PDA

View Full Version : [spoilers] Am I the only one who despises the majority of the optional objectives?



IamchaossthoughT
11-03-2012, 01:13 AM
Honestly, some of them are so ludicrous it just draws me out of the story. Like right now, I'm on sequence 7 and w/o giving spoilers, I have to air assassinate a grenadier. This has no function in the progression of the game... and not only that, it forces me to partly forego the stealthy nature that this mission requires. Not saying that you can't maintain your stealth and do this, but rather there is no point, other than for the sake of saying you did it.

I seriously wish I could turn them off. They're "optional" but thrown in your face constantly. Idk why it bugs me so much, but it does. Other than that, I am in love with this game.

What's your guys' take?

Also, sorry if there is another thread with this in it.

DinoSteve1
11-03-2012, 01:14 AM
tbh I enjoyed some of the optional missions more than the mai ones.

Jexx21
11-03-2012, 01:15 AM
That's the point, to encourage the use of playstyles different from the one that the mission primarily encourages.

shanethebouncer
11-03-2012, 01:15 AM
No. I think some of the optional objectives were ok but most just made no sense in regards to the missions.

Jexx21
11-03-2012, 01:16 AM
tbh I enjoyed some of the optional missions more than the mai ones.

This is off topic.

NinjaOnFire
11-03-2012, 01:16 AM
Both of you are correct.

IamchaossthoughT
11-03-2012, 01:17 AM
That's the point, to encourage the use of playstyles different from the one that the mission primarily encourages.


I understand the desire for replayability. But think about what you said, "encourage the use of playstyles different from the one that the mission primarily encourages." Why would you want to do that? Maybe on the second playthrough, but on the first, wouldn't you want to act out the story in a manner that you feel represents what would have happened?

I'm certainly not saying your wrong, friend, but I just don't get it. Bums me out way more than it should. lol.

DinoSteve1
11-03-2012, 01:20 AM
This is off topic.
How is it, he asked people opinions on the optional missions.

IamchaossthoughT
11-03-2012, 01:22 AM
How is it, he asked people opinions on the optional missions.


Optional OBJECTIVES. No matter, not a big deal. I do enjoy many of the side missions more than the main, too. =)

Jexx21
11-03-2012, 01:22 AM
Because he didn't.

Jexx21
11-03-2012, 01:24 AM
[QUOTE=IamchaossthoughT;8671563]I understand the desire for replayability. But think about what you said, "encourage the use of playstyles different from the one that the mission primarily encourages." Why would you want to do that? Maybe on the second playthrough, but on the first, wouldn't you want to act out the story in a manner that you feel represents what would have happened?

I'm certainly not saying your wrong, friend, but I just don't get it. Bums me out way more than it should. lol.[/QUOTE

It all depends on how you like to play the game.

Blind2Society
11-03-2012, 02:52 AM
Funny, I was about to make a thread saying full sync requirements are killing the games and by extension, the series. Having to restart a mission over and over and over and over is not a good thing. They talked of not keeping things just because they were there in the previous games yet they kept, in my opinion, the absolute worst aspect of the entire series.

As for sequence 7, I just finished it yesterday and I could walk you through it step by step if you like.

BBALive
11-03-2012, 02:58 AM
Some of them are bull. Too bad unlockable rewards are tied to them.

RoGi10
11-03-2012, 03:07 AM
The objectives are the difficulty setting. They are there for the challenge, and make it so the game isn't even easier than it already is.

Ubi-MoshiMoshi
11-03-2012, 01:54 PM
Be careful of spoilers guys, all spoilers must be tagged and posted in Hints and Tips.

ProdiGurl
11-03-2012, 02:27 PM
That's the point, to encourage the use of playstyles different from the one that the mission primarily encourages.

Exactly. They aren't supposed to "make sense" of or be vital to the mission/game - it's for variety, challenge and even training to some degree to teach you how to do something another way that you can use thru the game..
For example, right now I'm learning to hunt - [poss SPOIL]one of the objectives is to get a variety of animals and to get some from the air. If it was easiest to get deer, you'd just get those & be done. The synch forces you to hunt other stuff that takes more time & acquaints you w/ killing other things - & getting them different ways (snare, air, etc). [end SPOIL].
It gets you out of your comfort zone and gives other options in how you can achieve something other than the way you would do it.

I just don't get what's so hard to understand about the synch concept. It's been the theme of AC all along.

ProdiGurl
11-03-2012, 02:37 PM
Funny, I was about to make a thread saying full sync requirements are killing the games and by extension, the series. Having to restart a mission over and over and over and over is not a good thing. They talked of not keeping things just because they were there in the previous games yet they kept, in my opinion, the absolute worst aspect of the entire series.

As for sequence 7, I just finished it yesterday and I could walk you through it step by step if you like.

That's actually how you end up getting better at playing AC. When I played my first AC game, [ACB] I totally sucked. It was way too hard for me and I was blowing rage fits thru the entire thing. I was scaring my dogs lol.
I went on youtube ranting about how impossible it was to play & synch - now after playing ACB another time plus AC2 & ACR, ACB ended up not being as hard as I first thought it was.
It's almost easy for me now.
I get the frustration - in Seq. 2 I didn't know you could use 'unarmed' to pull guards into haystacks, so I had to redo the mission at least 13 times and I was fuming.
I luckily found a walkthru vid & saw how easy it was w/ the 1 guard I couldnt get past & used the haystack... my own bad.

kriegerdesgottes
11-03-2012, 02:39 PM
Funny, I was about to make a thread saying full sync requirements are killing the games and by extension, the series. Having to restart a mission over and over and over and over is not a good thing. They talked of not keeping things just because they were there in the previous games yet they kept, in my opinion, the absolute worst aspect of the entire series.

As for sequence 7, I just finished it yesterday and I could walk you through it step by step if you like.

I agree. I hate the full synch objectives as well.

IamchaossthoughT
11-03-2012, 07:22 PM
I agree. I hate the full synch objectives as well.



I don't understand the "this is the difficulty setting" comment. I mean, the game doesn't necessarily have to have Demon Souls' difficulty to be fun.

It just takes away from the immersion, I feel. I'm kind of hating it, at the moment, to be honest.

Savage_Baird
11-03-2012, 07:28 PM
I think they're very annoying as well and some of them even ruin the fun. I hate the ones that limit or not allow you to kill anyone. That's just crazy.

Milkytan
11-03-2012, 07:29 PM
Some optional objectives are... nearly impossible. Maybe that's just me, though. Like the air assassination on the grenadier as mentioned in the first post, how would you go about doing that properly while remaining undetected? And a few other ones too. Again, maybe it's just me since I'm not some ridiculously pro gamer or anything... but still.

zhengyingli
11-03-2012, 07:54 PM
The objectives are the difficulty setting. They are there for the challenge, and make it so the game isn't even easier than it already is.
On top of that, it's called "optional" for a reason. Some of them are near impossible, but I enjoy the challenge. HOWEVER, though I would attempt to achieve those full syncs during my first playthrough, if I fail any of them, I move on to get the story rolling and save the challenge for later.

BATISTABUS
11-03-2012, 07:57 PM
They're optional for a reason. They're meant to add challenge...if they're too hard, don't do them. If you want the rewards, get better. That's how games work. Every Assassin's Creed game up until this point has been brainlessly easy, and when we finally get some structure and challenge in our missions, everyone (including IGN) complains about it. This is a good thing...if you want an easy game, I have no sympathy for you.

zhengyingli
11-03-2012, 08:04 PM
They're optional for a reason. They're meant to add challenge...if they're too hard, don't do them. If you want the rewards, get better. That's how games work. Every Assassin's Creed game up until this point has been brainlessly easy, and when we finally get some structure and challenge in our missions, everyone (including IGN) complains about it. This is a good thing...if you want an easy game, I have no sympathy for you.
I think it's okay to want an easy game, but like you said, if one feels the objectives are hard, either get better or don't touch them. It's not as if you wouldn't to be able to beat the game if you don't do full sync.

Paulsifer42
11-03-2012, 08:10 PM
It's interesting how many people hate this, because I love it. Sequence 7 is actually a great example. The mission you speak of would, imo, be really easy if not for the optional parts. Granted, I had to try over and over to get it, but I felt a great deal of satisfaction once I figured it out. I haven't fully synced everything yet, like [poss spoiler] the first ship mission [poss spoiler done], but I'll go back to that if I want the full sync. That's how it's the difficulty setting and, I think, really important to the game.

[SPOILER] as for sequence 7, all I can say is poison darts, and arrows [SPOILER]

IamchaossthoughT
11-03-2012, 08:22 PM
I'm not saying that I want an easy game... I mean, even with the objectives that are optional, the game is still easy. It's more of an immersion thing for me. I realize that no one is forced to do them, obviously, but I am the type of person that hates having them shoved in my face constantly. I mean, they are nearly always showing. Drives me crazy. Sure, I eagerly try to do the optional objectives that make sense, but then there are the ones that I feel are added for no reason.

Some of the stealth objectives, or kill only 2 guards, etc, I enjoy those. They make sense, in terms of the gameplay and the story. It's just the ones that clearly area second thought, such as the grenadier one.

SPOILER:


what about the objective at the end of sequence 8 (I THINK) where you have to assassinate Hickey, and are given the optional objectives of killing 2 militia and not letting Washington's guards down, is this possible without letting the first guard die? I'm not saying I have a problem with these objectives, but I just tried that one quite a few times, and it kind of makes sense, but it is honestly the only objective I found I was unable to do. I could get to Hickey (sp?) and shove him, but he always has killed 1 guard by that time, and while you still get the objective if you kill him before he kills the other guard, I am just wondering if any of you were able to do it without any guards dying. Cheeers.

zhengyingli
11-03-2012, 08:51 PM
I'm not saying that I want an easy game... I mean, even with the objectives that are optional, the game is still easy. It's more of an immersion thing for me. I realize that no one is forced to do them, obviously, but I am the type of person that hates having them shoved in my face constantly. I mean, they are nearly always showing. Drives me crazy. Sure, I eagerly try to do the optional objectives that make sense, but then there are the ones that I feel are added for no reason.
I don't disagree with people hating the optional objectives; I just have problems with people declaring an optional feature somehow ruining the entire series. I will concede that the objectives popped up too many times during the missions. As for the objectives themselves, I always think of them as "that's how Connor/Ezio did it." Didn't bother me, but if certain challenges feel out of place, I would attribute it to story problems rather than a design problem.

JohnnyInksDotCom
11-03-2012, 08:58 PM
They're optional for a reason. They're meant to add challenge...if they're too hard, don't do them. If you want the rewards, get better. That's how games work. Every Assassin's Creed game up until this point has been brainlessly easy, and when we finally get some structure and challenge in our missions, everyone (including IGN) complains about it. This is a good thing...if you want an easy game, I have no sympathy for you.
Agreed

ACfan443
11-03-2012, 09:45 PM
I would've liked one optional objective only, cause I like the 100% synch in Brotherhood and Revelations. Adding so many constraints in AC3 makes it feel too linear. Yes they're optional, but I really hate seeing a red cross to further rub in my failure

Rob1610
11-04-2012, 02:40 AM
That's the point, to encourage the use of playstyles different from the one that the mission primarily encourages.

HA! Bullcrap! Ever since Full Synch was introduced, the freedom to choose how you go about the mission was thrown out the window. You can still choose, but most people are completionists and feel they have to do the Full Synch at one point or another. I certainly know how IamchaossthoughT feels. I hate some of the Obtional Objectives. I know that one from Sequence 7 VERY well. I retried that one bit SOOO many times trying to Air Assassinate the Grenadier without being spotted (the other Optional Objective), but Air Assassination is a High Profile kill that attracts attention even in hiding. Yes, they add more challenge and I like that, but I'm one of those completionists and I Retry from Checkpoint everytime I fail one, which is frequently considering some of those objectives are VERY annoying.


SPOILER:

what about the objective at the end of sequence 8 (I THINK) where you have to assassinate Hickey, and are given the optional objectives of killing 2 militia and not letting Washington's guards down, is this possible without letting the first guard die? I'm not saying I have a problem with these objectives, but I just tried that one quite a few times, and it kind of makes sense, but it is honestly the only objective I found I was unable to do. I could get to Hickey (sp?) and shove him, but he always has killed 1 guard by that time, and while you still get the objective if you kill him before he kills the other guard, I am just wondering if any of you were able to do it without any guards dying. Cheeers.

I've done it, albeit many attempts. You just have to run straight at him, not letting the citizens get in your way, and make sure he's focused on you while waiting for the other guards to attack you. If he goes for 1 of Washington's guards while your after the other objective, press X/Square once without killing him. Once you've killed 2 guards, go for Hickey.

IVIav3r1ck
11-04-2012, 02:50 AM
Yes, they are either half non-factors/non-sensical or half ridiculously and annoyingly tedious to where you are hoping that lucks goes your way as you are on your 30th attempt.

NyxCrab
11-04-2012, 03:34 AM
Personally, I thought the Optional Objectives made the game a bit more relaxing, as in, you weren't forced to do something. What makes it helpful is that you aren't forced to do a certain thing. Remember AC2, and the DLC dock mission, where you had the go on a boat and kill the guy without being detected, even though there where a lot of guards in an around the area. If you forced to do something like air assassinate a grenaider without being detected, the game would be impossible to beat. Just be glad it was optional, and not forced.

Paulsifer42
11-04-2012, 10:07 AM
I'm not saying that I want an easy game... I mean, even with the objectives that are optional, the game is still easy. It's more of an immersion thing for me. I realize that no one is forced to do them, obviously, but I am the type of person that hates having them shoved in my face constantly. I mean, they are nearly always showing. Drives me crazy. Sure, I eagerly try to do the optional objectives that make sense, but then there are the ones that I feel are added for no reason.

Some of the stealth objectives, or kill only 2 guards, etc, I enjoy those. They make sense, in terms of the gameplay and the story. It's just the ones that clearly area second thought, such as the grenadier one.

SPOILER:


what about the objective at the end of sequence 8 (I THINK) where you have to assassinate Hickey, and are given the optional objectives of killing 2 militia and not letting Washington's guards down, is this possible without letting the first guard die? I'm not saying I have a problem with these objectives, but I just tried that one quite a few times, and it kind of makes sense, but it is honestly the only objective I found I was unable to do. I could get to Hickey (sp?) and shove him, but he always has killed 1 guard by that time, and while you still get the objective if you kill him before he kills the other guard, I am just wondering if any of you were able to do it without any guards dying. Cheeers.

SPOILER
I had to do that one a couple of times. You have to get one guard to the left, and then one down a little ways. Both have to be in the back with a running assassination, and you can't get into an actual confrontation with them (or GW/guards die). It's tough, but it's possible.

Silhouelle
11-04-2012, 10:20 AM
I don't mind them. I am not at all pushed to doing them all, and if I fail I usually just continue on with the mission unless its a stealth orientated objective. I'm leaving them for subsequent playthroughs, or going back and replaying memories at least. I do like however that you don't need to do all the optional objectives in one go, if you accomplish one and fail the other two, you only have those failed two to do on a memory replay. :)

ProdiGurl
11-04-2012, 10:39 AM
I don't mind them. I am not at all pushed to doing them all, and if I fail I usually just continue on with the mission unless its a stealth orientated objective. I'm leaving them for subsequent playthroughs, or going back and replaying memories at least. I do like however that you don't need to do all the optional objectives in one go, if you accomplish one and fail the other two, you only have those failed two to do on a memory replay. :)

Ya like flying at the end of Seq. 4 - I have no choice but replay that memory another 50 times. What a pretty scene but I always manage to clip a tree somewhere.lol
:mad: But it's true, it does give me more to do when I'm done.

pirate1802
11-04-2012, 10:52 AM
Ya like flying at the end of Seq. 4 - I have no choice but replay that memory another 50 times. What a pretty scene but I always manage to clip a tree somewhere.lol
:mad: But it's true, it does give me more to do when I'm done.

Flying? O_o

Silhouelle
11-04-2012, 10:55 AM
Flying? O_o
Don't ask lest you be spoiled. ;)

ProdiGurl
11-04-2012, 11:07 AM
Ya it's a really well done scene - - just challenging. I finally gave up on it to move on with the story instead of tearing my hair out lol


The objectives are the difficulty setting. They are there for the challenge, and make it so the game isn't even easier than it already is.

Ya it just dawned on me before I found your post that that's basically AC's way of difficulty setting - I keep requesting that every year but now I see why they don't, they do it thru the synch system. In this forum last year during ACR, tons of people were complaining that it was way too easy.... I think devs raised the challenge on this one for them.

& I'm a completionist too but it doesn't make me hate synching if I can't get some of them. I'm a moderate gamer & have synch'd well over 1/2 of the missions without too much trouble so far. They just help me practice & get better at playing AC. However they do the system (synch or choosing a difficulty level), you need both for normal & advanced gamers to enjoy the game imo

pirate1802
11-04-2012, 11:13 AM
Don't ask lest you be spoiled. ;)

A simple yes or no would suffice! And is it as awesome as Ezio flying over Vnice. Really loved it!

ProdiGurl
11-04-2012, 11:25 AM
Well it's a short 'mission' (part of the story) & if you're trying to synch it, you're too busy to fully enjoy the scenery.
So no it's not the same in that regard. But if you click the pause screen to go to your options right before the mission finishes, you can go back to the last savepoint & replay it over & over to enjoy the scene.

Silhouelle
11-04-2012, 11:38 AM
A simple yes or no would suffice! And is it as awesome as Ezio flying over Vnice. Really loved it!
Well its very hard to say anything about it without spoiling. Whether its more or as awesome as Ezio's flying missions is down to preference. It can't really be compared directly as its a linear experience in this and far more story centric, I enjoyed it a lot more than Ezio's moment in the sky however. :)

BlackRose1809
11-04-2012, 12:24 PM
I found them fun, gives me a another reason to replay the game all over for a 100% because of the achievement. :3

Menacing Scarab
11-04-2012, 02:23 PM
The objectives are the difficulty setting. They are there for the challenge, and make it so the game isn't even easier than it already is.

(Don't see how anything I'm about to say will be a spoiler, but I'll give warning anyway")

Sure that works just fine when the optional objectives are not unreasonable. Seq. 7 the "air assassinate a grenadier" not impossible to figure out but not readily apparent either. Now take the optional objective on Seq. 7-4 to "air assassinate ****target (is what I'll call him)*** without being detected. There are tons of guards around and even being in the right spot to perform the objective they can see you as you do it even if no one was looking when you hit the flipping assassinate button. Now I'm in Seq 8 and have to chase someone and not "tackle or shove anyone." Nothing wrong with that as an objective assuming that the people do not move randomly each time you have to start.

You can not have these optional objectives tied to an achievement/trophy then turn around and make them so glitchy or reliant upon you getting lucky with the AI deciding that it will not do something like pop someone in 2 feet in front of you while you are chasing someone. I didn't care for the last AC title having that as an achievement because it really took away from the game having to restart so many times. Granted achievements are technically optional and not something you need to do but for someone like me who is pushed to do everything in a game because of the achievements they really should at least not be dependent on the game not screwing you for no reason. All I'm asking is that they care about the product they put out and not pull things out of their *** then not even have it work right. I know games aren't perfect at release but it seems to be more and more these days that developers try to push release dates way too early with a "oh well we'll fix it when we get good and **** well ready after we take their money" attitude.

the_zombiemule
11-06-2012, 02:31 AM
As someone who has a 100% for the single player in all the previous AC games, I feel like the optional objectives in AC3 are total garbage. I gave up early on the idea of ever getting 100% because its apparently not possible without finding the one very specific, unclear way I'm expected to do everything perfectly with zero margin for error. I don't think the studio that made this game did a very good job. I'd really like it if the people who made the AC2 games could give these guys lessons in designing optional objectives to be completable without visiting YouTube.

TrueAssassin77
11-06-2012, 02:35 AM
Honestly, some of them are so ludicrous it just draws me out of the story. Like right now, I'm on sequence 7 and w/o giving spoilers, I have to air assassinate a grenadier. This has no function in the progression of the game... and not only that, it forces me to partly forego the stealthy nature that this mission requires. Not saying that you can't maintain your stealth and do this, but rather there is no point, other than for the sake of saying you did it.

I seriously wish I could turn them off. They're "optional" but thrown in your face constantly. Idk why it bugs me so much, but it does. Other than that, I am in love with this game.

What's your guys' take?

Also, sorry if there is another thread with this in it.

OMG, i was just on that stupid a$$ mission. im hanging off the side of the ship and im wondering, how in the hell am i suppose to air assassinate him, without being detected. hell! how am i suppose to get above his a$$. it made no sense. if i air assassinate, i fail the stealth part, if i do the stealth part i fail the air assassination!
ugh just stupid design