PDA

View Full Version : AC4: Setting up for a Win or Fail!?



poptartz20
09-19-2013, 01:49 AM
Ok,

I know most of you are still skeptical about AC4 but after all the videos about gameplay and the new revisions to stealth, the new harpooning bit, "random" events and etc. I think there is also an improved crafting system as well.

It honestly looks like it's got all the right stuff so far. Also there is "Good Guy" Ashraf confirming things and basically answering community questions and just being awesome! With this being said, are you still worried about this game? What other questions or things do you think are still up in the air about gameplay or story that should be asked? and last one are you finally feeling any hype about the game! (I feel AC3 was more hyped than AC4--Maybe it's just me though)

k4Anarky2011
09-19-2013, 02:00 AM
I guess I'm lucky enough to NOT have played been diluted by AC. I haven't played AC:BH, AC: R, or AC3, so I'm pretty excited for AC4. I'm actually considering saving money for AC4 instead of getting GTA V ( I never really liked GTA; deep in the core it's pretty scripted... And I just happen to love EVERYTHING pirates, and AC4 pretty much plagarize the living daylight out of Sid Meier's Pirates - in a good way, imo - which was one of my favotire game ever)

What I want to know is the ocean floor... I was hoping a dev or someone can ABSOLUTELY confirm that the sea-floor is limited, so we can only access the sea-floors in certain areas.

Assassin_M
09-19-2013, 02:02 AM
I was hoping a dev or someone can ABSOLUTELY confirm that the sea-floor is limited, so we can only access the sea-floors in certain areas.
It's not nice to thank someone in one thread for answering a question then reveal that you didn't really believe them in another thread...

k4Anarky2011
09-19-2013, 02:03 AM
It's not nice to thank someone in one thread for answering a question then reveal that you didn't really believe them in another thread...
Sorry M... I just want to make sure. :p

Assassin_M
09-19-2013, 02:05 AM
Sorry M... I just want to make sure. :p
http://cdn.alltheragefaces.com/img/faces/large/annoyed-im-watching-u-l.png

Dutchman141
09-19-2013, 02:13 AM
Most of my questions are answered, the only thing I wonder is how AC4 will look on current gen consoles but they say it's at least as good as AC3 so I'm not worried about that anymore.
I'm realy looking forward to AC4 and personaly I think it's going to be the most versatile AC in the series with so many things to do besides the main quest.

I've just finished a playethrue of all AC titles and having to wait a month and a half for AC4 realy bugs me :)
I'm glad I pre-ordered so we'll have it on the day of release.

poptartz20
09-19-2013, 02:13 AM
I guess I'm lucky enough to NOT have played been diluted by AC. I haven't played AC:BH, AC: R, or AC3, so I'm pretty excited for AC4. I'm actually considering saving money for AC4 instead of getting GTA V ( I never really liked GTA; deep in the core it's pretty scripted... And I just happen to love EVERYTHING pirates, and AC4 pretty much plagarize the living daylight out of Sid Meier's Pirates - in a good way, imo - which was one of my favotire game ever)

What I want to know is the ocean floor... I was hoping a dev or someone can ABSOLUTELY confirm that the sea-floor is limited, so we can only access the sea-floors in certain areas.

Wow! Soo.. You only played AC1! That's unusual for most people around here! haha! So AC1 was your last played game in the franchise?

RatonhnhakeFan
09-19-2013, 02:18 AM
I think the gameplay's gonna be on point and it will keep the series afloat and sustain the sales of at least Brotherhood/Revelations. What I wonder if whether even great gameplay is capable of stopping the franchise fatigue in gaming community. This will be the SIXTH main AC game in just 6 years. And unlike Ubisoft thinks, COD is not an example how this may work. COD is more like e-sport game.

k4Anarky2011
09-19-2013, 02:18 AM
Wow! Soo.. You only played AC1! That's unusual for most people around here! haha! So AC1 was your last played game in the franchise?
AC1 and AC2. I can never finish AC2, because I'm having so much fun with the Assassination Contracts. There's just something really boss about shadowing your target from the rooftop... throw a smoke bomb, jump down to kill him and disappear before the guards know what happened. That and throwing musicians into rivers. ;)

But for some reason I like AC3's story the best. I really like Connor in pretty much every aspect.

Assassin_M
09-19-2013, 02:22 AM
But for some reason I like AC3's story the best. I really like Connor in pretty much every aspect.
I like you...you're a good human

k4Anarky2011
09-19-2013, 02:31 AM
Connor is really easy to connect with. He also has a tragic story that goes well with the people and the time... but somehow everything ended on a good note, and it fits with his humble nature.

Apart from his refreshed athletic and freerunning ability, I also love the way he fights. From charging in with a tomahak straight to the face to his shoulder bash, breaking arms and legs... Guy is inhumanly strong (yet gentle). And the way he runs... How he run compensate for his heavy build; I would shat myself is I see someone charging like that into me.

In a nutshell: Connor is built like a bear, runs like a bull, and has the stamina of a horse. But he has the heart of a good and caring man.

Megas_Doux
09-19-2013, 02:56 AM
All AC have, more or less, delivered in terms of atmosphere. I do not see AC IV being the exception, in fact despite there are no big cities, La Habana was scaled down a little bit too much, I am really looking forward to all the jungles, mayan ruins, beaches, sandbanks within this gorgeous caribbean world.

Give me background music, "something" to do, an unrestricted gameplay, solid mission design and a good story, and we are talking. Those are the concerns I have.

LoyalACFan
09-19-2013, 03:02 AM
Connor is really easy to connect with. He also has a tragic story that goes well with the people and the time... but somehow everything ended on a good note, and it fits with his humble nature.

Apart from his refreshed athletic and freerunning ability, I also love the way he fights. From charging in with a tomahak straight to the face to his shoulder bash, breaking arms and legs... Guy is inhumanly strong (yet gentle). And the way he runs... How he run compensate for his heavy build; I would shat myself is I see someone charging like that into me.

In a nutshell: Connor is built like a bear, runs like a bull, and has the stamina of a horse. But he has the heart of a good and caring man.

But... you said you never played AC3...?

Anyway, OT, I honestly think AC4 is going to be a "make-it or break-it" title for many fans after the disappointment of AC3. Certainly for me. I DID like Connor, as I've said many times on these forums, so don't jump on me for being a Connor "hater". But he was a great character stuck in a bad game. Despite a great lead character and a story with tons of potential, AC3 just wasn't fun for me at all. Six-hour prologue, crushing linearity, glitches galore, broken developer promises, inconsistent writing, and superfluous side content totally ruined it for me. If AC4 is similarly lacking, I'm afraid I'll have to (pardon the metaphor) jump ship and move on from AC.

I do still have hope for it though. I'm honestly getting much more of an "Assassin" vibe from its trailers and demos than I ever did with AC3's. I was excited that AC3 was moving in a bold new direction, but after that flopped, I'm more excited that they seem to be returning to some tried-and-true elements that they know will work.

Gi1t
09-19-2013, 03:04 AM
All AC have, more or less, delivered in terms of atmosphere. I do not see AC IV being the exception, in fact despite there are no big cities, La Habana was scaled down a little bit too much, I am really looking forward to all the jungles, mayan ruins, beaches, sandbanks and this gorgeous looking caribbean world.

Give me background music, "something" to do, an unrestricted gameplay, solid mission design and a good story, and we are talking.

Yeah, really I can see it being a very good critical success if not as big a finantial one as AC3 as long as there are no major aspects missing from the game that people were looking forward to (such as the overworld being much more restrictive than the demos make it look or the ship-to-ship combat being much more scripted and limited than it appears.) With a game like this, it's easy for people to have wild expectations about what they're getting, but if the demos can clear all that up, there won't be any major backlash with people complaining about missing features or deceptive marketing.

Megas_Doux
09-19-2013, 03:33 AM
Yeah, really I can see it being a very good critical success if not as big a finantial one as AC3 as long as there are no major aspects missing from the game that people were looking forward to (such as the overworld being much more restrictive than the demos make it look or the ship-to-ship combat being much more scripted and limited than it appears.) With a game like this, it's easy for people to have wild expectations about what they're getting, but if the demos can clear all that up, there won't be any major backlash with people complaining about missing features or deceptive marketing.

Ubisoft said that they were expecting less sales than the last year, which makes sense. Because, despite the fact that I really liked Connor and AC3, many thought Connor was dull, many complained about the story not being well told, many complain about the lack of background music and glitches, many did not like the ending and MANY of the hardcore fans, REALLY complain about the poor mission design that wasted the new gameplay mechanics.

Whereas I am nowhere as hyped as I was the last year, I can acknowledge that, at least in the demos, some of the AC3 problems have been, somewhat, addressed.

adventurewomen
09-19-2013, 12:17 PM
I guess I'm lucky enough to NOT have played been diluted by AC. I haven't played AC:BH, AC: R, or AC3,
You're missing out some great gaming moments, your loss!

You're not really an AC fan then. ;)


Connor is really easy to connect with. He also has a tragic story that goes well with the people and the time... but somehow everything ended on a good note, and it fits with his humble nature.

Apart from his refreshed athletic and freerunning ability, I also love the way he fights. From charging in with a tomahak straight to the face to his shoulder bash, breaking arms and legs... Guy is inhumanly strong (yet gentle). And the way he runs... How he run compensate for his heavy build; I would shat myself is I see someone charging like that into me.

In a nutshell: Connor is built like a bear, runs like a bull, and has the stamina of a horse. But he has the heart of a good and caring man.
How can you say this when you haven't even played AC3. I can't take you seriously.

Go play ALL of the AC games then state your opinions once you have played the games, you have no insight to any of the games so no one here is going to listen to your non-opinions without first playing the games.

pacmanate
09-19-2013, 12:24 PM
I was thinking about this yesterday...

AC4 seems to be taking the franchise in a new direction:

1. Naval
2. Seamless Boarding
3. Massive Caribbean world
4. Underwater Gameplay
5. Bounty system.

These 5 things in AC4 are new/welcome editions. But have you guys thought about games after AC4? Naval and seamlessness won't be in every game cause not every ancestor will be a pirate. The Caribbean world also ties into the seamlessness. Underwater gameplay might not be in the next AC game, because the other ancestos once again won't ALL be pirates. Same goes for the bounty system, it makes sense here, but might not make as much in other settings.

In short, whilst AC4 is bringing a lot new to the franchise, I am afraid that once we get out of pirates and naval, we will be going backwards again.

roostersrule2
09-19-2013, 12:48 PM
I was thinking about this yesterday...

AC4 seems to be taking the franchise in a new direction:

1. Naval
2. Seamless Boarding
3. Massive Caribbean world
4. Underwater Gameplay
5. Bounty system.

These 5 things in AC4 are new/welcome editions. But have you guys thought about games after AC4? Naval and seamlessness won't be in every game cause not every ancestor will be a pirate. The Caribbean world also ties into the seamlessness. Underwater gameplay might not be in the next AC game, because the other ancestos once again won't ALL be pirates. Same goes for the bounty system, it makes sense here, but might not make as much in other settings.

In short, whilst AC4 is bringing a lot new to the franchise, I am afraid that once we get out of pirates and naval, we will be going backwards again.You could use the seamlessnessess in future games, the same with the Underwater and Bounty System, just tweak it.

Who's to say we wont go to locations where Sea Battles occurred? They could use a similar Naval system to AC3's with AC4's improvements.

If the series goes backwards again it's gone, with Ubi having an ending in mind, they should also know how to get there. Hopefully the devs have set up the next few years of AC nicely.

dxsxhxcx
09-19-2013, 12:50 PM
it's a pirate game with what (IMO) is one of the most solid naval features I already saw in a game, it won't fail (as a pirate game), can't say the same as an Assassin's Creed game, only time will tell...

ArabianFrost
09-19-2013, 01:02 PM
I'm worried about the accessibility of the maps the most. Have you seen the sheer amount of Islands with mountains and trees and such? How many do you reckon actually are entirely explorable? My biggest concern is that the 50 chunks of Islands thrown around are not as plenty as we think they are, so they''ll always feel like narrow annoying pieces of land with heaps upon heaps of invisible walls or magically, non-traversible trees and inclinations. So basically, small map that's made to look big by parcelling it over sea, when in reality these small chunks are pretty small, linear and immersion-breakingly limited.

roostersrule2
09-19-2013, 01:08 PM
I'm worried about the accessibility of the maps the most. Have you seen the sheer amount of Islands with mountains and trees and such? How many do you reckon actually are entirely explorable? My biggest concern is that the 50 chunks of Islands thrown around are not as plenty as we think they are, so they''ll always feel like narrow annoying pieces of land with heaps upon heaps of invisible walls or magically, non-traversible trees and inclinations. So basically, small map that's made to look big by parcelling it over sea, when in reality these small chunks are pretty small, linear and immersion-breakingly limited.Although it's a possibility, the devs are giving you more freedom in previous AC's. They want you to get lost in the map, for you to do that you need to explore it. If exploring is no fun then you wont get lost and all Ubi did would have been for nothing, so if Ubi want to achieve their goal, just like the very best open world games, the map will be the star.

pirate1802
09-19-2013, 01:23 PM
It would fail hard. Pirate's Creed? I mean I'm flattered that Ubisoft decided to make a game after me, but seriously give us a proper Assassin game ubisoft

shobhit7777777
09-19-2013, 01:34 PM
Win

I think it may trump GTAV

I am LOOOOVING GTAV....but I feel AC4 might beat it on the basis of gameplay alone.

pirate1802
09-19-2013, 01:38 PM
Win

I think it may trump GTAV

I am LOOOOVING GTAV....but I feel AC4 might beat it on the basis of gameplay alone.

Really? Thats very big words of praise coming from you. :p

roostersrule2
09-19-2013, 01:41 PM
Win

I think it may trump GTAV

I am LOOOOVING GTAV....but I feel AC4 might beat it on the basis of gameplay alone.Doubt it, no matter how good AC4's gameplay is, GTA has one thing on it.

Driving a bike across a desert and up a mountain is a lot more thrilling then taking a boat through the seas, unless they perfected the storms. Which in GTA V they did, the atmosphere during a storm is so eerie, those flashes of lightning light up my whole room when it's dark, ACIV has an advantage though because storms can be dangerous, which adds to the thrill but just flying an airplane so close to a building makes you grit your teeth and you move like you're bracing for impact, I really hope ACIV is like that.

I'm starting to think ACIV will be my favourite AC, all it needs is a good story, good mission design and atmosphere, things AC3 lacked.

silvermercy
09-19-2013, 02:09 PM
It would fail hard. Pirate's Creed? I mean I'm flattered that Ubisoft decided to make a game after me, but seriously give us a proper Assassin game ubisoft
I'm so jealous now! Me wants me own game, too! *pouts* They'd better have a pink and silver cover for the next game!!

adventurewomen
09-19-2013, 02:10 PM
It would fail hard. Pirate's Creed? I mean I'm flattered that Ubisoft decided to make a game after me, but seriously give us a proper Assassin game ubisoft
Well it is international Talk Like A Pirate Day today! ;)

shobhit7777777
09-19-2013, 02:10 PM
Really? Thats very big words of praise coming from you. :p

I've been wrong before


Doubt it, no matter how good AC4's gameplay is, GTA has one thing on it.

Driving a bike across a desert and up a mountain is a lot more thrilling then taking a boat through the seas, unless they perfected the storms. Which in GTA V they did, the atmosphere during a storm is so eerie, those flashes of lightning light up my whole room when it's dark, ACIV has an advantage though because storms can be dangerous, which adds to the thrill but just flying an airplane so close to a building makes you grit your teeth and you move like you're bracing for impact, I really hope ACIV is like that.

I'm starting to think ACIV will be my favourite AC, all it needs is a good story, good mission design and atmosphere, things AC3 lacked.

for you maybe

The stuff in GTAV, while fun, is about as thrilling as...IDK...I don't have a good analogy. Its not as compelling as the stuff Black Flags is offering
I've driven ATVs on ****ed up terrain.....I've never sailed through the Caribbean waters in an 18th century galleon, pursuing whales.

GTAV has one thing going for it which I can't find in anyother game....the writing. Its superb.

Each to his own.

I must say though.....GTAV is an ungodly amount of fun

pirate1802
09-19-2013, 02:13 PM
Driving a bike across a desert and up a mountain is a lot more thrilling then taking a boat through the seas

Depends on the person doesn't it? For me, (and I'm going to get a lot of hate for it) AC games will always be better than GTA games because I fancy roaming about in a historical ancient city more than an everyday city. Just no mystery to it, no atmosphere (from my point of view).

roostersrule2
09-19-2013, 02:18 PM
I've been wrong before



for you maybe

The stuff in GTAV, while fun, is about as thrilling as...IDK...I don't have a good analogy. Its not as compelling as the stuff Black Flags is offering
I've driven ATVs on ****ed up terrain.....I've never sailed through the Caribbean waters in an 18th century galleon, pursuing whales.

GTAV has one thing going for it which I can't find in anyother game....the writing. Its superb.

Each to his own.

I must say though.....GTAV is an ungodly amount of funI can see where you're coming from, don't get me wrong traversing the open waters and hunting whales/sharks will be fun and thrilling but as you said each to their own. I may prefer travveling in AC IV to GTA V though so who knows, but form where I stand at the moment I prefer GTA V's thrilling ATV/Planeness do AC 3/4's thrilling boatness.


Depends on the person doesn't it? For me, (and I'm going to get a lot of hate for it) AC games will always be better than GTA games because I fancy roaming about in a historical ancient city more than an everyday city. Just no mystery to it, no atmosphere (from my point of view).I agree for every game except GTA.

That's why when you get R* to make historical games you get masterpieces such as RDR.

On another note AC needs something like GTA V has, it's like a huge easter egg/side quest/mystery thing, I wont spoil anything but it involves aliens. The thing is no one knows why it's there and what purpose it has.

RatonhnhakeFan
09-19-2013, 02:51 PM
Whereas I am nowhere as hyped as I was the last year, I can acknowledge that, at least in the demos, some of the AC3 problems have been, somewhat, addressed.I pretty much expect AC2/ACB situation here. Richer in experience and feedback from AC3, they will refine all the key aspects of the gameplay in AC4.

Hans684
09-19-2013, 03:13 PM
Depends on the person doesn't it? For me, (and I'm going to get a lot of hate for it) AC games will always be better than GTA games because I fancy roaming about in a historical ancient city more than an everyday city. Just no mystery to it, no atmosphere (from my point of view).

Agree with everything.

pirate1802
09-19-2013, 03:18 PM
I liked Sleeping Dogs better than GTA 4 for the same reason: The setting was alien to me, one that I havent seen in 9000 movies.

I-Like-Pie45
09-19-2013, 03:20 PM
I liked Sleeping Dogs better than GTA 4 for the same reason: The setting was alien to me, one that I havent seen in 9000 movies.

I have

pirate1802
09-19-2013, 03:21 PM
I have

Sucks for you then. :p

RatonhnhakeFan
09-19-2013, 03:21 PM
I have
Multiply that by 23894572390458938 and you will have an approximate number of how much more LA and NY appear in pop culture in comparsion to HK

pirate1802
09-19-2013, 03:24 PM
And I found Wei a much better character than Niko as well.

Farlander1991
09-19-2013, 03:25 PM
*looks at RatonhnhaketonFan's sig*

Liberty they speak of but for and justice who? O_o



(sorry, couldn't resist) :D

RatonhnhakeFan
09-19-2013, 03:26 PM
*looks at RatonhnhaketonFan's sig*

Liberty they speak of but for and justice who? O_o



(sorry, couldn't resist) :DYoda translator use did you? :p

(I may have gone a bit overboard with typography styling >.>)

Farlander1991
09-19-2013, 03:29 PM
Yoda translator use did you? :p

Heh :p Yeah.

Though, to be honest, while your sig looks neat from a purely visual standpoint, the eye is not led very well for a person who doesn't know the quote to properly read it. ... But we're on AC forums, so I don't think there are such people here :D

ArabianFrost
09-19-2013, 04:21 PM
Although it's a possibility, the devs are giving you more freedom in previous AC's. They want you to get lost in the map, for you to do that you need to explore it. If exploring is no fun then you wont get lost and all Ubi did would have been for nothing, so if Ubi want to achieve their goal, just like the very best open world games, the map will be the star.

I'm not saying exploring would be no fun, I'm saying that exploration would be lacking due to the short year cycle and the lack of actions Edward can apply when faced with unique landscapes such as mountains or steep inclinations.

Consider this screen for example:
http://i.imgur.com/xJvOV0j.png


Can you see how huge that is? For God's sake, it looks bigger than Havana. Do you really think they'll have a map this big fully explorable? Having one Havana is cumbersome enough. Multiply that by 50 for something that would only entertain keen explorers? As much as I would love that, I doubt it. These mountains for example wouldn't be explorable which would have been nice and all that thick foliage would just be too much to do in 2 years, especially over the area of 50 locations. This game could have been Just Cause 2 explorable in the sense that every inch is explorable, but this unfortunately can't happen and it worries me that it would too annoying. Too many animus walls and magical non-climbable terrain are my biggest worries.

adventurewomen
09-19-2013, 04:30 PM
Yoda translator use did you? :p

(I may have gone a bit overboard with typography styling >.>)
No you didn't the typography is great in your sig! :)

Farlander1991
09-19-2013, 04:37 PM
Can you see how huge that is? For God's sake, it looks bigger than Havana. Do you really think they'll have a map this big fully explorable? Having one Havana is cumbersome enough. Multiply that by 50 for something that would only entertain keen explorers? As much as I would love that, I doubt it. These mountains for example wouldn't be explorable which would have been nice and all that thick foliage would just be too much to do in 2 years, especially over the area of 50 locations. This game could have been Just Cause 2 explorable in the sense that every inch is explorable, but this unfortunately can't happen and it worries me that it would too annoying. Too many animus walls and magical non-climbable terrain are my biggest worries.

Well, look on the other side of the coin. Frontier. Huge fully explorable space. With very little things to do. I haven't played Just Cause 2, so I can't judge how it uses its space (though, I know that you can do all manners of crazy things in the game, and that certainly helps, but AC is not like Just Cause in that regards), but I would rather NOT have the whole area from that screen explorable but have cool free-running paths, places to find secrets (like, for example, in AC3 there was a Peg Leg's treasure in a chasm, it was pretty neat to try and get it from there), and stuff and content to do (and also have something memorale and unique in it, so it wouldn't transform into 'that another jungle') than have the jungle fully explorable but barren relatively to its size.

ArabianFrost
09-19-2013, 04:47 PM
Well, look on the other side of the coin. Frontier. Huge fully explorable space. With very little things to do. I haven't played Just Cause 2, so I can't judge how it uses its space (though, I know that you can do all manners of crazy things in the game, and that certainly helps, but AC is not like Just Cause in that regards), but I would rather NOT have the whole area from that screen explorable but have cool free-running paths, places to find secrets (like, for example, in AC3 there was a Peg Leg's treasure in a chasm, it was pretty neat to try and get it from there), and stuff and content to do (and also have something memorale and unique in it, so it wouldn't transform into 'that another jungle') than have the jungle fully explorable but barren relatively to its size.

Fair enough. You have a point, but it only makes sense in the context of AC's short cycle where we can't have both fully explorable and fully alive, so I still stand by mine. Huge AND lively world can be made and IS better than a limited one. It's a shame that AC has to sacrifice one in exchange of the other.

Your words give me a bit of hope at least.

Farlander1991
09-19-2013, 05:05 PM
Huge AND lively world can be made and IS better than a limited one.

That's debatable in my opinion (which is why I have reservations for The Witcher 3 with its ambition to do exactly that, even though I love CDPRed). A huge systemic playground and a detailed designed lively world are two different ends of a spectrum (and I'm not saying any one of them is bad, they're just different). I don't know if you've heard of the Gothic series (mainly the first two games), but there was a "holy war" between Gothic 1/2 and Morrowind, and I was always on the side of Gothic 1/2 precisely because it was lesser scoped but better designed world. Morrowind was just barren to me, without all the mods that people would create and additional expansion packs, and that's just tons of man-hours (and even then it can become a somewhat messy world with all that). And then Gothic 3 tried to take on the two different ends at once (lots of detailed cool explorable areas + all that in a huge systemic world) and kinda failed miserably.

I think the way AC is designed as a game, and the amount of things that the devs can do, somewhere in the middle of that spectrum, like it's the case with AC4 it seems, feels fitting to me.

pirate1802
09-19-2013, 05:21 PM
..I can see only one of the three pictures Frost posted..

Farlander1991
09-19-2013, 05:27 PM
..I can see only one of the three pictures Frost posted..

That's one screen, it's just got insanely huge black bars :p

...

Kinda ironic, considering how we're talking about huge empty spaces :D

ladyleonhart
09-19-2013, 06:03 PM
I'm not worried at all. :) I'm very excited about ACIV!! xD I trust the developers and as you said, Poptartz, Ashraf's been amazing in answering our questions, and Darby too. :D Then, I know, for me at least, it's going to be great and I'm going to love it. ;)

ze_topazio
09-19-2013, 07:06 PM
Regarding Ashraf honesty, let's not forget we also thought Hutchinson River was telling za truth...

ladyleonhart
09-19-2013, 07:14 PM
Regarding Ashraf honesty, let's not forget we also thought Hutchinson River was telling za truth...

Well, they're human. I'm sure it's really hard for them and they do want to answer everything properly. The fact is, there are some things that they just can't comment on, especially before the release. Then, if they make a mistake, I don't believe it is on purpose.

ArabianFrost
09-19-2013, 07:23 PM
Well, they're human. I'm sure it's really hard for them and they do want to answer everything properly. The fact is, there are some things that they just can't comment on, especially before the release. Then, if they make a mistake, I don't believe it is on purpose.

Exactly. They didn't "lie" to you. They just promised you a great game, but time was not to their advantage. At least I hope this teaches Yves that all great games need their time and MUST be delayed if there needs more time (see GTA V and TLOU) and I hope this teaches all future AC devs to be more long-sighted. I'm not happy with AC3, but they were in a really tight situation, so I can't be that harsh on the guys that make the game, even though their linear philosophy with AC3 was NOT to my liking.

Farlander1991
09-19-2013, 07:56 PM
even though their linear philosophy with AC3 was NOT to my liking.

The linear philosophy (not taking optional objectives into account right now at all) though seems to have come out more out of necessity rather than choice. Take a look at Sequence 6, or 2, or 4, or 7 (though, problems did start to creep out in 7 a bit), all those are sequences which provide quite a lot of freedom to the player, traditional AC style, which makes me think that they were amongst the first to be actually finished. And then they sorta went, 'right, we have to change things up if we want to finish this'.


At least I hope this teaches Yves that all great games need their time and MUST be delayed if there needs more time

But delays can also be quite dangerous. Focus can be actually lost because of them, and the result may turn out to be for the worst. It's a difficult question, and all depends on what's done and what's not done and how the project is faring in terms of how unbroken it is and all that kind of stuff. Basically, delays can be beneficial, but they also can be damaging.

lothario-da-be
09-19-2013, 08:20 PM
I am sure AC4 won't be a fail, but a win? Afther AC3 i am preparing myself for an ok game.

LoyalACFan
09-19-2013, 08:30 PM
The linear philosophy (not taking optional objectives into account right now at all) though seems to have come out more out of necessity rather than choice. Take a look at Sequence 6, or 2, or 4, or 7 (though, problems did start to creep out in 7 a bit), all those are sequences which provide quite a lot of freedom to the player, traditional AC style, which makes me think that they were amongst the first to be actually finished. And then they sorta went, 'right, we have to change things up if we want to finish this'.

Wouldn't it technically take less time to make it all open, though? I mean, after reaching America in Sequence 1, every mission except Bunker Hill took place on the open-world map. Wouldn't it have been easier to just put an assassination target on the map in the appropriate mission, put some guards around him, and say "have at it" rather than throwing in half a dozen checkpoints and cutscenes between you and the target? I mean, for example, shouldn't it have taken less time to just put Thomas Hickey in a guarded area in the NY map (maybe that cabin by the lake in the northeast) and let the player go kill him rather than designing the lengthy prison/hanging cutscenes, slow-motion chase, and all that?

RatonhnhakeFan
09-19-2013, 08:38 PM
Wouldn't it technically take less time to make it all open, though? I mean, after reaching America in Sequence 1, every mission except Bunker Hill took place on the open-world map. Wouldn't it have been easier to just put an assassination target on the map in the appropriate mission, put some guards around him, and say "have at it" rather than throwing in half a dozen checkpoints and cutscenes between you and the target? I mean, for example, shouldn't it have taken less time to just put Thomas Hickey in a guarded area in the NY map (maybe that cabin by the lake in the northeast) and let the player go kill him rather than designing the lengthy prison/hanging cutscenes, slow-motion chase, and all that?
I think it's the case of devs wanting every mission to be super unique and... too big budget lol.

ArabianFrost
09-19-2013, 08:39 PM
The linear philosophy (not taking optional objectives into account right now at all) though seems to have come out more out of necessity rather than choice. Take a look at Sequence 6, or 2, or 4, or 7 (though, problems did start to creep out in 7 a bit), all those are sequences which provide quite a lot of freedom to the player, traditional AC style, which makes me think that they were amongst the first to be actually finished. And then they sorta went, 'right, we have to change things up if we want to finish this'.



But delays can also be quite dangerous. Focus can be actually lost because of them, and the result may turn out to be for the worst. It's a difficult question, and all depends on what's done and what's not done and how the project is faring in terms of how unbroken it is and all that kind of stuff. Basically, delays can be beneficial, but they also can be damaging.

I'd say its philosophy was more leaning on linear. If you have read Darby's words on the matter, he openly expressed AC3's philosophy as linear and he's an insider there. That along with the 2.5 hour cutscenes heavily implied a scripted game which in itself lead to linearity.


About the delays, I agree. One new popping idea can lead to another and another and it just throws of the initial focus, but with AC3 this wasn't the case. This probably wasn't a matter of a game that had a good core and base with a few missing additions. This was a case of a game that couldn't complete its core experience in the given time. Let's say the devs had an initial plan for the game with certain gameplay features in mind, but eventually these features taker longer to implement than thought. At this point it doesn't become the problem of dreamy devs, but a core experience that was not complete because a delay couldn't happen. If the initial targets have not been, then it definitely warrants a delay. If the initial targets are achieved and a few new additions to the game pop up, it's not as critical.

Sushiglutton
09-19-2013, 08:41 PM
I'm pretty confident AC4 will be a better game than AC4 for me. Just the setting and the new protagonist practically guarantee this. I think combat and parkour will still feel flat and lack depth/variety. Stealth I honestly don't know how it will turn out. I believe the missions will overall be more open as they have said (and the vids have shown). I have a feeling some sideactivities like underwater and harpooning will be a bit underwhelming.

Overall I think it will be a fine game, just not the great AC game I'm longing for that would take the world of gaming by storm!

ArabianFrost
09-19-2013, 08:45 PM
I'm pretty confident AC4 will be a better game than AC4 for me. Just the setting and the new protagonist practically guarantee this. I think combat and parkour will still feel flat and lack depth/variety. Stealth I honestly don't know how it will turn out. I believe the missions will overall be more open as they have said (and the vids have shown). I have a feeling some sideactivities like underwater and harpooning will be a bit underwhelming.

Overall I think it will be a fine game, just not the great AC game I'm longing for that would take the world of gaming by storm!

If we want to perfectly describe AC4, it's basically just a culmination of everything good in the past 5 games, but not necessarily an improvement upon those mechanics. Which is good and bad. It's a good AC game, but it's not an innovative AC game. Again, not bad. Look at the Batman series.

RatonhnhakeFan
09-19-2013, 08:49 PM
If we want to perfectly describe AC4, it's basically just a culmination of everything good in the past 5 games, but not necessarily an improvement upon those mechanics. Which is good and bad. It's a good AC game, but it's not an innovative AC game. Again, not bad. Look at the Batman series.But if it wasn't for AC3 taking risk and trying to innovate, there wouldn't be AC4 in the shape we see today in previews.

LoyalACFan
09-19-2013, 08:57 PM
But if it wasn't for AC3 taking risk and trying to innovate, there wouldn't be AC4 in the shape we see today in previews.

You're right, but AC3 tried way too hard to be innovative IMO, to the point that half its content felt superfluous and detracted severely from the main experience. If it meant that we could have four or five more sequences to give Connor a proper story arc, I would GLADLY sacrifice hunting, liberation contracts, crafting, privateer missions, naval missions, clubs, homestead recruiting, assassination contracts, and tree-running.

RatonhnhakeFan
09-19-2013, 09:07 PM
You're right, but AC3 tried way too hard to be innovative IMO, to the point that half its content felt superfluous and detracted severely from the main experience. If it meant that we could have four or five more sequences to give Connor a proper story arc, I would GLADLY sacrifice hunting, liberation contracts, crafting, privateer missions, naval missions, clubs, homestead recruiting, assassination contracts, and tree-running.

There was no need to sacrifice hunting, liberation contracts, crafting, privateer missions, naval missions, clubs, homestead recruiting, assassination contracts, and tree-running. They had enough time to develop long campaign along with all those new gameplay additions. Somethign else should've been done and we all know what that is - cut Haytham levels completly or considerably, down to 1 sequence max. Look at the stuff you listed - all of it is not available in full till sequence 6. Almost nothing from the new gameplay mechanics gets introduced in Haytham's section, it gets delayed and packed in the remaining 7-9 sequences (many of which much shorter than first 3 sequences) which makes it distract from the main campaign much more.

LoyalACFan
09-19-2013, 09:18 PM
There was no need to sacrifice hunting, liberation contracts, crafting, privateer missions, naval missions, clubs, homestead recruiting, assassination contracts, and tree-running. They had enough time to develop long campaign along with all those new gameplay additions. Somethign else should've been done and we all know what that is - cut Haytham levels completly or considerably, down to 1 sequence max. Look at the stuff you listed - all of it is not available in full till sequence 6. Almost nothing from the new gameplay mechanics gets introduced in Haytham's section, it gets delayed and packed in the remaining 7-9 sequences (many of which much shorter than first 3 sequences) which makes it distract from the main campaign much more.

But it's not necessary, is what I'm saying. I didn't particularly feel the need to go hunting ever again after the village missions, because I could get more money than I knew what to do with just from looting chests, and it just wasn't enjoyable enough to do it for its own sake. Same goes for literally everything else I mentioned (in addition to fetch quests and courier assignments, which I forgot to mention). They weren't necessary, and frankly weren't fun. Just my opinion.

As for Haytham, I actually liked his sequences quite a bit, since they introduced you to all the Templars and made them seem more interesting than just evil moustache-twirling bastards (though they ruined it when Charles suddenly became a racist bully five years later, but that's another story). The fact is, Connor got shafted by an excessive focus on the Revolution, not Haytham. Sequences 7-10 were almost exclusively focused on the war rather than Connor's struggle. If they were going to shove the Revolution in our faces like they did, they should have at least given him a few more sequences where he was tending to Assassin/Kanienkeha'ka matters instead of Patriot ones.

ze_topazio
09-19-2013, 09:26 PM
Or maybe they could have simply delayed the game and put more work in to it, nobody cared about that 12/12/12 thing.

LoyalACFan
09-19-2013, 09:29 PM
Or maybe they could have simply delayed the game and put more work in to it, nobody cared about that 12/12/12 thing.

You'd be surprised at how many people did care about that stupid 12/21/12 thing.

RatonhnhakeFan
09-19-2013, 09:37 PM
But it's not necessary, is what I'm saying. I didn't particularly feel the need to go hunting ever again after the village missions, because I could get more money than I knew what to do with just from looting chests, and it just wasn't enjoyable enough to do it for its own sake. Same goes for literally everything else I mentioned (in addition to fetch quests and courier assignments, which I forgot to mention). They weren't necessary, and frankly weren't fun. Just my opinion.But that's the problem of balancing the mechanics and mission design. Hunting could've been incorporated in much more missions and it should've had much MUCH bigger importance in crafting and the crafted goods should've had much bigger effect.


As for Haytham, I actually liked his sequences quite a bit, since they introduced you to all the Templars and made them seem more interesting than just evil moustache-twirling bastards (though they ruined it when Charles suddenly became a racist bully five years later, but that's another story). The fact is, Connor got shafted by an excessive focus on the Revolution, not Haytham. Sequences 7-10 were almost exclusively focused on the war rather than Connor's struggle. If they were going to shove the Revolution in our faces like they did, they should have at least given him a few more sequences where he was tending to Assassin/Kanienkeha'ka matters instead of Patriot ones.Yes, from the perspective of getting to know the future targets, Haytham section were cool, and the twist was great too. But from the gameplay perspective and Raton's arc they had quite a negative effect. Like I said, all the cool new mechanics the game advertises ain't even introduced in Haytham's sections. And if they had time to develop 12 sequences and not more, then they should've devoted more to Raton within those 12 sequences. Haytham sections did NOT have to be so long. Sequence 1 could've been cut completly, replaced with 1 cutscene of him arriving to America. Sequence 2 & 3 could've been condensced into 1, getting to know the Templar team as we're already working on getting access to the Temple. With the amount of cutscenes involved, we didn't really need to go through 'team assemble' part first to get to know the characters. Also, the number of the Templars themselves could've been cut (personally I would exclude Pitcairn and maybe Church or Hickey, they were nowhere near as important as Johnson, Lee & Haytham).

I agree on Kanienkeha'ka matters not being prominent enough and I suggested that half of the Homestead missions could've been instead devoted to Raton's village, as I thought that there was bit too much of Homestead stuff. It was great and all, but started to get tiring as I was doing quest #3874827 for Prudence or the Lumbermen.

Still, nowhere does the game moves as slowly as in Haytham's sections.


Or maybe they could have simply delayed the game and put more work in to it, nobody cared about that 12/12/12 thing.Many did, but even if they didn't. it was never about 2012 but about filling Ubisoft pockets. The series is on annual schedule, there's no room for delays, zero. That's the most harmful aspect of the process.

Farlander1991
09-19-2013, 09:44 PM
Wouldn't it technically take less time to make it all open, though? I mean, after reaching America in Sequence 1, every mission except Bunker Hill took place on the open-world map. Wouldn't it have been easier to just put an assassination target on the map in the appropriate mission, put some guards around him, and say "have at it" rather than throwing in half a dozen checkpoints and cutscenes between you and the target? I mean, for example, shouldn't it have taken less time to just put Thomas Hickey in a guarded area in the NY map (maybe that cabin by the lake in the northeast) and let the player go kill him rather than designing the lengthy prison/hanging cutscenes, slow-motion chase, and all that?

Several points.
1. You don't first design and build a city and then place missions on it (well, I guess most of the secondaries would be an exception, but still), you do it in parallel.
2. Even though AC4 marketing boasts about return to form of AC1 about 'just placed guards and the target and have at it', that's actually a lot more difficult process to design and make than it sounds.
3. With the exception of the few set-pieces like the Public Execution, and battles of Lexington/Concord and Monmouth (and not taking optional objectives into account), which are, I might add, the ONLY set pieces that take place on open world maps, all AC3 missions that take place on the open world maps of Boston, New York and Frontier are designed by the principles found in Ezio's trilogy. There is a goal and/or certain situation, and you do it/deal with the situation. In fact, you can find an equivalent to pretty much any AC3 mission in AC2. Now, I'm not trying to say that those missions in AC3 couldn't be better designed and that there aren't questionable decisions (after all, I have an entire blog post series about that), but most of the linearity perception is skewed due to missions that take place on unique locations (like Haytham's journey to America ship, the prison, or the brewery) or naval parts (or already mentioned set-pieces which aren't big in number). Missions that take place on open-world maps, though, in terms of philosophy and basic design principles are not unusual for the AC series at all.

RatonhnhakeFan
09-19-2013, 10:17 PM
Several points.
3. With the exception of the few set-pieces like the Public Execution, and battles of Lexington/Concord and Monmouth (and not taking optional objectives into account), which are, I might add, the ONLY set pieces that take place on open world maps, all AC3 missions that take place on the open world maps of Boston, New York and Frontier are designed by the principles found in Ezio's trilogy. There is a goal and/or certain situation, and you do it/deal with the situation. In fact, you can find an equivalent to pretty much any AC3 mission in AC2. Now, I'm not trying to say that those missions in AC3 couldn't be better designed and that there aren't questionable decisions (after all, I have an entire blog post series about that), but most of the linearity perception is skewed due to missions that take place on unique locations (like Haytham's journey to America ship, the prison, or the brewery) or naval parts (or already mentioned set-pieces which aren't big in number). Missions that take place on open-world maps, though, in terms of philosophy and basic design principles are not unusual for the AC series at all.The problem's that these few set-pieces, enclosed areas + very simplistic battle mini-games are all packed very close to each other after Sequence 6, that's why it feels worse.

pacmanate
09-19-2013, 10:21 PM
You'd be surprised at how many people did care about that stupid 12/21/12 thing.

I cared for it because I thought it was going to be something epic.


But nope.

phoenix-force411
09-19-2013, 10:22 PM
I like ACIV, but I never really liked the Naval Combat. Every time I think about sea water fights, I just don't want to play it.

pacmanate
09-19-2013, 10:26 PM
I like ACIV, but I never really liked the Naval Combat. Every time I think about sea water fights, I just don't want to play it.

I like Naval combat, I just hate watching it. I honestly find it the most boring thing to watch.

RatonhnhakeFan
09-19-2013, 10:30 PM
I like Naval combat, I just hate watching it. I honestly find it the most boring thing to watch.lol same. I enjoyed naval a ton in AC3, but watching it puts me to sleep xD

shobhit7777777
09-20-2013, 11:47 AM
I know that you can do all manners of crazy things in the game.

Dude...you have no idea.

CartopBALTO
09-20-2013, 11:48 AM
Still can't believe that the hero is a pirate...

Mr_Shade
09-20-2013, 11:58 AM
to be honest..

I will just be running around looking at the plants and waiting for it to rain.. :)

pacmanate
09-20-2013, 12:58 PM
to be honest..

I will just be running around looking at the plants and waiting for it to rain.. :)

I love the foliage in this game. 500xp for Ubisoft.

roostersrule2
09-20-2013, 01:10 PM
I love the foliage in this game. 500xp for Ubisoft.Indeed, the way it moves is awesome.

Also one thing I love is gaming is realistic water movements and ACIV's water is the best I've ever seen in a game. They should use a physics engine on the water, if you already don't then it would be the most realistic water in a game ever.

pacmanate
09-20-2013, 02:40 PM
Indeed, the way it moves is awesome.

Also one thing I love is gaming is realistic water movements and ACIV's water is the best I've ever seen in a game. They should use a physics engine on the water, if you already don't then it would be the most realistic water in a game ever.

I think the tech video was one of my favourite videos Ubi has released. I also agree that the water is amazing. The sea and foliage just wow me everytime I see it. What took me by surprise was how it reacted to rain.

roostersrule2
09-20-2013, 02:42 PM
I think the tech video was one of my favourite videos Ubi has released. I also agree that the water is amazing. The sea and foliage just wow me everytime I see it. What took me by surprise was how it reacted to rain.Indeed, at the start of this year I had little to no hype for this game but it's starting shape up very nicely, if they address the problems of AC3 and the story is good this will be the the best AC yet.

pacmanate
09-20-2013, 02:45 PM
Indeed, at the start of this year I had little to no hype for this game but it's starting shape up very nicely, if they address the problems of AC3 and the story is good this will be the the best AC yet.

Agreed. They seem to have acknowledge all the hand holding crap and seem to be adding a lot of new things in this game. Everything I have seen and heard about stealth is great, the game looks great, but now it all hinges on the story.

roostersrule2
09-20-2013, 02:47 PM
Agreed. They seem to have acknowledge all the hand holding crap and seem to be adding a lot of new things in this game. Everything I have seen and heard about stealth is great, the game looks great, but now it all hinges on the story.I have faith in Darby, I liked ACR's story a lot and the voice acting looks, well sounds incredible.

This being their second year with the engine will mean less bugs.

pacmanate
09-20-2013, 02:49 PM
I have faith in Darby, I liked ACR's story a lot and the voice acting looks, well sounds incredible.

This being their second year with the engine will mean less bugs.

I have faith in Darby too. I think Revelations story was good considering it was meant to be a DS game. Now that he knows he was writing for a full console/PC numbered title I am sure he will do it justice.

BUT YA NEVER KNOW. Mission design could ruin the story too :|

roostersrule2
09-20-2013, 02:53 PM
I have faith in Darby too. I think Revelations story was good considering it was meant to be a DS game. Now that he knows he was writing for a full console/PC numbered title I am sure he will do it justice.

BUT YA NEVER KNOW. Mission design could ruin the story too :|Maybe but Pirates get into much more interesting and exciting events then people who are in the American Revolution and in AC3 it was some times historical accuracy that took preference over mission design, making it boring.

With a pirate theme they can go and create more of their own thing rather then follow history to an extent where it plagues the game.

pacmanate
09-20-2013, 03:49 PM
Maybe but Pirates get into much more interesting and exciting events then people who are in the American Revolution and in AC3 it was some times historical accuracy that took preference over mission design, making it boring.

With a pirate theme they can go and create more of their own thing rather then follow history to an extent where it plagues the game.

Not to mention having a Native American character probably restricted them a bit too

roostersrule2
09-20-2013, 03:50 PM
Not to mention having a Native American character probably restricted them a bit tooEspecially when he was a jerk lololololol

pacmanate
09-20-2013, 03:52 PM
Especially when he was a jerk lololololol

Uh oh...

So I was on my way to see my tutor like an hour ago right and this Indian guy comes up to me and says:

Guy: "Hey, you know all these white people are really stingy round here you know".
Me: "...yeah...?"
Guy: " I need some money I just got out of prison"
Me: "...."
Guy: " I don't steal or nothing".

Seriously, what the ****.

roostersrule2
09-20-2013, 03:55 PM
Uh oh...

So I was on my way to see my tutor like an hour ago right and this Indian guy comes up to me and says:

Guy: "Hey, you know all these white people are really stingy round here you know".
Me: "...yeah...?"
Guy: " I need some money I just got out of prison"
Me: "...."
Guy: " I don't steal or nothing".

Seriously, what the ****.You racist.

RatonhnhakeFan
09-20-2013, 03:56 PM
Not to mention having a Native American character probably restricted them a bit too
If anything it was the desire to put in as many Revolution events & characters as possible that restricted them.

pacmanate
09-20-2013, 03:57 PM
You racist.

I am brown though. It wasn't that scary, more of a wtf moment as there were loads of people.

Best believe I was ready to knock him out though.

roostersrule2
09-20-2013, 03:57 PM
If anything it was the desire to put in as many Revolution events & characters as possible that restricted them.So they put in themes to make the game worse?

roostersrule2
09-20-2013, 03:57 PM
I am brown though. It wasn't that scary, more of a wtf moment as there were loads of people.

Best believe I was ready to knock him out though.Hahahaha that last part made me laugh.

pirate1802
09-20-2013, 03:59 PM
Maybe but Pirates get into much more interesting and exciting events then people who are in the American Revolution and in AC3 it was some times historical accuracy that took preference over mission design, making it boring.

With a pirate theme they can go and create more of their own thing rather then follow history to an extent where it plagues the game.

Yeah.. the American Revolution thing overshadowed AC3 too much in my opinion, and it stiffed the creativity. With AC4 (admittedly there is too much naval stuff being shown, but still) I get the assassiny feel from it, albeit a pirate assassin. Not a native guy running around with the Colonial flag, if you know what I mean. AC works best when set in a relatively unknown setting, and using that setting as a backdrop to tell its own story. Look at AC1,2,Brohood and Revs. AC3 was basically THE american revolution story, with a little prologue thrown into it. AC4 seems to be going back into the old ways, in that it uses the setting as a backdrop to tell Eddy and Friend's story

pacmanate
09-20-2013, 03:59 PM
If anything it was the desire to put in as many Revolution events & characters as possible that restricted them.

Not really as that was what the game revolved around, the American Revolution.

I am sure Connor was restricted due to him being Native American and the team not wanting to "dishonor or disrespect" Natives.

RatonhnhakeFan
09-20-2013, 04:00 PM
So they put in themes to make the game worse?Urhm no? But when they put in too many specific events & characters from the "theme" that dictate when/where the story HAS to progress because of these events and characters, then it's a problem.


Not really as that was what the game revolved around, the American Revolution.Revolution was suppoused to be a backdrop for the Raton/Assassin/Templar story. but it went beyond that in 2nd half of the game.


I am sure Connor was restricted due to him being Native American and the team not wanting to "dishonor or disrespect" Natives.In some aspects of course but him being Native never dictated where he would have to be or speak with whom. In contrast, the Revolution is highly detailed in history books along with the key players like George Washington.

pacmanate
09-20-2013, 04:02 PM
Urhm no? But when they put in too many specific events & characters from the "theme" that dictate when/where the story HAS to progress because of these events and characters, then it's a problem.

Now we are going more on the basis of a poorly written story and mission design. I was talking about Connor.

roostersrule2
09-20-2013, 04:03 PM
Urhm no? But when they put in too many specific events & characters from the "theme" that dictate when/where the story HAS to progress because of these events and characters, then it's a problem.And it didn't so the game was worse because of it.

pacmanate
09-20-2013, 04:11 PM
I give up trying to talk about AC3 in a civil way anymore.

roostersrule2
09-20-2013, 04:13 PM
I give up trying to talk about AC3 in a civil way anymore.It's rather funny.

RatonhnhakeFan
09-20-2013, 04:48 PM
And it didn't so the game was worse because of it.It did heavily in second part of the game.

roostersrule2
09-20-2013, 04:50 PM
It did heavily in second part of the game.That's when the poor mission design kicked in.

RatonhnhakeFan
09-20-2013, 04:52 PM
That's when the poor mission design kicked in.Unfortunately yes, in particular when it came to ground battles.

poptartz20
09-21-2013, 11:29 PM
Umm... I think we will all be in for a big surprise! :D

I mean honestly I don't think they would leave mission design as is considering the terrible backlash from the community when it came to AC3. Ubisoft actually does listen.

AC3 even though it was and still is my favorite in the series. I feel as if it was a stepping stone to get to something greater! Also if correct me if I'm wrong but AC4 is the biggest game for the series to date. It's bigger as in terms of world and overall scope.

Megas_Doux
09-22-2013, 02:19 AM
Yeah.. the American Revolution thing overshadowed AC3 too much in my opinion, and it stiffed the creativity. With AC4 (admittedly there is too much naval stuff being shown, but still) I get the assassiny feel from it, albeit a pirate assassin. Not a native guy running around with the Colonial flag, if you know what I mean. AC works best when set in a relatively unknown setting, and using that setting as a backdrop to tell its own story. Look at AC1,2,Brohood and Revs. AC3 was basically THE american revolution story, with a little prologue thrown into it. AC4 seems to be going back into the old ways, in that it uses the setting as a backdrop to tell Eddy and Friend's story

AC3┤s MAIN gameplay problem, aside from being linear, is:

Historic events being included just because"!!!!!
I mean, The Tea Party, the Midnight ride etc etc. Connor throwing tea boxes and serving as Paul revere┤s personal driver, PLAIN awful.....

poptartz20
09-22-2013, 03:22 AM
AC3┤s MAIN gameplay problem, aside from being linear, is:

Historic events being included just because"!!!!!
I mean, The Tea Party, the Midnight ride etc etc. Connor throwing tea boxes and serving as Paul revere┤s personal driver, PLAIN awful.....

Not like that wasn't an important part leading up to or being apart of the American Revolution? They just threw it in just because it seemed cool.

Shahkulu101
09-22-2013, 03:37 AM
I didn't mind the tea party, in fact I quite liked that particular mission. But Paul Revere's ride...I get chills thinking about it.

Megas_Doux
09-22-2013, 03:47 AM
Not like that wasn't an important part leading up to or being apart of the American Revolution? They just threw it in just because it seemed cool.

The problem is not the event itself, but what you had do to at it, which was utter boring.

pirate1802
09-22-2013, 04:31 AM
AC3┤s MAIN gameplay problem, aside from being linear, is:

Historic events being included just because"!!!!!
I mean, The Tea Party, the Midnight ride etc etc. Connor throwing tea boxes and serving as Paul revere┤s personal driver, PLAIN awful.....

Actually the Tea Party mission felt appropriate because (and I'm no expert so I may be wrong) I think when the real people threw the cartons of tea aboard they did it dressed as Natives I think? So Connor throwing the boxes connects facts and fiction in a typical AC way. But yeah, the others, including Paul's ride etc were just...

And why does Connor have to be present at every historical signings etc?

Hans684
09-22-2013, 06:48 AM
Actually the Tea Party mission felt appropriate because (and I'm no expert so I may be wrong) I think when the real people threw the cartons of tea aboard they did it dressed as Natives I think? So Connor throwing the boxes connects facts and fiction in a typical AC way. But yeah, the others, including Paul's ride etc were just...

And why does Connor have to be present at every historical signings etc?

To be fair AC is a fictional story based on history. It's like saying you want to have a AC in the American Revolution without being in the historical events. Sounds boring.

pirate1802
09-22-2013, 09:19 AM
To be fair AC is a fictional story based on history. It's like saying you want to have a AC in the American Revolution without being in the historical events. Sounds boring.

No, I don't want an AC based on the American Revolution. I want an AC based on the same time, somewhere around the event. Look at AC1 and AC2/B/R. Was Altair present at every 9000th event in the Third Crusade and met each and every important figure? The stoy focussed on him and his targets. the crusades were occuring somewhere in the background. I think there was only one mission where we directly saw it. Same with AC2. Was Ezio doing the same in the Renaissance period?

Hans684
09-22-2013, 10:35 AM
No, I don't want an AC based on the American Revolution. I want an AC based on the same time, somewhere around the event. Look at AC1 and AC2/B/R. Was Altair present at every 9000th event in the Third Crusade and met each and every important figure? The stoy focussed on him and his targets. the crusades were occuring somewhere in the background. I think there was only one mission where we directly saw it. Same with AC2. Was Ezio doing the same in the Renaissance period?

"History is the study of change. Change is life. When things become static, it means they're dead."
Don't stay to much in the past, anyway unlike Alta´r & Ezio who affected/created some events, Connor was in some events. And since the series is based on history we will be in events like Bunker Hill if there is a target there that is part of the story, even if you like it or not it's history.

pirate1802
09-22-2013, 10:37 AM
"History is the study of change. Change is life. When things become static, it means they're dead."
Don't stay to much in the past, anyway unlike Alta´r & Ezio who affected/created some events, Connor was in some events. And since the series is based on history we will be in events like Bunker Hill if there is a target there that is part of the story, even if you like it or not it's history.

AC isn't a history documentary. I have my books for that. AC is a story whose MAIN aim is to entertain. By being a history documentary it ceases to be interesting.

Hans684
09-22-2013, 10:50 AM
AC isn't a history documentary. I have my books for that. AC is a story whose MAIN aim is to entertain. By being a history documentary it ceases to be interesting.

Let me quote what i said: "Based on history"
The historical time period, writher and Game Director affects how the time period is going to be presented.

pirate1802
09-22-2013, 10:56 AM
Let me quote what i said: "Based on history"
The historical time period, writher and Game Director affects how the time period is going to be presented.

And you don't have to land your game right in the middle of said historical events and include as many events as possible. keep it in the periphery. Because you're not making a history lesson. You'e making a game. And your top priority should be towards entertaining your audience, not educate them (which they don't do anyway). That was my point.

Hans684
09-22-2013, 11:39 AM
And you don't have to land your game right in the middle of said historical events and include as many events as possible. keep it in the periphery. Because you're not making a history lesson. You'e making a game. And your top priority should be towards entertaining your audience, not educate them (which they don't do anyway). That was my point.

Ubisoft is a game company so it is made to entertain so thay are not gonna make it just to educate us. And it is the Game Director & story writher who chooses what time period and what events in the time period the assassin is going to go too. The story writher writhe the story while the Game Direcor(and other Devs.) desides howe it is going to be presended while staing true to the story writhen by the story writher.

pirate1802
09-22-2013, 11:42 AM
Ubisoft is a game company so it is made to entertain so thay are not gonna make it just to educate us. And it is the Game Director & story writher who chooses what time period and what events in the time period the assassin is going to go too. The story writher writhe the story while the Game Direcor(and other Devs.) desides howe it is going to be presended while staing true to the story writhen by the story writher.

Wow! Didn't know all that! :O

Megas_Doux
09-22-2013, 08:07 PM
"History is the study of change. Change is life. When things become static, it means they're dead."
Don't stay to much in the past, anyway unlike Alta´r & Ezio who affected/created some events, Connor was in some events. And since the series is based on history we will be in events like Bunker Hill if there is a target there that is part of the story, even if you like it or not it's history.

I like the Bunker/breed hill sequence, in terms of gameplay, my favorite in the game.....

But the others, specially the "Midnight Ride", that I mentioned above are plain boring. I can understand the historic point of view that indicates that some people of Boston were dressed as native americans, but throwing boxes????????

I know that "the regulars are coming" is sorrounded by mystery/exaggerations, but being JUST Paul Revere┤s driver?????? That one is even worse if you consider the horse mechanics of the game...Why instead not prevent a templar plan to kill Revere , swiftly following him through the Frontier eliminating soldiers with the new mechanics such as tree running, hiding zones and bow?

We all know the answer..... :(

Farlander1991
09-22-2013, 09:18 PM
I can understand the historic point of view that indicates that some people of Boston were dressed as native americans, but throwing boxes????????

The main goal of that mission though is to fight the redcoats and protect two characters. Throwing boxes is just an optional objective that you can, but don't have to, complete. And I thought it was a very cool optional objective that spruced up the mission and added a bit of a multi-tasking to the battle scenario, and it's not as ridiculous as 'air assassinate a grenadier'. The Tea Party is one of my favourite missions in the game.

pacmanate
09-22-2013, 11:05 PM
Wow! Didn't know all that! :O

News to me. I feel like a right noob of a senior.

pirate1802
09-23-2013, 05:01 AM
News to me. I feel like a right noob of a senior.

I know right? I feel so enlightened.

blacklimoband
09-23-2013, 07:04 AM
Personally, I'm not even looking at this as an AC game, I'm gonna buy it cos it the most freakin awesome looking sailing/pirate game I've ever seen!!!! Naval combat in AC3 was the best I've ever experienced, and I've played a LOT of sailing games. This one for me is a definite SHUT UP AND TAKE MY MONEY!

FrankieSatt
09-23-2013, 02:03 PM
I feel no hype for ACIV. WAY too much focus on Pirates, Pirate Ships and Pirate Ship fighting and not enough on the actual Assassin's, Templa'rs. The Harpoon mini-game will get just as boring as hunting did in ACIII.

This will be the 1st AC game, since ACII, that I have not pre-ordered and will not buy on day 1. I might get it when it hits the bargain bin but most likely I won't play it at all.

roostersrule2
09-23-2013, 02:14 PM
I feel no hype for ACIV. WAY too much focus on Pirates, Pirate Ships and Pirate Ship fighting and not enough on the actual Assassin's, Templa'rs. The Harpoon mini-game will get just as boring as hunting did in ACIII.

This will be the 1st AC game, since ACII, that I have not pre-ordered and will not buy on day 1. I might get it when it hits the bargain bin but most likely I won't play it at all.The marketing focus's on pirates, boats etc. the actual game will be about Assassins just as much as pirates. That harpooning game looks much better then AC3's hunting, no QTE's! If you end up not liking it, just don't play it.

Dutchman141
09-23-2013, 02:18 PM
Personally, I'm not even looking at this as an AC game, I'm gonna buy it cos it the most freakin awesome looking sailing/pirate game I've ever seen!!!! Naval combat in AC3 was the best I've ever experienced, and I've played a LOT of sailing games. This one for me is a definite SHUT UP AND TAKE MY MONEY!

This.

Although I realy like the AC games your motivation is excactly the same as mine, AC4 is gonna be the best pitate game I have ever played.
This might sound shallow but it's just the way its.