PDA

View Full Version : Climbing speed in AC1 compared to AC3-4



Sushiglutton
03-01-2014, 11:04 PM
Maybe we have allready discussed this, can't remember lol. Anyway I played some AC1 yesterday and what strikes me every time I go back to it is that the slower climbing speed compared to AC3-4 is much, much better.

One of the things that makes the climbing different in AC compared to other games is the density of the grips and how natural it looks when the assassin grabs them. If you take an extreme example like Mario you are either on the ground or you jump up and stand on the platform. There is no transition between the two, so you don't feel that connection with the world. Or if you take a more modern example like Sleeping Dogs the character can run up walls, but there are no grips and the whole thing feels a lot more artificial and gamey than what it does in AC. No other franchise has as good climbing as AC does imo.

Now here's the thing. In AC3 they greatly increased the speed Connor can scale a building. He more or less jumps from grip to grip and he can climb a tower very quickly. There is a greater distance between grips (it feels like that anyway). What this means imo is that the very qualities which make climbing in AC so unique are reduced. There's less of a feeling of connection with the surface. It feels gamier, less grounded.

I can see why they did it, but imo it was a misstake. What do you think?

Consus_E
03-01-2014, 11:31 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-xRxGdNquC4&list=LLwYGdzfZm2XSPQ0txm56dbg&index=8

I think the rock climbing from AC3 looks pretty good and the player moves at a decent speed. This would be an ideal model for climbing all in AC

breakdownthewall
03-01-2014, 11:32 PM
Agreed. I remember instantly feeling the difference when I first climbed a building in AC3. It required less focusing and didn't feel like an accomplishment when you climbed it, did not feel real. I really miss the old system!

Fatal-Feit
03-01-2014, 11:33 PM
I don't think the speed is the main issue. It's the immersion, IMO. I haven't played AC:1 in a long while so I can't say much about it but what I can assume is that the premise behind climbing was heavily emphasized. In AC:2-AC:R, the main point of climbing was to traverse between collectibles, chases, and getting from point A to point B during puzzle sequences. There wasn't a lot of focus on the climbing itself, rather it's more focused on the player's objective. The 17th century saga took the climbing and like AC:2-AC:R furthered its direction towards a more seamless and indirect route.

I think the point of this discussion as a whole is the fact that the future sequels of AC makes an effort in building around the main concept with contents, than focusing on its original foundations. So climbing isn't the only mechanic, TBH.

Inb4HMS

[edit] I'd also like to add this video in.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BZGEXfOmaMc
From the video, you can see they're trying to add a lot of what you described AC to have, Sushi. I think the main reason with why we're not as immersed as before is because of what I said earlier. There are too much going on. On-screen HUD, collectibles, side objectives, mission prompts, and de-synchs. Despite the tedious mission designs, AC left us with plenty of room and freedom to enjoy the little things unlike the future games. Which I can guess is another reason why people have more fun watching demos or strolling around after completing everything.

jdowny
03-02-2014, 12:07 AM
I agree, but I'm completely fine with AC II and Brotherhood's climbing mechanics as well.

AC Revelation's hookblade made climbing too quick and easy, but in AC III and IV there's just no challenge or thinking required - you simply press a direction for them to go in. I'd say this is a step too far, as there were several times playing as either Connor or Edward that I'd press a button hoping to hop across to something close by and they'd leap 10 feet to something really far away. This is an issue with the controls anyway as they've got rid of the jogging control which differentiated between jumping off a ledge to something below and leaping as far as you could.

Again, it seems like a dumbing down of the games. Now we have one command to sprint quickly or to climb. I prefer a more calculated approach to climbing in AC games - where you have to think and where the player has more control over his movements. As Connor or Edward I felt incredibly clumsy. I can see why they went with this sort of approach because it only allows the player to jump if there's something to hold on to, saving them the bother of wondering. But I'd say it's had the opposite effect - I've had a lot more frustrations and issues with characters jumping or climbing where I don't want them to than I ever did in previous games.

Sushiglutton
03-02-2014, 12:16 AM
I think the rock climbing from AC3 looks pretty good and the player moves at a decent speed. This would be an ideal model for climbing all in AC

It's hard to compare with rockclimbing as that feature wasn't in AC1. I also don't think it's super important what is possible and not. To me it's about what feels right. And maybe it's nostalgia or whatever, but whenever I go back to AC1 the climbing speed feels just right and AC3-4 feels twitchy and unsatisfying. The bigger jumps also means that you almost never have to go around a tower to find a path up.



Agreed. I remember instantly feeling the difference when I first climbed a building in AC3. It required less focusing and didn't feel like an accomplishment when you climbed it, did not feel real. I really miss the old system!

Agree about the focus thing. It has been simplified to a point where it feels mechanical, which is a shame.



I don't think the speed is the main issue. It's the immersion, IMO. I haven't played AC:1 in a long while so I can't say much about it but what I can assume is that the premise behind climbing was heavily emphasized. In AC:2-AC:R, the main point of climbing was to traverse between collectibles, chases, and getting from point A to point B during puzzle sequences. There wasn't a lot of focus on the climbing itself, rather it's more focused on the player's objective. The 17th century saga took the climbing and like AC:2-AC:R furthered its direction towards a more seamless and indirect route.

I think the point of this discussion as a whole is the fact that the future sequels of AC makes an effort in building around the main concept with contents, than focusing on its original foundations. So climbing isn't the only mechanic, TBH.

Inb4HMS

[edit] I'd also like to add this video in.

From the video, you can see they're trying to add a lot of what you described AC to have, Sushi. I think the main reason with why we're not as immersed as before is because of what I said earlier. There are too much going on. On-screen HUD, collectibles, side objectives, mission prompts, and de-synchs. Despite the tedious mission designs, AC left us with plenty of room and freedom to enjoy the little things unlike the future games. Which I can guess is another reason why people have more fun watching demos or strolling around after completing everything.


Maybe you have a point. But if you still have AC1 I suggest climbing a random tower in it and then do the same in AC3/4. The difference I'm talking about should be immediately clear. I also want to say that I think they made a lot of really good additions to the parkour such as vaulting, slding, rock climbing, treeclimbing and so on. I am absolutely not saying the team did an overall poor job. But the feel of climbing straight up a building is not as good as in AC1 imo.



I agree, but I'm completely fine with AC II and Brotherhood's climbing mechanics as well.

AC Revelation's hookblade made climbing too quick and easy, but in AC III and IV there's just no challenge or thinking required - you simply press a direction for them to go in. I'd say this is a step too far, as there were several times playing as either Connor or Edward that I'd press a button hoping to hop across to something close by and they'd leap 10 feet to something really far away. This is an issue with the controls anyway as they've got rid of the jogging control which differentiated between jumping off a ledge to something below and leaping as far as you could.

Again, it seems like a dumbing down of the games. Now we have one command to sprint quickly or to climb. I prefer a more calculated approach to climbing in AC games - where you have to think and where the player has more control over his movements. As Connor or Edward I felt incredibly clumsy. I can see why they went with this sort of approach because it only allows the player to jump if there's something to hold on to, saving them the bother of wondering. But I'd say it's had the opposite effect - I've had a lot more frustrations and issues with characters jumping or climbing where I don't want them to than I ever did in previous games.

Agree with everything you said. I mean climbing has always been and should always be relatively easy. It's just that they have taken it one step too far into brain-dead teritory. And it sucks the joy and feel out of the experience. And just like you describe it lowers the precision which can be aggrevating.

ACfan443
03-02-2014, 12:37 AM
I've always preferred the slower climbing speed of the earlier games. The way Altair and Ezio shifted their weight, the intricate and precise movements, and the detail in the animations made for a navigation system which felt far more tactile and realistic.

The way the Connor and Edward shoot up buildings like spiderman looks somewhat ridiculous, the speed and animations are suitable for cliff faces and organic environments, but not so much cities and other man made structures (in my opinion).

Putting the time and effort into climbing a huge monument was once rewarding, it felt like you had accomplished an impressive feat (Acre, Florence, and Venice towers come to mind). But with the automation and speedy scrambling in the newer games, I don't feel that level of thrill or satisfaction anymore because of how little input I have. The unrealistically fast rate of scale also diminishes the feeling of height you get from an otherwise vertically impressive structure.

I also find the new system to be clunky and problematic at times, but that's kinda irrelevant here.

Fatal-Feit
03-02-2014, 01:30 AM
Maybe you have a point. But if you still have AC1 I suggest climbing a random tower in it and then do the same in AC3/4. The difference I'm talking about should be immediately clear. I also want to say that I think they made a lot of really good additions to the parkour such as vaulting, slding, rock climbing, treeclimbing and so on. I am absolutely not saying the team did an overall poor job. But the feel of climbing straight up a building is not as good as in AC1 imo.

A reasonable point and don't get me wrong, I'm not disagreeing. Climbing in AC was the highlight of the game from what I remember, but IMO, after the continued direction of the franchise from then on, I feel climbing is at its best in the latest entries. Or at least parkouring in general.

IWGCJoeCool
03-02-2014, 02:31 AM
i felt totally immersed during th Ezio stories, when you had to work on the climbing alot, and utilize the jump/grab motion...the drop grab for that matter. i enjoy the better free running in III and IV, but the climbing coulda took more thought on our parts. your timing could make it silky smooth, bad timing clunky.

SixKeys
03-02-2014, 02:41 AM
Agreed with OP. It feels weird going back to AC1 after playing the other games since it has the slowest climbing, but it also feels the most realistic. Connor, Edward and even Ezio climbed with such swiftness and ease, it made you feel like climbing those heights wasn't actually a big deal. Alta´r takes things one cautious step at a time, so when you're climbing something like the cathedral in Acre, you can practically feel the gravity weighing you down and the anxiety as you slowly heave yourself closer to the top. Alta´r may be a parkour pro, but he also controls more like a regular person. So you get the power fantasy and realistic immersion in one package.

IWGCJoeCool
03-02-2014, 03:28 AM
Agreed with OP. It feels weird going back to AC1 after playing the other games since it has the slowest climbing, but it also feels the most realistic. Connor, Edward and even Ezio climbed with such swiftness and ease, it made you feel like climbing those heights wasn't actually a big deal. Alta´r takes things one cautious step at a time, so when you're climbing something like the cathedral in Acre, you can practically feel the gravity weighing you down and the anxiety as you slowly heave yourself closer to the top. Alta´r may be a parkour pro, but he also controls more like a regular person. So you get the power fantasy and realistic immersion in one package.

the cathedral in Acre, thanks for reminding me of possibly the scariest thing ever in this series, thinking back to the very first play. but, it was all new back then.

Dome500
03-02-2014, 03:50 AM
I don't think the speed is the main issue. It's the immersion, IMO. I haven't played AC:1 in a long while so I can't say much about it but what I can assume is that the premise behind climbing was heavily emphasized. In AC:2-AC:R, the main point of climbing was to traverse between collectibles, chases, and getting from point A to point B during puzzle sequences. There wasn't a lot of focus on the climbing itself, rather it's more focused on the player's objective. The 17th century saga took the climbing and like AC:2-AC:R furthered its direction towards a more seamless and indirect route.

I think the point of this discussion as a whole is the fact that the future sequels of AC makes an effort in building around the main concept with contents, than focusing on its original foundations. So climbing isn't the only mechanic, TBH.

Inb4HMS

[edit] I'd also like to add this video in.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BZGEXfOmaMc
From the video, you can see they're trying to add a lot of what you described AC to have, Sushi. I think the main reason with why we're not as immersed as before is because of what I said earlier. There are too much going on. On-screen HUD, collectibles, side objectives, mission prompts, and de-synchs. Despite the tedious mission designs, AC left us with plenty of room and freedom to enjoy the little things unlike the future games. Which I can guess is another reason why people have more fun watching demos or strolling around after completing everything.


I don't think the immersion suffers from side activities, though I agree that collectibles have gotten a little overhand in AC4.

Anyway, this alpha footage looks awesome. Why didn't they include such lively and busy camps more often in the game? That would have really made the feeling of the game a lot better having more of those camps with soldiers and civilians...

Also regarding the tree-climbing. I really liked it. The main problem I had was that instead of having multiple paths in the trees which you can tackle from differenr points and sides and which cross each other frequently you most of the time had that per-deremined single path that lead you to a special objective or mission or collectible. I would have loved to see more tree-paths there which enable me to be more dynamic.

Liked the tree-stone jumping over a river.

I agree on the OP, but just partially.

I think if they'd find a balance between too fast and emphasis on the weight of the assassin they could make it more smooth and still let you "feel" the climb.
Also, what IMO makes the whole climbing more "weightless" and less like an accomplishment is also that single button for climing you only have to hold down.
I mean, if I want to climb straight up, sure. But if I can't climb up but have to climb left or right I want to press left or ride. In the newest AC's (3+4) however Connor/Edward just plainly did that for you automatically. Feels less as if you are climbing and more like you watch him climbing.

LUR21
03-02-2014, 05:45 AM
Completely agreed OP. Climbing use to be a challenge and some buildings were sort of like figuring out a puzzle and most of all you were scared of making the wrong move cause it meant plummeting to your death. These days it's just one button and she"ll be right.

I fell in love with AC cause of its uniqueness of controls as in the puperteering concept and it's challenging free run system. I liked that if I ran full pelt in to the crowd I would fall over with out pressing O. Just added that extra challenge in free running where you had to be mindful of your surrounding and
plot a course. Now once again it's just one button does all. Especially with jogging and sprinting. In the old
days you could hold on to just R1 and
that was your sort of safe mode and it stopped you from climbing things you didn't want to. Then hold down X when you actually wanted to climb.

Dont get me wrong the new running system looks amazing with the vaults as well but I still think that it should be R1 and X to sprint and with holding them both you can still do those new vaulting moves.

I just think in my opinion that I absolutely love the old challenge of free running and climbing. If they could move back towards that I would love it. As said I just loved the old uniqueness and at the moment they are moving to far away from something that a lot of us really enjoyed.

HDinHB
03-02-2014, 08:07 AM
There was a similar thread (http://forums.ubi.com/showthread.php/822652-Free-Running-in-future-AC-titles)a few weeks ago, and I think the consensus was the new climbing scheme is just too easy, too safe, too disconnecting. A lot of the thrill is gone because the computer is doing a lot of the work. Some of the most satisfying moments for me in all of AC have been beating the free running puzzles. Beating Francesco to the roof of the church, reaching the tomb in the dome of Il Duomo (the dome of The Dome?) , watching the funny Ezio "shrug" when I try to make him leap further up the wall than he is capable--as if to say "I'm not gonna try to jump that high--you try it." All of the tombs, the lairs, and the secret areas were fun because they were challenging.

The cliff and tree climbing of AC3 were great additions, but they weren't especially challenging. The closest thing AC3 had were some of the free-running puzzles in the Mason's tunnels, and those were very very short. There were a couple of interesting climbs in AC4 (like the initial cliff at Grand Inagua), but no real white-knuckle rides. The most satisfying climbs for me since the AnvilNext engine was introduced in AC3 have been Adewale's escape from the sinking ship and Aveline's adventures in the Chichen Itza temples. But in general my feeling has been, "oh, if only that had gone on a little longer."

Farlander1991
03-02-2014, 10:07 AM
I'm not that keen on AC1 climbing speed, to be honest. I think it's too slow. On the other hand, the AC3/AC4 one is probably too fast (though, considering the size of the rock faces that we would get in AC3 and that the climbing system was modified for that mostly and that it's possible to climb it like that at such speed, I can understand why they have done it). I don't really like Ezio's climbing at all as well because it's very un-uniform in speed and principles (like, he climbs something really slow, but another section that's the same like this he would climb really fast). Plus the climb leaps and hook leaps really make a lot of building design unnecessary.

What I did like about AC1, is that sometimes you really get to think, 'ok, how do I climb this?'. But even then there are still a lot of times when you just press up and that's it. For example, getting to the bottom of the cathedral tower on the roof is interesting, but then climbing from there to the top cross itself just takes soooooooo long, and it would not have been boring if I had to move around the tower to climb it.

So I think it has to be something of a mix between AC1 and AC3/AC4, but without the speed ununiformity of Ezio's trilogy. With more variative building design (in terms of paths to climb), at least for landmarks/viewpoints.

One of the other reasons I don't like AC1 climbing speed is chases (either chasing smb. or being chased by somebody). Yes, you want to make free-running routes more effective than climbing and don't want to make the climbing speed too fast as it would break line of sight very easily. However, AC1 climbing speed also greatly breaks the feeling of flow and the thrill of a chase. Here you are, running awesomely and swiftly alongside buildings while the guards are running on approximately the same speed behind you, on a free-run route that gets you to a wall, which then you start climbing it and it's suddenly, 'I'll just pretend I don't need to catch/escape anyone and will slowly grab these parts of the building that are close to eachother one by one...'

jdowny
03-02-2014, 01:38 PM
I don't really like Ezio's climbing at all as well because it's very un-uniform in speed and principles (like, he climbs something really slow, but another section that's the same like this he would climb really fast). Plus the climb leaps and hook leaps really make a lot of building design unnecessary.[

Care to elaborate on Ezio's non-uniform speed? You mean how he would change from slow-paced like Altair to leaping up it? That never bothered me much (discounting the hookblade which I frankly hated), so for me Ezio's climbing is the happy medium.


One of the other reasons I don't like AC1 climbing speed is chases (either chasing smb. or being chased by somebody).

I agree with you on this. I was never bothered by the speed with which Altair would climb except when he was being chased, and especially when guards would start pelting him with rocks causing him to fall. This is why I felt that Ezio had that happy medium - but it can always be improved.


So I think it has to be something of a mix between AC1 and AC3/AC4, but without the speed ununiformity of Ezio's trilogy. With more variative building design (in terms of paths to climb), at least for landmarks/viewpoints.

Agreed on this, though I think the great thing about Ezio's trilogy was again this idea of control - you could leap up if you wanted to but you could also climb in a controlled and slower manner. Sometimes for me it breaks the immersion slightly in AC III or IV when I'm trying to be stealthy (which evokes images of moving slowly and quietly) and the character is leaping up this building like his life depends on it. Same goes for sprinting instead of jogging.

So for me the middle ground is based around more control and a greater challenge. AC 1 was too slow when being chased, AC III and IV were too quick and sloppy. I want to be able to look at a building in the game and ask myself how do I climb this (incidentally, does anyone find themselves doing this in real life?) I want to be able to work out my path instead of sprinting up this building making huge leaps that I didn't ask the character to do. Like everything else in a game, climbing should be rewarding.

Farlander1991
03-02-2014, 02:49 PM
That never bothered me much (discounting the hookblade which I frankly hated), so for me Ezio's climbing is the happy medium.

That bothered me because of how inconsistent it was. I mean, TECHNICALLY it was consistent, but the feel was very inconsistent. Let's say there's a building with two identical floor sections, Ezio would climb them differently because of some brick inbetween which changed his internal calculations on how he'd climb. That annoyed me.


Agreed on this, though I think the great thing about Ezio's trilogy was again this idea of control - you could leap up if you wanted to but you could also climb in a controlled and slower manner

I agree with the idea of control, although I think that the climb leap is somewhat of a poor way to do it as it renders most of the climbing puzzles useless.

However, there's one really cool thing, when it comes to control, in Revelations that I REALLY want to see expanded to all manners of things related to free-running and free-climbing. When there's the lamp you swing on, you could either not use your hookblade and use the lamp to turn, or use the hookblade and use the lamp to leap farther. Expand this idea to like all objects having two uses (and you pretty much select which one by either holding or not holding a certain button when you do it), with different actions that make sense depending on the object, and the possibilities of level design and parkour freedom increase immensely!


Sometimes for me it breaks the immersion slightly in AC III or IV when I'm trying to be stealthy (which evokes images of moving slowly and quietly) and the character is leaping up this building like his life depends on it. Same goes for sprinting instead of jogging.

You can jog in AC3/AC4, although that can't be done with digital (i.e. keyboard) controls, just with analog sticks.

One of the things that might help the climbing mechanics is context sensitivity + different climbing modes depending on if you hold the high profile down or not. So when you hold the high profile, your climbing is faster but perhaps more sloppier (so maybe you need to make additional presses to hold on to something and if you don't you'll fall), and when you don't you're climbing slowly but surely.

And context sensitivity akin to how it works with jumping different distances in AC3/AC4 - in a sense that different distances cause different animations. So, for example, when we're in alert mode there's one set of climbing animations (even if mechanically the speed may remain the same way depending on high profile press), when we're above a certain height - another set, etc.

Of course, this is just a draft general idea and there are TONS AND TONS of things to elaborate to make it actually work.

jdowny
03-02-2014, 03:27 PM
I agree with the idea of control, although I think that the climb leap is somewhat of a poor way to do it as it renders most of the climbing puzzles useless.

I meant leaping in terms of high profile/low profile movement. Poor word choice.


You can jog in AC3/AC4, although that can't be done with digital (i.e. keyboard) controls, just with analog sticks.

One of the many issues of playing with a keyboard and mouse unfortunately. But perhaps you can enlighten me - From AC 1 to Revlations, if you used the high profile movement (jogging) to move off a ledge, as long as there was an object underneath the player would jump down. Is this feature available in AC III and IV? Because from my standpoint when playing with a keyboard and mouse, I can only leap a huge distance in the direction I'm facing.

If it's not, then the changes made to movement in AC III are just plain odd. On foot (at least on keyboard) we can either walk or sprint, there's no jogging. Yet on the horse we can either jog (canter) or sprint, we can't walk. So if we try to walk, which has a definite use for me as a player, the horse rears up - an utterly useless gesture that adds nothing to the game aside from looking cool. But I'd much rather have my ability to walk the horse.

Ubisoft have always said that AC games are best played with a controller, but until AC III I didn't realise I'd actually be penalised for playing with a keyboard. At least that's how it looks to me.


One of the things that might help the climbing mechanics is context sensitivity + different climbing modes depending on if you hold the high profile down or not. So when you hold the high profile, your climbing is faster but perhaps more sloppier (so maybe you need to make additional presses to hold on to something and if you don't you'll fall), and when you don't you're climbing slowly but surely.

That's pretty much how it was before AC III. And I agree, I think it would be much better, though perhaps not including making additional presses to hold on to something. Context sensitivity is an interesting idea and one I'm frankly surprised they haven't included. I'd love to see some more stealthy animations when we move into a wanted zone. In addition to the player having his hood up, this would go a long way to communicating this to the player.

Sushiglutton
03-02-2014, 03:52 PM
@Farlander:

The basis of this thread is not scientific :). I mean I dunno if a slightly faster climbspeed then in AC1 would feel better. What I do knowis that every time I go back and play AC1 after playing 3-4 I think to myself: "man, this feels great!", so there is something off about 3-4.

When it comes to chases I can agree that it can be annoying in AC1. But I also think that there is a point with that. Chases should always be more horizontal than vertical, as that will always be faster. Also keeping the player at street level adds crowd dynamic into the mix which has it┤s benefits. Problem with AC3 is that in a chase you just can just run to the closest building, Connor "jumps up" and you allready have a big advantage. In AC1 you have to run on the street and look for a good opportunity to get to the roof, such as a ladder or a low straight wall. This forces you to do a bit of thinking on the feet, which can only be a good thing imo.

Climb leap I think is a great idea in principle that I wish they went back and built upon. I was not crazy about the implementation in AC2 and onwards. You say it "make(s) a lot of building design unnecessary". I agree with this ofc as you can bypass some of the "puzzles". However that to me is an implementation problem. I think the climb leap should be slow in the sense that if you do one after another it should take longer to scale a building than if you just climbed straight up (this could be controlled by the animation speed). This would prevent overuse of the move. Secondly you shouldn't be able to jump as high as in AC2 but rather use it to jump sideways and diagonally up.

The basic idea of the climb leap is excellent. It creates tense moments, adds variety and player control.

Farlander1991
03-02-2014, 03:53 PM
Is this feature available in AC III and IV? Because from my standpoint when playing with a keyboard and mouse, I can only leap a huge distance in the direction I'm facing.

I don't know if there's such a feature for analog controls, because I haven't actually played the game myself with the controller, just keyboard/mouse. I just know that jogging's there (at least in AC3) because I saw people jog in AC3 with a controller.

However, if you hold high profile and drop button, you will jump to the surface below instead of forward (so, for example, if you're on a roof and instead of jumping over the street to another roof you want to jump down on the street without having to stop and hang, hold the drop button while running and Connor/Edward will jump down to the surface below.


So if we try to walk, which has a definite use for me as a player, the horse rears up - an utterly useless gesture that adds nothing to the game aside from looking cool.

Rearing up is like a hand-brake tool in racing games - you use it to turn on the spot in another direction instead of having to make a circle, so there's a definite practical use to it (especially in tighter areas).

However, horse controls have been atrocious in all AC games, so I wouldn't be surprised if that doesn't work half the time.


That's pretty much how it was before AC III.

Not exactly. For example, in Ezio's games (at least AC2 since this is the Ezio game I've played the latest) Ezio while having high profile pressed would frequently climb like Altair even where he could climb like Ezio (as I've mentioned, has to do something with his calculations when he thinks he can or can't do that because of some additional ledges). I'm proposing more like, low profile - Altair mode, high profile - Ezio mode, with no suddenly switching up speed when it wouldn't make sense (and the AC3/AC4's system of being able to dynamically change which distance to climb while retaining speed would certainly help in this regard).

Fatal-Feit
03-02-2014, 04:12 PM
Just a plausible conclusive answer.

What if the AnvilNext or the new controls introduced an X button instead of tilting the analog? The climbing in the last few installments had both fast and slow paced climbing, including jogging, however I feel like people weren't aware or taking advantage of it. Which is understandable because after playing the old games, you get this need to fully tilt your analog and press all sort of jumble.

So let's say the Assassin's next to a building. If you press X and tilt towards the wall, the Assassin will attempt to climb it like in the old installments. However with new system as I've mention, if the player continue to hold onto the X button, the Assassin will attempt to climb it faster like how he would originally if you fully tilt the analog. If you let go of the X button, he will slow down as though you were loosing up the analog. A good fix if I may say so myself.

[edit] And to jump towards another direction you would have to double tap.

Sushiglutton
03-02-2014, 04:16 PM
Just a plausible conclusive answer.

What if the AnvilNext or the new controls introduced an X button instead of tilting the analog? The climbing in the last few installments had both fast and slow paced climbing, including jogging, however I feel like people weren't aware or taking advantage of it. Which is understandable because after playing the old games, you get this need to fully tilt your analog and press all sort of jumble.

So let's say the Assassin's next to a building. If you press X and tilt towards the wall, the Assassin will attempt to climb it like in the old installments. However with new system as I've mention, if the player continue to hold onto the X button, the Assassin will attempt to climb it faster like how he would originally if you fully tilt the analog. If you let go of the X button, he will slow down as though you were loosing up the analog. A good fix, if I may say so myself.


Not a fan sorry. I'm usually for players creating their own challenge, but this is too much. Having a much faster climbstyle a button away would be way too hard to not abuse.

Fatal-Feit
03-02-2014, 04:25 PM
Not a fan sorry. I'm usually for players creating their own challenge, but this is too much. Having a much faster climbstyle a button away would be way too hard to not abuse.

This is a problem the developers are probably having difficulties with. Finding that 50/50 gap between the slow pace and fast pace for both sides. I personally don't care about the old climbing system but I can understand why some people preferred it. Or at least to an extent.

Maybe make slower climbing built in as a penalty. For example, if you're climbing with your Tomahawk or Swords out, your climbing speed and furiosity will diminish. But if you equip your hidden blades instead, your climbing speed won't be penalized making chase sequences more fluent.

I'm just throwing ideas, btw.

jdowny
03-02-2014, 06:34 PM
However, if you hold high profile and drop button, you will jump to the surface below instead of forward (so, for example, if you're on a roof and instead of jumping over the street to another roof you want to jump down on the street without having to stop and hang, hold the drop button while running and Connor/Edward will jump down to the surface below.

I've used this before but it's not the same system as the previous games - it just sends the player down without calculating if there's anything for him to safely land on below. Plus there are a couple of frustrating issues with this method. The first is that if you press it too close to an edge, the character will hang from that edge. The second is that if there happen to be guards below (or citizens perhaps), the character will leap onto them from the roof, which can be inconvenient to say the least. Lastly, using the mouse for this is much easier and simpler.


Rearing up is like a hand-brake tool in racing games - you use it to turn on the spot in another direction instead of having to make a circle, so there's a definite practical use to it (especially in tighter areas).

I've never had to use that, ever. Besides, the turning circle is so slow using this method that it's in fact quicker to turn manually - unfortunately to me it remains useless. I wouldn't say the horse controls have been atrocious in all AC games - in Ezio and Altair's games I found the controls were fine - not great, but acceptable. This was mainly because they were identical to the player's controls and provided four levels of movement. It's only in AC III and IV that they've become atrocious. Without being able to walk, my horse simply galloped through cities, knocking over anyone they came into contact with and shattering any immersion.


Not exactly. For example, in Ezio's games (at least AC2 since this is the Ezio game I've played the latest) Ezio while having high profile pressed would frequently climb like Altair even where he could climb like Ezio

(That's why I said pretty much, not exactly). But yes, I agree with what you're getting at - it would be nice to have high profile meaning high speed, low profile meaning low speed.


This is a problem the developers are probably having difficulties with. Finding that 50/50 gap between the slow pace and fast pace for both sides. I personally don't care about the old climbing system but I can understand why some people preferred it. Or at least to an extent.

This is exactly my point. If Ubisoft are now finding that their market is split down the middle between people wanting fast pace and slow pace, then they need to give more control to the player, not less as they have done.

bveUSbve
03-03-2014, 11:03 AM
However, if you hold high profile and drop button, you will jump to the surface below instead of forward (so, for example, if you're on a roof and instead of jumping over the street to another roof you want to jump down on the street without having to stop and hang, hold the drop button while running and Connor/Edward will jump down to the surface below.
Thank you for mentioning this. I just tried it a little, and it seems to work. But it seems to work only when the drop button is pressed WHILE jogging/running already. So when standing on higher ground (at some edge), it's probably impossible or very hard to pull off to jump down to the nearest lower surface, since the moment you pull the right trigger (XBox controller) this is handled as "default jump" which regularly results in a giant leap forward. Which is often times inappropriate in the environment or simply not what you wanted.

In my opinion it clearly was a mistake to omit the necessity to press an extra button for high profile movement. In theory it might appear a good idea to rely on the possibilities of the analogue trigger to control speed. But in practice it's a mess - too hard to control, especially in fast paced situations.

Farlander1991
03-03-2014, 11:07 AM
But it seems to work only when the drop button is pressed WHILE jogging/running already.

No, if you're on the edge then just hold high profile + drop without the directional button, he will drop below.

bveUSbve
03-03-2014, 11:24 AM
On the topic of climbing:

A year ago I had opened a discussion about the ape-like climbing in AC III in a German forum. My arguments where similar to yours, Sushiglutton. The extremely fast climbing looks superhuman, makes thinking about a climbable route almost unnecessary. And in the end you get no feeling of accomplishment from scaling even a high cliff or building.

And then there is - for me - an aesthetic side to it: the person climbing like this looks not human but rather like an ape. Not a good thing in a game of this type, I think. :)

Unfortunately, in that discussion most people were indifferent about my complaints. People - sometimes you really have to force them to what's good for them ... :p

bveUSbve
03-03-2014, 11:33 AM
No, if you're on the edge then just hold high profile + drop without the directional button, he will drop below.
You are right, when standing at the edge or near enough to it, this works. Maybe I can get used to it, don't know yet. But the way it worked pre AC III to me still seems more "natural". (I became aware of the old "short jump" by chance; I don't think the same could have happened with the current control scheme ...)

Sushiglutton
03-03-2014, 11:36 AM
On the topic of climbing:

A year ago I had opened a discussion about the ape-like climbing in AC III in a German forum. My arguments where similar to yours, Sushiglutton. The extremely fast climbing looks superhuman, makes thinking about a climbable route almost unnecessary. And in the end you get no feeling of accomplishment from scaling even a high cliff or building.

And then there is - for me - an aesthetic side to it: the person climbing like this looks not human but rather like an ape. Not a good thing in a game of this type, I think. :)

Unfortunately, in that discussion most people were indifferent about my complaints. People - sometimes you really have to force them to what's good for them ... :p


I think it's easy to forget how it felt in the old games. But if someone first climbed the cathedral in Acre (as Sixkeys suggested) and then right after the cathedral in Havanna I would be very suprised if people did not agree with us. It's just such a hugely different sense of scale and weight that has a fairly big impact on the experience.

jeffies04
03-03-2014, 11:42 AM
There are those players who thought back to climbing those giant steeples in Acre, "dang this is taking forever. Why can't I just climb up the building," and on the aesthetics side, "why does every other step and body movement he's taking look identical to the last one?" Climbing and exploring the different layers of the city was something that was fresh and new in AC1 and maybe even AC2, it was a major thing going for it.

Me, personally, I'm over having to think about the climbing. Get me up the building. Make it look cool. I don't want to plunge to my death because I calculated the wrong step or held the wrong button on a climb that took me 3-5 minutes. There's so much more to the games these days that I'm not playing it to climb steeples. But I do think the new climbing styles look pretty awesome. Maybe not 100% realistic, but I wouldn't call it ape-like. If this game simulated everything about real life and didn't take me to some level of fantasy it would be the last thing I would want to play.

Just throwing another side of the coin out there. :)

Farlander1991
03-03-2014, 11:43 AM
You are right, when standing at the edge or near enough to it, this works. Maybe I can get used to it, don't know yet. But the way it worked pre AC III to me still seems more "natural". (I became aware of the old "short jump" by chance; I don't think the same could have happened with the current control scheme ...)

Yeah.

To be honest, though, both parkour systems are versatile enough in their own right, both parkour systems have got their share of control problems and annoyances, and both don't utilize their cool features enough in the level/world design.

Sushiglutton
03-03-2014, 11:57 AM
There are those players who thought back to climbing those giant steeples in Acre, "dang this is taking forever. Why can't I just climb up the building," and on the aesthetics side, "why does every other step and body movement he's taking look identical to the last one?" Climbing and exploring the different layers of the city was something that was fresh and new in AC1 and maybe even AC2, it was a major thing going for it.

Me, personally, I'm over having to think about the climbing. Get me up the building. Make it look cool. I don't want to plunge to my death because I calculated the wrong step or held the wrong button on a climb that took me 3-5 minutes. There's so much more to the games these days that I'm not playing it to climb steeples. But I do think the new climbing styles look pretty awesome. Maybe not 100% realistic, but I wouldn't call it ape-like. If this game simulated everything about real life and didn't take me to some level of fantasy it would be the last thing I would want to play.

Just throwing another side of the coin out there. :)


Fair enough :). To me climbing around ancient cities is the core feature of AC and I don't think I'll ever get tired of it. But for me to enjoy it more it needs to become more interactive and climbing the highest building should feel like some sort of accomplishment. Not hard, but soemthing more than holding-the-stick-forward that we have now.

That some moves look identical in AC1 is to me a seperate issue. AC3 is better animated overall, no doubt about that. As for how realistic it is, that's not really why I prefer the AC1 pace. I know nothing about climbing buildings and can't say what's realistic or not. I just think the pace in AC1 feels much better. You even have the time to look down every now and then which is awesome.

shobhit7777777
03-03-2014, 12:56 PM
Sushi, I completely get your POV. Climbing is too automated these days. The issue, personally, is not with the pace....but the degree of control that has been sacrficed

Climbing in the Pre-AC3 games was an engaging activity

The player's decisions mattered and you had to be involved. I enjoyed charting a path...I enjoyed getting stuck and then looking around for a way up. It was immersive in that sense and ultimately more rewarding.

Furthermore, the system was accessible and streamlined. It wasn't overtly complex or dense. It struck the right balance between demanding enough input and at the same time being automated enough to NOT make you feel like an idiot or exacerbate the human-avatar disconnect.

That said....I REALLY like the fluidity of animations and the fact that the Assassins in AC3/4 move so fast as they are running around. I feel that some aspects of the automation are great.....its very seamless and your focus is on charting a path and feeling awesome

I personally feel that we can have a system which incorporates the best of both worlds - The fluidity and agility of AC3/4 and the Legacy levels of engagement

The game should allow us to do certain overt actions manually...actions like:

1. Ledge grab leap - Its the move (introduced in AC2?) where you press up and jump....and Ezio leaps up to grab a ledge...which is out of arm's reach. This would increase the level of interaction and control...in a good way. Right now....you just fly up.

2. Mid-leap grab - its the move you do while falling...where your assassin extends his arm and tries to grab the nearest geometry. Currently, you just jump full on and your Assassin does the rest....grabs automatically. The option should be given to the player - fall or grab on? This would remove some stickiness from the running where it can be painful to get down to street level in a hurry

I think the two actions above might enhance the experience without making it a complete cluster****

Farlander1991
03-03-2014, 01:07 PM
2. Mid-leap grab - its the move you do while falling...where your assassin extends his arm and tries to grab the nearest geometry. Currently, you just jump full on and your Assassin does the rest....grabs automatically. The option should be given to the player - fall or grab on? This would remove some stickiness from the running where it can be painful to get down to street level in a hurry

But this works just like in the previous games - if the jump is unsafe then you can grab (or not) depending on if you're holding the high profile button (basically the high profile button acts as the 'grab' button and the direction you're grabbing). And safe jumps were automatic in previous games as well (I mean, both safe and unsafe jumps are performed with the same button combination in previous games, but there's still differentiation).

shobhit7777777
03-03-2014, 01:42 PM
But this works just like in the previous games - if the jump is unsafe then you can grab (or not) depending on if you're holding the high profile button (basically the high profile button acts as the 'grab' button and the direction you're grabbing). And safe jumps were automatic in previous games as well (I mean, both safe and unsafe jumps are performed with the same button combination in previous games, but there's still differentiation).

WTF? Really?

Well, there needs to be a quick tutorial section explaining the nuances...especially if they change the system. Besides, I'd prefer the Circle button being used for that function...as a throwback to the puppeteering system

Farlander1991
03-03-2014, 01:48 PM
WTF? Really?

Well, there needs to be a quick tutorial section explaining the nuances...especially if they change the system. Besides, I'd prefer the Circle button being used for that function...as a throwback to the puppeteering system

Yeah, you can even do the side jumps (I mean the jump to the side parallel to the building and then grab the face of the building again; in case of AC3/AC4 by pressing high profile, instead of grab like it was previously, and the direction towards the building), though that's trickier when there's a close safe spot to land (but IIRC it would be like that in previous games too).

I've discovered that accidentally when I dropped myself from a cliff in AC3 and was freaking out because I thought the grab button was removed so I just started doing everything I can, and then figured out that it's the high profile that's responsible for this. (Also a similiar situation happened on the belltower of Havana's southern church in AC4, lol).

I actually don't know why the puppeteering system is called the puppeteering system still, since it's not a puppeteering system at all since AC3 (it kinda started to become a non-puppeteering system in ACR, actually, though still actions for the most part were assigned similar to previous ACs).

Sushiglutton
03-03-2014, 02:00 PM
Sushi, I completely get your POV. Climbing is too automated these days. The issue, personally, is not with the pace....but the degree of control that has been sacrficed

Climbing in the Pre-AC3 games was an engaging activity

The player's decisions mattered and you had to be involved. I enjoyed charting a path...I enjoyed getting stuck and then looking around for a way up. It was immersive in that sense and ultimately more rewarding.

Furthermore, the system was accessible and streamlined. It wasn't overtly complex or dense. It struck the right balance between demanding enough input and at the same time being automated enough to NOT make you feel like an idiot or exacerbate the human-avatar disconnect.

That said....I REALLY like the fluidity of animations and the fact that the Assassins in AC3/4 move so fast as they are running around. I feel that some aspects of the automation are great.....its very seamless and your focus is on charting a path and feeling awesome

I personally feel that we can have a system which incorporates the best of both worlds - The fluidity and agility of AC3/4 and the Legacy levels of engagement

The game should allow us to do certain overt actions manually...actions like:

1. Ledge grab leap - Its the move (introduced in AC2?) where you press up and jump....and Ezio leaps up to grab a ledge...which is out of arm's reach. This would increase the level of interaction and control...in a good way. Right now....you just fly up.

2. Mid-leap grab - its the move you do while falling...where your assassin extends his arm and tries to grab the nearest geometry. Currently, you just jump full on and your Assassin does the rest....grabs automatically. The option should be given to the player - fall or grab on? This would remove some stickiness from the running where it can be painful to get down to street level in a hurry

I think the two actions above might enhance the experience without making it a complete cluster****


Sorry if I'm repeating myself (and I noticed you said "personally"), but to me the pacing is def part of the problem. Even when I climb straight up in AC1 it still feels better. Climbing in AC1 feels like it's higher resolution, denser and I like the way Altair methodically picks one grip after another. This may sound nerdy, but I feel a lot more connected to the surface in AC1 than I ever do in AC3-4. And since it is no real interactivity in eiter case it has to do with the pacing.

As for adding more interactivity I'm all for it. I think one of the biggest issue with AC3 was that the mechanics were designed like smartphone UIs. It seems to me like they iterated and iterated trying to remove every unnecessary button press they could. That is awesome for smartphones, but a disastrous way to design a game imo. The goal is to give the illusion that the player is performing the things on screen and you can't do that by throwing all interactivity out the window.

Sorry I know you allready knew these things, I just get a bit emotional when I think back at the sins of AC3 lol.

Anyway I think your ideas for interactivity are great. I think you should be able to do the Ledge grab leap also diagonally and straight left or right, which for some building should be the only way to climb them. If you fail you may fall down a bit (obv it should be forgiving). They could also play some with ropes, window shutters that suddenly opens (you need to hold circle to not fall) and so on.

About point 2 I also missed that one for a long time :D. I think it was Farlander who explained it to me too. Anyway I agree with you that there's no reason to have moved it from circle, so the joke is on them really ;)!

jdowny
03-03-2014, 02:18 PM
1. Ledge grab leap - Its the move (introduced in AC2?) where you press up and jump....and Ezio leaps up to grab a ledge...which is out of arm's reach. This would increase the level of interaction and control...in a good way. Right now....you just fly up.

2. Mid-leap grab - its the move you do while falling...where your assassin extends his arm and tries to grab the nearest geometry. Currently, you just jump full on and your Assassin does the rest....grabs automatically. The option should be given to the player - fall or grab on? This would remove some stickiness from the running where it can be painful to get down to street level in a hurry

Agreed - so really, we're talking about Ezio's sort of climbing here - that was the happy medium I think we all like, though with minor updates here and there like animation.

Speaking of animation though, was anyone annoyed by the jumping animations of AC III and IV? When I first saw them, I thought there was something odd about them. I didn't particularly like the clumsy way that Connor/Edward would throw themselves through the air waving their hands to steady themselves. It was a long way from the elegant, balletic leaps of Altair and Ezio and Haytham. But okay - they wanted to show that Connor had a heavier, more brutal and powerful style of fighting, running and climbing compared with the precision of other assassins - I'm okay with that.

But when I watched the series about the making of AC III I realised why it looked odd. For some reason they didn't feel that the jumping abilities of the mo-cap actors looked cool enough, so they launched them through the air with pneumatic springs. Aside from making absolutely super-human leaps, this results in horrible animation when the player is jumping across small gaps - like a series of beams placed a metre apart. From a standing/crouched position, they go from 0mph to 10mph then straight back to 0. Besides moving too fast for this sort of movement, there's next to no transition between being still and jumping. Altair and Ezio's animations felt smooth and feasible.

The best example to illustrate this is in AC III in Connor's village. In the main Mohawk hut where the Chieftain sits, there are a series of beams above. Try jumping between these and you'll see. Just wondered if anyone had noticed or was bothered by this as well.

Farlander1991
03-03-2014, 02:26 PM
Doesn't Haytham have the same free-running animations as Connor?

At any rate, I didn't notice any sudden transition or unsmooth jumping in AC3/AC4. Heck, when it comes to the animations themselves, I prefer them so much more to the previous games (just the sheer variety of it) and never felt that there was something off (at least not in relation to other jumps from the same game). And animation transitions were always awesome, be it during simple running, or free-running. But that may be very subjective.

Speaking of mo-cap though, launching mo-cap actors doesn't have anything to do with the speed (also, it doesn't mean that the entire mo-cap animation is used, most likely just parts of it that are suitable), speed is determined by the movement programming part, broadly speaking. You don't start an animation that moves the character jump from point A to point B - you move the character from point A to B and then play an appropriate animation during that action, the animation itself is technically static (which allows to make everything uniform and of right speed). Also the reason the mo-cap actors were launched in the first place was to be able to have longer falling animations for reference (since the distance may vary from normal jumping due to the difference between height of the jump).

Farlander1991
03-03-2014, 02:33 PM
When it comes to animation, the only thing that pisses me off a lot is the climbing stairsteps. AC3/AC4 doesn't differentiate between stairs and hills, so people climb stairs as they'd climb hills, skipping two-three stairsteps in a step. This is not that noticeable for the main character, but NPCs doing with... especially elegantly walking women with umbrellas... If there's a criticism I have regarding AC3 animation - then it's that.

jdowny
03-03-2014, 02:43 PM
Doesn't Haytham have the same free-running animations as Connor?

Nope, they're entirely different, and imitate Ezio and Altair's way of jumping and falling. Which was actually a nice touch to the game. He even has different sprinting animations as well as some unique fighting and vaulting techniques.


Speaking of mo-cap though, launching mo-cap actors doesn't have anything to do with the speed (also, it doesn't mean that the entire mo-cap animation is used, most likely just parts of it that are suitable), speed is determined by the movement programming part, broadly speaking. You don't start an animation that moves the character jump from point A to point B - you move the character from point A to B and then play an appropriate animation during that action, the animation itself is technically static (which allows to make everything uniform and of right speed). Also the reason the mo-cap actors were launched in the first place was to be able to have longer falling animations for reference (since the distance may vary from normal jumping due to the difference between height of the jump).

I realise that, but there's an aspect of matching up the distance the mo-cap actors jump to the distance the player jumps in the game. If the distance jumped in the game is too short, these animations look awkward and jarring. But the use of pneumatics to push the mo-cap actors looks to me very unnatural. It doesn't look as though they're using their own body - it looks, unsurprisingly, as though they're being vaulted through the air. The body doesn't react in the same way at all. It's reacting against the push and trying to balance itself instead of moving fluidly.

It's hard to explain what I mean though, so the best example I can think of to demonstrate this is the one I mentioned in the Mowhawk village in AC III. There are countless others, but this is the simplest one to explain.

Farlander1991
03-03-2014, 02:52 PM
Nope, they're entirely different, and imitate Ezio and Altair's way of jumping and falling. Which was actually a nice touch to the game. He even has different sprinting animations as well as some unique fighting and vaulting techniques.

Hm, that's cool. I thought only the combat and walking was different.


I realise that, but there's an aspect of matching up the distance the mo-cap actors jump to the distance the player jumps in the game.

AC3 (and 4) has a whole system that decides which animations to use depending on the distance and height of the jump. While I do agree that there may be spots where animations look off (because, let's say, the distance was only just slightly larger than the threshold but the character used the unfitting animation regardless), I think for the most part they work incredibly well (which considering the sheer size of the AC3/4s worlds and the fact that the grid patterns are a lot more variative than in previous game due to the system where the character dynamically counts the distance of actions rather than having a strict guideline for each action, is incredibly impressive).

jdowny
03-03-2014, 03:42 PM
AC3 (and 4) has a whole system that decides which animations to use depending on the distance and height of the jump. While I do agree that there may be spots where animations look off (because, let's say, the distance was only just slightly larger than the threshold but the character used the unfitting animation regardless), I think for the most part they work incredibly well (which considering the sheer size of the AC3/4s worlds and the fact that the grid patterns are a lot more variative than in previous game due to the system where the character dynamically counts the distance of actions rather than having a strict guideline for each action, is incredibly impressive).

It's less that the distance is larger than the threshold and more that it's smaller. I don't have the vocabulary or the knowledge to describe the exact details of what's happening and why it looks wrong, but it's as though on these smaller gaps the animation isn't quite completing - as though because of the short distance and fast speed with which the character is moving, it can only show a fraction of the full animation. As a result, when moving across this sort of 'stepping stone' design, the animation stutters. These leaping animations work fine across huge gaps because you can get the full swing of it, but it's as though they didn't animate for the sorts of 'stepping stone' gaps I've mentioned. Let me know if anyone gets a chance to go the the Mowhawk camp and try it - someone might be able to better explain what's happening with it.

Are you still planning on doing your analysis of AC IV Farlander?

Megas_Doux
03-03-2014, 05:16 PM
Pretty good and respectful exchange of opinions in this thread!
Nice!

ACHILLES4713
03-04-2014, 12:17 AM
People - sometimes you really have to force them to what's good for them ... :p

I smell a Templar in our midst. ;)

Farlander1991
03-05-2014, 09:47 AM
It's less that the distance is larger than the threshold and more that it's smaller. I don't have the vocabulary or the knowledge to describe the exact details of what's happening and why it looks wrong, but it's as though on these smaller gaps the animation isn't quite completing - as though because of the short distance and fast speed with which the character is moving, it can only show a fraction of the full animation. As a result, when moving across this sort of 'stepping stone' design, the animation stutters. These leaping animations work fine across huge gaps because you can get the full swing of it, but it's as though they didn't animate for the sorts of 'stepping stone' gaps I've mentioned. Let me know if anyone gets a chance to go the the Mowhawk camp and try it - someone might be able to better explain what's happening with it.

Are you still planning on doing your analysis of AC IV Farlander?

I have checked the Mohawk camp and see what you mean, although it looks weird more because there are so many planks close to eachother, a single short jump by itself looks normal to me (especially when in variation with a lot of other surfaces). I think this is more of an exception than the rule, though, hey, the system can always be improved :)

I have started doing a few things for it, but as I already said, it may take a very unspecified amount of time :(

BoBwUzHeRe1138
03-05-2014, 11:49 AM
It's also how you climb too.

You used to have more input and had to do a slight bit more of work. Now the game more or less just...DOES it. I miss the old style of climbing. That said.. AC still has the best climbing mechanic AND aesthetic around. Second place I'd have to give to Shadow of Mordor, the first game to emulate AC's climbing mechanics and do it justice. Other games like the Saboteur did what AC did with climbable buildings but have LAAAAAAME animations.