PDA

View Full Version : Assassin's Creed 3 boss talks series' future, annualisation plans, no more trilogies



anik_lc
09-28-2012, 06:58 PM
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-09-28-assassins-creed-3-boss-talks-series-future-annualisation-plans-no-more-trilogies

LoyalACFan
09-28-2012, 07:25 PM
"We have next year's game planned out already because we never want to develop a game in less than a year, but we have to wait and see what the reception to Connor is first..."

Baww, come on Alex, we're not THAT stupid. We all know you lot are making a Connor game for next year :rolleyes:

ACfan443
09-28-2012, 07:26 PM
"Our goal is to ship a game every year"
"The series' initial success was gratifying and then when we were told we'd be doing it every year"

This has pretty much confirmed an AC release next year. Oh Ubisoft, why? Just let there be a break!

Lass4r
09-28-2012, 07:35 PM
I'm confused.
So, they've told us several times the AC franchise is annual. Alex told us here that they don't want a development cycle of just one year however. Still, by the sounds of it, they haven't gone into discussions about the next game yet.

So we can take from that that there will not be a game next year? Or is he just trying to confuse us by telling us they have yet to do the discussions?
It doesn't make sense....


Great interview btw!

HisSpiritLives
09-28-2012, 07:37 PM
"Our goal is to ship a game every year"
"The series' initial success was gratifying and then when we were told we'd be doing it every year"

This has pretty much confirmed an AC release next year. Oh Ubisoft, why? Just let there be a break!

I dont want break.Llike Alex said if they can deliver good game next year why they shouldnt release it.

Layytez
09-28-2012, 07:37 PM
Man I can't keep up with these Oct/Nov releases. They come out as soon as serious work in uni starts :(.

HisSpiritLives
09-28-2012, 07:37 PM
I'm confused.
So, they've told us several times the AC franchise is annual. Alex told us here that they don't want a development cycle of just one year however. Still, by the sounds of it, they haven't gone into discussions about the next game yet.

So we can take from that that there will not be a game next year? Or is he just trying to confuse us by telling us they have yet to do the discussions?
It doesn't make sense....


Great interview btw!

There is game coming next year trust me.

LoyalACFan
09-28-2012, 07:39 PM
I dont want break.Llike Alex said if they can deliver good game next year why they shouldnt release it.

The question is whether they actually can deliver a quality game in that amount of time. It sounds like a good idea when he says it, but I don't think they'll be able to pull off another game that will feel adequate as a follow-up to the monstrous AC 3 in such a short time.

rileypoole1234
09-28-2012, 07:47 PM
Cool, unlike most people I want as much AC as I can get. If there's another game next year so be it.

Assassin_M
09-28-2012, 07:52 PM
Cool, unlike most people I want as much AC as I can get. If there's another game next year so be it.
Ditto..

I dont want a radical change with every game. If I`ll have fun, gimme more. So far, I have not been disappointed..

pacmanate
09-28-2012, 07:53 PM
I hope it doesn't turn out to be a brotherhood :\ that just felt like DLC, and Revelations IMO had a **** story.

eagleforlife1
09-28-2012, 07:54 PM
Ditto..

I dont want a radical change with every game. If I`ll have fun, gimme more. So far, I have not been disappointed..

My thoughts precisely.

ACfan443
09-28-2012, 07:58 PM
The quality may be good, but the problem I have is that (in my opinion) yearly cycles bring AC down to COD and FIFA's level, it just doesn't feel special anymore, especially when you know 'oh they'll just release another one next year...and the year after'

twenty_glyphs
09-28-2012, 08:14 PM
I'm confused.
So, they've told us several times the AC franchise is annual. Alex told us here that they don't want a development cycle of just one year however. Still, by the sounds of it, they haven't gone into discussions about the next game yet.

So we can take from that that there will not be a game next year? Or is he just trying to confuse us by telling us they have yet to do the discussions?
It doesn't make sense....


Great interview btw!

To me, it kind of sounded like he was saying next year's potential game is being planned and worked on already, but a second Connor game depends on fan reaction and might come out after 2013 instead of next year. That might even help alleviate some of the yearly fatigue with the same protagonists if they take a break from Connor for next year's game, then pick up Connor's story at a new chapter in his life instead of immediately where it left off.

I have no problem with yearly releases as long as the quality stays at least at the level of Brotherhood and doesn't dip to the level of Revelations. If they can keep games at the scope and size of AC2 every year with overlapping development teams, that would be awesome. Hopefully now that they are planning for yearly releases they can plan out better arcs to keep from having another Ezio trilogy over three straight years. For me, one year feels like forever between games, especially since I only buy about 3-5 games each year.

BATISTABUS
09-28-2012, 08:16 PM
I hope it doesn't turn out to be a brotherhood :\ that just felt like DLC, and Revelations IMO had a **** story.
Brotherhood added almost an equal amount of story (with dungeons and other side-missions) and an entire successful multiplayer mode.

Revelations had a better story than ACII, which honestly had the most forgettable story in the series. Revelations had the best cinematics (camera angles, face capture, music), characterization, and all-around voice acting. Textures and buildings looked really nice (except for the Altair memory bits...I prefer the look of AC1). They even started going back to that AC1 notion of Templars being more misguided than evil. The biggest failings with Revelations were the multiplayer, Den Defense, the Desmond levels (should've been a downloadable game on its own SEPARATE from ACR), putting one of the biggest twists in the franchise's history in the DLC, and the familiarity (as Hutchinson said). I love both Kyd's and Balfe's music tracks, but I wish just one of them had scored the game.

On a side note, I really think the reasons players liked Ezio so much more than Altair was because of the games themselves and the difference in the quality of voice actors. If AC1 wasn't so repetitive and Shahbaz played the part well, we might've got Bloodlines on the home consoles. Altair had a fantastic story with fantastic growth, but you REALLY had to be invested in the game. A player needed to really pay attention to what he was saying (instead of how he said it) to fully understand and appreciate what was happening.

INDIANA_PRIDE
09-28-2012, 08:37 PM
I have loved all of the AC games so I wouldn't be mad if there was another AC game next year and the year after that.

tarrero
09-28-2012, 08:50 PM
I would like a game every 2 or 3 years......
We will have to wait.

Assassin_M
09-28-2012, 08:51 PM
I would like a game every 2 or 3 years......
We will have to wait.
You will, Not me:p

tarrero
09-28-2012, 08:56 PM
You will, Not me:p

Haha I know :P

jantherocker
09-28-2012, 09:14 PM
i believe this is nothing shocking :D

it`s one of their biggest and best selling Brand of games if not THE best

the Universe is rich and the possible Storys almost endless(If you look closly History has a lot to tell^^)

im fine with that :D

unlike many others i enjoyed Brotherhood and Loved Revelations(i just seem to not understand the hate some people have for it)

freddie_1897
09-28-2012, 09:51 PM
i am fine with them making annual games but on one condition:

it follows a separate story. put it this way, all the numbered games are the big ones. the main story and so on. and any spin offs that come out annually are named (like revelations and brotherhood) but follow a separate, less in depth story. maybe each game could be of separate assassins from around the globe going in the animus to find information, rather than each spin off game being about the main story but not as important,

dxsxhxcx
09-28-2012, 11:20 PM
IMO they should have at least 2 years of developing time, less than that and we'll be seeing features like "den defense" and "desmond journey" being implemented often (if you know what I mean), release AC3 in 2012, then a new game in 2014 and the next on 2016, this way we'll have some time to breath and the devs will have more time to work on their ideas...

projectpat06
09-28-2012, 11:32 PM
Just because they're waiting to see the fans' reception to Connor doesn't mean they haven't already started working on next year's release. They could easily work on building the setting, game mechanics, etc and spend next year working on the story and character progression. I'm sure they can project that Connor will be liked, but they also have the resources to pull off a new character in a year if they need to change.

MetalCreed
09-28-2012, 11:32 PM
Lol if it's another Connor game I ain't buying it at full price.

Jexx21
09-28-2012, 11:41 PM
i am fine with them making annual games but on one condition:

it follows a separate story. put it this way, all the numbered games are the big ones. the main story and so on. and any spin offs that come out annually are named (like revelations and brotherhood) but follow a separate, less in depth story. maybe each game could be of separate assassins from around the globe going in the animus to find information, rather than each spin off game being about the main story but not as important,

Brotherhood and Revelations had a more in depth story than ACII.

To be honest, I think AC2 had the worst story of an AC game.. but I'm not saying that it's bad..

Assassin_M
09-28-2012, 11:42 PM
Brotherhood and Revelations had a more in depth story than ACII.

To be honest, I think AC2 had the worst story of an AC game.. but I'm not saying that it's bad..
Subjective, Guys.... Subjective xD

Jexx21
09-28-2012, 11:45 PM
:P


Honestly, I have a problem hating most movies/games/books I read.., I can't really bring myself to hate anything, because I usually gain some enjoyment out of it, and if I don't, I just assume it's not meant for me to like.

But when I DO like something, I tend to have problems with finding things wrong with it, as I can usually find an excuse I consider legitimate to cover the problems up.

Some people call me easily pleased.

Assassin_M
09-28-2012, 11:45 PM
:P


Honestly, I have a problem hating most movies/games/books I read.., I can't really bring myself to hate anything, because I usually gain some enjoyment out of it, and if I don't, I just assume it's not meant for me to like.

But when I DO like something, I tend to have problems with finding things wrong with it, as I can usually find an excuse I consider legitimate to cover the problems up.

Some people call me easily pleased.
Or Fan-boy:rolleyes::p

Jexx21
09-28-2012, 11:56 PM
Yea.. there's a reason why I avoid forums like the plague nowadays.

Soulid_Snake
09-29-2012, 12:55 AM
I need to know something guys, technically compared to AC2, how well does Brotherhood and Revelations stand against it? I'm talking about things like level design, framerate, visual appearance? Does it feel rushed? This is the impression I've been getting when reading reviews and why I think annual releases are a bad idea!

Assassin_M
09-29-2012, 12:58 AM
I need to know something guys, technically compared to AC2, how well does Brotherhood and Revelations stand against it? I'm talking about things like level design, framerate, visual appearance? Does it feel rushed? This is the impression I've been getting when reading reviews and why I think annual releases are a bad idea!
You never played Brotherhood or Revelations ?

Escappa
09-29-2012, 01:04 AM
1. If they DO annual releases they need a third team. So that each game has more development-time

2. It would be nice if they had a new charachter and setting for every game, but not jumping in time. For example let's say next game ends in 1799 Spain and the game after that begins in 1800 England and ends in 1838 and the next starts in 1839 Australia and so on. So you can play through the games and litteraly have a trip through history.

Jexx21
09-29-2012, 01:06 AM
I need to know something guys, technically compared to AC2, how well does Brotherhood and Revelations stand against it? I'm talking about things like level design, framerate, visual appearance? Does it feel rushed? This is the impression I've been getting when reading reviews and why I think annual releases are a bad idea!

Nah, Brotherhood and Revelations look loads better than AC2. Framerate is the same. Level design is better, the linear missions are a lot more enjoyable, and I think that Rome and Constantinople are some of the best designed cities, if not the best ones.

Soulid_Snake
09-29-2012, 01:08 AM
You never played Brotherhood or Revelations ?

Never, I read the quality has been compromised in a few reviews! I heard framerates being low for the games and feeling rushed! Can you put any of my doubts to rest?

Soulid_Snake
09-29-2012, 01:10 AM
Nah, Brotherhood and Revelations look loads better than AC2. Framerate is the same. Level design is better, the linear missions are a lot more enjoyable, and I think that Rome and Constantinople are some of the best designed cities, if not the best ones.

Thank you! :cool:

How do the framerates hold up?

Jexx21
09-29-2012, 01:10 AM
Oh, and I play them on PC, so that may affect the framerate, but generally it's the same framerate.

Soulid_Snake
09-29-2012, 01:16 AM
Oh, and I play them on PC, so that may affect the framerate, but generally it's the same framerate.

Thank you again! I'm a console gamer, but this is why I need a gaming PC!:)

Assassin_M
09-29-2012, 01:28 AM
Thank you! :cool:

How do the framerates hold up?
Brotherhood

Rome: Its 3 times the size of Florence, with a Country side and City. Not my favorite City, but the variety in the Districts should be nice and also the presence of MANY side missions make Rome feel full.

Frame-Rate: I played on PS3 and I had the same experience as I did with AC II, there was a drop here and there, but not really noticeable.

Level Design: Its just as good as AC II. The structure is very familiar. the Underground missions are as fun as ever, not really a fan of the Armor, though..

Visual Appearance: The Graphics are a jump from AC II. It finishes with the cartoonish feel it had and gives a much more gorgeous look on Characters and environment..

Story: I know You did not mention this, but you know. Its my least favorite story so far, the conversations during the present time sound like something from Scooby doo. Ezio`s story begins solid, but becomes less complex as you go on, but it will keep you interested till the end nonetheless. 9 sequences

Brotherhood ALWAYS has you occupied. It has tons of Side play. Templar Agents, Underground Missions, faction Missions, Repressed Memories..


Revelations

Constantinople: A bit smaller than Rome, but much more dense. The city feels so much more alive and returns that Atmosphere from AC I. You know ? The Markets and Merchants..My favorite city.

Frame-Rate: Same as Brotherhood..

Level Design: Again, very Familiar structure, with a lot more Variety in the Missions it gives you. The Underground missions are story based now and the secret armor only needs ONE secret Underground mission, again not a fan of it..

Visual Appearance: The graphics are another step up from ACB, with more detail added to the faces and environment. They can sometimes look choppy, though, due to some extent of lack of proper polish.

Story: My favorite, but it starts slowly and begins to pick up pace after sometime into sequence 4. The writing is so much better than Brotherhood where you actually feel the trouble you may be in. The Conversations with Clay are great too.

ACR is not the best polished game, but I enjoyed it so much. It gave closure to 2 great characters, but there are some very missed Opportunities with many characters; nonetheless, you`ll finish having MANY favorite moments to add to your already present favorites. Den Defense creates a nice distraction, I loved it... I dunno what you might think. The Desmond Missions are First person, platformer. I enjoyed it too. It tells you a lot more about Desmond..9 sequences

So there you, you must remember that these are my Perceptions. I advice you watch some Non-spoiler Videos on Youtube

Soulid_Snake
09-29-2012, 01:44 AM
@Assassin_M: Thank you, so much! Well, I've got no excuse now with the Ezio trilogy coming! I know this may sound bad, but with me a highly playable game takes precedence over a story.

monster_rambo
09-29-2012, 01:47 AM
I dont want break.Llike Alex said if they can deliver good game next year why they shouldnt release it.

But developing good games requires time.....

Assassin_M
09-29-2012, 01:48 AM
@Assassin_M: Thank you, so much! Well, I've got no excuse now with the Ezio trilogy coming! I know this may sound bad, but with me a highly playable game takes precedence over a story.
Sure, not a problem...

Because I study Game Design, Gameplay almost ALWAYS gets a Priority in my Preferences, because I played a game with a FANTASTIC story, but had broken gameplay... I never continued the game till the end, sadly..


But developing good games requires time.....
Not Necessarily..

Just look at GTA IV..

projectpat06
09-29-2012, 01:51 AM
^^^ I would have to agree, in ACR, the city of Constantinople is gorgeous. Graphics are solid, city feels very alive, and the gameplay is the best so far. I wasn't too excited about it or the whole concept of the hook blade but the game took me by surprise. I really liked how they amped up the Assassin recruits with the side quests and made the templar dens a lot harder to infiltrate so you had to use your recruits this time around. Overall, they made ezio even more badass and more believable as a leader of the brotherhood.

Soulid_Snake
09-29-2012, 01:58 AM
[

Not Necessarily..

Just look at GTA IV..

Didn't GTAIV take around 4 years to develop?


^^^ I would have to agree, in ACR, the city of Constantinople is gorgeous. Graphics are solid, city feels very alive, and the gameplay is the best so far. I wasn't too excited about it or the whole concept of the hook blade but the game took me by surprise. I really liked how they amped up the Assassin recruits with the side quests and made the templar dens a lot harder to infiltrate so you had to use your recruits this time around. Overall, they made ezio even more badass and more believable as a leader of the brotherhood.

That is good to hear, I think some reviewers were bashing on the games for not trying to change the formula too much, and yet these guys having the front to give COD 9/10, yearly!:mad:

Jexx21
09-29-2012, 02:00 AM
Sure, not a problem...

Because I study Game Design, Gameplay almost ALWAYS gets a Priority in my Preferences, because I played a game with a FANTASTIC story, but had broken gameplay... I never continued the game till the end, sadly..


Not Necessarily..

Just look at GTA IV..

Heh, I wanna go into game design after I get out of high school.

Maybe we'll cross paths applying at Ubisoft, eh? :P

Assassin_M
09-29-2012, 02:01 AM
[

Didn't GTAIV take around 4 years to develop?




Yup, exactly my point. It took 4 years to be made. The world was A LOT smaller than San Andreas, less Mini games, shorter story, less Vehicles, less Customization ..etc


Heh, I wanna go into game design after I get out of high school.

Maybe we'll cross paths applying at Ubisoft, eh? :P

Maybe:p

I may be the one interviewing you xD Im in second year..

kriegerdesgottes
09-29-2012, 02:07 AM
I have to admit. If Ubisoft does indeed take more than a year to develop the game and not 10 months like they admitted to with Brotherhood then I am ok with seeing another Connor game next year. But it has to be better than Revelations. Brotherhood was ok except for the desynch for being caught crap.(which I saw today ACIII is unfortunately also doing :(. ) but it almost wouldn't be right to see the majority of Ezio's life and a fair chunk of Altair's life (although not enough) and only 30 years of Connor's life. That would be disappointing for me especially considering the potential that the 18th century offers with the French Revolution and event he Revolution in Haiti. There is soo much history there to explore.

projectpat06
09-29-2012, 02:08 AM
Yup, exactly my point. It took 4 years to be made. The world was A LOT smaller than San Andreas, less Mini games, shorter story, less Vehicles, less Customization ..etc



Maybe:p

I may be the one interviewing you xD Im in second year..

If you decide to start up your own VG company, give me a shout. I actually applied to ubisoft a few months back

Jexx21
09-29-2012, 02:09 AM
I still need to get GTA IV.. should I get it or just wait for GTA V?

And that's cool M.

Assassin_M
09-29-2012, 02:10 AM
If you decide to start up your own VG company, give me a shout. I actually applied to ubisoft a few months back
Nice:D

Looks like We might have a Company on our hands here. Some fine Future and current game designers around...
All we need is a Business Graduate and we`ll be Ok:p


I still need to get GTA IV.. should I get it or just wait for GTA V?

And that's cool M.
If you`re looking for a great story, awesome characters and decent, fun gaming and somehow, never played San Andreas.. Get GTA IV complete edition.
Other than that, wait for V

projectpat06
09-29-2012, 02:20 AM
Nice:D

Looks like We might have a Company on our hands here. Some fine Future and current game designers around...
All we need is a Business Graduate and we`ll be Ok:p



That would be me. I already did my thesis on the digital entertainment industry. Probably about to go to Grad school or get a second degree since the job market blows. But still have some ideas and story lines written down if I ever got the chance.

Assassin_M
09-29-2012, 02:22 AM
That would be me. Probably about to go to Grad school or get a second degree since the job market blows.
Awesome;)

We have a Dual Specialist :p

monster_rambo
09-29-2012, 02:59 AM
Sure, not a problem...

Because I study Game Design, Gameplay almost ALWAYS gets a Priority in my Preferences, because I played a game with a FANTASTIC story, but had broken gameplay... I never continued the game till the end, sadly..


Not Necessarily..

Just look at GTA IV..

Well, I don't want to get into another debate again....But here is my opinion

Assassin's Creed 1, 2, & 3 each have at least 2 years of development. The core mechanics and principles that defined the Assassin's Creed series remains the same but the overall experience isn't. In AC1, we play as a stoic 12th century Assassin on a mission to purge the Crusaders out of the Holy Land. AC1 was a defining moment of a new series and it was certainly the most innovative. It had free running, social stealth, and a compelling story to match. However, it had many problems that needed to be improve. In AC2, we were introduce to a new character named Ezio and we were exploring the 15th century Renaissance. The character modeling and animations have been significantly improved and the fight system is different. There were more cities than ever and the emptiness that existed in the Kingdoms in AC1 were no longer present. Repetitive missions were removed. This game also introduced the economic system and customization options to allow the player to choose weapons, armor, and dyes for the character. Not to mention, the introduction of TWCB, the build up to the climax and conclusion of the story, subject 16 puzzles, and the story of the modern day Assassin had the player on the edge of their seats at all times. AC3 is going to be a new setting and under a different character. Some of the major improvements is that Desmond will not be sidelined, there will be more modern assassin's vs. templar story/gameplay, naval battles, a new engine (AnvilNext), battles at historical events, imrpoved graphics and character modeling and also many features that will not be announce until release day. Ultimately, what I'm trying to say is that these 3 games had SIGNIFICANT improvements and it offer the player to experience something "new" and "fresh". Keeps them engage and interested.

In ACB, I will give credit. They introduced the multiplayer and the modern day story was shocking and the most compelling. HOWEVER, since we were re-living the memories of Ezio and the gameplay was pretty much similar to AC2. Alot of it felt kind of repetitive and non-engaging. Not to mention to the fact that we had fewer Assassination targets and we could only explore ONE city. The battle between Ezio and Cesare didn't felt as engaging as AC2's 30 years of struggle for revenge against the templars. The war machines and glyphs were fun but I think overall, it just felt to me that it didn't lived up to the expectation of AC2 since the bar was set so high.

In ACR, it was worst, Constantinople was alot smaller than Rome and it introduced elements to the game that does not belong to Assassin's Creed. I don't think Den defense belongs in a game like Assassin's Creed. Assassin's Creed is about action/adventure. If people really wanted to play tower defense, they would go to game like PixelJunk and not Assassin's Creed. Desmond's journey was pure disappointment. I expected to the gameplay to be like Desmond freerunning within the Animus and solving puzzles but instead we are put into 1st person controlling a block like object and trying to awkwardly navigate through. What is more disappointing is that after playing through all 5 sequences, it didn't reveal anything interesting or important to Desmond. All we know from the sequences is that "he ran away and he likes the girls with skimpy outfits in New York". The ending and the overall story didn't deliver since it only confirmed what we already know which is "we need to find lost temples to save humanity, blah, blah, blah" Forgot to add, it is even funnier that the DLC for the "lost archives" actually revealed more revelations than they main story itself which was completely ridiculous. I remember in AC2 and ACB we had to go through 6 dungeon missions before we uncover the ultimate armour. In ACR, all we have to do is collect 10 memoir pages and explore Haghia Sophia which could be completed in less than 3 minutes. The Altair missions felt short. All of this could have been avoided if they have given more time.

I have heard from other posts that people are thinking that it is best to make games annually. They felt that spin-offs should be made annually and for the big Assassin's Creed games, it should be made by the core development team in a longer period of time. That way, people are able to play new AC games each year. If I played AC games each year, is really going to bored my brains out. I want my variety and a break from the series.

Personally, i think if they were giving more time, these games would be gold quality but they were rushed so it didn't live up to the expectations of AC1 and AC2. Sorry for rambling for too long but this is how I feel and remember again, this is my opinion so let's not get into an argument.

Jexx21
09-29-2012, 03:01 AM
ACB and ACR were gold quality and better than AC1 and AC2.

Most people agree with that, for ACB anyway (and I mean not on these forums)

Assassin_M
09-29-2012, 03:05 AM
Well, I don't want to get into another debate again....But here is my opinion

Assassin's Creed 1, 2, & 3 each have at least 2 years of development. The core mechanics and principles that defined the Assassin's Creed series remains the same but the overall experience isn't. In AC1, we play as a stoic 12th century Assassin on a mission to purge the Crusaders out of the Holy Land. AC1 was a defining moment of a new series and it was certainly the most innovative. It had free running, social stealth, and a compelling story to match. However, it had many problems that needed to be improve. In AC2, we were introduce to a new character named Ezio and we were exploring the 15th century Renaissance. The character modeling and animations have been significantly improved and the fight system is different. There were more cities than ever and the emptiness that existed in the Kingdoms in AC1 were no longer present. Repetitive missions were removed. This game also introduced the economic system and customization options to allow the player to choose weapons, armor, and dyes for the character. Not to mention, the introduction of TWCB, the build up to the climax and conclusion of the story, subject 16 puzzles, and the story of the modern day Assassin had the player on the edge of their seats at all times. AC3 is going to be a new setting and under a different character. Some of the major improvements is that Desmond will not be sidelined, there will be more modern assassin's vs. templar story/gameplay, naval battles, a new engine (AnvilNext), battles at historical events, imrpoved graphics and character modeling and also many features that will not be announce until release day. Ultimately, what I'm trying to say is that these 3 games had SIGNIFICANT improvements and it offer the player to experience something "new" and "fresh". Keeps them engage and interested.

In ACB, I will give credit. They introduced the multiplayer and the modern day story was shocking and the most compelling. HOWEVER, since we were re-living the memories of Ezio and the gameplay was pretty much similar to AC2. Alot of it felt kind of repetitive and non-engaging. Not to mention to the fact that we had fewer Assassination targets and we could only explore ONE city. The battle between Ezio and Cesare didn't felt as engaging as AC2's 30 years of struggle for revenge against the templars. The war machines and glyphs were fun but I think overall, it just felt to me that it didn't lived up to the expectation of AC2 since the bar was set so high.

In ACR, it was worst, Constantinople was alot smaller than Rome and it introduced elements to the game that does not belong to Assassin's Creed. I don't think Den defense belongs in a game like Assassin's Creed. Assassin's Creed is about action/adventure. If people really wanted to play tower defense, they would go to game like PixelJunk and not Assassin's Creed. Desmond's journey was pure disappointment. I expected to the gameplay to be like Desmond freerunning within the Animus and solving puzzles but instead we are put into 1st person controlling a block like object and trying to awkwardly navigate through. What is more disappointing is that after playing through all 5 sequences, it didn't reveal anything interesting or important to Desmond. All we know from the sequences is that "he ran away and he likes the girls with skimpy outfits in New York". The ending and the overall story didn't deliver since it only confirmed what we already know which is "we need to find lost temples to save humanity, blah, blah, blah"

I have heard from other posts that people are thinking that it is best to make games annually. They felt that spin-offs should be made annually and for the big Assassin's Creed games, it should be made by the core development team in a longer period of time. That way, people are able to play new AC games each year. If I played AC games each year, is really going to bored my brains out. I want my variety and a break from the series.

Personally, i think if they were giving more time, these games would be gold quality but they were rushed so it didn't live up to the expectations of AC1 and AC2. Sorry for rambling for too long but this is how I feel and remember again, this is my opinion so let's not get into an argument.
I know what you think, you didn't have to write all of that..:p

You are free to think as you like. ACR sucked, ACB was Sub-par. Im fine with that.. I just said that good games don't HAVE to be made in 2, 3 or 4 years and gave GTA IV as an example

HisSpiritLives
09-29-2012, 09:23 AM
ACB and ACR were awesome for me not as good as AC2 but still i loved them so they can make quality game in year.

hadarm18
09-29-2012, 09:45 AM
I think AC 2 (until the release of AC 3)is the best game in the franchise and think that is a good indicator that atleast 2 years have to pass for a proper development

Now i wouldnt mind another game with Connor next year but i think that after that they need to make a minimum 2 year pause OR start developing "AC 4" right after AC 3 just like they did after AC 2

dewgel
09-29-2012, 11:17 AM
It's money. It's all down to money. Think about it, the world is in economic crisis, we're all short a few bob, studios are laying off. If Ubisoft hadn't brought out AC:B, and AC:R, AC3 wouldn't have been possible. For example, Brotherhood alone took around $1.87 billion in profits. A lot of that wedge will have gone back into AC3, which has been very costly to make. Think of this: If they done AC2 then AC3 directly, how would Ubisoft have paid the wages alone? They've got 4 studios and about 500+ people on the payroll to pay for. A game in development brings in no money whatsoever. AC:B and AC:R have helped that.

However, development wise, I don't think AC3 would be as good as it is without the others. You can tell they tested new features out in Brotherhood and Revelations to get the fan reactions on new stuff. Brotherhood introduced the recruitment system and better graphics for the characters, Revelations introduced the new controls (Y / Triangle now being shoot / tool), even better facial capture (Albeit more monkey like).

Plus, the previous 2 games have kept us going until AC3. Come on, imagine you'd been waiting since November 2009 for this game. Wouldn't you be a little bored waiting by now? It's been difficult waiting since March for me.

AND, to top it off.. I don't mind annual releases. As long as it pays off with something like AC3.

freddie_1897
09-29-2012, 11:25 AM
Nice:D

Looks like We might have a Company on our hands here. Some fine Future and current game designers around...
All we need is a Business Graduate and we`ll be Ok:p

if you're looking for a quantum physicist give me a shout!

GeneralTrumbo
09-29-2012, 12:46 PM
You're all idiots. You are supporting my favorite game series getting rammed into the ground. I'm disgusted. Don't expect a constant flow of good games because it just won't happen. I'm done after AC3 with this series.

GeneralTrumbo
09-29-2012, 12:49 PM
ACB and ACR were gold quality and better than AC1 and AC2.

Most people agree with that, for ACB anyway (and I mean not on these forums)
Actually, everyone I've heard's opinion is that AC2 was the best game from the series. Quit believing what you want.

ProletariatPleb
09-29-2012, 12:57 PM
ACB and ACR were gold quality and better than AC1 and AC2.

Most people agree with that, for ACB anyway (and I mean not on these forums)
Well then those "most people" don't understand the essence of what AC is all about.

MasterSimaYi
09-29-2012, 01:05 PM
If they employ multiple teams to make different games simultaneously and have one be released every year while having the same quality as AC1, AC2 and AC3 I'm fine with it. I'm not easily bored of any series, but I don't like the annual releases either. I will just have to embrace the fact that they do want annual releases, but I hate to say that I do not have the fate that every year's release will be of great quality. The Ubisoft devs don't care as much about [I]our[I/] opinions as we'd like them to...

But how will they even pull of another Connor game if AC3 is supposed to be Desmond's last game and will resolve the ultimate disaster? Will they just ditch the descendant and make it a Connor-only game? Will they just squeeze Desmond out for one more game? Will they introduce a completely new descendant who just decides that he doesn't need to have previous synch with Connor and jumps right to Connor's memories from after 1783? I'm not particularly fond of any of these options.

Though I take joy in knowing that Alex also would like to have each game have a new setting and a new protagonist. And that there won't be any more character trilogies. All I want to hear is that there won't be any 'duologies' either... I already voiced my opinion on this in another thread, so I won't go into any further depth on this.

Jexx21
09-29-2012, 04:31 PM
Actually, everyone I've heard's opinion is that AC2 was the best game from the series. Quit believing what you want.
Err.. I meant everyone I talk to in real life.

But ya know, whatever..

Jexx21
09-29-2012, 04:34 PM
Well then those "most people" don't understand the essence of what AC is all about.
Or maybe you don't understand that the core of AC is subjective.

dxsxhxcx
09-29-2012, 04:43 PM
But how will they even pull of another Connor game if AC3 is supposed to be Desmond's last game and will resolve the ultimate disaster? Will they just ditch the descendant and make it a Connor-only game? Will they just squeeze Desmond out for one more game? Will they introduce a completely new descendant who just decides that he doesn't need to have previous synch with Connor and jumps right to Connor's memories from after 1783? I'm not particularly fond of any of these options.



I believe the first option is the better (if they decide to make another game with Connor), they shouldn't be tied to Desmond to make a "spin off" at this point, first because this would probably affect how AC3 would end and second because I bet many people would hate to not have what they promised us, a proper closure to Desmond story in AC3...

the third option is probably the worst, bring back "old" characters that way IMO would be the worst thing to do, if they want to bring old characters to new games, they should do like they did with Altair (not necessarily using the seals, but the old character having a support role instead of being the main character of the game) but it should be done right, I think it's a shame that probably the best thing that happened with a character (Altair) of a game was a book telling us his story and I don't want to see that happening again...

Assassin_M
09-29-2012, 05:53 PM
Well then those "most people" don't understand the essence of what AC is all about.
Sid.... You`re starting to sound like someone I don't like..

REDFOX4554
09-29-2012, 05:59 PM
When he says "we will wait and see the fans reaction"
I take it he means they are going to look at how many copies it sold and decide if they can get away with another Brotherhood. Remember the
"we'll give you a trailer if you spam ads all over the internet" campaign?

"wow look how many people decided to buy it! I guess people have no problem with the anual releases"

Jexx21
09-29-2012, 06:04 PM
No, I think he means that they'll wait and see the reaction to Connor and his personality.

Jexx21
09-29-2012, 06:06 PM
Sid.... You`re starting to sound like someone I don't like..
His signature does practically say that UbiSoft ruined three of their game series though, you shouldn't really be surprised..

Assassin_M
09-29-2012, 06:08 PM
His signature does practically say that UbiSoft ruined three of their game series though, you shouldn't really be surprised..
Yeah its his opinion, sure...

But that last post was just.....Stupid.

Jexx21
09-29-2012, 06:11 PM
I agree on that.

M, do you have a steam account or something? I'm not sure if I can friend you via the UPlay client outside of a game.

Assassin_M
09-29-2012, 06:13 PM
I agree on that.

M, do you have a steam account or something? I'm not sure if I can friend you via the UPlay client outside of a game.
I THINK I have a Steam:p

I`ll look for it xD (If I actually have one) and I`ll PM you..

ProletariatPleb
09-29-2012, 06:19 PM
His signature does practically say that UbiSoft ruined three of their game series though, you shouldn't really be surprised..
Hello? This isn't Sid's talk of the future of Ubisoft thread?

I put "most people" in quotes because it wasn't a serious statement about their opinion, it was an implication to the "most people" part, which in this case means I haven't met many people that would claim so and it's the first time I'm hearing this NOT their opinion...........do I really have to explain all this? You already understood what I meant but trying to muscle me in by technicality, right?

Jexx21
09-29-2012, 06:33 PM
No, I just think that your comment was illogical because you were essentially bashing others I know that think ACB was the best so far for having their own opinion.

All I saw was someone thinking that their opinion was fact.

ProletariatPleb
09-29-2012, 06:36 PM
No, I just think that your comment was illogical because you were essentially bashing others I know that think ACB was the best so far for having their own opinion.

All I saw was someone thinking that their opinion was fact.
And that's YOUR opinion, I've just clearly stated(in my last post) what I meant incase it was unclear, deal with it. If you feel the need to press the matter go ahead I'm done here.

I'm bashing no one, just implying surprise to that statement because I've never heard that before.

Jexx21
09-29-2012, 06:40 PM
If you have never heard that before, you have selective hearing, because I said it numerous times..

and yes, you were bashing because you said that they don't know what Assassin's Creed is all about then. Maybe you didn't mean to insult/bash others, but it is pretty much what you did..

by the way, when I don't reply to you on Steam, it's because I'm actually away at school or something, not because I don't want to to talk to you; when I get home to reply, you're never online

ProletariatPleb
09-29-2012, 06:46 PM
If you have never heard that before, you have selective hearing, because I said it numerous times..

and yes, you were bashing because you said that they don't know what Assassin's Creed is all about then. Maybe you didn't mean to insult/bash others, but it is pretty much what you did..

by the way, when I don't reply to you on Steam, it's because I'm actually away at school or something, not because I don't want to to talk to you; when I get home to reply, you're never online
Like I said I'm not discussing the matter further, already cleared up what I wanted to say, maybe it was poorly worded because expressing things in text is hard.

And about steam, I only wanted to ask you if you had bought/had plans to buy Borderlands 2, lol.

Soulid_Snake
09-30-2012, 02:38 PM
I still need to get GTA IV.. should I get it or just wait for GTA V?

And that's cool M.

Technically one of the most refined games out there!

This is a subjective opinion, but GTAIV is freaking awesome! I'm in the process of Platinum-ing it. Your probably looking at least 20 hours on your first playthrough, if you wanna 100 percent(not platinum) it, your looking at a minimum of 40 hours, this is not including the DLC episodes(DLC is worthy of a stand alone title). If your gonna get GTAIV, get the complete edition with all the DLC.

ajl992008
09-30-2012, 09:01 PM
i in fact want there to be a game next year, i like playing ac every year, its a pain to wait for it that long as it is, but of course if quality drops then they should take more time but if they can keep up with quality i see no problem.

FatRascal
09-30-2012, 09:21 PM
We need at least one more new character after Connor though, so that we can get to VICTORIAN LONDON....! (crosses fingers)

ACfan443
09-30-2012, 09:21 PM
After AC1 came out, rumours about AC2 arose, people were excited about it but had no idea when it was coming out. Then two years later when it was announced the buzz generated was HUGE, there was a sense of excitement, anticipation and (sounds kinda cheesy but) magic. In my opinion, this element has been lost and ruined by these yearly releases, now that we know they'll release one every year, there's less excitement.

Let me remind you when AC2 was revealed, how awesome it was seeing the E3 demo:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W8Qz9ah8cKQ

HisSpiritLives
09-30-2012, 09:26 PM
If they can keep to release good games like they did i can play them 100 years ,it is just AC games can get me bored.

Assassin_M
09-30-2012, 09:32 PM
I don't play games for "Magic"

I play games to have fun

ACfan443
09-30-2012, 09:40 PM
I don't play games for "Magic"

I play games to have fun

Not playing for magic, I was referring to the excitement experienced prior to release

ajl992008
09-30-2012, 09:42 PM
for me the reason why i wasn't as excited for brotherhood and revelations wasn't because of what people argue that there wasn't much change (the changes made where more than enough for me from release to release) but it was that it wasn't a new time period, that's what made ac2 fresh, it was a new time period, if they incorporate changes to the level of brotherhood and revelations but do them in a new time period with a new ancestor i have no worries, the time period is the very important to me.

Assassin_M
09-30-2012, 09:44 PM
Not playing for magic, I was referring to the excitement experienced prior to release
I know what you mean..

and honestly, I couldn't care less about that magic prior to release..

Im more of an "After release" kind of guy. Game makes me happy playing ? Yes ? Nothing else matters... At least that is how I feel.

ACfan443
09-30-2012, 09:56 PM
I know what you mean..

and honestly, I couldn't care less about that magic prior to release..

Im more of an "After release" kind of guy. Game makes me happy playing ? Yes ? Nothing else matters... At least that is how I feel.

Each to their own :p

Assassin_M
09-30-2012, 10:02 PM
Each to their own :p
Amen;)

Jexx21
09-30-2012, 10:54 PM
I actually was more excited for ACR than I am AC3.

I mean, I'm still super excited for AC3, but I'm not on these forums for pretty much the whole day. In fact, I've only been on them again for the past few days,

Evenesque
09-30-2012, 11:18 PM
I'm a huge fanboy of the AC series as a whole. They tick so many boxes about things I enjoy in games and enjoy living out in fantasies. It will take a massive, dramatic change in quality for me to not enjoy an AC game, and an even bigger one for me to never buy one again. AC games are one of the only franchises I will buy every year without fail next to Rockstar games.

I completely ignored ACR the whole year before it came out because I was drunk on Skyrim hype, which eventually helped ruin the game for me, along with a terrible PS3 port and a sub-par Gamebryo engine. But After I got done feeling slighted by Bethesda, I picked up ACR and felt like getting back on an old bike. AC games, even if they only change as much as ACB to ACR will always entertain me. I have yet to play an AC game that disappointed me. I was one of the few people in the community I live in which has a lot of 30+ gamers that enjoyed the first game without being bored. I played the living daylights out of AC1 because the game fits with my personality really well. It's never disappointed me in that respect, and it continues to allow me to personify (major cheese incoming) a character that I feel I could be in another life. Which is incredibly important to me, and probably isn't to most other people who play the game.

When I was a kid all my fantasy games were of spec-ops and medieval Lord of The Rings type deals, and I was always the kid who enjoyed the stealth assassin. There's always things AC games can do better, but as long as they keep blending their mix of Spec Ops time-traveling (forest) ninja, I'll be happy.

Plus the story entertains the hell out of me. Probably always will, considering there's so many more places they could take it after this year. Places they've undoubtedly planned going for some time now.

Jexx21
10-01-2012, 12:35 AM
I love Skyrim, and honestly, the Creation engine is a lot better than the engines the previous Beth games ran on.

Evenesque
10-01-2012, 12:46 AM
I love Skyrim, and honestly, the Creation engine is a lot better than the engines the previous Beth games ran on.

If that's the only thing you got out of my post, you make me very sad.

That said, that's your opinion, and I'm going to disagree with it until the day I die. I'll just leave it at that and let this resume topic.