PDA

View Full Version : Assassin's Creed will be annual until...



ProletariatPleb
03-31-2013, 07:21 PM
...players say stop.

"With the Assassin's Creed series getting new instalments annually, there are, perhaps, those who will grow tired of franchise -- if they haven't already. Since Assassin's Creed II, there's been a new title in the main series every year, the last one being Assassin's Creed III. Then there are all the spin-offs, comics, novels, shorts, and animated movies which, frankly, seem a tad unnecessary. That's just a lot of saturation.

Ubisoft Montreal's head honcho, Yannis Mallat, recently told Eurogamer at GDC that they have no intention of taking a breather, as he believes that fans are eager for more. "The players will tell us. Right now there are more and more coming into the franchise, so I don't see that day ... It's our breakthrough. When you have quality content, the frequency of coming out with the game is not an issue at all."


With Assassin's Creed III being the most successful game in the series, inexplicably, to me, the numbers appear to be on Mallat's side. There are several teams working on Assassin's Creed titles, so at least the same teams aren't having to split their time between, say, Black Flag, and the yet unrevealed title being planned for next year."

http://www.destructoid.com/assassin-s-creed-will-be-annual-until-players-say-stop-250038.phtml


STOP

http://www.lederer.nl/stop.jpg

UrDeviant1
03-31-2013, 07:24 PM
http://www.clker.com/cliparts/i/y/2/R/C/b/stop-signal-hi.png

nunosilva13
03-31-2013, 07:28 PM
http://img.vidaextra.com/2008/10/continue.jpg

pirate1802
03-31-2013, 07:31 PM
http://www.clker.com/cliparts/i/y/2/R/C/b/stop-signal-hi.png

Megas_Doux
03-31-2013, 07:38 PM
I agree.


PD AC3 is my favorite in the series, despite its flaws....

silvermercy
03-31-2013, 07:42 PM
I have different opinion as usual here: :p Please don't stop. I actually like AC annual releases and I don't care if they're not a perfect 10.

People... you need to say STOP with your wallets. If you're still gonna buy Black Flag you can scream at them until you're blue in the face but AC will still be released every year.

(Plus, they seem to be very confident that they don't need old hardcore fans as much when they have a great and constant influx of new ones.)

ProletariatPleb
03-31-2013, 07:47 PM
People... you need to say STOP with your wallets.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UIQtlQl783M

UrDeviant1
03-31-2013, 07:48 PM
Lmao^

silvermercy
03-31-2013, 07:50 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UIQtlQl783M

LOL!!

http://data.whicdn.com/images/24019701/387281_310919338947844_230382797001499_936196_4876 74901_n_thumb.jpg

SixKeys
03-31-2013, 07:52 PM
People... you need to say STOP with your wallets. If you're still gonna buy Black Flag you can scream at them until you're blue in the face but AC will still be released every year.


This. It's disheartening to see how many fans here first whine and moan about the declining quality of the series and then in the same breath go on to say "but I will keep buying the games nonetheless". If you're disappointed with the series direction, at least stop pre-ordering the $70-100 editions. All the extra in-game content will eventually be released as DLC and if you want the statues, collector boxes, art books etc. they'll be up on eBay in no time. Wait until the reviews start rolling in and make your decision based on those or other players' feedback.

I for one will not be pre-ordering this year and will wait until I can get the game cheaply in a Steam sale.

Megas_Doux
03-31-2013, 07:57 PM
I for one will not be pre-ordering this year and will wait until I can get the game cheaply in a Steam sale.

I wish I had done that with ACB.......

AssassinVenice
03-31-2013, 08:10 PM
I wish I had done that with ACB.......
WTF man! ACB was among the best AC games ever!
ACR and AC3 are the least likeable AC games, in my list at least.:o

ze_topazio
03-31-2013, 08:15 PM
I have never pre-order a game in my entire life and i see no reason to start doing it.

nunosilva13
03-31-2013, 08:23 PM
WTF man! ACB was among the best AC games ever!
ACR and AC3 are the least likeable AC games, in my list at least.:o

among the best? i'm ill ._.

dewgel
03-31-2013, 08:26 PM
I'm actually not bothered about yearly releases, they handle it pretty well to be honest.

It's the same as Call of Duty, the fans think it only gets 1 year dev time and then they chuck it out (even if it feels like it sometimes), same as AC.

As long as different studios / teams continue to develop it, I'm happy to play it. I think they lost the plot after Brotherhood and forgot what their original plan was and AC3 tried too hard to un-screw what was screwed.

x___Luffy___x
03-31-2013, 08:29 PM
i love ac games. played every ac. i like the annual releases, keep em coming ubi....

Assassin_M
03-31-2013, 08:31 PM
WTF man! ACB was among the best AC games ever!
ACR and AC3 are the least likeable AC games, in my list at least.:o
Different opinions ? AC III and R rank as the top 2 for me..

ACB being the second worst

silvermercy
03-31-2013, 08:34 PM
Different opinions ? AC III and R rank as the top 2 for me..

ACB being the second worst
Same for me for AC3 and ACR.

What was the worst other than ACB??

Assassin_M
03-31-2013, 08:35 PM
Same for me for AC3 and ACR.

What was the worst other than ACB??
AC II

*looks down on all the disgruntled AC II fans*

Stardust235
03-31-2013, 08:37 PM
http://www.clker.com/cliparts/i/y/2/R/C/b/stop-signal-hi.png

Rugterwyper32
03-31-2013, 08:37 PM
This will probably be the last AC game I buy on release. Still preordering it over Amazon because I only preorder 1 game a year and this is the game that catches my attention for that this year enough for that. After this, I'll probably get games of the series once the price has gone down to $25 the year after. Even with more reason if another game I'm highly interested in is up.

ProletariatPleb
03-31-2013, 08:41 PM
Different opinions ? AC III and R rank as the top 2 for me..

ACB being the second worst
:| You have betrayed me, where is AC1.

Assassin_M
03-31-2013, 08:42 PM
:| You have betrayed me, where is AC1.
above them all ?? LAWL

ProletariatPleb
03-31-2013, 08:44 PM
above them all ?? LAWL
You said top 2 :|

and to everyone: let's not derail this topic please, enough with which AC we like and dislike, more focus on annual releases and how they impacted said games perhaps?

Assassin_M
03-31-2013, 08:46 PM
http://d24w6bsrhbeh9d.cloudfront.net/photo/5695776_700b.jpg

UrDeviant1
03-31-2013, 08:51 PM
It's hard to say if the annual releases impact the games, because don't the game generally have a 2-year dev cycle? If so, any shortcomings in quality I put down to bad design and QA. The reason I resent yearly releases is because it's affected the excitement I get out of a new game. I'm a late bloomer, I'v only really started to feel it since ACIV's announcement.

ACfan443
03-31-2013, 08:55 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/showthread.php/761799-New-article-interview-Ubi-boss-talks-annualised-AC-Next-gen-and-franchise-fatigue

I apologise :/

BATISTABUS
03-31-2013, 09:00 PM
I think releases should definitely slow down. I'm still really excited for Black Flag...I could just stand to wait a year or two longer.

ProletariatPleb
03-31-2013, 09:02 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/showthread.php/761799-New-article-interview-Ubi-boss-talks-annualised-AC-Next-gen-and-franchise-fatigue

I apologise :/
This was more of a joke-ish topic, telling them to stop. But I hate you :|

ACfan443
03-31-2013, 09:04 PM
This was more of a joke-ish topic, telling them to stop. But I hate you :|

I'm sorry, I won't do it again, I promise

TheHumanTowel
03-31-2013, 09:09 PM
I would stay stop but it's pretty clear the executives don't care what we have to say really. And it's true AC3 was massively successful and brought a ton of new people into the series, largely due to the overwhelming ad campaign. What worries me is that these new people will think AC3 is what Assassin's Creed is supposed to be. i.e Wannabe GTA with only the most tenuous link to being an assassin.

I've talked about the problems with simultaneous development before so not going to repeat them here. A word of advise though, don't pre-order. Your friend TheHumanTowel never does.

Megas_Doux
03-31-2013, 09:14 PM
WTF man! ACB was among the best AC games ever!
ACR and AC3 are the least likeable AC games, in my list at least.:o

Perspectives, It seems.

In terms of story, to me ACB is an uber linear and cartoonish plot full of, linear and cartoonish antagonists; my very least templar crew in the series. Besides that, I find Rome to be a rather dull and boring city, despite having the best landmarks in the series, though. If Toscana and Firenze had an ugly looking baby, that would be Romeīs rendition in that game.

RinoTheBouncer
03-31-2013, 09:44 PM
I don't wanna sound like a ***** but it's really simple, you don't want a new AC game, don't buy it. Many others like me crave for an AC game every month not every year.
I'm sure Ubisoft know what they're doing. ACIII got great sales if not the best despite all the initial negative reviews by fans. Ezio is my No.1 but I admit that many polls on these forums lately (not to mention yaoi drawings on Tumblr ..etc.) have been praising and bowing for Connor and Haytham. Ezio's adventures gave hardcore fans of Ezio, like me all they wanted so I don't see the failure in releasing AC games annually.

Non of the games underperformed. Each game had it's share of admiration and appreciation from newcomers and long-time fans if not brought a thousands of new players to the series.

I wonder why gamers interfere with what's non of their business. Complain about characters, story, graphics, technical stuff but release intervals/times? that's their business, if you don't want a new game, just don't buy it till 3 years later and voila, you've got the time gap you wanted.

Soulid_Snake
03-31-2013, 09:52 PM
I would stay stop but it's pretty clear the executives don't care what we have to say really. And it's true AC3 was massively successful and brought a ton of new people into the series, largely due to the overwhelming ad campaign. What worries me is that these new people will think AC3 is what Assassin's Creed is supposed to be. i.e Wannabe GTA with only the most tenuous link to being an assassin.

I've talked about the problems with simultaneous development before so not going to repeat them here. A word of advise though, don't pre-order. Your friend TheHumanTowel never does.

Same here, I've never pre-ordered a game in my life! The ****e-ness that was AC3 has made me really cautious with AC4, if it's as bad as AC3, I'm never buying a AC game again. AC lost its innocence and direction with AC3.

Assassin_M
03-31-2013, 09:59 PM
Same here, I've never pre-ordered a game in my life! The ****e-ness that was AC3 has made me really cautious with AC4, if it's as bad as AC3, I'm never buying a AC game again. AC lost its innocence and direction with AC3.
Innocence ?

SixKeys
03-31-2013, 09:59 PM
I wonder why gamers interfere with what's non of their business. Complain about characters, story, graphics, technical stuff but release intervals/times? that's their business, if you don't want a new game, just don't buy it till 3 years later and voila, you've got the time gap you wanted.

How is this none of our business? Nobody here is saying you must stop buying the games even if you enjoy them. We're talking about the people who complain and complain about each new game yet keep buying them anyway. It's about voting with your wallet. If you think the quality is just fine, good for you, go nuts. But many others, myself included, think the yearly releases are affecting the quality of the series negatively and the only way to send a message to Ubisoft is to stop supporting bad games.

Assassin_M
03-31-2013, 10:00 PM
They should stop with the franchise when they are finished with Black Flag.
No, no they should not...just slow down

Dosenwabe
03-31-2013, 10:03 PM
Need my yearly dose AC. I'm thrilled that it's really annual now, so I don't have to hope and wait several years. I'm not getting any younger, you know.

AherasSTRG
03-31-2013, 10:05 PM
For God's sake, people. I never really liked most of the opinions expressed in this forum, but this whole thread is just HILARIOUS. Annual releases do not equal to a lower quality of the game for many many reasons:
1. Since the basic structure of the game is ready, only thing the developement team needs to do is come up with a new story and a new setting. This can be done pretty quickly. Usually the time needed to create a sequel to a game takes around 2 years (all AC games have taken 1.5 to 3 years to be created).
2. I do not believe that we, hardcore fans, have been fed up by our favourite series. I have been playing AC since the very first game and in fact, I eagerly wait every year for the next one. I have spent 90+ hours in the single player of AC3 (+20 hours in the DLC) and I still want more. I simply love the game. Dishonored + AC3, that's my gaming life right now. I believe that the rest of the people replying on this thread are also great fans of the series. There is no way you could grow tired of the franchise, especially in that point. I am dieing to know what will happen next in the AC universe.
3. Sure, AC3 was not what we expected. We wanted more from it, since it was advertised like a very well developed game. But, you know what, Ubisoft screwed up. But that was all there was to it. They just made one (1), a single bad AC game:
AC1: Innovation
AC2: No Comment
ACB: New mechanics and gameplay, Ezio at its finest
ACR: Not so stealthy, but nevertheless, a story and a setting that we'll remember in all of our gaming life
And then, comes 3. It was not a bad game, just not what we expected. We wanted more from our favourite franchise, we wanted our hype to be answered to the highest degree (mine was to be honest). Most of us (you) were disappointed. But these people have only created one (1), a single bad AC game. That was not a let down. Ubisoft is a great company, they have done wonders with Far Cry 3 and other games they own. They bought THQ, they are growing, AC is growing. And it grows because we support them.
Are we (you) like that in our everyday lives as well? Our (your) wife fails to cook a nice dinner for us and instantly we tell her not to cook for a while? This is hilarious if not sad. It's the same thing with what most people are saying in this thread.
And I repeat: Annual releases do not equal to a lower quality of the game

RinoTheBouncer
03-31-2013, 10:07 PM
How is this none of our business? Nobody here is saying you must stop buying the games even if you enjoy them. We're talking about the people who complain and complain about each new game yet keep buying them anyway. It's about voting with your wallet. If you think the quality is just fine, good for you, go nuts. But many others, myself included, think the yearly releases are affecting the quality of the series negatively and the only way to send a message to Ubisoft is to stop supporting bad games.

Bad games? I guess fans who think that way should check their standards first because they seem to be way too high. AC is offering us so much with each new game. I don't think there's a franchise on current gen. consoles that is as big as or bigger than Assassin's Creed. The amount of historical details, characters, emotions, music, story, gameplay, extras is bigger than any other franchise. They're doing their best to make something awesome without repeating themselves.

I don't see how a game that sold about 12 million copies is considered a "bad game" and I cannot understand how AC4:Black Flag is named "Bad" just because the protagonist was seen with two women in a bed room. I'm not saying you said this, I'm just noting what people are complaining about in the last two ACs (the second being an upcoming game that they haven't played yet). I'm disappointed with their idea of Modern Day play and I hope it gets better but really, I think people should 'send a message' by telling them about the qualities not by telling them to stop releasing games annually.


For God's sake, people. I never really liked most of the opinions expressed in this forum, but this whole thread is just HILARIOUS. Annual releases do not equal to a lower quality of the game for many many reasons:
1. Since the basic structure of the game is ready, only thing the developement team needs to do is come up with a new story and a new setting. This can be done pretty quickly. Usually the time needed to create a sequel to a game takes around 2 years (all AC games have taken 1.5 to 3 years to be created).
2. I do not believe that we, hardcore fans, have been fed up by our favourite series. I have been playing AC since the very first game and in fact, I eagerly wait every year for the next one. I have spent 90+ hours in the single player of AC3 (+20 hours in the DLC) and I still want more. I simply love the game. Dishonored + AC3, that's my gaming life right now. I believe that the rest of the people replying on this thread are also great fans of the series. There is no way you could grow tired of the franchise, especially in that point. I am dieing to know what will happen next in the AC universe.
3. Sure, AC3 was not what we expected. We wanted more from it, since it was advertised like a very well developed game. But, you know what, Ubisoft screwed up. But that was all there was to it. They just made one (1), a single bad AC game:
AC1: Innovation
AC2: No Comment
ACB: New mechanics and gameplay, Ezio at its finest
ACR: Not so stealthy, but nevertheless, a story and a setting that we'll remember in all of our gaming life
And then, comes 3. It was not a bad game, just not what we expected. We wanted more from our favourite franchise, we wanted our hype to be answered to the highest degree (mine was to be honest). Most of us (you) were disappointed. But these people have only created one (1), a single bad AC game. That was not a let down. Ubisoft is a great company, they have done wonders with Far Cry 3 and other games they own. They bought THQ, they are growing, AC is growing. And it grows because we support them.
Are we (you) like that in our everyday lives as well? Our (your) wife fails to cook a nice dinner for us and instantly we tell her not to cook for a while? This is hilarious if not sad.
It's the same thing with what most people are saying in this thread.
And I repeat: Annual releases do not equal to a lower quality of the game

Perfectly said!

silvermercy
03-31-2013, 10:11 PM
......
This. :) And I wouldn't call AC3 a bad game either, yes. Sure it wasn't 'THE best game evarr", but how come it's so many people's favourite (new AC fans usually)?

MasterAssasin84
03-31-2013, 10:14 PM
I say keep them coming, IMO i love my fix of Assassins Creed ! Lets not forget that ubi have multiple studios worldwide so there is no reason as to why they cant deliver a quality game ! i have seen lots of people on here moaning about AC3 and how the quality of the game is shocking !! i do not know exactly what planet some of these people are on but IMO AC3 was amazing the technology of the anvil next engine was huge leap in the right direction both graphically and gameplay.

I am not sure what people are looking for in a game but AC3 was simply stunning and i am still enjoying every moment of it, i am confident that AC4 BF will build on the success of AC3, so ubi keep them coming you are doing a fantastic job.

AssassinHMS
03-31-2013, 10:16 PM
In my opinion, the problem isn't the anualisation of the series. The problem is the lack of love the devs have for this franchise. Their goal is to make the biggest game yet and not the best game ever. So in each game they introduce a bunch of new features (such as: economy system, den defense, bomb crafting, naval gameplay, hunting...). None of them are bad, simply some better implemented than others, and yet this franchise suffers a lot because of them. They are there to please most kinds of gamers, to increase profit: Hey do you like owning virtual money and investing it in virtual buildings? Then you'll like this. Do you like boats? Cause we have boats! Do you enjoy hunting animals? Then this game is for you! And while the devs are busy working on these futures they ignore what's important. I now money is what drives industry, in this case game industry, but without love and passion, the product won't be half as good as it could be. Instead of investing time in perfecting the core aspects of the franchise (the stealth and the navigation) and improving the assassin experience (by providing good open ended assassination missions, by letting the player plan the mission, by creating an immersive, believable world with interesting side missions, random events and targets to assassinate), they use this precious time to kill this awesome franchise by adding a lot of content that has nothing to do with the feeling of the game, rush or ignore the things that make the assassin’s creed experience and glue them all together in one big mess.
Assassin’s creed 3 is the best example of this. The trailers showed an amazing game with amazing features but unfortunately very few were in the final game, not because there was not enough time but because the people who made that game tried to do too much, didnīt focus on what they should have had and were too greedy trying to please everyone.
Of course this is just my opinion but this is the best explanation I find for what happened to the Assassin’s Creed franchise.

ProletariatPleb
03-31-2013, 10:16 PM
I'm sure Ubisoft know what they're doing.
Do they? Every game seems to take a very different direction.


ACIII got great sales if not the best despite all the initial negative reviews by fans.
So does CoD.


Each game had it's share of admiration and appreciation from newcomers and long-time fans if not brought a thousands of new players to the series.
As it is with every famous game that has a sequel.


I wonder why gamers interfere with what's non of their business. Complain about characters, story, graphics, technical stuff but release intervals/times? that's their business, if you don't want a new game, just don't buy it till 3 years later and voila, you've got the time gap you wanted.
Not the point, the games are being worked on for a year to release as soon as possible and get some $$$ the quality is obviously suffering because of it as they don't get enough time to test and implement new things and instead we'll get more of the same.

TheHumanTowel
03-31-2013, 10:23 PM
And I repeat: Annual releases do not equal to a lower quality of the game
Shame that's what's happened the last two games.



Are we (you) like that in our everyday lives as well? Our (your) wife fails to cook a nice dinner for us and instantly we tell her not to cook for a while? This is hilarious if not sad. It's the same thing with what most people are saying in this thread. It's not like Ubisoft or the AC developers are rubbing their hands and laughing behind our backs. AC is not the only thing we have in our lives. We'd better let the developers decide when they believe is the best time to release an AC game. "Milking the franchise" and "Those greedy ..." are expressions befitting teenagers, not serious grown up adults, who I believe are writing in these forums. We should not judge by a single game (which was not bad, just mediocre).
Why don't you stop speaking as if your opinion is representative of the entire fanbase. Lots of people me included were very disappointed with ACR and again with AC3. And that analogy is so far off the mark it's ludicrous.

silvermercy
03-31-2013, 10:27 PM
In my opinion, the problem isn't the anualisation of the series. The problem is the lack of love the devs have for this franchise.
I don't think that's the case. I'm pretty sure the devs love what they're doing or they wouldn't be doing that. Whatever greed comes into play comes from the company itself. And can you blame it? That's what companies do.

they use this precious time to kill this awesome franchise by adding a lot of content that has nothing to do with the feeling of the game, rush or ignore the things that make the assassin’s creed experience and glue them all together in one big mess.
This is entirely subjective. I think that's the problem older fans have vs. new ones: older fans (AC1 to AC2) have a very specific image of what AC means in their mind, which is consciously or subconsciously resistant to any change.

....trying to please everyone.
...and it worked. It sold 12 million units and it keeps selling in the new year. Strangely, I think casual gamers are a bigger financial force than hardcore ones.

Megas_Doux
03-31-2013, 10:29 PM
Shame that's what's happened the last two games.

.

Although I would prefer games every two years, gotta say that I liked ACR and ACIII way more than ACB, and that ACIII is my favorite in the series....
To me, ACB summarizes all the possible mistakes in the franchise.


Why don't you stop speaking as if your opinion is representative of the entire fanbase. Lots of people me included were very disappointed with ACR and again with AC3. And that analogy is so far off the mark it's ludicrous

You are doing the same you criticized above.

Do not get me wrong, I do not like games to spam every year. But while the sales remain high, Ubisoft will continue with this trend...

RinoTheBouncer
03-31-2013, 10:32 PM
Do they? Every game seems to take a very different direction.


So does CoD.


As it is with every famous game that has a sequel.


Not the point, the games are being worked on for a year to release as soon as possible and get some $$$ the quality is obviously suffering because of it as they don't get enough time to test and implement new things and instead we'll get more of the same.

Yup, taking different directions is good. No one wants to get stuck with the same style of gameplay for eternity.

CoD is a very successful game. Not my type of game but if it's selling well and people are enjoying it, what's wrong with that?

The $$$ they're getting is a lot of money, and it's probably one of the highest among other games so if so much money is coming from it, then there's so much interest in the games. I guess that's common sense. Remember that AC games come in expensive and different collector's edition and every year they get more and more sales despite the short time gap, which means people are ready to pay for a game they love that much.

Even though I don't believe it, but they usually say that they've been working for more than that time frame. You also mentioned 'new things', I don't think ACIII has no new things, nor AC4 looks like any of the previous games, same goes for AC:R. All of them had their share of 'new things'. I'm not saying they're all perfect but they're good enough to earn the success and recognition they have now.

AherasSTRG
03-31-2013, 10:33 PM
Not the point, the games are being worked on for a year to release as soon as possible and get some $$$ the quality is obviously suffering because of it as they don't get enough time to test and implement new things and instead we'll get more of the same.

2 years in developement is more than enough to create a sequel to a game. The quality does not suffer by the annualisation of the series. One years is plenty of time for TESTING and please, do not tell me that the 5 previous AC games, which were annually released, lacked new mechanics in each game.

TheHumanTowel
03-31-2013, 10:34 PM
Although I would prefer games every two years, gotta say that I liked ACR and ACIII way more than ACB, and that ACIII is my favorite in the series....
To me, ACB summarizes all the possible mistakes in the franchise.
AC3 has a lot of good things in it and does some things better than past games. I enjoyed it overall but it disappointed me as an Assassin's Creed game.

AherasSTRG
03-31-2013, 10:42 PM
Why don't you stop speaking as if your opinion is representative of the entire fanbase. Lots of people me included were very disappointed with ACR and again with AC3. And that analogy is so far off the mark it's ludicrous.

I am not saying that my opinion is representative. In fact, I am saying the exact opposite, I totally disagree with the majority of the fanbase that is writing in this thread. Starting from the assumption that ACR was a good game, I am saying:
Ubisoft fails to deliver us a good game and we tell them not to create a game for a while.
Our wife fails to prepare a good dinner for us and we tell her not to cook for a while.
I believe it is the exact same thing.

ACfan443
03-31-2013, 10:43 PM
2 years in developement is more than enough to create a sequel to a game. The quality does not suffer by the annualisation of the series. One years is plenty of time for TESTING and please, do not tell me that the 5 previous AC games, which were annually released, lacked new mechanics in each game.

Only AC3 had the most newest mechanics, and from a technological stand point is worthy to be a true sequel to AC2. Visual enhancements aside, the two games before AC3 introduced hardly any new mechanics. With the overlapping developments, they also cannot implement improvements based on feedback, so you'd have to wait for the sequel after (thus affecting the quality of the game), that's another problem.

ProletariatPleb
03-31-2013, 10:49 PM
Yup, taking different directions is good. No one wants to get stuck with the same style of gameplay for eternity.
Trying something different and trying something completely different and throwing it to the masses are not the same.



CoD is a very successful game. Not my type of game but if it's selling well and people are enjoying it, what's wrong with that?
CoD adds nothing of value and it's been stagnant for years, you wish for AC to be the same?



The $$$ they're getting is a lot of money, and it's probably one of the highest among other games so if so much money is coming from it, then there's so much interest in the games. I guess that's common sense. Remember that AC games come in expensive and different collector's edition and every year they get more and more sales despite the short time gap, which means people are ready to pay for a game they love that much.
Ofcourse they'll get more sales it's sequel number X game now, even if they release a trailer showing poop wearing an assassin hoodie and flushing other poops having a cross on them, people will want it.



Even though I don't believe it, but they usually say that they've been working for more than that time frame. You also mentioned 'new things', I don't think ACIII has no new things, nor AC4 looks like any of the previous games, same goes for AC:R. All of them had their share of 'new things'. I'm not saying they're all perfect but they're good enough to earn the success and recognition they have now.
Hardly anything has changed in the core of the game, they've tacked on different systems on the game, adding fat, but very little of real value.





The quality does not suffer by the annualisation of the series. One years is plenty of time for TESTING and please, do not tell me that the 5 previous AC games, which were annually released, lacked new mechanics in each game.
After all this time you actually think Ubisoft test their games? And all the 5 AC games didn't release annually, only ACB, ACR and AC3 released one after another. Out them only III added/improved things worth noting. Rest was all mostly gimmicky and tacked on for the sake of "shiny new this year"

AssassinHMS
03-31-2013, 10:50 PM
I don't think that's the case. I'm pretty sure the devs love what they're doing or they wouldn't be doing that. Whatever greed comes into play comes from the company itself. And can you blame it? That's what companies do.

This is entirely subjective. I think that's the problem older fans have vs. new ones: older fans (AC1 to AC2) have a very specific image of what AC means in their mind, which is consciously or subconsciously resistant to any change.

...and it worked. It sold 12 million units and it keeps selling in the new year.

Well, I'm an old fan (since AC1), more or less, and I enjoyed some of the changes they made like the naval gameplay or the economic system but I think the cost of such implements was to high. I'd rather that the games stayed pure in terms of the feeling of being an assassin and just refined the core aspects with a few twists.
While it is true that Assassin's Creed 3 sold 12 million units most of those sales were because long time fans believed and trusted the developers and didn't expected them to lie about some of the game's features and, like me, were thrilled by the trailers never expecting that the game would turn out so different.
Trying to please everyone is a bad tactic because it never works in long term. It's impossible to please everyone whether you are a company trying to sell a game or a person trying to be friendly. Either they make enemies for the right reasons or they face the price for having no values and for not standing for what they think it's worth standing for. Sometimes I wish Assassin's Creed was more like the Thief franchise. :)

pacmanate
03-31-2013, 11:15 PM
...and it worked. It sold 12 million units and it keeps selling in the new year. Strangely, I think casual gamers are a bigger financial force than hardcore ones.

Ah, that is true, however now the hardcore fans are more sceptical, and for good reason.

AC3 wasn't a bad game, what made it bad was how over hyped it was. They made it out to be amazing, however I found it the same enjoyment level as the others, not any more, not any less, and that is why I was disappointed and can never look at the game as a "wow, this really changed AC for me".

However, after AC4, they need a break. If they have an ACV that will be 3 numbered title in 3 years and tbh thats just too much for me personally. Now that next gen is rolling I wouldnt mind a spin off for next year (just because of the next gen consoles), but I wouldnt be bothered if there wasnt any AC next year

SixKeys
03-31-2013, 11:20 PM
It's ridiculous to equate sales numbers with the general reception of the game. Most of the 12 million copies that AC3 sold were pre-orders, made before the game was out. Only after people got the game could they form an opinion on it. And judging by review sites, AC3 may not have been considered poor but underwhelming. Even lots of hardcore fans on these forums who were really excited for the game were disappointed by the obvious lack of polish in the final product.

Opinions are subjective, but it's a fact that AC3 had more bugs on release than any of its predecessors. Bugs that could have easily been caught if the developers had just had a few more months to smooth things out. Several cool features were planned and even showcased in early public demos (canoes, swimming beavers, random events, lakes freezing), but were ultimately dropped from the game at the last moment with no explanation. Why? Because they didn't have time to polish those features. They HAD to get the game out before the end of 2012 because the next game was already in the works, using the same engine and probably most of the same code. Meaning that the problems that were there at the time of AC3's launch would inevitably show up in AC4. Players didn't start giving feedback about all the problems until last November. That gives the AC4 devs a little less than a year to go through all the fan feedback, fix the problems that AC3's coding brought over to AC4 while also testing for all the new bugs that inevitably happen when you start fixing old ones. (Keep in mind that every patch that has come out for AC3 thus far has broken something that previously worked fine.)

If AC4 sells as well as AC3, I will concede Ubi must be doing something right (at least from their perspective). Before we see the numbers though, I'm not going to believe that sales numbers perfectly correlate with the number of people who liked the game.

Assassin_M
03-31-2013, 11:22 PM
I`m enjoying being a spectator for once... *eats pop corn*

pacmanate
03-31-2013, 11:23 PM
I`m enjoying being a spectator for once... *eats pop corn*

Popcorn is one word.

Assassin_M
03-31-2013, 11:25 PM
Popcorn is one word.
*pop corn crackles*

don care, bruh

pacmanate
03-31-2013, 11:27 PM
*pop corn crackles*

don care, bruh

don't*







*runs away*

Assassin_M
03-31-2013, 11:30 PM
don't*






*runs away*
*throws shoe*

ProletariatPleb
03-31-2013, 11:31 PM
*throws shoe*
Show some support, when it's actually time for you to be M, you're being a spectator.

Assassin_M
03-31-2013, 11:34 PM
Show some support, when it's actually time for you to be M, you're being a spectator.
Oh come on, you dont need me, you guys seem to be doing excellent on your own :P

besides, let the scales be balanced a bit, I mean, honest truth here, If I enter this, I`ll completely destroy the opposition..Heh....heh...heh...heh...carry on, you`re doing fine

*continues to eat pop corn*

Soulid_Snake
03-31-2013, 11:34 PM
Innocence ?

Innocence - the state of being pure.

AC2 = Innocence = Pure = Work of Art.

AC3 = All about the money = Failed Hollywood attempt = Garbage.

Assassin_M
03-31-2013, 11:37 PM
Innocence - the state of being pure.

AC2 = Innocence = Pure = Work of Art.

AC3 = All about the money = Failed Hollywood attempt = Garbage.
even though I disagree about AC3 being garbage and AC2 being a work of art, I nonetheless got the picture xD

Soulid_Snake
03-31-2013, 11:40 PM
even though I disagree about AC3 being garbage and AC2 being a work of art, I nonetheless got the picture xD

I'm glad we can agree to disagree. :cool:

Megas_Doux
03-31-2013, 11:41 PM
Innocence - the state of being pure.

AC2 = Innocence = Pure = Work of Art.

AC3 = All about the money = Failed Hollywood attempt = Garbage.

That is your opinion....

Mine is that the game who went the easy way, with the "womanizer, stereotyped on a certain country" aka james bond and other dozens of characters like that, was not AC3.....

If that is the case, to me:

ACI = Innocence and work of art.

Gi1t
03-31-2013, 11:41 PM
I'm more annoyed by the way the problem is being written off completely.

People say 'this is a problem' or 'this could become a problem very soon' and th only reaction is 'no it's not, everything's fine'. -__- Oversaturation of games CAN become a problem, and even if Ubisoft thinks it hasn't had any negative effects to date, they should at least be willing to acknowledge the risks.

Look at it this way; if they are flatly refusing to admit there could be a problem, how are they supposed to plan a way around it? With their resources, there are plenty of ways to plan ahead and combat the problems that come with a rushed release, such as lack of technical polish and the inability to consider feedback carefully. But if they're just denying that it's even capable of being a problem, they'll never be able to fight it.

In short, I'd rather hear them say 'yeah, that can be a challenge of designing games with such high demand, and ideally, we'd like to give each game extra time, but we're working on a number of ways to work around those issues'. Having a completely different develpment team for Black Flags is a perfectly valid way to work against this problem, and I can understand if they said they were really in a position where they need to satisfy the demand and keep their investors happy too. It's the attitude of not giving a **** that's got people convinced they don't know what they're doing and are only after one thing. Their PR lately has been pretty terrible. -__-

Dosenwabe
04-01-2013, 12:10 AM
Problems... Problems everywhere! lol Keep on ranting in your little threads, I'll just enjoy my awesome yearly, interactive history lesson. :)

ProletariatPleb
04-01-2013, 02:37 AM
Problems... Problems everywhere! lol Keep on ranting in your little threads, I'll just enjoy my awesome yearly, interactive history lesson. :)
I'll enjoy other games knowing I have standards and will not consume crap.

Megas_Doux
04-01-2013, 03:30 AM
I'll enjoy other games knowing I have standards and will not consume crap.

That is probably a little too harsh! I mean, no even brotherhood suits that word yet haha. With that being said. I have to admit that I am not very excited for ACBF aside from freeroaming in La Habana...

ProletariatPleb
04-01-2013, 03:41 AM
That is probably a little too harsh! I mean, no even brotherhood suits that word yet haha. With that being said. I have to admit that I am not very excited for ACBF aside from freeroaming in La Habana...
Sometimes it's necessary :p

UrDeviant1
04-01-2013, 05:41 AM
So many people don't see how this has a negative effect and are actually quite content with the low quality parts of these games. You morons are what's wrong with this franchise. You lack taste and unfortunately you seem to be the people the devs are focusing on. How are the games supposed to get better if there's a mass amount of simpletons going around saying they see nothing wrong with the series and are quite content with it being run into the ground? I'm talking about game quality in general and not just the fact it's becoming fatigued.

ACIV is make or break. Mess this up and I'm out (not like they care). INJUSTICE!

VitaminsXYZ
04-01-2013, 05:51 AM
You morons are what's wrong with this franchise. You lack taste and unfortunately you seem to be the people the devs are focusing on. How are the games supposed to get better if there's a mass amount of simpletons going around saying they see nothing wrong with the series and are quite content with it being run into the ground?

http://media.tumblr.com/eb7720adef5bf7cfac5b69a7db0639f2/tumblr_inline_mj3lznQrQr1qz4rgp.gif

ProletariatPleb
04-01-2013, 05:53 AM
So many people don't see how this has a negative effect and are actually quite content with the low quality parts of these games. You morons are what's wrong with this franchise. You lack taste and unfortunately you seem to be the people the devs are focusing on. How are the games supposed to get better if there's a mass amount of simpletons going around saying they see nothing wrong with the series and are quite content with it being run into the ground? I'm talking about game quality in general and not just the fact it's becoming fatigued.

ACIV is make or break. Mess this up and I'm out (not like they care). INJUSTICE!
http://i.imgur.com/Pq62t5i.jpg

catkiller97
04-01-2013, 05:57 AM
i don't think its ubi fault becoz AC is the second most selling game of this gen after COD. AC3 alone sold 12mn copies..

ACfan443
04-01-2013, 10:42 AM
So many people don't see how this has a negative effect and are actually quite content with the low quality parts of these games. You morons are what's wrong with this franchise. You lack taste and unfortunately you seem to be the people the devs are focusing on. How are the games supposed to get better if there's a mass amount of simpletons going around saying they see nothing wrong with the series and are quite content with it being run into the ground? I'm talking about game quality in general and not just the fact it's becoming fatigued.

ACIV is make or break. Mess this up and I'm out (not like they care). INJUSTICE!

As long as strong sales continue they won't stop, because you, I and everyone here will buy it anyway..and the one after it..and the one after that.

ProletariatPleb
04-01-2013, 10:53 AM
As long as strong sales continue they won't stop, because you, I and everyone here will buy it anyway..and the one after it..and the one after that.
Count me out.

rob.davies2014
04-01-2013, 11:15 AM
I despair at this article. That is an awful way to manage a franchise. If they say they're going to keep going as long as sales figures are high that implies that they're going to wait until there's a dip in sales before they consider taking a break. But if there's a dip in sales that means there would have been a significant drop in quality in the games. And by then I think it'll be too late.
They need to maintain the standard the franchise had at the beginning. I'm not saying Brotherhood and Revelations are bad games, they're good but they don't have zest that I feel the numbered titles have. The jump from AC1 to AC2 has not yet been replicated. I think there should have been a break in 2011, no Revelations. And a break this year as well, no Black Flag.
Ubi need to take more breaks and make us miss the games more.

Legendz54
04-01-2013, 11:24 AM
Just put my faith back in the modern day for christ sake! It went downhill after brotherhood, Ubisoft doesn't see the modern day the way we do anymore..

As for yearly releases, We will see... If they produce some good stuff every year all will be good, but if the story starts getting told poorly then we will have a problem.

AssassinHMS
04-01-2013, 12:15 PM
As long as strong sales continue they won't stop, because you, I and everyone here will buy it anyway..and the one after it..and the one after that.

Not really. When I buy an Assassin's Creed game I don't buy it because I want to virtually kill a bunch of people or because I want to navigate a boat, I buy it because I want to feel like an assassin who stalks Templars through a beautifull world, that plans his missions, and assassinates targets for a higher purpose, for the creed. AC 3 was completely the opposite of what I wanted and expected. However it opened my eyes to the fact that I can't believe in what the devs say. Therefore I will think twice before buying any other AC game and I know I'm not the only one who thinks this way. I bet many people here will only buy AC IV after the reviews and if they find them satisfactory.

pacmanate
04-01-2013, 06:13 PM
In my eyes, AC3's Templar group had the best ideals of Templars in past games so when they died I was kinda like "Wow, that was pointless".

Assassin_M
04-01-2013, 06:18 PM
In my eyes, AC3's Templar group had the best ideals of Templars in past games so when they died I was kinda like "Wow, that was pointless".
you`re drunk

wrong thread

pacmanate
04-01-2013, 06:20 PM
you`re drunk

wrong thread

Hahhahaha :o

Gi1t
04-01-2013, 09:08 PM
So many people don't see how this has a negative effect and are actually quite content with the low quality parts of these games. You morons are what's wrong with this franchise. You lack taste and unfortunately you seem to be the people the devs are focusing on. How are the games supposed to get better if there's a mass amount of simpletons going around saying they see nothing wrong with the series and are quite content with it being run into the ground? I'm talking about game quality in general and not just the fact it's becoming fatigued.

ACIV is make or break. Mess this up and I'm out (not like they care). INJUSTICE!

Well, I'd say that fans have a right to be that way if they really want to, but the developers cannot afford to have an attitude like that. Even if the people who think it's just amazing as hell are the vast majority, as creators in general they should be capable of being self-critical and they should want to make it better than just 'good'. Anyone trying to make art should aspire to go beyond their limits and ultimately get to the point of prooducing truly mind-blowing work. And the people who are willing to be critical while not being haters are a great way to identify a series' strengths. Anything that both the critics and the die-hard fans acknowledge as being good is usually going to be something worth keeping.

ProletariatPleb
04-01-2013, 09:12 PM
Anyone trying to make art should aspire to go beyond their limits and ultimately get to the point of prooducing truly mind-blowing work. And the people who are willing to be critical while not being haters are a great way to identify a series' strengths. Anything that both the critics and the die-hard fans acknowledge as being good is usually going to be something worth keeping.
Bioshock :o

AvK KiNgKoBrA
04-01-2013, 09:16 PM
AC 2 is the best IMO due to the branching story,varied locations an simplicity of the game itself. AC3 was jus too bland story-wise for me tho the combat was the best

Assassin_M
04-01-2013, 09:21 PM
AC 2 is the best IMO due to the branching story,varied locations an simplicity of the game itself. AC3 was jus too bland story-wise for me tho the combat was the best
what does that have to do with the annualization of the series ??

pacmanate
04-01-2013, 09:27 PM
what does that have to do with the annualization of the series ??

The same thing my post had to do with annual releases.

Assassin_M
04-01-2013, 09:32 PM
The same thing my post had to do with annual releases.
so you`re both drunk ??

ACfan443
04-01-2013, 09:32 PM
The same thing my post had to do with annual releases.

Sober up.

silvermercy
04-01-2013, 09:35 PM
Okay, it's been pretty much covered now that a portion of fans would like it annualised, others wouldn't.

Curious, any games that you would DEFINITELY like annualised? :p Mine would be so many, but let's say Portal.

TheHumanTowel
04-01-2013, 09:42 PM
Okay, it's been pretty much covered now that a portion of fans would like it annualised, others wouldn't.

Curious, any games that you would DEFINITELY like annualised? :p Mine would be so many, but let's say Portal.
None.

AvK KiNgKoBrA
04-01-2013, 09:45 PM
what does that have to do with the annualization of the series ??


so you`re both drunk ??

Its a secret Shhh.........

silvermercy
04-01-2013, 09:49 PM
None.
Even if they hypothetically delivered high quality games that objectively scored 10 out of 10?

TheHumanTowel
04-01-2013, 09:51 PM
Even if they hypothetically delivered high quality games that objectively scored 10 out of 10?
lol if only that was the case.

silvermercy
04-01-2013, 09:53 PM
lol if only that was the case.

I see... So it's not the annual release that's the problem but the fear of lack of quality.

TheHumanTowel
04-01-2013, 09:56 PM
I see... So it's not the annual release that's the problem but the fear of lack of quality.
Well there'd be a bit of fatigue if the advertising is as consistent as AC but the main one is yeah annual releases affect quality. Miyamoto put it well. "A delayed game is eventually good, a rushed game is forever bad."

silvermercy
04-01-2013, 10:02 PM
Well there'd be a bit of fatigue if the advertising is as consistent as AC but the main one is yeah annual releases affect quality. Miyamoto put it well. "A delayed game is eventually good, a rushed game is forever bad."
The way I see it with the AC fandom is that if it took 3 years between games the fans would still have issues: "we waited 3 years for this piece of ****!?" lol
Right now a team takes about 3 years anyway, so for me it's the same difference.
The only way it could improve with a wait is if they had both teams working on the same game, but perhaps that's not feasible.
Or... With a long wait the fans would get desperate and would accept lower quality. lol

Assassin_M
04-01-2013, 10:05 PM
With a long wait the fans would get desperate and would accept lower quality. lol
Not exactly lower quality, but we`ll simply LOVE IT, even if it was the exact same game....just look at Uncharted

silvermercy
04-01-2013, 10:07 PM
Not exactly lower quality, but we`ll simply LOVE IT, even if it was the exact same game....just look at Uncharted

Ah, I see what you did there. Humph! :p

(Ezio returns to Firenze! Fans go nuts.)

Assassin_M
04-01-2013, 10:09 PM
Ah, I see what you did there. Humph! :p

(Ezio returns to Firenze! Fans go nuts.)
don't get me wrong, I love Uncharted xD

Jexx21
04-01-2013, 10:23 PM
For me, it's actually not a fear of a lack of quality (i find AC3 to be the best game in the series), I just feel like I'm getting worn out of Assassin's Creed. I think they need to extend the releases by half a year. So there's a year and a half between AC releases.

Gi1t
04-02-2013, 12:28 AM
Okay, it's been pretty much covered now that a portion of fans would like it annualised, others wouldn't.

Curious, any games that you would DEFINITELY like annualised? :p Mine would be so many, but let's say Portal.

That's a good question. :)

(I'd have to say none, but if you eliminate any and all quality issues and assume that each is as fresh and interesting as the last, it would really just come down to not having the time to absorb it after a certain point. You'd lose interest simply because you don't have the time to really get caught up in it and still keep your life in order.)

However, this isn't a perfect world, and the issue really does come down to a drop in quality. And it's not a 'fear of quality dropoff', but rather an observational thing. People are unhappy not only with some aspects of recent games, but also with the apparent lack of interest in addressing those problems. Looking at the history of the series, a lot of them those problems either starting or becoming more pronounced with the transition into annual releases. They're reading into it and drawing the conclusion that this is, at least in part, responsible for things they're unhappy with.

DTfunjumper
04-02-2013, 02:31 AM
So many people don't see how this has a negative effect and are actually quite content with the low quality parts of these games. You morons are what's wrong with this franchise. You lack taste and unfortunately you seem to be the people the devs are focusing on. How are the games supposed to get better if there's a mass amount of simpletons going around saying they see nothing wrong with the series and are quite content with it being run into the ground? I'm talking about game quality in general and not just the fact it's becoming fatigued.

ACIV is make or break. Mess this up and I'm out (not like they care). INJUSTICE!

Sorry for taking an older post to reply on, but you want the harsh and sad truth from somebody working as a kind of social developer? (not naming my job)
Because most of society is formed by either very rich simpletons or not so rich ones, but all will find money to invest into a bit of BOOM BOOM BANG BANG MULTIKILL MASSACRE BADASS WANNABE ASSASSIN. Why put in complex stealth mechanics and use them for missions? Most morons wouldn't even SEE the hidden path. so simple it down to shove'em an axe up where the sun never shines and tell them to have fun with a brainless buttonsmash massacre.
For the next game: tweak a few things, put in new little gimmicks and present your mashed crap to the public as "innovative", just how COD runs.
They just git to smell the cash of simpletons waving their wallets wanting a hooded supersoldier, so they took the CODtrain to easycashton from f*ckfanbaseburg.
WE ARE NOT EVEN MENTIONED AS A WORRYING BASE, just as a bunch of annoying naggers trying to stop them from being "productive".
They used to actually at least TRY and calm us down, jut thinking back to AC II and Brotherhood presentations (good old times ey?), but now we are not the majority anymore. We are what THEY used to be, just with the difference that we are capable of using the pink/grey thing between our ears while they just pay for more BANG. (Reminds me of the experiment with hominidae and simple monkeys. They could either keep their food or swap for a bit of chimpporn. While great apes swapped wisely, analizing what was the need and was bareable, the simple monkeys porned themselves to death... just a fun fact and comparison)
So literally, we've done our duty and this interview was kind of Ubisofts way of saying "thanks for making us big, now f*ck off"(or at least that's how i feel reading it)

You sir officially though deserve a piece of proof for your honest and helpful comment! (not being sarcastic!)
Take my... cookie as a reward!

Oh i forgot. A friend of mine started a bet with me. The first one to buy AC IV may officially be b*tchslapped 20 times by the winner. Not mentioning this may be used our entire lifetime.
(Simple thought of mine)
I've been thinking on how the HELL you are going to be stealthy at sea (where you will be most of the time) and i have found aprox NOTHING.

ProletariatPleb
04-02-2013, 03:36 AM
Okay, it's been pretty much covered now that a portion of fans would like it annualised, others wouldn't.

Curious, any games that you would DEFINITELY like annualised? :p Mine would be so many, but let's say Portal.
It seems like some people just want a fix of AC every year, irrelevant if it's a turd wrapped in a food colors.

No, no game needs to be annualised, well maybe CoD can stay so that little kids can swear at each other and let us buy better games but I don't wanna see AC go down that path, it was a glorious series, now it seems like a rehash every year with changes so arbitrary it gets boring pretty soon.

pirate1802
04-02-2013, 04:22 AM
Not exactly lower quality, but we`ll simply LOVE IT, even if it was the exact same game....just look at Uncharted

Exactly. What happens is when your favourite game comes out with a sequel after a long time, you're happy that you're getting a game at all even if it brings zero improvements. A new Deus Ex game is in the talks and fans are already excited about it. I'm sure it'll be well-received if it just maintains the standards it set in Human Revolution even without implementing significant upgrades.

Whereas when game come close together you ask yourself WHY? instead of WHY NOT? and try to justify to yourself, a sequel so soon, in the process magnifying its flaws.

Its like your best friend visiting you after a long time. You cherish his visit even if he doesn't bring gifts. While the same person starts visiting you every day, every hour.. you're like: uhh.. he came again? Why? -____-

Assassin_M
04-02-2013, 04:25 AM
the same person starts visiting you every day, every hour.. you're like: uhh.. he came again? Why? -____-
While most of us are not really at that phase yet, we`re pretty close and that`s bad....we shouldn't even be THIS close

pirate1802
04-02-2013, 04:26 AM
While most of us are not really at that phase yet, we`re pretty close and that`s bad....we shouldn't even be THIS close

That was an exaggeration but you get the point. xD

ProletariatPleb
04-02-2013, 04:27 AM
Exactly. What happens is when your favourite game comes out with a sequel after a long time, you're happy that you're getting a game at all even if it brings zero improvements. A new Deus Ex game is in the talks and fans are already excited about it. I'm sure it'll be well-received if it just maintains the standards it set in Human Revolution even without implementing significant upgrades.

Whereas when game come close together you ask yourself WHY? instead of WHY NOT? and try to justify to yourself, a sequel so soon, in the process magnifying its flaws.

Its like your best friend visiting you after a long time. You cherish his visit even if he doesn't bring gifts. While the same person starts visiting you every day, every hour.. you're like: uhh.. he came again? Why? -____-
http://i.imgur.com/geXrmng.gif

Assassin_M
04-02-2013, 04:28 AM
That was an exaggeration but you get the point. xD
Totally, I get your point...

What bugs is that this interview is basically shrugging off, not reassurance..if it came from a Dev, maybe it would`v been different

monster_rambo
04-02-2013, 01:50 PM
As long as the sales meet their expectations, they will continue to push annual releases because it is profitable regardless of the amount of complaints on the quality and fatigue the core AC fans face after buying each game. What is all this complaining about?! You guys brought this on yourselves because you know that you will buy AC regardless, and then you guys come on these forums complain about bugs, story, character, poor mission designs, stupid delivery missions, blah, blah, blah.....well what do you expect? You guys are the ones buying the game and this gives them extra incentive to implement little change in the series.

pirate1802
04-02-2013, 06:42 PM
As long as the sales meet their expectations, they will continue to push annual releases because it is profitable regardless of the amount of complaints on the quality and fatigue the core AC fans face after buying each game. What is all this complaining about?! You guys brought this on yourselves because you know that you will buy AC regardless, and then you guys come on these forums complain about bugs, story, character, poor mission designs, stupid delivery missions, blah, blah, blah.....well what do you expect? You guys are the ones buying the game and this gives them extra incentive to implement little change in the series.

This almost makes me feel bad for feeling good about AC IV..

ProletariatPleb
04-02-2013, 06:44 PM
This almost makes me feel bad for feeling good about AC IV..
Are you sure you're feeling "good" or that you're hopeful it won't be a sack of ****.

ACfan443
04-02-2013, 06:46 PM
Are you sure you're feeling "good" or that you're hopeful it won't be a sack of ****.

How did that word bypass the swear filter.. :eek:

pirate1802
04-02-2013, 06:50 PM
Are you sure you're feeling "good" or that you're hopeful it won't be a sack of ****.

Cautiously feelin' good. It gives me the AC2 vibes in terms of the setting and protag, but looks tend to lie.. doubly so after AC3. So.. yep, feelin' good but cautious.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VGmDsh2EW_U

ProletariatPleb
04-02-2013, 06:51 PM
How did that word bypass the swear filter.. :eek:
Holy ****! you're right, how the hell did that happen dammit

Megas_Doux
04-02-2013, 06:52 PM
Are you sure you're feeling "good" or that you're hopeful it won't be a sack of ****.

I am wary, lurking in the shadows......

See, in fact I will be my first non preorder AC since AC1....I am positive about the setting, though. Really love La Habana.

pirate1802
04-02-2013, 06:52 PM
Holy ****! you're right, how the hell did that happen dammit

**** yeah!

ACfan443
04-02-2013, 06:58 PM
Holy ****! you're right, how the hell did that happen dammit

EDIT: Pacmanate where are you?!

TheHumanTowel
04-02-2013, 07:04 PM
****ing ****balls. Free at last!

pirate1802
04-02-2013, 07:06 PM
Pacmanate where are you?!

Probably engineering this whole ****ing mess behind the curtains!

ACfan443
04-02-2013, 07:07 PM
Probably engineering this whole ****ing mess behind the curtains!

I feel so ****ing naughty, teehee.

Sushiglutton
04-02-2013, 07:11 PM
Would have made the same decission if I was in their shoes. If your sales for the fifth game goes up 50% to >12M you have to be a fool not to keep doing what you are doing ;). That said, it's a bit of a shame since several aspects of the franchise suffers quality-vise imo.

pacmanate
04-02-2013, 07:28 PM
I can say **** now?!

EDIT - YES!!!

Okay giese. YOu can say **** as long as you dont edit it otherwise it astricates you

Mr_Shade
04-02-2013, 08:26 PM
really guys?


enjoy the infractions...


Just because you can, does not mean you should...

ProletariatPleb
04-02-2013, 08:33 PM
really guys?


enjoy the infractions...


Just because you can, does not mean you should...
But Mr.Shaadddeee I only said sh** and the swear filter was broken :(

ACfan443
04-02-2013, 08:44 PM
Those red cards on my post block are rather unsightly :/

silvermercy
04-02-2013, 08:45 PM
Can someone take a screencap? :p I'm curious now.

Mr_Shade
04-02-2013, 08:54 PM
Those red cards on my post block are rather unsightly :/
maybe don't swear then...

Seeing it was broken and posting on purpose = not the smartest thing to do...



Just because the filter was down, does not mean anyone should swear - I thought you knows would be an example of how to behave - guess not.

Bastiaen
04-02-2013, 08:57 PM
Don't stop.

ProletariatPleb
04-02-2013, 09:02 PM
Don't stop.
Make it pop.

ACfan443
04-02-2013, 09:03 PM
I apologise mr shade, won't happen again.


Can someone take a screencap? :p I'm curious now.

Of the infraction symbol?

http://imgur.com/kqRHfL0.jpg

silvermercy
04-02-2013, 09:05 PM
^ Ah I see little part of a yellow dot. lol Is that it?? (Was hoping for a "User what ru doin? User! Stahp!")

ACfan443
04-02-2013, 09:06 PM
^ Ah I see little part of a yellow dot. lol Is that it??

The red cards, I just realised they're only on one of the posts, not all of them

Mr_Shade
04-02-2013, 09:11 PM
The red cards, I just realised they're only on one of the posts, not all of them
They are on the offending post - the one where the infraction is set..

Just remember - 3 strikes and your out..


Swearing = 1 strike and lasts a month - so get another 2 points in that month = 2 week suspension [minimum]

different things = can have different points.. so best idea? - don't get any!

Gi1t
04-02-2013, 09:53 PM
I suggest you continue the topic in the other thread..

Fine, I will. Was still writing when you close that one, so here it is on the previous thread...


I want this franchise to evolve, but evolve in a way that I can still call it Assassin's Creed. Adding a bunch of new features and forgeting the heart of Assassin's Creed doesn't make it evolve, it turns it into another franchise. What must evolve are the core aspects. For example: you want to improove your kitchen so you paint it or decorate it. One year later you realize you're not fully satisfied with it, that you want more, so you demolish the kitchen and build a huge playroom. Something like that.

Yeah, exactly. I think the 'core vs. content' conflict is becoming a bigger and bigger problem in the industry these days. Games start off with a strong core, but then they get obsessed with adding content to the game to make it a fuller experience overall, and they go too far. The game becomes focused on having a lot of 'things' in it, but the core doesn't get worked on and all those flashy bits of content remain isolated from one another.
They don't blend together into a comprehensive whole, and the core and the overall direction of the project get buried in a sea of random perks. -__-

Take fighting for example. You have a bunch of attacks, and a very effective dodge ability, and enemie designed to fit the combat style, and people love it. Then you go to add content and you try to add more attacks, so you remove the dodge button. Or you add a bunch of new enemies and don't bother to modify the dodge feature so that it's still useful, so it becomes worthless. That little dodge function may not have been the thing people gush over, but it kept the fighting system interesting. Now all you've got are flashy moves and th combet just sort of feels dull and somehow nobody can figure out why. -__- When trying to improve on a winning design, people seem very prone to overlooking those sophisitcated features that actually hold things together and add dimension to games whose objectives are, as a whole, very simplisitc. Most of the time, all you do in any game is platforming/climbing, talking to people, and fighting and that's it. It's the features that flesh out the core gameplay that really make it interesting. If you focus all your attention on content, you dilute it down to just that basic premise of 'go here--do that--rejoice!--repeat' gameplay. The core features aren't always front and center, they're not flashy and fun all on their own, but just becasue not everyone who buys it will understand how they hold the game together and make it great doesn't mean they're not working out and don't deserve attention.

ProletariatPleb
04-02-2013, 10:06 PM
Fine, I will. Was still writing when you close that one, so here it is on the previous thread...



Yeah, exactly. I think the 'core vs. content' conflict is becoming a bigger and bigger problem in the industry these days. Games start off with a strong core, but then they get obsessed with adding content to the game to make it a fuller experience overall, and they go too far. The game becomes focused on having a lot of 'things' in it, but the core doesn't get worked on and all those flashy bits of content remain isolated from one another.
They don't blend together into a comprehensive whole, and the core and the overall direction of the project get buried in a sea of random perks. -__-

Take fighting for example. You have a bunch of attacks, and a very effective dodge ability, and enemie designed to fit the combat style, and people love it. Then you go to add content and you try to add more attacks, so you remove the dodge button. Or you add a bunch of new enemies and don't bother to modify the dodge feature so that it's still useful, so it becomes worthless. That little dodge function may not have been the thing people gush over, but it kept the fighting system interesting. Now all you've got are flashy moves and th combet just sort of feels dull and somehow nobody can figure out why. -__- When trying to improve on a winning design, people seem very prone to overlooking those sophisitcated features that actually hold things together and add dimension to games whose objectives are, as a whole, very simplisitc. Most of the time, all you do in any game is platforming/climbing, talking to people, and fighting and that's it. It's the features that flesh out the core gameplay that really make it interesting. If you focus all your attention on content, you dilute it down to just that basic premise of 'go here--do that--rejoice!--repeat' gameplay. The core features aren't always front and center, they're not flashy and fun all on their own, but just becasue not everyone who buys it will understand how they hold the game together and make it great doesn't mean they're not working out and don't deserve attention.
Hey you! I like you :p

You said it, they've been so focused on adding more things even if they're disconnected and unnecessary just for the sake of adding something "new" every year making other things obsolete. As a PC player I turned off the triangles in AC3, set the speed of the game to X2 and still didn't die in combat, it's just too easy, all flash no substance.

AssassinHMS
04-02-2013, 10:54 PM
Even if the series were no longer annualized, the problem would remain since the devs would use the extra time to add even more features instead of perfecting the already existing ones. Assassin's creed has an iden***y crysis that can only be solved if it stays true to its roots while inovating and improving its core elements. Itīs not about making the biggest game yet, it's about creating the best assassin's creed game ever.

Assassin_M
04-02-2013, 10:57 PM
Even if the series were no longer annualized, the problem would remain since the devs would use the extra time to add even more features instead of perfecting the already existing ones. Assassin's creed has an iden***y crysis that can only be solved if it stays true to its roots while inovating and improving its core elements. Itīs not about making the biggest game yet, it's about creating the best assassin's creed game ever.
If they abandon the yearly release, they`ll have nothing to add...they wont be obliged to...That`s what we`re saying, the key to refining the core concepts is abandoning the yearly release, because so long as THAT remains, they`ll always be desperate to add something new every year to appease the schedule and not make it seem like they`re rehashing the game. If they abandon the yearly release, released games in 2 or 3 years, they wont have to ADD anything, just refine what`s there slightly, new story, new experience DONE...10/10

JUST LOOK AT UNCHARTED, PEOPLE

AssassinHMS
04-02-2013, 11:41 PM
If they abandon the yearly release, they`ll have nothing to add...they wont be obliged to...That`s what we`re saying, the key to refining the core concepts is abandoning the yearly release, because so long as THAT remains, they`ll always be desperate to add something new every year to appease the schedule and not make it seem like they`re rehashing the game. If they abandon the yearly release, released games in 2 or 3 years, they wont have to ADD anything, just refine what`s there slightly, new story, new experience DONE...10/10

JUST LOOK AT UNCHARTED, PEOPLE

I see... Well I think an AC game every 2 years with improved core features, a new setting and assassin plus a few twists and inovations would suffice. On the other hand, unlike Uncharted, CoD is pretty much the same every year (not that I want that for AC of course)... i guess it depends on who the game is targeted for.

VitaminsXYZ
04-02-2013, 11:48 PM
If they abandon the yearly release, they`ll have nothing to add...they wont be obliged to...That`s what we`re saying, the key to refining the core concepts is abandoning the yearly release, because so long as THAT remains, they`ll always be desperate to add something new every year to appease the schedule and not make it seem like they`re rehashing the game. If they abandon the yearly release, released games in 2 or 3 years, they wont have to ADD anything, just refine what`s there slightly, new story, new experience DONE...10/10

JUST LOOK AT UNCHARTED, PEOPLE

Agreed. I feel like the name's becoming a bit worn out. The yearly release isn't helping either, as it's just forcing them to have to keep adding in new features without first having seen the feedback from the previous game.

So yeah, a few years break in between would be nice. I'm not even looking forward to Black Flags all that much. (And this is coming from someone who thoroughly enjoyed AC3.)

Assassin_M
04-02-2013, 11:52 PM
Agreed. I feel like the name's becoming a bit worn out. The yearly release isn't helping either, as it's just forcing them to have to keep adding in new features without first having seen the feedback from the previous game.

So yeah, a few years break in between would be nice. I'm not even looking forward to Black Flags all that much. (And this is coming from someone who thoroughly enjoyed AC3.)
Have you noticed how the animations in AC I and AC II were the EXACT same ? Walking, executions, counters, assassinations, running and climbing ? no one cared, but now ?? go anywhere and you`ll see "disappointed to see the same animations of Connor" it`s still too soon in people`s heads, it`s still too fresh...

SixKeys
04-03-2013, 12:15 AM
Assassin's creed has an iden***y crysis

LOL, looks like the swearing filter has been set back on overdrive.

ACfan443
04-03-2013, 12:17 AM
LOL, looks like the swearing filter has been set back on overdrive.

Hahaha!

Gi1t
04-03-2013, 04:07 AM
Hey you! I like you :p

You said it, they've been so focused on adding more things even if they're disconnected and unnecessary just for the sake of adding something "new" every year making other things obsolete. As a PC player I turned off the triangles in AC3, set the speed of the game to X2 and still didn't die in combat, it's just too easy, all flash no substance.

Thanks! :D

It's something I feel like I see a lot, and combat seems to be the most common example. With Ninja Gaiden 2, they just crammed in a lot of new content on top of the old system and the only thing they changed was to make Ryu's dodge less effective against multiple enemies, then cram in MORE enemies. -__- The result was that it became a lot more of a typical action game in that there was little point in being intelligent in how you fought, most of the huge list of new attacks in the game were just for show, only a few of them were actually cheap enough to be really good in combat, and instead of 3-5 smart enemies, you fought 7-12 aggressive, but rather stupid enemies that could no longer block or dodge attacks. That effective and reliable dodge function in the first game kept the comlplex combat working even in pretty crazy circumstances, but people didn't see it. They never understand that the more effective your defenses are, the more crazy **** the character/s can handle in combat. If you REALLY want to make an intense combat system, start with a great defense; otherwise, the enemies have to be morons to make up for the fact that your character can't handle too much pressure at once.

According to the creators of NG2, they wanted to 'make sure the player felt like they were accomplishing something every time they pressed a button' (Itagaki's own words if memory serves). So apparently, people didn't like having to think about how they attacked their targets at all. They wanted all the flash and none of the substance and that's what they got. As much as people whine about it, Ninja Gaiden 3 was a step FORWARD, albeit, from the game the messed things up in the first place.

ProletariatPleb
04-03-2013, 04:14 AM
Thanks! :D

It's something I feel like I see a lot, and combat seems to be the most common example. With Ninja Gaiden 2, they just crammed in a lot of new content on top of the old system and the only thing they changed was to make Ryu's dodge less effective against multiple enemies, then cram in MORE enemies. -__- The result was that it became a lot more of a typical action game in that there was little point in being intelligent in how you fought, most of the huge list of new attacks in the game were just for show, only a few of them were actually cheap enough to be really good in combat, and instead of 3-5 smart enemies, you fought 7-12 aggressive, but rather stupid enemies that could no longer block or dodge attacks. That effective and reliable dodge function in the first game kept the comlplex combat working even in pretty crazy circumstances, but people didn't see it. They never understand that the more effective your defenses are, the more crazy **** the character/s can handle in combat. If you REALLY want to make an intense combat system, start with a great defense; otherwise, the enemies have to be morons to make up for the fact that your character can't handle too much pressure at once.

According to the creators of NG2, they wanted to 'make sure the player felt like they were accomplishing something every time they pressed a button' (Itagaki's own words if memory serves). So apparently, people didn't like having to think about how they attacked their targets at all. They wanted all the flash and none of the substance and that's what they got. As much as people whine about it, Ninja Gaiden 3 was a step FORWARD, albeit, from the game the messed things up in the first place.
Every game wants to be boom boom explosions now & "epic" scenes. Let's make the player feel like the ultimate badass by making the game easier or adding a **** ton of enemies.

pirate1802
04-03-2013, 12:33 PM
Whenever I read Sid's posts I imagine him being like this:
http://buzz.petsadviser.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/tardar.jpg

catkiller97
04-03-2013, 12:42 PM
^ true

ProletariatPleb
04-03-2013, 03:43 PM
Whenever I read Sid's posts I imagine him being like this:


Imagine me like this
https://fbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/60666_10200931631915774_1591252451_n.jpg

pirate1802
04-03-2013, 05:06 PM
Imagine me like this
https://fbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/60666_10200931631915774_1591252451_n.jpg

Purging casuals and related suspects?

ProletariatPleb
04-03-2013, 05:08 PM
Purging casuals and related suspects?
Yes Comrade Commissar.

TinyTemplar
04-03-2013, 06:06 PM
wait .. i don`t get it

pirate1802
04-03-2013, 06:44 PM
Yes Comrade Commissar.

Reminds me of that epic Volga river crossing of CoD 1. The good old days, before CoD became a *****.. :(

ProletariatPleb
04-03-2013, 06:51 PM
Reminds me of that epic Volga river crossing of CoD 1. The good old days, before CoD became a *****.. :(
>That feel when one of the characters is voiced by Jason Statham
>That feel when you're playing as British defending while reinforcements arrive.

ToniTorsi
04-03-2013, 07:32 PM
http://www.clker.com/cliparts/i/y/2/R/C/b/stop-signal-hi.png

pirate1802
04-03-2013, 07:40 PM
>That feel when one of the characters is voiced by Jason Statham
>That feel when you're playing as British defending while reinforcements arrive.

Pegasus bridge.. DEM FEELS!

dbuddy101
04-03-2013, 07:56 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/webkit-fake-url://6A8E115E-3920-4A8E-BE15-F93430D4C5A6/stop-signal-hi.png

Ygdrasel
04-04-2013, 12:54 AM
Annual releases aren't an issue for me. It's not like they get a 1-year dev time. They just get released once a year.

SixKeys
04-04-2013, 01:33 AM
Annual releases aren't an issue for me. It's not like they get a 1-year dev time. They just get released once a year.

ACB and ACR were developed in less than a year.

Assassin_M
04-04-2013, 01:34 AM
ACB and ACR were developed in less than a year.
No actually, ACB was a bit over a year...maybe ACR was less than a year, but not ACB

Ygdrasel
04-04-2013, 01:48 AM
ACB and ACR were developed in less than a year.

ACB wasn't. ACR was, maybe. And it was still great overall so either way, I don't see this arrangement as a problem.

ProletariatPleb
04-04-2013, 04:01 AM
ACB wasn't. ACR was, maybe. And it was still great overall so either way, I don't see this arrangement as a problem.
Firstly, your name sounds like something I've heard in LOTR.

Now on-topic: ACB and ACR weren't exactly "quality" releases as such and added very little to the franchise in terms of actual gameplay content, especially ACR. They could've been a lot better if they had more time don't you think?

Acrimonious_Nin
04-04-2013, 05:39 AM
This. It's disheartening to see how many fans here first whine and moan about the declining quality of the series and then in the same breath go on to say "but I will keep buying the games nonetheless". If you're disappointed with the series direction, at least stop pre-ordering the $70-100 editions. All the extra in-game content will eventually be released as DLC and if you want the statues, collector boxes, art books etc. they'll be up on eBay in no time. Wait until the reviews start rolling in and make your decision based on those or other players' feedback.

I for one will not be pre-ordering this year and will wait until I can get the game cheaply in a Steam sale.

Yeah, You make a good point and I am with you there. People are not seeing that this game has officially become another Splinter Cell: Convictions. This game has been a disappointment. I will only buy it when the price lowers....very low...I will watch the story line from the wiki and youtube videos....I am in it these days for the story line more than the gameplay ever since they sold out on the original stealth game Idea...I got this game because I needed a stealth game...not an Action one making Assassins look like they suffer from the lack of philosophical mores >_>

Gi1t
04-04-2013, 06:27 AM
Firstly, your name sounds like something I've heard in LOTR.

Now on-topic: ACB and ACR weren't exactly "quality" releases as such and added very little to the franchise in terms of actual gameplay content, especially ACR. They could've been a lot better if they had more time don't you think?

Actually, I believe that would be Norse mythology. :)

ACRules2
04-04-2013, 06:37 AM
If you don't like the games, don't buy em. Simple as that. In my opinion, keep on rolling with Assassins Creed, Ubi!

pirate1802
04-04-2013, 06:48 AM
If you don't like the games, don't buy em. Simple as that. In my opinion, keep on rolling with Assassins Creed, Ubi!

-__-

Look I'm as much an AC fan as you are, and would like to see this franchise soar to unbelievable heights. Which is why I want Ubi to take their time with the releases. Its never as simple as "do you like 'em or not?!" Yes I like 'em, which is why I don't wanna see them so soon, not because I hate them. Yearly releases are a bad thing and almost every malady afflicting AC can be traced back to it. Accept it or not the quality IS dropping due to these yearly releases. It hasn't yet (IMO) dropped to critical levels, that's why there's still time to mend it. But if they continue like this sooner or later the series we all love will fade from memory.

ProletariatPleb
04-04-2013, 06:55 AM
If you don't like the games, don't buy em. Simple as that. In my opinion, keep on rolling with Assassins Creed, Ubi!
Simple seems a bit charitable!

Legendz54
04-04-2013, 07:46 AM
A little off topic but the lack of AC4 videos and info is starting to annoy me.

Ygdrasel
04-04-2013, 09:38 AM
Yeah, You make a good point and I am with you there. People are not seeing that this game has officially become another Splinter Cell: Convictions. This game has been a disappointment. I will only buy it when the price lowers....very low...I will watch the story line from the wiki and youtube videos....I am in it these days for the story line more than the gameplay ever since they sold out on the original stealth game Idea...I got this game because I needed a stealth game...not an Action one making Assassins look like they suffer from the lack of philosophical mores >_>

This series never had the best stealth. You can't sell out what you never had. Stealth has been blending and hiding. Both elements in every game, with blending being improved from 2 onward. Where's the sellout?

ProletariatPleb
04-04-2013, 10:45 AM
Why blend when you can kill everything in sight within 5 secs. THAT is the problem.

Ygdrasel
04-04-2013, 10:54 AM
Why blend when you can kill everything in sight within 5 secs. THAT is the problem.

AC is not a stealth series so that is not a real problem. It's an action series with stealth elements.

But in answer to your question: Why kill everything when you can become essentially invisible within 5 seconds?

Stealth is trivial to violence users because they can just kill everything in seconds. Violence is trivial to stealth users because they can just blend into the crowd in seconds. Take your option and enjoy. There is no problem.

AssassinHMS
04-04-2013, 10:55 AM
Why blend when you can kill everything in sight within 5 secs. THAT is the problem.

Precisely

Ygdrasel
04-04-2013, 10:59 AM
Precisely

Why have swords when you can just shoot everyone dead from a distance?

Why fight when you can just have recruits fight for you?

Why walk when you can just get a horse?


Tell me more about how having options in video games is a problem. :rolleyes:

ProletariatPleb
04-04-2013, 11:04 AM
Why have swords when you can just shoot everyone dead from a distance?
Cause pistols are slow and this is a melee combat game? Without that it's just CoD now.


Why fight when you can just have recruits fight for you?
That not even valid, why are you playing a game if you wanna watch others do the work might as well watch a movie, oh wait AC IS A MOVIE now.


Why walk when you can just get a horse?
Cause it gets stuck everywhere and you get shot down from it all the time. What's the point of free-running anymore? The streets are faster.


Tell me more about how having options in video games is a problem. :rolleyes:
Tell me more about how these so called "options" haven't ruined the game.

AssassinHMS
04-04-2013, 11:05 AM
Why have swords when you can just shoot everyone dead from a distance?

Why fight when you can just have recruits fight for you?

Why walk when you can just get a horse?


Tell me more about how having options in video games is a problem. :rolleyes:

Having options is a good thing but in this case it's all about: How do I fell like killing him today? instead of What is the best way to kill him? or Will I be able to kill him?
This lack of difficulty kills tension and imersion because you fell like you're above the game and not in the game. Not to mension it's unrealistic.

Ygdrasel
04-04-2013, 11:18 AM
Tell me more about how these so called "options" haven't ruined the game.

...Are you suggesting that options (sans quotes, because they ARE optional), which have no effect on you unless you CHOOSE TO USE THEM, ruin the game?

If so, you're a ****ing idiot (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/StopHavingFunGuys), and that's as nicely as I can say that.

@HMS: I've never had an issue with immersion myself. True, difficulty has never been this series' strong point. But surely we can have difficulty and options alike. I want my target to be a challenge but I also want to decide how I'd like to see him end. Tough missions with multiple methods of completion isn't some far-off Nirvana. It's doable and has been done in other titles. Hitman's even pulled it off a few times.

As for unrealistic...Genetic memory, evil mind-controlling pharmacy company (well, maybe), 2012 planet-destroying solar flare, alien holograms, magic Pope staff, physics-negating haystacks...If you're going to use 'unrealistic' as a criticism, you'll need to be a bit more detailed.

Assassin_M
04-04-2013, 11:19 AM
Woah, that`s a bit harsh

Ygdrasel
04-04-2013, 11:25 AM
Woah, that`s a bit harsh

Yeah, I'm a harsh guy. It's a quick, effective way to handle dumb **** like (paraphrase ahead) "This thing that I don't have to use and won't affect me in any way unless I want it to RUINS EVERYTHING!"

Assassin_M
04-04-2013, 11:27 AM
Yeah, I'm a harsh guy. It's a quick, effective way to handle dumb **** like (paraphrase ahead) "This thing that I don't have to use and won't affect me in any way unless I want it to RUINS EVERYTHING!"
I`m gonna put you under work in progress then ?

ProletariatPleb
04-04-2013, 11:27 AM
...Are you suggesting that options (sans quotes, because they ARE optional), which have no effect on you unless you CHOOSE TO USE THEM, ruin the game?

If so, you're a ****ing idiot (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/StopHavingFunGuys), and that's as nicely as I can say that..
No you fool, people really need a brain these days... what you mentioned aren't even the "choices" what we're talking about, that was the whole point of the post, I even specifically highlighted "options" for that very purpose.

Point is that if you can end fights in 5 seconds why would you hide? A squad of trained men cannot fighting this so called "assassin" while he decimates them in so short a time. Yeah right.

Ygdrasel
04-04-2013, 11:36 AM
Point is that if you can end fights in 5 seconds why would you hide?

If you can hide in 5 seconds, why would you fight?

I'm fairly sure I just went over this. Your question applies equally to BOTH solutions.

Some people, MIRACULOUS as it may seem to you, PREFER to hide. THAT is why they would hide. And that is why the OPTION is there. The same applies vice-versa. Some prefer to fight. That's why THAT option is there.

Now which part of this, exactly, ruins the game?

FYI, you did not highlight anything. You put it in quotation marks which is an entirely different thing. If you intend emphasis, as is the purpose of highlighting, try italics instead.

And people have brains these days. You just apparently communicated something you didn't intend to, which would be a fault on your end. You implied options ruin the game. That is a fact. If you did not mean to imply that, figure out where your words went wrong.

ProletariatPleb
04-04-2013, 11:42 AM
Now which part of this, exactly, ruined the games?
*facepalm* that was a satirical post based on what you said incase you still don't get it.

Now on topic, the point here is the game has changed from Assassin's Creed to one-man army warrior guy that can win the American Revolution all alone given the chance. The so called option for hiding is underwhelming and HIGHLY overshadowed by finish the fight already.

Ygdrasel
04-04-2013, 11:51 AM
The game is Assassins' Creed. It always has been. It still is now. And even Altair was a one-man army in the very first game. Where is the change when it's been that way from day one?

You don't like to hide. You prefer to fight. You think it's faster, easier, whatever. I get that. But you are not the only player.

You think the character is overpowered. You want the game to be a challenge. Great. Suggest ways to achieve that, maybe.

Or play a series made for challenge.

ProletariatPleb
04-04-2013, 11:57 AM
The game is Assassins' Creed. It always has been. It still is now. And even Altair was a one-man army in the very first game. Where is the change when it's been that way from day one?
No it's not AC anymore, it's fallen to mediocrity. Altaïr could do that yes, but fighting took longer. It was easier to escape, there was a thrill to escape and be a blade in the crowd and it as 10x faster than fighting all the guards.


You think the character is overpowered. You want the game to be a challenge. Great. Suggest ways to achieve that, maybe.
You really are new here, aren't you? My suggestion wouldn't count for jack.


Or play a series made for challenge.
Except it was a bit more challenging earlier, now it's getting easier and easier every game, I can play it with my eyes closed now.

Ygdrasel
04-04-2013, 12:04 PM
Fighting took longer because combat was clunky and enemy AI slower and crummier. That's a negative point, not a positive.

If you bring no suggestions to up the challenge, you really have no reason to complain about a lack of it. "It needs to be more challenging! No, I have no idea how but it NEEDS it!" - Do you see the problem here? You're complaining just fine but you're not offering solutions. And the kind of people who do that, well, they kind of suck.

D.I.D.
04-04-2013, 12:06 PM
AC is not a stealth series so that is not a real problem. It's an action series with stealth elements.

But in answer to your question: Why kill everything when you can become essentially invisible within 5 seconds?

Stealth is trivial to violence users because they can just kill everything in seconds. Violence is trivial to stealth users because they can just blend into the crowd in seconds. Take your option and enjoy. There is no problem.

There has been a problem.

I really dislike this projection of the series's future based upon the things that it has done badly in the past. Yes, the stealth has not been very well done as of yet, but that's because this attention is overdue, not that it is unnecessary. Forget your experience of the games, with all of their bloat; it's plainly obvious that an assassination simulator ought to involve a lot of sneaking and selective killing of particular targets. That should be thrilling. Then, sometimes a plan will go wrong and you have to run and maybe fight your way out of trouble. That should be exciting too. Making the seemingly impossible possible is at the root of Splinter Cell, Thief, Dishonored, and many other games of this type.

The trouble with AC's pretence of options is that neither option is exciting anymore. I defy anyone to claim that their adrenalin was pumping due to anything presented in AC3. You could be perfectly successful, slumped back in your seat, barely trying to win.

This was the problem of ACR's illusion of options too: just a wide variety of different types of autokill, which gives designers an excuse not to design. Why leave interesting alternative routes to be found for different styles, if you can just delegate to the player by pretending to be generous? By this point, we really should have better sneaking options. We should be using darkness as camouflage, like they were in Splinter Cell: CT, at a relatively early stage in the deployment of dynamic lighting in games. Maybe there should be experimentation with first person modes to approach targets in a crowd and use line-of-sight blocking. Meanwhile combat gets tweaked in ways that are meaningless unless everyone who is at risk of being killed by you is doing something about that: fighting hard alongside their comrades when they're in large numbers, running away to bring reinforcements if at a disadvantage (unless you chase and stop them), all the things that might add more excitement and variety to the gameplay and make you feel like you're really up against the defence of a city.

I worry that the combat has led to soldier characters, that the combat style and the interest in explosive cinematics is leading towards war themes, and that the potential of the series might be squandered in pursuit of the wrong things. The reason AC is suited to a fictionalised reality rather than a totally fictional world is that history is riddled with political intrigues in which assassination was very common and a serious risk for powerful people, and it's really not the same to say "well, a lot of people die in a war so let's pick out a few and say they were assassinated". I hope that AC4 is the last militarised game for a while, or that warfare is only a distant backdrop to something else.

ProletariatPleb
04-04-2013, 12:09 PM
There has been a problem.

I really dislike this projection of the series's future based upon the things that it has done badly in the past. Yes, the stealth has not been very well done as of yet, but that's because this attention is overdue, not that it is unnecessary. Forget your experience of the games, with all of their bloat; it's plainly obvious that an assassination simulator ought to involve a lot of sneaking and selective killing of particular targets. That should be thrilling. Then, sometimes a plan will go wrong and you have to run and maybe fight your way out of trouble. That should be exciting too. Making the seemingly impossible possible is at the root of Splinter Cell, Thief, Dishonored, and many other games of this type.

The trouble with AC's pretence of options is that neither option is exciting anymore. I defy anyone to claim that their adrenalin was pumping due to anything presented in AC3. You could be perfectly successful, slumped back in your seat, barely trying to win.

This was the problem of ACR's illusion of options too: just a wide variety of different types of autokill, which gives designers an excuse not to design. Why leave interesting alternative routes to be found for different styles, if you can just delegate to the player by pretending to be generous? By this point, we really should have better sneaking options. We should be using darkness as camouflage, like they were in Splinter Cell: CT, at a relatively early stage in the deployment of dynamic lighting in games. Maybe there should be experimentation with first person modes to approach targets in a crowd and use line-of-sight blocking. Meanwhile combat gets tweaked in ways that are meaningless unless everyone who is at risk of being killed by you is doing something about that: fighting hard alongside their comrades when they're in large numbers, running away to bring reinforcements if at a disadvantage (unless you chase and stop them), all the things that might add more excitement and variety to the gameplay and make you feel like you're really up against the defence of a city.

I worry that the combat has led to soldier characters, that the combat style and the interest in explosive cinematics is leading towards war themes, and that the potential of the series might be squandered in pursuit of the wrong things. The reason AC is suited to a fictionalised reality rather than a totally fictional world is that history is riddled with political intrigues in which assassination was very common and a serious risk for powerful people, and it's really not the same to say "well, a lot of people die in a war so let's pick out a few and say they were assassinated". I hope that AC4 is the last militarised game for a while, or that warfare is only a distant backdrop to something else.
Ah Doubleclick my dearest friend, you're always there to shine the light, I was growing tired of this "debate".

Assassin_M
04-04-2013, 12:10 PM
Ah Doubleclick my dearest friend, you're always there to shine the light, I was growing tired of this "debate".
Yeah, he put it in a much better, more coherent way:p

Ygdrasel
04-04-2013, 12:23 PM
There has been a problem. [cut for length]

You offer solutions. You're useful. I like you. Hello. Me, I don't mind the easiness, but let's have at it anyway:

The running for reinforcements bit is good. I recall 3 had something like that, but only once early on.

Fighting alongside their comrades (as in multiple attackers striking at once) is something the AI tries a few times in 3...But then a single counter insta-kills all attackers. Enemy AI needs tweaks. No waiting turns (they're improving), running for backup when odds are against them (or just calling for it, and I mean heavy backup)...And the counter system needs to be less...insta-killy. But I can't think of a way to do that...Alternatively, countering itself could be made more difficult (say, instead of one counter button, the button is randomized each time...But that'd be quick-timey, and people hate those.) For insta-kill arrows, bullet, etcetera, maybe give the guards an armor system. Bullet takes out an armor piece, opens a weak spot, rather than insta-kill...

I remember AC1 had this ANNOYING BELL that rang throughout the city when you got going...Something like that, a city-wide alert, maybe triggers heavy spawning of alert guards in the streets and such...Defenses of a city. Maybe with increased notoriety/high-profile acts, the type of guards spawning improve. Start off, simple peacetime officers...End, armored hulks. Scale the defenses with the threat.

Maybe the city guard has spies, hell, why not? Civvies that can raise an alarm, no more walking around a corner and killing everyone just because no guards saw it.

Personally, I think guards immediately trying to execute is a bit...Well, insane. Maybe "death" on lower notoriety lands you in a prison of sorts. Cue jailbreak sequence, with plenty of guards and defenses.

ProletariatPleb
04-04-2013, 12:29 PM
I have found his weakness, if you write long coherent explanatory posts he becomes all chummy chummy otherwise he calls you a ****ing idiot.

Assassin_M
04-04-2013, 12:30 PM
I have found his weakness, if you write long coherent explanatory posts he becomes all chummy chummy otherwise he calls you a ****ing idiot.
Well, not to justify him calling you an Idiot, but TF`s post was pretty well thought out :P

Something....you failed to do

*runs away*

Ygdrasel
04-04-2013, 12:31 PM
I have found his weakness, if you write long coherent explanatory posts he becomes all chummy chummy otherwise he calls you a ****ing idiot.

I didn't call you a ****ing idiot. I said if you were suggesting what I thought you were suggesting, you're a ****ing idiot. You claim you weren't so you weren't a ****ing idiot. Just unclear and desperately lacking explanation.

You'll have to forgive me if I show preference toward those who are coherent.

ProletariatPleb
04-04-2013, 12:33 PM
Well, not to justify him calling you an Idiot, but TF`s post was pretty well thought out :P
That is was no doubt, but I'm tired of offering my suggestions or watching anyone give suggestions. We all know how much Ubi cares about their "fans" M.

Ygdrasel
04-04-2013, 12:35 PM
That is was no doubt, but I'm tired of offering my suggestions or watching anyone give suggestions. We all know how much Ubi cares about their "fans" M.

If you tire of suggestions, do not offer complaints. If you think Ubisoft doesn't give a **** about you, don't buy their product. It's very simple.

Assassin_M
04-04-2013, 12:36 PM
If you think Ubisoft doesn't give a **** about you, don't buy their product. It's very simple.
I have to agree with this phrase...that`s the only way we`ll be heard

ProletariatPleb
04-04-2013, 12:38 PM
I'm not buying. You do realize I started this very thread for that very purpose right?

Ygdrasel
04-04-2013, 12:41 PM
I'm not buying. You do realize I started this very thread for that very purpose right?

Quite. That doesn't quite explain the complaining about the games while giving not a single **** for solutions but you're free to continue that bizarre bit of pointlessness.

ACfan443
04-04-2013, 12:42 PM
http://newnation.sg/wp-content/uploads/eat-popcorn-3D.gif

Assassin_M
04-04-2013, 12:42 PM
Who wants a banana ??

Legendz54
04-04-2013, 12:42 PM
https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTAF57fWpLNL3W59WNvZZK_b20B_TTit r3Y7AG8raNfJAjq3u5FbA

ProletariatPleb
04-04-2013, 12:46 PM
Quite. That doesn't quite explain the complaining about the games while giving not a single **** for solutions but you're free to continue that bizarre bit of pointlessness.
Firstly, thank you for not being a hostile gorilla this time around.

There is a different topic for suggestions, if you want post there but it falls on deaf ears. What we're saying here is they need to slow down with AC games every year they virtually add nothing new anymore and it feels more of the same.

Dosenwabe
04-04-2013, 02:09 PM
New Setting, new time period maybe, new story, new characters, new soundtrack, new giant open world with insane details and historical accuracy every year. A lot of research is behind each new game. No, it doesn't feel like more of the same.

SixKeys
04-04-2013, 02:18 PM
New Setting, new time period maybe, new story, new characters, new soundtrack, new giant open world with insane details and historical accuracy every year. A lot of research is behind each new game. No, it doesn't feel like more of the same.

Yeah, just like Scary Movie/Date Movie/Disaster Movie all felt completely different. :rolleyes:

Dosenwabe
04-04-2013, 02:26 PM
Yeah, just like Scary Movie/Date Movie/Disaster Movie all felt completely different. :rolleyes: Difficult challenge for everybody: Write a more stupid argument then this!

pirate1802
04-04-2013, 02:41 PM
Well to be fair every gaming franchise follows a base motif. AC is no different. The reason why AC feels more of the same is because they come so soon after one another. See a gap of 2-2.5 years between each AC, and watch the "more of the same argument" crowd almost disappear.

Megas_Doux
04-04-2013, 06:07 PM
Point is that if you can end fights in 5 seconds why would you hide? A squad of trained men cannot fighting this so called "assassin" while he decimates them in so short a time. Yeah right.

You speak of ACIīs combat "difficulty" like it were Metal Gear on extreme european level........Do not get me wrong, I LOVE ACI, but by any means is a hard nor challenging game. Ok!!! it may not be as easy in terms of combat as Ezioīs trilogy, but still you could manslaughter an entire battalion -Arsuf, remember?-. Guards flew away after some of them were killed, and your "health" bar was EFFING huge.....

In AC3 -which is not remotely hard by the way- at least the always dumb guards did not quit, your health bar was shorter, and you could be suddenly killed if hit by a grenade.......

ProletariatPleb
04-04-2013, 06:09 PM
You speak of ACIīs combat "difficulty" like it were Metal Gear on extreme european level
I didn't even say AC1 was difficult anywhere 0_o I just said combat took more time, you have to kill each person individually, and not kill 1 then just watch flashy animations do the rest.

silvermercy
04-04-2013, 06:22 PM
Well to be fair every gaming franchise follows a base motif. AC is no different. The reason why AC feels more of the same is because they come so soon after one another. See a gap of 2-2.5 years between each AC, and watch the "more of the same argument" crowd almost disappear.
In all sincerity, I think that's never gonna happen. LOL "This ish again!? 2.5 years for THIS!?!?"

ProletariatPleb
04-04-2013, 06:28 PM
In all sincerity, I think that's never gonna happen. LOL "This ish again!? 2.5 years for THIS!?!?"
Y'know, when they get more time they can do other things with the game, it's not like they'll still develop the game for 1 year and then put it in the shelf and wait for release date...

silvermercy
04-04-2013, 06:32 PM
Y'know, when they get more time they can do other things with the game, it's not like they'll still develop the game for 1 year and then put it in the shelf and wait for release date...
But they're doing the same now with different teams? lol
I can see a difference when it comes to feedback though, indeed... More time to listen to any changes that fans want. So I'll agree with that.
(Well, not that the fans will ever be happy unless they're in the design team themselves!)

ProletariatPleb
04-04-2013, 06:40 PM
But they're doing the same now with different teams? lol
I can see a difference when it comes to feedback though, indeed... More time to listen to any changes that fans want. So I'll agree with that.
(Well, not that the fans will ever be happy unless they're in the design team themselves!)
They're adding stuff on top, that's easy and hardly requires feedback. The thing is to change the core of the game, innovate, iterate, it should actually feel like they've surpassed the previous game, but I don't see that happening really.

Acrimonious_Nin
04-04-2013, 06:41 PM
Let's Admit it. Ubisoft is heading towards this, "why struggle when COD is making millions/billions off a simple action movie/game story plot + expensive DLC's". Ubisoft has done it again...where they get a stealth game and turn it into an action game with stealth elements. I will not buy this game ! (:< when this game decides to bring back stealth as its core model then I will return...other than that....it seems that KP has stayed true to the stealth genre :D so why not look to MGS V!!! XD

Gi1t
04-04-2013, 07:43 PM
AC is not a stealth series so that is not a real problem. It's an action series with stealth elements.

But in answer to your question: Why kill everything when you can become essentially invisible within 5 seconds?

Stealth is trivial to violence users because they can just kill everything in seconds. Violence is trivial to stealth users because they can just blend into the crowd in seconds. Take your option and enjoy. There is no problem.

Tell me more about how having options in video games is a problem



Sure. :)

Basically, while a lot of different gameplay styles don't conflict with one another because they pretty much have exactly the same goal as far as the 'feel' they want to give the player, there are some styles, like stealth, that require more than just a basic functionality to be engaging for the player in the way that they're supposed to be.

As you know, any gameplay style needs to be challenging and rewarding to be any good, and so, in order to make stealth a viable form of gameplay, it needs to feel rewarding and worthwhile. There needs to be an incentive for players to use it, ESPECIALLY if they have the option not to. Otherwise, it totally undermines that sense of a rewarding experience. Say you walk into a fort and you're using your stealth skills to remain hidden, but somehow you keep getting spotted and having to sit there and wait for your Assassin to die so you can try again, then eventually, you get frustrated and you end up killing everyone in the fort...and find it's rediculously easy....then being good at stealth doesn't feel like it's worth anything.

To use another example, say you're playing a game like Elder Scrolls and you're trying to win a tough fight using your magic user character that you've made, and then you get frustrated and try using your sword and it just becomes really easy when you do that, you'd say 'well what was the ******* point of me investing all that time and energy into making this mage if it's STILL easier to just use a regular old sword?!' 0__o Similar problem; it's not worth being good at something if, even after you've practiced it a lot, it's still way easier to do it the 'brute force' way.

Even though AC does give you an option as to how and when you fight, once you put that stealth element into the game, it needs incentives to make it worth using, because that's what makes players feel like they're cool for using it. You either need fights that are challenging enough to make re-attaining and holding on to your stealthy status a worthwhile option, or some other reward for using it. It needs to feel like there's something you're getting around that would otherwise be a big inconvenience. People will enjo combat and climbing/platforming elements if they're in there, but with stealth, you need more; it can't just 'be there'. As it stands, combat is just waaaaaay too easy. It's so easy, that it's actually a lot less annoying to wipe out three city blocks full of enemies than it is to wait for the Assassin to die, and that's just rediculous.

As for the combat itself, I'm a big fan of action games, and I would NOT consider Assassin's Creed's combat to be on the same level with major action/combat titles. I have RPGs that have much more interesting combat than AC, and they aren't up to the level of major action/combat titles either. I would consider AC to be a general action game that offers stealth, platforming and action combat, and it takes a new angle with stealth by making about acting normal instead of hiding behind random **** and it allows the player to fight if and when they choose to and be exposed without instantly failing them. So you have all three choices, but if you want stealth to be a part of the equation, it needs to be a priority to make it work.

AC has been focusing too much on combat, but not really evloving on that either. As Sid and I said, they're improving things by merely tacking on little bits of content to core systems that really need to evlove more.

SixKeys
04-04-2013, 09:52 PM
Even though AC does give you an option as to how and when you fight, once you put that stealth element into the game, it needs incentives to make it worth using, because that's what makes players feel like they're cool for using it. You either need fights that are challenging enough to make re-attaining and holding on to your stealthy status a worthwhile option, or some other reward for using it. It needs to feel like there's something you're getting around that would otherwise be a big inconvenience. People will enjo combat and climbing/platforming elements if they're in there, but with stealth, you need more; it can't just 'be there'. As it stands, combat is just waaaaaay too easy. It's so easy, that it's actually a lot less annoying to wipe out three city blocks full of enemies than it is to wait for the Assassin to die, and that's just rediculous.

Yeah, basically stealth is more like an afterthought now instead of a core pillar like the devs keep claiming. The biggest problem is that stealth isn't as rewarding as fighting your way through every situation. There should be benefits and downsides to both approaches. Using stealth in AC3 never really felt rewarding to me because it was so much more unreliable than combat. The detection system is broken, so even if you do a perfect job sneaking your way in, it's still a crap shoot whether you end up being detected or not. In previous AC games you knew what you did wrong every time you were detected because the detection made sense. High profile actions in line of sight = detection. Sneak behind a guard's back without making a sound = stealth. In AC3 it's a 50-50 chance no matter what you do. There's no incentive to choose stealth when it just means getting frustrated by the faulty AI. So ultimately it's not a choice between stealth and combat, it's a choice between a broken system and a working system.

AssassinHMS
04-04-2013, 10:41 PM
Yeah, basically stealth is more like an afterthought now instead of a core pillar like the devs keep claiming. The biggest problem is that stealth isn't as rewarding as fighting your way through every situation. There should be benefits and downsides to both approaches. Using stealth in AC3 never really felt rewarding to me because it was so much more unreliable than combat. The detection system is broken, so even if you do a perfect job sneaking your way in, it's still a crap shoot whether you end up being detected or not. In previous AC games you knew what you did wrong every time you were detected because the detection made sense. High profile actions in line of sight = detection. Sneak behind a guard's back without making a sound = stealth. In AC3 it's a 50-50 chance no matter what you do. There's no incentive to choose stealth when it just means getting frustrated by the faulty AI. So ultimately it's not a choice between stealth and combat, it's a choice between a broken system and a working system.

Ah but you see, this franchise is no longer about being a sneaky assassin. It's about being a super hero who kills the enemies of his "people" one by one plus a thousand redcoats in the process.
And naval battles, it's also about naval battles.