PDA

View Full Version : Things that need to change for future ACs



Proghouseman
11-18-2013, 03:41 PM
I decided to give you guys 1 last shot to keep me interested in this series. Here I am enjoying AC for the first time since Brotherhood and then the naval missions happened. First of all: They are bugged. Please stop shoving new gameplay mechanics down our throats without polishing them first. I think you owe your fans that much. Second: If we fail a mission a few times, please allow us to skip it. Not everyone is a hardcore full synch completionist. I for one enjoy AC games for a sense of discovery and history. This game is now frustrating to me and it's supposed to be doing the opposite. A sense of accomplishment would be better served in a different way than completing a frustrating mission. Thirdly: You could have done a way better job harnessing the power of the PS4. I know and can see the subtle graphical differences, but it's just lazy basically porting the game. Because of these things, it's doubtful I will be purchasing anymore AC games. You've taken a once very promising franchise and milked it to death.

MnemonicSyntax
11-18-2013, 03:53 PM
I decided to give you guys 1 last shot to keep me interested in this series. Here I am enjoying AC for the first time since Brotherhood and then the naval missions happened. First of all: They are bugged. Please stop shoving new gameplay mechanics down our throats without polishing them first. I think you owe your fans that much. Second: If we fail a mission a few times, please allow us to skip it. Not everyone is a hardcore full synch completionist. I for one enjoy AC games for a sense of discovery and history. This game is now frustrating to me and it's supposed to be doing the opposite. A sense of accomplishment would be better served in a different way than completing a frustrating mission. Thirdly: You could have done a way better job harnessing the power of the PS4. I know and can see the subtle graphical differences, but it's just lazy basically porting the game. Because of these things, it's doubtful I will be purchasing anymore AC games. You've taken a once very promising franchise and milked it to death.

How is naval bugged? I haven't had any issues with it. What's the problems you're having?

People love new game play. It keeps the series fresh and exciting.

Secondly, the requirements for missions and whatnot have been drastically reduced. I'd say this is the most casual AC game besides 1 to date. You aren't required to get 100% sync for the story to continue. What mission are you stuck on, maybe we can help you.

I can't help you on the third, except that wait until another AC game comes out, or buy a powerhouse PC, because them godrays... very nice.

roostersrule2
11-18-2013, 04:12 PM
AC1 isn't the most casual, that is ACB.

To the OP the naval is hardly bugged, it is about as polished as it can be and although I agree with you about needing new mechaincs to be polished before added, I disagree that the naval was like this in AC4.

it just seems you're having problems with the difficulty which is easily fixed by practising the combat, you'll get it after a while. Skipping doesn't work with AC as we're accessing our Ancestors memory to see his life, skipping it defeats the point.

It's not lazy porting, it's that it was held back by current gen.

MnemonicSyntax
11-18-2013, 04:15 PM
AC1 isn't the most casual, that is ACB.

To the OP the naval is hardly bugged, it is about as polished as it can be and although I agree with you about needing new mechaincs to be polished before added, I disagree that the naval was like this in AC4.

it just seems you're having problems with the difficulty which is easily fixed by practising the combat, you'll get it after a while. Skipping doesn't work with AC as we're accessing our Ancestors memory to see his life, skipping it defeats the point.

It's not lazy porting, it's that it was held back by current gen.

There's hardly any requirements that must be done besides the investigation missions in 1. In 4, the alternate objectives are much more casual to pull off. None of this "don't take any damage while you air assassination your target but you can't use the rooftops" crap.

roostersrule2
11-18-2013, 04:20 PM
There's hardly any requirements that must be done besides the investigation missions in 1. In 4, the alternate objectives are much more casual to pull off. None of this "don't take any damage while you air assassination your target but you can't use the rooftops" crap.That doesn't make a game casual. Easy combat is what makes an AC game casual. Ever since ACB the combat has been easy, it was never hard but kill streaks just let you destroy enemy after enemy.

The full sync requirements aren't even that hard in AC4.

MnemonicSyntax
11-18-2013, 04:29 PM
That doesn't make a game casual. Easy combat is what makes an AC game casual. Ever since ACB the combat has been easy, it was never hard but kill streaks just let you destroy enemy after enemy.

The full sync requirements aren't even that hard in AC4.

As someone who plays AC with 100% completion, I think that "casual" is up to the player itself. For example, not having to do stupid sub requirements make the game much more enjoyable and easy to pick up and play.

Combat is easy for anyone that practices it. I get the same pile of bodies in 3 and 4 now.

roostersrule2
11-18-2013, 04:31 PM
As someone who plays AC with 100% completion, I think that "casual" is up to the player itself. For example, not having to do stupid sub requirements make the game much more enjoyable and easy to pick up and play.

Combat is easy for anyone that practices it. I get the same pile of bodies in 3 and 4 now.Indeed, but he doesn't seem like the kind of player who cares about 100% completion. It just seems he's getting frustrated with failing the missions.

Kulgrim
11-18-2013, 07:10 PM
When he says naval missions, is he referring to the missions acquired from the captured forts? If so, only one seems bugged and it is the final one, for some reason it shows on the map, but is not actually available till you finish the others. The other missions however where a breeze and rather easy to complete, especially if you have upgraded the Jackdaw to at least the second to last upgrades, in fact at that point it is basically over kill. **Why can I not format my posts, I can not seem to get the damn thing to drop down a line unless I actually have crap typed here?**

MnemonicSyntax
11-18-2013, 07:10 PM
When he says naval missions, is he referring to the missions acquired from the captured forts? If so, only one seems bugged and it is the final one, for some reason it shows on the map, but is not actually available till you finish the others. The other missions however where a breeze and rather easy to complete, especially if you have upgraded the Jackdaw to at least the second to last upgrades, in fact at that point it is basically over kill. **Why can I not format my posts, I can not seem to get the damn thing to drop down a line unless I actually have crap typed here?**

That's not a bug. That's intentional.

Kulgrim
11-18-2013, 07:27 PM
Sorry,, MnemonicSyntax, but I can promise you, had I QA'd this game that would have been flagged as a bug. That is conflicting UI elements and would have been filed as such. If that quest has a pre-requisite to appear in the actual world, it should NOT appear on the map until that point. That is a broken breadcrumb and as such should have, and I would almost bet dollars to donuts it was, flagged as a bug, however it was most likely given a low priority and as such was deemed not a blocking issue.

MnemonicSyntax
11-18-2013, 07:29 PM
Sorry,, MnemonicSyntax, but I can promise you, had I QA'd this game that would have been flagged as a bug. That is conflicting UI elements and would have been filed as such. If that quest has a pre-requisite to appear in the actual world, it should NOT appear on the map until that point. That is a broken breadcrumb and as such should have, and I would almost bet dollars to donuts it was, flagged as a bug, however it was most likely given a low priority and as such was deemed not a blocking issue.

That part is a bug, yes. But showing up last is not.

Landruner
11-18-2013, 08:00 PM
Anyhow - although I still enjoy the game for its pirate's part & gameplay - The Assassin's gameplay parts and their mission's designs in general have to be changed and reviewed from scratch
with a new and fresh level designs, scenarios, and structures and implantation in the game(s) - This is certainly the main focus for the next entries of this franchise before a lot of assassin's fans quit the ship.

AssassinHMS
11-18-2013, 10:04 PM
There are so many things that need to be changed that I don’t even know where to begin. Truth be told, I think many people in these forums could make a better use of AC than Ubisoft’s masterminds.
Anyway this is what needs to change for future AC games.

The developers need to focus on the core mechanics:
- Combat is nothing but a sad and boring joke. Where is the challenge? Why is combat resumed to instant kill cutscenes? Where is the believability and the tension? Why is it simply a cheap display of gratuitous violence? I don’t think the hidden blade should work as a weapon and, unless the assassin has other weapons with him at the time, it should only allow for some blocks with the bracer. As for sword combat it should be a matter of tiring the opponent (depleting a stamina bar) and catching him off guard (with swift and unexpected moves). In order to deplete the stamina bar the player would have to clash his swords with the opponent’s and keep attacking using diversion moves (such as kicks, quick steps and maybe even a few punches). Once the stamina bar nears its depletion, the opponent’s moves will be slower and weaker and the chance of a critical attack (such as a stab with a knife or an impalement with a sword) will increase. Also, combat needs to be much harder or else the whole game will suffer for it. And notice that, just because fighting more than 3 enemies at once is hard and more than 6 almost impossible, doesn’t mean the game is difficult or that you will die a lot. Navigation, in the form of escape, is the answer in such dire situations.
- Navigation is completely automatic. Just hold down a trigger and watch. There is nothing to it which is a huge problem given how important it is. Navigation is the bridge between combat and stealth. This means navigation is the tool to use when facing more than 3 or 4 enemies at once. We should be able to use crowds to our advantage when escaping, such as bumping pedestrians causing them to drop their merchandise which would knock off nearby pursuers. The player should be able to dodge, to slide or to roll whenever he wants in order to avoid getting hit or simply to adapt to the environment. These things are what makes the player feel in control of the action, feel in the shoes of the assassin instead of feeling as if he’s watching a movie.
- Stealth is way too underdeveloped. Where is the ability to crouch? You say the assassins work in the dark to serve the light but there isn’t even a shadow/light based stealth system. And what about using stealth, noises and the environment to play mind tricks, confuse guards and lead them to their end? And what about social stealth? How is it that an assassin can blend while carrying tons of weapons in plain sight? At least add some cape that we can buy in a tailor to hide a crossbow or a bow (like in ACR), boots where we can place a knife, a cane to conceal a sword… And does it make sense to have tons of small groups of people every corner? Why not create big groups of people (14 or 17 people at once) that appear randomly when being chased down in certain locations. For example, if I’m being chased by some guards you can let me hear some music or the cheer of a crowd coming from somewhere. Then, I can follow the sound only to find a group of people enjoying some festivities inside a building or out in the open. There I can get in the middle of the chaos and break the line of sight. Then all I have to do, is to casually walk away from the crowd while the pursuers are still lost inside it trying to find my location. Besides these random and, not so usual, big crowds, there could be “special” NPCs that could work as a social disguise in the same way as the courtesan seen in AC4 BF CGI trailer. This is how you make social stealth work Ubisoft.
On another note the hidden blade is so misused. The mechanics around it need to be developed. For example, if I want to silently kill a target behind a wall of guards I can stab him in the back but, as soon as the body reaches the ground, any guard near it will listen. What if, by holding the attack button (square in the PS3) instead of just taping it, the assassin, not only stabs the target, but also silently places the body on the ground without making a noise? Plus, suspicious enemies should be able to react in time before the assassin pulls out the hidden blade in front of them. So, in order to successfully kill enemies that are suspicious and watching the assassin, the player should use a diversion first, like casually dropping a gold coin in front of the guard and move for the kill as soon as he kneels to pick it up (like in AC Lineage).

Oh, and by the way, this I just wrote is more than an opinion. You do need this, Ubisoft, to improve AC because, you don’t improve AC by adding naval or hunting or crafting or underwater, you improve AC by improving the core components. Get it?

However this is not only what AC needs to achieve its true potential, there are the so called “details”:
- The freedom. The ability to put the hood up and down. The ability to remove weapons and choose what equipment we want to carry. Instead of making overwhelming worlds why don’t you create a smaller world (still big enough) where we can actually explore the inside of buildings. We could assassinate targets inside their own houses, enter through a window and steal their belongings, find secret passages, etc.
- The spark. The conspiracies, the secrecy, the puzzles, the fear, the mystery of these secret societies that dwell in an apparently healthy city. The beauty of both the world and the music and the sadness, the darkness and the sense of danger. Also, center the story less on the protagonist and about how "awesome" he is and more on the city and its society, focus more on the Templars, on the Assassins and on the Creed.
- The feeling of being in the shoes of an assassin. You can’t have this if you ran away from the harsh and planned life of an assassin and if you mask it or pretend it isn’t there. You have to portrait the essential or else it feels like we’re playing as a prototype of an assassin. Investigations must be there and must be as much of a reality as assassinations, for an assassin cannot assassinate without investigating first. Oh, and investigations don’t belong in cutscenes as they can be fun and more entertaining than naval or hunting. Just the ability of being able to spy on people’s lives, to explore the streets in free roam and spot a suspicious person (a dark look, expensive clothes, strange behavior) and be able to stalk him which would lead to a Templar meeting or to more information that would unlock a new assassination mission, is better and more suited to this franchise than any animal we can hunt. You could also make the player feel like his choices matter if you add a weight limit and an improved noise detection system which would make the player think twice before going out on a difficult mission. If the player carries too many weapons, the assassin will move slower and not so quietly which would make both navigation and stealth more difficult. Note that this isn’t meant to punish the player but to add realism and make him feel that his choices matter, that thinking like an assassin pays off. This way, the player can choose his weapon set according to his play style and replay missions with different weapons which would allow for different approaches (it adds replay value).

The main goal of AC is to make the player feel like an assassin and encourage him to plan and think like one and never to please everyone. It’s all there Ubisoft, so do what you think is better for the franchise and don’t let it be wasted any further.

BATISTABUS
11-18-2013, 10:23 PM
Second: If we fail a mission a few times, please allow us to skip it.
...what? When has this ever been an option in a video game? Why would you want this? Why are you even playing games?

I wouldn't even say that AC4 is even moderately challenging. Stealth missions require some thought, but they're not crazy puzzles. Naval combat is difficult if you don't upgrade your ship....so just upgrade your ship. The naval is remarkably well polished.

AC franchise is not milked to death. Every game has improved on something done in the previous game, and introduced something really significant for the franchise despite the yearly release schedule. If anything, it seems like games are getting better.

AC1: Amazing lore, story, free-running, cities, music, atmosphere, awesome villains, etc.
AC2: Mastery of city-building, more interesting side-content (tombs)
ACB: extremely fun and unique multiplayer
ACR: new level of cinematics/face capture, satisfying narrative conclusion to 2 protagonists
AC3: Pushing face capture even more, tree-running, naval combat, new engine
AC4: Mega naval overhaul, vast improvement of open world, huge additions to stealth, much improved level design

Landruner
11-19-2013, 12:37 AM
There are so many things that need to be changed that I don’t even know where to begin. Truth be told, I think many people in these forums could make a better use of AC than Ubisoft’s masterminds.
Anyway this is what needs to change for future AC games.

The developers need to focus on the core mechanics:
- Combat is nothing but a sad and boring joke. Where is the challenge? Why is combat resumed to instant kill cutscenes? Where is the believability and the tension? Why is it simply a cheap display of gratuitous violence? I don’t think the hidden blade should work as a weapon and, unless the assassin has other weapons with him at the time, it should only allow for some blocks with the bracer. As for sword combat it should be a matter of tiring the opponent (depleting a stamina bar) and catching him off guard (with swift and unexpected moves). In order to deplete the stamina bar the player would have to clash his swords with the opponent’s and keep attacking using diversion moves (such as kicks, quick steps and maybe even a few punches). Once the stamina bar nears its depletion, the opponent’s moves will be slower and weaker and the chance of a critical attack (such as a stab with a knife or an impalement with a sword) will increase. Also, combat needs to be much harder or else the whole game will suffer for it. And notice that, just because fighting more than 3 enemies at once is hard and more than 6 almost impossible, doesn’t mean the game is difficult or that you will die a lot. Navigation, in the form of escape, is the answer in such dire situations.
- Navigation is completely automatic. Just hold down a trigger and watch. There is nothing to it which is a huge problem given how important it is. Navigation is the bridge between combat and stealth. This means navigation is the tool to use when facing more than 3 or 4 enemies at once. We should be able to use crowds to our advantage when escaping, such as bumping pedestrians causing them to drop their merchandise which would knock off nearby pursuers. The player should be able to dodge, to slide or to roll whenever he wants in order to avoid getting hit or simply to adapt to the environment. These things are what makes the player feel in control of the action, feel in the shoes of the assassin instead of feeling as if he’s watching a movie.
- Stealth is way too underdeveloped. Where is the ability to crouch? You say the assassins work in the dark to serve the light but there isn’t even a shadow/light based stealth system. And what about using stealth, noises and the environment to play mind tricks, confuse guards and lead them to their end? And what about social stealth? How is it that an assassin can blend while carrying tons of weapons in plain sight? At least add some cape that we can buy in a tailor to hide a crossbow or a bow (like in ACR), boots where we can place a knife, a cane to conceal a sword… And does it make sense to have tons of small groups of people every corner? Why not create big groups of people (14 or 17 people at once) that appear randomly when being chased down in certain locations. For example, if I’m being chased by some guards you can let me hear some music or the cheer of a crowd coming from somewhere. Then, I can follow the sound only to find a group of people enjoying some festivities inside a building or out in the open. There I can get in the middle of the chaos and break the line of sight. Then all I have to do, is to casually walk away from the crowd while the pursuers are still lost inside it trying to find my location. Besides these random and, not so usual, big crowds, there could be “special” NPCs that could work as a social disguise in the same way as the courtesan seen in AC4 BF CGI trailer. This is how you make social stealth work Ubisoft.
On another note the hidden blade is so misused. The mechanics around it need to be developed. For example, if I want to silently kill a target behind a wall of guards I can stab him in the back but, as soon as the body reaches the ground, any guard near it will listen. What if, by holding the attack button (square in the PS3) instead of just taping it, the assassin, not only stabs the target, but also silently places the body on the ground without making a noise? Plus, suspicious enemies should be able to react in time before the assassin pulls out the hidden blade in front of them. So, in order to successfully kill enemies that are suspicious and watching the assassin, the player should use a diversion first, like casually dropping a gold coin in front of the guard and move for the kill as soon as he kneels to pick it up (like in AC Lineage).

Oh, and by the way, this I just wrote is more than an opinion. You do need this, Ubisoft, to improve AC because, you don’t improve AC by adding naval or hunting or crafting or underwater, you improve AC by improving the core components. Get it?

However this is not only what AC needs to achieve its true potential, there are the so called “details”:
- The freedom. The ability to put the hood up and down. The ability to remove weapons and choose what equipment we want to carry. Instead of making overwhelming worlds why don’t you create a smaller world (still big enough) where we can actually explore the inside of buildings. We could assassinate targets inside their own houses, enter through a window and steal their belongings, find secret passages, etc.
- The spark. The conspiracies, the secrecy, the puzzles, the fear, the mystery of these secret societies that dwell in an apparently healthy city. The beauty of both the world and the music and the sadness, the darkness and the sense of danger. Also, center the story less on the protagonist and about how "awesome" he is and more on the city and its society, focus more on the Templars, on the Assassins and on the Creed.
- The feeling of being in the shoes of an assassin. You can’t have this if you ran away from the harsh and planned life of an assassin and if you mask it or pretend it isn’t there. You have to portrait the essential or else it feels like we’re playing as a prototype of an assassin. Investigations must be there and must be as much of a reality as assassinations, for an assassin cannot assassinate without investigating first. Oh, and investigations don’t belong in cutscenes as they can be fun and more entertaining than naval or hunting. Just the ability of being able to spy on people’s lives, to explore the streets in free roam and spot a suspicious person (a dark look, expensive clothes, strange behavior) and be able to stalk him which would lead to a Templar meeting or to more information that would unlock a new assassination mission, is better and more suited to this franchise than any animal we can hunt. You could also make the player feel like his choices matter if you add a weight limit and an improved noise detection system which would make the player think twice before going out on a difficult mission. If the player carries too many weapons, the assassin will move slower and not so quietly which would make both navigation and stealth more difficult. Note that this isn’t meant to punish the player but to add realism and make him feel that his choices matter, that thinking like an assassin pays off. This way, the player can choose his weapon set according to his play style and replay missions with different weapons which would allow for different approaches (it adds replay value).

The main goal of AC is to make the player feel like an assassin and encourage him to plan and think like one and never to please everyone. It’s all there Ubisoft, so do what you think is better for the franchise and don’t let it be wasted any further.

Bien dis mon ami!!!, I agree with any percentile of your point (nice post too) and I could have not say better myself, "Sir, I just bend myself to your ideas, and sincerely hope that some people from the devs team could take a careful check to your post"

dxsxhxcx
11-19-2013, 12:43 AM
get better at it (practice doesn't hurt, in fact makes your success much more enjoyable when you achieve it by your own means without the game making the experience a ride in the park) or watch walkthroughs on youtube since any kind of effort required from a challenge the game might offer seems to bother you...

Landruner
11-19-2013, 12:50 AM
get better at it (practice doesn't hurt, in fact makes your success much more enjoyable when you achieve it by your own means) or watch walkthroughs on youtube since any kind of effort required from a challenge the game might offer seems to bother you...

I am not sure it is what he meant to say...?

I-Like-Pie45
11-19-2013, 01:34 AM
...what? When has this ever been an option in a video game? Why would you want this? Why are you even playing games?

I wouldn't even say that AC4 is even moderately challenging. Stealth missions require some thought, but they're not crazy puzzles. Naval combat is difficult if you don't upgrade your ship....so just upgrade your ship. The naval is remarkably well polished.

AC franchise is not milked to death. Every game has improved on something done in the previous game, and introduced something really significant for the franchise despite the yearly release schedule. If anything, it seems like games are getting better.

AC1: Amazing lore, story, free-running, cities, music, atmosphere, awesome villains, etc.
AC2: Mastery of city-building, more interesting side-content (tombs)
ACB: extremely fun and unique multiplayer
ACR: new level of cinematics/face capture, satisfying narrative conclusion to 2 protagonists
AC3: Pushing face capture even more, tree-running, naval combat, new engine
AC4: Mega naval overhaul, vast improvement of open world, huge additions to stealth, much improved level design

http://86bb71d19d3bcb79effc-d9e6924a0395cb1b5b9f03b7640d26eb.r91.cf1.rackcdn.c om/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/new-super-mario-bros-wii-walkthrough.jpg

BATISTABUS
11-19-2013, 03:27 AM
New Super Mario Bros. Wii
I am genuinely saddened by this.

MnemonicSyntax
11-19-2013, 03:37 AM
The difference though is, Mario Bros. is a family game, where mature and children play alike. Assassin's Creed isn't meant to be played without being at least a late teen in most parts of the world.

Skipping a level in SMB doesn't change the story. Skipping a mission in AC would ruin everything about it's dynamic.

roostersrule2
11-19-2013, 03:54 AM
I am genuinely saddened by this.GTA V and RDR also have this, Simpsons Hit and Run as well.

MnemonicSyntax
11-19-2013, 04:40 AM
The main goal of AC is to make the player feel like an assassin and encourage him to plan and think like one and never to please everyone. Itís all there Ubisoft, so do what you think is better for the franchise and donít let it be wasted any further.

You keep saying this, but when will you understand you're not the one that's going to be pleased here? Investigations haven't occurred since AC1. You'd think that would tell you something.

Newsflash. Ubisoft is in the business to make money. You're the one that's not going to be pleased because the franchise is always up for trying new and different things. You want AC1, and that's fine and dandy, but it's all repetitiveness.

Some of your stuff sounds great on paper, but I don't want a "weight" system. I don't want a light/dark stealth system. That's Elder Scrolls games, that's Splinter Cell. That's not Assassin's Creed.

Stuff like crouching has already been tried and found not to work well.

Assassin's Creed isn't the game for you, it seems.

BATISTABUS
11-19-2013, 06:25 AM
GTA V and RDR also have this, Simpsons Hit and Run as well.
Like you can decline to do a mission entirely? Or you can just walk to another mission on the map instead?

Kagurra
11-19-2013, 06:44 AM
The PS4 just came out. The devs don't know how to harness it's potential like they do with the current-gen. Remember what AC1 looked like? That was on a "next-gen" console at the time. The same console some really great looking games are on nowadays like The Last of Us, and a bunch of other recent examples. You can even use AC4 on current-gen as a comparison to AC1. Same console, way better graphics. Give it some time and we'll start seeing some truly amazing looking games.

Also, don't get me wrong, AC4 looks amazing on next-gen and everything I said also applies to Xbox one.

MnemonicSyntax
11-19-2013, 07:31 AM
Like you can decline to do a mission entirely? Or you can just walk to another mission on the map instead?

You can't skip a storyline mission in RDR, I don't think. Others you can back out of though, but it's not something that's just skipped.

roostersrule2
11-19-2013, 07:51 AM
Like you can decline to do a mission entirely? Or you can just walk to another mission on the map instead?You can skip the section of gameplay in that mission if it's too hard.

Kagurra
11-19-2013, 08:18 AM
You can skip the section of gameplay in that mission if it's too hard.

That shouldn't exist.

roostersrule2
11-19-2013, 08:21 AM
I don't see the problem with it, it just makes the game more accessible without hindering the experience for anyone who doesn't want it.

Kagurra
11-19-2013, 08:23 AM
I don't see the problem with it, it just makes the game more accessible without hindering the experience for anyone who doesn't want it.

It promotes weakness. Not to be all dramatic...

But I hate when people are having trouble with something so they give up.

AssassinHMS
11-19-2013, 09:43 PM
Bien dis mon ami!!!, I agree with any percentile of your point (nice post too) and I could have not say better myself, "Sir, I just bend myself to your ideas, and sincerely hope that some people from the devs team could take a careful check to your post"Thanks :) These are some of the ideas, I’ve had since I joined this forum, summed up in one post. Anyway, this is the complete opposite of what Ubisoft did. So yeah, this is what AC could’ve been if Ubisoft hadn’t given up on it from the start.




You keep saying this, but when will you understand you're not the one that's going to be pleased here? Investigations haven't occurred since AC1. You'd think that would tell you something. There weren’t any open ended assassinations since AC1 until AC4 brought them back. That should tell you something. And what’s your point when you say that investigations were exclusive to AC1? By the way, there were investigations in other games, such as AC3.


Newsflash. Ubisoft is in the business to make money. You're the one that's not going to be pleased because the franchise is always up for trying new and different things. You want AC1, and that's fine and dandy, but it's all repetitiveness. What exactly are you saying? That I shouldn’t fight for the franchise, for the real AC? That I should just watch Ubisoft ruin AC and sell its essence for money without saying a thing?
What do you mean by AC1 being all repetitiveness? Did you play AC1?
Newsflash. Ubisoft would be making a lot more money if they hadn’t sold out, especially in the long run as this faÁade that Ubisoft calls AC can’t hold on for much longer. It’s quite obvious really…this franchise is just having its minute of fame. However, it will soon be forgotten as it happens to everyone and everything that sells itself for quick cash. The only way AC can last and make Ubisoft’s pockets deeper is if they bring back the real AC. There is no way around this. It has been proven many times by many people and many companies that only think about money.



Some of your stuff sounds great on paper, but I don't want a "weight" system. I don't want a light/dark stealth system. That's Elder Scrolls games, that's Splinter Cell. That's not Assassin's Creed. Actually it is AC. It improves the core mechanics and encourages the player to think like an assassin. How is this not AC? Or are naval battles, underwater, hunting and crafting more like AC?




Stuff like crouching has already been tried and found not to work well. .Not true. It did not work well because it was restricted to specific situations and because it didn’t have an actual gameplay purpose which confused some people. A real crouch system with a real gameplay purpose would work very well.


Assassin's Creed isn't the game for you, it seems.It’s actually the exact contrary. AC is the game for me. What isn’t for me are these pathetic brainless, faceless, casual games that happen to have AC in the title.

MnemonicSyntax
11-19-2013, 11:06 PM
It all comes down to the facts. The fact is, AC1 was the same three things, over and over again. You pickpocketed, beat up someone for info, or eavesdropped. There was no side missions to make it interesting, nor was there a reward for doing side missions. Stuff like collecting keys to unlock armor is worthwhile, and helping people build up a homestead to improve yourself, like Connor did in 3, is worthwhile.

AC1 had none of this. and it wasn't until the PC version that more investigation styles were added. But beyond that, that's it. There was nothing extra to do, nothing to build Altair up as a character and the people around him.

AC1 was a great game, but it was the same thing over and over again. People will tell you that, reviewers will you tell you that. When 2 came out, people avoided it at first because they didn't finish 1, and didn't want "more of the same."

I'm wondering if you played 1, because while I myself enjoyed it, completed it, I'm glad the franchise has moved on from it. You keep talking about the franchise dying, but that's simply not true. Assassin's Creed 3 sold more games than any of the franchise, because it opened a world where you can do different things, even if Connor wasn't well received as an Assassin, most people find that the game is pure fun.

You keep talking about the "real AC" but this is the real AC. It's not 1191. It's not some order on top of a hill that everyone is aware of, it's spread thin. Fighting for survival. It's people living dual lives and keeping one secret from the other. You laude over 2 so much, but Giovanni Auditore was the exact same way.

You want an Assassin who is a pure Assassin, right? Someone who isn't a pirate or doesn't have a dual role, but they don't exist anymore. And it's not about even making money, though I won't deny that's part of it, but the point is to have fun. Doing different things and changing mechanics is fresh and exciting. You keep saying there's no way around this, but a company in the business of making money realizes that's how it goes, and money talks. I'm sorry that you don't seem to grasp this.

As far as what is and isn't AC, they haven't had a system for stealth based on light/dark since the beginning, nor weight requirements, etc. A load out? Sounds great. I'd be down for that. But how can you seriously want a weight system and a light/dark stealth system for "realism" when the same guy does a swam dive off a 50 story building and lands in a haystack below is considered "fine" afterward. I think it's ironic that you neglect that as part of the "realism" factor, yet want other things that take away from the social stealth aspect of the game. Stuff like hunting, naval battles, underwater, etc. are all great examples of different things to do that are just plain fun and also improve on the character. And, they make sense. It would be odd to have Ezio go hunt, but at least Connor did it (for funds) and Edward did it (for funds and crafting) and both make sense. And in 4, there are some parts of the game that suggest you upgrade your ship before continuing. That's awesome to me. Granted, you aren't forced to, but if you don't. prepare for a challenge on your hands.

I suggested instead of a crouch button, that when you leave a stalking zone to remain crouched and possibly cloaked for a few seconds until you make it to the next zone. If you don't make it within say, three seconds, you stand back up and lose the cloaked effect. I thought of this because the time when you leave a group of people blended and walk away, is much longer than it is when you leave a stalking zone and it does look sorta goofy walking to the next zone that's 2 feet away from your last one. I don't know how well it'll be handled, but I'd settle for a button too. However, the point I made was the crouching was tried and it confused people. Playtesters, who we don't know. They may be seasoned AC players or new to the series, or a bit of both, but either way it didn't go real well. I'm not against the idea though.

Ubisoft is trying to gain new fans in the franchise. They said 3 was something of a rebirth, though I think 4 fits the bill more. Ubisoft also has other brilliant games like Splinter Cell that deal with a light/dark stealth and a load out and more. But AC isn't Splinter Cell, and for that I'm thankful. It's a much more relaxed stealth, and better combat.

Again, I'm sorry you feel the way you do, but the track record and sales record shows that people like doing different, fun things, as brainless as you think they are.

Landruner
11-19-2013, 11:36 PM
My point is they can still keep an Assassin doing sides activities and just enhancing the assassin part at the same time! It is possible, and it just demand a bit more focus in the mission designs and more care in the direction of an inventive and interesting story.

I think the best demonstration of what actually Assassin Creed (Post Altair and Ezio) should have been regarding "what is a real assassin" is in fact in the promo movie Lineage with Giovanni Auditore - Giovanni was a rich noble, family man and a banker and he was using his activity as a cover for his real activity "Assassin" he was discreet, smart and secret about it, none even quiet his family knew really about it, but it had a goal believing in his cause... - While during the night or once a conspiration or a plot was in the air it was turning into an Assassin, and starting investigating in order to narrowing his seeking for finding the plotters, and then trying to prevent a murder from happening... and then the rest of the story with still investigation, and fight and more plot and corruption, and betrayal and so one along the 2 other episodes of Lineage.
Okay doing side missions as a noble banker and family man is not fun for any player, but it is still possible to combine some more interesting activities for the player (Pirate, rebel, revolutionary, spy, cowboy, tomb raider, soldier, musketeer, bandit, knight, gentleman thief, etc...) without losing the sight that the character whatever he/she does is an assassin in the first place.
As a pirate Edward was introduced in the Creed and the brotherhood should have had a progression in more assassination activities that involved him in a deeper concept toward those missions (main mission and sides Assassination missions).
As a half native partisan of a revolution, Connor should have a progression into his faith and creed... before even starting to kick the butts of 150b guards in a row, or playing the tourist during the American Revolutionary War...
As got lineage whatever could happen, If Giovanni had to make a choice or a decision it will be an assassin's one because he believed in a cause and will not have take a banker's decision even if he could have been in middle of the deal of his century.

I don't understand how they could show in a promo movie for AC2 what most of the people are waiting and expecting for in an assassin, and always fail in trying to do one for the 2 past games - The all philosophy of the assassin's character is there is that promo movie and they should use it as a template for the mission design and the story as well.

AssassinHMS
11-20-2013, 12:26 AM
Where to startÖfirstly, you completely missed my point once again.

Iíll try to keep my post short and straight.
Facts:
AC1 had the original ideas intact.
AC1 was quite repetitive.
Conclusion:
Having played the game, I can say that the repetitiveness isnít due to the focus on the actual franchise but due to the poor variety of the missions and lack of side missions. This has nothing to do with the concepts themselves but with the way they were conveyed. Exploring and developing these concepts (like I did in my original post) takes away the boredom and the repetitiveness while staying true to the ACís foundations and without resorting to naval, or what else, to replace the actual Assassinís Creed part. Get it? Itís quite simple really.

Now, it has become clear to me that you donít understand some messages that I have explicitly conveyed in my posts. Without understanding those points you can never understand the rest, so letís see if I can make these things clear to you. But first, answer this: Why is it that I say this franchise became faceless?


After I think you understand my message Iíll answer some of this:

As far as what is and isn't AC, they haven't had a system for stealth based on light/dark since the beginning, nor weight requirements, etc. A load out? Sounds great. I'd be down for that. But how can you seriously want a weight system and a light/dark stealth system for "realism" when the same guy does a swam dive off a 50 story building and lands in a haystack below is considered "fine" afterward. I think it's ironic that you neglect that as part of the "realism" factor, yet want other things that take away from the social stealth aspect of the game. Stuff like hunting, naval battles, underwater, etc. are all great examples of different things to do that are just plain fun and also improve on the character.


Oh, and I couldnít care less if the assassin is a pirate, a noble, etc. as long as he/she is an assassin first. Actually, I donít even care much for that, since what really interests me is the city, the society, the mysteries and conspiracies and the Assassin/Templar conflict. So yeah, why should I care about a man when I can learn about entire civilizations? Problem is, AC looks like a Hollywood movie now, as it focuses mostly on the protagonistís life and personality and on showing how ďbadassĒ he is. Pity.

xx-pyro
11-20-2013, 12:33 AM
No thanks playing a character who is solely an Assassin got old with Altair, Ezio, and even Connor. Characters who are Assassin's but that ideology can perhaps clash with other beliefs they may hold would be much more interesting. Hell, I'd even be OK with playing an Assassin who becomes a Templar at the end of the game.

I also hate it when people talk about what makes AC "AC", because in reality that isn't up to anyone here. You can talk about what makes an AC game unique in terms of your own opinion, but you can't say one game is or isn't an AC game based on your own personal guidelines that others may or may not agree with.

MnemonicSyntax
11-20-2013, 12:35 AM
AssassinHMS, I'm not here to argue with you man. And I understand what you're saying. But the things you think are brainless and pointless and being the badass is what people want. Sales prove this, reviews prove this.

The stuff you don't like, people are eating it up. That's a fact man.

I'd be down for some sort of balance, but you'd have to be able to accept a balance too. Or, you really don't, if you don't want to keep playing. That's your prerogative and I'm not here to change your mind on that.

I'm going to go play AC4 on PC now, since it was released today. Have a good one.

MnemonicSyntax
11-20-2013, 12:36 AM
No thanks playing a character who is solely an Assassin got old with Altair, Ezio, and even Connor. Characters who are Assassin's but that ideology can perhaps clash with other beliefs they may hold would be much more interesting. Hell, I'd even be OK with playing an Assassin who becomes a Templar at the end of the game.

I also hate it when people talk about what makes AC "AC", because in reality that isn't up to anyone here. You can talk about what makes an AC game unique in terms of your own opinion, but you can't say one game is or isn't an AC game based on your own personal guidelines that others may or may not agree with.

Agreed. There's not many games out there that let you take away what you put into it. That's why AC does fairly well in the market.

Landruner
11-20-2013, 12:39 AM
No thanks playing a character who is solely an Assassin got old with Altair, Ezio, and even Connor. Characters who are Assassin's but that ideology can perhaps clash with other beliefs they may hold would be much more interesting. Hell, I'd even be OK with playing an Assassin who becomes a Templar at the end of the game.

I also hate it when people talk about what makes AC "AC", because in reality that isn't up to anyone here. You can talk about what makes an AC game unique in terms of your own opinion, but you can't say one game is or isn't an AC game based on your own personal guidelines that others may or may not agree with.

Sorry, I am confused because we were obviously several people posting at the same time, so I don't know whom you are replying this to? for what I wrote above, because it is not what I meant to say...

AssassinHMS
11-20-2013, 01:07 AM
No thanks playing a character who is solely an Assassin got old with Altair, Ezio, and even Connor. Characters who are Assassin's but that ideology can perhaps clash with other beliefs they may hold would be much more interesting. Hell, I'd even be OK with playing an Assassin who becomes a Templar at the end of the game.
Who said I wanted to play as someone who is solely an assassin? Tell me where I said that.
Not that I would mind though. AC doesn’t need to be about the protagonist like I said in my other posts. There are so many more interesting things than can’t be explored if the story is centered on the main character, but………that is what Hollywood movies do.


I also hate it when people talk about what makes AC "AC", because in reality that isn't up to anyone here. You can talk about what makes an AC game unique in terms of your own opinion, but you can't say one game is or isn't an AC game based on your own personal guidelines that others may or may not agree with.Now, now there is no need to hate people who say that. Hate yourself for not understanding the obvious. If a game does not rely on AC’s core mechanics, doesn’t actually develop them and focuses on other things that don’t have anything to do with Assassin’s Creed, then that game is a bad AC game or not a real AC game, as it doesn’t have the things that make an AC game(at least in terms of gameplay).
It’s funny that you don’t think that there are things that make an AC game. It’s funny because that is what happens when you change a franchise so much, to the point you don’t even know what defines it, what separates it from others anymore, so you say it can be anything. It’s wrong at so many levels.

Landruner
11-20-2013, 01:23 AM
@AssassinHMS - You know that normally in Patrice's mind AC1 was not supposed to be like it was, and pretty much like you, me and some others on this forum and elsewhere see the thing about "our way" to see Assassin's creed that some don't get there - They just carried one mission template for the all game in AC1, but his concept was much deeper that the final result, you know that and it is not a big news neither.
Patrice is a genius and a real artist, and if his game would have been really made the way it was intended it would have been a legendary piece of video gaming. Anyway, like I said above, with the things like they are now, it is perfectly possible to combine story & adventure gameplay and mixing it with a bit more emphasis on the assassin gameplay with a deeper concept, and system more improved combat system & gameplay as well.

EDIT: You, I, and some other users there, did loose our time in argumentation and being called then "Haters" by someone that apparently did not even play the game and still open it in insulting people because that someone knows better the game better people do on this forum...that how the new AC generation of player(s) of this franchise is certainly (?)

MnemonicSyntax
11-20-2013, 07:55 AM
Now, now there is no need to hate people who say that. Hate yourself for not understanding the obvious. If a game does not rely on ACís core mechanics, doesnít actually develop them and focuses on other things that donít have anything to do with Assassinís Creed, then that game is a bad AC game or not a real AC game, as it doesnít have the things that make an AC game(at least in terms of gameplay).
Itís funny that you donít think that there are things that make an AC game. Itís funny because that is what happens when you change a franchise so much, to the point you donít even know what defines it, what separates it from others anymore, so you say it can be anything. Itís wrong at so many levels.

See, this is my problem with you. YOU have the problem with the franchise. There are others here, who have a problem with the franchise. But YOU are in the minority.

You talk about the core of an AC game, that very core is killing people and free running. It's a historical hop through time. That's what the devs have said, that's what other people have said.

Seriously, please... just stop telling others that their opinion is wrong, because that's what you are doing. It's not up to you to decide which way the series goes, because every game that says "Assassin's Creed" in it, regardless of having a number or a subtitle, or pirates or naval combat, is STILL an Assassin's Creed game, whether you like it or not.

If you want to have your own little world where 1 and 2 and whatever else you enjoy as part of the only "real" AC franchise, that's fine. In your head. You can't sit here and continuously say that the games that come out with Assassin's Creed on them aren't really Assassin's Creed games, because they are.

It's like if people don't agree with you, they're wrong. That's not how you win a conversation, especially over the internet. Stuff like this:


Oh, and by the way, this I just wrote is more than an opinion. You do need this, Ubisoft, to improve AC because, you donít improve AC by adding naval or hunting or crafting or underwater, you improve AC by improving the core components. Get it?

Is absolute garbage. It makes you sound arrogant and conceited. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. Get it?

I can't wait for the next iteration to come out, so this can be said all over again. Maybe by the next few iterations, you'll "get it."

xx-pyro
11-20-2013, 07:57 AM
Sorry, I am confused because we were obviously several people posting at the same time, so I don't know whom you are replying this to? for what I wrote above, because it is not what I meant to say...

Not directed at anyone, more of a blanket statement.

xx-pyro
11-20-2013, 08:09 AM
Who said I wanted to play as someone who is solely an assassin? Tell me where I said that.
Not that I would mind though. AC doesnít need to be about the protagonist like I said in my other posts. There are so many more interesting things than canít be explored if the story is centered on the main character, butÖÖÖthat is what Hollywood movies do.

Now, now there is no need to hate people who say that. Hate yourself for not understanding the obvious. If a game does not rely on ACís core mechanics, doesnít actually develop them and focuses on other things that donít have anything to do with Assassinís Creed, then that game is a bad AC game or not a real AC game, as it doesnít have the things that make an AC game(at least in terms of gameplay).
Itís funny that you donít think that there are things that make an AC game. Itís funny because that is what happens when you change a franchise so much, to the point you donít even know what defines it, what separates it from others anymore, so you say it can be anything. Itís wrong at so many levels.

Too lazy to multiquote here so sorry if the double post bothers anyone but this post was too hilarious not to respond to. Let's break it down a bit.

You've said you wanted an Assassin who put being an Assassin first in quite a few posts, so there's that. Next, characters are often the most important part of a story, because without them growing or progressing your story has no real merits and is just there as a filler for gameplay- I don't think anyone wants this. Hollywood movies are plot-centric because you aren't playing a game, so characterization is one of the main ways to grab and keep interest in a story told through film medium. Just because games have gameplay, that doesn't mean we shouldn't be equally focused on one of the pillars of great storytelling- that being characters and characterization, to say so is to be deluded.

Also, to use your own words, please tell me where I posted that I hate people who say that they can decide what AC's "core elements" are and state it as fact. Protip: I never said that. What I did say however was that I hated when people did that, but I suppose if twisting my words is the way you want to go about a discussion then I'm all for it. As for the next little bit, I think it's quite clear to most people here (though I'll only speak for myself) that you're the one who doesn't really understand the obvious. They've been improving the core pillars of the game that they themselves stated (besides maybe combat, which could be vastly improved). Social stealth, combat, a historical trip through time, and a conflict between Templars and Assassins have been the core of AC since the beginning (in my opinion), and they've been adding on to every single one of these with almost every installment of the game.

People like you who want every game to be a rehashed AC1/2 because it makes you feel oldschool and like a series veteran are the ones that inhibit any sort of progress being made in a franchise. The absolute worst thing that could happen in an annualized franchise is that it becomes the same rehashed ******** every year, and becomes staler than month old bread. Every game they've released has had a strong foundation starting with the aforementioned "core elements", and I have no reason to believe that anytime in the near future any of those elements will be burned down, scratched out, or not built upon.

TLDR- Grow up and realize innovation and change are necessary for a franchise to keep people interested.

AssassinHMS
11-20-2013, 02:04 PM
You talk about the core of an AC game, that very core is killing people and free running. It's a historical hop through time. That's what the devs have said, that's what other people have said. No, the core elements of AC, as everyone knows, are combat, stealth and navigation. These three pillars have been dismissed and are so underdeveloped that they can no longer sustain the franchise by themselves. Without its core, without solid pillars, the franchise is weak. If the pillars are weak and they keep adding supports (like naval, hunting, etc.) the structure will hold for a while but, without a proper focus on improving the core pillars, it will come down eventually.
This is as obvious as it can get. Itís not an opinion, it is a fact.


Seriously, please... just stop telling others that their opinion is wrong, because that's what you are doing. It's not up to you to decide which way the series goes, because every game that says "Assassin's Creed" in it, regardless of having a number or a subtitle, or pirates or naval combat, is STILL an Assassin's Creed game, whether you like it or not. Improving and relying on core mechanics is what AC needs to survive. Again, this isnít a matter of opinion, itís simply reality. Iím not talking about the name ďACĒ, Iím talking about what defines AC. Any game can be named AC, even an open world Uncharted with naval, but changing the whole concept and throw assassins into the mix isnít the same as the concept of AC.


Is absolute garbage. It makes you sound arrogant and conceited. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. Get it?
It is the truth, nothing more. It may sound arrogant or conceited but that is because Iím calling things for what they are. AC needs to focus on improving the core mechanics or else it wonít last. Naval, hunting, underwater and crafting wonít cut it.
You call those who want ACís essence back few, but those ďfewĒ people are the ones who allowed this franchise to succeed. Itís wrong to turn your back on those who were there from the start and focus on appealing to everyone else, especially for money.



People like you who want every game to be a rehashed AC1/2 because it makes you feel oldschool and like a series veteran are the ones that inhibit any sort of progress being made in a franchise. The absolute worst thing that could happen in an annualized franchise is that it becomes the same rehashed ******** every year, and becomes staler than month old bread. Every game they've released has had a strong foundation starting with the aforementioned "core elements", and I have no reason to believe that anytime in the near future any of those elements will be burned down, scratched out, or not built upon.
TLDR- Grow up and realize innovation and change are necessary for a franchise to keep people interested.
*Yawn*ÖÖÖÖÖÖÖyou're still one neuron short of a synapse

xx-pyro
11-20-2013, 02:20 PM
I like how you didn't try to argue any part of my argument, I guess we're only one step away from ad hominem to win yourself arguments, sucks to suck. Also, if you don't know what either neurons or synapses are you probably shouldn't use either term, considering what you said to me makes 0 sense.

MnemonicSyntax
11-20-2013, 02:40 PM
No, the core elements of AC, as everyone knows, are combat, stealth and navigation. These three pillars have been dismissed and are so underdeveloped that they can no longer sustain the franchise by themselves. Without its core, without solid pillars, the franchise is weak. If the pillars are weak and they keep adding supports (like naval, hunting, etc.) the structure will hold for a while but, without a proper focus on improving the core pillars, it will come down eventually.
This is as obvious as it can get. Itís not an opinion, it is a fact.

Combat needs work, but to many it's quite enjoyable since 3, including myself.

As for stealth? Where was the stealth in AC1? There was NO stealth in AC1 whatsoever except to serve as a chase breaker. Since that has improved greatly as games go on (more unique chase breakers, guards actually seek you out in those spots (benches, haystacks, BUT now also stalking zones) Last night I shot a guard who was coming after me on a those tight ropes, and when he fell, another guard came looking at the scene. I was on a roof, but the guard had died in front of one of those new shed like hide spots, and it was quite comical to watch him open it cautiously and then jump back in fear, except... I wasn't in there.

Navigation is for the most part fine. I've seen in previous posts about running away when the battle is too much, and you can. I don't understand your issue with the trigger button, it works just as well as holding down the trigger button and X or A, because they do the same thing.


Improving and relying on core mechanics is what AC needs to survive. Again, this isnít a matter of opinion, itís simply reality. Iím not talking about the name ďACĒ, Iím talking about what defines AC. Any game can be named AC, even an open world Uncharted with naval, but changing the whole concept and throw assassins into the mix isnít the same as the concept of AC.

Others have said this to you too, but AC is fine. You keep wanting to bring Assassin's to the forefront, but as time went on, the Assassins and Templars war became much less obvious and much more secret. As time moves forward, and the numbers on both sides are thinning, the war is put aside because both sides essentially need to rebuild. We see this in Brotherhood and in 3. There's always a balance of power between the two and one will always be better than the other in that regard.

Do I think Black Flag would make an awesome stand alone pirate game? Absolutely. Is it fine that they made the story of Black Flag and then threw the Templars and Assassins into it, seemingly as an afterthought? Yes, because that's the world we live in. We don't know what goes on privately elsewhere. The same lies with Edward. The story clearly shows this. He's a guy, trying to make it and he gets caught up into something that's far bigger than he could imagine. That's relatable to people like us. People have complained that it's not really Assassin's Creed as much as it is Pirate's Creed, but that's because of the storyline. In the end, it opens up new worlds and possibilities for future stories.


I
t is the truth, nothing more. It may sound arrogant or conceited but that is because Iím calling things for what they are. AC needs to focus on improving the core mechanics or else it wonít last. Naval, hunting, underwater and crafting wonít cut it.
You call those who want ACís essence back few, but those ďfewĒ people are the ones who allowed this franchise to succeed. Itís wrong to turn your back on those who were there from the start and focus on appealing to everyone else, especially for money.

Yes, it will cut it. Sales prove this. The people that have allowed this franchise to succeed are the ones that are dropping 60 bucks each time a new game release happens because they enjoy it. I'm not saying AC has faults, it certainly does (see my thread for things I'd like to change if you're interested).

And, I've been playing Assassin's Creed since day 1. I AM an old school fan and I think these changes are great. So how can I turn my back on myself? Just because I don't agree with you doesn't mean I'm not dedicated.

Your words are so... I don't know. You didn't allow anything, the people who paid for the game allowed it. I know you think that making money is somehow selling out, but this is a job for many people.

Maybe see about getting in Indy game made with your desires to the letter. This isn't a "well if you can do better, than you do it" post either, it's more like "I fear you're not going to get what you want so prove me (and Ubi) wrong."

I'm fairly sure that if AC hadn't improved itself to where it is now, and kept just spitting out AC1 clones, I'd be done by now.

MnemonicSyntax
11-20-2013, 02:42 PM
I like how you didn't try to argue any part of my argument, I guess we're only one step away from ad hominem to win yourself arguments, sucks to suck. Also, if you don't know what either neurons or synapses are you probably shouldn't use either term, considering what you said to me makes 0 sense.

I never got a retort about "weight physics" and light/dark stealth after I mentioned about realism and how a Leap of Faith ties into that very same realism.

Landruner
11-20-2013, 06:49 PM
I think we all disagree each other or we see the things the same way but do not express it in the correct way, I understand what AssassinHMS tries to explain there and above and what xx-Pyro writes there and what he/she wrote previously.

We just all agree on one point - something a bit deeper and re-working the Assassin Part, abilities, scenarios and mission design, and something has to be done for improving the combat system as well.
That is also the general consensus with a lot of opinion made by a lot of people on this forum, outside this forum, by some other whomever they are or do including some professional and reviewers.

The way of being successful in any project and its follow-ups is always re-challenging what had been working once, and trying to enhance it in the more interesting and creative ways. This is maybe what should be done concerning those main parts of this franchise.

The technology is there now for almost everybody to enjoy and offering some offering some new creative possibilities for the developers in those matters.

Hans684
11-20-2013, 08:42 PM
No, the core elements of AC, as everyone knows, are combat, stealth and navigation. These three pillars have been dismissed and are so underdeveloped that they can no longer sustain the franchise by themselves. Without its core, without solid pillars, the franchise is weak. If the pillars are weak and they keep adding supports (like naval, hunting, etc.) the structure will hold for a while but, without a proper focus on improving the core pillars, it will come down eventually.
This is as obvious as it can get. It’s not an opinion, it is a fact.

Improving and relying on core mechanics is what AC needs to survive. Again, this isn’t a matter of opinion, it’s simply reality. I’m not talking about the name “AC”, I’m talking about what defines AC. Any game can be named AC, even an open world Uncharted with naval, but changing the whole concept and throw assassins into the mix isn’t the same as the concept of AC.


It is the truth, nothing more. It may sound arrogant or conceited but that is because I’m calling things for what they are. AC needs to focus on improving the core mechanics or else it won’t last. Naval, hunting, underwater and crafting won’t cut it.
You call those who want AC’s essence back few, but those “few” people are the ones who allowed this franchise to succeed. It’s wrong to turn your back on those who were there from the start and focus on appealing to everyone else, especially for money.


Correct about stealth, combat and navigation being the official main pillars but the thing is all kind of games use those. It's not underdeveloped nor dismissed or have you forgotten what the series use. It uses history, modern day and Those Who Came Before, that is what makes AC. It's core concept, gameplay(stealth, combat & navigation) is mean to change, evolve......change is life, if things become static it means theire dead. Let me ask you something thing, would it be "AC" if they hade taken either, the historical, modern day or TWCB out of the series? AC is based on history(obviously), so without history there is no AC becouse then there are no historical time periods and settings to have the series in....like The Golden Age of Piracy, American Revolution, Ottoman Empire, Renissance & The Third Crusade. All real life events, all past of history making all the time periods & settings a part of AC. Stuff like naval, hunting is part of the core pillars, becouse all of it is within the history part and stealth, combat & navigation. Naval battles did happen and it uses stealth, combat and navigation all at the same time.

AC is improving it is based on history, so it has to adapt to the choosen time period. A AC game sett in The Golden Age of Piracy without naval, underwater ect is a weak AC becouse it would narrow itself ruling out a lot of history. What is the point of having a game series based on history if it can't wisit every time period and setting while staying true to it?
What deffines is what it use not how the gameplay is, the gameplay is meant to adapt to every time period & setting while keeping the core concept history, modern day & TWCB.
Modern day is the strongest part where we the Animus ect that gives us access to the historical part where something TWCB relented is needed. Yes, Uncharted can go to The Golden Age of Piracy with naval and then label itself "Assassin's Creed" but that want make it AC. Sure it have History but more mythical, it is about old treasures, and it have modern day story but nothing like AC and it have reare artifacts but not made by a long lost Civilisation. They haven't changed the core concept but rather adapted it to he choosen time period & setting but what have then adapted? Well it is the official core stealth, combat & navigation. All made to absolutely any time period & setting.

AC is improving it's by focusing the core pillars the stealth, combat & navigation when they adapt those mechanics to the choosen time period & setting while keeping history, modern day & TWCB. Without history, modern day & TWCB there would be no "AC". And naval, hunting ect both uses stealth, combat & navigation, therefor AC is evolving it's core, so it will cut it. AC never lost it's essences, you are just dissepointed with the recent games, time period ect and the series is on annual releases something making future games a disepointment to you but it's only natural to feel that way. And those "few" people are the ones holding the series back, they forget that the series is based on history. So any time period & setting fits AC, it's just that official core stealth, combat & navigation has to evolve to keep it fresh by adapting those to the choosen time period while keeping history, modern day & TWCB. It's wrong to turn your back on history, it's their playground and the reason stealth, combat & navigation easely can adapt to any time period & setting while keeping history, modern day & TWCB.