PDA

View Full Version : The direction I want AC to take (only about gameplay, no spoilers)



Sushiglutton
12-04-2012, 06:38 PM
AC3 is one of the most complex games I have ever played in terms of number of systems included. If you compare to other modern games like Mass Effect, Arkham City or even Red Dead they are not even close. This is cool ofc, but with complexity comes a number of problems. The most obvious one is a lot of bugs. Secondly the core mechanics (such as combat) won't be as good as they should. Thirdly some smaller systems will feel underdeveloped and not fun at all (for example the QTE-based animal interactions). Finally the game needs a very long tutorial to explain all the mechanics to new gamers.

The creative director Hutchinson said before the release that AC3 would be "Back to Basics" (http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-03-09-assassins-creed-3-will-be-back-to-basics). After playing the game I can't say I noticed that at all. Basically all old mechanics are back, more complicated than before. Ubi has also added many new ones on top. In my opinion it would have been much better if they had done as Hutchinson said in the Eurogamer interview.

There are many old systems that could have been removed completely. I want a focus on the main protagonist and his abilities rather than a lot of external things. Here are some things I think should be removed:

- Recruits. They add very little in terms of gameplay (you're not even allowed to use them in most missions) and were tedious to unlock.
- Way too many "go here, press a button (if even that)"-type missions. Chests, trinkets, feathers, almanac pages, deliviries, mini assassinations, homestead missions, adventurer missions and probably a few I forgot. They are simply not fun.
- Tunnels. Just have some simple fast traveling mechanic.
- Trade/crafting. Not really needed.
- Modern day part.
- Full synchronization.


Instead of these things I would do:

- Make sure the combat is up to modern standards (aka smooth and with quickfire gadgets etc).
- Work on enemy AI, especially for stealth.
- Make the parkour slightly more interactive.
- Non QTE based animal encounters.
- Make the horses smoother/faster.
- A few treasures hidden well that needed some cleverness from the player to find (puzzle elements perhaps).
- Create a seperate tutorial, so that the main story missions can be played more freely.
- Have general objectives that can be completed in a wide array of ways without punishing some of them.


Removing a lot of the fluff and focus on the core would ensure that the game was a lot more fun to play imo. Every single mission would benefit from more engaging core mechanics. Adding some fresh systems for each game like Homestead and Naval is also great and I enjoyed both a lot.

D.I.D.
12-04-2012, 07:34 PM
There are many old systems that could have been removed completely. I want a focus on the main protagonist and his abilities rather than a lot of external things. Here are some things I think should be removed:

- Recruits. They add very little in terms of gameplay (you're not even allowed to use them in most missions) and were tedious to unlock.

Hmm, I'm in two minds about this. I really like recruits, and I liked the fixed characters in AC3. I thought it was nice to have distinct faces, and I enjoyed having recruits that fed into the main story, but sadly that only happened with Stephane.

I can certainly see what you mean about their usefulness though. They're good for getting you out of a big fight quickly during free roam, but it's a shame we can't use them in missions. How would you feel if the recruits specific skills became a puzzle element in the missions, i.e. you had to figure out the to get through this zone, you would need to use Recruit X's ability in a particular way?


- Way too many "go here, press a button (if even that)"-type missions. Chests, trinkets, feathers, almanac pages, deliviries, mini assassinations, homestead missions, adventurer missions and probably a few I forgot. They are simply not fun.

Yeah I'm with you on that, particularly with the Homestead. I really like to see the world change as buildings go up and a place becomes populated with more (and happier) people, but there were way too many empty missions padding that out.

I like collectibles though, particularly when they cause something else to happen. In the Frontier, it was the collectibles that forced me to explore the land, and the chests tended to help me to find the forts. It's good when one thing leads to another.


- Tunnels. Just have some simple fast traveling mechanic.

Ah. Now, I would have to fight you on this. Those tunnels earn their keep, and I want them to stay, especially if the game goes to any English or Scottish cities. If you don't want to use them, you've got plenty of other options for fast travel, so they're just a means of earning additional points. Running overground doesn't really take that long.


- Trade/crafting. Not really needed.

I felt the same way. I used it a few times and quickly ditched it. It wasn't very well planned out, it took too long to discover recipes and gain the ability to use them, and constantly keeping the assassins working abroad provided plenty of money. Still, if they keep it I don't care, because again this was something you could take or leave.


- Modern day part.

Yeah, I'm done. The animus would be a nice surprise from time to time, if they've got a genuinely good modern day story to tell at that particular time. I'd be fine if most ACs were just episodes in history though, and I wouldn't cringe myself inside out as often.


- Full synchronization.

Again, this doesn't hurt me. I don't really get the problem: if 100% is important, then you ought to be an obsessive person who's into fiddly details and repetition. If you're not willing to do that, it doesn't matter if you finish the game with 60% or 100%: you still completed the game.


Instead of these things I would do:

- Make sure the combat is up to modern standards (aka smooth and with quickfire gadgets etc).

For AC's third-person combat, I expect the easiest improvement is to work on rewarding the player for excellent timing, and detecting and punishing button-mashing. I'm in two minds as to whether this would enormously improve the game or not, but I'd like something in the game that made me wary about starting fights.


- Work on enemy AI, especially for stealth.

This is a resource problem, as much as anything. Much as the current consoles can't handle the physics modelling that PCs can do, they also can't spare cycles to govern complex group AI and all of the variables that come with it. Expect big improvement in AI a couple of years into the next gen though.


- Make the parkour slightly more interactive.

What do you mean by this? I have a couple of ideas about how you could enter a slow-motion mode and use selection of surfaces to decide your movements; is that the kind of thing you mean?


- Non QTE based animal encounters.
I understand people not liking QTEs for presentation reasons, but then again... if you think about it, there's not a lot of difference between the game asking you to press B and then A, and the block-disarm-attack combat that we use in free-flowing combat. I get what you mean, but I didn't hate the hunting.


- Make the horses smoother/faster.

Always room for improvement. It must be a nightmare to make a horse work with an uneven landscape which causes a character to hop, climb and dive around on foot.


- A few treasures hidden well that needed some cleverness from the player to find (puzzle elements perhaps).

Yes. To be fair, AC3 had quite a lot of treasures that you had to approach indirectly, but it's good to make the player earn those things.


- Create a seperate tutorial, so that the main story missions can be played more freely.

Yes, I thought ACB's simulation rooms were perfect.


- Have general objectives that can be completed in a wide array of ways without punishing some of them.

I'll agree with the basis of that, although I don't mind punishment. What I miss is that in AC2 and ACB, I used to wander around the mission objective buildings, casing the area and looking for different ways in, and then I'd go and test them. I'd like to get back to that kind of design and expand on it. A game can be a lot shorter and tighter with that kind of design, and be more fun as a result while still having new things to experience on a replay. I keep saying "Dishonored" on this forum, and I'll do it again: like Dishonored. There you go.

montagemik
12-04-2012, 07:37 PM
I WANT ............... Bound to be happy at the end then.

ProdiGurl
12-04-2012, 07:59 PM
>>. Secondly the core mechanics (such as combat) won't be as good as they should <<
Nope, cannot agree there - combat is enhanced and much better - even more difficult in a way as there's more than plain button mashing.
I hope they never go back to the previous mechanics (much as I loved Ezio & previous combat) :)
(not that improvements can't be made).

>> Here are some things I think should be removed:

- Recruits. They add very little in terms of gameplay (you're not even allowed to use them in most missions) and were tedious to unlock.
ACR was awesome with heavy Recruit interaction and presence... plus their own dens to manage. That was a fantastic element I'd love to see more of.
I guess the best solution would be to let us use the recruits on more missions if we wanted. I like using them, it felt like I was more of a team with them working with me. I almost think Recruiting could be a separate game itself... it was my favorite thing to do in ACB & ACR.
- Way too many "go here, press a button (if even that)"-type missions.
Chests, trinkets, feathers, almanac pages, deliviries, mini assassinations, homestead missions, adventurer missions and probably a few I forgot. They are simply not fun. K, so skip them all and let others who do love it, enjoy them.
- Tunnels. Just have some simple fast traveling mechanic. Agree - I loved ACB's fast travel.
- Trade/crafting. Not really needed. It's the monetary system - most chests didn't have alot of $$ & there were alot fewer of them. The Homestead/crafting/trading system was brilliant. Again, if you have no interest, SKIP IT ALL and leave that for people who do enjoy it (like me).
- Modern day part.?
- Full synchronization. << I'm fine w/ leaving it, but there has to be difficulty level added or keep synching - there are whole threads on it so I won't elaborate.

Sushiglutton
12-04-2012, 08:15 PM
Thank you for taking the time to answer :)!


Hmm, I'm in two minds about this. I really like recruits, and I liked the fixed characters in AC3. I thought it was nice to have distinct faces, and I enjoyed having recruits that fed into the main story, but sadly that only happened with Stephane.

I can certainly see what you mean about their usefulness though. They're good for getting you out of a big fight quickly during free roam, but it's a shame we can't use them in missions. How would you feel if the recruits specific skills became a puzzle element in the missions, i.e. you had to figure out the to get through this zone, you would need to use Recruit X's ability in a particular way?

I agree that the recruits were better than ever in AC3. They had more personality and more things they could do. I don't think they are horrible. It's just that it has been done now and I don't see a big reason to use them. I would prefer more gadgets for the protagonist instead for puzzles. It's also immersion breaking how they magically appears. It looks kind of stupid tbh.



Yeah I'm with you on that, particularly with the Homestead. I really like to see the world change as buildings go up and a place becomes populated with more (and happier) people, but there were way too many empty missions padding that out.

Yeah those "I left X in city Y" -missions were pretty lame lol.




Ah. Now, I would have to fight you on this. Those tunnels earn their keep, and I want them to stay, especially if the game goes to any English or Scottish cities. If you don't want to use them, you've got plenty of other options for fast travel, so they're just a means of earning additional points. Running overground doesn't really take that long.

First off the "if you don't like it, don't use it"-argument is kind of dangerous. As I said in my OP there are many problems associated with having too many systems. Another system that was better than ever. If they keep them (in say a British setting) I wish they fleshed them out a lot more. That's kind of the general philosophy I want the game to adopt: if you do something, make it deep enough to be fun.



I felt the same way. I used it a few times and quickly ditched it. It wasn't very well planned out, it took too long to discover recipes and gain the ability to use them, and constantly keeping the assassins working abroad provided plenty of money. Still, if they keep it I don't care, because again this was something you could take or leave.

I care because it is resources and time that could have been spent better elsewhere.



Yeah, I'm done. The animus would be a nice surprise from time to time, if they've got a genuinely good modern day story to tell at that particular time. I'd be fine if most ACs were just episodes in history though, and I wouldn't cringe myself inside out as often.

I think it's one of those thing that if they got rid of it people would be mad at first. But after playing the game noone would really care. It just something that complicates everything with little gain. Let the player be modern day character and the XBOX/PS/PC/Wii be the Animus. No need for an extra level.



Again, this doesn't hurt me. I don't really get the problem: if 100% is important, then you ought to be an obsessive person who's into fiddly details and repetition. If you're not willing to do that, it doesn't matter if you finish the game with 60% or 100%: you still completed the game.

I didn't get 100% on every mission and it didn't hurt too bad ;). My problem is that it feels like they design the missions around the synch mechanic. In other words they have decided what the proper way to complete a mission is. Then they have conveniently placed things, like say a bale of hay, so that the player can complete the mission according to plan.




For AC's third-person combat, I expect the easiest improvement is to work on rewarding the player for excellent timing, and detecting and punishing button-mashing. I'm in two minds as to whether this would enormously improve the game or not, but I'd like something in the game that made me wary about starting fights.

Button mashing is a bit discourage to be fair. I mean if you mash counter Connor will just throw the enemies without hurting them. Also if you mash attack you may miss a counter. But I see what you mean, it could be more distinct.




This is a resource problem, as much as anything. Much as the current consoles can't handle the physics modelling that PCs can do, they also can't spare cycles to govern complex group AI and all of the variables that come with it. Expect big improvement in AI a couple of years into the next gen though.

This is probably very true. AC is one of the franchises I look forward to the most next gen.




What do you mean by this? I have a couple of ideas about how you could enter a slow-motion mode and use selection of surfaces to decide your movements; is that the kind of thing you mean?

As it is now the game basically does all the work. I think requiring some timing for some moves would be nice. Like making the slide player controled and perhaps jumping over small objects, so you have to time it correctly to flow (similar to Mirror's Edge). Also more moveable objects would be nice.



I understand people not liking QTEs for presentation reasons, but then again... if you think about it, there's not a lot of difference between the game asking you to press B and then A, and the block-disarm-attack combat that we use in free-flowing combat. I get what you mean, but I didn't hate the hunting.

I thought sneaking in the stalking zones and using traps were ok. There are many things you can't do in QTE that you could in normal combat. Like choosing weapons, control movement and so on. Another problem with the QTEt was that all animals felt exactly the same. A bear was not much different from a moose (or whatever it was) etc.




Always room for improvement. It must be a nightmare to make a horse work with an uneven landscape which causes a character to hop, climb and dive around on foot.

True and I understand that they focus on the freerunning which is really neat. I also think it's a factor of console hardware. If they have faster horses they must stream the world faster, something the consoles can't do at this point,.




Yes. To be fair, AC3 had quite a lot of treasures that you had to approach indirectly, but it's good to make the player earn those things.

They were not that smart though. More like search the area a little. I wouldn't mind a few Zelda like puzzles or something.




Yes, I thought ACB's simulation rooms were perfect.

Yeah they were great.



I'll agree with the basis of that, although I don't mind punishment. What I miss is that in AC2 and ACB, I used to wander around the mission objective buildings, casing the area and looking for different ways in, and then I'd go and test them. I'd like to get back to that kind of design and expand on it. A game can be a lot shorter and tighter with that kind of design, and be more fun as a result while still having new things to experience on a replay. I keep saying "Dishonored" on this forum, and I'll do it again: like Dishonored. There you go.

Completely agree, I missed that feeling. The fort side missions were a lot of fun in that sense though. I haven't played Dishonored yet, I really should :D!

Sushiglutton
12-04-2012, 08:27 PM
>>. Secondly the core mechanics (such as combat) won't be as good as they should <<
Nope, cannot agree there - combat is enhanced and much better - even more difficult in a way as there's more than plain button mashing.
I hope they never go back to the previous mechanics (much as I loved Ezio & previous combat) :)
(not that improvements can't be made)..

I agree the combat was better than ever. Basically the first time I have ever had fun with AC combat. But it wasn't as good as say Arkham Asylum. And even further behind Arkham City. Ubi could do a lot better!



>> Here are some things I think should be removed:

- Recruits. They add very little in terms of gameplay (you're not even allowed to use them in most missions) and were tedious to unlock.
ACR was awesome with heavy Recruit interaction and presence... plus their own dens to manage. That was a fantastic element I'd love to see more of.
I guess the best solution would be to let us use the recruits on more missions if we wanted. I like using them, it felt like I was more of a team with them working with me. I almost think Recruiting could be a separate game itself... it was my favorite thing to do in ACB & ACR.

We have different opinions that's cool. If they keep them I think they need to be fleshed out even more.




- Way too many "go here, press a button (if even that)"-type missions.
Chests, trinkets, feathers, almanac pages, deliviries, mini assassinations, homestead missions, adventurer missions and probably a few I forgot. They are simply not fun. K, so skip them all and let others who do love it, enjoy them..

No doesn't work that way. Like I said in my OP the vast amount of content causes many problems. Other systems suffer. And when they do, my enjoyment of the game suffers. And then I suffer.




- Trade/crafting. Not really needed. It's the monetary system - most chests didn't have alot of $$ & there were alot fewer of them. The Homestead/crafting/trading system was brilliant. Again, if you have no interest, SKIP IT ALL and leave that for people who do enjoy it (like me)..

I liked the story part of the Homestead and the idea of building a comunity. Your second point I replied to above.




- Modern day part.? .

What happens outside of the animus. Desmond missions basically.


- Full synchronization. << I'm fine w/ leaving it, but there has to be difficulty level added or keep synching - there are whole threads on it so I won't elaborate.

Yeah I noticed that thread. I'm also ok with it as long as it doesn't interfer too much with mission design.

Dymez_510
12-04-2012, 09:14 PM
Here are some things I think should be removed:

- Recruits. They add very little in terms of gameplay (you're not even allowed to use them in most missions) and were tedious to unlock.

No way. I loved it! Even if I couldn't use them in every mission -- if anything -- I would prefer to be able to use them in more missions. It's fun having a small tandem of assassins that you recruit, train to get better, and help earn you some extra money. I would like to see this feature expand instead of being removed.


- Way too many "go here, press a button (if even that)"-type missions. Chests, trinkets, feathers, almanac pages, deliviries, mini assassinations, homestead missions, adventurer missions and probably a few I forgot. They are simply not fun.

I don't see how this is a hindrance of any kind. All open-world/sandbox style games have these collectibles that, if you do complete them, will help you out with a slight boost of some sort (health, cash, weaponry, etc.). They are also easily avoidable. I mean, you don't have to do them, they are extras. Things like that are put there for the gamer's benefit if they choose to do so.


- Tunnels. Just have some simple fast traveling mechanic.

They actually are a simple fast traveling mechanic once you find each location. When I do decide to fast travel (which is rarely), I just select it from the start menu and load up at that location. It really wouldn't make a difference to me whether they get rid of it or not; I like to explore the world.


- Trade/crafting. Not really needed.

I disagree with this. That extra money has came in handy many of times for me after I spent half of the game ignoring trading. The crafting also provides some really cool weapons, like Washington's sword, among many others. I'd like to see that expanded on.


- Modern day part.

I don't know -- if it ties in well with the story, so be it. Desmond was facing issues in present day when it came down to the story, so I don't see how that's something that could have been avoided.


- Full synchronization.

This is another one of those things that I don't see as a hindrance. If you want to do it, do it. If you don't, skip it. This is more for the gamers who enjoy obtaining a reward for their work, which is why we have trophies/accomplishments. Normally, I avoid "100% completions" and things of that nature, but in AC3 when I realized I was at 93%, I figured "why the hell not?" I say leave it. Although I may not care much about it, other people enjoy it.


Instead of these things I would do:

- Make sure the combat is up to modern standards (aka smooth and with quickfire gadgets etc).

Definitely. Smoother combat can do nothing but help. I'm all for it. I would like some quickfire gadgets, but nothing too crazy, or else we're just looking at an alternate version of Batman.


- Work on enemy AI, especially for stealth.

I agree. Could be better. However, I always felt like with this generation of consoles, this is probably the best we're going to be able to get. I think with the next generation there will be much, much more sophisticated AI across all games... but that's just me.


- Make the parkour slightly more interactive.

Yes. It seems a bit clunky, definitely not fluid. I think repetition is the cure here. I expect better in the next AC.


- Non QTE based animal encounters.

This wouldn't bother me if I could escape it. So, I agree. I hate that I could be in the woods hunting for a specific animal or just coming from somewhere else, then a Bear comes out of no where trying to gorge me and I'm stuck in this button pressing marathon instead of being able to just get away through the trees or something. Then, usually, when I'm done with one and trying to get out of there, I get sucked up into another press-a-thon. So, definitely. Let's go at animals like humans or just be able to run away.


- Make the horses smoother/faster.

I say they should completely rip off the controls, physics, everything horse related from Red Dead Redemption.


- A few treasures hidden well that needed some cleverness from the player to find (puzzle elements perhaps).

Would be nice. Wouldn't really make a never mind for me, I'm still going to find it. Puzzle elements are what I miss from the Resident Evil franchise, though. It would be nice to see it show up somewhere.


- Create a seperate tutorial, so that the main story missions can be played more freely.

Although AC3 was my first AC, I've encountered this with other franchises that I've been a long time player of, and I was slightly annoyed that the tutorials were inserted within the actual game. So, although it didn't bother me in AC3, I'm sure it will bother me a little bit in the next installment. I understand, but it's not a make or break thing for me. Just a minor annoyance for the first 20 minutes or so of (hopefully) a 40-50 hour experience.


- Have general objectives that can be completed in a wide array of ways without punishing some of them.

Options. All games (especially of the sandbox genre) must have options! Yes, I agree with this, although I prefer the punishment. Another thing I think will be a staple of the next generation of consoles when it comes to this franchise and others like it. Looking forward to that.

ProdiGurl
12-04-2012, 09:31 PM
I agree the combat was better than ever. Basically the first time I have ever had fun with AC combat. But it wasn't as good as say Arkham Asylum. And even further behind Arkham City. Ubi could do a lot better!


That was my bad, I misunderstood what you meant about combat - I agree with you here. I had some secondary weapon lags



We have different opinions that's cool. If they keep them I think they need to be fleshed out even more.


I agree with that too - I still think they aced recruiting in ACR - missions were more relevant and we worked one on one with them.
I also loved the assassin dens... let us fully upgrade those w/ our money (ie. buy better training equipment, make it cushier, better weapons for recruits,, new outfits for them, etc. etc. Could be really fun.



No doesn't work that way. Like I said in my OP the vast amount of content causes many problems. Other systems suffer. And when they do, my enjoyment of the game suffers. And then I suffer.

I doI don't know what suffered becuz of what. - but it's a very common element in most games that you go out finding things for whatever reasons. ?
Some I grab, some I ignore.





What happens outside of the animus. Desmond missions basically.

I left the modern day one blank - I'm neutral on it. I was never a Desmond fan & I'm ok with that fading into the distance becuz my interest is in the assassins & the world they operate in.

:)

TheHumanTowel
12-04-2012, 09:34 PM
- Recruits. They add very little in terms of gameplay (you're not even allowed to use them in most missions) and were tedious to unlock.
I liked the abilities the recruits give you like the prison escort and of course assassinate. I'd rather they kept abilities like that but removed the leveling up of recruits.

- Modern day part
No. The modern day story has always been the driving force of the series and is not something you can just cut out. Assassin's Creed 2 ending without the modern day context? Makes no sense. The modern day isn't frivolous and disposable.

Work on enemy AI, especially for stealth.
Yes and more effort put into the stealth system in general. It's good it's just that not a lot of missions are designed well for stealth at all. The Fort missions are a great example of satsifying choice between stealth and action.

VibrantJarl57
12-05-2012, 12:10 AM
I disagree with some of your wants. I think the visits to the past are what has been unique and special about assassins creed. I think getting closer to modern times is what is causing the stories to get dull and lifeless. All modern warfare games are story-less boring shooters for those who want no real mental stimulation. You can leave your brain in your other pants cause with Call of Duty or others of that type, you don't need your brain. If you can finish a game in 20 hours it is a worthless game. I wish assassins creed would return to the sort of puzzle quests that they were getting to in AC 2. I would like to see more of the story of the Templars and why they are the enemy. In AC3 the Templars and Assassins sounded exactly alike. If the series viewed itself more as an adult series too there would be more of interest. I don't know why it is, but when you gear a game to under 18s it gets dull at once. I say let the kids go ask Mom and Dad what Ezio is doing to Christina - that's how the little ****s learn after all.
The characters of the first assassins, Altair and Ezio are some of the best creations in game history - Haytham Kenway was like that and they just dumped him. They need to stop doing that. If you have a gift for a thing for god's sake don't ignore it. How about a female assassin? Course she would have to have skills because her injury tolerance is not going to be like a mans - there's a challenge for players right there. I would also rather see the Abstergo/Assassins Network find a new DNA strain than for anyone to try to package and sell Altair, Ezio, and Kenway. If Desmond is dead, well that would be too bad cause I really liked Haytham Kenway and would love to see more of him, but if Desmond is dead then be done and go on. Unless Ubisoft can be 100% true to those past assassins let them go: don't ruin them with changes and stories that don't fit them.
I do agree that enemies/fighters need work. But its great that battle like the naval warfare has been added. I can see a lot of battle possibilities such as the castle siege from Brotherhood that was not really explored and what about an assassin hanging with someone nomadic like Ghengis Khan? That covers siege, cavalry and infantry as well as stealth, economic warfare and espionage. Stay in historical times please!! It is what Ubisoft does best. Not all americans are stupid twits who don't know and don't care about history.

VibrantJarl57
12-05-2012, 12:15 AM
??How about recruits that you play until they get into some terrible trouble (or you get them into some awful trouble) and must return to playing the main assassin again to save, kill or do something unusual but cool for them??

Torvaldesq
12-05-2012, 01:12 AM
This thread has quote overload. It's almost painful to read.

I'll say that I agreed about the Recruits. I actually was not that fond of them even in Brotherhood / Revelations. I feel like they don't really add that much to free roam, and don't fit well in missions (in large part because the abilities they're given would make missions too easy). I do think the idea of working with other assassin's isn't something to give up on, but I think they should find a different way of doing it.

I'm not sure what to say about combat. I've never really been impressed with the combat aspect of AC since AC 1, and AC 3 is still not all that great. AC always seemed to shine when it was about stealth and instant kills, and always felt a little ridiculous when my assassin got in a fight with 20 guys and wiped the floor with all of them because they'd come only 1-2 at a time. Though I can see why it's fun to have a mission or two where that happens no matter what and you have to fight through a lot, I'd still rather see combat developed in such a way that it's more intense skill-wise but also very punishing if you seek out open combat.

I agree that the tunnels were not interesting. Or, maybe to say it better, the level of interest they created was not in keeping with the amount of time involved in exploration. The tunnels were interesting for a very short time, but quickly became tedious as you unlocked more routes. That stuff is really only as interesting as the level of challenge associated with it. For instance, if unlocking a new route involved some intense climbing / running on a timer, I'd have more fun doing it. Just walking through empty hallways one after another though gets old quickly.

I agree that trade crafting was really not fun in this game. Just an overly complex system with little reward mixed in. Also the menu wasn't fun to work with. I'd have far preferred a menu that just let you see all the items to make in a grid and allowed you to make them if you had the materials, rather than going to a new window to actually craft each individual item.

I disagree about not wanting lots of items spread around (feathers, chests, etc.) It's a good way to encourage exploration (I'd add that they should continue with their practice of giving maps that show you the spots though - it would be very annoying if they ever went back to the way things were done in AC 1 where you had no way of knowing which items you had gotten and which ones you hadn't without visiting each location). When possible though, I think they should try to make reaching those things involve more fun challenges. And they definitely could use more puzzles.

I disagree about synchronization. It creates two difficulties for each mission. Easy difficulty for just getting through it, and hard difficulty for getting 100%. I feel like it gives them room to create an interesting set of challenges. They just need to use better discretion and make sure that optional objectives are not too prone to bad randomness. An example of a very bad set of optional objectives is the Giant and the Storm naval mission (to destroy three ships by targeting their gunpowder barrels). They also need to be aware that people seeking those should not have to go through a long portion of the mission to get back to the part that's difficult over and over again.

I disagree that the modern day story should be removed. I think the modern day connection is one of the most interesting aspects of Assassin's Creed. I do think they need to take a lot of time to carefully consider the reasons for going back and whether those reasons seem particularly strong. It's too easy to fall back on, "We need another key for ANOTHER temple we didn't know about before." And it's also too easy to get stupidly convoluted with time-traveling messages (it's already pretty messy and convoluted, and not in a clever way, just in a way that makes it look like the writers didn't care about logical plotholes well enough). So what should they do? I don't know. If I was a writer being paid to do this though, I think I could come up with a good plot given a year.

montagemik
12-05-2012, 01:50 AM
This thread has quote overload. It's almost painful to read.





Since when has a Topic that involves I WANT ever been a short list & had a lack of people Wanting more ?
It's ALL about having their WANTS acknowledged & noticed. ;)

PANiC_ATTACKER
12-05-2012, 11:28 AM
I agree almost completely with the OP!. AC has become full of fluff that is not needed! like recruits and RPG elements. AC3 was like watching a really long and boring movie where i didn't care about any of the characters!
AC2 was the greatest game they made, take it back to basics Ubi

shobhit7777777
12-05-2012, 12:24 PM
I agree almost completely with the OP!. AC has become full of fluff that is not needed! like recruits and RPG elements. AC3 was like watching a really long and boring movie where i didn't care about any of the characters!
AC2 was the greatest game they made, take it back to basics Ubi

TBH The recruits were a positive addition to the AC lore IMO. Its not fluff since it builds on the mythos and adds to the core of the "Assassin" gameplay. But yeah....some of the fat on the game is just..sickening. AC2 IMO was a great balance between the diversionary fluffy facebook BS bits and the actual core gameplay. ACR IMO perfected the formula..with AC3 taking a few steps back.

ProdiGurl
12-05-2012, 12:42 PM
??How about recruits that you play until they get into some terrible trouble (or you get them into some awful trouble) and must return to playing the main assassin again to save, kill or do something unusual but cool for them??

I had made a post somewhere as a suggest that it could be fun if we had the ability to go rescue them in failing missions once their mission isn't going well. I notice the risk is higher for failure in ACIII than it was in previous games.


Since when has a Topic that involves I WANT ever been a short list & had a lack of people Wanting more ?
It's ALL about having their WANTS acknowledged & noticed. ;)
LOL - every time I see your name I think, "I WANT". hahha. But in essence, that's what I see alot too but at the same time tho, I think suggestions are good and important but you definitely have a point as I rummaged around the past 4 pages yesterday. yikes.:nonchalance:


TBH The recruits were a positive addition to the AC lore IMO. Its not fluff since it builds on the mythos and adds to the core of the "Assassin" gameplay. But yeah....some of the fat on the game is just..sickening. AC2 IMO was a great balance between the diversionary fluffy facebook BS bits and the actual core gameplay. ACR IMO perfected the formula..with AC3 taking a few steps back.

Hey, we finally agree on something! :D ACR's best work was on the Recruit system all around. From dens to one-on-one missions, to den defense (just disliked the system they used for defense - much prefer open combat), to running with them on the rooftop to a mission, you felt like you were part of a significant Order. I don't like the concept of just being a lonely rogue assassin that does my own thing my own way & it's all about me and for me.

This is a huge network - assassins vs. Templars and I think it's a group effort on both sides. That should be the concept of AC.
I let it go that there is alot less 'brotherhood' in ACIII becuz the story plot is that Achilles dropped the ball and let the Templars get out of control and shunned his duty. So there won't be that presence in this game - Connor is doing the work to build it back up now. I hope to see more of them in the next game and I'd seriously suggest Devs offering us the ability to upgrade our Dens.

*ps. I realize you had moved topic to fluff, but I think Recruiting was nearly perfected in ACR along w/ the fluff balance. However the game was shorter - I would have liked more 'fluff' (assassin contracts, etc)

zelda.franco
12-05-2012, 12:56 PM
Hello!!
Do you realise that the things you think should be removed are many of the things that make the game more dificult??
And this is a game not a movie, How do you conceive the idea of a game without collectible items (almanac pages, feathers, chests, trinkets for example.)??
The full synchronization is one of the best things of the game!!
Moderns days part makes a very good story and AC series it is all about the story.
Connor is the only active assassin in the colonies and you expect no recruits for train, the order of assassins would be very disagree.
------
"Make sure the combat is up to modern standards" YOU mean more easily.
"Non QTE based animal encounters." You want to fight against a bunny or wolf like you fight a guard.
"Create a seperate tutorial, so that the main story missions can be played more freely. " I am totally agree with this.

-----
Sorry for my english!!

shobhit7777777
12-05-2012, 02:25 PM
Hey, we finally agree on something! :D ACR's best work was on the Recruit system all around. From dens to one-on-one missions, to den defense (just disliked the system they used for defense - much prefer open combat), to running with them on the rooftop to a mission, you felt like you were part of a significant Order. I don't like the concept of just being a lonely rogue assassin that does my own thing my own way & it's all about me and for me.

This is a huge network - assassins vs. Templars and I think it's a group effort on both sides. That should be the concept of AC.
I let it go that there is alot less 'brotherhood' in ACIII becuz the story plot is that Achilles dropped the ball and let the Templars get out of control and shunned his duty. So there won't be that presence in this game - Connor is doing the work to build it back up now. I hope to see more of them in the next game and I'd seriously suggest Devs offering us the ability to upgrade our Dens.

*ps. I realize you had moved topic to fluff, but I think Recruiting was nearly perfected in ACR along w/ the fluff balance. However the game was shorter - I would have liked more 'fluff' (assassin contracts, etc)


I'll agree with you on anything AC if it:

1. Keeps to the mythos of Assassin vs Templar covert war
2. Expands the gameplay in meaningful ways i.e. ties into the fantasy of being an ASSASSIN
3. Expands the options available to the player in the main gameplay loop - The recruits were very versatile..use them for single sentry elimination for a sneak attack, use them for a direct approach or create diversions. This encouraged experimentation and gave the player tactics while still focusing on the core of Assassin like gameplay

If it fulfills the above criteria (As decided by me :cool:) I'll have no problems with it.

TrueAssassin77
12-05-2012, 04:37 PM
recruits....

I'm sorry but i disagree.

the game is called Assassin's Creed. A CREED is basically a brotherhood, or a group of like minded individuals. it actually MAKES SENSE that we have recruits or partners. like it literally fits in with the story. them being useless is an opinion anyhow. i love using them..... in ACR and ACB, since they looked like actual assassins. i try to avoid it in this game because, having a cook come to my side in battle just doesn't feel right with me. they seemed more like a gang, rather than a brotherhood...

you are also contradicting your own philosophy, you ask for more freedom, yet you aim to delete optional elements of the game that actually creates freedom

TrueAssassin77
12-05-2012, 04:43 PM
and yes i agree with prod, the recruit system was awesome in ACR... o bad it was dumbed down in ACR in stupid ways. Why? i know that the assassin don' have much of a presence, but in terms of customization, it shouldn't be effected. i have an artisan that can craft cloths.... so why am i not asking her to make assassin cloths? i have an artisan that makes weapons... so why am i not asking him to craft weapons. i have artisans that could make houses... so why can't i ask them to make "assassin dens" in my homestead? everything points to the idea that, if anything we should have increased customization in this game. the devs could used the homestead to completely revamp the customization in this game. you have all the tools to do whatever the hell you want! but they are limited.