PDA

View Full Version : Assassin's Creed Poll - How important is story?



UbiGabe
04-08-2011, 12:11 PM
Hello again, Assassins! Please take a minute to answer the following question!

Ureh
04-08-2011, 12:47 PM
I can't believe this question is being asked. Story is the key ingredient. It's why most of us are playing this game. ACBs plot was acceptable but anything below that would've turned into disappointment. Posting that question makes me think that Ubisoft is considering not focusing on the singleplayer and instead on multiplayer.

Second most important thing is the historical context and being able to explore memories and find out "what really happened".

YeOldeSierra
04-08-2011, 12:48 PM
The story is one of the core elements of a game that drive me to play it. If a game has poor gameplay I can stand that in order to actually get into the story a little more, because a lot of the time I can enjoy a game for its story more than anything.

If we're discussing a franchise such as the Assassin's Creed franchise, however, story is one of the aspects of the game that appeal to me. I always want a good story from a franchise that has established itself as one to watch for in that field. The gameplay is already polished in Assassin's Creed but if it's polished even further, great! I'd buy the game even if it had weak graphics and poor gameplay. If it's an Assassin's Creed game I'd take the chances on it that the story would make up for any other areas that would fall flat - not that I imagine any of them would.

A lot of people value graphics, perhaps even over the story. I personally find the story to be one of the reasons I buy a game more than anything else. While this console generation has shown itself to be focused completely on the multiplayer experience, I still value a quality story over the online, 99% of the time.

IndieDevJack
04-08-2011, 01:44 PM
Second only to gameplay for me.

elvindrummer
04-08-2011, 01:49 PM
I think for creed fans story is really important! The people who love the game as much as I do (my absoulate favorite game of all time!) love the whole game but really love the story.

The story is what made me go http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_redface.gif and go out and buy an xbox to play this game! I needed to know what happened! But people don't value story as much don't value the game as much. My boyfriend doesn't care about storylines that much (he prefers rpgs, some with weak storylines) but even he likes creed for the storyline. It is one of the few games he doesn't skip through the cut scenes.

LCGuardian
04-08-2011, 02:28 PM
I believe that for a singleplayer-driven title, like all the AC games have been (and I include ACB in that even with the multiplayer), the storyline has to be the most compelling element once a proven gameplay experience has been established.

AC1 set the bar for the gameplay (any changes to combat or freerunning have been incremental since then). I think the challenge for future AC titles (or title if November/March's release is to be AC3 and a conclusion to the AC storyline) is to expand on the existing plotlines is a believeable and coherent way. AC2 did that well, ACB I feel did it well with the Desmond plot line, but less well with the conclusion to Ezio's story (I feel, like a number of others, that Ezio's story was a bit thin to cover an entire game in ACB). The next release I feel needs to make a return to a detailed singleplayer narrative a priority.

phil.llllll
04-08-2011, 02:34 PM
Depends what type of game we're talking about here.

For AC the story is of utmost importantance especially considering AC has always been a story driven experience.

Take Brotherhood for instance (hell any successful game that's known for it's story) and take away that element and replace it with just some written text that says go out and do these misssions and what not and I guarantee it wouldn't be as successful as it is now.

Story gives the game purpose and drives the experience. In AC, it's the pillar from which the game was built. It's the context for the gameplay (I'm playing as an assassin as opposed to some nameless entity) and it gives it purpose.

The gameplay in AC is obviously built around the idea of being an Assassin. For instance, I don't want to see jetpacks in AC anytime soon even though that might be a fun way to get around.

So, how important is story? Just look at all the successful games within the past few years and that should give anyone a good clue on how many devs view the issue.

If a dev decides to have a story in their game, I would hope that would come first instead of creating a story around a bunch prebuilt levels and ideas, which a lot of times the story will suffer as a result and hence just be a negative note on said game.

crash3
04-08-2011, 02:47 PM
Originally posted by YeOldeSierra:
The story is one of the core elements of a game that drive me to play it. If a game has poor gameplay I can stand that in order to actually get into the story a little more, because a lot of the time I can enjoy a game for its story more than anything.

If we're discussing a franchise such as the Assassin's Creed franchise, however, story is one of the aspects of the game that appeal to me. I always want a good story from a franchise that has established itself as one to watch for in that field. The gameplay is already polished in Assassin's Creed but if it's polished even further, great! I'd buy the game even if it had weak graphics and poor gameplay. If it's an Assassin's Creed game I'd take the chances on it that the story would make up for any other areas that would fall flat - not that I imagine any of them would.

A lot of people value graphics, perhaps even over the story. I personally find the story to be one of the reasons I buy a game more than anything else. While this console generation has shown itself to be focused completely on the multiplayer experience, I still value a quality story over the online, 99% of the time.

i love the educational/historical side to the story-the storyline in ACB was much too vague and rushed, AC2 was much better but i still would like to see a longer, more in depth storyline....with better graphics!

PirateRob
04-08-2011, 03:45 PM
Originally posted by Ureh:
I can't believe this question is being asked. Story is the key ingredient. It's why most of us are playing this game. ACBs plot was acceptable but anything below that would've turned into disappointment. Posting that question makes me think that Ubisoft is considering not focusing on the singleplayer and instead on multiplayer.

Second most important thing is the historical context and being able to explore memories and find out "what really happened".

I totally agree I'm getting tired of devs thinking multiplayer is the main pull for a game , for one without a good story and gameplay a game is nothing the main reason I love ac is for the story, it has to be so good it draws you in.
Secondly, not everybody has xbl or psn so they miss out on a good story and a lengthy game for such a stupid reason, I mean look at games before xbl or psn or online multiplayer they were a lot more story driven and longer games, look at Legend of zelda series it succeeds because of an epic story no online multiplayer just a story driven lengthy game/s.
I for one think Ubisoft will lose a lot of hardcore fans if the story for the next ac game or games get shorter or just a way of linking random levels killing people look at call of duty story is basically there to link levels, no depth to the story and massive focus on multiplayer

TwentyGlyphs
04-08-2011, 04:00 PM
The story in Assassin's Creed games is critical. If it weren't for the story of the game series, this would be something I played and then forgot about until the next game (even though the gameplay is great). Because the story is engrossing and shows us "what really happened" and pulls in so many historical events and conspiracy theories, Assassin's Creed is something very special.

I agree that Ezio's story in Brotherhood was a little weak and it would be hard to accept anything less than that. I want to see something more along the lines of Assassin's Creed 1 and 2's stories in future games.

Desmond's story in Brotherhood started to really pick up steam, so I want to see that aspect of the story continue to grow in each game as well.

tjbyrum1
04-08-2011, 06:35 PM
I wouldn't play Assassin's Creed if it wasn't for the story.

1. Story - I got to have a story with good characters, just to keep me entertained and wanting more. AC does JUST that.
2. Gameplay and Features - I have to have something that makes the game enjoyable to play. Assassin's Creed has done this in ways games never have before.
3. Genre/Setting - I like having historical games, which have real-life locations. Assassin's Creed does the super great.
4. Graphics - Graphics are obviously not EVERYTHING, but I like to have some appealing art and animation. I don't buy games FOR the graphics, but I would prefer having good graphics. Assassin's Creed has some very great graphics.

salad10203
04-08-2011, 07:35 PM
Story has to be great but so does gameplay. If you have but not the other you have a good game. But if you have both you have a classic.

dxsxhxcx
04-08-2011, 08:24 PM
story is the main reason why I play any game, so yes, STORY is essential!!! Even more when we are talking about AC...

ps: such question being asked from someone related to Ubisoft makes me feel worried about the future of the game... :S

phil.llllll
04-08-2011, 09:49 PM
Originally posted by dxsxhxcx:
ps: such question being asked from someone related to Ubisoft makes me feel worried about the future of the game... :S

I don't think you should worry. They're just looking for fan input on the matter. They obviously know the importance of story as evidenced by their last three AC games and all previous PoP games.

LordWolv
04-09-2011, 12:49 AM
Storyline is absolutely essential. I'm annoyed they're even asking this question. Assassin's Creed is deeply brilliant because of its vast storylines that suck you in. AC without story, well, I wouldn't buy it.

Ultim4teSurviv4
04-09-2011, 01:54 AM
Originally posted by Isaac500:
Storyline is absolutely essential. I'm annoyed they're even asking this question. Assassin's Creed is deeply brilliant because of its vast storylines that suck you in. AC without story, well, I wouldn't buy it.

Damn right. So many other games out there but this one is especially great because of the story line and one of the only reasons I play it is for the singleplayer storyline.

Sizzlemon
04-09-2011, 03:17 AM
The storyline is EXTREMELY important. There is no point building a game around a mediocre story. AC has been very sucessful in the story because it leaves you with a big shift in momentum. The first game, you find out the Templars still exist. The second game, you find out that Desmond is the 'Chosen One' that will save ALL of humanity. Finally Brotherhood, after weeks of trolling through memories you find the Apple only to have Desmond stab Lucy and collapse, then to mysterious people that turn out to be the Assassin's come and take Desmond and strap him back into the Animus.

Basically it just keeps you guessing as to what will happen next.

arkadye
04-09-2011, 06:09 AM
I don't think any one answer sums up my feeling here.

If a game's mechanics are good, and the game is fun, I don't really care whether the story is any good or not (see Unreal Tournament).

But a good story - well handled - will turn a good game into an excellent one, and an excellent one into Game-Of-All-Time material (see Assassin's Creed 2 or Portal).

That said, no matter how good the story is it mustn't get in the way of having fun. This was something Assassin's Creed 1 had problems with (and much to your credit, you picked up on that and answered all the substantial criticism levelled at that game with AC2). It kept AC1 being in the "best game ever" and put into the category of "a game with great potential".

UBOSOFT-Gamer
04-09-2011, 07:55 AM
Depends on the genre. Ego-shooter, i dont care not much about the story. But in ASSASSINS CREED story is the most important thing to me, since it was the story which made me buy and play the game. The rest of the game, like time set, historical persons, etc is a result of the story!

Xanatos2007
04-09-2011, 09:17 AM
Super important: it's the only thing distinguishing Assassin's Creed as a 'great' game rather than merely a 'good' game.

AntiChrist7
04-09-2011, 09:20 AM
Originally posted by Xanatos2007:
Super important: it's the only thing distinguishing Assassin's Creed as a 'great' game rather than merely a 'good' game.

indeed. all the work you guys put in it, especially when making the glyphs, is one of the great features of this game. Normally i'm not tha tinto RPG/action games, but because of the story (together with awesome grpahics and excellent gameplay), i'm loving the AC series. don't neglect the story for the enxt game(s), and keep up doing things like Project Legacy

ace3001
04-09-2011, 09:30 AM
Originally posted by Xanatos2007:
Super important: it's the only thing distinguishing Assassin's Creed as a 'great' game rather than merely a 'good' game. This. And am I the only one who's getting a bit scared when Gabe asked something like this?

dxsxhxcx
04-09-2011, 10:20 AM
Originally posted by kolitha.kuruppu:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Xanatos2007:
Super important: it's the only thing distinguishing Assassin's Creed as a 'great' game rather than merely a 'good' game. This. And am I the only one who's getting a bit scared when Gabe asked something like this? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

don't worry, you're not the only one... :P

ChaosxNetwork
04-09-2011, 11:22 AM
Did you really just ask this to the Assassin's Creed community, about Assassin's Creed, Gabe?
It should be obvious that it is important as it is what make Assassin's Creed, Assassin's Creed...
Order of importance;
Story,
Gameplay,
Exotic Gameplay,



Multiplayer.
If you spend more than 30% of your time on Multiplayer I will hunt all of you down and slap every single one of you.

METALLICS2005
04-09-2011, 01:36 PM
please invest as much as you can in the story !!

PirateRob
04-09-2011, 01:56 PM
Originally posted by xHITx_Chaos:
Did you really just ask this to the Assassin's Creed community, about Assassin's Creed, Gabe?
It should be obvious that it is important as it is what make Assassin's Creed, Assassin's Creed...
Order of importance;
Story,
Gameplay,
Exotic Gameplay,



Multiplayer.
If you spend more than 30% of your time on Multiplayer I will hunt all of you down and slap every single one of you.

^this! I'd join in the hunt, I really thought the ac devs had more integrity than to possibly focus on a cash cow multiplayer yearly release, please for the love of the creed don't do that!!

crash3
04-09-2011, 03:29 PM
i think this question has only been asked because of all the complaints about ACBs vague/rushed storyline

the next AC storyline should be as long as the Red Dead Redemption Singleplayer Storyline and be more in depth than AC2 was (AC2 was a fantastic storyline now develop it) cheers

RzaRecta357
04-09-2011, 03:51 PM
Maybe they asked it so they can reskin some things and churn out a new game full of new story but same gameplay elements as ACB. Haha.

Electrocide
04-09-2011, 04:53 PM
Most important is the story. Period

Im playing assassin creed 90% casue of its misterious story, other is gameplay. They are "playing" with things we can't even explain in real life. The idea of the Animus, dna...adam and eve, the piece of eden, makes the game so special. And it needs to keep being epic, and never ending xD More more and more of the good story!

SWJS
04-10-2011, 12:03 AM
Woah guys, chill, I highly doubt Ubisoft is going to try jumping the shark for a quick bit of cash.

But, just in case, Gabe, pass this advice on to your bosses.

I'm a huge videogame apprecionist and being one I know that there is no one thing that makes a game good, there are several factors.

The number one thing that should be top priority when making any game is the gameplay, because without it, then you don't have a game. Games are meant to be an interactive form of media. Story isn't top priorty, and graphics aren't top priority, the gameplay is, because it is the interactive part.

This, however, does not mean Story or Graphics do not matter. Good games always build the story around the gameplay.

These three things are essential to a game's success, and must always be included.

Multiplayer is optional, but it can be included, because being able to have fun with friends is always welcome, and it also increases replay value,.


Also, please don't take the graphitards too seriously. While graphics are an essential part of them, they don't determine the worth. You can polish a game all you want, but if you shine it up so much that it takes the focus off of the fun aspect, the entire point of the game is ruined.

Hence the word game Ubisoft.

St4va
04-10-2011, 04:07 AM
As it's been said, the story is what makes the series successful.
Don't get me wrong, the gameplay is a very important feature too, afterall
that whats made the significant change between the first and the second game.

Tiholaznik
04-10-2011, 04:54 AM
And it is very important that the story is good! Like in 1st AC and maybe in the 2nd one. Sadly the story in brotherhood has become a little too childish. Assassins are good guys and Templars are bad guys, that is just too simple. There is nothing new in that.
Otherwise the game itself is great.
Cheers

Chidder
04-10-2011, 06:55 AM
When it comes to a sim game or a jump-n-run title I don't think the story is important.
However, it's certainly by far the most important part of any AC title!!

phil.llllll
04-10-2011, 10:04 AM
Originally posted by EzioTheAssassin:
Good games always build the story around the gameplay.


Not true in fact, I'd argue the opposite. And certainly this isn't the case for Assassin's Creed.

Ureh
04-10-2011, 10:38 AM
Originally posted by EzioTheAssassin:
Good games always build the story around the gameplay.


That's your opinion but you state it as a fact.

I don't disagree about gameplay being important. But it seems to me that Ubi had been spending the last year focusing more on gameplay and letting story deteoriate. In my opnion, I believe story and gameplay go hand-in-hand. If one suffers so will the other. Whereas others believe one is more important than the other.

I like that Ubi turns to their fans for input. But this survey is redundant. They speak of how the fans contribute to the success of the franchise. That means they should know what we love and hate (it's posted all over their own forums). It's almost like they're asking us to edit the story for them. I've read a interview where the writter said he knew where he wanted to go with the story; that nothing was improvised as the game was being developed.

Maybe they caught so much hate for all those conspiracy theories...

knb2011
04-10-2011, 11:13 AM
Originally posted by ComDevGabe:
Hello again, Assassins! Please take a minute to answer the following question!

I'm one of the guys who worked on this masterpiece( no false modesty http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif), i love the story and the way that make you view things about the written history. As an artist, made some tribute for it. Check it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9HBxRJiGVQQ

WastingMyTIM3
04-10-2011, 02:34 PM
Please make the next game's story more compelling and epic like the first 3 Assassin's Creed games that were released on consoles. I felt that Assassin's Creed 2 was just the right length. Brotherhood was too short and the storyline was too compacted.

I hope AC3, if its the absolute last game that we would see of Desmond, don't leave any Cliffhangers!!! Those kill me sooooooo bad!

As much as I want the next game to be Desmond only, there's probably going to be Animus involved? Hopefully there will be a nice mixture of both characters! 50/50, unlike AC2 and ACBH, those were like, 80/20...

MichaelElboim
04-10-2011, 03:32 PM
Although ACB was better than AC2 in almost anything, the only reason I liked AC2 more - was the story.
It swept me, and still remain the BEST GAME I HAVE EVER PLAYED, only because of the story.

A good story can make even simple games great (The Longest Journey for example), but a bad story can make even the greatest games suck (Dragon Age 2 for example).

Story is the most important factor in any creation. It gives the creation a meaning.
I really hope the future AC games will have a better and deeper story each time!

NewBlade200
04-10-2011, 06:23 PM
If the gameplay and story reinforce each other than the game becomes so much better than if it had good story, but bad gameplay or vise versa. That said, great gameplay makes a fun game, great story makes a classic.
Mix them together and you have a great game that will stick with us long after the disc has stopped being produced.

Blind2Society
04-10-2011, 10:33 PM
Oh My God! How have I missed this post for three days? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif


Originally posted by Ureh:
I can't believe this question is being asked.
I feel ya but boy am I glad it was.

Originally posted by NewBlade200:
That said, great gameplay makes a fun game, great story makes a classic.
Right On! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/clap.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

The story is of EPIC importance. ACB doesn't shake a stick at AC1 nor ACII story wise. I was super disapointed with this. That is not to say the game wasn't great, It was just seriously lacking when compared to the earlier games. This is, of course, inside the animus I am refering to. There are some threads with great info, tips, and suggestions that would help return the AC series to it's former glory story wise.

Gabe, please oh please make sure AC3's story is in depth and compelling. I beg of you. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif

-Bring back better post assassination conversations.
-Shaun's cheeky commentaries on people of interest.
-The main character needs more internal conflicts and complexity.
-The plot needs more mind boggling twists. And I don't mean like the game endings. Those weren't twists. To quote someone else who described it better than I can... "No, all of the games seem to end in a head-scratching moment of pure what-the-f**k." -Russ Frushtick
Not that I didn't enjoy those moments http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif.

So that's just to name a few...

itsamea-mario
04-11-2011, 08:18 AM
Story is THE reason i like this game, everything else is just a bonus.

That doesn't mean you should skimp on the gameplay, just that the stroy should be the key focus.

ThaWhistle
04-11-2011, 10:03 AM
in a series where the gameplay is basically gutted and redone at every iteration, the story is the only thing really keeping the series together.

GlytchMeister
04-11-2011, 01:37 PM
For me, story is the key to an excellent game. Sure, you can have gazillion-dollar graphics, physic engines, sounds, etc, etc. But the main difference between Pong and Assassin's Creed is the story.
It's the story that makes players want to play. It motivates them. Story allows players to really immerse themselves in the game, to think to themselves "Now what's going to happen? What does this mean? How could this change things?" ...
and most importantly of all: "I think I'll stay up just a little bit longer."

I don't stay up late to keep the high score. I stay up all night for a good story; be it in a book, a movie, a TV series, or one heck of a good game.

SWJS
04-11-2011, 01:49 PM
Originally posted by Ureh:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by EzioTheAssassin:
Good games always build the story around the gameplay.


That's your opinion but you state it as a fact.

I don't disagree about gameplay being important. But it seems to me that Ubi had been spending the last year focusing more on gameplay and letting story deteoriate. In my opnion, I believe story and gameplay go hand-in-hand. If one suffers so will the other. Whereas others believe one is more important than the other.

I like that Ubi turns to their fans for input. But this survey is redundant. They speak of how the fans contribute to the success of the franchise. That means they should know what we love and hate (it's posted all over their own forums). It's almost like they're asking us to edit the story for them. I've read a interview where the writter said he knew where he wanted to go with the story; that nothing was improvised as the game was being developed.

Maybe they caught so much hate for all those conspiracy theories... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>That's because it is fact. Since games were created it has always been about gameplay. Some of the most popular games in history had extremely weak stories, or no story at all. Take Mario or Pacman for example. People enjoyed them because they were fun. The only reason focus has shifted from gameplay to story and graphics is because of the advancement of technology and the evolution of videogames from simple forms of entertainment to virtual forms of art and interactive storyteling. Gameplay should always be at the heart of a videogame.

Being an amateur writer myself, I always found AC's story to be extremely well written, and I enjoy Desmond's framing story. If you'd read my entire post, I did say that gameplay and graphics go hand in hand, in a manner of speaking. I believe that as AC's gameplay improved, then so too did the story. I enjoyed the more dynamic gameplay. I actually felt like I was firing a cannon during a seige. It was very compelling. Of course my feelings and opinions are focused on gaming in general, not just AC.

But I do have to agree. Ubi does listen to us for input, and many people omplained about the gameplay from AC1, and so they improved it in AC2. Even if they are trying to milk the AC cash cow, I believe they still want to keep the milk as delicious for us as possible, which definately sets AC apart from COD, which has soured long ago. Even Halo was losing it's flavor until Reach, and even then it was still a bit bitter.

I'm not expecting disappointment though. Ubi knows better than to go the route of COD.

Ureh
04-11-2011, 02:42 PM
Originally posted by EzioTheAssassin:
That's because it is fact. Since games were created it has always been about gameplay. Some of the most popular games in history had extremely weak stories, or no story at all. Take Mario or Pacman for example. People enjoyed them because they were fun. The only reason focus has shifted from gameplay to story and graphics is because of the advancement of technology and the evolution of videogames from simple forms of entertainment to virtual forms of art and interactive storyteling. Gameplay should always be at the heart of a videogame.

Being an amateur writer myself, I always found AC's story to be extremely well written, and I enjoy Desmond's framing story. If you'd read my entire post, I did say that gameplay and graphics go hand in hand, in a manner of speaking. I believe that as AC's gameplay improved, then so too did the story. I enjoyed the more dynamic gameplay. I actually felt like I was firing a cannon during a seige. It was very compelling. Of course my feelings and opinions are focused on gaming in general, not just AC.

But I do have to agree. Ubi does listen to us for input, and many people omplained about the gameplay from AC1, and so they improved it in AC2. Even if they are trying to milk the AC cash cow, I believe they still want to keep the milk as delicious for us as possible, which definately sets AC apart from COD, which has soured long ago. Even Halo was losing it's flavor until Reach, and even then it was still a bit bitter.

I'm not expecting disappointment though. Ubi knows better than to go the route of COD.

You're implying that I didn't read your entire 1st post in this thread. Is it because I only quoted one sentence?

I did read the whole post when I first saw it and I can say that you did [i]not[/b] even come close to saying that gameplay and graphics go hand in hand. You said that gameplay are first priority, followed by story and graphics. Even the statement after that says something about gameplay being the center and story wraps around it. Which is just a repeat of your first statement (gameplay = 1st priority, story = second priority).

My posts never touched on graphics.

Your stance on story and gameplay is quite clear. But we're focusing only on Assassin's Creed, not dinosaur games like Mario and Pacman (where story was nearly nonexistent). Like you said, this generation of games focuses heavily on story, music, graphics, and gameplay. In current-gen games like AC, I believe gameplay and story go hand in hand. If one suffers so does the other. This poll makes me feel that Ubisoft is thinking about slacking on the story for the next game. I think it's safe to say that most people didn't react as positively to ACBs story time as they did with AC1 and AC2. Whereas others who are not as strict with story, such as yourself, weren't as disappointed.

AC1 is another example of how the gameplay/story balance was breached. Story was great, but it suffered because of repetitive gameplay.

About "fact": Everyone has their own facts and opinions. Just because you believe your opinion is a fact, it doesn't mean it is a fact for everyone else.

SWJS
04-11-2011, 03:11 PM
Originally posted by Ureh:

You're implying that I didn't read your entire 1st post in this thread. Is it because I only quoted one sentence?

I did read the whole post when I first saw it and I can say that you did [i]not[/b] even come close to saying that gameplay and graphics go hand in hand. You said that gameplay are first priority, followed by story and graphics. Even the statement after that says something about gameplay being the center and story wraps around it. Which is just a repeat of your first statement (gameplay = 1st priority, story = second priority).

My posts never touched on graphics.

Your stance on story and gameplay is quite clear. But we're focusing only on Assassin's Creed, not dinosaur games like Mario and Pacman (where story was nearly nonexistent). Like you said, this generation of games focuses heavily on story, music, graphics, and gameplay. In current-gen games like AC, I believe gameplay and story go hand in hand. If one suffers so does the other. This poll makes me feel that Ubisoft is thinking about slacking on the story for the next game. I think it's safe to say that most people didn't react as positively to ACBs story time as they did with AC1 and AC2. Whereas others who are not as strict with story, such as yourself, weren't as disappointed.

AC1 is another example of how the gameplay/story balance was breached. Story was great, but it suffered because of repetitive gameplay.

About "fact": Everyone has their own facts and opinions. Just because you believe your opinion is a fact, it doesn't mean it is a fact for everyone else. First off I'd like to appologize for saying graphics. I instead meant to say story. I was in a hurry and in a forum debate I'm usually quick to think I'm debating with people who only appreciate graphical quality instead of story and/or gameplay. I'm so used to it. I didn't mean to offend or invoke the wrong outcome. We're all gamers, and we're all here for a reason after all. We're all on the same side.

And no, actually I'm implying that you didn't read the entire post because you insist that I didn't say anything that even remotely implied that I said Gameplay and Story go hand in hand. Please read the following three sentences from my original post carefully:


Originally posted by EzioTheAssassin:
This, however, does not mean Story or Graphics do not matter. Good games always build the story around the gameplay.

These three things are essential to a game's success, and must always be included. I would say that heavily implies that they go together, correct?

But back to the matter at hand, I do agree that gameplay and story in this generation of gaming do go hand in hand, and I can sympathize with the fear of Ubisoft jumping the shark. But as I also said before, I don't believe Ubisoft is full of idiots like most companies today, which is why they decided to ask us before jumping the shark.

Granted I did come into this topic with the mindset of a gamer and not an AC fan, and I thought I'd throw in my two cents. I figured I would think about it professionally and give my advice/opinion to help them for future reference.

But make no mistake, being an AC fan I do understand that the story is beyond important.

Lignjoslav
04-12-2011, 07:42 AM
Originally posted by ComDevGabe:
Hello again, Assassins! Please take a minute to answer the following question!

Do you feel that STORY is essential to your enjoyment of a gameplay experience? Importance of story to AC series cannot be overstated! The story is what kept a gamer going even when missions in the first AC got a little repetitive and the story is what makes a player can't wait for the next sequel. It was really well thought out and masterfully presented.

In more general terms, not every game needs to have a story (at all) to be fun (UT), but it can vastly enrich the experience and it's what keeps the player thinking about the game even when not at the computer.

Also, once a story has been made one of the defining elements of the series, watering it down completely ruins the experience, even if the game mechanics remains solid!

crash3
04-12-2011, 11:35 AM
Originally posted by Tiholaznik:
And it is very important that the story is good! Like in 1st AC and maybe in the 2nd one. Sadly the story in brotherhood has become a little too childish. Assassins are good guys and Templars are bad guys, that is just too simple. There is nothing new in that.
Otherwise the game itself is great.
Cheers

i think a really cool feature in AC2 that ACB for some reason dropped was the quick videos about each templar target that had a little background story in itself-adding to the significance of each templar character so they arent just simplay bad guys-but in ACB all the templars are is bad guys-the AC2 templar videos added more depth to the story-they need to return i think for AC3

also i think the storyline in AC3 needs to be much longer (even longer than AC2) and more thorough/detailed as it progresses so there arent any gaps left in the plot-we need a more gradual, progressive feel to the game

we need more missions within the story which could make the whole game feel more full/whole so we dont have to spend time collecting stupid flags and treasure chests-collectable items randomly placed througout AC cities need to go they are so boring and a waste of time/money which could be spent on more missions which you earn money for anyway just make the missions take us to every corner of the cities so we explore them fully

DeeCazo
04-12-2011, 06:01 PM
The story in this game is my favorite of any game.

The fact that multiplayer was a surprisingly awesome as it was, just added to the experience.

Maybe next game we could get some co-op action and maybe customizable assassins for MP.

EmperorxZurg
04-12-2011, 10:24 PM
EXTREMELY important. As a film director that's what I was raised with. People love stories. Not shiny graphics. If you make a game with cool graphics and stuff, people will like it for a bout a week. If it has an amazing story, people will talk about it forever and become more loyal fans because it intrigues them and makes them want to know more. Hence why RPG's do well even when some are still 8bit (and no, I play no D&D)

Xanatos2007
04-13-2011, 12:20 AM
Of course just as important as the story itself is the way it's told. The majority of games (Devil May Cry, Call of Duty, etc) use the gameplay merely as a vehicle to shift the player from one cutscene to the next in order to tell the plot, where as other games (Amnesia: The Dark Descent, Assassin's Creed, etc) have the story & gameplay go hand in hand. Whether it's told through in-game dialogue (Kane & Lynch), notes & diaries found (Thief), or simply through the environment (Penumbra and Bioshock) the plot flows seamlessly with the gameplay, keeping the player engaged with the game's narrative.

crash3
04-13-2011, 06:13 AM
in AC2 the graphics i thought were mediocre but the fantastic storyline distracted me from that aspect whereas the storyline in ACB wasnt as great as i thought and despite the graphics improvements i still didnt think they were that great-i noticed more flaws in the game because of the rushed storyline and not greatly improved graphics of ACB

ThaWhistle
04-13-2011, 10:23 AM
Originally posted by Xanatos2007:
Of course just as important as the story itself is the way it's told. The majority of games (Devil May Cry, Call of Duty, etc) use the gameplay merely as a vehicle to shift the player from one cutscene to the next in order to tell the plot,


err?Id say call of duty is exactly the opposite. the stories are there, but they are so trite and cliche that they are certainly not the main selling point, the gameplay is. the same gameplay they;ve been selling for 8 years, with slight changes every time. I mean the black ops story line was basically like apocalypse now, shutter island and a few other movies thrown in a blender.

assassin_peace
04-13-2011, 01:18 PM
Story is extremly essential, specially in AC series because we are all absolutely trapped by the storyline and I'm worried you're even asking this question.
Of course, there are other important aspects that are essential for Assassin's Creed games like the atmosphere, the playability, and the graphics.
But the real strenght of the series is in the past and present characters and in the storyline.
Please Ubisoft focus in the singleplayer experience. Multiplayer is quite good, but is not the reason why we buy Assassin's Creed games!

Rawbbeh
04-13-2011, 03:27 PM
Story is the most important thing in the game. It's why I'm still playing. Why I started over in Brotherhood. (And I accidentally sold the two shrunken heads..) <__<.. Thing is, I'm tired of Ezio's story. We spend 2 and Brotherhood focusing on him. Lets get back to Desmond, yo! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Blind2Society
04-14-2011, 01:21 AM
Originally posted by Xanatos2007:
Of course just as important as the story itself is the way it's told. The majority of games (Devil May Cry, Call of Duty, etc) use the gameplay merely as a vehicle to shift the player from one cutscene to the next in order to tell the plot, where as other games (Amnesia: The Dark Descent, Assassin's Creed, etc) have the story & gameplay go hand in hand. Whether it's told through in-game dialogue (Kane & Lynch), notes & diaries found (Thief), or simply through the environment (Penumbra and Bioshock) the plot flows seamlessly with the gameplay, keeping the player engaged with the game's narrative.
Well said sir, well said indeed.

CFord664
04-14-2011, 02:27 AM
Story is Assassin's Creed.

'Nuff said.

crash3
04-14-2011, 05:42 AM
i would like to play as the next assassin when he is a young boy who was born into the brotherhood so we see the absolute foundations of his development. as a child he could learn to steal, blend/escape and free-run

largejc
04-14-2011, 06:01 AM
Story is the most important Aspect of a game.
It's even better if it is true history!

crash3
04-14-2011, 06:59 AM
Originally posted by largejc:
Story is the most important Aspect of a game.
It's even better if it is true history!

thats wat i like about the storyline too how it incorporates historical events and characters-the storyline is actually quite educational compared to other games which are just shoot and kill

Blind2Society
04-14-2011, 02:23 PM
Originally posted by crash3:
i would like to play as the next assassin when he is a young boy who was born into the brotherhood so we see the absolute foundations of his development. as a child he could learn to steal, blend/escape and free-run
Agreed. This is what made Fallout 3 great and what made Fallout New Vegas pale in comparison.

ReadySteadyEddy
04-14-2011, 05:15 PM
The story is MOST important where else you pull gamers whit. But come with a whole new story something not often done because a story whare the parents of a child gets kill is being so often and predictable... Example for a story a templer That is connected to the assassins and and become's a assassins or betray them :P

Cr8zGamer
04-14-2011, 09:12 PM
Story is the cord of the any good game like everyone here said this question shouldnt be asked in the first place unless Ubisoft is going to stop doing the story and 'god forbid' if they do this they are killing this great series and i would probably wont by it cuz of weak story

crash3
04-15-2011, 04:50 AM
i reckon the next story will involve napoleon turning out to be a templar, once king louis the 16th is overthrown, and the assassins are taken completely by surprise and nearly wiped out, explaining the little number of modern day assassins because the brotherhood never fully recovered

it makes sense because we see napoleon with the apple in one of the AC2 truth puzzles

dxsxhxcx
04-15-2011, 11:44 AM
Originally posted by Blind2Society:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by crash3:
i would like to play as the next assassin when he is a young boy who was born into the brotherhood so we see the absolute foundations of his development. as a child he could learn to steal, blend/escape and free-run
Agreed. This is what made Fallout 3 great and what made Fallout New Vegas pale in comparison. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

this would be awesome!!! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

cjutd
04-17-2011, 03:48 PM
C'mon Ubi... Why is this question even being asked?

lilbacchant
04-17-2011, 06:17 PM
<sigh>

I too share the anxiety that others have expressed over you asking this question. My hope is that you're simply looking for ammunition to fend off pressure from above to rush out paragraph story-bits disguised as poor chapters.

I guess the question you have to ask yourselves (as developers) is whether you want to use the medium of games as a couch-potato replacement for the competitive urge (e.g., as opposed to actually playing sports), or do you want to explore the medium's potential as an interactive story (e.g., as opposed to reading or simply watching a movie).

~ Part 1: Immersion ~

AC1, imo, was a breakthrough achievement of the latter (as was Oblivion, e.g., several years ago). I applaud you whole-heartedly for that creative vision and effort. It wasn't perfect gameplay-wise (pre-missions were a bit redundant), but overall the interactive portion and blended story was a milestone for creating immersion.

However, while AC2 improved -- somewhat -- on the gameplay, the story seemed geared for a less mature audience and the player's interaction with the story was much more linear. I had a much harder time connecting, or immersing, with Ezio because I never really had to think.

When playing Altair I had to think about missions and even plan. I'd climb to a high point near the "zone" just so I could survey and contemplate entrance/exit strategies. Sometimes these initial plans would change while "thinning the heard" around the perimeter; let alone the quick thinking if it all went fubar. The point is that because of this thinking, the difference between Altair and myself began to blur ... immersion.

In AC2 we were often gated thru the missions. In AC:B it was even worse and I'd dare say we were railroaded thru the missions. There was less and less thinking, less and less blurring, less and less immersion.

Don't get me wrong, AC:B was fun as far as the game mechanics were concerned and I think y'all are headed in the right direction there (though I still really, really wish you'd give us difficulty settings). But it feels counterproductive, to say the least, to restrict our choices as to when and how to use those mechanics in missions.

~ Part 2: The Ending of Chapters (games) ~

The ending of AC1 was epic. I was on the edge of my seat once I got to Arsuf and mostly stayed there until the end. I was smack in the middle of a warzone fending off entire patrols of soldiers. And then ... Oh crap! A whole group of templars?!. As if that weren't enough, my blood pressure didn't dare dip once I got back to Masyaf and had to tangle with groups of assassins, all of my targets at once, etc.

Indeed, all of the skills I'd learned throughout the game were put to the test. They weren't a reward in and of themselves, they were sorely needed at the end. And, woh-boy, what a rollercoaster of a test it was.

The story-bits and revelations were interwoven into that action perfectly. Those "interruptions" might've let us catch our breath, but my heart never stopped pounding and that just added to the excitement of the story itself. The pacing was spot-on.

AC2 had no rollercoaster at the end. "The Truth" and the vault were exciting revelations about the plot, but they were mostly forced to stand alone. They were intriguing enough to make me want to see what lay around the next corner, but that corner was at the end of a fairly long, bland hallway.

The end of AC:B was... well, I'm not sure what to call it. The last memory, except the last sequence, was mostly a series of forced-play hurdles. Having to use the apple as a weapon for two, short, uninspired sequences was like a big speed bump.

In the last sequence when I first realized that I was plopped into a warzone, I thought, "Ye-hoo, now I'll have to work those mad skills I've learned!" Alas, it was just a few waves of seemingly normal amounts of normal guards. Fighting Cesare was a brief challenge, but barely made me lean forward, let alone sit on the edge.

The gameplay didn't create much excitement at the end. So what did the story add? Well, nothing but confusion. By the time I was fighting Cesare, I didn't really get what the urgency or necessity was. And neither "The Truth" or the acrobatics with Desmond in the vault culminated in revelations. Quite the opposite in fact.

At the end of AC:B I was just left befuddled. The ending of "The Truth" with Desmond in freefall is the perfect metaphor. I no longer have any sense of what my place in the AC universe is; hell, I don't even know where the floor is. No sense of direction whatsoever ... up, down, left, right ... nothing.

For a while I've pondered, thought, scoured the forums, the wiki, etc. looking for a direction. Now I'm quickly getting to the point where I just don't care. From your perspective, that's probably NOT a good place for me to be.

You guys/gals should strongly consider working out a DLC or something that'll at least give us a center of gravity for the story. Because, I don't know about others, but right now I'm drifting. If I were you, I'd rather have me eagerly anticipating what's around the next corner, because if I'm drifting, I could easily drift away.*

~ Summation (Yes, I'm finally going to answer your question) ~

Imo, for a game to be great (even good), it has to be a solid, thought-provoking interactive story. The interactive part requires a good game design that encourages immersion. Closed-off choices and linear design make for poor immersion. The story part, I assume, is self-explanatory.

Game mechanics are secondary. Any improvements and enhancements of those are a bonus, but less important. Bad mechanics can be a distraction, but AC has never had that problem, imo.

Yes, story matters a lot.

*[For the moment I'm still hopeful that you'll get back to good storytelling and design. If I wasn't still hopeful, I wouldn't have scribbled this verbose diatribe.]

Blind2Society
04-17-2011, 06:29 PM
^ http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/clap.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

phil.llllll
04-17-2011, 09:46 PM
Originally posted by lilbacchant:
<sigh>

~ Part 1: Immersion ~

AC1, imo, was a breakthrough achievement of the latter (as was Oblivion, e.g., several years ago). I applaud you whole-heartedly for that creative vision and effort. It wasn't perfect gameplay-wise (pre-missions were a bit redundant), but overall the interactive portion and blended story was a milestone for creating immersion.



I couldn't agree more! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/clap.gif

For AC1 the story was a huge part of the overall experience and immersion. Never had I seen a game that had a story so well presented (it had a theme that permeated every aspect of it), and ideas so carefully expressed as with the original Assassin's Creed. It kept me hooked from start all the way to the epic end.

I too am hopeful that we'll see a return to form in that regard.

Xanatos2007
04-18-2011, 02:50 AM
Originally posted by lilbacchant:
<sigh>

I too share the anxiety that others have expressed over you asking this question. My hope is that you're simply looking for ammunition to fend off pressure from above to rush out paragraph story-bits disguised as poor chapters.

I guess the question you have to ask yourselves (as developers) is whether you want to use the medium of games as a couch-potato replacement for the competitive urge (e.g., as opposed to actually playing sports), or do you want to explore the medium's potential as an interactive story (e.g., as opposed to reading or simply watching a movie).

~ Part 1: Immersion ~

AC1, imo, was a breakthrough achievement of the latter (as was Oblivion, e.g., several years ago). I applaud you whole-heartedly for that creative vision and effort. It wasn't perfect gameplay-wise (pre-missions were a bit redundant), but overall the interactive portion and blended story was a milestone for creating immersion.

However, while AC2 improved -- somewhat -- on the gameplay, the story seemed geared for a less mature audience and the player's interaction with the story was much more linear. I had a much harder time connecting, or immersing, with Ezio because I never really had to think.

When playing Altair I had to think about missions and even plan. I'd climb to a high point near the "zone" just so I could survey and contemplate entrance/exit strategies. Sometimes these initial plans would change while "thinning the heard" around the perimeter; let alone the quick thinking if it all went fubar. The point is that because of this thinking, the difference between Altair and myself began to blur ... immersion.

In AC2 we were often gated thru the missions. In AC:B it was even worse and I'd dare say we were railroaded thru the missions. There was less and less thinking, less and less blurring, less and less immersion.

Don't get me wrong, AC:B was fun as far as the game mechanics were concerned and I think y'all are headed in the right direction there (though I still really, really wish you'd give us difficulty settings). But it feels counterproductive, to say the least, to restrict our choices as to when and how to use those mechanics in missions.

~ Part 2: The Ending of Chapters (games) ~

The ending of AC1 was epic. I was on the edge of my seat once I got to Arsuf and mostly stayed there until the end. I was smack in the middle of a warzone fending off entire patrols of soldiers. And then ... Oh crap! A whole group of templars?!. As if that weren't enough, my blood pressure didn't dare dip once I got back to Masyaf and had to tangle with groups of assassins, all of my targets at once, etc.

Indeed, all of the skills I'd learned throughout the game were put to the test. They weren't a reward in and of themselves, they were sorely needed at the end. And, woh-boy, what a rollercoaster of a test it was.

The story-bits and revelations were interwoven into that action perfectly. Those "interruptions" might've let us catch our breath, but my heart never stopped pounding and that just added to the excitement of the story itself. The pacing was spot-on.

AC2 had no rollercoaster at the end. "The Truth" and the vault were exciting revelations about the plot, but they were mostly forced to stand alone. They were intriguing enough to make me want to see what lay around the next corner, but that corner was at the end of a fairly long, bland hallway.

The end of AC:B was... well, I'm not sure what to call it. The last memory, except the last sequence, was mostly a series of forced-play hurdles. Having to use the apple as a weapon for two, short, uninspired sequences was like a big speed bump.

In the last sequence when I first realized that I was plopped into a warzone, I thought, "Ye-hoo, now I'll have to work those mad skills I've learned!" Alas, it was just a few waves of seemingly normal amounts of normal guards. Fighting Cesare was a brief challenge, but barely made me lean forward, let alone sit on the edge.

The gameplay didn't create much excitement at the end. So what did the story add? Well, nothing but confusion. By the time I was fighting Cesare, I didn't really get what the urgency or necessity was. And neither "The Truth" or the acrobatics with Desmond in the vault culminated in revelations. Quite the opposite in fact.

At the end of AC:B I was just left befuddled. The ending of "The Truth" with Desmond in freefall is the perfect metaphor. I no longer have any sense of what my place in the AC universe is; hell, I don't even know where the floor is. No sense of direction whatsoever ... up, down, left, right ... nothing.

For a while I've pondered, thought, scoured the forums, the wiki, etc. looking for a direction. Now I'm quickly getting to the point where I just don't care. From your perspective, that's probably NOT a good place for me to be.

You guys/gals should strongly consider working out a DLC or something that'll at least give us a center of gravity for the story. Because, I don't know about others, but right now I'm drifting. If I were you, I'd rather have me eagerly anticipating what's around the next corner, because if I'm drifting, I could easily drift away.*

~ Summation (Yes, I'm finally going to answer your question) ~

Imo, for a game to be great (even good), it has to be a solid, thought-provoking interactive story. The interactive part requires a good game design that encourages immersion. Closed-off choices and linear design make for poor immersion. The story part, I assume, is self-explanatory.

Game mechanics are secondary. Any improvements and enhancements of those are a bonus, but less important. Bad mechanics can be a distraction, but AC has never had that problem, imo.

Yes, story matters a lot.
Damn, you beat me to it. Well I already said roughly half of that elsewhere, but never so in-depth or well written.

The Truth puzzles were probably the most intriguing part of AC2 and some of them can really do your head in, although the devs didn't work it into the overall plot for it to have any direct in-game impact.

One subtle but effective way the devs immersed the player in the first AC was through the "interactive cutscenes" where you were free to shift about the crowd while the drama went on; it gave the feeling that you really were a predator stalking your prey. And keeping Altair's face hidden from the camera most of the time really did allow you to 'step into his shoes' (think about it - you can't really imagine Altair without the hood). Compare that to AC2/B's "cinematic" style that takes the reigns away from you and practically plunges Ezio through the front door of cutscenes with plenty of close-ups instead of letting you circle your target like a proper Assassin.

I also maintain that Altair is still the only proper Assassin of the series. The Assassin's Creed games lately seem to have very little to do with 'Assassins' (proper ones) or a 'Creed', which is pretty damn poor given the title.

Originally posted by lilbacchant:
*[For the moment I'm still hopeful that you'll get back to good storytelling and design. If I wasn't still hopeful, I wouldn't have scribbled this verbose diatribe.]
I've said it before and I'll say it again: the sudden drop in story quality coincides with Patrice Désilets & Corey May losing the reigns (Corey is no longer the lead scriptwriter and Patrice has left Ubisoft entirely).

Pattington_Bear
04-18-2011, 03:04 AM
I think these guys have done an awesome job answering the question in detail, but yes story must play an integral role in every AC game.

Blind2Society
04-18-2011, 04:49 AM
Originally posted by Xanatos2007:
One subtle but effective way the devs immersed the player in the first AC was through the "interactive cutscenes" where you were free to shift about the crowd while the drama went on; it gave the feeling that you really were a predator stalking your prey. And keeping Altair's face hidden from the camera most of the time really did allow you to 'step into his shoes' (think about it - you can't really imagine Altair without the hood). Compare that to AC2/B's "cinematic" style that takes the reigns away from you and practically plunges Ezio through the front door of cutscenes with plenty of close-ups instead of letting you circle your target like a proper Assassin.
^ http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/clap.gif I didn't know I missed that till you mentioned it. The more I think about AC1 the more I miss it. Though at this point there are a lot of game mechanics, fight options, and climb options I can no longer do without. God, ahem, I mean Minerva http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif I hope they combine the great aspects of both for AC3.


Originally posted by Xanatos2007:
I also maintain that Altair is still the only proper Assassin of the series. The Assassin's Creed games lately seem to have very little to do with 'Assassins' (proper ones) or a 'Creed', which is pretty damn poor given the title.
Though I don't know I agree completely, I do severely miss some of the things that made Altair more of a mysterious figure. With Ezio everybody knows who he is including his targets. For Altair he was just a nameless, highly skilled assassin to his targets.


Originally posted by Xanatos2007:
I've said it before and I'll say it again: the sudden drop in story quality coincides with Patrice Désilets & Corey May losing the reigns (Corey is no longer the lead scriptwriter and Patrice has left Ubisoft entirely).
That is a crying shame http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

Edit: Though that's not to say that no one else is capabale of writing a good compelling story. They just have to make sure they don't rush it. They have to be sure to go back over it with a fine tooth comb a ton of times. Make sure nothing comes off as cheap. Make sure the gameplay, requirements, camera angles, visuals and the like add to and enhance the story not take away from it.

That being said, I would not be surprised if the entire Desmond trilogy was already written before the release of AC1.

Xanatos2007
04-18-2011, 05:15 AM
Well Patrice did say that he didn't want the series to become "Desmond's Creed", yet in the intros of both AC2 & ACB (seriously, why, why are these cutscenes there?) Desmond ends with "My name is Desmond Miles, and this is my story." And from what I can tell they're just making up Desmond's story as they go along.

crash3
04-18-2011, 02:17 PM
there needs to be more compulsory desmond sequences out of the animus, i thought there would be more of him in brotherhood-was a bit disappointed. but that shouldnt mean that we have a shortened about of time in the animus we need a much longer storyline next game and it needs to be more in depth and thought provoking like AC1 was

lilbacchant
04-18-2011, 06:02 PM
Originally posted by Xanatos2007:
Damn, you beat me to it.

When one's combat skills are as poor as mine, one has to be quick. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif


Well I already said roughly half of that elsewhere,

Yes, you did, and I hope you don't feel like I stepped on your toes with the re-package.


but never so in-depth or well written.

Coming from someone with your insight and skills of expression with the written word, that means a lot. Thanks. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blush.gif


The Truth puzzles were probably the most intriguing part of AC2 and some of them can really do your head in, although the devs didn't work it into the overall plot for it to have any direct in-game impact.

Agreed: The Glyphs --> Truth segment in AC2 were an innovative way to give depth and background to the overall plot.

I'll admit to finding some of the puzzles frustrating in my first playthru, and running to the wiki a few times for help (Thanks Wiki contributors!). But, wow, was the payoff HUGE! Even in subsequent playthrus I've done the clusters just to see that video, and it still raises a few hairs on my arm.

I'm glad in AC:B that they reduced the number of Glyphs (now Rifts, I guess), but instead of adding to the plot, the Truth just helped turn it into a clusterf**k. What a shame.


One subtle but effective way the devs immersed the player in the first AC was through the "interactive cutscenes" where you were free to shift about the crowd while the drama went on; it gave the feeling that you really were a predator stalking your prey. And keeping Altair's face hidden from the camera most of the time really did allow you to 'step into his shoes' (think about it - you can't really imagine Altair without the hood).

Compare that to AC2/B's "cinematic" style that takes the reigns away from you and practically plunges Ezio through the front door of cutscenes with plenty of close-ups instead of letting you circle your target like a proper Assassin.

That is soooo observant. You're absolutely right. Those unconscious (well, unconscious for most of us http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif) details in ambience play a much bigger role in aiding or clouding immersion than most of us realize.

I know for some in AC1, they felt like the post-assassination cutscenes with the target yanked them away from the immersion. And I understand that. However, those immersion-breakers served a purpose; without those, the idea that Altair was learning wisdom along the way would've been lost, or at least greatly minimized.

It's the 'breakers' with no purpose that bug the heck out of me. These typically result from either ignorance or simple disregard of the importance of immersion.

I remember in AC2 at the end of the "Bonfire of the Vanities" sequence when Ezio got up on the platform to chastise the crowd -- i.e., trying to show he'd learned something profound amongst the killings and conspiracies -- it felt forced and jarring to me. Nowhere along the way were we given the sense that he was learning about morals or ethics or thinking philosophically whatsoever.

It's kind of funny how we tend to notice the things that break immersion but not the ones that are enhancing it. {shrug}


I also maintain that Altair is still the only proper Assassin of the series. The Assassin's Creed games lately seem to have very little to do with 'Assassins' (proper ones) or a 'Creed', which is pretty damn poor given the title.

Yeah, Ezio's been mostly wrapped in the persona of a revenge-minded revolutionary. I hope the next ancestor actually "works in the dark, to serve the light".

And in order for the "Creed" to show up in any meaningful manner we'd need a character(s) who is wise enough to appreciate it. Again, hopefully the next ....


I've said it before and I'll say it again: the sudden drop in story quality coincides with Patrice Désilets & Corey May losing the reigns (Corey is no longer the lead scriptwriter and Patrice has left Ubisoft entirely).

Yep, and it's pretty hard to dispute that after AC:B. It was Patrice's core vision that brought AC to life. I'd hoped, and expected, after hearing he left that there were others on the team that were both privy to and passionate about carrying that torch forward. After AC:B, I still have some hope, but no longer any expectations.

Blind2Society
04-18-2011, 06:44 PM
Originally posted by lilbacchant:
That is soooo observant. You're absolutely right. Those unconscious (well, unconscious for most of us http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif) details in ambience play a much bigger role in aiding or clouding immersion than most of us realize.

I know for some in AC1, they felt like the post-assassination cutscenes with the target yanked them away from the immersion. And I understand that. However, those immersion-breakers served a purpose; without those, the idea that Altair was learning wisdom along the way would've been lost, or at least greatly minimized.

It's the 'breakers' with no purpose that bug the heck out of me. These typically result from either ignorance or simple disregard of the importance of immersion.

I remember in AC2 at the end of the "Bonfire of the Vanities" sequence when Ezio got up on the platform to chastise the crowd -- i.e., trying to show he'd learned something profound amongst the killings and conspiracies -- it felt forced and jarring to me. Nowhere along the way were we given the sense that he was learning about morals or ethics or thinking philosophically whatsoever.

It's kind of funny how we tend to notice the things that break immersion but not the ones that are enhancing it. {shrug}
You are right on.


Originally posted by lilbacchant:
Yeah, Ezio's been mostly wrapped in the persona of a revenge-minded revolutionary. I hope the next ancestor actually "works in the dark, to serve the light".

And in order for the "Creed" to show up in any meaningful manner we'd need a character(s) who is wise enough to appreciate it. Again, hopefully the next ....
This is one of the most well said and important comments I have yet read on this forum.

lilbacchant
04-18-2011, 08:17 PM
Originally posted by Blind2Society:
This is one of the most well said and important comments I have yet read on this forum.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blush.gif
Aargh! Enough with the compliments already! Any more and I'm gonna have to crawl back into my shell -- assuming it'll still contain my ego.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif
Thanks though.
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Blind2Society
04-18-2011, 09:55 PM
I would like to make a point on the subject in hopes that someone from Ubi wil actually read it.

Once Ezio retrieves the apple the story ceases to exist until Desmond arrives at the Colosseo. The period between was, to be frank, unacceptable. There was no story, no dialog. Unless you count, Come on assassin's let's go kill some guards. Oh, and what is this about we need an army to defeat Cesare? That's not how it works. We are supposed to be covert assassins. Didn't we learn that at the beginning of AC1?

Also, the confrontation between the assassins and Cesare at the gate was just deplorable. Vittoria agli assassini? That was close to pushing it when Catarina said it. At the end it was just lame. This part should have played out much more like the intro movie. We didn't need any cheeky comments or cheap dialog to make the sequence long fight scene any worse.

So in conclusion, when talking this part of the story, shame on you Ubi, shame on you http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

Xanatos2007
04-19-2011, 10:20 AM
The devs had better be paying close attention to this thread. I know people don't like being told how to do their jobs (especially in a creative context) but there are several people on the AC dev team who need a little refresher course.

IndieDevJack
04-19-2011, 12:59 PM
Originally posted by phil.llllll:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by EzioTheAssassin:
Good games always build the story around the gameplay. Not true in fact, I'd argue the opposite. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>First off, I doubt Ezio the Assassin was implying that any and all games that don't do this are necessarily bad. After all, recent games like Heavy Rain and Enslaved have been well received for their stories, despite that both games are built on foundations of quick-time events and win buttons, both of which are popularly shunned amongst gaming enthusiasts.
And certainly this isn't the case for Assassin's Creed. Actually, a quick examination of the Assassin's Creed franchise proves this is very much the case. The core mechanics of the franchise are parkour and combat. Not only are they the two most fleshed out and fully realized mechanics, they're also the two that get used most often. Therefore, these are the two mechanics to keep your eyes on when looking out for whether the story is built around the game or the opposite way around.

For the first game, the story was definitely not built around the game. Altair was more of a medieval private detective, and that could not be easily expressed through running and fighting, so a few simple mechanics were invented to suit the story, such as walking up behind somebody, or, my personal favorite, sitting down at a bench. It's quite obvious, through fan response, that these mechanics were not invented with fun in mind. The eavesdropping missions are the most transparent of all. You press a button to advance the story; no actual play is even involved.

Now, keeping in mind the core mechanics, the two things that most everybody thinks of when they think about playing Assassin's Creed, and also keeping in mind which, of the two games, is universally agreed to have the better story, let's take a look at Assassin's Creed II.

It's safe to say Ezio is not a private investigator. If there's really anything he can be labeled as, he's a revolutionary. He doesn't simply snoop around and find maps for guard patrol routes or get the drop on private conversations about parties. He actively goes out and thwarts enemy plans while simultaneously protecting innocent people and his allies. And how is this story expressed through play? Well, picking pockets is now only a part of play, though it does have a role in obtaining a certain mask, sitting at benches is now only part of play, fists are now only a part of play, though there are a few plot points where Ezio can only use his fists.

Ultimately, the story is no longer expressed using the same mechanics as in the first game, so what's left? Well, there's running and fighting, and what does Ezio spend the majority of the game doing? Even if it was by mistake (and I assure you it was not), the story in Assassin's Creed II is written around the play.

I get the impression that you think writing a game's story around its play is inherently a bad thing, but look: the overall plot from the first game to the second hasn't changed one bit. Assassin's Creed II is still very much about assassinating people, defending the freedom of humanity, and finding out what strange things are going on behind the scenes. It's simply the way in which the story is conveyed that changed, and please let me remind you which one is more popular for its story.

The phrase 'you can have a good game without a story, but you can't have a good game without a game' does not translate to 'story is unimportant.' It simply means that the best way to add a story, which, by the way, is important, is to make it around the play.

It's nothing to do with which is the more important element. It's everything to do with making them compliment each other in a way that both are melded into one identity. And, obviously, Assassin's Creed does that quite well.

phil.llllll
04-19-2011, 02:12 PM
Originally posted by IndieDevJack:
Actually, a quick examination of the Assassin's Creed franchise proves this is very much the case. The core mechanics of the franchise are parkour and combat. Not only are they the two most fleshed out and fully realized mechanics, they're also the two that get used most often. Therefore, these are the two mechanics to keep your eyes on when looking out for whether the story is built around the game or the opposite way around.

Yes and those two mechanics you mentioned are all built around the idea of how the assassin operates, again, they took their cues from the story.



Originally posted by IndieDevJack:
For the first game, the story was definitely not built around the game. Altair was more of a medieval private detective, and that could not be easily expressed through running and fighting, so a few simple mechanics were invented to suit the story, such as walking up behind somebody, or, my personal favorite, sitting down at a bench. It's quite obvious, through fan response, that these mechanics were not invented with fun in mind.

Regarding all the investigations, they were built as a means to plan for the main assassinations which were some of the best parts of the game.



Originally posted by IndieDevJack:
Ultimately, the story is no longer expressed using the same mechanics as in the first game, so what's left? Well, there's running and fighting, and what does Ezio spend the majority of the game doing? Even if it was by mistake (and I assure you it was not), the story in Assassin's Creed II is written around the play.

Well that's a bold assumption. Actually, it doesn't have to be one or the other, and there are probably compromises made both ways; but really when you have a story as specific as any of the AC games, it most certainly had to be thought up first before what was to be done in the game came to mind. Just look at the setting of the second game - they specifically chose it for people and events that took place there. It's not like the level designers just started building flying machines and the writers said - hey sounds like it would fit with Da Vinci and the renaissance.


Originally posted by IndieDevJack:
I get the impression that you think writing a game's story around its play is inherently a bad thing, but look: the overall plot from the first game to the second hasn't changed one bit. Assassin's Creed II is still very much about assassinating people, defending the freedom of humanity, and finding out what strange things are going on behind the scenes. It's simply the way in which the story is conveyed that changed, and please let me remind you which one is more popular for its story.

The plot hasn't changed much from the first to the second? Well I guess if you state it in such grossly simple terms maybe but there's a whole lot missed out on if you do.

Also, remind me which one you think is the more popular/better of the two? And while not inherently a bad thing, making a game and then jamming a story in there somewhere isn't the best recipe for a good story - even if the game is good. In fact, I'd have to say that's probably a rarity in gaming today, since most hired writers have a good understanding of the process regardless.


Originally posted by IndieDevJack:

It simply means that the best way to add a story, which, by the way, is important, is to make it around the play.

It's nothing to do with which is the more important element. It's everything to do with making them compliment each other in a way that both are melded into one identity. And, obviously, Assassin's Creed does that quite well.

Again this is assuming quite a lot not to mention not every dev operates the same way. Fact is, if you build a game around an idea (write the story, and build your gameplay around that as the AC series does) then really there should be no risk to either. Do the opposite, build a game and at the last minute try to jam some semblance of a story in there and all you end up with is possibly a negative note on the game (i.e. a bad story).

IndieDevJack
04-19-2011, 03:06 PM
I don't know where I gave the impression that a story written around play has to be "crammed in at the last minute." That's in direct contradiction of my statement that it needs to be a synergetic, complimentary, ongoing process.

Portal is a great example of this ongoing process. The writing was constantly, regularly written and rewritten to fit changes in the game from start to finish. It was by no means crammed in at the last second, and it was by no means a bad story. Heck, the Companion Cube was born from this synergetic process. The designers realized that too many play testers were discarding one of the weighted storage cubes early in the puzzle and not realizing why they couldn't solve it, so what was the solution? Draw the player's attention to it through writing.

And before you think that I'm implying that the story must get pushed around every time the game changes and the story no longer fits the new mission, let me point out the influence that story has on the game's designers. GLaDOS, even, was born from this synergetic process. Before Wolpaw was brought in to write a story for the game, it was just a game about portals, nothing more. Once he was brought in, the designers fell in love with the robotic, disconnected voice and its cutely sinister intentions. As more puzzles continued to be added, the designers pushed more and more towards having her be a part of not just the story but also the game.

And you're misunderstanding the nuances of the process. I didn't say that the story of Assassin's Creed II didn't start from the beginning. The team did, in fact, choose quite a few things that were to be in the story before any real work on the game began. But the part of the story that players experience is intertwined with the game. This isn't Indigo Prophecy where the story is about solving a murder mystery, but the actual gameplay involves nothing more than carrying boxes and finding files. This is Assassin's Creed where, aside from the first game, fighting the Templars means fighting the Templars.
Well that's a bold assumption. The game is about fighting. The story is about fighting. They're intertwined with each other. I don't see how there's any assumption to be made there.
Originally posted by phil.llllll:
Also, remind me which one you think is the more popular/better of the two? Popularity, by its very nature, is not what one person thinks. Assassin's Creed II is more popularly revered as having the better story, both by professional critics and fans.

phil.llllll
04-19-2011, 03:53 PM
Originally posted by IndieDevJack:
I don't know where I gave the impression that a story written around play has to be "crammed in at the last minute." That's in direct contradiction of my statement that it needs to be a synergetic, complimentary, ongoing process.


I agree with you on that.


Originally posted by IndieDevJack:
And you're misunderstanding the nuances of the process. I didn't say that the story of Assassin's Creed II didn't start from the beginning. The team did, in fact, choose quite a few things that were to be in the story before any real work on the game began. But the part of the story that players experience is intertwined with the game. This isn't Indigo Prophecy where the story is about solving a murder mystery, but the actual gameplay involves nothing more than carrying boxes and finding files. This is Assassin's Creed where, aside from the first game, fighting the Templars means fighting the Templars.

Not sure at all what you're trying to say here especially about fighting (the fight system was altered for the worst in the second game I'd say). Also, story is always intertwined with the game (it's a game after all, not a book) and I wasn't suggesting the two be seperate.


Originally posted by IndieDevJack:
The game is about fighting. The story is about fighting. They're intertwined with each other. I don't see how there's any assumption to be made there.

I meant the part where you said the story was written around the play. As I pointed out the story certainly came before any part of the game was being made, and while there's probably concessions both ways for sure, saying any AC game's story (as a whole) was specifically made up to fit a certain style of play is ignoring the obvious. They took a story they had and built a game around it, not the other way around.



Originally posted by IndieDevJack:
Popularity, by its very nature, is not what one person thinks. Assassin's Creed II is more popularly revered as having the better story, both by professional critics and fans.

I think you made that up honestly. If anything the story taking a turn for the worst was one of the main complaints I saw reviewers make - check GT reviews of both for example.

crash3
04-20-2011, 04:04 AM
make the story more in depth/complex/thought provoking

needs a more philosophical aspect like AC1 had, there needs to be more than just Assassins=Good and Templars=Bad. we need more questionable motives and morals

story needs to be much longer so it can gradually progress, ACB was very vague and finished pretty quick considering Cesare was meant to be the greatest foe yet

Archybad
04-22-2011, 09:17 AM
Originally posted by crash3:
make the story more in depth/complex/thought provoking

needs a more philosophical aspect like AC1 had, there needs to be more than just Assassins=Good and Templars=Bad. we need more questionable motives and morals

story needs to be much longer so it can gradually progress, ACB was very vague and finished pretty quick considering Cesare was meant to be the greatest foe yet

AC:B wasn't meant to be a proper single player campaign. It was there to wrap up Ezio's story and give us a multiplayer.
---

Personally I find that story often takes a backseat to another factor of the game but if the story is good then that is what makes the game excellent rather than just good. In AC1 story was the main thing and it got tedious at times because it was the same little tasks you did again and again and that's what happens when the story is the main thing.

If the gameplay is engaging and doesn't get boring then the story could be pathetic and you'd still play it for ages (As is the case with racing/skateboarding games). The story is just what boosts a good game to a great game. Definitely the most important part of a game but you can't play a game on story alone, it needs to be fun as well.

Blind2Society
04-22-2011, 08:22 PM
Originally posted by whattafool:
It was there to wrap up Ezio's story
But it didn't...


Originally posted by whattafool:
Definitely the most important part of a game but you can't play a game on story alone, it needs to be fun as well.
Very true.

crash3
04-23-2011, 06:04 AM
we need to be able to interact more with things like buildings and people would make story more in depth

mantledarcanum
04-25-2011, 09:05 PM
Originally posted by Ureh:
I can't believe this question is being asked. Story is the key ingredient. It's why most of us are playing this game. ACBs plot was acceptable but anything below that would've turned into disappointment. Posting that question makes me think that Ubisoft is considering not focusing on the singleplayer and instead on multiplayer.

Second most important thing is the historical context and being able to explore memories and find out "what really happened".

Thank you! If storyline weren't important, then we wouldn't have things like Lineage.. nor 75% of the threads on this board being full of conspiracies, theories, and even historical account banter. Even more importantly, if storyline weren't important, no one would have raged so massively over AssBro's ending.

STORY>gameplay>sound>graphics>multiplayer

Extractz
04-26-2011, 11:01 AM
The Story line of the game is the main part, Same As Movies , The Story line is what gets you thinking and gunning to know the rest .

This Game has to be by far the best , As I Have only played ACBH I Really did enjoy it .

But Yeah, It was a stupid Question to ask .

Neelanna
04-26-2011, 02:05 PM
Such a question frightens me a bit, honestly.
Thats like asking if food is an important part of a meal?

Story is EVERYTHING here. Gameplay is important and graphics gets thrown in there somewhere down the line, but without story there is no game.

I will be quite honest, I never played the Assassin Creed games until a few months ago. They were always just another console game to me. I expected them to be big on action, and button mashing and low on anything substantive. It wasn't until the release doldrums of January and February that I just picked up AC2 just to bide time until the March releases.
As it turns out I was completely wrong. I loved it.. I only played if for about 2 hours, before turning it off and downloading the first AC from steam. The story was the hook for me. If it had only been a overhyped action game full of complex button pressing sequences, and no story, then I NEVER would have bothered with the first or with brotherhood.
If it comes to having to decide between hiring more writers or more animators, then hands down.... hire more writers. You can never have a game that is TOO deep.

crash3
04-26-2011, 02:30 PM
storyline needs to be longer, more progessive and much deeper. i mean the game is rated 15 after all i think we will understand the story

RishabhSingh
04-26-2011, 11:58 PM
Hey guys,I think story is the most important element of a game,specially if the game is AC,think about it this game has taught me so much about history nd historical figures like rodrigo borgia,who i didnt know even existed,nd all the beautiful architecture and soothing soundtracks,overall this game is the ultimate package..so thank you UBISOFT and the TEAM behind AC!! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Biomedical-Fire
04-28-2011, 11:01 AM
With story driven games such as Assassin's Creed, the story is very important, it's what separates the great games from the mediocre. If the story isn't told right or if it is weak, then the game will suck no matter how the gameplay is and how good the visuals look.

Now, the next poll that Ubisoft should ask is; "Should we release an universal Collector's Edition?"

Killer-Me99
04-28-2011, 05:15 PM
Story (the MOST important), gameplay, and singleplayer in general is ALL I care about.

Please spend your time developing the singleplayer and story more than Muliplayer.

cless711
04-29-2011, 07:28 PM
Yes story is Very essential for gameplay experience, especially with the AC series. I play AC mainly for the Single player content and I really hope that the next game has a lot more single player content than brotherhood, at least a little more than AC2.

crash3
04-30-2011, 10:54 AM
Originally posted by cless711:
Yes story is Very essential for gameplay experience, especially with the AC series. I play AC mainly for the Single player content and I really hope that the next game has a lot more single player content than brotherhood, at least a little more than AC2.

i hope thstorylines much longer next time too, i thought RDR had the perfect storyline length

Eltima
05-03-2011, 10:25 AM
??????? ? ????? ? ???? ???? ??? ???? ???! ? ??????? ?? ????????? ?????? ?????????, ? ????? ? ???????????? ???? ??? ?? ???? ???. ? ????? ??????? ?????? ??? ???? ???? ????? Assassin's creed Brotherhood. ???? ???????????? ???? ?????-?????? ??????????? ?? ??? ???????? ? ????? ??: ?????????? ? ?????: ???????, ??????? ????. ?????? ????? ???? ????? ????????? ? ????? ??????, ???? ?? ???????? ????? ?? ????????????? ? ????? ??????? ??????????? ??????! ???????? ???????? ? ???? ??????! ? ?????!

<span class="ev_code_RED">Please make sure you post in English which is the Forums Language.</span> http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

XxCometStormxX
05-04-2011, 11:47 AM
Many Games are now becoming multiplayer only games. Fine with me, but also give me something I can play alone. Assassin's Creed I and II are most most favorite single player games to date. Brotherhood was okay but had a crummy ending. Assassin's Creed multiplayer I haven't played yet since the PSN is down. Maybe that will change my mind.

El Zo1212o
05-05-2011, 07:33 PM
Originally posted by ComDevGabe:
Hello again, Assassins! Please take a minute to answer the following question!
While admittedly I am a bit late to the party, but isn't this kind of a silly question? I mean, yeah I played the first one mostly for the thrill of killing badguys, slipping away and watching everyone panic, but ever since about 80% of the way through Assassin's Creed, I've been hooked on the story. This series has blown my mind in so many ways, I don't think I could handle the heartbreak if it devolved into coookie-cutter sequels and sci fi cliches...

Oh, and if you're still following this thread, maybe you can give us a scoop on Lost Legacy?

Echo Yin
05-08-2011, 09:01 AM
no doubt i play ac because its story's fantastic, even in revelation we still play ezio, i asure a good and unique story catches my eyes.

crash3
05-08-2011, 12:36 PM
the best AC story weve had so far was definitely from AC2. i dont think ACB was that good in comparison. i think even AC1 was better in some ways than ACB because there was a big philosophical element to the game. ACB was too linear if thats the right way to describe it!

Ypsan
05-09-2011, 03:47 AM
Story is very important to me and it is the main reason I'm sticking to AC.

But the direction you've taken is very confusing. Why do we relive the memories of Ezio? Weren't we supposed to simply learn Ezio's skills through bleeding effect to become better assassin, as Lucy implied?

Altair's realization of the true meaning behind the words "Nothing is true. Everything is permitted." already gave us a hint of what power Pieces Of Eden really have. His journal reveals that despite his wisdom he fell victim of that illusion once he came into possetion of POE (at the end od AC1), or so I believe. What now?

We've spent two episodes watching Ezio avenge his family, form Brotherhood, rebuild Rome and fight Templars over the posetion of POE without him having the slightest clue of what we already know thanks to Altair. Ezio's life up to now is almost irrelevant to us except for that "WTF?" moment in Minerva's Temple. Did we have to relive whole Ezio's life just to see his great discovery in his late age in Istanbul?
Seems to me that Templar's animus is way more advanced than ours. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

knb2011
05-09-2011, 09:26 AM
Checkout the ACB tribute:

Mr. M's Assassin's Creed Brotherhood tribute on Jesper Kyd - Ezio's Family (Extnct Remix)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9HBxRJiGVQQ

FrankieSatt
05-09-2011, 11:03 AM
Someone, or some people, are not doing their job if this question has to be asked.

Story is the main reason I'm playing the games and started playing the games. I have other games with similar game play to the Assassin's Creed series but the Story Line is unique and is the reason why I'm playing these games as well.

Dieinthedark
05-10-2011, 02:52 PM
Story is the most important thing. I'm normally on SC forums but I've played all of the AC games. A lot of people didn't like AC1 but I felt w/the story it kept me drawn in and hence, I loved the game BECAUSE I loved the story. It goes hand in hand. That's way the AC games have been special: Heavy importance of the story! Don't forget this Ubi!!!!

spyrochick101
05-10-2011, 08:49 PM
The story is the most important thing, I agree. Ubi, you've created a story that is so involved and so epic that we're all still talking/speculating about the ending of Brotherhood, to now thoughts on Revelations. You guys keep us playing, thinking and talking about the story even long after we have beaten the games.

The story keeps me hooked and yearning to know more. =D This is the best video game story ever/to date in my opinion. Keep up the awesomeness!

Dieinthedark
05-12-2011, 02:34 PM
Originally posted by spyrochick101:
The story is the most important thing, I agree. Ubi, you've created a story that is so involved and so epic that we're all still talking/speculating about the ending of Brotherhood, to now thoughts on Revelations. You guys keep us playing, thinking and talking about the story even long after we have beaten the games.

The story keeps me hooked and yearning to know more. =D This is the best video game story ever/to date in my opinion. Keep up the awesomeness!

+1 Best story for video games EVER! You crap out on the story, game will flop. That's just given. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

BeCk41
05-14-2011, 04:02 AM
I love a good story! Anything that captures your attention is good. : )

AubreyWilborn
05-14-2011, 12:19 PM
Originally posted by Ypsan:
Story is very important to me and it is the main reason I'm sticking to AC.

But the direction you've taken is very confusing. Why do we relive the memories of Ezio? Weren't we supposed to simply learn Ezio's skills through bleeding effect to become better assassin, as Lucy implied?

Altair's realization of the true meaning behind the words "Nothing is true. Everything is permitted." already gave us a hint of what power Pieces Of Eden really have. His journal reveals that despite his wisdom he fell victim of that illusion once he came into possetion of POE (at the end od AC1), or so I believe. What now?

We've spent two episodes watching Ezio avenge his family, form Brotherhood, rebuild Rome and fight Templars over the posetion of POE without him having the slightest clue of what we already know thanks to Altair. Ezio's life up to now is almost irrelevant to us except for that "WTF?" moment in Minerva's Temple. Did we have to relive whole Ezio's life just to see his great discovery in his late age in Istanbul?
Seems to me that Templar's animus is way more advanced than ours. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

I agree with the above qoute. Ezio's life after ACB(and arguably after AC2) IS irelevant. We know that his story somehow leads up to Desmond's. Why not just get on, fully, into Desmond's story?

In regards to the AC series games, storyline is more important than gameplay, and FAARRR more important than graphics, controls, etc. If the storyline isn't good, then forget about the game, period. If the storyline of an AC game doesn't: A. Make sense
B. Tie in logically with the other games
C. Keep the player interested, captivated, and guessing.

Then the game is a failure and a flop, no matter how many other bells and whistles it has. An AC game also has to be somewhat believable. When playing Brotherhood, I couldn't beleive that the FIRST thing Ezio does after his villa is destroyed,his uncle killed; and after being shot TWICE, the first thing he does is mount his horse and ride towards Rome.

Really? The Ezio we met in AC2 was a litter smarter than this


The AC game with the best storyline so far has been AC2, hands down. The way Ezio's story of revenge and discovery was melded with Desmond's story was really brilliant. The game was also really well researched, which is a must for any AC game. The game's setting of Renaissance Italy was believable, interesting and engaging. Thus, it made the game that much better.

So, in conclusion, story is EXTREMELY important. It's kinda worrying that now AC games are set to be released at yearly intervals, which really doesn't leave enough time for polished gameplay elements, graphics, AND a good storyline. Call of Duty games are released yearly as well, and their plots are always just excuses to shoot people.

AubreyWilborn
05-14-2011, 12:32 PM
Originally posted by Xanatos2007:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by lilbacchant:
<sigh>

I too share the anxiety that others have expressed over you asking this question. My hope is that you're simply looking for ammunition to fend off pressure from above to rush out paragraph story-bits disguised as poor chapters.

I guess the question you have to ask yourselves (as developers) is whether you want to use the medium of games as a couch-potato replacement for the competitive urge (e.g., as opposed to actually playing sports), or do you want to explore the medium's potential as an interactive story (e.g., as opposed to reading or simply watching a movie).

~ Part 1: Immersion ~

AC1, imo, was a breakthrough achievement of the latter (as was Oblivion, e.g., several years ago). I applaud you whole-heartedly for that creative vision and effort. It wasn't perfect gameplay-wise (pre-missions were a bit redundant), but overall the interactive portion and blended story was a milestone for creating immersion.

However, while AC2 improved -- somewhat -- on the gameplay, the story seemed geared for a less mature audience and the player's interaction with the story was much more linear. I had a much harder time connecting, or immersing, with Ezio because I never really had to think.

When playing Altair I had to think about missions and even plan. I'd climb to a high point near the "zone" just so I could survey and contemplate entrance/exit strategies. Sometimes these initial plans would change while "thinning the heard" around the perimeter; let alone the quick thinking if it all went fubar. The point is that because of this thinking, the difference between Altair and myself began to blur ... immersion.

In AC2 we were often gated thru the missions. In AC:B it was even worse and I'd dare say we were railroaded thru the missions. There was less and less thinking, less and less blurring, less and less immersion.

Don't get me wrong, AC:B was fun as far as the game mechanics were concerned and I think y'all are headed in the right direction there (though I still really, really wish you'd give us difficulty settings). But it feels counterproductive, to say the least, to restrict our choices as to when and how to use those mechanics in missions.

~ Part 2: The Ending of Chapters (games) ~

The ending of AC1 was epic. I was on the edge of my seat once I got to Arsuf and mostly stayed there until the end. I was smack in the middle of a warzone fending off entire patrols of soldiers. And then ... Oh crap! A whole group of templars?!. As if that weren't enough, my blood pressure didn't dare dip once I got back to Masyaf and had to tangle with groups of assassins, all of my targets at once, etc.

Indeed, all of the skills I'd learned throughout the game were put to the test. They weren't a reward in and of themselves, they were sorely needed at the end. And, woh-boy, what a rollercoaster of a test it was.

The story-bits and revelations were interwoven into that action perfectly. Those "interruptions" might've let us catch our breath, but my heart never stopped pounding and that just added to the excitement of the story itself. The pacing was spot-on.

AC2 had no rollercoaster at the end. "The Truth" and the vault were exciting revelations about the plot, but they were mostly forced to stand alone. They were intriguing enough to make me want to see what lay around the next corner, but that corner was at the end of a fairly long, bland hallway.

The end of AC:B was... well, I'm not sure what to call it. The last memory, except the last sequence, was mostly a series of forced-play hurdles. Having to use the apple as a weapon for two, short, uninspired sequences was like a big speed bump.

In the last sequence when I first realized that I was plopped into a warzone, I thought, "Ye-hoo, now I'll have to work those mad skills I've learned!" Alas, it was just a few waves of seemingly normal amounts of normal guards. Fighting Cesare was a brief challenge, but barely made me lean forward, let alone sit on the edge.

The gameplay didn't create much excitement at the end. So what did the story add? Well, nothing but confusion. By the time I was fighting Cesare, I didn't really get what the urgency or necessity was. And neither "The Truth" or the acrobatics with Desmond in the vault culminated in revelations. Quite the opposite in fact.

At the end of AC:B I was just left befuddled. The ending of "The Truth" with Desmond in freefall is the perfect metaphor. I no longer have any sense of what my place in the AC universe is; hell, I don't even know where the floor is. No sense of direction whatsoever ... up, down, left, right ... nothing.

For a while I've pondered, thought, scoured the forums, the wiki, etc. looking for a direction. Now I'm quickly getting to the point where I just don't care. From your perspective, that's probably NOT a good place for me to be.

You guys/gals should strongly consider working out a DLC or something that'll at least give us a center of gravity for the story. Because, I don't know about others, but right now I'm drifting. If I were you, I'd rather have me eagerly anticipating what's around the next corner, because if I'm drifting, I could easily drift away.*

~ Summation (Yes, I'm finally going to answer your question) ~

Imo, for a game to be great (even good), it has to be a solid, thought-provoking interactive story. The interactive part requires a good game design that encourages immersion. Closed-off choices and linear design make for poor immersion. The story part, I assume, is self-explanatory.

Game mechanics are secondary. Any improvements and enhancements of those are a bonus, but less important. Bad mechanics can be a distraction, but AC has never had that problem, imo.

Yes, story matters a lot.
Damn, you beat me to it. Well I already said roughly half of that elsewhere, but never so in-depth or well written.

The Truth puzzles were probably the most intriguing part of AC2 and some of them can really do your head in, although the devs didn't work it into the overall plot for it to have any direct in-game impact.

One subtle but effective way the devs immersed the player in the first AC was through the "interactive cutscenes" where you were free to shift about the crowd while the drama went on; it gave the feeling that you really were a predator stalking your prey. And keeping Altair's face hidden from the camera most of the time really did allow you to 'step into his shoes' (think about it - you can't really imagine Altair without the hood). Compare that to AC2/B's "cinematic" style that takes the reigns away from you and practically plunges Ezio through the front door of cutscenes with plenty of close-ups instead of letting you circle your target like a proper Assassin.

I also maintain that Altair is still the only proper Assassin of the series. The Assassin's Creed games lately seem to have very little to do with 'Assassins' (proper ones) or a 'Creed', which is pretty damn poor given the title.

Originally posted by lilbacchant:
*[For the moment I'm still hopeful that you'll get back to good storytelling and design. If I wasn't still hopeful, I wouldn't have scribbled this verbose diatribe.]
I've said it before and I'll say it again: the sudden drop in story quality coincides with Patrice Désilets & Corey May losing the reigns (Corey is no longer the lead scriptwriter and Patrice has left Ubisoft entirely). </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

What you said about Patrice Desilets and Corey May is also a fear I have. AC1(and, IMO, AC2) were well-written, well-researched, historical gaming gold. ACB is good, but definitely not up to the standard of the other games.

I hope I'm wrong about this, but the loss of the creative writing staff, and the newly rushed schedule( an AC game EVERY YEAR?) might just doom the AC series, and turn into cookie-cutter garbage.

Tuck2103
05-16-2011, 03:49 AM
Ubisoft, the reason that your AC-francise is so extremely popular, is because you don't follow the globalisationstream that nearly all film- and gamemakers follow.

Look at the Harry Potter films. Rowling's story is very complex, yet the directors have cut out all the hard parts for one reason: they want to please the dumb people who'd otherwise not bother watching it, for it's too difficult to understand. The argument "we can't record enough filmmaterial to include the complex parts" is a damn LIE, a templar could've said the same. All they care about is earning money, not quality. People with decent brains think the film is rubbish therefore.
And this happens to all games and films these years. Except for Assassin's Creed.

I don't need to tell you Ubisoft-guys what makes your game so great. It's because you include both a complex story for the minority of smart people, and lots of action for the dumb part of society. That's why, AC is a game for everyone. Keep it complex and yet simple, it's brilliant!

DannyStrong
05-16-2011, 04:05 PM
The story is easily the most imoprtant thing, atleast in the case of assassin's creed. I think most of us just play it because we want more of the story.

But I think this is in part because the game fails in so many other ways, so the people who are less interested in the story stopped playing.

Just a couple of examples :

1- stealth. I think a lot of people were wanting to see stealth similiar to the steal in splinter cell convictions.. Where being stealthy is very challenging but worth it because if you get caught you go into a big fight where the odds are deeply stacked against you.. instead most most of assassin's creed missions don't really require or allow for the same level of stealth. and if you get caught it is no problem to fight off the guards and continue.. especially in bortherhood where there is literally a "win" button that triggers a magical arrow storm.

2- weapons and economy. Being able to buy weapons is cool. But you don't really have to work for them. You can buy up the entire city and buy pretty much all weapons early on.. and the joke is that the more money you spend the more money you get. You'll never run out of money so there is never any careful purchasing decisions. The amount of money the player has needs to be limited. A millionaire assassin doing his deeds himself just seems weird. The introduction of needing to acquire certain raw materials to make/buy weapons was a nice touch to keep weapons hard to get I think the next game should expand on this. I would much rather explore the area for raw materials for weapons rather than to just simply hangout and eventually get the money for doing literally nothing.

So to conclude, yes the story is the most important part of the game, without the fantastic story that is assassin's creed all that is left is a very weak action adventure game. I think you guys should keep up with the great story telling but just try to improve on the game mechanics. Everyone already loves the story. I think omproving other parts of the game while maintaning the story would increase the fanbase and overall interest in the game

MCRMJ
05-18-2011, 06:44 PM
For me, the story is the main part of the AC universe, it binds everything together.

What I don't want to see, is the whole storyline fragment too much. Having games across multiple systems (ipods, DS, PSP, Consoles/PC), then you have all the extra bits like comics, the Project Legacy stuff, you run the risk of missing huge chunks if you don't actively seek them out.

Having the storyline spread like this also runs the risk of making things too complex, which then leads to the need for retcons.

Another huge gaming series did this, Metal Gear Solid, jumping around in the timeline of the whole series, created little retcons here and there which detracted from the narrative. By the time the final game came around, they had to resort to some rather cop out answers to the bigger questions about the story (nanomachines anyone? lol).

From the way Ubisoft has gone so in depth with three main games (the amount of historical bits and pieces in the The Truth etc is fantastic), gives me hope they won't take easy routes out of things, but it's still something that niggles me.

What I would like though, is a few more answers along the way. It's all very well to drop huge bombshells, but adding too many questions and not giving any answers (Brotherhood did this in spades), seems like it will only store up problems later.

Anything relating to Ezio and his involvement in the last two games should be answered in full in Revelations

MykaelJay
05-28-2011, 03:09 AM
This is the worst question you can ask. The story of a game should not be developed seperately to the rest of the game - it should be told through the rest of the game. It should be indistinguishable from the gameplay, the music and the cinematography. A game is supposed to be an organic thing, with all parts moving towards the same end. Nothing should be considered above all else, but rather, as part of everything else.

...or maybe that's just me.

EDIT: Oh there seems to be similar sentiments above. I guess I'd better actually read this thread.


Originally posted by EzioTheAssassin:
I believe that as AC's gameplay improved, then so too did the story. I enjoyed the more dynamic gameplay. I actually felt like I was firing a cannon during a seige. It was very compelling.
This is a perfect example of what I'm saying. When a grenade goes off in CoD or Halo or whatever shooter you're playing at the time, the camera is showered with mud, your vision is obscured by dust, your ears begin to ring; you are blinded and deafened and emotionally affected by the battle. You're drawn further into the story, enhancing it and advancing it. Every time you throw a corpse into a haybale, you're experiencing a slice of the character's life. Every time you pass a herald and hear about the latest syphilis outbreak, the world is painted in brighter colours.


Originally posted by Ureh:
Your stance on story and gameplay is quite clear. But we're focusing only on Assassin's Creed, not dinosaur games like Mario and Pacman (where story was nearly nonexistent).
On the other hand, posts like this disgust me. Mario and Pacman had no dialogue or written narrative, but they both had fully realised stories with immense world depth. The timer on each Mario level reminded you of the urgency of your mission just as well as any expositional character would. Rather, the vast stretches of hostile terrain which Mario treads tells of a solitary duty, a dark world resisted only by one man. He knows damn well that after wading through Bowser's army he's just going to find another Toad locked away, but he always hopes - maybe this time...
Regardless, it's not as though he can just abandon them because they aren't royalty. Each deserves his help as much as she does, and so he soldiers on.


Originally posted by Xanatos2007:
Of course just as important as the story itself is the way it's told. The majority of games (Devil May Cry, Call of Duty, etc) use the gameplay merely as a vehicle to shift the player from one cutscene to the next in order to tell the plot, where as other games (Amnesia: The Dark Descent, Assassin's Creed, etc) have the story & gameplay go hand in hand. Whether it's told through in-game dialogue (Kane & Lynch), notes & diaries found (Thief), or simply through the environment (Penumbra and Bioshock) the plot flows seamlessly with the gameplay, keeping the player engaged with the game's narrative.
Here we go, a succinct and powerful summation of the point I'm trying to make. I agree wholeheartedly with what is said here.


Originally posted by lilbacchant:
I guess the question you have to ask yourselves (as developers) is whether you want to use the medium of games as a couch-potato replacement for the competitive urge (e.g., as opposed to actually playing sports), or do you want to explore the medium's potential as an interactive story (e.g., as opposed to reading or simply watching a movie).

~ Part 1: Immersion ~

AC1, imo, was a breakthrough achievement of the latter (as was Oblivion, e.g., several years ago). I applaud you whole-heartedly for that creative vision and effort. It wasn't perfect gameplay-wise (pre-missions were a bit redundant), but overall the interactive portion and blended story was a milestone for creating immersion.

However, while AC2 improved -- somewhat -- on the gameplay, the story seemed geared for a less mature audience and the player's interaction with the story was much more linear. I had a much harder time connecting, or immersing, with Ezio because I never really had to think.

When playing Altair I had to think about missions and even plan. I'd climb to a high point near the "zone" just so I could survey and contemplate entrance/exit strategies. Sometimes these initial plans would change while "thinning the heard" around the perimeter; let alone the quick thinking if it all went fubar. The point is that because of this thinking, the difference between Altair and myself began to blur ... immersion.

In AC2 we were often gated thru the missions. In AC:B it was even worse and I'd dare say we were railroaded thru the missions. There was less and less thinking, less and less blurring, less and less immersion.

...

Imo, for a game to be great (even good), it has to be a solid, thought-provoking interactive story. The interactive part requires a good game design that encourages immersion. Closed-off choices and linear design make for poor immersion. The story part, I assume, is self-explanatory.
A much less succinct, but still meaningful argument. Someone else said something about pacing among the crowd during cutscenes as Altair. It is at these points where your anxiety is highest: you've just spent the better part of an hour collecting information on the target, the area and the patrols (all of which was a very important part of the narrative), and being able to pace during the monologues was all that kept me from pulling my hair out.
I'd been hoping for the cutscene to die out over the last few years, but the cinematic sequences during the siege of Monteriggioni have made me reconsider (and in fact, through most of Brotherhood). The way you splice gameplay and cutscene is together is just sublime. As long as you continue to do what you have done, and continue to do it in a thoughtful, creative way, I think future games will be just as good.

GarethNelson
05-28-2011, 02:35 PM
Ubisoft - don't you dare water down the awesome story, it's building up to something truly epic

knb2011
05-30-2011, 07:43 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9HBxRJiGVQQ New ACB tribute! -revelations http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

Berneri
05-31-2011, 03:42 AM
Yup, I have to agree that ACB has better gameplay, but the story in AC2.. It's just something amazing.


Originally posted by GlytchMeister:
And most importantly of all: "I think I'll stay up just a little bit longer."

I don't stay up late to keep the high score. I stay up all night for a good story; be it in a book, a movie, a TV series, or one heck of a good game.

THIS. Thank you good sir, you took the words right out of my mouth! :3

SpaceRazzer
06-01-2011, 06:13 AM
It's really important!

If I had to make a list, it would be something like...

1st: Story & Gameplay
2nd: Music
3rd: Graphics
4th: Originality & extras

Assassin's Creed has always had fun gameplay and a cool story (which got better during AC2 and ACB), and I was amazed by the upgrade of graphics ACB had received.
Also, ACB had a lot of extras and collectibles and such.

Lastly, a good story has a lot of mystery surrounding it. I like that. :3
Games like Assassin's Creed and Halo make me go: "...wait, what the brown?!" multiple times! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

joelsantos24
06-01-2011, 09:55 AM
I have to say it's pretty hard to even accomodate such a question? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

The story is obviously the fundamental buiding blocks upon which the game itself is essencially built.

sassinscreed
06-02-2011, 10:44 AM
Originally posted by Ureh:
I can't believe this question is being asked. Story is the key ingredient. It's why most of us are playing this game. ACBs plot was acceptable but anything below that would've turned into disappointment. Posting that question makes me think that Ubisoft is considering not focusing on the singleplayer and instead on multiplayer.

Second most important thing is the historical context and being able to explore memories and find out "what really happened".

acceptable is right word for ac b story it is acceptable but worse then previous ac games i hope they will do it better in revelations because assassins creed is singleplayer and not multiplayer game

beatledude210
06-08-2011, 02:16 PM
Originally posted by YeOldeSierra:
The story is one of the core elements of a game that drive me to play it. If a game has poor gameplay I can stand that in order to actually get into the story a little more, because a lot of the time I can enjoy a game for its story more than anything.

If we're discussing a franchise such as the Assassin's Creed franchise, however, story is one of the aspects of the game that appeal to me. I always want a good story from a franchise that has established itself as one to watch for in that field. The gameplay is already polished in Assassin's Creed but if it's polished even further, great! I'd buy the game even if it had weak graphics and poor gameplay. If it's an Assassin's Creed game I'd take the chances on it that the story would make up for any other areas that would fall flat - not that I imagine any of them would.

A lot of people value graphics, perhaps even over the story. I personally find the story to be one of the reasons I buy a game more than anything else. While this console generation has shown itself to be focused completely on the multiplayer experience, I still value a quality story over the online, 99% of the time.


I strongly agree with you. You said it perfectly.

Sheer-Fury
06-08-2011, 04:07 PM
Isn't the story behind this game what gave it its fame and appeal? Why would the story not be important? You could say this for other games maybe, but for all the Assassin's Creeds story is the driving force that makes me come back to play it over and over again. It makes me buy the next game and wait for the next one. Sure multiplayer was a wonderful addition,and it turned out great in my opinion, but to neglect the story mode is out of the question. This is not to say that other improvements and other things are petty and negligible, but I think I can guarantee that the story is what keeps everyone coming back for more.

HackMagnetking
06-08-2011, 10:05 PM
The whole reason I suffer through Ezio's poor jump decision from the ledge to the ground instead of the wall so that i get the 100% sync on the mission is because of the story. If this story was bad, I wouldn't be on here!

BoomJack94
06-09-2011, 11:39 AM
This question is being asked soley because of Brotherhood's considerably weak story and it's terrible facial animation, but mainly the former. And I hope that they take in consideration the poll results and do something about it. Assassin's Creed is a story, not just a game.

kosmoscreed
06-09-2011, 08:41 PM
For me it's something in the middle, 50% story and 50% gameplay and environment.

GotFragPro
06-10-2011, 12:42 PM
Story (to me) is everything! When I get a game I play single player mode first, then some multiplayer. I didn't like Homefront AT ALL!!! It lacked story and was boring and predictable. It's sad that some games think it's ok to make a 45 minute story mode and put everything they have into MP. But, I doubt you'll lack story in this series. It has genius writers, and from the past three games, the story has thrived! Unlike many sequels. Anyways, I can't wait to see the story in this game. I praise you guys for what you've done. Can't wait for AC Revalations!

Sporkfighter
06-11-2011, 09:37 PM
I answered storyy as being in the top five though I would say that story is one of the top three things for me typically first or second. You have to have a great story and great gameplay to make a great game 98% of the time. Those two things make up the third most important element which I would say is immersiveness. Assassin's Creed has always had this in the main games and they all continue to become more and more developed in each title which is why I keep buying games in the series.

Ulicies
06-12-2011, 02:09 PM
AC2's gameplay got a little more button-mashy in my opinion, as you could just press down X until their HP falls. In AC1, you had to out-perform the guards with skillful combinations and actions. I loved having little clues laid around the game to discover trivia about the in-game universe. Doing that became one of my favorite things ever since Metroid Prime.

That said, discovering a new historic period and setting is my favorite aspect of the Assassin's Creed franchise. The storyline is definitely the driving force behind following Desmond. I voted the second option (Storyline apart of the top 5 things I look for).

Anaklusmos1995
06-16-2011, 12:11 PM
I am fascinated by games with catching stories. My first really serious one whas Legacy of Kain,and there are others that will always keep in my memory, like Max Payne, World of Warcraft and Shinobido.

hend_alatouli
06-20-2011, 07:00 AM
it's sooooooooo important!! either it's Desmond's story (which is the most important story) or his ancestors, and i have to tell you that Ezio's story in brotherhood did gave us details about him as much as i wanted!! so i'd love to see a huge development in their stories in Revelation, i want something shocking!!

Chriwalker
06-21-2011, 06:13 PM
Story is the key factor, all the other things is extra snacks http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

luckyto
06-22-2011, 10:27 AM
I imagine the strong fan base will lean towards story first.

To me, gameplay is always first. Even games with terrible stories can survive on gameplay (Just Cause 2).

Story is probably second with environment (graphics and music and sound) being a very close third. When story and environment come together, a game is elevated to its highest potential. These are the games I come back to over and over and over again. These are the games that I wait for the sequels feverishly and purchase them at launch day prices.

But if gameplay is errant, quirky, buggy or frustrating; you might as well can all that hard work because I can't stand to play it.

----
PS And believe it or not, I love the action and fighting and swordplay in Assassin's Creed games.

crash3
06-22-2011, 10:33 AM
I hope the ACR story is much better than ACB, I hope it lasts longer and is more in depth

Super Easy Combat and Stealth gameplay doesnt seem to have improved at all from what we saw in the E3 demo so hopefully a much better story will make up for the lack of gameplay improvements

Calvarok
06-22-2011, 07:44 PM
Story is very important, but at the end of the day, I love assassin's Creed because I've played more than 100 hours of absolutely nothing but screwing around, with no missions or anything.

Gameplay and environment is about 70% of the game for me, but the story is really important too, since if I don't like the story it makes playing the game feel pointless to me.

I would have bought just-cause 2 if it had a better story. And it had a really interesting sandbox to play around with.

magicalandi
06-30-2011, 07:44 PM
I LOVE the storyline but quit it with the terrible endings

lukaszep
07-03-2011, 01:30 AM
Without the story, there's no purpose to the gameplay, and there would be very little making me want to play the game. But i still would because the gameplays amazing...But that's because the stories amazing http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

ClairKruskamp
07-07-2011, 06:28 PM
The story is what made me love the game. I will say that what made me first play AC is the amazing kills I saw on the commercials and online. The I fell in love with the story, then I fell in love with the writing, then the concept art.... then I became an addict.. yes I admit I am an AC addict, and you know what I am so not afraid to admit it.

crash3
07-11-2011, 07:26 AM
I hope ACR has a much longer and more complex storyline than ACB which was pretty disappointing as it felt rushed and was very short

I hope we get to play proper sequences as Altair in ACR, I hope they arent like those really short christina missions in ACB

Michelasso
07-16-2011, 05:11 AM
This poll is useless. As the result in the AC forum was predictable. If I was Ubi I would ask:

- How important is the multiplayer? - My answer: little to none.
- How important is the ending?

Seriously, I can't believe you guys interrupted a game (ACB) in such a way, just to say: it will be continued. ACR is better explaining everything, because that has been very frustrating.

acjake
07-17-2011, 04:56 PM
Originally posted by Xanatos2007:
Super important: it's the only thing distinguishing Assassin's Creed as a 'great' game rather than merely a 'good' game.

Agree. Story is extremely important. I personally believe the core AC experience will always be the story telling and single player. I love the length of AC games but they need to make then longer IMO they should aim for something in between 60-80 hours, I mean AC2 took me 60 hours (I did every little thing and took my time). I do enjoy the multiplayer component however I prefer the story/single player experience. I'm sure ACR will be a lengthy game but if it isn't than AC3 should be a huge in terms of scope and hours of gameplay. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

acjake
07-17-2011, 04:57 PM
Originally posted by Xanatos2007:
Super important: it's the only thing distinguishing Assassin's Creed as a 'great' game rather than merely a 'good' game.

Agree. Story is extremely important. I personally believe the core AC experience will always be the story telling and single player. I love the length of AC games but they need to make them longer, IMO AC2 was the longest in terms of gameplay hours. I do enjoy the multiplayer component however I prefer the story/single player experience. I'm sure ACR will be a lengthy game but if it isn't I'm sure AC3 will be a huge game, in terms of scope and hours of gameplay. Anyway just my opinion. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

zerocooll21
07-26-2011, 03:32 PM
Story has blown my mind since day one. Please don't loose sight of this.

johke13
07-27-2011, 04:08 PM
The story of any video game can determine how "great" the game is.

Piners1983
07-28-2011, 02:18 PM
I agree with the majority here and believe that story is crucial to the success of the Assassins Creed Saga. I hope in the next title they work out the multilayer issues AND maintain a superb story line instead of rushing out another title.\

www.freedomcomputers.net (http://www.freedomcomputers.net)

Piners

moraneqrstu51
07-30-2011, 09:40 AM
Yes, story is very important. It can help make a good game great. One thing I like about AC1's story was that you walked around during cutscenes, it made everything feel more interactive. I think using both at the appropriate times will help make the games better. For example, scenes like when you are talking to Lorenzo Medici on the bridge, and he tells you about how your father saved his life, a normal cutscene, like the one used, would be best. However, when you are watching The Banker talk to his colleagues and guests at the party a more interactive cutscene would be better. I hope you appreciate my comments.

sinfulskiz
07-31-2011, 10:07 PM
Storyline is the only reason I play Assassin's Creed. Every single one of them. When AC:B was released, I played the storyline multiple times, and attempted to play Multiplayer... I couldn't pull myself to reach beyond level 22. I felt as though the game had sacrificed storyline content for multpilayer features and that, as a huge fan, made me sad. It is true what multiple previous posters have written:

Most game companies don't listen and believe that a strong multiplayer is what draws in the players, but when it comes to AC:B, it is itself... a revelation, in that multiplayer is not purely what a majority of gamers are after.

I can only hope that the future of Assassin's Creed franchise focuses primarily on what made it so strong in the first place, and what will continue to make it unique, that item being... a great story.

crash3
08-01-2011, 04:11 PM
ACR is the big one, I seriously hope the storyline is brilliant. It needs to be longer and more complex than ever, I dont care if multiplayer is crap as long as singleplayer storyline is amazing.

Come on Ubisoft, dont let us down!

Godofwar915
08-06-2011, 09:19 AM
I think the story makes the game and i had an idea about how it could continue from ac revelations .i think descmond should take over as the main charachter of the series and continue from 2012

Vanadio23
08-06-2011, 10:44 AM
Story is the most important thing in any videogame, but even more in a franchise like Assassin's Creed.

I really felt disappointed with AC: Brotherhood plot, especially after such a masterpiece as AC II. It felt disconnected and it didn't pull the player into it.

I understand your focus in the multiplayer as it is an important feature to expand the game but if you let the singleplayer go to hell you can bet you're going to lose a lot of your fanbase. Another game with the plot quality of Brotherhood could really end my interest in Assassin's Creed franchise.

Auditore723
08-08-2011, 03:41 PM
Story is the most important thing especialy in Assassin's Creed, thats what got me interested in the franchise now i just love the game so much. If it weren't for the story i wouldn't be playing it

http://mypsn.eu.playstation.com/psn/profile/Auditore723.png (http://eu.playstation.com/psn/profile/Auditore723/)

STEELCITY1989
08-17-2011, 08:39 AM
Honestly Assassins Creed was just another great looking and fun game until the story was really set in motion in AC2. It's what separates this game from any other. The continuation of the story is what makes me want to play Revelations more so than the game play. And that's really saying something.

Pitalla
08-29-2011, 05:59 PM
ACB had an amaizing story that married the game itself. It was an amaizing experience. I think it was because you didnt felt alone, the world felt alive and made you feel like you where an important part of it. It also Humanized Ezio into a great scale and thus it was a superb game.

Story it's the Key ingredient for AC. It must be taken with care and not with careless attitude. So far the story has been going into a FLAWLESS SPREE! But with each new game there comes the risk of screwing up or of making it even better!

Jjfd99
08-31-2011, 02:29 PM
Of course the story is the most important. I heard from friends the online was stupid. I personally just played it for trophies.

Pitalla
09-20-2011, 06:03 PM
If the story is so important, how come we got mega trolled with this Ezio not being descenant of Altair?

Now please do not come to explaining and excusing me with your loop wholes. There are more points pointing that they are than the ones that they arent.
And besides people has made the idea that they are.

You guys should be doing the story awesome, not bad.

EmperorxZurg
09-20-2011, 06:53 PM
Wait what? How is a plot twist bad? If anything, this is a sign that the writers are thinking creatively and not sticking with what people ASSUME to be the norm. The fact that we now know that they're only related through Desmond is a sign of good story writing. Unless being predictable is apparently good story now?

LightRey
09-20-2011, 11:47 PM
Originally posted by Pitalla:
If the story is so important, how come we got mega trolled with this Ezio not being descenant of Altair?

Now please do not come to explaining and excusing me with your loop wholes. There are more points pointing that they are than the ones that they arent.
And besides people has made the idea that they are.

You guys should be doing the story awesome, not bad.
They didn't "troll" us with that fact. It's not a big deal. I don't know why it's such a big deal to you, but them not being related makes just as much sense as them being related.

There's absolutely nothing concrete that points in any way at them being related. Yes, they both have eagle vision, but saying that means they're related is like saying that everyone that's lactose intolerant is related to some European guy who lived 500 years ago that was lactose intolerant.
I myself never once assumed they were related. It makes perfect sense and there were no direct clues that they were. He was never mentioned as a "forefather" of Ezio, just as a legendary Assassin, which was all the more reason to doubt they were related, since that fact would've been something to be proud of.

I don't get why you think this is such a big deal, because it isn't. Ubisoft actually casually mentioned this, because it wasn't even "revealing" enough.

itsamea-mario
09-21-2011, 03:02 AM
I'm actually warming to that idea.
I used to dislike it but now I realise that if Desmond is the convergence point for lots of different special bloodlines, then that makes much more badass than if he came from a single bloodline, which would inevitably become diluted.

Darby mcdervit put it quite well in a recent Q and A.

JenC03
09-21-2011, 03:07 AM
Haha, I already answered this when it was asked by their official facebook page. Is it bad that I felt obliged to answer again...? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

luckyto
09-21-2011, 07:52 AM
Originally posted by itsamea-mario:
I'm actually warming to that idea.
I used to dislike it but now I realise that if Desmond is the convergence point for lots of different special bloodlines, then that makes much more badass than if he came from a single bloodline, which would inevitably become diluted.

Darby mcdervit put it quite well in a recent Q and A.

I totally agree.

Nice video, BTW

itsamea-mario
09-21-2011, 02:24 PM
What? Which video? The Q&A?

xCr0wnedNorris
09-21-2011, 02:27 PM
Important factors in gaming ranging from most important to least important.

1. Gameplay
(A very very very very very very very very close)2. Story
3. How the controls handle
4. Graphics