PDA

View Full Version : Why are the ubisoft's games so easy?



SuperLoboMau 25
01-13-2013, 10:56 PM
Ubisoft, recently, has made a excelent work in the story of the games, but they are pretty easy, look to all AC's games and Far Cry 3. It's a failure in my opinion, what do you guys think about it?

xboxauditore
01-13-2013, 11:06 PM
Far cry 3 Is not easy. At least it wasn't for me.

But yeah the other games are very easy to finish.

zzmorg82
01-13-2013, 11:08 PM
Well, every game now-a-days usually take about 2 days to complete if you're a hard core gamer such as myself. But the replay and side missions is what makes the game more longer to complete.

Sushiglutton
01-13-2013, 11:14 PM
I guess Ubi believes that easy games will sell more. AC is a very mainstream franchise with over ten million players (I think?). It's also a franchise with a strong emphasize on story and exploration of beautiful historical worlds. For these reasons many of the AC players are very poor gamers (that's not to say that they are lesser as humans ofc :) ). Ubi tries to design the games so that all these gamers can get through them and experience as much of the content as possible. This means handholding, an insane amount of tutorials, automated controls, waypoints for everything, linear paths and so on.

Ubi probably believes more advanced gamers will buy it anyway thanks to the graphics and production values (and I think they are correct). But this is not a gamers franchise sadly and likely never will be. My personal opinion is that it's a big shame :(. I do enjoy the high production values, but the mediocre and restricted gameplay is very frustrating. I want to believe Ubi can step it up, but after five games I'm pretty cynical about it.

xboxauditore
01-13-2013, 11:18 PM
I guess Ubi believes that easy games will sell more. AC is a very mainstream franchise with over ten million players (I think?). It's also a franchise with a strong emphasize on story and exploration of beautiful historical worlds. For these reasons many of the AC players are very poor gamers (that's not to say that they are lesser as humans ofc :) ). Ubi tries to design the games so that all these gamers can get through them and experience as much of the content as possible. This means handholding, an insane amount of tutorials, automated controls, waypoints for everything, linear paths and so on.

Ubi probably believes more advanced gamers will buy it anyway thanks to the graphics and production values (and I think they are correct). But this is not a gamers franchise sadly and likely never will be. My personal opinion is that it's a big shame :(. I do enjoy the high production values, but the mediocre and restricted gameplay is very frustrating. I want to believe Ubi can step it up, but after five games I'm pretty cynical about it.

Excuse me sir, Do you have time to talk about the glory that is Bioshock?

Sushiglutton
01-13-2013, 11:22 PM
Excuse me sir, Do you have time to talk about the glory that is Bioshock?

Maybe :D, what do you want to talk about (haven't played it in a few years)?

SuperLoboMau 25
01-13-2013, 11:22 PM
If they permit us change game's difficult it would be already allright, I guess. AC franchise has an amazing potential, but it would be very better explored in other undertaking's hand. It's true that 90% of current games are easy, but when they have "Very hard" option, become acceptable.

PandaPuff86
01-13-2013, 11:50 PM
Ubisoft, recently, has made a excelent work in the story of the games, but they are pretty easy, look to all AC's games and Far Cry 3. It's a failure in my opinion, what do you guys think about it?

The way I think of it is that there's more things and places to explore which makes the game last long and sometimes hard. The game is made to be easy because most people are not hardcore gamers. I would love a more difficult game in AC but I would have to go elsewhere. Funny thing is is that before the Thanksgiving Day patch the game was hard already including the chase with that guy before going to prison. Kids whine and Ubi listens then we got a much more easier game to play. Sad really...

Gi1t
01-13-2013, 11:53 PM
Excuse me sir, Do you have time to talk about the glory that is Bioshock?

In terms of what exactly? Difficulty? I finished 1 and 2 on their hard modes and they were still pretty easy. In both cases I had massive quantities of ADAM left over at the end. (I had over 2000 left at the end of 2).

Sometimes settings are the only good way to give players different experiences relative to their skills. Even so, what I like to see are games that make things challenging, but not just difficult for the sake of being difficult. I think not giving players checkpoints and making them redo a ton of stuff they already did when they die is just weak. I prefer to see the challenge focused on the enemies or challenges themselves. THEY should be the factors that impede further progress, not the rules of the game. I'd rather see a save point right before a much tougher boss than a lot of retracing prior steps leading up to a boss that's just sort of tough. That's why I always say accessibility and difficulty are separate. A game can be hard even if it's accessible, in fact, it can be much harder because the accessibility allows you to throw much tougher challenges at the player without the game getting boring.

Th3Aw3som3On31
01-14-2013, 12:01 AM
Excuse me sir, Do you have time to talk about the glory that is Bioshock?

I don't mean to argue or offend, but I started Bioshock 2 (Bought it used for $9) and didn't like it at all. Took it back like 3 days later :/

IronEagl3
01-14-2013, 12:20 AM
The most unlinear & difficult AC game to date imo is AC1.

SkiesSeven
01-14-2013, 12:56 AM
Ubisoft, recently, has made a excelent work in the story of the games, but they are pretty easy, look to all AC's games and Far Cry 3. It's a failure in my opinion, what do you guys think about it?

Honestly I like games that inspire creativity and choice in one's approach, like Far Cry 3, instead of games that just crank up the difficulty so that you have to repeat the same boring, cheap sequences, over and over again. It's unfortunate that people praise games based on difficulty when it's actually a really OLD ploy from game developers who don't know any other way of prolonging a game creatively.

SuperLoboMau 25
01-14-2013, 01:00 AM
Honestly I like games that inspire creativity and choice in one's approach, like Far Cry 3, instead of games that just crank up the difficulty so that you have to repeat the same boring, cheap sequences, over and over again. It's unfortunate that people praise games based on difficulty when it's actually a really OLD ploy from game developers who don't know any other way of prolonging a game creatively.

It isn't about prolong the game, but put more emotion in each mission.

Bashilir
01-14-2013, 03:10 AM
Honestly I like games that inspire creativity and choice in one's approach, like Far Cry 3, instead of games that just crank up the difficulty so that you have to repeat the same boring, cheap sequences, over and over again. It's unfortunate that people praise games based on difficulty when it's actually a really OLD ploy from game developers who don't know any other way of prolonging a game creatively.

I agree with this. Difficulty just makes the game aggravating. I'd rather have creativity and cool things rather then "We're going to increase this guy's health by alot and make the number of enemies go up by 10x." Lame.

victthoe
01-14-2013, 04:41 AM
It's true that 90% of current games are easy, but when they have "Very hard" option, become acceptable.http://webcardid.com/apple/images/a14http://www.sdra.info/k2.jpg

Gi1t
01-14-2013, 05:25 AM
Honestly I like games that inspire creativity and choice in one's approach, like Far Cry 3, instead of games that just crank up the difficulty so that you have to repeat the same boring, cheap sequences, over and over again. It's unfortunate that people praise games based on difficulty when it's actually a really OLD ploy from game developers who don't know any other way of prolonging a game creatively.

Exactly! :D Making you go back through half of the level and re-fight a bunch of enemies you already defeated is not difficulty, that's merely forcing the player to spend more time playing the easier sections of a game instead of focusing attention and time spent on the more challenging aspects that are supposed ot be the stars of the show.


It isn't about prolong the game, but put more emotion in each mission.

If the only way to make a boss fight emotional is to make death really frustrating because you lose a bunch of progress, then I would say that it's not a very impressive boss fight to begin with.


I agree with this. Difficulty just makes the game aggravating. I'd rather have creativity and cool things rather then "We're going to increase this guy's health by alot and make the number of enemies go up by 10x." Lame.

Agreed. Too many games just crank up the stats and call it hard mode. I want to see more games add new challenges to the harder difficulties, like new enemies and new abilities for existing ones, more complex puzzles etc.

SuperLoboMau 25
01-14-2013, 09:39 AM
It's not about repeat a part you have already made when you die. God of war and Halo (many other games) in Very Hard mode is enough to me and you don't need repeat. The emotion is just have to use your skills with inteligence and dexterity to win. Ubi just need put an option to change difficult, in very hard your health could be low and enemies attack a little more and its allright.

Assassin_M
01-14-2013, 10:12 AM
It's not about repeat a part you have already made when you die. God of war and Halo (many other games) in Very Hard mode is enough to me and you don't need repeat. The emotion is just have to use your skills with inteligence and dexterity to win. Ubi just need put an option to change difficult, in very hard your health could be low and enemies attack a little more and its allright.
That`s the thing they`re talking about. Difficulty settings mean 4 versions of the game. Easy one, normal one, Hard one, extreme one. You`re just repeating things, except amped up for each increasing difficulty. Creativity is not difficulty. having you repeat the same things, but harder is the difficulty, which is supposed to be dead by now...

WillNiira
01-14-2013, 01:18 PM
It all depends on how you play them, if you stealth your way through the map course etc, it will become easy. If you just go through everything and make it the hard way, of course it will become tough. It all depends on how much gameplay sequences you've seen, if you've seen a lot, then you probably know how to go through every mission. If you don't, well.. Good, it's always fun to play a game you've not seen gameplay of, it's much more tougher as well which is more fun.

PANiC_ATTACKER
01-14-2013, 02:14 PM
Way way too easy!!

ElDoucherino
01-14-2013, 03:39 PM
Agreed. Too many games just crank up the stats and call it hard mode. I want to see more games add new challenges to the harder difficulties, like new enemies and new abilities for existing ones, more complex puzzles etc.

This^. As a former game design student this was the main focus in a paper I did at the end of my studies. Creating a new mode for the hardest of level of difficulty. My experiment was to create a fps type game in which the protagonist lost abilities rather then making enemies godlike. Like for an example if shot in the leg make it harder for the player to reach certain areas of the map and so on. But this of course doesn't work for a game like AC but I rather see creative solutions for cranking up the difficulty rather then throwing in 10 more soldiers or making Connor, in this case, more vulnerable to hits. It's not fun.

And FYI, we in our class was taught to create easy games because it's alot more casual gamers these days and not every one has the time to play 40+ something hours for each title. It's sad really, but that's reality. And yes, AC is a fairly easy game...if you take the tank approach of playing. I myself always strive for playing stealthy and sometimes you succeed, sometimes you don't. The difficulty lies within making the gameplay look good if you catch my drift.

D.I.D.
01-14-2013, 03:47 PM
I don't mean to argue or offend, but I started Bioshock 2 (Bought it used for $9) and didn't like it at all. Took it back like 3 days later :/

B2 was made by a completely different team, and it's clunky as hell. I gave up after about an hour and a half, not fun. Play the original.

Sushiglutton
01-14-2013, 04:27 PM
This^. As a former game design student this was the main focus in a paper I did at the end of my studies. Creating a new mode for the hardest of level of difficulty. My experiment was to create a fps type game in which the protagonist lost abilities rather then making enemies godlike. Like for an example if shot in the leg make it harder for the player to reach certain areas of the map and so on. But this of course doesn't work for a game like AC but I rather see creative solutions for cranking up the difficulty rather then throwing in 10 more soldiers or making Connor, in this case, more vulnerable to hits. It's not fun.

And FYI, we in our class was taught to create easy games because it's alot more casual gamers these days and not every one has the time to play 40+ something hours for each title. It's sad really, but that's reality. And yes, AC is a fairly easy game...if you take the tank approach of playing. I myself always strive for playing stealthy and sometimes you succeed, sometimes you don't. The difficulty lies within making the gameplay look good if you catch my drift.

I agree that just changing the stats is not ideal, but it's better than nothing. I mean it's not for replay value, but for making that first playthrough a little bit more interesting for more experienced gamers. Obv it's also a lot cheaper than changing more intricate parts of the design. The game I have played that handles difficulty the best is Perfect Dark. It had fairly large, open levels. For every difficulty level new objectives were added that forced you to explore more areas of the map. It made every new playthrough feel fresh. About your idea to take away abilities on higher difficulties, I really hate that, sorry. On the contrary the complexity should increase on the higher difficulty levels. The player should be forced to use more of his abilities in more imaginative ways imo :).

The idea to make the challenge being about to look good, rather than to survive is great imo. That's the approach used in games like Arkham City for example. However AC doesn't even allow you to do that as the mechanics are just to simplified. For example how do you look good in a freerunning sequence? All you can do is to hold the stick in a certain direction and the game will do the rest. Every playthrough of a tomb, by a reasonable player, will look identical. Same with combat, it's just too shallow. They need to liberate the controls to allow more advanced gamers something to strive for.

Sadly what they taught you in schoold is probably very accurate. That's why the line between games and movies is getting blurrier, instead of adding more interactivity :(.

Littleweasel
01-14-2013, 05:33 PM
i personally think the AC difficulty is just right. if a game is too hard for people to complete they will not like the game as much as a game that is easier to complete

kuled2012
01-14-2013, 06:36 PM
Far cry is not easy, at least on hard mode anyway.

Gi1t
01-14-2013, 07:01 PM
I agree that just changing the stats is not ideal, but it's better than nothing. I mean it's not for replay value, but for making that first playthrough a little bit more interesting for more experienced gamers. Obv it's also a lot cheaper than changing more intricate parts of the design. The game I have played that handles difficulty the best is Perfect Dark. It had fairly large, open levels. For every difficulty level new objectives were added that forced you to explore more areas of the map. It made every new playthrough feel fresh. About your idea to take away abilities on higher difficulties, I really hate that, sorry. On the contrary the complexity should increase on the higher difficulty levels. The player should be forced to use more of his abilities in more imaginative ways imo :).

The idea to make the challenge being about to look good, rather than to survive is great imo. That's the approach used in games like Arkham City for example. However AC doesn't even allow you to do that as the mechanics are just to simplified. For example how do you look good in a freerunning sequence? All you can do is to hold the stick in a certain direction and the game will do the rest. Every playthrough of a tomb, by a reasonable player, will look identical. Same with combat, it's just too shallow. They need to liberate the controls to allow more advanced gamers something to strive for.

Sadly what they taught you in schoold is probably very accurate. That's why the line between games and movies is getting blurrier, instead of adding more interactivity :(.

I think the best way to make a game have difficulty settings that aren't just cranking up the stats would be to start from the top down, designing the hardest challenges and most complex enemies first and then simply picking out things to remove from each difficulty down. Making simpler variations of the advanced enemies, removing a couple of attacks, making puzzles a little less difficult to figure out etc. :) Perfect Dark sounds like it handles difficulty well, by doing the sensible thing and making creatve use of what they already have in the game. :D

About making it look good; I think LOSING should look good too. Most of the games I play these days, I find that actual death is very rare (unless I die on purpose), but the struggle is just to make it look good. Most games look awesome when you do everything right, but once you make a mistake, it ceases to look cool. -__- I know I bring this up way too much, but one of the games that really handles this issue well is Ninja Gaiden Black, because the enemies don't look incompetent, they don't stop attacking after one hit, they actually have attacks that are equal to many of your own in terms of how spectacular they are. Because of this, it still looks convincing whether your winning or losing; it doesn't make you go 'really? this incredible badass can't handle an attack from this guy that can barely wield a sword properly?'

The other issue with difficulty is whether or not failure goes with the story or completely kills the momentum. It's lame when they make a big deal about some epic moment in the story and then destroy that by making it waaaaay too easy to die at that part. You don't want to have a big moment interrupted by death; you want the difficuty to feel appropriate to the scene (on normal mode anyway). If you want to make something hard, then build it up that way so the player will expect to possibly die here.

Sushiglutton
01-14-2013, 07:26 PM
1) I think the best way to make a game have difficulty settings that aren't just cranking up the stats would be to start from the top down, designing the hardest challenges and most complex enemies first and then simply picking out things to remove from each difficulty down. Making simpler variations of the advanced enemies, removing a couple of attacks, making puzzles a little less difficult to figure out etc. :) Perfect Dark sounds like it handles difficulty well, by doing the sensible thing and making creatve use of what they already have in the game. :D

2) About making it look good; I think LOSING should look good too. Most of the games I play these days, I find that actual death is very rare (unless I die on purpose), but the struggle is just to make it look good. Most games look awesome when you do everything right, but once you make a mistake, it ceases to look cool. -__- I know I bring this up way too much, but one of the games that really handles this issue well is Ninja Gaiden Black, because the enemies don't look incompetent, they don't stop attacking after one hit, they actually have attacks that are equal to many of your own in terms of how spectacular they are. Because of this, it still looks convincing whether your winning or losing; it doesn't make you go 'really? this incredible badass can't handle an attack from this guy that can barely wield a sword properly?'

3) The other issue with difficulty is whether or not failure goes with the story or completely kills the momentum. It's lame when they make a big deal about some epic moment in the story and then destroy that by making it waaaaay too easy to die at that part. You don't want to have a big moment interrupted by death; you want the difficuty to feel appropriate to the scene (on normal mode anyway). If you want to make something hard, then build it up that way so the player will expect to possibly die here.

This was a very clever post, I like your style :)!

1) I would looove if they took the top-down appoach you describe! Many advanced gamers for some reason hate tools built to aid more casual gamers, which I don't get. As long as they are optional it's good for everyone. For puzzles they can be very generous with clues. For combat I wouldn't mind a mark and execute type features that would allow less experienced gamers to pause the game and just choose which weapon to kill each enemy with. That way they wouldn't have to get stuck at all. Or you could do like Super Mario Wii and let the game play itself if you fail a couple of time to get by a hard section. Then you can take back control whenever you want. Finally visual tools like clearly marking the best route though a level could also be good. Stuff like that would allow Ubi to make a more challenging, intelligent, core game.

2) Another great point :D! Enemies are very passive and don't push when they have an opening. I think it would be cool if you faced some templar specialists also. Guys trained in a similar way as you that you must deal with in multiple stages and pay attention to which move they are doing.

3) Couldn't agree more. I especially hate when QTEs are the most difficult parts of a game. The difficulty should be in the core of the game and not in some side stuff, so to speak.

Gi1t
01-14-2013, 09:49 PM
This was a very clever post, I like your style :)!

1) I would looove if they took the top-down appoach you describe! Many advanced gamers for some reason hate tools built to aid more casual gamers, which I don't get. As long as they are optional it's good for everyone. For puzzles they can be very generous with clues. For combat I wouldn't mind a mark and execute type features that would allow less experienced gamers to pause the game and just choose which weapon to kill each enemy with. That way they wouldn't have to get stuck at all. Or you could do like Super Mario Wii and let the game play itself if you fail a couple of time to get by a hard section. Then you can take back control whenever you want. Finally visual tools like clearly marking the best route though a level could also be good. Stuff like that would allow Ubi to make a more challenging, intelligent, core game.

2) Another great point :D! Enemies are very passive and don't push when they have an opening. I think it would be cool if you faced some templar specialists also. Guys trained in a similar way as you that you must deal with in multiple stages and pay attention to which move they are doing.

3) Couldn't agree more. I especially hate when QTEs are the most difficult parts of a game. The difficulty should be in the core of the game and not in some side stuff, so to speak.

Thanks! :D

1: I originally thought of this as a way to improve games like action RPGs that rely mostly on recolored enemies as the game goes on. They design abasic enemy, then when they need a new one, they save a ton of effort by recoloring it, boosting the stats and maybe adding a status effect to its attacks. But if they started with the nastiest, most complex version of an enemy and gave it a lot of attacks and animations, they could work their way down and create the weaker enemies as more limited versions of the ultimate ones. That way, they would actually change the way they fight and what attacks they use as you climb up from the other direction. If the ultimate versions have the same depth as a boss enemy, then making interesting weaker variants will be even easier than making simplistic recolors. :D

2: I just want enemies to at least LOOK like they know what they're doing. Main characters' combat animations look so good, and they're quick and stylish. Why can't the enemies execute attacks and combos with that level of professionalism? Aren't the coolest fights in a lot of games the ones where you fight yourself or someone equivalent?

3: And even when it IS in the core of the game, put it where it belongs according to the story. If you have, say, a boss fight that's at a really critical moment in the story and then you follow that with another sequence that's really more of a story sequence than a gameplay challenge, you want ot keep it moving (unless the player deliberately chooses otherwise.) You don't want the player to dies during that second part their first time through and kill all the momentum you've worked on to build up to this moment by suddenly making it frustrating. XD

Dieinthedark
01-14-2013, 10:56 PM
That's why I took 45 hours to complete it. There's no challenge whatsoever. This needs fixed, like I want to die in one or two hits. Make it believable

Th3Aw3som3On31
01-16-2013, 01:40 AM
B2 was made by a completely different team, and it's clunky as hell. I gave up after about an hour and a half, not fun. Play the original.

Ah, I might. Bioshock 1 was more expensive than 2.

montagemik
01-16-2013, 03:58 AM
Why are UBI games so easy ? = To cater for the large amount of kids that buy them is the short answer .
The more popular gaming becomes , the easier they make the games .............Take most current generation players to the old Arcade games of the past & watch them struggle .
Everything has to be instant or simpler these days or they lose interest quickly.