PDA

View Full Version : Which is Better? Previous AC Combat or AC 3?



HellSniper666
11-02-2012, 11:58 PM
I prefer the old way better. I felt more like a Assassin and love the more On Hands Dodging and Attacking. The new way seems too generic and like a Batman rip off.

TrueAssassin77
11-03-2012, 12:02 AM
have you played batman arkam _________?

the fighting is nothing like that in AC3.

new way is better. i played ACR the day before i got this for nostalgia's sake and i came to truely grasp just how slow the fighting in ACR was. nothing was assassin like either. and the eneimes watched you as you did this horrible long animation to kill one guy. it was ridunkulous.

afterthought: if fighting was like batman, it would be cool, but i like AC3's uniqueness

Muzza8391
11-03-2012, 12:04 AM
have you played batman arkam _________?

the fighting is nothing like that in AC3.

new way is better. i played ACR the day before i got this for nostalgia's sake and i came to truely grasp just how slow the fighting in ACR was. nothing was assassin like either. and the eneimes watched you as you did this horrible long animation to kill one guy. it was ridunkulous.

afterthought: if fighting was like batman, it would be cool, but i like AC3's uniqueness

I agree completely.

Conner seems way more deadly. Now you also have more options in combat.

tjbyrum1
11-03-2012, 12:09 AM
Explain what you man exactly OP.

To me, the combat is visually satisfying, with a lot of brutality and nice animation. The controls are also a lot easier to grasp, but it also requires skill at the same time and knowledge of your opponents. No more of that obnoxious 'lock-on' crap, and no more awkward gun-shooting, and no more ultimate killstreaks. It flows, and it's good. You attack the lesser beings with your main attack, maybe use your tool to get an upperhand, counter when needed, and then use the appropriate button to take down the enemy. If you fail to counter, or if you do counter but do not use the right button, then you lose health. Keep messing up and you'll die. I think it works like a charm.

I love unarmed combat, and I always go into fights with my fists and use my bow in between, it's very fun and very satisfying to watch. So my answer is: I prefer AC3's much improved combat for sure.

EDIT: I'd like to add that by 'flow' I mean it's just nonstop. You're either countering or you're attacking - one or the other. No more standing around. IF you are standing around, then quite frankly, you're not doing it right. If the enemy won't attack, you attack him; if he blocks, break his defense.

TrueAssassin77
11-03-2012, 12:12 AM
Explain what you man exactly OP.

To me, the combat is visually satisfying, with a lot of brutality and nice animation. The controls are also a lot easier to grasp, but it also requires skill at the same time and knowledge of your opponents. No more of that obnoxious 'lock-on' crap, and no more awkward gun-shooting, and no more ultimate killstreaks. It flows, and it's good. You attack the lesser beings with your main attack, maybe use your tool to get an upperhand, counter when needed, and then use the appropriate button to take down the enemy. If you fail to counter, or if you do counter but do not use the right button, then you lose health. Keep messing up and you'll die. I think it works like a charm.

I love unarmed combat, and I always go into fights with my fists and use my bow in between, it's very fun and very satisfying to watch. So my answer is: I prefer AC3's much improved combat for sure.

lol. i prefer my fist over any other weapon... yea fist fighting is that cool looking to me as well

Muzza8391
11-03-2012, 12:13 AM
Explain what you man exactly OP.

To me, the combat is visually satisfying, with a lot of brutality and nice animation. The controls are also a lot easier to grasp, but it also requires skill at the same time and knowledge of your opponents. No more of that obnoxious 'lock-on' crap, and no more awkward gun-shooting, and no more ultimate killstreaks. It flows, and it's good. You attack the lesser beings with your main attack, maybe use your tool to get an upperhand, counter when needed, and then use the appropriate button to take down the enemy. If you fail to counter, or if you do counter but do not use the right button, then you lose health. Keep messing up and you'll die. I think it works like a charm.

I love unarmed combat, and I always go into fights with my fists and use my bow in between, it's very fun and very satisfying to watch. So my answer is: I prefer AC3's much improved combat for sure.

EDIT: I'd like to add that by 'flow' I mean it's just nonstop. You're either countering or you're attacking - one or the other. No more standing around. IF you are standing around, then quite frankly, you're not doing it right. If the enemy won't attack, you attack him; if he blocks, break his defense.

Couldn't have summed it up any better. Well if a wasn't playing AC right now I may have :)

Sharkey1337
11-03-2012, 12:14 AM
I prefer Brotherhood's combat as it offered so much more, imo. The chain kills sped up combat quite a bit, and the dual weapon system worked wonderfully (Sword/Gun, Dagger/Knives). I was disappointed to see AC3 still has enemies just standing around watching you fight 1-2 guys, the new system can easily allow numerous soldiers attacking at once. AC3 is a step in the right direction, but they really need to address that AI issue.

UrDeviant1
11-03-2012, 12:24 AM
AC3 combat Is superior In every way. The kill animations are stunning and make you say WOW.

Free_Hidings
11-03-2012, 12:31 AM
AC3 looks better and is more fun, but one thing I miss is being able to offensively grab people. In one mission one of my synch objectives was to throw people into the water, I had to either wait for them to attack so I could counter and throw, or attack myself and hope to get them against it so I can knock them off. A minor issue, but it is always fun to just randomly grab someone and throw them off a cliff / into water. The guards definately attack more frequently which is nice.

AC3 is the most cinematic and awesome looking, and it's hard to pick between it and AC1 as far as skill / complexity. I would say AC1 takes more skill. It doesn't look nearly as good, nor flow nearly as well though. Both are fantastic. The only combat I didn't enjoy was AC2

Radman500
11-03-2012, 12:31 AM
AC3 combat is better, still pretty damm easy once you get use to it

DinoSteve1
11-03-2012, 12:33 AM
AC3's combat isn't as Fluid as ACB or ACR.

SplasH-PuLs3z
11-03-2012, 01:05 AM
AC3 and it's not close...

The kill animation are brutally and violently awesome. I like that you can use your other hand to block an attack while already being being engaged with another enemy. I love the unarmed combat and how you throw people on tables and use the environment at your advantage.

Now i hate that they took grabbing people away, i loved throwing people off roofs or in the water or grabbing them, head butting and kneeing them. And people might not want not admit it it but some guard still just stand there watching you murder there buddy's but it's not as bad as in previous titles.

AC3 is a huge step in the right direction gameplay wise.

Assassin_M
11-03-2012, 01:06 AM
AC3's combat isn't as Fluid as ACB or ACR.
Again, do not state your Opinion as fact

DinoSteve1
11-03-2012, 01:13 AM
Again, do not state your Opinion as fact

I never said it was a fact.

Jexx21
11-03-2012, 01:21 AM
But you stated it like one.

Assassin_M
11-03-2012, 01:25 AM
But you stated it like one.
This...

Which was my point. I`v no trouble you believing it as fact. Its the way you state it..

shanethebouncer
11-03-2012, 01:27 AM
The combat is better but I could do without the slow mo.

DinoSteve1
11-03-2012, 01:31 AM
I didn't, I stated that MY OPINION is that AC3's combat isn't as Fluid as ACB or ACR.

Kaschra
11-03-2012, 01:32 AM
I eally like the AC3 combat, I think it's my fave. I love all the different killing animations and the slow mo counters. Too bad you can't grab and throw people anymore, I really liked that.

Assassin_M
11-03-2012, 01:34 AM
I didn't, I stated that MY OPINION is that AC3's combat isn't as Fluid as ACB or ACR.
Yes... Thank you

luckyto
11-03-2012, 01:46 AM
AC1 or AC3. Tie, different, but tie .

UrDeviant1
11-03-2012, 01:47 AM
Don't know how anyone can say this combat isn't as fluid. It's nothing but fluid If you fight with skill. It's the best combat yet. FACT.

DinoSteve1
11-03-2012, 01:51 AM
No one said it isn't fluid,but its not as fluid as ACB or ACR.







Thats my opinion in case some people can't tell.

UrDeviant1
11-03-2012, 01:55 AM
ACB and ACR were about standing still and waiting for a counter attempt. You could chain kills then and you can still chain kills now, only now you don't have to stand still and wait for someone to attack so you can chain kills. So why Is ACB and ACR combat more fluid?

UsedxAndxAbused
11-03-2012, 02:25 AM
AC1 AC2 AC REV AND AC BH are way better games at least the multiplayer games actually worked and were nowhere near as glitchy

BBALive
11-03-2012, 02:41 AM
I think AC3's combat is vastly superior.

It feels better, it looks better, it flows better. You actually have to use buttons other than X/Square now, and it's slightly more challenging. Especially if you're surrounded.

You can still chain your kills together like in Brotherhood and Revelations, but enemies attack more often, so you still have to pay attention, and counter appropriately, whereas in previous games you could just switch off and continually press X until everyone was dead. Additionally, guards that are immune to certain attacks can still be chain killed if you press the correct button, keeping the flow going.

hyatari
11-03-2012, 03:08 AM
Don't know how anyone can say this combat isn't as fluid. It's nothing but fluid If you fight with skill. It's the best combat yet. FACT.

Skill? It's just a script fest. There's no skill to pushing the same two buttons the whole game. It's watered down and completely light weight.

Assassin_M
11-03-2012, 03:09 AM
Skill? It's just a script fest. There's no skill to pushing the same two buttons the whole game. It's watered down and completely light weight.
Same 2 buttons ? Apparently you do not even know how the combat works..

BBALive
11-03-2012, 03:15 AM
It's watered down and completely light weight.

And yet it's still more complex than the combat in the previous games.

hyatari
11-03-2012, 03:21 AM
Which ain't sayin' much, unfortunately.

al-Assas
11-03-2012, 04:00 AM
No more standing around.

Why would you stand around?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vy8mtZcp7rY#t=55s

Sharkey1337
11-03-2012, 04:07 AM
ACB combat was extremely fluid once you learned it, just check this vid out:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1WNKvvxJbdo

Assassin_M
11-03-2012, 04:10 AM
We played brotherhood, mate..

We do not need a Video to know how it was..

AC 3 builds upon the Fluid Streaks, So I do not understand where the problem is..

UrDeviant1
11-03-2012, 04:14 AM
ACB combat was extremely fluid once you learned it, just check this vid out:

And It wasn't at all difficult to learn. A 2y/o could do It.

Sharkey1337
11-03-2012, 04:21 AM
And It wasn't at all difficult to learn. A 2y/o could do It.

And how is AC3 any different? You either block then counterattack or block then disarm. Neither is that deep or complicated, but I prefer ACB's combo weapon system more as it allowed you to attack enemies at different ranges easily with sword+gun or dagger+throwing knives. You can incorporate the pistol and rope dart in AC3, but it just felt better in ACB to me.

UrDeviant1
11-03-2012, 04:31 AM
And how is AC3 any different? You either block then counterattack or block then disarm. Neither is that deep or complicated, but I prefer ACB's combo weapon system more as it allowed you to attack enemies at different ranges easily with sword+gun or dagger+throwing knives. You can incorporate the pistol and rope dart in AC3, but it just felt better in ACB to me.

I never said It was deep, nor complicated, just more so than any other AC. You can use the environment In kills, you can use a meat shield to stop yourself from being shot, you can put enemies on their arse and initiate kill streaks, you can kill 2 enemies at once with awesome looking animations while In open conflict. You can also Use the Bow within your kills. So compared to ACB I'd say the combat Is just a bit different.

Sharkey1337
11-03-2012, 04:38 AM
Yeah, I do enjoy the contextual kills AC3 has. I wish being shot did more damage as I usually don't bother with the meat shields, mostly because the game seems pretty random on letting me grab someone. AC3 definitely has highlights in its combat, such as the awesome double counters, but I really wish you were attacked by more soldiers at once instead of 1-2 guys attacking while everyone else just circles you. For me, having more aggressive combatants coming at me would've made the combat more enjoyable, but for now I still love ACB's combat the most.

Assassin_M
11-03-2012, 04:40 AM
Yeah, I do enjoy the contextual kills AC3 has. I wish being shot did more damage as I usually don't bother with the meat shields, mostly because the game seems pretty random on letting me grab someone. AC3 definitely has highlights in its combat, such as the awesome double counters, but I really wish you were attacked by more soldiers at once instead of 1-2 guys attacking while everyone else just circles you. For me, having more aggressive combatants coming at me would've made the combat more enjoyable, but for now I still love ACB's combat the most.
How can you love ACB`s combat more than AC III`s and yet criticize elements in AC III that are ALSO present in ACB ??

SplasH-PuLs3z
11-03-2012, 05:10 AM
And how is AC3 any different? You either block then counterattack or block then disarm. Neither is that deep or complicated, but I prefer ACB's combo weapon system more as it allowed you to attack enemies at different ranges easily with sword+gun or dagger+throwing knives. You can incorporate the pistol and rope dart in AC3, but it just felt better in ACB to me.

AC3 as bow+tomawhak/knife/sword, gun/knife or musket kills....just as easy to attack from different range...

Ljh x
11-03-2012, 05:19 AM
AC3 Combat is superior! It's fun, fluid and Isn't too difficult to master.

Also The first time i hanged someone with a rope Dart i nearly fainted because of how cool it was.

abbitha7
11-03-2012, 05:47 AM
I don't really prefer one over the other. ACIII definitely has more badass animations. Hanging someone with the rope dart is oh so satisfying, and some of the kill moves are so cool they make me gasp.

I will say that ACIII's combat takes very little skill. I basically just mash x and b on my controller and I very rarely get hit by the enemy while still doing all the awesome kill and attack moves (I am only in sequence 7 though, maybe it gets more difficult?). I think previous AC titles had more of a learning curve.

zhengyingli
11-03-2012, 07:28 AM
Skill? It's just a script fest. There's no skill to pushing the same two buttons the whole game. It's watered down and completely light weight.
I came closed to dying several times. I know I don't suck, so it's most likely not scripted. Also, I believe you need at least three buttons to maneuver these battles. As for my opinion, I love it. ACB's was swift, but the transition look janky most of the time. I'm not a fan of the new brutal but slow combat animations ACR implemented, but it's basically the same as ACB.