission's where you are forced into these fights. In the first game you could nearly play through the game by just assassinating your targets. The end is scripted though.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">When have you ever been forced into using an execution streak? When have you ever been forced to use things like the gun, crossbow, or poison darts in fights? When have you been forced to kick guards to break their defense? The answer to all of those is never. Just because you can use those mechanics doesn't mean you absolutely have to 100% of the time. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
You are completely missing the point. I cannot even explain how much you miss that point.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">You say you advocate as much freedom to play how you want as possible, yet you go to the near opposite of the spectrum and try to take out mechanics that allow people to play how they want to. Guess what? There are people out there who enjoy taking out 50 people like it's nothing. There're people who enjoy huge explosions and fast paced action. Assassin's Creed is trying to give everybody the choice of playing how they want, don't try to take that away. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I don't see at all where I do try to take out mechanics. In fact I don't try to do that, I even readd them from the first game, where timing was key, AI was aggressive and searched for you. The easiest way to handle the difficulty and the challenge would be with different difficulty modes. But I don't see this happening as much as I and a lot of other people would like to see this. So we need to find a middle way and AC1 offered it.

That it will be more challenging for people to kill 50 people is right but they have still all their mechanics and can do as they intend to do. Making a game more challenging means automatically that some mechanics will be taken out? I don't think so and I don't see at all where you get that from again.

xCr0wnedNorris
06-08-2011, 05:55 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Andre202:

When the guards are hunting you and one of them is always getting behind you to hit you with his weapon and you are not able to lose line of sight because of that. That's not a situation where I would say I want to fight them, but get rid of them. Did I want to fight the group? NO. Was there another possibility to get rid of them? Maybe, when you are in the town and are able to climb or you have smoke bomb to distract them. But what if you don't want to use the bomb, but want to get rid of the guards by running or even by riding a horse (while other guards hunt you with a horse)? The easiest way would be to fight them. Do I want to fight them? Again, NO. Do I want to get rid of them. Yes. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's the result of playing how you want to play. That's how it was when you were running from guards in AC1, they'd chase you to the ends of the Earth. If you don't want to fight them then you have to outrun them. Use hiding spots and vigilantes to your advantage to try and escape. Sure it's not as easy as killing them, find one post where I ever stated such, but if you wanted to play like that you can, it's not some impossible feat like you're making it out to be.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Anyway it's actually about the mission's where you are forced into these fights. In the first game you could nearly play through the game by just assassinating your targets. The end is scripted though. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You were forced into multiple fights in all of the Assassin's Creed game. In the first game, half of the missions you were actually forced into a fight with absolutely no way to avoid them. You say that the first game had much more freedom for their assassinations, but in actuality, those missions were the most scripted.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">You are completely missing the point. I cannot even explain how much you miss that point. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well what point are you even trying to make? Because to me it looks like you're trying to make the game more stealth based, even though it already can be stealth based.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I don't see at all where I do try to take out mechanics. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Let me follow that with other quotes by you. (With my points in bold.)

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">It's about Stealth, Creed and Challenge!!! No, it's about fun. Assassin's Creed is a game, games are meant to be enjoyed, not to test. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">It's the game that should give you the challenge, you shouldn't make up challenges for yourself to make the game more challenging. The game does give you a challenge, however it's up to you to determine how difficult you percieve that challenge. Also, why shouldn't we challenge ourselves? Is it so wrong to try and think up of new and unique ways to play the game? Isn't that what you said you wanted? For people to choose how they play? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">In fact I don't try to do that, I even readd them from the first game, where timing was key, And what about those who want to take a more aggressive approach? Do you think it's fair to them that they have to wait for the enemy to attack before they do anything? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

These heavily imply a message that the system they've been using in the recent games have become worse and that they should take out mechanics that they've put in. You've been saying that it's too easy and that they need to make it more challenging(which yes, it can be easy, but it can also be extremely difficult if you want it to be. It all goes back to you making a concious effort to play the game how you want to).

There's nothing really wrong with the mechanics they've been using lately. All their doing is giving people the freedom to choose how they want to play.

And to go back to one of you're statements.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">When the guards are hunting you and one of them is always getting behind you to hit you with his weapon and you are not able to lose line of sight because of that. That's not a situation where I would say I want to fight them, but get rid of them. Did I want to fight the group? NO. Was there another possibility to get rid of them? Maybe, when you are in the town and are able to climb or you have smoke bomb to distract them. But what if you don't want to use the bomb, but want to get rid of the guards by running or even by riding a horse (while other guards hunt you with a horse)? The easiest way would be to fight them. Do I want to fight them? Again, NO. Do I want to get rid of them. Yes. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Didn't you want the game to be more challenging? There you go. You're contradicting yourself in that you're saying you want the game to be more challenging, but then when a challenging situation is put before you, you opt for the easier way out.

Mic_92
06-08-2011, 08:35 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by PhiIs1618033...:


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Mic_92:
(altough there was usually about only two different ways to kill the targets in AC1) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
You haven't played the game much, have you?

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes I have and please explain to me the big difference between whether you climb the ladder to get to him, blend or hide in a haystack.

It really boils down to sneaking your way to him and running straight to him.

crash3
06-09-2011, 02:47 AM
i think haystacks should take time to reset like the lifts did in singleplayer, think about it realistically, if you enter a bale of hay and then exit it your gonna take a lot of the hay/leaves out with you its not gonna stay intact

i just think that could be a way to make escaping more challenging

iN3krO
06-09-2011, 09:00 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by xCr0wnedNorris:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by daniel_gervide:

Ac1 was not for everybody... ubisoft described it as A NEW TYPE OF GAME if i can recall it well, if not go for the first thread of this forum...

However, ac2/Brotherhood wasn't that UNIQUE, it was more for the big market and that's why the game was dumbed down... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Well of course it wasn't unique anymore, the gameplay and story for those games was mostly based off of their prequels (a.k.a. Assassin's Creed 1). They can't change everything about the game and still call it a proper sequel, things have to be similar in some ways. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, i would prefer to have the 3 games with ac1 gameplay but with ac2/b missions rather of how it's now... what i mean is that Ac1 was really diffrent for other games of the same type (GTA, Mafia, GodFather, RedOfRedemption) but the following sequels are getting near and near to those games each release, making the game a big money cow instead a new UNIQUE GENERATION of GAMING... it's getting easy, like those games, it's getting more about action and less about being an assassin (assassins were stealthy cuz combat was hard but now you are agresive cuz stealthy gives u no reward when you are noob and combat is not anymore rewarding when you are skilled)

PhiIs1618033
06-09-2011, 11:17 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Mic_92:
Yes I have and please explain to me the big difference between whether you climb the ladder to get to him, blend or hide in a haystack.

It really boils down to sneaking your way to him and running straight to him. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I don't really get the big difference, you know. It all really boils down to making sure the guy dies.

I hope that makes it clear. I pay more attention to the details and the playstyle than you do. That's fine, I guess.

Also, to answer your question for real: It makes all the difference. Speed, how easily you get noticed, closest escape route, position in a fight, etc. It's not only about the action itself, but also the consequences it brings.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by xCr0wnedNorris:
And what about those who want to take a more aggressive approach? Do you think it's fair to them that they have to wait for the enemy to attack before they do anything? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
1. That isn't an aggressive approach.
2. An aggressive approach is very much possible. Check out this video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3mRMw24xs2I). Also, I don't know about anyone else, but I can take out a group of guards faster with my shortblade if I'm aggressive. Bottom line? The waiting and countering is for noobs.

As for your suggestion not to use the killstreak system: That would make combat ridiculously hard. Not because the enemies are so though, or you are so weak, but because it's pretty difficult to avoid killstreaking while still putting up a good and quick fight.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">
Well of course it wasn't unique anymore, the gameplay and story for those games was mostly based off of their prequels (a.k.a. Assassin's Creed 1). They can't change everything about the game and still call it a proper sequel, things have to be similar in some ways. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Bull****. AC1 had the whole investigation-thing. AC2 dropped it. Also, the crowd interaction became very limited. If a body dropped down from the roof, people wouldn't pay attention, while in AC1 they'd start running like hell.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">
There's nothing really wrong with the mechanics they've been using lately. All their doing is giving people the freedom to choose how they want to play. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I want to play aggressively in combat, should I end up in it, but the killstreak system just does not cut it. There's no challenge, so it's no fun to me. The problem is that you can keep adding mechanics, but they'll have little going for them because there are just so many of them.

Rea1SamF1sher
06-09-2011, 11:21 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by xCr0wnedNorris:
That's the result of playing how you want to play. That's how it was when you were running from guards in AC1, they'd chase you to the ends of the Earth. If you don't want to fight them then you have to outrun them. Use hiding spots and vigilantes to your advantage to try and escape. Sure it's not as easy as killing them, find one post where I ever stated such, but if you wanted to play like that you can, it's not some impossible feat like you're making it out to be. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I will correct myself to say it's kind of difficult to run away from the guards. The thing is it's not a challenge (in my opinion) and in this case (in ACB not in AC1) I cannot even say it's difficult because it's actually an unfair "tool" used by the devs to provoke a fight. Which shows the game going more in the direction of action. The situations where you run away from a group of guards and they are able to run faster then you so they just can hit you, I would call that unfair not difficult nor challenging. It's of course not impossible to run away from them, I mostly do run away. I guess I explained this example in the wrong way. I am all for a more aggressive AI but not by making them unfair. They should just run as fast as you and hunt you down to death and search for you to death (like in AC1).

It would be cool to have a good challenge by running away from the guards, but in with a fair AI. In AC1 they hunt you down to death (shame they don't run as fast as you) but they do search a lot more for you and they try more often to to barricade passages. I only saw three times the AI barricading the passage I wanted to come through in ACB. This happens a lot more often in AC1. In general the AI in AC1 feels more intelligent, while I have to say that there are some nice additions to the AI in ACB, like searching for you in the hay.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">You were forced into multiple fights in all of the Assassin's Creed game. In the first game, half of the missions you were actually forced into a fight with absolutely no way to avoid them. You say that the first game had much more freedom for their assassinations, but in actuality, those missions were the most scripted. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
First you had the missions you needed to do before you can do the assassination, the thing is you don't have to do all of them. People got to the sixth target without killing one guard but just only the targets. After that they had to do some missions, where you needed to to kill some guards. But that's at the end of the game. In ACB it's more often the case that you will kill more often a group of guards. You can explain it this way. In AC1 you always killed one target and some guards but therefore rescue a lot of others. In ACB you kill a lot more guards and therefore rescue a lot of others. Sounds strange though. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Well what point are you even trying to make? Because to me it looks like you're trying to make the game more stealth based, even though it already can be stealth based. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Yes an emphasis on Social Stealth and the Creed, just like the first game did. You were just counting variations of attacks you could do or you couldn't do in middle of a fight. The point is to be able to avoid this fight in most missions and even better being able to just do your objective without killing the others. When I saw the first trailer, I thought an Assassin does his work fast and precisely kills his targets. So he only does his objective and disappears as fast as he can. That doesn't mean at all taking out any other option you already got in the game. It's still everything possible, but there is an emphasis on the Creed to balance Stealth and Action in game. With ACB Action got superior.

Now there is a balance issue between using Action tactics or Stealth tactics because Action is more faster, easier and hasn't got any real consequences. But Stealth takes to much time to do, so the most choose Action without giving a thought for Stealth. By making the combat more difficult, people will begin to think before they get into a fight. Do I make it the stealthy way or do I take the challenge to fight these guys? It would make more fun and it still feels like the Creed is something important and in the Creed there is the Social Stealth included. At the end you will give more thought between choosing Action and Stealth when combat is more challenging. While it was still easy in AC1, you could fail a lot of times though because timing in combat was KEY.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">It's about Stealth, Creed and Challenge!!! No, it's about fun. Assassin's Creed is a game, games are meant to be enjoyed, not to test. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
You are quoting a sentence from a discussion with another member, who thought we already have enough of these threads, and think this fits into our discussion? I was responding to him, that this thread is not just about difficulty but about Stealth, Creed and Challenge, just like the topic says.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">It's the game that should give you the challenge, you shouldn't make up challenges for yourself to make the game more challenging. The game does give you a challenge, however it's up to you to determine how difficult you percieve that challenge. Also, why shouldn't we challenge ourselves? Is it so wrong to try and think up of new and unique ways to play the game? Isn't that what you said you wanted? For people to choose how they play? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
When you do challenges for yourself, you often do a lot of sacrifices which you don't have to do when there is a difficulty mode or when it has a learning curve, getting more and more difficult. That's the way it should work. There should be some kind of balance which a lot of people are already asking, like when wearing armor, your movement is "limited" (you cannot fight or run as fast).

I am nowhere against doing challenges myself. I do that with Splinter Cell for example. If the highest difficulty still has air for more challenge I will go up for that which usually ends up with limiting yourself to not use specific elements of the game. But when playing under these difficulties, I don't have to make any sacrifices but play the game as I want to and still have the same if not even deeper experience and still have a lot of challenge.

ACB isn't difficult at all, so should I start to make sacrifices already at the beginning of the game? Not being able to enjoy the game which offers me armors and a lot of things I can use? The game should give you a fair challenge/difficulty (GTA) and still offer all of it's experience. After that I can choose to do sacrifices to do the game more challenging. But the game should be the first to set the difficulty and the challenge. The only thing that needs to change is the combat system and the AI. Making timing KEY in combat and the AI more aggressive, more intelligent.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">In fact I don't try to do that, I even readd them from the first game, where timing was key, And what about those who want to take a more aggressive approach? Do you think it's fair to them that they have to wait for the enemy to attack before they do anything? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Everybody can play the game the way they want. The point of making the combat system difficult is to make the AI more aggressive which means the players won't have to wait that much anyway if they want to counter for example. The guards should always keep attacking you, just like they keep attacking Ezio in the Trailer. You can always attack as you want but if the guards attack you, you need to defend yourself which prevents you to fight always in one on one fight style. Where often one guard is attacking and you can do everything you want with him because the others are just watching you. The guards in the demo took a very long time attacking you at all and always attacked one by one.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">These heavily imply a message that the system they've been using in the recent games have become worse and that they should take out mechanics that they've put in. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
There is no problem in the variation of attacks you can do in the combat system. It has a simple to use approach and that's fine but the hard to master approach is missing. Adding difficulty to the combat system. Maybe it has to be balanced too. But the point is to ADD difficulty to the system, still being easy in control. The AI for example doesn't react to your killstreaks or doesn't defend themself there. There is need for improvement.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">You've been saying that it's too easy and that they need to make it more challenging(which yes, it can be easy, but it can also be extremely difficult if you want it to be. It all goes back to you making a concious effort to play the game how you want to). </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Already explained, the game is the first one to offer the full experience with a fair level of difficulty.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">There's nothing really wrong with the mechanics they've been using lately. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I have no problem with new gameplay features.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">All their doing is giving people the freedom to choose how they want to play. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Do the people who complain about the lack of freedom in missions have illusions?

Yes you are free when you don't do any missions, you do things the way you want them to do, but in the missions, you are often not as free, to do the things the way you want.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Didn't you want the game to be more challenging? There you go. You're contradicting yourself in that you're saying you want the game to be more challenging, but then when a challenging situation is put before you, you opt for the easier way out. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Yes I am all for more challenge. The thing about the hunting is to make it a fair challenge in this case and not give the AI suddenly an advantage over you just to hit you and to provoke a fight. They should hunt you down at the same speed, splitting up and flank you to get you. Just as you can grab the people while running, they should be able to do so too. So if they flank you and get you, you are sourrounded by them and either use your smoke bomb to disappear or have a challenging fight, which is much more important than having a challenge by running away from the guards. Both can be achieved by better AI and small tweeks on the Combat System though.