PDA

View Full Version : Ubisoft has ruined Assassin's Creed



kingcole225
08-23-2011, 11:46 PM
Warning: Wall of text

I was one of the first people to buy Assassin's Creed 1, buying it on release date with no doubt that it was going to be a great game despite the simple decent reviews it had received days earlier. I knew this not only because I'm stubborn with my opinions, but because this game was original: realistic AI, a realistic environment, and interesting stealth gameplay that spans city-size levels. This game was the epitomy of the next generation, and with an interesting story it was sure to be a great game. And I wasn't disappointed, the game far exceeded my expectations despite its length. I'd like to stop a state what made the game truly great before I move on to my next point: realism was a huge factor. The AI, the game mechanics, the notoriety level, all this contributed to make you actually feel like you were actually an assassin, constantly hunted and constantly hunting. The gritty and dark story will always stick out to me as one of the best parts of AC1. Scenes such as the man escaping from "the doctor" or the party scene just showed how cut-throat and dangerous a world without true policing (such as the olden days) were. The last part that really took Assassin's Creed the extra mile were of course, the assassinations. Each assassination was carefully constructed, allowing multiple paths of execution and encouraging experimentation. After every assassination there was, of course, the escape, which was almost as hard as the assassination itself.

Now onto AC2:

When AC2 was announced we were told "same formula, more content" and AC1 fans around the world rejoiced. However, this statement was a lie. After a little experimentation with the game, it was easy to tell that the formula had in fact changed: The game was no longer the gritty, realistic portrayal of the life of an assassin, but an arcadey, action sequence-filled GTA Italy. Assassinations need not be planned, as it was quite easy to simply run right up to your target and murder him. There was no fear of him running away, there was no careful escape, there was no recognition of the dog-eat-dog medieval world, only action hero bullsh*t. The game had lost all of its original innovation and had devolved into a Call of Duty-like ADD frenzy, forgetting its sandbox roots. Ever since AC2, the games have been devolving more and more and more, milking the boring formula before people recognize that AC is no longer interesting, and now many of us are fed up. You can see it in comments on youtube and other websites, everyone sees that Assassin's Creed Revelations is the same boring game that AC Brotherhood and AC2 were. The games simply don't have any soul in them, they are shells slightly filled with story and gimmicks, nothing like the innovation that was Assassin's Creed 1. So please Ubisoft, make Assassin's Creed 3 an interesting game. Get rid of this boring arcade game and get back to the gritty realism of Assassin's Creed 1.

kingcole225
08-23-2011, 11:46 PM
Warning: Wall of text

I was one of the first people to buy Assassin's Creed 1, buying it on release date with no doubt that it was going to be a great game despite the simple decent reviews it had received days earlier. I knew this not only because I'm stubborn with my opinions, but because this game was original: realistic AI, a realistic environment, and interesting stealth gameplay that spans city-size levels. This game was the epitomy of the next generation, and with an interesting story it was sure to be a great game. And I wasn't disappointed, the game far exceeded my expectations despite its length. I'd like to stop a state what made the game truly great before I move on to my next point: realism was a huge factor. The AI, the game mechanics, the notoriety level, all this contributed to make you actually feel like you were actually an assassin, constantly hunted and constantly hunting. The gritty and dark story will always stick out to me as one of the best parts of AC1. Scenes such as the man escaping from "the doctor" or the party scene just showed how cut-throat and dangerous a world without true policing (such as the olden days) were. The last part that really took Assassin's Creed the extra mile were of course, the assassinations. Each assassination was carefully constructed, allowing multiple paths of execution and encouraging experimentation. After every assassination there was, of course, the escape, which was almost as hard as the assassination itself.

Now onto AC2:

When AC2 was announced we were told "same formula, more content" and AC1 fans around the world rejoiced. However, this statement was a lie. After a little experimentation with the game, it was easy to tell that the formula had in fact changed: The game was no longer the gritty, realistic portrayal of the life of an assassin, but an arcadey, action sequence-filled GTA Italy. Assassinations need not be planned, as it was quite easy to simply run right up to your target and murder him. There was no fear of him running away, there was no careful escape, there was no recognition of the dog-eat-dog medieval world, only action hero bullsh*t. The game had lost all of its original innovation and had devolved into a Call of Duty-like ADD frenzy, forgetting its sandbox roots. Ever since AC2, the games have been devolving more and more and more, milking the boring formula before people recognize that AC is no longer interesting, and now many of us are fed up. You can see it in comments on youtube and other websites, everyone sees that Assassin's Creed Revelations is the same boring game that AC Brotherhood and AC2 were. The games simply don't have any soul in them, they are shells slightly filled with story and gimmicks, nothing like the innovation that was Assassin's Creed 1. So please Ubisoft, make Assassin's Creed 3 an interesting game. Get rid of this boring arcade game and get back to the gritty realism of Assassin's Creed 1.

Blind2Society
08-24-2011, 12:03 AM
No they didn't.

kriegerdesgottes
08-24-2011, 12:08 AM
I loved ACI and ACII but I do agree the franchise is headed down a dark and scary road.

SlimeDynamiteD
08-24-2011, 12:18 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Blind2Society:
No they didn't. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

(+5)

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by kingcole225:
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

If my memory doesn't abandon me, didn't you post something like this, a real while back about AC:Brotherhood as well?

Calvarok
08-24-2011, 12:18 AM
Aww, little troll is sad that the Rennaissance was not the same as the Crusades.

Wanna know why they're different? A couple hundred years, that's why.

You could just walk up to and kill most of the targets in AC1. And AC2 had so many targets that rand when you were detected, it's not even funny. You're way off.

Nothing was Arcadey about AC2.

Xanatos2007
08-24-2011, 12:27 AM
Oh good, and I thought I was the only one who noticed the series going downhill faster than a German Spitfire piloted by a depressed hippo.
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Calvarok:
Nothing was Arcadey about AC2. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Except the linearity of the missions, the arbitrary side quests and the entire economic system. Which is about all the innovation Ubisoft has made to the series thus far along with removing virtually all the difficulty.

SlimeDynamiteD
08-24-2011, 12:28 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Xanatos2007:
Oh good, and I thought I was the only one who noticed the series going downhill faster than a German Spitfire piloted by a depressed hippo. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yea... but you don't like anything really... :P

Xanatos2007
08-24-2011, 12:29 AM
Oh no, there is stuff I like. It's just that the "innovations" Ubisoft has made to the series are not one of them.

AlphaAltair
08-24-2011, 12:33 AM
AC is by far my favourite series, however I was very disappointed with ACB and my expectations for ACR are way down.

If Revelations is another Brotherhood I think I'll find it hard to maintain any interest, sadly.

SlimeDynamiteD
08-24-2011, 12:35 AM
What's so bad about Brotherhood eh?
I loved it. It was epic.
Just as I liked AC1 and AC2 and most likely AC:R as well.

You can't judge a game based on the little footage you've seen or on the fact that you didn't play the game yet.

Play first, Judge secondly.

naran6142
08-24-2011, 12:39 AM
oh plz not another thread like this. i mean no offence, and welcome to the forums, but this has been said a little to much. i respect your opinion but still

now i wasnt around when feed back was going in from AC1 but im sure that some of that feed back said that AC1 was too repetitive. so they changed it in AC2 to be less repetitive, i guess by taking out the investigations. now i did like doing the investigation but there wasn't a whole lot of gameplay in them.

pickpocket ting was just walking up behind a guy
eavesdropping was sitting on a bench
beat ups were just annoying
informants however were different and fun
it was cool to plan the assassination but i think you see my point

in AC2 there were no investigations but instead you had to think on the fly, which can be more fun in some cases.

i also dont like it when people say that in AC2 and ACB that you dont act like an assassin, cuz who here is an actual assassin from 500 to nearly 1000 years ago.

and AC2 doesnt feel like the "dog eat dog medieval times" time cuz it in the renaissances.http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

you have valid points but i dont think that ubisoft has ruined the games as the title of the thread suggests

Xanatos2007
08-24-2011, 12:44 AM
I did play AC2 and ACB, and since the ACR footage I've seen seems to follow suite to the overall decline it's safer to assume it's ****e until it proves itself otherwise.

SlimeDynamiteD
08-24-2011, 12:47 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Xanatos2007:
I did play AC2 and ACB, and since the ACR footage I've seen seems to follow suite to the overall decline it's safer to assume it's ****e until it proves itself otherwise. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It's the other way around, it's awesome unless it proves itself otherwise.

Cercatrova
08-24-2011, 12:48 AM
Everyone loves the first go. It is pure. Anything after, no matter how different, how similar, or how unique, is knocked as too derivative, too different, or too lame. It's always love for number 1, hate for everything after, wether it's Dragons Age, Knights of the Old Republic, Call of Duty, Battlefield, or whatever it may be.

If you just do not like it, do not play it. But frankly, the purist crap is rather derivative, repetative and lame. Sure, things have changed as the series has developed. Thats normal, it's what happens. If they kept it the same, you would like it, but your next door neighbor would say it's a weak rehash. Honestly, nobody really cares what you think, or what I think, but I am going to tell you: The game is all about an unfolding story. If you play it for the fighting, you are playing it for the wrong reasons. If you are playing it because of "awsum grafiks", you are playing for the wrong reasons. So fasten your seat belt, or get out of the car. Because Ubisoft is going whether you come on this "magical journey" or not.

Posting your whiny rant about why YOU do not like the game will not change anything, nor should it. Let Ubisoft make the decisions and sink or float on their own merits. If 5 million people play this game, 1 million probably have the same opinion as you, 1 million probably think it's rehashing the same old thing again and again (KILLING GETS SO BORINGZ ZOMG), and 2 million don't really care and just want to devour the next game in the series.

Xanatos2007
08-24-2011, 12:51 AM
So what you're saying is that we shouldn't voice our opinions? It's not our fault you don't agree with them.

As for "first is best"; I think Thief II is the best game of the series and Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory (3rd one) is the best game of its series, and I played them in chronological order. The reason AC1 is best is because it has by far the strongest plot and paces itself appropriately, unlike future AC titles whose stories appeal largely to people with short attention spans and gameplay to match.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SlimeDynamiteD:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Xanatos2007:
I did play AC2 and ACB, and since the ACR footage I've seen seems to follow suite to the overall decline it's safer to assume it's ****e until it proves itself otherwise. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It's the other way around, it's awesome unless it proves itself otherwise. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
No, no it's not.

kingcole225
08-24-2011, 01:07 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by naran6142:
oh plz not another thread like this. i mean no offence, and welcome to the forums, but this has been said a little to much. i respect your opinion but still

now i wasnt around when feed back was going in from AC1 but im sure that some of that feed back said that AC1 was too repetitive. so they changed it in AC2 to be less repetitive, i guess by taking out the investigations. now i did like doing the investigation but there wasn't a whole lot of gameplay in them.

pickpocket ting was just walking up behind a guy
eavesdropping was sitting on a bench
beat ups were just annoying
informants however were different and fun
it was cool to plan the assassination but i think you see my point

in AC2 there were no investigations but instead you had to think on the fly, which can be more fun in some cases.

i also dont like it when people say that in AC2 and ACB that you dont act like an assassin, cuz who here is an actual assassin from 500 to nearly 1000 years ago.

and AC2 doesnt feel like the "dog eat dog medieval times" time cuz it in the renaissances.http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

you have valid points but i dont think that ubisoft has ruined the games as the title of the thread suggests </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You could claim that in AC2 you had to think on the fly, but there was no real thinking to be done. Ubisoft had already forced you into a linear path that you will go down regardless because there is no other way. What you are talking about is the illusion of choice that Ubisoft gave as opposed to true choice in the first game. A lot of your points are completely groundless because I never said anything you are debating against (such as being a real assassin or claiming that the investigations were fun). However I will say that when I heard that Ubisoft was putting a lot more emphasis on content, I was excited for them to create tons of little investigation minigames before the big assassination.

kingcole225
08-24-2011, 01:15 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Cercatrova:
Everyone loves the first go. It is pure. Anything after, no matter how different, how similar, or how unique, is knocked as too derivative, too different, or too lame. It's always love for number 1, hate for everything after, wether it's Dragons Age, Knights of the Old Republic, Call of Duty, Battlefield, or whatever it may be.

If you just do not like it, do not play it. But frankly, the purist crap is rather derivative, repetative and lame. Sure, things have changed as the series has developed. Thats normal, it's what happens. If they kept it the same, you would like it, but your next door neighbor would say it's a weak rehash. Honestly, nobody really cares what you think, or what I think, but I am going to tell you: The game is all about an unfolding story. If you play it for the fighting, you are playing it for the wrong reasons. If you are playing it because of "awsum grafiks", you are playing for the wrong reasons. So fasten your seat belt, or get out of the car. Because Ubisoft is going whether you come on this "magical journey" or not.

Posting your whiny rant about why YOU do not like the game will not change anything, nor should it. Let Ubisoft make the decisions and sink or float on their own merits. If 5 million people play this game, 1 million probably have the same opinion as you, 1 million probably think it's rehashing the same old thing again and again (KILLING GETS SO BORINGZ ZOMG), and 2 million don't really care and just want to devour the next game in the series. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I disagree with your first game point but I see how you can think that. The first game is often much easier to introduce innovation in because there is no canon and no limits to what the game is. Personally I liked Halo 2, Mass Effect 2, and Battlefield Bad Company 2 (off the top of my head) more than I liked the originals. I think you are also missing my point. The series should've obviously changed, but it shouldn't throw away everything it started with. The similarities between the two games are ridiculously small.

Btw I think that to sit there and claim that we can never provide a good enough argument to change someone's mind is stupid and frankly a huge cop out. I'm expressing my opinion that Ubisoft is screwing up and I think that they will understand this if they bother to read.

misterB2001
08-24-2011, 01:23 AM
I also bought ac1 when it first came out, played the first couple of assassiations and thought 'meh' nice idea, but not enough variety.

Despite this, when I saw the ac2 trailer I thought, wow I must get that game. When I played it, it blew my mind. An outstanding game. It gave me the desire to go back and play ac1 again and im glad I did, because its worth it.

AC2 is my favourite, by far. Brotherhood & Revelations, for me, are just side games to tide us over until ac3 is ready, thats how I see it.

AC3 will be epic.

Calvarok
08-24-2011, 01:44 AM
AC2 barely had any linearity in most of its assassinations. It had so many assassiantions that you could do in any way that you wanted. People just get bogged down with the ridiculous amount of content that was in that game, much of it that was indeed more linear. But the majority actually was as or more open than AC1.

Ubisoft got so much right with AC2 it's not even funny. AC2 was the game I played more than I have ever played any single player game. More than 200 hours.

I played AC1 all the way through, and I don't give a crap what you or any other purist says: to me, it was like pulling teeth, with little bits of awesome, like the assassinations. (some of them, some of them were really boring) But the rest of the time was just blue, green, or brown cities, which had nothing to do in them except for repetitive side-missions that some bright-eyed ubisoft guy decided to use instead of proper fleshed out investigation missions for assassinations.

Ubisoft has ruined the previous pillars of Assassin's creed. Those pillars were: "punish the player for trying to use the awesome free movement system, by making guards who are always alert to you spawn in at random times and get you detected when climbing a wall", "People love holding down buttons and calling it stealth", "Content recycling is SOO next gen", and "People enjoy 20 hours of nothing but doom and gloom and murder, humor is out of the question".

Actually, AC2 had a downgraded graphics engine compared to AC1. That's probably one of the reasons you think it is more cartoony.

But honestly, you can't just walk in and tell me that the 200 hours I've enjoyed, and the 20 hours I enjoyed at parts but slogged through at others are WRONG. I EXPERIENCED intense boredom and mehness when I played AC1. That is a fact. I loved the concept, I loved so much about the game, but they didn't make things varied enough on the gameplay or story side. Each target's assassination gets more tiring and tiring as it settles into a cycle of "I saw you being evil. I did it for the greater good *dies* Al mualim, this dude said he did it for the greater good! Altair, they're BSing you. Oh, ok, that's not anywhere near enough of a reason for me to keep killing them, I think I'll go keep killing them"
Until it gets to maria and Robert and Al Mualim, where it's epic.

All I'm saying is that for me, Ubisoft is not going downhill until they release an Assassin's Creed game that I genuinely hate way more than the previous one. So far they've made my favorite sandbox game in AC2, made a sequel that was way better than I thought it would be for a year long dev cycle, even though it wasn't quite as good as AC2, and was too easy, and now they're releasing what looks like the best one so far, and they have more studios and teams working on it than ever before, to make sure it's better than Brotherhood was.

On the subject of lethal bombs: #1, you can only carry 5 at a time, and they cannot be looted from guards because you have to craft them at stations, #2, they've stated that they're trying to give enemies some of the tools that you have in order to make things more challenging. And we've already seen enemies use bombs in a cutscene. Maybe they don't use them for that mission (which is part of the very first mission in the game, so cut it some slack), but they've established that guards have bombs, so...

I'll judge the difficulty of this game when I see the difficulty of this game.

One thing to note, however, is that in Brotherhood, I had to use medicine a whole lot more than before. The guards may not pack enough of a punch, but they sure sting more than they did in AC2. As LightRey has said, AC2's combat was by far the easiest to come out of unscathed.

But yeah, if you thouroghly enjoyed the reskinned investigations over and over again in AC1, It doesn't surprise me that you're not the kind of person who likes what I like. You may rest assured, however, that pretty much every feature of the game and its effect on your play experience existed to a degree that Ubisoft did not intend for it to. When they shipped the game, they knew exactly what they'd done wrong. And the greatest majority of their players told them that they didn't like exactly those things.
I don't know why you enjoy said things, but I'm sorry, maybe you just chose to follow the wrong game series.

Xanatos2007
08-24-2011, 01:59 AM
We never said we like the repetitive level design of AC1's side quests, they were just easier to overlook when compared to the rest of the game (namely story, visuals & atmosphere). AC1 was at least focused, with every side quest contributing to your main objective. AC2 & future instalments on the other hand strive too hard for "variety" that the games can't focus on anything properly and as a result the storyline has to be simplified. Any depth gets shoved onto the sidelines instead of being woven into the narrative like a proper story.

Calvarok
08-24-2011, 02:13 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Xanatos2007:
We never said we like the repetitive level design of AC1's side quests, they were just easier to overlook when compared to the rest of the game (namely story, visuals & atmosphere). AC1 was at least focused, with every side quest contributing to your main objective. AC2 & future instalments on the other hand strive too hard for "variety" that the games can't focus on anything properly and as a result the storyline has to be simplified. Any depth gets shoved onto the sidelines instead of being woven into the narrative like a proper story. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I agree that AC2 was a little too simplified, and that Brotherhood was adequate but that it didn't have much depth, but the level of focus in AC1 exposed the repetitiveness of even the story. As I said, for most of the targets, there is not much variation, other than what offence that they justify comitting.

If a story is really focused, and it STILL drags itself out with side-missions that ostensibly are so important to it, it gets tiring.

I spent so much time sitting on benches listening to people talking about the least helpful things to the mission, with dramatic music and camera framing making it clear that the game was actually trying to present this to me as an integral part of the story, when all it actually is is this guy saying "yeah, there's an object that I left near the assassination area, it is easily climbable" when the object is so obvious that I actually didn't need it to be pointed out, I'd just see it when I got in, game. And besides, the area is climbable without using that bit of info, so it's doubly pointless.

At least AC2 felt like it was bigger than a single string of missions. Killing 9 assassination targets was often one sequence for Ezio. It felt like I was actually living a life, and the cities were varied enough that I felt like I was actually travelling. AC1 cities were mainly distinguisable from whatever overriding lighting color they used: blue, yellow, or green. All in the darker side of each of those. If you turned Acre green, it would take me many minutes to notice, while Venice and florence are immistakable no matter what lighting they're in.

I think that there were definate mistakes in the changes in AC2, but quite a few of those have been rectified in Brotherhood.

And I was able to put up with those mistakes in much the same way that you were able to put up with the investigations being repetitive. The only difference is that in AC2, there's more non-repetitive content than there is messed up gameplay mechanics.

Quite honestly, I think that Assassin's Creed is getting very close to perfect, and that if they stopped relying so heavily on insta-fail stealth and more on making enemies challenging and smarter, it would be almost there.

Black_Widow9
08-24-2011, 02:37 AM
Hello and welcome to the Forums http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif
Please use one of the Feedback threads or the Find button to search for previously created Topics.
Thanks http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

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