PDA

View Full Version : Patrice desilets: "First game is the purest"



eagleforlife1
07-31-2012, 07:19 PM
http://www.edge-online.com/news/assassins-creed-creator-first-game-purest

Can't say I particularly agree with him to be honest.

itsamea-mario
07-31-2012, 07:31 PM
I do.

Assassin_M
07-31-2012, 07:33 PM
I agree with him.

rileypoole1234
07-31-2012, 07:53 PM
I agree. That doesn't mean it's the best though.

MetalCreed
07-31-2012, 07:55 PM
Brutally honest though, it didn't change how AC1 was such a terrible game.

Assassin_M
07-31-2012, 07:57 PM
Brutally honest though, it didn't change how AC1 was such a terrible game.
Actually, what he says doesn't mean that AC I was the best game..

itsamea-mario
07-31-2012, 08:54 PM
Brutally honest though, it didn't change how AC1 was such a terrible game.

In what way was it terrible?

eagleforlife1
07-31-2012, 09:05 PM
In hindsight I think I do agree with him actually, although, I believe that AC2 is the far better game of the two.

eagleforlife1
07-31-2012, 09:06 PM
In what way was it terrible?

It is incredibly repetitive. I usually like to 100% games but after completing AC1 I couldn't go back to it.

GLHS
07-31-2012, 09:19 PM
If there would've been more freedom with weapons and fighting, and missions and actions in general weren't so repetitive, I would agree with him. I have replayed the game many, many times since it's release, and there is a feeling of a certain nostalgia that you don't get with the other games, so it's repetitiveness hasn't kept me from enjoying it. But AC2 is by far the strongest of them all and front-runner for the series.

kriegerdesgottes
07-31-2012, 09:21 PM
I totally agree with him. Good article. I always love hearing from Patrice.

TheHumanTowel
07-31-2012, 09:26 PM
I agree with him in that AC1 is the game truest to the original concept of Assassin's Creed but I don't really agree with the depth he's arguing is there. You kill a guard and other guards start to chase you. Sure that's a story you can tell yourself. What other stories are there? You kill two guards and guards start chasing you? It's not really Shakespeare. AC2 did a much better job of emergent events anyway with the pickpockets and borgia messengers.

SixKeys
07-31-2012, 09:29 PM
I agree with him. The other games were more narrative- than atmosphere-driven and as a consequence, they had to limit player freedom somewhat. It doesn't necessarily mean AC1 is the best game (that's a matter of opinion), just that it did exactly what it set out to do whereas the games that followed pandered more to typical mass market expectations.

I like what he says about AC1 allowing the player to create their own head canon instead of rigidly forcing them to follow a certain path. The thing that's always bugged me about 100% synch since ACB is the idea that there is only one "right" way to do the mission because that's how the ancestor did it. In AC1, the idea was that any way you finished the mission WAS how the ancestor did the mission. That's why AC1 remains fresh to me on every replay. I can change my approach every time and make up my own stories about why Altaïr did it that way. In the other games the cut scenes and full sync limit your imagination.

Aphex_Tim
07-31-2012, 09:58 PM
I have replayed the game many, many times since it's release, and there is a feeling of a certain nostalgia that you don't get with the other games,

Exactly. The sound that plays when picking up a flag or synchronizing a viewpoint brings back some gooood memories. ^^

notafanboy
07-31-2012, 10:04 PM
i know what he means by "small stories". For example , there is some dead crusaders infront of the roman ruins in the kindom near damascus, and if you aproach the bodies, some saracen guards start shooting at you. While i agree that the first AC is the "purest", the mission structure is still repetetive.

Requiscent
07-31-2012, 10:08 PM
AC I was great for its time, but I just can't play it anymore. I tried recently but I couldn't get into it anymore. Shame, it was a good game for the most part. However with all due respect I must disagree with him. Personally I feel AC II was the superior game even if it dropped the "grey" morality.

One of the joys of AC II was fleshing out the mythology of the Assassin's Creed series, it gave good insight into just how far this war had been going on, and who were the major players throughout time.

HaSoOoN-MHD
07-31-2012, 10:08 PM
Non-repetitive missions > freedom.
They sacrificed variety for this ''freedom''
And when you think about it, it was only the killbox.

itsamea-mario
07-31-2012, 10:17 PM
I feel everyone greatly exaggerates AC1's repetitiveness, like over time you keep getting told it is so you believe it more.
Sure the layout is the same each time, Investigate-kill, investigate-kill. But when you boil anything down it becomes repetitive. I found the investigations were fun to play, and though they usually have the same layout, you obviously learn different things from them, things you can use, YOU. every investigation isn't mandatory and you can take the information from them to plan the assassination your way, not the games way.
And when people keep getting saturated with 'repetitiveness, they often forget the other things, such as the immense sense of atmosphere, the beautiful views, and the gritty feel of gameplay. Plus an actual sense of mystery as the subtle story unfolded.

HaSoOoN-MHD
07-31-2012, 10:24 PM
The problem is those ''tips'' were un-needed. Completely, you could just run towards him and kill.
How games are not a big bag of repetitiveness? when it puts you in situations that challenges you to utilize the things you have. VARIED.
The investigations were a really tedious and boring, I love AC1, but even I cant deny it.
And too be fair, everything was grey....

itsamea-mario
07-31-2012, 10:31 PM
The problem is those ''tips'' were un-needed. Completely, you could just run towards him and kill.
How games are not a big bag of repetitiveness? when it puts you in situations that challenges you to utilize the things you have. VARIED.
The investigations were a really tedious and boring, I love AC1, but even I cant deny it.
And too be fair, everything was grey....

Just because you can doesn't mean you have to, it gave you the freedom to choose whether you wanted to run straight at them, or use stealth.

And everything was not grey, maybe in Acre, but jerusalem and Damascus had extremely vibrant colours.

HaSoOoN-MHD
07-31-2012, 10:32 PM
Err..no. Most of it was really...gray. Some less gray than others, but still.
But at what price? being extremely repetitive. Hell, that killed the game for alot of people, and the missions were not really the best thing out there. Collecting flags? come on.

Assassin_M
07-31-2012, 10:34 PM
Actually, If properly analyzed, AC II was repetitive as well. think about it, each NPC had the same layout of Introduction. He/she is in trouble, Help, then help his/her comrades. spread his/her men, and finally attack.

Thats how every Mission after the Pazzi Conspiracy went. With AC I for every Target I`d use a different set of Investigations each time so that it doesnt feel watered out and it worked for me. In my opinion AC I was the best in terms of Atmosphere and context.

TheFrontLine
07-31-2012, 10:36 PM
Err..no. Most of it was really...gray. Some less gray than others, but still.
But at what price? being extremely repetitive. Hell, that killed the game for alot of people, and the missions were not really the best thing out there. Collecting flags? come on.

You dislike the atmosphere, the missions, and collectibles.
Do you really "love AC1"?

itsamea-mario
07-31-2012, 10:36 PM
Err..no. Most of it was really...gray. Some less gray than others, but still.
But at what price? being extremely repetitive. Hell, that killed the game for alot of people, and the missions were not really the best thing out there. Collecting flags? come on.

If it was grey for you then you must have had problems with your screen...

And flags? AC2 had feathers, brotherhood had flags again, I'll give that in revelations the collectibles served a reasonable purpose.
Plus in AC1 you had the 60 Templars you had to find and kill, that was fun.

HaSoOoN-MHD
07-31-2012, 10:36 PM
Not really. 2 missions like that were present, one for the thieves guild, one for the Mercenaries. That is all I remember.
EDIT: The Grey actually works for the game, but saying it's all beautiful is meh.
The collectibles were a pain, and were useless. At the very least you got something in the rest.
60 Templars were fun, tho.
I finished it alot too, because past the extremely repetitive missions, it is really fun.

ShaneO7K
07-31-2012, 10:41 PM
I agree with him, I think it is basically in the part of The Kingdom before the Acre loading screen there is what looks like a pit for what looks like a mass grave that has been dug by the Crusaders and there was a fence around it with a small encampent. Outside Damascus or Jerusalem there is a pretty big encampment that is crowded with guards and I think you get attacked on sight if you enter.It's the small things like those that I love about AC1. I usually have 2-3 playthroughs of AC1 a year and I haven't really got bored of it yet, a great sense of nostalgia comes when playing it.

AC1 was also great on the eyes, the cities looked great and each had their own unique atmosphere.

Assassin_M
07-31-2012, 10:50 PM
I think this really comes down to variety of Opinions. I think AC I indeed presents the Pure form of the Assassins Creed element. It gave off a beautiful Atmosphere that represented a dark time in the Levant which showed how each city operated under such circumstances. The Colors indeed gave it off perfectly and the Soundtrack was spot-on for each place. I truly felt like I was in a holy place when visiting Jerusalem, I felt the glory of the Arab Civilization in Damascus and I felt the Awe and pain of war when visiting Acre, a city that was sieged before the events of the game. The original AC presented a formula of duty, a set of rules that were fun to follow in each Mission.

The Collectibles were indeed meh, but not for their relevance but because they had no reward.

All in all AC I was a splendid game to play and If I found that game horrible then no way on earth would I have continued till now..

LoyalACFan
07-31-2012, 11:03 PM
I'll agree with him that AC1 offered the most freedom, but the unscripted things he mentioned (like killing the guy on the stage and running from his followers) are literally the ONLY fun part of the game. I still go back to AC1 on occasion to mess around in the Kingdom and explore the cities, but I will never play through the story again. Pick-pocketing targets, eavesdropping, saving civilians, doing tasks for those annoying Assassin informants... All of it was painfully boring after the first few times. Every single game of the Ezio trilogy (even the oft-criticized Revelations) far surpassed AC1 in my eyes. Yes, we lost a lot of the unscripted content, but we at least got missions that were bearable to replay.

YRTEP
08-01-2012, 12:40 AM
I totally agree with him.

The idea behind AC was to make a social-stealth game (series). In terms of that AC(1) was the best and purest AC game.

HaSoOoN-MHD
08-01-2012, 01:01 AM
When they based the game on Hashashin they sort of doomed the Social Stealth aspect.
The Hashashin were not the stealthiest bunch.

Cornik22
08-01-2012, 01:03 AM
Guys, I've been doing some research and look what I found. It looks like Desilets is developing a new historical sandbox franchise for THQ. The first game will be callled 1666, and it will take place in XVII century London, during the Stuart period. Also, the Great Fire of London will be the most important event of the game. Sounds cool to me :)

HaSoOoN-MHD
08-01-2012, 01:05 AM
Guys, I've been doing some research and look what I found. It looks like Desilets is developing a new historical sandbox franchise for THQ. The first game will be callled 1666, and it will take place in XVII century London, during the Stuart period. Also, the Great Fire of London will be the most important event of the game. Sounds cool to me :)

Seriously patrice? oh why dont you add the idea of having a machine that helps you out? maybe add a character called Desmind -___-
If you want to make a new series, do so. But dont stick too the past.
I may be wrong and be completely different, but who knows...

kriegerdesgottes
08-01-2012, 01:25 AM
Guys, I've been doing some research and look what I found. It looks like Desilets is developing a new historical sandbox franchise for THQ. The first game will be callled 1666, and it will take place in XVII century London, during the Stuart period. Also, the Great Fire of London will be the most important event of the game. Sounds cool to me :)

Nothing has been confirmed that I have seen. 1666 has just popped up as a name for an upcoming game but as far as I've read, it has not been traced to whatever Patrice is working on and no one knows anything about the game. I believe a couple different names were saved like 1666 Amsterdam and something else. We will have to wait and see until we jump to conclusions. It might be from him though and that is the year that London burnt to the ground so we will have to wait and see. Patrice did say in an article that whatever he's working on it won't be about a person who kills for money but it'll be an action adventure game. I can't wait to see what he does with all the freedom he's getting from THQ.

HaSoOoN-MHD
08-01-2012, 01:27 AM
Wait...THQ...can make good games?
Other than Darksiders, since when?
Just make it distinctive. No better way too ruin your reputation by blatantly stealing another franchise.

Chocoburger
08-01-2012, 01:35 AM
I liked how AC 1 developed the villains more than the other games in the series. I also spent over 120 hours running around in AC 1 trying to collect every flag and kill every templar without using a guide, and loved it (until the last few hours--where I just ended up hating the experience). Eventually I ended up collecting 99/100 flags and 99/100 templars, then used a guide to help me search each spot.

I think for fans of AC 1, the limited nature of the game forced us to 'create our own events'. Though, I don't see why you cant do the same for AC II, AC:B and AC:R as well (which I did).

beatledude210
08-01-2012, 01:58 AM
As much as I respect Patrice and love his games (including AC1) I have to say I do not see eye to eye with him on this statement.

Calvarok
08-01-2012, 04:53 AM
I agree, but seriously, one man's purity is another man's unfocused.
I would have defined the game by the latter. The tools in the game aren't quite involving enough for me to really enjoy AC1 to the fullest, because it does give you so much freedom. AC3 will make me want more, since everything seems quite rethought and upgraded, enough that more freedom would be more interesting.

GLHS
08-01-2012, 09:40 AM
I'm not so sure that lack of innovation and good scripting skills are an excuse for "making up your own stories as you play through the game." Ok, so I can run by 50 guards and either fight, run and hide, or do both. K, what now? Oh yeah, the same thing. No matter where you are, how far you are in the game, what city...everything is the same. Sure, the cities themselves are pretty, but come on. There's a poor district, a middle district, and a rich district to each of them. Then there's the kingdom, Masyaf, and Arsuf. That's it. The gards are the same, saying the same things every place. There are only a few approches to each different target, and there's (in most cases) only one or 2 ways in. Scholars, being the most popular with the later targets. There's a stealth approach or an action approach. That's it. Flags and Templars would be greatly improved if they even bothered to give a reason for collecting them. But they don't. They were put there for the 360 users to gain achievements, but left them having no purpose (other than to go on a collecting spree, normally once) for PS3 users. And they won't give the game a trophy list so we can have a reason to do it again. They had their opportunity when they re-released it with AC:R. They can still do it now. And as I recall, AC1 is on many a fan's list for older games that need trophy support. MGS4 fans have been waiting years, and it's finally getting here in August.

The game presents a certain nostalgia with sights and sounds that allow it it's replayability. But without that, it has very little going for it.

eagleforlife1
08-01-2012, 09:43 AM
I'm not so sure that lack of innovation and good scripting skills are an excuse for "making up your own stories as you play through the game." Ok, so I can run by 50 guards and either fight, run and hide, or do both. K, what now? Oh yeah, the same thing. No matter where you are, how far you are in the game, what city...everything is the same. Sure, the cities themselves are pretty, but come on. There's a poor district, a middle district, and a rich district to each of them. Then there's the kingdom, Masyaf, and Arsuf. That's it. The gards are the same, saying the same things every place. There are only a few approches to each different target, and there's (in most cases) only one or 2 ways in. Scholars, being the most popular with the later targets. There's a stealth approach or an action approach. That's it. Flags and Templars would be greatly improved if they even bothered to give a reason for collecting them. But they don't. They were put there for the 360 users to gain achievements, but left them having no purpose (other than to go on a collecting spree, normally once) for PS3 users. And they won't give the game a trophy list so we can have a reason to do it again. They had their opportunity when they re-released it with AC:R. They can still do it now. And as I recall, AC1 is on many a fan's list for older games that need trophy support. MGS4 fans have been waiting years, and it's finally getting here in August.

The game presents a certain nostalgia with sights and sounds that allow it it's replayability. But without that, it has very little going for it.

^ This; well said.

HaSoOoN-MHD
08-01-2012, 09:49 AM
Actually, I just thought of that...
Cant you make ''stories'' through civilians? like, imagine a narrative in your head, do some investigation like things, then Assassinate this civilian as a target.
The only problem is those would be really, really lame.
The only actual freedom was in the targets. Which you can literally just run towards and be fine.

ProletariatPleb
08-01-2012, 11:19 AM
I agree with Desilets. Sure there were plenty of things that could've been change/fixed, but it was a brand new IP with a completely new idea, so expecting it to be perfect would be asking too much.

The atmosphere and moral greyness in AC1 was better than AC2 IMO
AC2 felt a lot more...black & white to me.

HaSoOoN-MHD
08-01-2012, 11:28 AM
Is it just me, or is AC1 sort of suffering the ''It's old=becomes better''
In 2007, people were ripping through the game...why is it suddenly so good?
Sid, the flaws were not ''small'' per say, they were major. Being a new IP is in no way a excuse for poor mission structure.

ProletariatPleb
08-01-2012, 11:35 AM
Is it just me, or is AC1 sort of suffering the ''It's old=becomes better''
In 2007, people were ripping through the game...why is it suddenly so good?
Sid, the flaws were not ''small'' per say, they were major. Being a new IP is in no way a excuse for poor mission structure.

Never said anything even remotely close to "small", and before you go on about "repetitive" blah blah, let me tell you, the PC format had 4 added missions types over the the original so I hardly felt that it was repetitive, and I'm only saying that it was a completely new IP with a new idea so it will have flaws. Quit taking whatever I say out of content. I have always liked AC1, and probably always will, just because a few people didn't like it doesn't mean I don't like it too.

HaSoOoN-MHD
08-01-2012, 11:38 AM
I never said anything about you, never said ''SID USED TO HATE IT AND NOW LOVES IT!'' now you are taking what I said out of context. Back then it was more hated than loved, if anything. Mostly because Raymond just LOVED hyping up the game so much.
....That is because you are on PC? meaning the rest of us eat dust with the lame missions we got. And I imagine if it gets stale at one point.
I am not sure who inspired the idea of the missions.

ProletariatPleb
08-01-2012, 11:41 AM
I never said anything about you, never said ''SID USED TO HATE IT AND NOW LOVES IT!'' now you are taking what I said out of context. Back then it was more hated than loved, if anything. Mostly because Raymond just LOVED hyping up the game so much.
....That is because you are on PC? meaning the rest of us eat dust with the lame missions we got. And I imagine if it gets stale at one point.
I am not sure who inspired the idea of the missions.
Yeah well, you get back what you do unto someone else >_>
On-topic: The PC format came ~5-6months after the original and it had 4 more mission types, don't blame me, I'm only saying I never felt it was repetitive because of that and therefore can't relate to what people mean when they say it's repetitive.

HaSoOoN-MHD
08-01-2012, 11:45 AM
Trust me, if you did play it on console, you would have almost killed your self.
I do wish we get the old killbox back, tho :( maybe a bit revamped, tho.

MasterSimaYi
08-01-2012, 11:47 AM
Trust me, if you did play it on console, you would have almost killed your self.

I never found anything in the game repetitive. I enjoyed everything, probably due to the game being so refreshing and all the locations being so different. Not every console player hates the game, you know.

HaSoOoN-MHD
08-01-2012, 11:52 AM
Even tho I really hated the mission structure, I still loved the game. It really felt fresh and unique, and it made up for the terrible mission structure in other departments.
And is it just me...or does it actually look better than Brotherhood in graphics? sort of what I felt while playing it.
Maybe 5 years in the future we may get a remake.

MasterSimaYi
08-01-2012, 11:54 AM
Maybe 5 years in the future we may get a remake.

As I said before, if they would change the missions:

Remake = reboot = retconning canon = bad.

No retcons pl0x. Not every game has to be perfect, focus on new games instead.

HaSoOoN-MHD
08-01-2012, 12:00 PM
Then maybe a remake with the ACIII engine? dont change anything, just the engine.

TheHumanTowel
08-01-2012, 12:16 PM
No AC1 is perfectly fine the way it is. There is no need once this first trilogy is finished to go back and rerelease any games. AC1's graphics and gameplay still holds up. The developers should focus on taking the series in a new direction.

HaSoOoN-MHD
08-01-2012, 12:22 PM
What do you mean by new direction? I would like to hear it.
Sort of like a 10 years thing, you know.

TheHumanTowel
08-01-2012, 12:31 PM
What do you mean by new direction? I would like to hear it.
Sort of like a 10 years thing, you know.
I don't mean anything specific just for the devs to work on new stories and explore new settings in future games. I think it would be a bad idea to needlessly rerelease past games.

HaSoOoN-MHD
08-01-2012, 12:37 PM
Not really, it's just AC1 with a new engine, as a 10 years celebration. Not like releasing the last 5 games, just that one for that special occasion.

BATISTABUS
08-01-2012, 12:45 PM
I prefer a number of things about the first game, but freedom definitely isn't one of them. AC1 is a sandbox with no incentive to explore and nothing to do. In all of the games you can run around just because it's fun, but AC1 has the smallest map. I really don't know what he's talking about.

Serrachio
08-01-2012, 01:36 PM
I'd say, the only thing that AC1 needs is trophy support for PS3 owners and subtitles.

Then again, I wouldn't mind them expanding the investigation types on consoles if it still gave the same information they provided before.

DavisP92
08-01-2012, 01:46 PM
welcome back hasoon. Either way I do think that AC1 has something that all of the other games don’t. It allowed the player, speaking from my experience, actually to plan out their approach before attacking the target. That is what made AC1 so enjoyable to me, I could kill the archers on a certain path and the guards on a certain street so that when I kill the templar I can run along the path I created for myself ahead of time.

AC2 had somewhat destroyed that concept by sometimes ending the mission as soon as you kill the target, and ACB and ACR re-spawned the guards after you killed the templar. I hope AC3 brings back the preparation concept, allow me to shoot an arrow at two guards on in a certain alleyway so that i can run through it without any trouble but we’ll see.

Story wise and gameplay variety, AC2 was better but I think AC1 had more potential.

HaSoOoN-MHD
08-01-2012, 01:51 PM
The problem is it was not really relevant. When you can just run past everything with the same results.
The killbox was there...but no real reason too utilize it.
I much rather prefer variety over something that I did not find to hold much relevance.

dxsxhxcx
08-01-2012, 01:58 PM
if they ever do a remake (or if someday they plan to bring the investigations back) they could add a little variety in the investigations, it doesn't need to be something entirelly new but give us the option to do the same thing eavesdrop/steal letters/etc with different ways like intereacting with the NPCs for example, imagine a situation where Altair (or other ancestor in the case of a new game with investigations) need to steal a letter, you can go and steal it yourself (stealthy), pay an NPC (a kid) to steal it for you or even pretend you're drunk and start a fight with the person who has the letter and steal it while you're fighting, instead of eavesdrop meetings only from benches we should be able to do it while we also are at a safe distance or even disguise ourselves as one of the "target" guards or maybe a city guard, when we want to obtain information of someone instead of just punch them to death we could bribe them or even convince them (what would involve dialogue options) to give us the information... with more options to achieve the same thing this wouldn't make things so repetive...

and they can always add new things like for example, intercept a letter before reach its destiny, change its content to our benefit and deliver the letter to the target.

example: we obtain a letter that was being sent to our target where they are trying to decide where our target and the person who sent the letter should meet, we intercept both letters and change it to a place of our choice in the map (the places would be pre-defined by the devs, but they could add 9 or 10 places to add some replay value), of course this would only work with fictional targets or real targets where the exact place of the death isn't clear, but IMo it would be cool to do something like this...

HaSoOoN-MHD
08-01-2012, 02:00 PM
The idea may sound cool with choices, but we are viewing memories, not making them.

dxsxhxcx
08-01-2012, 02:17 PM
The idea may sound cool with choices, but we are viewing memories, not making them.

true, for a moment I forgot about that.. xD

but IMO I wouldn't mind if they do this with "little" things like this that doesn't drastically affect the continuation of the story (just to add replay value and avoid the game being repetitive) and also are done just one time (the investigations as a whole) for each target and will always lead to the same end (the death of the target)... I bet many players killed their targets in the most different ways during each playthrough and this didn't stop them to tell the same story at the end...

MT4K
08-01-2012, 02:27 PM
The idea may sound cool with choices, but we are viewing memories, not making them.

They could have all the options available and just use the full sync system to say how the ancestor really did it. Just because the ancestor did something a certain way doesn't mean we should not be able to choose how we ourselves want to play it out. Just won't get full sync by doing it our own way.

HaSoOoN-MHD
08-01-2012, 02:29 PM
But choices have a too big of an impact. Sort of like killing civilians.

Serrachio
08-01-2012, 02:44 PM
They could have all the options available and just use the full sync system to say how the ancestor really did it. Just because the ancestor did something a certain way doesn't mean we should not be able to choose how we ourselves want to play it out. Just won't get full sync by doing it our own way.

No thanks. The Full Sync system pretends like it's giving you a choice, but the game makes out that you're not doing the mission right if you deviate from it, by rewarding 100% completion with achievements. I don't want to see that with Altair.

Personally, I prefer AC1 and AC2, because while you might be desynchronized in missions where utmost stealth is required, if you make yourself known to your target, you could still chase after them and assassinate them, unless they got too far away. Those games aren't trying to force you to "play right" because they offered plenty of chances to complete the mission in an alternate way.

MT4K
08-01-2012, 02:47 PM
But choices have a too big of an impact. Sort of like killing civilians.

Hence the full sync system.

If Connor gathered information by pickpocketing. Then that can be what you have to do for full sync. However if i want to gather the same information another way by eavesdropping or pretending to be one of the guards with that guy, then ishould be fully allowed. If i want full sync then i'll just replay it and use the pickpocket method the way the ancestor actually did it.

I Cannot see what the problem would be with this. If i choose to gather the information another way then it doesn't really affect the overall story since it is still the same information.

@Serrachio - I'm really just giving an idea of why the idea of options would not be as bad as Hasooon is kind of making it seem. I am not the biggest fan of full sync myself :P.

HaSoOoN-MHD
08-01-2012, 02:50 PM
Those just seem like they would go TOO off, just like killing civilians. Its beyond what the Animus can change. There is a limit too the Animus, you know.

MT4K
08-01-2012, 02:53 PM
Those just seem like they would go TOO off, just like killing civilians. Its beyond what the Animus can change. There is a limit too the Animus, you know.

But that was the entire point of the full sync system to begin with. To show players how the ancestor really did something and yet not stopping you from doing it differently. The only penalty supposedly being 50% sync instead of 100%.

That was really why they came up with that entire idea as far as i know.

DarkSolitude-X
08-01-2012, 02:55 PM
I feel everyone greatly exaggerates AC1's repetitiveness, like over time you keep getting told it is so you believe it more.
Sure the layout is the same each time, Investigate-kill, investigate-kill. But when you boil anything down it becomes repetitive. I found the investigations were fun to play, and though they usually have the same layout, you obviously learn different things from them, things you can use, YOU. every investigation isn't mandatory and you can take the information from them to plan the assassination your way, not the games way.
And when people keep getting saturated with 'repetitiveness, they often forget the other things, such as the immense sense of atmosphere, the beautiful views, and the gritty feel of gameplay. Plus an actual sense of mystery as the subtle story unfolded.

Talk to the rafiq then picketpocket, eavesdrop, interrogate. Wash and rinse for a total of nine times. Yeah, it gets very repetitive. I liked the atmosphere, but good lord, I can only do something that is exactly the same, so many times before I get tired of it.

HaSoOoN-MHD
08-01-2012, 02:55 PM
Yes, but even full sync has a limit. If full sync did not have a limit, we would not get de-synced. Ever. Which we do. Meaning some stuff, are just too much.
EDIT: Since I reached my post limit, using edits.
It would make sense maybe, if Connor could kill civilians for example, but having certain limitations and certain others just feels...disjointed.
Re-edit: Not really, you are not really ''telling'' your story because those are pre-set. Do not involve any options and have one way and outcome.

MT4K
08-01-2012, 03:00 PM
Yes, but even full sync has a limit. If full sync did not have a limit, we would not get de-synced. Ever. Which we do. Meaning some stuff, are just too much.

I see no reason why they cannot expand that limitation though. They are upgrading the Animus all the time in each successive game. Either way though it doesn't really bother me :D.

dxsxhxcx
08-01-2012, 03:02 PM
Those just seem like they would go TOO off, just like killing civilians. Its beyond what the Animus can change. There is a limit too the Animus, you know.

you aren't forced to do all the investigations to have access to the assassination mission so in a way you already are telling a different story each time you play and do only "n" number of investigations instead of all of them...

LoyalACFan
08-01-2012, 04:20 PM
Every time I see the title of this thread, I mentally set it to the tune of "First Cut is the Deepest." :nonchalance:

Serrachio
08-01-2012, 04:25 PM
Every time I see the title of this thread, I mentally set it to the tune of "First Cut is the Deepest." :nonchalance:

That's nice.

SteelCity999
08-01-2012, 05:10 PM
AC1 did more things right than people give it credit for. It was repetitive but AC2 and every other game that has followed since has been as well - in varying degrees and masked by different settings and circumstances. Unfortunately, from what Patrice is saying, great idea but there's no good way to execute such freedom to make your own story. Imagine getting dropped off in a large strange city and being expected to know everything you are supposed to see and go do with no guidance - you will miss stuff. You can stay non-linear but you need to make the player aware that something exists. Like RDR, yeah you had random events but you were made aware that you should stop. AC1 requires alot of patience and the story was ultimately what kept you going forward.

SixKeys
08-01-2012, 06:17 PM
I always liked the deep pit in the Kingdom near Acre precisely because they never explained it. What was it? Why was it there? You could choose to completely ignore it or you could take the risk of running into a camp full of guards and Templars just to satisfy your curiosity. In the end all you got was a couple of flags, but the mystery remained. I like to think that was where they found one of the Pieces of Eden, but Altaïr wouldn't have known about it at that point. That's the kind of stuff I miss in the later games, making up your own narrative and feeling like you're picking up clues for something that's not outright explained to you, unraveling the story yourself.

About the pointlessness of collecting flags in AC1: Patrice once admitted in an interview (http://www.joystiq.com/2009/06/10/interview-assassins-creed-2-creative-director-patrice-desilet/) that the flags were completely pointless on purpose. It was his way of commenting on how every game at the time was too much based on achievements and collectables. He put the flags in the game, but collecting them had no purpose to show to people that a game should be about more than achievements.

Full sync is another kind of achievement-driven toy. I think it's a lot more rewarding for the player when they tell themselves to perform a mission in a certain way (only use throwing knives, don't kill anyone, kill your target with your bare fists etc.) instead of being limited by the game. I especially hate it when the game tells me to perform the mission in a high-profile way like "kill everyone in the room with melee attacks" when I think it's far more challenging to sneak in unnoticed, poison my target and sneak out before the guards even notice anything. I, as the player, should be in control of my actions. What adds replay value to the game is not doing the mission the same way every time, but creating your own challenges and saying "this is how *I* think a real assassin would do it, hence this is how Altaïr/Ezio/Connor must have done it". The game should reward me for being creative and sometimes coming up with better solutions to a problem than the developers' suggestions, not punish me with 50% sync as if I'm doing something wrong by not following their rigid restrictions.

HaSoOoN-MHD
08-01-2012, 11:23 PM
...But the ''create your narrative'' was just so limited, and the ''freedom'' was not really big. Could have been done much better.
What you are describing sounds very familiar to what Deus Ex is. It does not hold your hand, at all. You just be creative, find different routes and ways, get rewarded.

Assassin_M
08-01-2012, 11:26 PM
...But the ''create your narrative'' was just so limited, and the ''freedom'' was not really big. Could have been done much better.
What you are describing sounds very familiar to what Deus Ex is. It does not hold your hand, at all. You just be creative, find different routes and ways, get rewarded.
Like I said, In the end it comes down to opinion and how you played the game..

YuurHeen
08-01-2012, 11:51 PM
I would not say that the freedom to make your own stories is why ac1 is the best of the franchise. That it is the most mature and that it makes you feel as just as a small part in a big conflict would do it more. while ezio was more like a superhero with a funny accent killing whoever he disliked whenever and wherever he wanted.

AlphaAltair
08-02-2012, 12:21 AM
I agree with Desilets 100%. AC1 was the thinking mans AC, imo it was only repetitive if you rushed through it without taking the time to enjoy the scenery. The sheer variety of ways to approach missions and the sense of freedom are aspects that are sorely missed in the subsequent games.

RatonhnhakeFan
08-02-2012, 01:13 AM
Purest? Yes, I would agree. But just not the best game...

Assassin_M
08-02-2012, 01:20 AM
Purest? Yes, I would agree. But just not the best game...
Who ever said it was ? We have been nagging since the first page that purest doesn't mean the best, but people just wont listen. and Im sure that's not what the article means.

HaSoOoN-MHD
08-02-2012, 11:01 AM
This could is sort of a corporate move. I mean, he left Ubisoft, no?
And know saying stuff like ''AC1 was the purest'' and what not seem kinda like: ''Yeah, the games I worked on had X and X and X, now I work for THQ, buy their stuff!''

TheHumanTowel
08-02-2012, 12:36 PM
This could is sort of a corporate move. I mean, he left Ubisoft, no?
And know saying stuff like ''AC1 was the purest'' and what not seem kinda like: ''Yeah, the games I worked on had X and X and X, now I work for THQ, buy their stuff!''
I think that's quite cynical. Why shouldn't he be allowed to express his thoughts on games he worked on? Especially Assassin's Creed. He basically created it.

HaSoOoN-MHD
08-02-2012, 12:39 PM
I am just stating one possibility, not nessecarily true or even what I believe, but just listing it down.

GLHS
08-02-2012, 01:11 PM
About the pointlessness of collecting flags in AC1: Patrice once admitted in an interview (http://www.joystiq.com/2009/06/10/interview-assassins-creed-2-creative-director-patrice-desilet/) that the flags were completely pointless on purpose. It was his way of commenting on how every game at the time was too much based on achievements and collectables. He put the flags in the game, but collecting them had no purpose to show to people that a game should be about more than achievements.


This is so stupid. That's the dumbest reason to include something. And if that were entirely true, they wouldn't have made achievements for said collectables for the 360 version. I can see something small being added for comedic and easter egg purposes, but to add like 300 collectable flags in a game for no reason other than to mock other games that actually have a purpose for collectables is just absurd. And to have everybody that doesn't get any rewards for them running around like mad to collect them, without properly explaining the supposed comedy behind it is even worse. Most easter eggs are hidden, but well understood by those that find them. That's just a waste of time on the parts of the players, as well as a waste of development time, energy, and creativity on the parts of the developers. They should've used that time and game space to create something useful. Say, more mission types, or more varied dialogue for NPC's and guards, for example.

AlphaAltair
08-03-2012, 03:19 PM
I always liked the deep pit in the Kingdom near Acre precisely because they never explained it. What was it? Why was it there? You could choose to completely ignore it or you could take the risk of running into a camp full of guards and Templars just to satisfy your curiosity. In the end all you got was a couple of flags, but the mystery remained. I like to think that was where they found one of the Pieces of Eden, but Altaïr wouldn't have known about it at that point. That's the kind of stuff I miss in the later games, making up your own narrative and feeling like you're picking up clues for something that's not outright explained to you, unraveling the story yourself.

About the pointlessness of collecting flags in AC1: Patrice once admitted in an interview (http://www.joystiq.com/2009/06/10/interview-assassins-creed-2-creative-director-patrice-desilet/) that the flags were completely pointless on purpose. It was his way of commenting on how every game at the time was too much based on achievements and collectables. He put the flags in the game, but collecting them had no purpose to show to people that a game should be about more than achievements.

Full sync is another kind of achievement-driven toy. I think it's a lot more rewarding for the player when they tell themselves to perform a mission in a certain way (only use throwing knives, don't kill anyone, kill your target with your bare fists etc.) instead of being limited by the game. I especially hate it when the game tells me to perform the mission in a high-profile way like "kill everyone in the room with melee attacks" when I think it's far more challenging to sneak in unnoticed, poison my target and sneak out before the guards even notice anything. I, as the player, should be in control of my actions. What adds replay value to the game is not doing the mission the same way every time, but creating your own challenges and saying "this is how *I* think a real assassin would do it, hence this is how Altaïr/Ezio/Connor must have done it". The game should reward me for being creative and sometimes coming up with better solutions to a problem than the developers' suggestions, not punish me with 50% sync as if I'm doing something wrong by not following their rigid restrictions.

Makes good sense to me!

As I said earlier AC1 is the THINKING mans AC!

CrazySN
08-03-2012, 06:03 PM
I disagree with Patrice. Just because they added more objectives in the second game, didn't mean they gave the players less freedom. There was still plenty more to do with each iteration of Assassin's Creed, and with each added feature, was plenty of more stories for a player to make in the game. I remember spending tons of more hours in AC2 than in AC1, just screwing around, throwing money, having an army of henchmen fighting guards, running around with thieves, etc. There was much less things in AC1 to toy around with, which is why I'm spending so much time praising AC3. In AC3, I'll have much more things to toy around with, like weather, weapons, companions, etc. With that, I can create many more varied stories than I ever could with AC1.

HaSoOoN-MHD
08-04-2012, 12:51 AM
Not sure how AC1 is a thinking mans AC...
It still held your hand, sort of :nonchalance:
But it did do it much less than the other games.

GLHS
08-04-2012, 08:52 AM
I disagree with Patrice. Just because they added more objectives in the second game, didn't mean they gave the players less freedom. There was still plenty more to do with each iteration of Assassin's Creed, and with each added feature, was plenty of more stories for a player to make in the game. I remember spending tons of more hours in AC2 than in AC1, just screwing around, throwing money, having an army of henchmen fighting guards, running around with thieves, etc. There was much less things in AC1 to toy around with, which is why I'm spending so much time praising AC3. In AC3, I'll have much more things to toy around with, like weather, weapons, companions, etc. With that, I can create many more varied stories than I ever could with AC1.

See that's how I feel. If anything, there's less freedom b/c there's less to do and less options. And before anybody gets on my about 100% synch, it's not even about that. That's an added feature that you either can ignore, or fulfill. Nobody even started complaining about it till after AC:R got it's bad rep. So don't start. There's less things to do in AC1 than any other game, and there's many less ways to screw around. So don't use 100% synch as an excuse for less freedom, cuz they even give you an option to not do it, unless you're actually going for it.