PDA

View Full Version : A idea on how to fix full sync :)



ToughGuy31
02-18-2013, 07:04 AM
Hi, after reading one of our threads here about level design, I thought it was time I shared my idea on full sync. A lot of people have complained that full sync adds another layer of linearity, and I thought of a idea of how to fix it. Let's say you’re playing a assassination mission, and you want to plow right through the enemy instead of sneak around them, but the optional objective says you have to be undetected. Well, what if instead of saying exactly what to do, it says nothing. So you decide to plow right through them and get a kill streak of ten. All of a sudden, your sync bar goes up, and you completed a optional objective. You kill 10 more, and it goes up again, but you still haven't gotten full sync. You decide to run right through to your target, and kill him with a air assassination. Your sync bar goes all the way up, and you get full sync. (Duh) The game tracked what you where doing, and since you where a total bad-***, you got full sync because you did a air assassination, beat the level within this time, and got 2 kill streaks of ten.
But some other guy can run around the enemies, not killing a single person except for the target, hides in some hay, does a leap of faith, and finishes the mission within x time. He also gets full sync because the game rewarded him for a number of points he had, not the objectives he had to complete. You’ll get points for killing x amount of people, but you can also get points for not killing anyone. You just need to get x amount of points to get full sync. This would benefit all types of players instead of a minority. As long as you get x amount of points on the mission, you’re good to go.

bveUSbve
02-18-2013, 10:28 AM
Criteria for full synchronization in many cases indeed were pretty annoying for me. Generally they tend to discourage experimentation on diverse ways to achieve an objective. And they seem completely arbitrary many a time - not based on some general principle of the Templar/Assassin you are currently playing as, like "kill as few as possible"/"kill as many as possible".

But what appears to be arbitrary can be "explained" just like this: for full sync you have to do it a certain way simply because that's the way Ezio/Haytham/Connor did it.

And that's also the reason why your proposition - an interesting one in itself - doesn't conform to what has been established for the animus and "synchronization".

pacmanate
02-18-2013, 10:33 AM
If anything, they should always have 2. One like normal, 3-4 objectives, or one stealth which criteria could be "Limit kills to 5" "Don't be seen".

AjinkyaParuleka
02-18-2013, 12:14 PM
Wish we could be Agent 47 :(.

SuperLoboMau 25
02-18-2013, 12:39 PM
They should remove full sync. The only I liked was the one in brotherhood when you need kill the fat guy from a bench.

SixKeys
02-18-2013, 06:39 PM
I like OP's idea. They can keep full sync, but it shouldn't be obvious. Just track the player's progress quietly in the background. In the multiplayer this is already the case. Most of the time when you complete a challenge, it's purely by accident, so it feels rewarding when an achievement notification suddenly pops up. If you want to keep track of the challenges, there's a separate menu for that. So players who want the extra challenge can check up on the full sync requirements in a separate menu while those who want to do things their way won't have to be annoyed by the "failed" red text.

AjinkyaParuleka
02-18-2013, 06:50 PM
They should remove full sync. The only I liked was the one in brotherhood when you need kill the fat guy from a bench.
Yeah lol,the second fat guy in the AC serious.

Frank9182011
02-18-2013, 08:11 PM
I think it would work better as a score system similar to that seen in Mark of the Ninja last year. This encourages creativity while still giving players objectives to shoot for. Mark of the Ninja's scoring system encouraged numerous play-through's of virtually all of the levels given the variability of the scoring system (all-kill play-through's, no-kill play-through's, etc.).

This system could be enhanced using a hybrid of Liberation's costume system and Mark of the Ninja's outfit system, which complemented its scoring system with unique abilities suited to different play-through styles.

Sushiglutton
02-18-2013, 09:48 PM
I think your idea is similar to what Ubi is doing in Splinter Cell? I mean scoring different playstyle, so that no matter how you choose to play you still get a good score if you play that style well. I must say I really like this concept of yours and look forward to see how it works in Blacklist. For something like you are suggesting to work in AC the missions have to become a lot less restricted in general. There is kind of no point to reward different playstyles when only one is allowed. That said, opening up the missions is something I really want anyway and then your system would work fine.


Criteria for full synchronization in many cases indeed were pretty annoying for me. Generally they tend to discourage experimentation on diverse ways to achieve an objective. And they seem completely arbitrary many a time - not based on some general principle of the Templar/Assassin you are currently playing as, like "kill as few as possible"/"kill as many as possible".

But what appears to be arbitrary can be "explained" just like this: for full sync you have to do it a certain way simply because that's the way Ezio/Haytham/Connor did it.

And that's also the reason why your proposition - an interesting one in itself - doesn't conform to what has been established for the animus and "synchronization".

Yeah you are correct that is the explanation. But isn't it kind of boring to follow a script someone else has thought out? I mean the point of gaming is the interactivity. Trying to play exactly as the ancestor did is kind of counter to that, even though it makes sense from a story point of view. Personally I think gameplay fun trumps story consistency in this situation :).

Gi1t
02-18-2013, 10:09 PM
Criteria for full synchronization in many cases indeed were pretty annoying for me. Generally they tend to discourage experimentation on diverse ways to achieve an objective. And they seem completely arbitrary many a time - not based on some general principle of the Templar/Assassin you are currently playing as, like "kill as few as possible"/"kill as many as possible".

But what appears to be arbitrary can be "explained" just like this: for full sync you have to do it a certain way simply because that's the way Ezio/Haytham/Connor did it.

And that's also the reason why your proposition - an interesting one in itself - doesn't conform to what has been established for the animus and "synchronization".

The problem isn't that it doesn't make any sense, but that it's discouraging to creativity. No other factor of the games relies on this rating system, so I think the game wouldn't be missing much if it were removed or replaced. It isn't worth it to have the idea of 'this is how it was done before' if all it really does is annoy the player. So I think the suggestions by ToughGuy31 and Frank918 make a lot of sense.

SixKeys
02-18-2013, 11:05 PM
The whole "you must do this because that's how the ancestor did it" is stupid anyway. As the player, I should be the one in control. If I choose to carry out a mission a certain way, then that's how the ancestor did it. That's the power of imagining yourself as an assassin. Some people like the idea of being an unstoppable tank, others get more satisfaction out of sneaking. In AC2 it was said that in order to be fully synched with Ezio, you had to get Altaïr's armor, but it wasn't forced upon you. If you didn't finish all the tombs before the end, you never got big red text popping up during the dramatic final moments saying you failed something. That is how it should be. If they want full sync to be in the game, it needs to be inconspicuous and not take away the enjoyment of players who don't wish to concern themselves with arbitrary restrictions.

Frank9182011
02-18-2013, 11:37 PM
The whole "you must do this because that's how the ancestor did it" is stupid anyway. As the player, I should be the one in control. If I choose to carry out a mission a certain way, then that's how the ancestor did it. That's the power of imagining yourself as an assassin. Some people like the idea of being an unstoppable tank, others get more satisfaction out of sneaking. In AC2 it was said that in order to be fully synched with Ezio, you had to get Altaïr's armor, but it wasn't forced upon you. If you didn't finish all the tombs before the end, you never got big red text popping up during the dramatic final moments saying you failed something. That is how it should be. If they want full sync to be in the game, it needs to be inconspicuous and not take away the enjoyment of players who don't wish to concern themselves with arbitrary restrictions.

I tend to agree with this - well put.

If you'd like to discuss this further, we have an interesting conversation in the "Should AC3's sync system be more like Mark of the Ninja?" thread I started.

I feel like mission structure is perhaps the most interesting and debatable AC3 discussion point. So, in my opinion, the more the merrier!

ToughGuy31
02-19-2013, 02:03 AM
Thanks for all the responses. I think it shouldn't be exactly how your ancestor did it, but just be as bad-*** as your ancestor.

bveUSbve
02-21-2013, 09:24 AM
The whole "you must do this because that's how the ancestor did it" is stupid anyway.
I don't think it's necessarily always "stupid". It depends on the circumstances and the given objective; but granted, those in ACIII quite often were stupid because they didn't make any sense in the situation or urged you to do things a certain way without good reason - and many a time they seemed unfair (to me - but maybe I only have to "L2P"?). However, the general concept itself makes sense within the animus-setting.

The way I see it, Ubisoft introduced optional full-sync objectives as an answer to all the criticism of the game being too easy. For unknown reasons they didn't want to do what everyone else does: let the player choose between several difficulty-settings for the whole game. Obviously, difficulty-settings still would be a good thing with regard to combat.

On the other hand it's a strength of the full-sync concept to bring (optional) challenges to the gameplay aside from combat. Of course there may be better means to achieve something like this. (I have to look into the discussion elsewhere that has been mentioned.)


In AC2 it was said that in order to be fully synched with Ezio, you had to get Altaïr's armor, but it wasn't forced upon you.
Good example. But the"full-sync" type we here are talking about made its first appearance in 'Brotherhood'. And generally in that it was handled better than in ACIII, I think, although there already were some rather "unfair" full-sync conditions in some quests.


If you didn't finish all the tombs before the end, you never got big red text popping up during the dramatic final moments saying you failed something. That is how it should be. If they want full sync to be in the game, it needs to be inconspicuous and not take away the enjoyment of players who don't wish to concern themselves with arbitrary restrictions.
Very good point. Those unavoidable obtrusive "YOU FAILED!" messages were a big design misstep. It felt like the game mocking you - for not being a "perfect" player or for just doing your own thing. And it didn't help that the presentation of full-sync criteria at the beginning of each mission could be missed so easily ...

SuperLoboMau 25
02-21-2013, 11:39 AM
The whole "you must do this because that's how the ancestor did it" is stupid anyway. As the player, I should be the one in control.

It's the point, we must have the control. I finish AC's games 2 or more times, one to do what I want and other to full sync. I feel ridiculous trying make something happens.

trever09
02-21-2013, 01:37 PM
I think Full-Sync is just a way of keeping canonical to the 2012 Story line, or wherever AC goes next. I'm also sure that one developer said that it was there if someone wanted to do it (The Mission) more like a real Assassin would do it or something like that.

dxsxhxcx
02-21-2013, 02:43 PM
If you didn't finish all the tombs before the end, you never got big red text popping up during the dramatic final moments saying you failed something. That is how it should be

I didn't see anyone talking about this until now but in AC3 this is even worse, now often once we finish a mission the screen freezes and the 100% sync requirements appear and most part of the time once we skip this screen we are teleported to other place, IMO this made the game look like it's divided by stages instead of an open world game, in the previous games, the transition from one mission/sequence to other was much more natural...