PDA

View Full Version : So...Hutchinson is directing Far Cry 4...



killzab
06-06-2014, 07:56 AM
That means he's not anywhere near AC :D

Now let's see Far Cry 4 fail.

BTW I am perfectly fine with Amancio being the director on Unity.

king-hailz
06-06-2014, 08:29 AM
http://www.gameinformer.com/b/news/archive/2014/06/04/assassin-s-creed-revelations-creative-director-returns-for-unity.aspx

Well watch the video on this site were amancio talk about how he approaches story telling...
To be honest revelations had the best storytelling out of all of the games so far. He added things that were lost im AC3. For example at the end when you walk as old altair shutting out all the lights and at the end when you sit to 'rest' i think that worked perfectly... especially mixed with darby's incredible writing making it one of the greatest moments in AC.

However i know people have certain problems with that game which are understandable since the gameplay didnt really change after brotherhood and the changes that were made were quite bad, like tower defense. But people forget that he only had about 9 months making that game because it was initially meant for the DS. So he kind of had to thinknof new ideas to make it different from brotherhood.

So if he had 9 months to make that imagine what he could do with 3 and a half years...

shobhit7777777
06-06-2014, 08:34 AM
Alex Amancio on ACU is the best damn news I've heard in a while.

The guy had a handle on what makes AC tick. The only AC which got the formula right.

killzab
06-06-2014, 08:34 AM
Alex Amancio on ACU is the best damn news I've heard in a while.

The guy had a handle on what makes AC tick. The only AC which got the formula right.

+100000

Farlander1991
06-06-2014, 08:43 AM
Hutchinson is a cool guy who knows his stuff. I know that because I talked to him :p So for anyone wondering 'how the **** does he get new jobs' - that's why, he knows his stuff. People tend to say 'look at his track record' without knowing what's behind the track record.

Spore? That thing had two project managers per evolution stage (with conflicting creative views), the organization was a mess as a whole, putting blame on Hutchinson alone is... well... stupid. (Not to mention, the game didn't turn out to be that bad, just disappointing in relation to Maxis' promises). I'm actually not entirely sure about Hutchinson's role in it, because I didn't talk to him about any of the projects specifically, know about Spore's troubled development from other people.
Army of Two? A perfectly solid game. Nothing incredibly amazing, but solid.
Then there's Assassin's Creed 3. An INCREDIBLY ambitious game with a HUGE team. That, with all its flaws and whatnot, is still a good game in general. The amount of things that had to be done for that game were enormous, and yes, not always the creative choices were the best (but, have in mind, a lot of times choices are not as much 'creative' as they are 'we'll have to do this instead of what we really want due to certain reasons', and sometimes you just have to go with the choices you first made because it would be bad production-wise to change them, even if you know yourself that the choice wasn't the best), and the game was too ambitious for its own good (that it led to a lot of things becoming more subpar than they should've been). But it's got a lot going for it and is average at least.

So we have a game that was a mess of development as a whole (no one in particular to blame, just a mess), a solid title and a letdown (but still not bad). Don't see a reason for the 'FC4 is going to fail' prophecy.

Sushiglutton
06-06-2014, 09:18 AM
I don't think it's classy to go on a personal attack like that. After all we have no insight into who decided what (except in some special cases). I agree that AC3 had some fundamentally very poor ideas/direction. I don't know who to blame for them (and I don't really care). I think it's better to describe what you didn't like than to point fingers at specific developers.



Alex Amancio on ACU is the best damn news I've heard in a while.

The guy had a handle on what makes AC tick. The only AC which got the formula right.


Yeah renovating shops, gimped strategy games and infuriating first-person platforming is the heart and soul of AC.

Mwahahahhahahaaahhahahaha

Farlander1991
06-06-2014, 09:20 AM
Yeah renovating shops

To be fair, that one's Patrice :p

Sushiglutton
06-06-2014, 09:27 AM
To be fair, that one's Patrice :p

Yeah it was first introduced in Brotherhood, which was bad enough. To do it all again, I mean that's just plain evil.

shobhit7777777
06-06-2014, 09:38 AM
Yeah renovating shops, gimped strategy games and infuriating first-person platforming is the heart and soul of AC.

Mwahahahhahahaaahhahahaha

Hiding in bushes and sinking ships sure as **** ain't

Templar Dens - Systemic Gameplay - Understanding of how core pillars work together.

Ubisoft unearthed quality AC gameplay a while ago - 2011 - with ACR. Which is why you have stealth gameplay suited for Far Cry/SC in a game where the AI is designed around Social Stealth in urban environments...and other ridiculous design decisions.

After WD...I'm getting burned out on Ubisoft's games and their consistent effing up of the core concept, pedestrian and unimaginative design choices and a terrible trend of "optimizing" the experience.

Ubi's concepts are game changers on paper...on execution...Ubi chickens out and ****s up. LCD design. They REALLY need to pull their socks up and grow a pair.

Note: To elaborate how ****ed up the situation is - Farcry 2 and 3 along with Splinter Cell Conviction got so many elements right....so many brilliant design choices - A few years down the line....and it seems that they have plateaued and forgotten their own lessons.

Its schizo I tell ya

killzab
06-06-2014, 09:41 AM
I don't think it's classy to go on a personal attack like that. After all we have no insight into who decided what (except in some special cases). I agree that AC3 had some fundamentally very poor ideas/direction. I don't know who to blame for them (and I don't really care). I think it's better to describe what you didn't like than to point fingers at specific developers.





Yeah renovating shops, gimped strategy games and infuriating first-person platforming is the heart and soul of AC.

Mwahahahhahahaaahhahahaha

Think of it this way ... do you think if Hutchinson and Ashraf switched games, ACIII and ACIV would've been the same ? I don't.

Aphex_Tim
06-06-2014, 09:44 AM
Where is all this Hutchinson "hate" coming from? I see it all the time! Give the dude a chance.
Spore and AC3 being kind of disappointing is more to blame on the massive hype these games got.

Edit: Okay, how the hell did replying to a post create a whole new thread?

shobhit7777777
06-06-2014, 09:46 AM
What the hell happened? I didn't start this thread....

Aphex_Tim
06-06-2014, 09:48 AM
The forums work in mysterious ways....

killzab
06-06-2014, 09:48 AM
Lol why'd you copy my thread ?

Fatal-Feit
06-06-2014, 09:48 AM
Yeah it was first introduced in Brotherhood, which was bad enough. To do it all again, I mean that's just plain evil.

The progression system was something Brotherhood nailed perfectly, even if they were mostly gimmicks. That's something AC:3 and AC:IV, despite being my favorites, desparately needed to improve. Sure, they had a 100% bar, but it really didn't do anything aside from cosmetics and digits. All it did was partially fulfill the completionist in all of us, but it never made us feel as satisfied.

Almost everything in the Ezio Trilogy had a progression formula and while some of us ,such as myself, would agree that it was repetitive and overused, we still enjoyed it and it made us feel really good at the end of the day. Hopping off after completing a mission/quest for gold and then renovating a few shops in a district, another ammo pouch, a spanking new sword was something addictive and satisfying. Although, I might just be speaking for myself.

It doesn't have to be renovations, but I'd dig something almost as addictive or even better.

Aphex_Tim
06-06-2014, 09:49 AM
I'll try again here then.....

Where is all this Hutchinson "hate" coming from? I see it all the time! Give the dude a chance.
Spore and AC3 being kind of disappointing is more to blame on the massive hype these games got.

Fatal-Feit
06-06-2014, 09:52 AM
Someone's been playing too much Watch_Dogs...

Locopells
06-06-2014, 09:54 AM
OK, not sure WHAT happened there, but we are one thread again...

king-hailz
06-06-2014, 10:06 AM
http://www.gameinformer.com/b/news/archive/2014/06/04/assassin-s-creed-revelations-creative-director-returns-for-unity.aspx

Well watch the video on this site were amancio talk about how he approaches story telling...
To be honest revelations had the best storytelling out of all of the games so far. He added things that were lost im AC3. For example at the end when you walk as old altair shutting out all the lights and at the end when you sit to 'rest' i think that worked perfectly... especially mixed with darby's incredible writing making it one of the greatest moments in AC.

However i know people have certain problems with that game which are understandable since the gameplay didnt really change after brotherhood and the changes that were made were quite bad, like tower defense. But people forget that he only had about 9 months making that game because it was initially meant for the DS. So he kind of had to thinknof new ideas to make it different from brotherhood.

So if he had 9 months to make that imagine what he could do with 3 and a half years...

Farlander1991
06-06-2014, 10:08 AM
Think of it this way ... do you think if Hutchinson and Ashraf switched games, ACIII and ACIV would've been the same ? I don't.

But if Ashraf and Hutchinson switched games, it doesn't mean by default that ACIII would've been better than ACIV. ACIII could still have been a huge letdown and ACIV - improvement in a lot of ways.

EDIT: Case in point, Ashraf was the LEad Designer on the game WET. I haven't played it, so don't have personal opinion, but overall it wasn't really well received neither by players nor critics (not badly either, though, simply average). There are a LOT of gears going on in game development, so quality of the game is not as binary as 'the person who is the creative director'.

Sushiglutton
06-06-2014, 10:46 AM
Hiding in bushes and sinking ships sure as **** ain't

Templar Dens - Systemic Gameplay - Understanding of how core pillars work together.

Ubisoft unearthed quality AC gameplay a while ago - 2011 - with ACR. Which is why you have stealth gameplay suited for Far Cry/SC in a game where the AI is designed around Social Stealth in urban environments...and other ridiculous design decisions.


Disagree! Don't see what's wrong with hiding in a bush. Naval blends very well with the other gameplay pillars! Both climbing and combat are implemented seamlessly into naval (it would be very hard to play a game with ship combat that doesn't have AC quality climbing after AC3-4). It's a third-person action game style activity. Ofc it's not what Altair would have done, but AC was always gonna add new mechanics based on era and setting.

Den defence was a completely seperate thing that had nothing to do with the rest of the game.

I don't think social stealth is particulary interesting in AC:R (or in AC in general). It's just a reskin of normal stealth that looks kind of ridiculous a lot of the time. I enjoyed the plantations more than the dens in AC:R.



After WD...I'm getting burned out on Ubisoft's games and their consistent effing up of the core concept, pedestrian and unimaginative design choices and a terrible trend of "optimizing" the experience.

Ubi's concepts are game changers on paper...on execution...Ubi chickens out and ****s up. LCD design. They REALLY need to pull their socks up and grow a pair.

Note: To elaborate how ****ed up the situation is - Farcry 2 and 3 along with Splinter Cell Conviction got so many elements right....so many brilliant design choices - A few years down the line....and it seems that they have plateaued and forgotten their own lessons.

Its schizo I tell ya

This I comletely agree with though. Ubi frequently has fantastic concepts, but they shoot themselves in the foot a lot. They make the mechanics/content so simplistic that it becomes mundane. And to compenste they add tons and tons of it (to give "value" to the consumer). This makes their games feel factory made and bloodless.



The progression system was something Brotherhood nailed perfectly, even if they were mostly gimmicks. That's something AC:3 and AC:IV, despite being my favorites, desparately needed to improve. Sure, they had a 100% bar, but it really didn't do anything aside from cosmetics and digits. All it did was partially fulfill the completionist in all of us, but it never made us feel as satisfied.

Almost everything in the Ezio Trilogy had a progression formula and while some of us ,such as myself, would agree that it was repetitive and overused, we still enjoyed it and it made us feel really good at the end of the day. Hopping off after completing a mission/quest for gold and then renovating a few shops in a district, another ammo pouch, a spanking new sword was something addictive and satisfying. Although, I might just be speaking for myself.

It doesn't have to be renovations, but I'd dig something almost as addictive or even better.


Disagree with a lot here as well :). Brotherhood far from nailed progression imo. It was tedious as hell. I think both AC3 and AC4 had better progression mechanics. I agree with you do that AC focus too much on creating checklists for 100% which isn't the best direction imo. As I always say: Robust core mechanics and content built aroound them, that's the way!

pacmanate
06-06-2014, 11:07 AM
How can you be so naive to think that Hutchinson was the reason that people didn't like the WHOLE game.

LoyalACFan
06-06-2014, 11:23 AM
I honestly believe that Hutchinson has a handle on what he's doing. Probably more so than Amancio. Think of it this way... Take all of the aspects of AC3 that fell short. Liberation contracts, homestead missions, hunting mechanics, sloppy storytelling. If the game had been given a few more months of development time (and the full dev team it was intended to have) I truly think that those aspects would have turned out fine. Now look at the things ACR got wrong; hookblade, Den Defense, cheesy exotic missions, FP Desmond block puzzles, and The Lost Archive. Even if ACR had gotten another full year, those things still would have been stupid. ACR's only saving graces were the story (which is more thanks to Darby than Amancio) and the aspects which were basically copy-pasted from Brotherhood.

Granted, I know Revelations only had a 9-month dev cycle, and I appreciate the fact that Amancio had very little time and resources to work with. But virtually every new thing that Revelations offered was broken or out of place in an AC game. Brotherhood was one of the most critically-acclaimed games of 2010; Revelations didn't really NEED any new gimmicks. A whole new setting and the "final chapters of Altair and Ezio" tagline would have been enough to pass it off, riding on ACB's shoulders. If all the new gimmicks had been scrapped and those man-hours redirected toward making, say, a couple more Altair missions, ACR would have been a vastly better game.

I'm being somewhat disingenuous by boiling down the entire development process to one man, but the way I see it, Hutchinson = visionary whose resources were unexpectedly limited due to ACB and ACR, while Amancio = the guy who shoehorned in a bunch of needless new gimmickry instead of focusing on a solid core experience. I'm willing to give Amancio another chance with Unity since he was admittedly forced to rush ACR to market, but I still have much more faith in Hutchinson.

shobhit7777777
06-06-2014, 12:27 PM
Disagree! Don't see what's wrong with hiding in a bush. Naval blends very well with the other gameplay pillars! Both climbing and combat are implemented seamlessly into naval (it would be very hard to play a game with ship combat that doesn't have AC quality climbing after AC3-4). It's a third-person action game style activity. Ofc it's not what Altair would have done, but AC was always gonna add new mechanics based on era and setting.


Thats the problem - Adding new mechanics without improving the existing stuff.

Nothing inherently wrong with bush hiding ( I indulge in it on a daily basis) what does matter is if a specific feature suits the game.

AC started out as this open world assassin game with heavy simulation elements (Social acceptability?) to deliver an urban Assassin experience. Thats the core concept...thats what everything is geared towards (Freerunning and climbing...the USP of the game - rests on urban environments). AI behaviour is designed around tight urban environments and blending in. Heck there was a button devoted to moving through crowds (beautiful)

The devs added stealth - but a different kind...one at odds with the core gameplay and CONCEPT (Blade in the crowd). Damn near every game lets you slink around crouched...not many let you move through a dense market, stalking your unaware prey.

Now...it'd be disingenous of me to say that crouching/los stealth stuff is BAD...nope its good....but it should complement the social stealth gameplay..beef it up. SS gameplay has been largely neglected.

Can social stealth be fun in and of itself? Well...can sitting in a shadow be fun?

In Stealth games, the hiding mechanic - central element - shouldn't be about the mechanic itself but the OPPORTUNITIES and GAMEPLAY EXPERIENCE it opens up

Splinter Cell lets me be the shadowy panther
AC should let me be the blade in the crowd

Social Stealth allows greater mobility and a different set of options...not to mention all dem feels. AC should capitalize on that

Coming back to ACR - It was beautiful because the Templar Dens were sandboxes IN AN URBAN setting where social stealth was a completely viable approach in terms of exploration and planning and even execution

The current crop of games...they resort to non-urban settings where Social Stealth is not a viable approach...now AC4 can get away with it partially because of the setting...but overall..the franchise needs to revise its vision.



I don't think social stealth is particulary interesting in AC:R (or in AC in general). It's just a reskin of normal stealth that looks kind of ridiculous a lot of the time. I enjoyed the plantations more than the dens in AC:R.

Fair enough....I seriously hope Ubi does BOTH forms well. Bush hiding isn't as appealing to me. SS feels more sneaky, in line with the AC concept and is a very different experience.


This I comletely agree with though. Ubi frequently has fantastic concepts, but they shoot themselves in the foot a lot. They make the mechanics/content so simplistic that it becomes mundane. And to compenste they add tons and tons of it (to give "value" to the consumer). This makes their games feel factory made and bloodless.

*Hugs*

Farlander1991
06-06-2014, 12:31 PM
As a Game Designer, I know plenty of situations when something seems awesome and then months later you feel 'what was I thinking?!'

Short development cycles frequently lead to decisions that can't always be properly thought out, and the fact that we're dealing with big budget games here means that you have to stick with those decisions anyway. Long development cycles can be no better. So both ACR and AC3 situations were tricky in a way (AC3 also faced a dilemma of wanting to be a very epic ending but as it turned out not having exactly the amount of resources needed to be so).

But there's also one very important quality, btw, that both Hutchinson and Amancio have. And that is leading a group of several hundred people to a completed project, as cohesive as possible given all the blocks on the road. That is a quality you simply can't find in everybody, so it's understandable why Ubi trusts both Hutchinson and Amancio with new big projects.

Tenvern
06-06-2014, 01:50 PM
It's incredibly silly to think Hutchinson was the reason people didn't like AC3.
The game didn't have one set flaw but was combined of several, it's unlikely he was the reason for all of them.
I don't think this forum is a place where you should go on what comes off as an almost personal attack at someone because you didn't like the previous game they directed.

killzab
06-06-2014, 01:59 PM
It's incredibly silly to think Hutchinson was the reason people didn't like AC3.
The game didn't have one set flaw but was combined of several, it's unlikely he was the reason for all of them.
I don't think this forum is a place where you should go on what comes off as an almost personal attack at someone because you didn't like the previous game they directed.

Ah ah so much hypocrisy from these forums.

I have seen Amancio being despised so many times here, but suddenly it's wrong to criticize Hutchinson ?

I remember someone posted a photo of Amancio on a thread and everyone was like "please lord purify this thread".

m4r-k7
06-06-2014, 02:01 PM
I love AC for the fact that it doesn't let you crouch whenever you want. I like walking through the crowds. Nothing gave me greater satisfaction than in AC 1 (and AC 2) when you would move throughout the crowd getting closer and closer to your target. I also think that walking in a badass fashion looks a lot cooler than merely crouching.

Farlander1991
06-06-2014, 02:02 PM
Ah ah so much hypocrisy from these forums.

It's hypocrisy only if the same people did it. As far as I'm aware people are consistent when it comes to their personal hates over here :p It's just different people hate the different person (and some, well, don't hate anybody)

killzab
06-06-2014, 02:03 PM
It's hypocrisy only if the same people did it. As far as I'm aware people are consistent when it comes to their personal hates over here :p

Indeed I am, I love Corey, Patrice, Jean and Ashraf.

I HATE Darby and Hutchinson.

I don't mind Alex Amancio., I even like him I think.

shobhit7777777
06-06-2014, 02:18 PM
Indeed I am, I love Corey, Patrice, Jean and Ashraf.

I HATE Darby and Hutchinson.

I don't mind Alex Amancio., I even like him I think.

How can you hate them? Thats a very strong emotion. You can disagree with them...but hate?

killzab
06-06-2014, 02:22 PM
How can you hate them? Thats a very strong emotion. You can disagree with them...but hate?

Maybe I don't hate Hutchinson, but I just dislike his work.

I actually hate Darby though. I even clashed with him directly.

SpiritOfNevaeh
06-06-2014, 02:39 PM
I honestly believe that Hutchinson has a handle on what he's doing. Probably more so than Amancio. Think of it this way... Take all of the aspects of AC3 that fell short. Liberation contracts, homestead missions, hunting mechanics, sloppy storytelling. If the game had been given a few more months of development time (and the full dev team it was intended to have) I truly think that those aspects would have turned out fine. Now look at the things ACR got wrong; hookblade, Den Defense, cheesy exotic missions, FP Desmond block puzzles, and The Lost Archive. Even if ACR had gotten another full year, those things still would have been stupid. ACR's only saving graces were the story (which is more thanks to Darby than Amancio) and the aspects which were basically copy-pasted from Brotherhood.

Granted, I know Revelations only had a 9-month dev cycle, and I appreciate the fact that Amancio had very little time and resources to work with. But virtually every new thing that Revelations offered was broken or out of place in an AC game. Brotherhood was one of the most critically-acclaimed games of 2010; Revelations didn't really NEED any new gimmicks. A whole new setting and the "final chapters of Altair and Ezio" tagline would have been enough to pass it off, riding on ACB's shoulders. If all the new gimmicks had been scrapped and those man-hours redirected toward making, say, a couple more Altair missions, ACR would have been a vastly better game.

I'm being somewhat disingenuous by boiling down the entire development process to one man, but the way I see it, Hutchinson = visionary whose resources were unexpectedly limited due to ACB and ACR, while Amancio = the guy who shoehorned in a bunch of needless new gimmickry instead of focusing on a solid core experience. I'm willing to give Amancio another chance with Unity since he was admittedly forced to rush ACR to market, but I still have much more faith in Hutchinson.

Agreed. Hutchison was a good director; the development team just didn't have the time they wanted, which I think they should've gotten to make the game better, but I still don't know why it was rushed. I would have preferred the game have a delayed release with less glitches than it is now.

He's still with Ubisoft anyway so maybe he'll work on another AC when they need him. but I still have faith in the man.

Sushiglutton
06-06-2014, 02:46 PM
Maybe I don't hate Hutchinson, but I just dislike his work.

I actually hate Darby though. I even clashed with him directly.

Don't know exactly what happened, but you have to put yourself in his shoes a bit. I mean he has poured years of work into these games and the reward from fans is frequently comments like: "another underwhelming generic story" and so on. Now it's ok to be critical (hell I'm critical all the time), but if the developers get a bit defensive, or short at times, I think that's perfectly understandable.

Farlander1991
06-06-2014, 02:53 PM
Hutchison was a good director; the development team just didn't have the time they wanted, which I think they should've gotten to make the game better, but I still don't know why it was rushed.

That AC3 is going to be released in 2012 was known ever since AC1's release in 2007. Well, it wasn't stated outright, but with the satellite launch to be stopped on December 21st, 2012, knowing that the game is going to be released by that date just in time to let the players be the ones who keep the world in a normal shape (although at the time there was no literal end of the world coming, just the metaphorical satellite one) - that's just too good to pass by. So end of 2012 was set as a fix date for AC3 from the get go, when it just started its development early 2010.

But they bit more than they could handle in the end. Which doesn't mean that the end product is bad, but with some lesser goals AC3 as a whole could be much more polished. Still, there's no way they would ever pass on the 2012 release date, since it's been 5 years of waiting both for fans and developers alike.

killzab
06-06-2014, 02:56 PM
Don't know exactly what happened, but you have to put yourself in his shoes a bit. I mean he has poured years of work into these games and the reward from fans is frequently comments like: "another underwhelming generic story" and so on. Now it's ok to be critical (hell I'm critical all the time), but if the developers get a bit defensive, or short at times, I think that's perfectly understandable.

Disrespecting a consumer's opinion, a long time fan's opinion in particular, is not understandable IMO, especially when the criticism was justified and elaborated and not for the sake of hating.

SpiritOfNevaeh
06-06-2014, 03:00 PM
That AC3 is going to be released in 2012 was known ever since AC1's release in 2007. Well, it wasn't stated outright, but with the satellite launch to be stopped on December 21st, 2012, knowing that the game is going to be released by that date just in time to let the players be the ones who keep the world in a normal shape (although at the time there was no literal end of the world coming, just the metaphorical satellite one) - that's just too good to pass by. So end of 2012 was set as a fix date for AC3 from the get go, when it just started its development early 2010.

But they bit more than they could handle in the end. Which doesn't mean that the end product is bad, but with some lesser goals AC3 as a whole could be much more polished. Still, there's no way they would ever pass on the 2012 release date, since it's been 5 years of waiting both for fans and developers alike.

Oh yeah, thats right - that "end of the world" date in-game. That makes sense but true that they did take on more than they can handle. Hopefully they'll learn their lesson next time around.

Sushiglutton
06-06-2014, 03:01 PM
@shobbit: The thing for me is that I'm not really sure how cool the "blade in the crowd" fantasy really is. It's kind of slow, passive, don't want to do anything that stands out (which is what I do most of the time anyway lol). It's fiddly to maneuver when lots of unpredictable humans are doing their things (alternatively it feels robotic). When I board the monk-train in AC1 I just wanna laugh at the whole situation.

I love the "acrobatic running across ancient rooftops beneath a starry sky"-fantasy a lot more.

In general I'm a huge fan of the lone hero thing. I'm no fan of crowds at all though ;).



Disrespecting a consumer's opinion, a long time fan's opinion in particular, is not understandable IMO, especially when the criticism was justified and elaborated and not for the sake of hating.

Like I said I don't know the situation. Suppose he was disrespectful, I just don't think it's enough reason to hate someone (which in my world is pretty strong), especially given the kind of stuff I'm sure he gets a lot of the time. I would just let it go. Darby has overall been extremely generous and patient responding to fans imo.

Farlander1991
06-06-2014, 03:31 PM
Disrespecting a consumer's opinion, a long time fan's opinion in particular, is not understandable IMO, especially when the criticism was justified and elaborated and not for the sake of hating.

You forget the part where Darby carefully explained every creative decision he was asked which was interpreted by said consumers as a middle finger (i.e. put words in his mouth which he never actually said or meant). Said and some other consumers also started saying that he doesn't know what the **** he is doing and all that good stuff. Really respectful, yes.

I think the whole debacle that happened during Q&As showed flaws from all sides, so hating is overreacting.

dxsxhxcx
06-06-2014, 03:34 PM
Agreed. Hutchison was a good director; the development team just didn't have the time they wanted, which I think they should've gotten to make the game better, but I still don't know why it was rushed. I would have preferred the game have a delayed release with less glitches than it is now.

He's still with Ubisoft anyway so maybe he'll work on another AC when they need him. but I still have faith in the man.

I believe Yves and Ubisoft said countless times that their current business model doesn't affect the quality of the product, delay an AC game would be admit that this statement is wrong.

it's a lot easier to release a game full of bugs because, well, no game is 100% bug free and about the quality of the side content or the product itself, they can defend themselves by saying that is a matter of opinion, some people didn't like it, others did, blah, blah, blah..

killzab
06-06-2014, 03:38 PM
You forget the part where Darby carefully explained every creative decision he was asked which was interpreted by said consumers as a middle finger (i.e. put words in his mouth which he never actually said or meant). Said and some other consumers also started saying that he doesn't know what the **** he is doing and all that good stuff. Really respectful, yes.

I think the whole debacle that happened during Q&As showed flaws from all sides, so hating is overreacting.

It's not only about the Q&A's but also some of his tweets aiming directly at me that disrespected my opinions.

DinoSteve1
06-06-2014, 03:49 PM
Ugh it irritates me when people use the excuse "short development time" for a bad game, the company chose to release that game as it is they must have been happy enough with it.

Dev_Anj
06-06-2014, 03:57 PM
the company chose to release that game as it is they must have been happy enough with it.

Not necessarily true. Thief 2 was released under heavy pressure, and it's clear that the final levels in that game were a bit rushed. One month after releasing it, Looking Glass Studios shut down.

I'm not saying Ubisoft was in the same situation, but sometimes games get released pre maturely because of lack of developer time.

Will_Lucky
06-06-2014, 04:10 PM
I'm really glad Amancio is working on Unity for a single reason, he is the first person since Patrice to work as the Creative Director on two games for the series. And its great that finally for the first time since AC2 we will have an experienced mind who knows the series working on another entry.

As for Hutchingson I did bring up when FC4 was announced that he was the leader but no one seemed interested :p. I'm somewhat pleased he isn't doing another game in the series yet, I feel while AC3 was good it was somewhat off the mark, I hope he finds success with FC4 but I'd rather no have him on the AC series again soon.

I-Like-Pie45
06-06-2014, 04:49 PM
Far Cry 3 already ruined the series

I don't think theres anymore damage Hutchinson can do to the series that that POS hasnt

pacmanate
06-06-2014, 05:28 PM
Don't know exactly what happened, but you have to put yourself in his shoes a bit. I mean he has poured years of work into these games and the reward from fans is frequently comments like: "another underwhelming generic story" and so on. Now it's ok to be critical (hell I'm critical all the time), but if the developers get a bit defensive, or short at times, I think that's perfectly understandable.

Yeah... so? He should be able to handle criticism and defend his work without attack the critique

DinoSteve1
06-06-2014, 05:31 PM
Far Cry 3 already ruined the series


I respectfully disagree.

Shahkulu101
06-06-2014, 09:41 PM
Yeah... so? He should be able to handle criticism and defend his work without attack the critique

He didn't 'attack the critique'. Darby frankly and meticulously explained his creative decisions and the fans got pissy because "WA WE NO LYK DIS DERBY...BAAADDD!"

At least he was honest with his answers and didn't circumvent questions with diplomatic bullcrap. What do you want him to say? "I was wrong, I'm terrible and my work is crap clearly all of you could do my job better - good day."

Sushiglutton
06-06-2014, 09:58 PM
^^^Thanks Shak for clearing that up without any circumvent or diplomatic bullcrap :)

killzab
06-06-2014, 10:23 PM
He didn't 'attack the critique'. Darby frankly and meticulously explained his creative decisions and the fans got pissy because "WA WE NO LYK DIS DERBY...BAAADDD!"

At least he was honest with his answers and didn't circumvent questions with diplomatic bullcrap. What do you want him to say? "I was wrong, I'm terrible and my work is crap clearly all of you could do my job better - good day."

Well.. even if he did justify his choices in a straight manner, we can still disagree with him and think he's "bad" for the franchise, right ?

pacmanate
06-06-2014, 10:48 PM
Well.. even if he did justify his choices in a straight manner, we can still disagree with him and think he's "bad" for the franchise, right ?

Duh.

Although I like Darbys work. I do however think his tweets come across a bit abrupt though. Same with Escoblades, haven't followed what hes been doing since before AC4

SixKeys
06-06-2014, 10:59 PM
Gotta agree with Sushi and Shahk here. I don't like it when people get overly personal with their attacks against devs. Frankly we don't know what goes on behind the scenes and game development is tricky business, so I'm sure there's not just one person to blame for all of one game's failings.

I don't have anything personal against either Hutchinson or Amancio. Even though AC3 is my least favorite, I believe Hutchinson had a strong vision for the game that unfortunately didn't come together the way I would have liked. We knew a lot more about AC3's development due to the hype machine, so we also got to hear a lot more soundbytes from Hutchinson explaining this or that decision. With Amancio, ACR was developed in less than 10 months, so I'm willing to give them some slack. At the same time, the game had some of the worst design decisions in the history of the franchise, so I'm a bit nervous about Amancio's return. He's the one who decided to make Desmond's Journey all about, well, Desmond, instead of Subject 16 and Lucy. As a result, fans were charged extra for a crappy DLC that contained all the actual "revelations" promised by the title. That is unforgivable.

OTOH, Unity has no such problems since modern day is what it is now and Unity has surely had a longer development time. Hopefully this time Amancio has the time and resources to deliver a game with a more cohesive vision.

P.S. Fans, myself included, can be ****ty with their opinions sometimes. So far I think all the devs have handled themselves professionally when addressing fans' questions, especially given the passive-aggressive or downright hostile way those questions are often asked. (E.g. "Whose bright idea was it to kill off so-and-so?") Some of the same fans I see criticizing Darby here all the time are among some of the most obnoxious, entitled brats in the fandom. If he has ever been anything less than courteous in his responses to them, I don't blame him.

killzab
06-06-2014, 11:16 PM
Gotta agree with Sushi and Shahk here. I don't like it when people get overly personal with their attacks against devs. Frankly we don't know what goes on behind the scenes and game development is tricky business, so I'm sure there's not just one person to blame for all of one game's failings.

I don't have anything personal against either Hutchinson or Amancio. Even though AC3 is my least favorite, I believe Hutchinson had a strong vision for the game that unfortunately didn't come together the way I would have liked. We knew a lot more about AC3's development due to the hype machine, so we also got to hear a lot more soundbytes from Hutchinson explaining this or that decision. With Amancio, ACR was developed in less than 10 months, so I'm willing to give them some slack. At the same time, the game had some of the worst design decisions in the history of the franchise, so I'm a bit nervous about Amancio's return. He's the one who decided to make Desmond's Journey all about, well, Desmond, instead of Subject 16 and Lucy. As a result, fans were charged extra for a crappy DLC that contained all the actual "revelations" promised by the title. That is unforgivable.

OTOH, Unity has no such problems since modern day is what it is now and Unity has surely had a longer development time. Hopefully this time Amancio has the time and resources to deliver a game with a more cohesive vision.

P.S. Fans, myself included, can be ****ty with their opinions sometimes. So far I think all the devs have handled themselves professionally when addressing fans' questions, especially given the passive-aggressive or downright hostile way those questions are often asked. (E.g. "Whose bright idea was it to kill off so-and-so?") Some of the same fans I see criticizing Darby here all the time are among some of the most obnoxious, entitled brats in the fandom. If he has ever been anything less than courteous in his responses to them, I don't blame him.

I suppose it's aimed at me... well too bad cause I think you're one of the most interesting members here but it doesn't have to go both ways.

But you're forgetting something : he's a professional and we are customers, he can't afford being rude to the customers.

SixKeys
06-06-2014, 11:32 PM
I suppose it's aimed at me... well too bad cause I think you're one of the most interesting members here but it doesn't have to go both ways.

But you're forgetting something : he's a professional and we are customers, he can't afford being rude to the customers.

You're not the only Darby critic here, JSYK. But if the shoe fits...

Like I said, I haven't seen Darby act rudely towards any fans so far. He has explained and defended his writing decisions, something that I think is perhaps in itself unadvisable for any author, precisely because even politely defending your creations does feel somewhat unprofessional. (Imagine if Stephen King went on Amazon.com to reply to his readers' reviews.)

The alternative, of course, would be that Darby not explain his creative process at all and turn down any interviews. Corey May rarely talks about his writing process at all, on Twitter or anywhere else. I think it's pretty cool that Darby actually engages with the fans and answers questions as well as he possibly can. He is the only AC writer to have openly admitted that the Lucy plot could have been handled better. He gave fans a polite but non-sugarcoated answer when they asked whether Connor would be getting a sequel. Hutchinson et al were all dancing around the issue with diplomatic answers like "well, it depends on his reception". Darby's the one who straight up revealed no Connor sequel was currently in the works, and he actually got **** from fans for being honest about it, even though he didn't even write AC3. As if it was his fault.

Professionals should show professional behavior, of course, but I don't believe in the "customer is king" BS either. If the customer is the one who's being rude, the shopkeepers are well within their rights to refuse to cater to their every demand.

killzab
06-06-2014, 11:39 PM
You're not the only Darby critic here, JSYK. But if the shoe fits...

Like I said, I haven't seen Darby act rudely towards any fans so far. He has explained and defended his writing decisions, something that I think is perhaps in itself unadvisable for any author, precisely because even politely defending your creations does feel somewhat unprofessional. (Imagine if Stephen King went on Amazon.com to reply to his readers' reviews.)

The alternative, of course, would be that Darby not explain his creative process at all and turn down any interviews. Corey May rarely talks about his writing process at all, on Twitter or anywhere else. I think it's pretty cool that Darby actually engages with the fans and answers questions as well as he possibly can. He is the only AC writer to have openly admitted that the Lucy plot could have been handled better. He gave fans a polite but non-sugarcoated answer when they asked whether Connor would be getting a sequel. Hutchinson et al were all dancing around the issue with diplomatic answers like "well, it depends on his reception". Darby's the one who straight up revealed no Connor sequel was currently in the works, and he actually got **** from fans for being honest about it, even though he didn't even write AC3. As if it was his fault.

Professionals should show professional behavior, of course, but I don't believe in the "customer is king" BS either. If the customer is the one who's being rude, the shopkeepers are well within their rights to refuse to cater to their every demand.

"If the shoe fits" alright, I'll try to forget you insulted me ... :rolleyes:

But you know, when Black Flag was released , I posted a thread trying to explain how in my opinion , the story was disappointing, and I never insulted Darby or anything, I even said I was doubly disappointed because I loved ACR's story. And Darby tweeted something like " lol that thread is funny". This is a totally moronic and unprofessional way to take a fan's opinion in consideration

SixKeys
06-06-2014, 11:47 PM
"If the shoe fits" alright, I'll try to forget you insulted me ... :rolleyes:

But you know, when Black Flag was released , I posted a thread trying to explain how in my opinion , the story was disappointing, and I never insulted Darby or anything, I even said I was doubly disappointed because I loved ACR's story. And Darby tweeted something like " lol that thread is funny". This is a totally moronic and unprofessional way to take a fan's opinion in consideration

I would have to see the exact thread and quotes from Darby to have an opinion on that. What I have seen on these forums is that people tend to blame Darby for the most ridiculous things. Just recently people were - once again - discussing the lack of beaked hoods, as if it was such an important core feature, and someone said Darby was "the worst thing to happen to this franchise" simply because Darby's explanation for why the the last two games (AC4 and Unity) to not give the protagonist a beaked hood was unsatisfying to them.

Really? Really?? You think a ******* triangle on the main character's hood is so important you're going to go and call another human being the worst thing to happen to these games? And then expect him to treat you like your complaints are perfectly valid and rational and deserving of his time?

(This is a generic "you" I'm talking about, not you specifically.)

LieutenantRex
06-06-2014, 11:49 PM
I met Darby in 2012 at PAX. He was disgusting. Completely disinterested in my questions and rude in his responses. He spoke with sarcasm laced in every word. He's a jerk, and I can't believe how much respect he gets on the forums. He represents everything that Ubisoft has shown itself to be: underwhelming, hipsters, and complete idiocy.

SixKeys
06-06-2014, 11:58 PM
I met Darby in 2012 at PAX. He was disgusting. Completely disinterested in my questions and rude in his responses. He spoke with sarcasm laced in every word. He's a jerk, and I can't believe how much respect he gets on the forums. He represents everything that Ubisoft has shown itself to be: underwhelming, hipsters, and complete idiocy.

He gets respect from those who have not witnessed him being a jerk. I'm not going to just take some random person's word for it without them presenting evidence. In all the interviews I've ever seen him in, he's seemed like a pretty cool guy. Until someone proves otherwise, I'm going to assume mostly good things about him.

Shahkulu101
06-07-2014, 12:24 AM
I met Darby in 2012 at PAX. He was disgusting. Completely disinterested in my questions and rude in his responses. He spoke with sarcasm laced in every word. He's a jerk, and I can't believe how much respect he gets on the forums. He represents everything that Ubisoft has shown itself to be: underwhelming, hipsters, and complete idiocy.

Your questions were probably stupid.

Because your the kind of cripplingly negative idiot that asks 'How disappointing do you think Unity will be?'

LieutenantRex
06-07-2014, 12:34 AM
Your questions were probably stupid.

Because your the kind of cripplingly negative idiot that asks 'How disappointing do you think Unity will be?'

Honestly, I would be upset if this weren't coming from a socially inept virgin. Go **** off, thanks.

killzab
06-07-2014, 12:36 AM
Honestly, I would be upset if this weren't coming from a socially inept virgin. Go **** off, thanks.

Shots fired

Shahkulu101
06-07-2014, 12:38 AM
Honestly, I would be upset if this weren't coming from a socially inept virgin. Go **** off, thanks.

Hahahhahahahha

No problemo mate

Locopells
06-07-2014, 12:40 AM
Watch it, guys...

Tenvern
06-07-2014, 12:46 AM
This thread is going exactly where I expected it to when I first saw it.
You guys never dissapoint do you?

Shahkulu101
06-07-2014, 12:52 AM
This thread is going exactly where I expected it to when I first saw it.
You guys never dissapoint do you?

It's good to have popcorn at the ready

Tenvern
06-07-2014, 01:11 AM
Yeah. There are people on this forum who seem to only want to create negativity, makes me wonder why they bother staying if they're going to complain about everything.

I-Like-Pie45
06-07-2014, 01:13 AM
Watch it, guys...

You ought to be more liberal with your usage of mod powers

SixKeys
06-07-2014, 01:39 AM
You ought to be more liberal with your usage of mod powers

"Were it that we applied the sword more liberally and more often, the world would be a better place!"

JustPlainQuirky
06-07-2014, 03:10 AM
Edward Braddock was a wise man indeed. :rolleyes:

Ureh
06-07-2014, 03:53 AM
Probably mentioned dozens of times, but I wouldn't point fingers and heap fault onto the poster boy. Not unless we were able to prove that he had complete control over every aspect of the project... down to the development time and resources.

I-Like-Pie45
06-07-2014, 04:48 AM
Probably mentioned dozens of times, but I wouldn't point fingers and heap fault onto the poster boy. Not unless we were able to prove that he had complete control over every aspect of the project... down to the development time and resources.

http://www.ariablarg.tv/asset/uploads/2012/06/110213-yves-guillemot-chief-executive-and-founder-of-the-worlds-third-largest.jpg

twenty_glyphs
06-07-2014, 04:50 AM
At this point I probably prefer Amancio to Hutchinson working on Unity. Both have their strengths and weaknesses, and both failed to deliver completely for most fans. I think the argument that giving AC3 more time would blow ACR out of the water isn't entirely true, because the amount of development time directly influenced decisions made, especially for ACR.

For example, video interviews for ACR at Ubisoft Massive gave the impression that the block puzzle gameplay existed as a demo that Massive presented sometime before ACR's development, and the Montreal team asked them if they could make it work in ACR. That decision was likely made because of the severe lack of time that ACR had, and the puzzle gameplay might not have been used had the game had a full development cycle. It's hard to judge moves like that, because there's a good chance that some decisions in ACR were made just to get enough "new" features to make the game look like it wasn't a complete rehash in such a short amount of time.

As for AC3, extra time to polish it up would have been nice, but it wouldn't have fixed the game's story (past and present), the boring utilization of the setting and characters or likely even the broken stealth. Many of those decisions were locked in years before the game's release. There were a lot of good ideas that AC3 brought to the series, so it wasn't all bad.

I thought Amancio gave really good interviews, and he seemed to really understand the franchise. Unfortunately, a lot of that did not come through in Revelations, from exploring Desmond's boring backstory instead of Subject 16's discoveries to the complete change in Subject 16's personality. His interviews made it sound like he understood the questions that fans had after Brotherhood and that they intended to deliver in a big way. Too bad that fell flat on its face. I'd still say Amancio gave better interviews than Hutchinson and made me feel like the franchise was in good hands. And even with Revelations' shortcomings, its story still felt more like Assassin's Creed to me than AC3 did.

I'm interested to see what Amancio does with a similar time and money investment that Hutchinson had for AC3.

HercRembrandt
06-07-2014, 05:57 AM
Well, I'm not happy with all the developments of the series, but it's a bit of a stretch to assume that any individual is particularly responsible for any single game. This is Ubisoft, the biggest game corporation of them all. The committee that designs an Ubisoft game was itself designed by a committee. 10 studios working on Unity, remember? AC4 was about pirates because the Singapore studio just happened to create the naval mechanics for AC3 without being specifically asked to do it. And on top of that, there is the HQ Editorial Team who get to have their input on the work of all the individual studios. There is no singular vision here. And some would argue that's the biggest problem with Ubisoft games.

shobhit7777777
06-07-2014, 02:41 PM
@shobbit: The thing for me is that I'm not really sure how cool the "blade in the crowd" fantasy really is. It's kind of slow, passive, don't want to do anything that stands out (which is what I do most of the time anyway lol). It's fiddly to maneuver when lots of unpredictable humans are doing their things (alternatively it feels robotic). When I board the monk-train in AC1 I just wanna laugh at the whole situation.

I love the "acrobatic running across ancient rooftops beneath a starry sky"-fantasy a lot more.

In general I'm a huge fan of the lone hero thing. I'm no fan of crowds at all though ;).



Don't think we can debate the coolness of a fantasy...since that is is super subjective....might as well debate my fetish for tight black costumes (You bring it up and I'll smack you)

You can like/disike it but the fact remains that social stealth is an important and integral part of the game and the assassin experience - its evident in the design.

The developers can either choose to leave it as it is but the question then arises - how is AC unique? or innovative? When its predatory accessible stealth is being done in almost every other Ubi game?
How is the series evolving when stealth gameplay is the same ol move from hiding spot to another.

Social Stealth is an unexplored concept. They tried it once, improved it a little with AC2...and then nothing. You have the same unevolved social stealth system which is stagnating. A vital part of the AC experience which can be a unique and fresh gameplay experience is left untouched.

I do agree that in its current state it is passive and not very engaging....not to mention it breaks immersion - And for this very reason I would like to see more emphasis on improving crowd simulation, AI and more 'active' social stealth mechanics.

SS isn't just about hiding in crowds....it ties into so many facets of gameplay - from notoriety affecting public perception to granting a different way of interacting with (and ****ing over) the AI

I would also like to emphasize how deep social stealth elements - done right - will open up oppurtunities for systemic and emergent gameplay. If our Assassin can manipulate large crowds, use crowds to flood areas for cover or causing a panicked rush to lose pursuers or even using public reactions to elicit a particular response from guards....it benefits robust gameplay

Social Stealth and LOS Stealth should complement each other to provide a compelling, comprehensive and dynamic gameplay IMHO....that'd be next gen AC for me.

Dev_Anj
06-07-2014, 03:06 PM
Besides if you want to play bush hiding based stealth, you'd be better off playing MGS. MGS deals with the concept of bush stealth or camouflage in a more detailed, comprehensive manner.

Also yes Sushiglutton, honestly I feel that social stealth looks bad to you because they haven't implemented it correctly so far.

Hans684
06-07-2014, 04:44 PM
The developers can either choose to leave it as it is but the question then arises - how is AC unique? or innovative? When its predatory accessible stealth is being done in almost every other Ubi game?
How is the series evolving when stealth gameplay is the same ol move from hiding spot to another.

Social Stealth is an unexplored concept. They tried it once, improved it a little with AC2...and then nothing. You have the same unevolved social stealth system which is stagnating. A vital part of the AC experience which can be a unique and fresh gameplay experience is left untouched.

I do agree that in its current state it is passive and not very engaging....not to mention it breaks immersion - And for this very reason I would like to see more emphasis on improving crowd simulation, AI and more 'active' social stealth mechanics.

AC(1) challenged Hitman, Both use SS, the difference is that Hitman does it better. For all we know the company making Hitman games consider AC(1) a poor beta. And no it's not unexplored, again it's Hitman in the spotlight, they did it first and is still better at SS than AC. When it comes to how unique/innovative in term of Assassins AC is. Then they still have the same uniques as before, AC is based on the historical Assassin Order unlike Hitman. AC could evolved to a great open world Hitman beating Hitman at every aspect but they(including Patrice) choose a more adventure style that has been used ever since AC2.

Dev_Anj
06-07-2014, 04:57 PM
Hitman uses a completely different kind of social stealth, it relies more on disguises than crowds.

It definitely has more solid social stealth than the AC franchise for sure, AC stopped trying to improve the social stealth after AC 2, and in AC 4 it was near completely abandoned for bush hiding and line of sight stealth.

Hans684
06-07-2014, 05:02 PM
Hitman uses a completely different kind of social stealth, it relies more on disguises than crowds.

It definitely has more solid social stealth than the AC franchise for sure, AC stopped trying to improve the social stealth after AC 2, and in AC 4 it was near completely abandoned for bush hiding and line of sight stealth.

Doesn't really change my point, it's still SS. As for improvement, then Liberation is the best example.

shobhit7777777
06-07-2014, 06:19 PM
AC(1) challenged Hitman, Both use SS, the difference is that Hitman does it better. For all we know the company making Hitman games consider AC(1) a poor beta. And no it's not unexplored, again it's Hitman in the spotlight, they did it first and is still better at SS than AC. When it comes to how unique/innovative in term of Assassins AC is. Then they still have the same uniques as before, AC is based on the historical Assassin Order unlike Hitman. AC could evolved to a great open world Hitman beating Hitman at every aspect but they(including Patrice) choose a more adventure style that has been used ever since AC2.

Hitman's social stealth is centered around finding and using disguises to make your way around....the question of blending into a large crowd or using the crowd to your advantage is absent in Hitman.

Simply put - Hitman presents only a slice of social stealth gameplay. Its not really social stealth when you're disguised as a Ninja in an underground fortress full of Ninjas.

Absolution does take some cues from AC and is a better game for it.