PDA

View Full Version : would you buy AC1 again if ...



nitres15
03-09-2013, 11:15 PM
would you buy AC1 again if it had combat from ac3,new animations(new as in new for the game,not ripped out of AC3) and completely new mission structure (which doesnīt necessarily have to change the story. The assassinations would stay the same though). I really liked AC1, but there was so many faults and problems with it, i canīt help but to think what iīd be like today. The setting is one of my favorites too.

crash3
03-09-2013, 11:20 PM
I would as long as, graphics, combat, stealth and storyline were improved-of course the storyline would have the same result

HeedfulMass4856
03-09-2013, 11:20 PM
AC1 was the best game (I-M-O); of course I'd buy it!

Maybe this could be possible: a remake of the game that started it all. I REALLY like this idea.

Epsilonyx
03-09-2013, 11:21 PM
I would buy it even it they simply updated that control scheme and graphics. I loved everything else in it.

SixKeys
03-09-2013, 11:21 PM
I would buy AC1 again if they promised not to change a thing about it except update the graphics maybe. The combat was fine the way it was and mission structure was better than in AC3. Animations are fine too, I don't see a reason to add new ones just for the sake of it.

HeedfulMass4856
03-09-2013, 11:25 PM
I would buy AC1 again if they promised not to change a thing about it except update the graphics maybe. The combat was fine the way it was and mission structure was better than in AC3. Animations are fine too, I don't see a reason to add new ones just for the sake of it.
I felt more like an 'Assassin that never got hit by his opponent' in Revelations where there was freeflow with Altair. Graphics can always be improved. I agree that the mission structures was 10 times better than ACIII. AC1 also was more realistic and plausible.

ACfan443
03-09-2013, 11:27 PM
I would buy it again if they updated the graphics, added side content and trophy support, but kept everything else the same. I love the mission structure, animations and combat just as they are.

nitres15
03-09-2013, 11:29 PM
really ? the investigations mission were super repetetive and boring in the first one. I loved ac1, but please wash that nostalgia of your face

MasterAssasin84
03-09-2013, 11:31 PM
I really liked the graphics of AC1 they was very polished in my opinion although if they upgraded the combat system to AC3 they would be on to a winner in my view.

HeedfulMass4856
03-09-2013, 11:32 PM
really ? the investigations mission were super repetetive and boring in the first one. I loved ac1, but please wash that nostalgia of your face

Naw, I'll keep it right where it is.

Honestly, a true gamer would know that it was repetitive because it was realistic. Assassin's back then did just what the game portrayed - kill, stalk, kill, kill, stalk, kill, kill, kill, etc.

SixKeys
03-09-2013, 11:33 PM
really ? the investigations mission were super repetetive and boring in the first one. I loved ac1, but please wash that nostalgia of your face

I never had a problem with them. I felt like a real assassin investigating clues and planning my mission around the information gained. Not as fast-paced as racing with some random thief across rooftops for no reason, but definitely more immersive.

HeedfulMass4856
03-09-2013, 11:34 PM
There are a plethora of elements and improvements that could be added to the game to make it as good as AC2, or maybe better (yes, I am semi-delusional).

nitres15
03-09-2013, 11:36 PM
Naw, I'll keep it right where it is.

Honestly, a true gamer would know that it was repetitive because it was realistic. Assassin's back then did just what the game portrayed - kill, stalk, kill, kill, stalk, kill, kill, kill, etc.

but that wasnīt fun at all, and guess what, being an assassin in real life probably isnīt super fun too. So what youīre saying is that every game should be repetetive just for the sake of being more realistic. And what is a "true gamer" ? The first thing that comes to mind is a hideous creature wrapped around in its favorite transformers bedsheet, living under a bridge, playing video games

ze_topazio
03-09-2013, 11:42 PM
Only thing i want is a trophy patch.

HeedfulMass4856
03-09-2013, 11:42 PM
but that wasnīt fun at all, and guess what, being an assassin in real life probably isnīt super fun too. So what youīre saying is that every game should be repetetive to be more realistic. And what is a "true gamer" ? The first thing that comes to mind is a hideous creature wrapped around in its favorite transformers bedsheet, living under a bridge, playing video games

LOL, just overlook the "true gamer" part of my comment; your description makes me shameful to call myself a true gamer.

And the realistic part is just an opinion. Call of Duty players... I mean fast-paced gamers, like games that are fast paced, but there's still some out there who actually like realistic games, whether it be fast-paced or slow.

nitres15
03-09-2013, 11:46 PM
LOL, just overlook the "true gamer" part of my comment; your description makes me shameful to call myself a true gamer.

And the realistic part is just an opinion. Call of Duty players... I mean fast-paced gamers, like games that are fast paced, but there's still some out there who actually like realistic games, whether it be fast-paced or slow.
just be a gamer. Or even better, a person who plays games.

Megas_Doux
03-09-2013, 11:47 PM
In my book:

AC I atmosphere, setting, investigations -though more varied-, mission design + AC III gameplay mechanics such as combat, tree running, weather, seasons, stalking zones, hide behind columns + AC II kind of platforming levels = BEST AC EVER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I dream about having to infiltrate Krac des chevaliers for example....

itsamea-mario
03-09-2013, 11:48 PM
I liked the way AC1 did things.....

maybe speed up the free running/climbing, maybe some new moves and more side quests and stuff.

dxsxhxcx
03-09-2013, 11:51 PM
I would buy AC1 again if they promised not to change a thing about it except update the graphics maybe. The combat was fine the way it was and mission structure was better than in AC3. Animations are fine too, I don't see a reason to add new ones just for the sake of it.


I doubt they would be able to keep the same atmosphere (just see what they did with ACR), IMO more side missions (investigations for the main assassination and side missions) could be added in order to make the game less repetitive, make the guards attack a lot faster as well, add the blending system from AC3 (at least the ability to walk among two or more people and blend) and subtitles... but don't touch the mission design.. hehe.. :p

Frank9182011
03-09-2013, 11:53 PM
I don't really get what people talk about when they say you had to use stealth to accomplish your assassinations in the first AC. Sure, like all of the other AC games, you can be stealthy when tackling missions (just look at the guy who did the pure stealth runs of the forts in AC3), but you certainly don't have to.

Hell, AC didn't have many stealth tools at all to work with. Basically the only thing you could do is fold your hands like a scholar to walk slower. At least other games give you blending, crouching, etc. As much as I personally love the first game, the investigations do feel repetitive at times, and some random beggar knocking into you and making you notorious out of nowhere felt cheap and didn't encourage more skillful play - more often than not, it was a function of luck.

When it comes to missions, you can still just run up, start a fight, parry and assassinate, and be done with ease. Of course, it's more fun to choose to be stealthy. Again, however, this choice isn't peculiar to the first AC.

To stay on topic, I've been keen on an AC1 update for a while.

crash3
03-09-2013, 11:56 PM
AC1 had an edge because you actually felt as if you were part of a brotherhood, not some one-man army like ezio and connor

dxsxhxcx
03-10-2013, 12:00 AM
AC1 had an edge because you actually felt as if you were part of a brotherhood, not some one-man army like ezio and connor

that's one thing I wish they bring back someday, sometimes I wonder how the brotherhood was able to survive after all these years, every new game they release the Order is always falling into pieces, I don't know how people still didn't get tired of that...

the only problem is that "Ezio" probably wouldn't fit in an Order like the one in AC1 (if you know what I mean)...

Frank9182011
03-10-2013, 12:01 AM
AC1 had an edge because you actually felt as if you were part of a brotherhood, not some one-man army like ezio and connor

What?

Altair is just as much of a juggernaut as Ezio and Connor. At least with the latter two, they begin inexperienced. Look at Ezio: you see him go through the entire process of induction into the Brotherhood. You then get to see him, in turn, do the same to others.

With Altair, you start as a total boss albeit very arrogant. The consequences of this arrogance are then used as a reason to demote you in order to give him a semblance of development over the course of the game. In open combat, however, it's just as easy to take down dozens of guards.

Hell, people in the game still call him "Master."

HeedfulMass4856
03-10-2013, 12:02 AM
AC1 had an edge because you actually felt as if you were part of a brotherhood, not some one-man army like ezio and connor

Exactly!


What?

Altair is just as much of a juggernaut as Ezio and Connor. At least with the latter two, they begin inexperienced. With Altair, you start as a total boss albeit very arrogant. The consequences of this arrogance are then used as a reason to demote you in order to give him a semblance of development over the course of the game. In open combat, however, it's just as easy to take down dozens of guards.

Hell, people in the game still call him "Master."

Yeah, but he was a more realistic one, IMO.

itsamea-mario
03-10-2013, 12:05 AM
What?

Altair is just as much of a juggernaut as Ezio and Connor. At least with the latter two, they begin inexperienced. With Altair, you start as a total boss albeit very arrogant. The consequences of this arrogance are then used as a reason to demote you in order to give him a semblance of development over the course of the game. In open combat, however, it's just as easy to take down dozens of guards.

Hell, people in the game still call him "Master."

He could wipe out a ton of guards if he so chose.

But there's only like one or two missions where the actual objective is to fight a group of more than 5 people.

dxsxhxcx
03-10-2013, 12:06 AM
What?

Altair is just as much of a juggernaut as Ezio and Connor. At least with the latter two, they begin inexperienced. Look at Ezio: you see him go through the entire process of induction into the Brotherhood. You then get to see him, in turn, do the same to others.

With Altair, you start as a total boss albeit very arrogant. The consequences of this arrogance are then used as a reason to demote you in order to give him a semblance of development over the course of the game. In open combat, however, it's just as easy to take down dozens of guards.

Hell, people in the game still call him "Master."

I believe what he meant is that in AC1 we (I at least) had the feeling that we were part of something bigger than us, in the next games everything revolve around the character, the Order is a mess and is up to the character to put it back on tracks...

Sushiglutton
03-10-2013, 12:10 AM
Yeah I wouldn't mind a remake, but I think it's way too early. The franchise hasn't advanced that much yet either in technology or gameplay. Maybe ten years from now or something (Playstation 5). Could be interesting.

joey-4321_web
03-10-2013, 02:37 AM
that's one thing I wish they bring back someday, sometimes I wonder how the brotherhood was able to survive after all these years, every new game they release the Order is always falling into pieces, I don't know how people still didn't get tired of that...

the only problem is that "Ezio" probably wouldn't fit in an Order like the one in AC1 (if you know what I mean)...

when did the order fall? the italian branch of the order fell in AcB, and the american branch fell sometimes between haythems and connors memories in Ac3 by haythem and the templars (i dont consider assassins creed forsaken canon). the only time the whole order ever fell was in modern day. the purge where a sleeper agent killed the assassins creed and exposed the location of most of the assassin camps. abstergo and killed everybody in them.

the order never fell to pieces before the purge.

dxsxhxcx
03-10-2013, 02:49 AM
when did the order fall? the italian branch of the order fell in AcB, and the american branch fell sometimes between haythems and connors memories in Ac3 by haythem and the templars (i dont consider assassins creed forsaken canon). the only time the whole order ever fell was in modern day. the purge where a sleeper agent killed the assassins creed and exposed the location of most of the assassin camps. abstergo and killed everybody in them.

the order never fell to pieces before the purge.

like you said the Order "fell" in ACB and a little before the events of AC3, Ezio and Connor rebuild it again in their respective time and setting, IMO in AC2 the Templars seemed much more stronger and organized than the Assassins,in AC1 both Orders looked equally big and strong (to the point where we see Robert knocking at Al Mualim's door and suffering a defeat there), while in the other games the Templars seemed to have (at least for me) an advantage over the Assassins that looked weak until the ancestor we control appear and "saves the day".

Perk89
03-10-2013, 03:09 AM
They'd have to fix a lot. Basic mechanics such as combat would have to be brought up to speed rather than the infuriating system that was used. (that sadly didn't even make Altair feel like a real Assassin, he could barely go toe to toe with a single Crusader, at least ACR fixed his reputation in that department)

They'd also have to fill the world with side quests and people that were actually engaging, as well as rework the mission structure by having each pre-assassination information round up be interesting and unique. I know a guy who wanta to get into the series so bad but refuses to because the horrible and boring repetitive work that game made you do.

There's a reason that game almost kill the series.

Oh. And Altair needs a voice actor who doesn't sound like pre pubescent angry teen, and actualy derives from Syria.

joey-4321_web
03-10-2013, 03:13 AM
like you said the Order "fell" in ACB and a little before the events of AC3, Ezio and Connor rebuild it again in their respective time and setting, IMO in AC2 the Templars seemed much more stronger and organized than the Assassins,in AC1 both Orders looked equally big and strong (to the point where we see Robert knocking at Al Mualim's door and suffering a defeat there), while in the other games the Templars seemed to have (at least for me) an advantage over the Assassins that looked weak until the ancestor we control appear and "saves the day".

Read my post again. The order never fully fell before the purge, just certain branches of it. It is a war you know.
Did you really think the entire assassin order was based in Italy at one point?
ACR proves you wrong, when ezio visits the Istanbul assassins and in embers when someone from the Chinese branch visits Ezio

Also what does IMO mean?

ACfan443
03-10-2013, 03:14 AM
really ? the investigations mission were super repetetive and boring in the first one. I loved ac1, but please wash that nostalgia of your face

Don't enforce your views on to others. It's a matter of opinion, and I for one didnt find AC1 repetitive at all. Out of all the ACs, I've replayed the first one the most. The mission structure may have been similar, but each assassination felt different because it took place in a different city, different environment and required a different approach. I'd rather they didn't change it to make Altair blow up half a district or travel through the air in some flying contraption.

Perk89
03-10-2013, 03:19 AM
Yeah, except here's the thing. Boring, repetitive mission structure isn't just some new radical idea he invented. It was *very* well documented at the time and still is treated as the biggest balk and chain of that game today.

You enjoyed it? Dandy. But acting as if what he's saying isn't the general consensus is just a fallacy.

dxsxhxcx
03-10-2013, 03:29 AM
Read my post again. The order never fully fell before the purge, just certain branches of it. It is a war you know.
Did you really think the entire assassin order was based in Italy at one point?
ACR proves you wrong, when ezio visits the Istanbul assassins and in embers when someone from the Chinese branch visits Ezio

Also what does IMO mean?

IMO = In My Opinion

when I said the Order was "falling into pieces" I wasn't being literal, what I was trying to say is that the Order (or its respective branches) looked weak in AC2/B/3, and I know that the italian and/or american branches don't represent the entire Order, I just have the habit to call the branches we see in each game "Order" because the games usually don't focus in more than one branch per game...

ACfan443
03-10-2013, 03:39 AM
Yeah, except here's the thing. Boring, repetitive mission structure isn't just some new radical idea he invented. It was *very* well documented at the time and still is treated as the biggest balk and chain of that game today.

You enjoyed it? Dandy. But acting as if what he's saying isn't the general consensus is just a fallacy.

When did I say what he said wasn't the general consensus? It's still a matter of opinion regardless. A lot of people found it repetitive, a few didn't. I'm one of the few that didn't. On paper the structure may sound repetitive, but in practice the experience varies from person to person.

Assassin_M
03-10-2013, 04:11 AM
When did I say what he said wasn't the general consensus? It's still a matter of opinion regardless. A lot of people found it repetitive, a few didn't. I'm one of the few that didn't. On paper the structure may sound repetitive, but in practice the experience varies from person to person.
This..

I still have it, but I`d buy it anyways if i wanted to....regardless of it having AC III combat and other new features...

BATISTABUS
03-10-2013, 04:47 AM
Honestly...no. There are a lot of things AC1 did right that no other game did. Even graphically, AC1 is probably the second best in the series (second to AC3).

SixKeys
03-10-2013, 04:56 AM
Why are some people here trying to tell others who enjoyed the game "the game is not enjoyable, that's a well-documented fact"? You can judge a game by its technical strengths and weaknesses, but you can't judge someone's personal enjoyment of something.

I can see how some people would get bored with the investigation missions in AC1. Personally I don't see how they're any less repetitive than the 15 thief races in the Ezio games yet nobody ever complains about those. Could it be that *gasp* people enjoy different things?

To me AC1 is an experience. Every time I dive into it again, I can feel the heat of the Middle Eastern sun, the tension as I sneak past an army of angry-sounding Turkish soldiers, the loneliness of being completely on your own in a hostile city, and the exhilaration of exploration, learning to know your surroundings simply by listening to the sounds around you and navigating based on landmarks. Sometimes I put the game on for no other reason than to walk around.

The atmosphere is what got me into the game, not the wealth of side missions, flashy kill moves or cinematic story moments. I don't want Ubisoft to ever remake the game to resemble the ones that came after, because it wouldn't be the game I love anymore. AC1 isn't perfect, but it's far more original and immersive than any of its sequels. I'd like to keep it that way.

Farlander1991
03-10-2013, 05:00 AM
Which actually leads to a good point: AC1 is the only game of the series that can be unfrustratingly completed with the HUD fully turned off. It was AWESOME playing the game like that, but AC2 and onwards, it simply just can't be done.

SixKeys
03-10-2013, 05:10 AM
Which actually leads to a good point: AC1 is the only game of the series that can be unfrustratingly completed with the HUD fully turned off. It was AWESOME playing the game like that, but AC2 and onwards, it simply just can't be done.

Yup. I always play AC1 with the HUD off, it's awesome. The cities are just the right size that you can easily learn to memorize your surroundings and you can find missions just by listening to the crowd. The town criers' repeated soundbytes might seem repetitive until you realize they were meant to be. You quickly learn the repetitive soundbytes so they become part of the background noise, so as soon as you actually hear a town crier saying different things, it grabs your attention and you know you've stumbled upon a clue. It's genius. Just like how a real assassin would go about finding information. All the religious propaganda sounds the same in every city, only the names and gods change, so he quickly learns to ignore it. But once he hears new names and new information being mentioned, he realizes there's something suspicious about this person.

Farlander1991
03-10-2013, 05:18 AM
Yup. I always play AC1 with the HUD off, it's awesome. The cities are just the right size that you can easily learn to memorize your surroundings and you can find missions just by listening to the crowd. The town criers' repeated soundbytes might seem repetitive until you realize they were meant to be. You quickly learn the repetitive soundbytes so they become part of the background noise, so as soon as you actually hear a town crier saying different things, it grabs your attention and you know you've stumbled upon a clue. It's genius. Just like how a real assassin would go about finding information. All the religious propaganda sounds the same in every city, only the names and gods change, so he quickly learns to ignore it. But once he hears new names and new information being mentioned, he realizes there's something suspicious about this person.

Yeah, and the fact that you have to actually listen to what the bureau leaders are saying to know in which locations search for information (and their relative location in relation to the bureau). Oh, and when you first enter a city, you go on a viewpoint not to reveal an icon on the map, but to actually search for a building with the assassin insignia on the roof. The whole game really was designed with HUD-less gameplay in mind. To the point that you see how many throwing knives you've got left by looking at the actual amount of throwing knives in the holsters.

I actually think that the HUD was a late addition, probably based on playtest complaints, but at the same time the HUD leads to a total different experience and style of gameplay (in my opinion inferior to playing without the HUD), which is why AC1 wasn't received that well and they've made all those changes in AC2.

Gi1t
03-10-2013, 05:47 AM
Read my post again. The order never fully fell before the purge, just certain branches of it. It is a war you know.
Did you really think the entire assassin order was based in Italy at one point?
ACR proves you wrong, when ezio visits the Istanbul assassins and in embers when someone from the Chinese branch visits Ezio

Also what does IMO mean?

No, I see what he's saying here. In the first game, you were part of a working order that was capable of running with or without you, but in the later games, the division of the order in your particular location is not currently in full operation; it's up to you and a spare few senior members to rebuild it, and it's largely your job to manage things, or at least that's the feeling you get. The difference in AC1 was that you were more of a cog in a machine that was in full operation around you, and in a way, because you weren't in charge of managing things, you felt more independent and at the same time, the order itself felt more powerful.

Point is, it may not have been in shambles everywhere, but the branch relative to YOU was in need of management and repair.

Anyway, I felt that AC1 was mildly repetetive by comparison with other games, meaning a fair bit more repetetive than it should have been, though not totally overkill. Let's face it, the tasks you're assigned in any game are basically going to be a lot of permutations of the same thing and repetitiveness or lack thereof is all about how well the game differentiates between each occurrence of a task. AC1 is constructed of basic objects sprinkled around the target zone; social hazards, enemies, allies. The tasks, I found engaging, but the game needed more elements to complicate later missions. EX: Later interrogation missions did nothing more than to feature an abundance of identical 'thugs' wandering around the target area. XD There wasn't much difference in the scenarios either, and the person would clearly wander in circles until engaged.

That said, I felt that the basic set of tools and controls you were given offered enough flexibility that I was able to find it amusing, and most importantly, I didn't feel like I was staring down an obvious path that was the only possible way to make the mission go smoothly. The paths you could take may not have been hard to figure out most of the time, but there were enough of them to make you feel like you had to think about it for yourself, if only for a moment.

I think the games that are worse, as far as repetition, are games that feed you identical objectives that you have to do in more or less the same way, and use them as filler to make the game seem longer, or worse, games that deliberately make you repeat things you've already done after you die just because they think that's 'hardcore'. -__- The only thing worse than stuff you feel like you've done before is stuff you HAVE done before. (Side note on this: Obviously, there's a personal threshold for repeating gameplay that varies from person to person as well as other gameplay related factors, but my point is, there are games that blatantly abuse the threat of making you do stuff over again.)

kriegerdesgottes
03-10-2013, 05:58 AM
I love AC1 the way it is. It could use more things to do but the game is still amazing.

poptartz20
03-10-2013, 09:16 AM
From what I remember of AC1... and it has been years since I played it. I found it to be AMAZING. I knew when I first saw the game advertised that I would love it before I even got a PS3. haha! Honestly I wouldn't really change a thing about AC1. If I was I would like to see side missions added along with better kill animations. :) It was groundbreaking for it's time back in 07', but to answer your question. Hell ya I would buy it again! It was fun!

Assassin_M
03-10-2013, 09:18 AM
Yeah, and the fact that you have to actually listen to what the bureau leaders are saying to know in which locations search for information (and their relative location in relation to the bureau). Oh, and when you first enter a city, you go on a viewpoint not to reveal an icon on the map, but to actually search for a building with the assassin insignia on the roof. The whole game really was designed with HUD-less gameplay in mind. To the point that you see how many throwing knives you've got left by looking at the actual amount of throwing knives in the holsters.

I actually think that the HUD was a late addition, probably based on playtest complaints, but at the same time the HUD leads to a total different experience and style of gameplay (in my opinion inferior to playing without the HUD), which is why AC1 wasn't received that well and they've made all those changes in AC2.
I`m glad i`m not the only one who did this :D

IWGCJoeCool
03-10-2013, 01:24 PM
i'd pay for an Expansion or DLC pack that updated the game with the Weather and darkness/light cycles. i'd love to do arial kills too. i didnt mind the LT target locking and was curious why that has been removed. AC1 was original, and everything since has tried to walk a fine line of originality without going too far away from what made it great in the first place. yes, all the entries have had alot going for them, but yes, a look at the whole will reveal some shortcomings to some, others to others. we have to expect that sooner or later we're going to get a Phantom Menace or a Star Trek V to name obvious examples of well known and appreciated franchises.

JC

lothario-da-be
03-10-2013, 04:16 PM
They should do this for ac's 10th birthday.

Sickull
03-10-2013, 04:21 PM
If it's retelling that same part of Altairs story then no.

CalgaryJay
03-11-2013, 03:50 PM
Absolutely I'd buy it if things were fixed up. I'm actually replaying it now, for the first time since I originally beat it almost 3 years ago, I forgot how much I love that setting. Coolest, best setting for an assassin, period. I love that mystical vibe they created too, the ambient music (remember that, Ubi?) is fantastic, and hasn't been recreated in any subsequent AC game.

I also forgot how much I like Altair. After AC3, I declared Connor my all-time favourite assassin. I now revert that back to AC1 Altair. He's got the introverted nature that I like in an assassin, yet he still has the Ezio brashness, and is somewhat of a flawed character. Perfect mix.

After playing the others, AC1 can be frustrating, as of course the only drawback is how insanely repetitive it is. I just keep picturing how much better the game would be if it wasn't the first AC to come out. I would love if they re-did this setting with the same vibe as AC1 (albeit a new story)

MasterAssasin84
03-11-2013, 03:53 PM
I`m glad i`m not the only one who did this :D

No you are not alone , find it so much more refreshing actualy taking in information and conducting my investigations as an Assassin Should am i right ?

It made the whole experience more rewarding you finaly seek out your target.

Goxxi
03-11-2013, 04:01 PM
Maybe I would like to see some remake of the original AC game in about 10 years when when would spent all other settings (like French Revolution , Brasil and South America, October Revolution, 100 years war , 30 years wars, Victorian England......etc) but now definitely not.

lothario-da-be
03-11-2013, 04:53 PM
No you are not alone , find it so much more refreshing actualy taking in information and conducting my investigations as an Assassin Should am i right ?

It made the whole experience more rewarding you finaly seek out your target.
It sounds cool, gonna do this next time.

CalgaryJay
03-11-2013, 06:45 PM
Maybe I would like to see some remake of the original AC game in about 10 years when when would spent all other settings (like French Revolution , Brasil and South America, October Revolution, 100 years war , 30 years wars, Victorian England......etc) but now definitely not.

Meh, I think we're too recent as it is, I'm not interested in Ubi covering any more recent wars/revolutions. It was cool for one game, but I find when its this recent, where there's this much info on the daily (and even hourly) events, the devs get too bogged down in the minutiae of covering every little thing that happened.

Think of the worst missions in 3, they all revolved around trying to re-create skirmishes/incidents: Tea Party where you had to throw a bunch of tea over the edge, running around with Paul Revere door to door, the battle for that one bridge (I'm too lazy to look up the name) where you just rode back & forth ordering cannonfire...it just wasn't very fun. IMO stay away from actual big wars/revolutions, and just focus on an interesting time period itself. You have much more freedom in storytelling that way.

Personally I'd like to see Ubi really hit the reset button to at least the medieval period. The modern, industrial world just doesn't grip me like the settings of the first couple games.

kesh_362
03-11-2013, 06:52 PM
I would buy it in a heartbeat if they kept the story the same, made it less repetitive, had most of the improvements introduced in later games (free running, combat and stealth in particular), good side quests, improve the kingdom and make it like something like the frontier was in AC3 with side quests. Perhaps they make the cities bigger too.

D.I.D.
03-11-2013, 07:17 PM
The only issue for me would be the AC3 combat, but I'd be fine with that system as long as multiple enemies swing for me at the same time. That's the only thing that needs to change, maybe with the reintroduction of some strafing to make this work.

That way you can kill one person easily, maybe two, but if three are fighting then two of them will be attacking you at any given time. To win, you'd have to use movement to get out of an encircling group and force them into a line, or use stealth to avoid that combat altogether.

xXMrGR1NCHXx
03-11-2013, 07:28 PM
I already play AC1 as it is, I love that game.

leCarrot
03-11-2013, 07:31 PM
I always stabbed beggars and lunatics in AC1 to get past guards in the assassination missions. Does that make me a bad person?

Yes, it does, but it also shows how dull I found the game. A poor game always makes me lose my sense of morality :nonchalance:
But some sort of remake would be fun, especially if they implemented mechanics from, say, the Hitman series (never played it, but I've heard that it's got some good assassinations), as in more freedom with the actual assassinations.

Oh, and better voice acting and a story that didn't feel like it was ripped off Disney.


Note: I played AC1 after AC2 and B, so my views are naturally tainted. Please don't mind me. *cowers behind chair*

hellomrdarcy
03-11-2013, 08:28 PM
AC1 is a piece of holy art. I love that game, and I doubt there will ever be somethinge quite like it. Just the atmosphere throughout the game is fantastic.

Bastiaen
03-11-2013, 09:04 PM
I will buy anything Assassin's creed. Forever and always. I finished a replay of AC1 last night. It was awesome. I keep thinking I should get rid of a lot of my other games so I can focus on AC more.

BATISTABUS
03-11-2013, 10:43 PM
Hell, I'd buy the game again completely the same if they only replaced Altair's lines.