PDA

View Full Version : Taking a break from the Unity hype... let's talk Rogue's New York...



BoBwUzHeRe1138
09-18-2014, 12:05 AM
What do you guys think? Same NY as before or new?

I know they said that it's bigger because the fires hadn't occurred yet so all that stuff is there but what about the part we DID previously play in? Same exact layout, buildings, streets, etc or do you think they've changed them?

I'm curious as to whether they kept NY exactly as it was + adding the buildings that were burned down in AC3 OR if they took the criticisms of AC3's cities into consideration when making Rogue. For instance, will the buildings, on average, be taller than they used to be? Will the streets be narrower? Basically, are they just copy/pasting what they did in AC3 over to Rogue with the addition of that one area OR are they revamping the city and taking a bit more liberties with it in order to make the city more akin to the cities of AC1, Ezio trilogy, or even Havana from AC4?

What do you think?

Shahkulu101
09-18-2014, 12:24 AM
There's zip lines at least...

I'd expect they've changed the layout a bit to better accommodate free running. It's obviously just going to be the exact same city without the NY fire ruins (and in turn more city area as a result), Ziplines and adapted building placement.

Megas_Doux
09-18-2014, 12:25 AM
Based from the screenshots....


http://cdn2-www.playstationlifestyle.net/assets/uploads/gallery/assassins-creed-rogue/acro_screen_templarvsassassincaptain_gc_140813_10a mcet_1407873228.jpg

and


http://images.eurogamer.net/2013/articles/1/7/0/0/7/1/9/ubisoft-only-vocal-minority-complains-about-number-of-assassins-creed-games-140803010699.jpg/EG11/resize/600x-1/quality/80/format/jpg

http://img2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20140805153426/assassinscreed/images/a/af/Assassins_Creed_Rogue_Screenshot_NY.jpg

Same two and three storey tall builings, the layout seems pretty similar, although less widespread being honest, with the exception that the stuff burnt in the Fire of New York will be included....YAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Greed at its best.

LoyalACFan
09-18-2014, 12:27 AM
I believe they said they narrowed certain streets and redesigned some buildings to better facilitate parkour.

However I really couldn't care less about Rogue's NY, the AC3 cities were the worst ones in the franchise IMO (Rome was the worst map but that was because of all the boring countryside, the urban parts were cool). I don't think a few tweaks are going to save them for me, I just found them to be hellishly boring after the wondrous glory that was Constantinople. The only Rogue location that looks interesting to me is the North Atlantic. NY sucks, and I don't know what "Appalachian river valley" they based their map on, but it sure as hell looks NOTHING like anything I've seen in Appalachia.

ze_topazio
09-18-2014, 12:28 AM
Colonial America buildings were tall enough, it was the wideness of the streets that made them hard to freerun in.

Locopells
09-18-2014, 12:29 AM
They say that it will be similar but different, considering that it takes place years before Connor, and NY developed quite quickly during that time. Also, they said they'd come up with a new solution to the wide streets.

Namikaze_17
09-18-2014, 12:36 AM
Meh...I don't care about the Gameplay or Setting.

My hype is for the story & characters.

JustPlainQuirky
09-18-2014, 12:37 AM
As long as they remove demon children I'll be fine.

LoyalACFan
09-18-2014, 12:43 AM
As long as they remove demon children I'll be fine.

Lol yes, those little bastards were 100 times worse than minstrels

JustPlainQuirky
09-18-2014, 12:46 AM
lol yes, those little bastards were 100 times worse than minstrels

"hahaha hahaha! Ohh ooohh? Ah aha ha ha"

Namikaze_17
09-18-2014, 12:48 AM
"hahaha hahaha! Ohh ooohh? Ah aha ha ha"

Best AC quote ever... 0.0

GoldenBoy9999
09-18-2014, 12:53 AM
This will probably be the first location in AC I'm not going to be climbing around having fun in. I'll just get the collectibles and side missions, and then go to the Arctic/ River Valley or ACU.

JustPlainQuirky
09-18-2014, 12:59 AM
I'm pretty excited for the river valley & arctic tbh

too bad you freeze to death when in water.

I mean it's cool (haha cool...punny) hey considered context, but no more swimming to your ship :C

Megas_Doux
09-18-2014, 01:00 AM
Worse than AC III kids?????? AC I´s 894834983094809 beggars!!!!!!

"JUST A FEW COINS PLEASE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"" And the ones that push are the biggest nuisance to date

JustPlainQuirky
09-18-2014, 01:06 AM
I want a co-op game starring a beggar, a leprosy victim, a ministrel, and a child.

Stephane being the best friend and Patience being the mentor.

Cesare makes a return as the villain.

RinoTheBouncer
09-18-2014, 01:07 AM
Meh...I don't care about the Gameplay or Setting.

My hype is for the story & characters.

Same here. Just give me a good story, both modern day and historical and give me some good first civ. stuff and I’ll be happy.

Ureh
09-18-2014, 01:07 AM
Worse than AC III kids?????? AC I´s 894834983094809 beggars!!!!!!

"JUST A FEW COINS PLEASE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"" And the ones that push are the biggest nuisance to date

I thought the kids and beggars were pretty easy to circumvent/avoid. But the beggars in AC1 did throw rocks at Altair if he wasn't fast enough. They'll even say stuff like... "Take that!" and "Get out of this city!" Something like that.... my memory is a bit rusty. :p

JustPlainQuirky
09-18-2014, 01:09 AM
Same here. Just give me a good story, both modern day and historical and give me some good first civ. stuff and I’ll be happy.

Me three.

Namikaze_17
09-18-2014, 01:42 AM
I want a co-op game starring a beggar, a leprosy victim, a ministrel, and a child.

Stephane being the best friend and Patience being the mentor.

Cesare makes a return as the villain.

I'd buy it...

guardian_titan
09-18-2014, 01:51 AM
Given that New York's map is already built in AC3 and pre-fire New York was going to be included before getting scrapped, I don't see the city being that different from what we saw in AC3. Probably the odd tweak to improve flow, but I don't see them changing too much. It's still New York in the end. They change it too much, people will cry foul that the city is nothing like what we saw before. They might as well have given us a different city like one in Greenland or Nova Scotia.
With regards to New York and Boston versus other AC cities, you can't expect a city that's like 100 years old to match the grandeur of a city 10x (or better) in age. Seeing cities that are up and coming rather than already sprawling and grand gives variety to the series. Staring at cities like Rome, Paris, etc gets rather boring after a while. They're hundreds and even thousands of years old in some cases so have time to build up and have amazing architecture that is potentially from multiple cultures and is quite old as well, but when you sit down and look at the basics, Rome, Paris, and even Constantinople all share a lot of similarities that are rather formulaic, and in the end, rather boring. All three share a city divided by a body of water with a grand building (Vatican, Notre Dame, Hagia Sophia). New York can't claim a grand building until later in the 1800s when St. Patrick's and other landmark churches were built. Boston doesn't really have anything like that. Nothing as recognizable anyway. New York's body of water would have to be the water surrounding Long Island, but given that Ubisoft's not likely to include it, New York ends up fairly waterless. Boston has the odd causeway and the dock, but nothing that really divides the city in two. You got the one pond, but that ended up getting filled in during the 1800s so can you really count it? And it doesn't really divide the city, either. It was shallow.

Ultimately, nothing ever built in the US will be as old as what's in Europe or Asia. It's kind of like the argument of old versus new tech. I regularly hear that things aren't make like they used to, the old ways were better, etc. I suppose ultimately it's better to agree to disagree. Someone likes chocolate while someone else likes vanilla. Personally, I prefer AC3's architecture and found Rome and Constantinople boring. Then again, I happen to be an American so perhaps I'm a bit biased.

Looking at dates:
New York was founded in 1624. (126 years old in 1750.)
Boston was founded in 1630. (120 years old in 1750.)

Paris was founded around 250 BC and possibly settled as early as 9000 BC. (2000+ years old in 1750.)
Rome was founded around 753 BC and possibly settled as early as 12,000 BC. (2503+ years old in 1750.)
Constantinople was founded in 324. (1,426 years old in 1750).

That's like expecting a newborn to be able to keep up with a fully grown athletic adult in a marathon. Ain't happening.

BoBwUzHeRe1138
09-18-2014, 01:53 AM
I believe they said they narrowed certain streets and redesigned some buildings to better facilitate parkour.

However I really couldn't care less about Rogue's NY, the AC3 cities were the worst ones in the franchise IMO (Rome was the worst map but that was because of all the boring countryside, the urban parts were cool). I don't think a few tweaks are going to save them for me, I just found them to be hellishly boring after the wondrous glory that was Constantinople. The only Rogue location that looks interesting to me is the North Atlantic. NY sucks, and I don't know what "Appalachian river valley" they based their map on, but it sure as hell looks NOTHING like anything I've seen in Appalachia.

The worst. I didn't appreciate Constantinople much at the time mainly because I wasn't thrilled at having another Ezio game that was very tacked on feeling but also because you sometimes don't know what you have til it's gone. That's what happened when AC3 came out. Upon replaying ACR, post-AC3, it was a much better game than I remembered. So is AC1!

Istanbul was an amazing city. So were Florence, Venice, and Rome though I do agree the countryside was boring.


As long as they remove demon children I'll be fine.

I don't think I've ever wanted to murder children. AC3 changed that.


Worse than AC III kids?????? AC I´s 894834983094809 beggars!!!!!!

"JUST A FEW COINS PLEASE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"" And the ones that push are the biggest nuisance to date

I agree -- those gibbering pushers are ridiculously frustrating. The kids are vocally annoying, those people are physically annoying.


I want a co-op game starring a beggar, a leprosy victim, a ministrel, and a child.

Stephane being the best friend and Patience being the mentor.

Cesare makes a return as the villain.

I may just hate you.

Namikaze_17
09-18-2014, 01:56 AM
Damn, Guardian...

You're posts are LOOONNNGG!!!!

Shahkulu101
09-18-2014, 01:59 AM
Damn, Guardian...

You're posts are LOOONNNGG!!!!
I rather enjoy them.

Namikaze_17
09-18-2014, 02:08 AM
I rather enjoy them.

I enjoy long posts as well...

Makes me take you more seriously in what you're talking about. :)

Shahkulu101
09-18-2014, 02:11 AM
Uhhhh guys...y'all are forgetting the return of Ziplines!

http://i.imgur.com/FW73H1T.jpg

BoBwUzHeRe1138
09-18-2014, 02:22 AM
Given that New York's map is already built in AC3 and pre-fire New York was going to be included before getting scrapped, I don't see the city being that different from what we saw in AC3. Probably the odd tweak to improve flow, but I don't see them changing too much. It's still New York in the end. They change it too much, people will cry foul that the city is nothing like what we saw before. They might as well have given us a different city like one in Greenland or Nova Scotia.
With regards to New York and Boston versus other AC cities, you can't expect a city that's like 100 years old to match the grandeur of a city 10x (or better) in age. Seeing cities that are up and coming rather than already sprawling and grand gives variety to the series. Staring at cities like Rome, Paris, etc gets rather boring after a while. They're hundreds and even thousands of years old in some cases so have time to build up and have amazing architecture that is potentially from multiple cultures and is quite old as well, but when you sit down and look at the basics, Rome, Paris, and even Constantinople all share a lot of similarities that are rather formulaic, and in the end, rather boring. All three share a city divided by a body of water with a grand building (Vatican, Notre Dame, Hagia Sophia). New York can't claim a grand building until later in the 1800s when St. Patrick's and other landmark churches were built. Boston doesn't really have anything like that. Nothing as recognizable anyway. New York's body of water would have to be the water surrounding Long Island, but given that Ubisoft's not likely to include it, New York ends up fairly waterless. Boston has the odd causeway and the dock, but nothing that really divides the city in two. You got the one pond, but that ended up getting filled in during the 1800s so can you really count it? And it doesn't really divide the city, either. It was shallow.

Ultimately, nothing ever built in the US will be as old as what's in Europe or Asia. It's kind of like the argument of old versus new tech. I regularly hear that things aren't make like they used to, the old ways were better, etc. I suppose ultimately it's better to agree to disagree. Someone likes chocolate while someone else likes vanilla. Personally, I prefer AC3's architecture and found Rome and Constantinople boring. Then again, I happen to be an American so perhaps I'm a bit biased.

Looking at dates:
New York was founded in 1624. (126 years old in 1750.)
Boston was founded in 1630. (120 years old in 1750.)

Paris was founded around 250 BC and possibly settled as early as 9000 BC. (2000+ years old in 1750.)
Rome was founded around 753 BC and possibly settled as early as 12,000 BC. (2503+ years old in 1750.)
Constantinople was founded in 324. (1,426 years old in 1750).

That's like expecting a newborn to be able to keep up with a fully grown athletic adult in a marathon. Ain't happening.

I understand WHY the buildings aren't like they were. and to be fair, the cities like Const., Rome, Venice, etc. were also slightly exaggerated to make parkour more fun.

I just dislike that we decided to use a setting with such buildings. For instance, a game set in China would be VASTLY different than Unity. The cities would look nothing a like, but both would be dense, urban playgrounds. Boston and NY are not those, not historically anyway. And to me, that's kind of lame to me. Sure it provides variety but not the right kind. China, Babylonia, any number of different places provide variety but Boston and NY provided variety in the sense that you have less to parkour around. Constantinople is not really all that similar to Rome or Venice. the architecture, the fact that it's built on a slope, etc.

I'm American too. I just don't think Colonial America was a good fit for AC. It's like the people wanting a WWII game or a Wild West game. Oooh... AC in the Wild West. Never mind the fact that Rockstar already made a cowboy game that would be hard to beat but it would just SUCK. What would you free run on? That one saloon way over there?

But agree to disagree like you said, I suppose haha


Uhhhh guys...y'all are forgetting the return of Ziplines!

haha nooo, I remember them. Those will speed up travel, and may be a way they try to combat the wide streets of NY but they wouldn't really change the city much I don't believe.

Assassin_M
09-18-2014, 05:59 AM
*sigh* do I need to record a video of parkour in NY? (Yes, sixkeys, I know your AC III was terrible and full of bugs) parkour in NY was absolutely fine--the buildings were tall enough and there were a lot of connections between wide streets.

New York is also severely underrated.

marvelfannumber
09-18-2014, 06:17 AM
From what i've seen analyzing the trailers they changed some of the buildings to have more flat roofs and made a few streets slightly smaller. They also restored the burnt down parts and made the city smaller overall.

Ugh I am just so annoyed they decided to reuse New York again in a time period which is barely different at all from AC3.

I mean I would much rather run around New York when it looked like this:

http://i.imgur.com/HFAZdgV.jpg

Or this (plz):

http://i.imgur.com/qROZwFQ.jpg

Not this:

http://i.imgur.com/hMidcRT.jpg

I rest my case

Legendz54
09-18-2014, 06:47 AM
"hahaha hahaha! Ohh ooohh? Ah aha ha ha"

The one time I considered harming children.....

BoBwUzHeRe1138
09-18-2014, 09:10 AM
*sigh* do I need to record a video of parkour in NY? (Yes, sixkeys, I know your AC III was terrible and full of bugs) parkour in NY was absolutely fine--the buildings were tall enough and there were a lot of connections between wide streets.

New York is also severely underrated.

Nope, I'm good.


From what i've seen analyzing the trailers they changed some of the buildings to have more flat roofs and made a few streets slightly smaller. They also restored the burnt down parts and made the city smaller overall.

Ugh I am just so annoyed they decided to reuse New York again in a time period which is barely different at all from AC3.

I mean I would much rather run around New York when it looked like this:

http://i.imgur.com/HFAZdgV.jpg

Or this (plz):

http://i.imgur.com/qROZwFQ.jpg

Not this:

http://i.imgur.com/hMidcRT.jpg

I rest my case

Ehhhh. Those buildings are TOO tall. And the streets would be even wider to accommodate traffic. Where would you be running around? In between cars? I feel there's a certain point at which things get TOO modern for AC to still feel like AC.

That said, if they do wind up making a mobster-like AC, I'm getting it. White trench coat, subtly beaked fedora, red tie, red belt? white/black fancy shoes? Yes please. I'd still be iffy on it but I've theorized a possible AC during that time. J Edgar Hoover is a Templar, naturally. You'd be an Assassin growing up as part of the "mafia" though really, your family never harmed civilians and was actually more interested in running ops that screwed over the Templar-influenced government.

marvelfannumber
09-18-2014, 09:38 AM
Ehhhh. Those buildings are TOO tall. And the streets would be even wider to accommodate traffic. Where would you be running around? In between cars? I feel there's a certain point at which things get TOO modern for AC to still feel like AC.


I've heard this argument many times before (don't get me wrong, it is a legitimate concern) but I always point out that this didn't stop them in Revelations for example.

I mean they added the Hookblade, so what's stopping them from adding some sort of grappling hook/zipline attachment to the hidden blade? It would help with climbing speed and navigation (it's also semi plausable for the time).

(Plus the taller buildings help ease the wideness of the streets, as you have longer fall time)

GunnerGalactico
09-18-2014, 11:30 AM
*sigh* do I need to record a video of parkour in NY? Parkour in NY was absolutely fine--the buildings were tall enough and there were a lot of connections between wide streets.

New York is also severely underrated.

I didn't experience any such problems with the parkour in NY. You're right though, NY is underrated. In Rogue NY looks more visually and aesthetically pleasing, and on the plus side ziplines make a return.

Locopells
09-18-2014, 11:53 AM
Bear in mind what I said earlier, that with the speed NY developed during that era, it will reasonably different, or so the devs say.

marvelfannumber
09-18-2014, 12:02 PM
Bear in mind what I said earlier, that with the speed NY developed during that era, it will reasonably different, or so the devs say.

Historically all that would be different would be:

- Burnt parts not burnt down

- The city being smaller

- Less landmarks

The street grid and buildings would be the same for the most part.

SixKeys
09-18-2014, 01:22 PM
The children in AC3 were far more annoying than AC1's beggars, mainly because they didn't even speak properly, just made gibberish noises. A better comparison point would be the crazy lepers. The lepers and demon children need to have a gibberish-a-thon.

"Mrr....Mnh arrgh ah ha ha huh nrgh!!"

"Ah ha ha ha! Wop wop wop! Ta-dah!"

JustPlainQuirky
09-18-2014, 01:23 PM
The children were annoying because you couldn't kill them.

Namikaze_17
09-18-2014, 01:25 PM
Which was BS by the way... :rolleyes:

SixKeys
09-18-2014, 01:26 PM
Seriously, the more I think about it, AC3's children would have been perfectly fine if they just had proper lines of dialogue.

Namikaze_17
09-18-2014, 01:31 PM
"Mister, can you spare some Change?"

"I am GEORGE WASHINGTON!"

"O say can you see..."

^ These lines would've been fine.

JustPlainQuirky
09-18-2014, 01:33 PM
"I will devour your soul"

"have you prayed to lord satan?"

"kill your family kill your family kill your family"

sounds more fitting.

SixKeys
09-18-2014, 01:42 PM
You think the devs got rid of children after AC3 because players kept trying to kill them? I actually liked tjhe idea of having children in the AC universe, it feels like a bit of a downgrade not to have them anymore. All they had to do was make them less demonic.

Namikaze_17
09-18-2014, 01:52 PM
Anyone notice that everytime you threw money in AC3, there's always this woman that sounds like Marge from The Simpsons that says: "Money!"

I wonder if it's a Easter Egg?

GunnerGalactico
09-18-2014, 01:53 PM
I also felt that the minstrels in AC2 and ACB were quite annoying too, only because they were walking in circles around. I only wish there was an option whereby we can knock them out with their own lute. :p

GoldenBoy9999
09-18-2014, 01:56 PM
"I will devour your soul"

"have you prayed to lord satan?"

"kill your family kill your family kill your family"

sounds more fitting.

Lol, this should be one of the cheats in the game.

ze_topazio
09-18-2014, 06:26 PM
I say proudly that I tried every single thing I could to kill the AC3 kids, I punched the beggars and crazy guys in AC1 and punched the minstrels in AC2/B.


edit: ah yes, I also beat the crap out of Leonardo and Machiavelli in AC2/B.

SpiritOfNevaeh
09-18-2014, 06:52 PM
I say proudly that I tried every single thing I could to kill the AC3 kids, I punched the beggars and crazy guys in AC1 and punched the minstrels in AC2/B.

Pushing them into the water works.

Just throw some coins and have fun

http://26.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lxyensWOOB1qjemo2o1_250.gif

GunnerGalactico
09-18-2014, 07:01 PM
In AC1, sometimes I draw my sword whenever the beggars or crazy guys come near me. Trust me, it scares the living daylights out of them :p

ze_topazio
09-18-2014, 07:02 PM
Pushing them into the water works.

Just throw some coins and have fun

http://26.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lxyensWOOB1qjemo2o1_250.gif

http://38.media.tumblr.com/504d592bfa5f95e032475550789d4e47/tumblr_mphb4b98CB1spdbf2o1_500.gif

SixKeys
09-18-2014, 08:38 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N3NKFt8s5cA

Notice that the kid keeps laughing even after he's been knocked dead/unconscious. More proof they're hellish little demon spawns.

Shahkulu101
09-18-2014, 08:47 PM
Holy crap that's brutal!

Laughed though.

m4r-k7
09-18-2014, 08:48 PM
In AC1, sometimes I draw my sword whenever the beggars or crazy guys come near me. Trust me, it scares the living daylights out of them :p

THOSE CRAZY GUYS ARE THE MOST ANNOYING PEOPLE IN ANY AC GAME. THEY JUST PUSH YOU AND IT TAKES AGES TO REGAIN YOUR BALANCE lol

Namikaze_17
09-18-2014, 09:05 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N3NKFt8s5cA

Notice that the kid keeps laughing even after he's been knocked dead/unconscious. More proof they're hellish little demon spawns.

It's funny how Guards don't care about you killing a Child, but go nuts if you're holding a weapon, or throwing Money at them. :rolleyes:

GunnerGalactico
09-18-2014, 09:05 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N3NKFt8s5cA

Notice that the kid keeps laughing even after he's been knocked dead/unconscious. More proof they're hellish little demon spawns.

Damn! that's harsh

GoldenBoy9999
09-18-2014, 10:19 PM
Man, I didn't know you kid kill little kids like that. It almost makes me feel sorry for them, but then again...

JustPlainQuirky
09-18-2014, 10:22 PM
Kid deserved it.

Namikaze_17
09-18-2014, 10:30 PM
That kid could've been someone's Ancestor... :(

SpiritOfNevaeh
09-18-2014, 11:34 PM
Damn! THAT IS BRUTAL!

Kakuzu745
09-19-2014, 12:02 AM
So...we took a break from the hype of Unity to talk about...killing children? Ok cool, gotta love the forums ;)

BoBwUzHeRe1138
09-19-2014, 01:27 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N3NKFt8s5cA

Notice that the kid keeps laughing even after he's been knocked dead/unconscious. More proof they're hellish little demon spawns.

But the laughter doesn't stop? Ugh, NOT WORTH IT THEN lol

ze_topazio
09-19-2014, 10:48 AM
It's funny how Guards don't care about you killing a Child, but go nuts if you're holding a weapon, or throwing Money at them. :rolleyes:

Who would care about those AC3 kids getting killed?!

RinoTheBouncer
09-19-2014, 01:43 PM
I believe there will be a great deal of copy/paste from ACIII, with some re-texturing or remodeled/re-arranged buildings, but that’s about it. They choose a hybrid setting between ACIII and ACIV for a reason, which is to re-use assets. They’re not gonna build anything from scratch.

ze_topazio
09-19-2014, 01:52 PM
Provided the game is good I don't mind reused stuff.

pacmanate
09-19-2014, 01:56 PM
Neither do I, but what I do find cheeky is that its a full priced game.

RinoTheBouncer
09-19-2014, 02:07 PM
I don’t mind reused stuff as long as it has a brilliant story. I mean AC:B was so similar to ACII, yet both were perfect, individually, so I don’t mind it, but I’m just saying that I don’t think there’s gonna be too much innovation when it comes to locations.

I keep wondering what the modern day will look like and what the first civ. locations will be like. Are we gonna go to the frontier again? are we gonna see the Grand Temple?

pacmanate
09-19-2014, 02:15 PM
I don’t mind reused stuff as long as it has a brilliant story. I mean AC:B was so similar to ACII, yet both were perfect, individually, so I don’t mind it, but I’m just saying that I don’t think there’s gonna be too much innovation when it comes to locations.

I keep wondering what the modern day will look like and what the first civ. locations will be like. Are we gonna go to the frontier again? are we gonna see the Grand Temple?

First civ location* there is never more than one. Also theres a new image that came out that shows part of it.

The Valley or w/e is the new frontier.

GoldenBoy9999
09-19-2014, 02:23 PM
I'm pretty disappointed in the Valley so far because I can tell by some of the screenshots that it's just going to be little locations like AC4 and not like the awesome Frontier in AC3. Hopefully there will be a big Frontier zone though to dock at. I am interested in the snow locations though.

Shahkulu101
09-19-2014, 04:32 PM
Neither do I, but what I do find cheeky is that its a full priced game.

That's daft. It will have the same 10-15 hour story we always get with a massive map (The River Valley alone is bigger than the Caribbean) and as AC games always do, have a lot of side content.

It will have enough content to warrant a full release, that's a definite.

Assassin_M
09-19-2014, 04:39 PM
That's it. I'm doing that Parkour video of NY

Fatal-Feit
09-19-2014, 05:22 PM
There is nothing wrong with New York, aside from a lack of ambient music. Parkouring was perfectly fine, and a whole lot easier than a lot of previous cities.

Also, I didn't think New York was boring. Say what you want about the look and aesthetics, but it was a lot more alive than any of the previous cities. Venice, included.

Megas_Doux
09-19-2014, 06:58 PM
That's it. I'm doing that Parkour video of NY

Parkour can be done for sure, thing is the location is not particularly impressive to use kind words, to justify TWO games with an ingame difference of 15 years, DULLNESS at its best. It does not even share the natural beauty of AC IV' s locations let alone the grandeur of previous cities like Damascus, Acre, Florence, Venice, Constantinople and Rome, or the incoming Paris.

Pus there was no background music.....

JustPlainQuirky
09-19-2014, 06:59 PM
It does not even share the natural beauty of AC IV' s locations let alone the grandeur of previous cities like Damascus, Acre, Florence, Venice, Constantinople and Rome, or the incoming Paris.

http://m.cdn.blog.hu/sm/smokingbarrels/image/lebowski1.jpg

Megas_Doux
09-19-2014, 07:10 PM
http://m.cdn.blog.hu/sm/smokingbarrels/image/lebowski1.jpg

I can give you the point about the"prettiness", although one has to he honest and admit the Caribbean has some of the most beautiful landscapes in the world while the surroundings of NY are not known for that, but the architecture is NO contest, compare this:

http://tinkersandsaints.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/NewYork.jpg



http://s.wiiugo.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Assassins-Creed-3-Great-Fire-of-New-York.jpg

VS

http://www.flashback-rome.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/roma_papi_3.jpg

http://m4.i.pbase.com/g3/55/319655/2/124504634.oKOmXPA5.jpg

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-lcC_sxXlzO4/Tw2PKpYVIFI/AAAAAAAAAVg/bgXP2dUS-Z8/s1600/Assassins-Creed-Revelations_2011_05-26-11_006.jpg

http://www.farhorizons.com/trips/europe/egyptinrome/images/Florencehistoriccenter.jpg



http://www.pixelbusters.es/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/guest-controller-assassins-creed-revelations-concept-art-headline.jpg

http://reflectionseurope.com/gallery/imagestore/Syria/reflectionseurope_com_Umayyad_Mosque_Damascus_Syri a.jpg

As I said, You can normally parkour in NY, but the rest pales.....

LatinaC09
09-19-2014, 07:10 PM
Meh..I think I'm one of the few people who don't play AC for the parkour. I was able to enjoy NY and Boston in AC3. I love history and the fact that the cities really did look close to what they actually were at that time was enough to make me appreciate it. Granted, I'm not particularly thrilled with the same city being in another AC game but that's only because I would like to see another city. Heck I'd be content if they were to go to Virginia or Georgia. I love the history and that's why I play these games (even if it isn't 100% accurate lol)

Kakuzu745
09-19-2014, 07:17 PM
I was able to enjoy Boston and New York for sure but to be honest they are nowhere comparable to Damascus or the Caribbean landscapes.

Truth be told each city has its own strengths..."looking pretty" is not really the strength of the AC cities. The Frontier on the other hand...that is beautiful.

pacmanate
09-19-2014, 08:17 PM
New York and Boston were the worst designed cities in AC games.

1. Streets were too wide
2. Roof tops were too varied height wise breaking parkour fluidity
3. The rooftops were too pointy

They SUCKED. The fluidity in the parkour was so bloody terrible, I am glad they are redesigning them for AC Rogue. I also like how the AC4 team mentioned AC3's cities sucked so they made the cities more dense and better for parkour.

DumbGamerTag94
09-19-2014, 09:05 PM
New York and Boston were the worst designed cities in AC games.

1. Streets were too wide
2. Roof tops were too varied height wise breaking parkour fluidity
3. The rooftops were too pointy

They SUCKED. The fluidity in the parkour was so bloody terrible, I am glad they are redesigning them for AC Rogue. I also like how the AC4 team mentioned AC3's cities sucked so they made the cities more dense and better for parkour.

AC4s cities more dense???????? Are you dense??????

and The Ezio games also featured some Extremely WIDE streets. And wouldn't say AC3s cities were any worse in that regard. I can understand the variety/beauty argument. But that is fairly subjective. As I personally like colonial Georgian style architecture.

Fatal-Feit
09-19-2014, 09:16 PM
New York and Boston were the worst designed cities in AC games.

1. Streets were too wide
2. Roof tops were too varied height wise breaking parkour fluidity
3. The rooftops were too pointy

They SUCKED. The fluidity in the parkour was so bloody terrible, I am glad they are redesigning them for AC Rogue. I also like how the AC4 team mentioned AC3's cities sucked so they made the cities more dense and better for parkour.

1. So was Venice, Rome, and many other cities.
2. That's literally common in every city, not just AC:3's.
3. Pointy rooftops helps avoid detection. Other than that, it didn't hinge game-play.

...Parkouring was fine. I'll make an upload if _M doesn't.

EmbodyingSeven5
09-19-2014, 09:17 PM
Lol yes, those little bastards were 100 times worse than minstrels

worst part was that you couldn't kill em.

Fatal-Feit
09-19-2014, 09:19 PM
worst part was that you couldn't kill em.

You should see Sixkeys' sig.

marvelfannumber
09-19-2014, 09:21 PM
I actually had an easier time free running along New York than Venice. Sure New York had Broadway and Broad Street which were way too wide, but Venice had the huge canals (which were rather annoying to get out of), big walls which you couldn't climb and massive squares.

New York only had two streets that really bothered me to be honest. Venice on the other hand had plenty of places which annoyed me.

Megas_Doux
09-19-2014, 09:23 PM
AC4s cities more dense???????? Are you dense??????

and The Ezio games also featured some Extremely WIDE streets. And wouldn't say AC3s cities were any worse in that regard. I can understand the variety/beauty argument. But that is fairly subjective. As I personally like colonial Georgian style architecture.


1. So was Venice, Rome, and many other cities.
2. That's literally common in every city, not just AC:3's.
3. Pointy rooftops helps avoid detection. Other than that, it didn't hinge game-play.

t.

I Agree with pac!

Parkour is more fluid in Havana and even Kingston than Boston and NY. In regards of the cities during Ezio´s trilogy, well there are indeed some wide streets, but in general the quantity of narrow alleys, taller buildings and ACTUAL landmarks surpass with EASE anything and everything in Colonial America. In the latter there is NO stuff like Florence´s and Acre´s cathedral, Rome Castel Saint Angelo, Hagia Sophia, the Roman Ruins, etc etc ETC.......

The only buildings that I enjoy are NY´s brewery and Saint Paul´s Chapel.....

Look at the pics I posted above....

GunnerGalactico
09-19-2014, 09:24 PM
I didn't have any such problems with the fluidity of the parkour in NY.

Megas_Doux
09-19-2014, 09:27 PM
I didn't have such problems with the fluidity of the parkour in NY.


I did not have problems, the city was just a boring chore to begin with. Plus there was no background music and Rome, Constantinople, Damascus, Acre, Firenze, Jerusalem and Venice, just to say some, are way more interesting.

And adding further insult to injury, they RE use it within a time frame of 15 years, such GREED.

Namikaze_17
09-19-2014, 09:33 PM
I did not have problems, the city was just a boring chore to begin with. Plus there was no background music and Rome, Constantinople, Damascus, Acre, Firenze, Jerusalem and Venice, just to say some, are way more interesting.

And adding further insult to injury, they RE use it within a time frame of 15 years, such GREED.

Well by that Logic, that's like comparing an Old Person to a child over who has more Wisdom.

Of course those cities you mentioned beat Boston and NY, they're in countries that have been around for centuries.

Megas_Doux
09-19-2014, 09:35 PM
Well by that Logic, that's like comparing an Old Person to a child over who has more Wisdom.

Of course those cities you mentioned beat Boston and NY, they're in countries that have been around for centuries.

Exactly!

That is why cities like that are WAY more suitable for an Assassin´s Creed game......The rural approach was a nice change of pace, in AC IV :p , but thank Azathoth we have an interesting urban playground back in the likes of Paris.

GunnerGalactico
09-19-2014, 09:35 PM
I did not have problems, the city was just a boring chore to begin with. Plus there was no background music and Rome, Constantinople, Damascus, Acre, Firenze, Jerusalem and Venice, just to say some, are way more interesting.

And adding further insult to injury, they RE use it within a time frame of 15 years, such GREED.

I know it is not as picturesque as the cities you have mentioned, but it was charming in it's own way. The only thing I disliked was the lack of ambient music. Each to their own I guess.

marvelfannumber
09-19-2014, 09:40 PM
I agree that New York definetly lacked the appropriate atmosphere (How could they leave out the ambient music?! HOW!), but I thought it's charm came from it's authencity. It was probably the most authentic city Ubisoft have built for an AC so far and I definetly appreciate that.

Though I will add that New York looked beautiful during the winter.

DumbGamerTag94
09-19-2014, 09:40 PM
I had no fluidity problems with AC3 either.

I've replayed the entire series over probably well over 10 times. And I can say with 100% certainty that from an annoying falling off rooftops/breaking parkour fluidity sense. That AC3s cities are no different from any other in terms of wide street issues(Venice's Canals for example or Florence's wide streets and courtyards).

And AC3 has plenty of landmarks too they just may not be as "nice" to you.

There's fenuel Hall in Boston, Old North Church, New York has Kings College(Colombia University), Federal Hall, St Paul's chapel, Trinity Church, Bridewell Prison, etc.

The only problem is that they aren't as internationally famous because most are no longer standing or have been replaced with small monuments or parks.(for instance Battery Park NY is where Fort George used to be). And federal hall is now a museum on wall st.

How beautiful they are on the other hand is subjective.

Namikaze_17
09-19-2014, 09:44 PM
Exactly!

That is why cities like that are WAY more suitable for an Assassin´s Creed game......The rural approach was a nice change of pace, in AC IV :p , but thank Azathoth we have an interesting urban playground back in the likes of Paris.

I personally enjoyed the more rural approach with AC3. Sure it's cities aren't as large or wide as the cities you mentioned but give it a break man...the true landscape was actually the Frontier which is Connor's real home like how Florence was Ezio's.

And Tbh, sometimes bigger =/= better you catch what I'm saying? The fact that although flawed, NY & Boston were actually built accurately than the previous games cities who were "Rised" a little to make parkour more fluid.

Don't get me wrong, I LOVE CITIES! Venice & The Frontier are my favs.

EDIT: I didn't have any problems running in AC3 cities or the Frontier...I actually had problems running in Florence & Venice though. Not to mention the annoying crowds of people that would make me fall while running.

And I agree, the lack of ambient music was a low point in some parts.

Megas_Doux
09-19-2014, 09:47 PM
I had no fluidity problems with AC3 either.

I've replayed the entire series over probably well over 10 times. And I can say with 100% certainty that from an annoying falling off rooftops/breaking parkour fluidity sense. That AC3s cities are no different from any other in terms of wide street issues(Venice's Canals for example or Florence's wide streets and courtyards).

And AC3 has plenty of landmarks too they just may not be as "nice" to you.

There's fenuel Hall in Boston, Old North Church, New York has Kings College(Colombia University), Federal Hall, St Paul's chapel, Trinity Church, Bridewell Prison, etc.

The only problem is that they aren't as internationally famous because most are no longer standing or have been replaced with small monuments or parks.(for instance Battery Park NY is where Fort George used to be). And federal hall is now a museum on wall st.


Those are just too small !!!!!!!!!


Faneuil Hall as seeing in AC III

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/98/Faneuil_Hall_1740.jpg

New York City Hall as seen in AC III

http://www.nps.gov/feha/historyculture/images/20_4-mm2_2.jpg

Il Duomo di Firenze as seen in game:

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Qwz7-WuqVVw/T06shFWbkqI/AAAAAAAAAGY/ENprKjWJEg8/s1600/santa-maria-dei-fiori+alzado+exterior.jpg

And Hagia Sophia seen in game:

http://www.teslasociety.com/pictures/Roman%20Empire%20Images/RomanEmpire3.jpg

You could fit those small buildings inside the cathedrals....Anf those catherals are some of the most innovative buildings of their kind. True marvels of their times, the mere comparison is a joke.

Again, AC III is the only main game in the franchise that does NOT feature an UNESCO World Heritage for a reason.......

Fatal-Feit
09-19-2014, 09:53 PM
I Agree with pac!

Parkour is more fluid in Havana and even Kingston than Boston and NY. In regards of the cities during Ezio´s trilogy, well there are indeed some wide streets, but in general the quantity of narrow alleys, taller buildings and ACTUAL landmarks surpass with EASE anything and everything in Colonial America. In the latter there is NO stuff like Florence´s and Acre´s cathedral, Rome Castel Saint Angelo, Hagia Sophia, the Roman Ruins, etc etc ETC.......

The only buildings that I enjoy are NY´s brewery and Saint Paul´s Chapel.....

Look at the pics I posted above....

Havana, I agree. But not Kingston. Kingston's on the same level, if anything.

Anyway, looks and aesthetics are subjective. I enjoyed Colonial America a lot more than Rome, Forli, San Gimignano, Nassau, and Kingston (not naming AC:1 or AC:R's because I haven't spent half as much time with Altair's games as said others). Parkouring aside, they felt so much more realistic, organic, immersive, and alive. It wasn't just the architectures and historical landmarks that made the cities, there was the varied AIs that don't feel like robots, animals in the city, the improved vegetation and trees, varying weathers, the overall atmosphere, etc. Personally, the older cities might be more ''interesting'' and ''unique'', but I prefer how they're actually represented over pictures.

DumbGamerTag94
09-19-2014, 09:55 PM
They don't have to be huge. I don't give a ****. And besides AC3s buildings aside from landmarks are just as tall as the rest of the series. Typically being 3-4 stories in NY(I checked last time I played).

And why the hell would the US give a **** about UNESCO? We literally created the UN and Unesco. And that's all headquartered in.....New York.
Americans are more concerned with National Parks and National Register of Historic places. Why? Because the UN recognition is just as freaking valid.

Lol UNESCO......are you kidding???......that's like a participation trophy in elementary school sports lol.

What's the UN anyway besides a useless version of NATO?? Lol

Kakuzu745
09-19-2014, 09:55 PM
I dont even understand why this is a discussion...some people are really too defensive with AC3. NY and Boston were not really that impressive in some items if you compare it vs. other cities...there is no need to try to defend them like if that was an insult.

Namikaze_17
09-19-2014, 09:57 PM
Those are just too small !!!!!!!!!


Faneuil Hall as seeing in AC III

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/98/Faneuil_Hall_1740.jpg

New York City Hall as seen in AC III

http://www.nps.gov/feha/historyculture/images/20_4-mm2_2.jpg

Il Duomo di Firenze as seen in game:

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Qwz7-WuqVVw/T06shFWbkqI/AAAAAAAAAGY/ENprKjWJEg8/s1600/santa-maria-dei-fiori+alzado+exterior.jpg

And Hagia Sophia seen in game:

http://www.teslasociety.com/pictures/Roman%20Empire%20Images/RomanEmpire3.jpg

You could fit those small buildings inside the cathedrals....
Again, AC III is the only main game in the franchise that does NOT feature an UNESCO World Heritage for a reason.......

But how many more years of art and culture do those cities have over AC3 Cities?

That's like Comparing Mcdonalds to newly opened burger joint.

Still not a valid reason in my eyes.

Shahkulu101
09-19-2014, 09:57 PM
I dont even understand why this is a discussion...some people are really too defensive with AC3. NY and Boston were not really that impressive in some items if you compare it vs. other cities...there is no need to try to defend them like if that was an insult.

Yes, there is absolutely no need for their shocking and horrendous difference of opinion...

Fatal-Feit
09-19-2014, 10:04 PM
NY and Boston were not really that impressive in some items if you compare it vs. other cities...there is no need to try to defend them like if that was an insult.

Thanks for not reading the thread.

TheHumanTowel
09-19-2014, 10:07 PM
But how many more years of art and culture do those cities have over AC3 Cities?

That's like Comparing Mcdonalds to newly opened burger joint.

Still not a valid reason in my eyes.
Lol that doesn't make the comparison unfair. It's just part of the reason why New York sucks compared to Florence, Constantinople, Venice, etc.

GunnerGalactico
09-19-2014, 10:09 PM
But how many more years of art and culture do those cities have over AC3 Cities?

That's like Comparing Mcdonalds to newly opened burger joint.

Still not a valid reason in my eyes.

Well, that's one way of putting it. :p

The cities in AC3 are quite young and were still in development, they are not as steeped in history as the other cities in AC1 onwards to ACR.

Namikaze_17
09-19-2014, 10:10 PM
I dont even understand why this is a discussion...some people are really too defensive with AC3. NY and Boston were not really that impressive in some items if you compare it vs. other cities...there is no need to try to defend them like if that was an insult.

It's not even that...I just think it isn't as bad as some make it out to be. Is it perfect? No. My favorite? No. I just disagree with the bigger = better notion as all.

DumbGamerTag94
09-19-2014, 10:12 PM
It's come to my realization that people on these forums are incredibly dumb. And can't tell the difference between several things.

1: Preference=/=Superiority

2: Opinion=/=Facts

I've played the series a ton of times over and all the cities play just as well as any other. If you don't think it's as nice. Or you don't like that particular setting. That does not mean it's inferior. It only means that YOU don't like it!!!!!

How hard is this for people to get through their heads.

Megas_Doux
09-19-2014, 10:13 PM
They don't have to be huge. I don't give a ****. And besides AC3s buildings aside from landmarks are just as tall as the rest of the series. Typically being 3-4 stories in NY(I checked last time I played).

And why the hell would the US give a **** about UNESCO? We literally created the UN and Unesco. And that's all headquartered in.....New York.
Americans are more concerned with National Parks and National Register of Historic places. Why? Because the UN recognition is just as freaking valid.

Lol UNESCO......are you kidding???......that's like a participation trophy in elementary school sports lol.

What's the UN anyway besides a useless version of NATO?? Lol

It is MUCH more interesting to climb the former ones that the latter ones....But if you take it that personal, I´ll step back: NY and Boston during the XVIII century are on the same level that Damascus, Rome, Firenze, Venice, Acre and Constantinople in their respective games...:o


But how many more years of art and culture do those cities have over AC3 Cities?

That's like Comparing Mcdonalds to newly opened burger joint.

Still not a valid reason in my eyes.


There is valid point, back in the day, 2007-2011, the developers used to say that in order to choose a game the setting had to fulfill two things:

1 Being historically "relevant"
2 Architecturally interesting.

And the latter is absent from AC III....



I dont even understand why this is a discussion...some people are really too defensive with AC3. NY and Boston were not really that impressive in some items if you compare it vs. other cities...there is no need to try to defend them like if that was an insult.

Well, MOST forum members here are not offended and are taking the discussion pretty maturely......

marvelfannumber
09-19-2014, 10:15 PM
It's come to my realization that people on these forums are incredibly dumb. And can't tell the difference between several things.

1: Preference=/=Superiority

2: Opinion=/=Facts


Welcome to the internet my friend, I am glad you have joined us.

Namikaze_17
09-19-2014, 10:15 PM
Lol that doesn't make the comparison unfair. It's just part of the reason why New York sucks compared to Florence, Constantinople, Venice, etc.

Oh, yes...it's totally fair comparing cities in their early stages to cities in their best shape.

NY didn't get to it's "prime" until centuries later.

TheHumanTowel
09-19-2014, 10:19 PM
It's come to my realization that people on these forums are incredibly dumb. And can't tell the difference between several things.

1: Preference=/=Superiority

2: Opinion=/=Facts

I've played the series a ton of times over and all the cities play just as well as any other. If you don't think it's as nice. Or you don't like that particular setting. That does not mean it's inferior. It only means that YOU don't like it!!!!!

How hard is this for people to get through their heads.
Wow thanks for this revelation Bmark. Everyone go back and edit your posts. Every time you say "New York is a dull piece of ****" add "It is my humble opinion that, New York is a dull piece of ****."


Oh, yes...it's totally fair comparing cities in their early stages to cities in their best shape.

NY didn't get to it's "prime" until centuries later.
Sure but it's totally fair to compare cities that were all the settings of the one video game series.

Namikaze_17
09-19-2014, 10:23 PM
It is MUCH more interesting to climb the former ones that the latter ones....But if you take it that personal, I´ll step back: NY and Boston during the XVIII century are on the same level that Damascus, Rome, Firenze, Venice, Acre and Constantinople in their respective games...:o




There is valid point, back in the day, 2007-2011, the developers used to say that in order to choose a game the set had to fulfill two things:

1 Being historically "relevant"
2 Architecturally interesting.

And the latter is absent from AC III....




Well, MOST forum members here are not offended and are taking the discussion pretty maturely......

Noticed how you mentioned 2007-2011 which was during the FIRST games...times have changed, and so have they.

NY & Boston being Architecturally interesting is all subjective, and not everyone is gonna like every setting.

I don't get what you mean by "Relevant" can you elaborate on that some more? :)

DumbGamerTag94
09-19-2014, 10:34 PM
Wow thanks for this revelation Bmark. Everyone go back and edit your posts. Every time you say "New York is a dull piece of ****" add "It is my humble opinion that, New York is a dull piece of ****."


Exactly! Your heavy sarcasm aside you've just hit the nail on the head. People for some reason are Pulling some BS trying to claim some kind of Superiority among the settings. Which is utterly farcical. There is no gameplay differences between the cities that's a line of tripe and has been disproven multiple times by many people(Assassin_M has some excellent videos comparing Venice to New York parkour). The only difference is some perceived superiority or preference. Neither of which has any kind of definitive proof or can hold any water.

Essentially all the settings are just as freaking good and play just the same. Only your opinion on weather YOU FIND it fun, or beautiful, or interesting is what makes them different. And people are perfectly entitled to hold the complete opposite belief.

BTW NY is not my favorite city nor is AC3 my personal favorite.
My favorite cities are as follows.
Rome
Florence
Havana
New York
Venice
Jerusalem
Boston
Constantinople
Kingston
Acre
Damascus

In that order. So sue me. Sorry I'm not in the Constantinople or die club of delusional elitists. Literally all the cities are no different. Only your preference matters. Stop trying to make up BS reasons or pass off some outright lie/opinion as a scientific fact as why one is better than the other.

It's as simple as "I just like X better". You don't have to justify everything or try to prove it's somehow better.

Megas_Doux
09-19-2014, 10:41 PM
Oh, yes...it's totally fair comparing cities in their early stages to cities in their best shape.

NY didn't get to it's "prime" until centuries later.

I am NOT talking about modern New York!

As far as I remember, AC III is set in the XVIII century and I have ALL the right of the world to express my dislike for it and the fact is used not one but TWO times as an AC location...


Noticed how you mentioned 2007-2011 which was during the FIRST games...times have changed, and so have they.

NY & Boston being Architecturally interesting is all subjective, and not everyone is gonna like every setting.

I don't get what you mean by "Relevant" can you elaborate on that some more? :)

During podcasts, interviews and press articles developers said that when they decide where to set a location, they take into consideration whether the period is important and famous in the "grand scheme of things". But at the same time, it had to be a "fresh" location in the media, and a location in which fire arms were not that advanced hence why they chose the Crusades, Italian Renaissance, American Revolution, but ruled out, according to them, Feudal Japan, Ancient Egypt and WWII.

More info here:

http://gamerant.com/assassins-creed-settings-egypt-japan-ww2-brian-142025/

And to Bmark, I can parkour normally in AC III, I just get bored to death while doing so in those buildings that I find small and uninteresting, in which adding further insult to injury, there is NO background music.

Namikaze_17
09-19-2014, 10:47 PM
I am NOT talking about modern New York!

As far as I remember, AC III is set in the XVIII century and I have ALL the right of the world to express my dislike for it and the fact is used not one but TWO times an AC location...



During podcasts, interviews and press articles developers said that when they decide where to set a location, they take into consideration whether the period is important and famous in the "grand scheme of things". But at the same time, it had to be a "fresh" location in the media, hence why they chose the Crusades, Italian Renaissance, American Revolution, but ruling out, according to them, Feudal Japan, Ancient Egypt and WWII.

More info here:

http://gamerant.com/assassins-creed-settings-egypt-japan-ww2-brian-142025/

I understand your dislike for 18th Century cities ( They aren't my favorites either) and I respect your opinion on it as well. And I'm not talking about 2014 NY, more like 1860-1900's NY.

And regarding the settings, I personally wouldn't mind those as much as you, but in the end, It's Ubi's say over what "Relevant".

Megas_Doux
09-19-2014, 10:51 PM
I understand your dislike for 18th Century cities ( They aren't my favorites either) and I respect your opinion on it as well. And I'm not talking about 2014 NY, more like 1860-1900's NY.


NY during that period would be, MUCH more interesting architectural wise to me. And now that you ask, it is the greedy fact that is being used TWO time within a time frame of 15 years that bothers me.

DumbGamerTag94
09-19-2014, 10:55 PM
And to Bmark, I can parkour normally in AC III, I just get bored to death while doing so in those buildings that I find small and uninteresting, in which adding further insult to injury, there is NO background music.
And you have every right to have been bored or not like it. But others did like it. Including myself. Our views are just as valid.

Now the lack of background music I can understand that being irritating.

But I didn't personally mind it so much as it allowed me to focus on all the goings on in the environment and get that 18th century immersion on. While the background music in AC2-B-R. I felt were horrifically annoying with the content opera wailing I couldn't ever hear what was going on around me...listen in on the convos and general feel if the city(something that gets an amazing amount of research and detail in AC but was easily ignored in Ezio's games due to annoying music). AC1 AC4 did much better.

But I'm actually amazed at how much historic research goes in to the random convos of NPCs in AC games. It's impressive. No wonder they ditched the music in AC3. All that work would have been wasted.

Kakuzu745
09-19-2014, 10:59 PM
Yes, there is absolutely no need for their shocking and horrendous difference of opinion...

You are missing the point...i am not talking about the difference of opinion, I am talking about getting defensive when someone says New York is below the par compared to other cities. Is it really necessary? It is also just an opinion, that was my point...no need to feel like their precious NY is under attack.


Thanks for not reading the thread.

Thanks for hiding your lack of understanding of what I said with a random useless comment.


It's not even that...I just think it isn't as bad as some make it out to be. Is it perfect? No. My favorite? No. I just disagree with the bigger = better notion as all.

I agree but saying Damascus is better than New York when stating an opinion is not necessarily an attack in NY. It is exactly that, an opinion.

Namikaze_17
09-19-2014, 11:09 PM
NY during that period would be, MUCH more interesting architectural wise to me. And now that you ask, it is the greedy fact that is being used TWO time within a time frame of 15 years that bothers me.

I understand...I would have rather Rogue be in a different setting and city.

This game should've been's- well you know who. ;)

Fatal-Feit
09-19-2014, 11:11 PM
You are missing the point...i am not talking about the difference of opinion, I am talking about getting defensive when someone says New York is below the par compared to other cities. Is it really necessary? It is also just an opinion, that was my point...no need to feel like their precious NY is under attack.

Thanks for hiding your lack of understanding of what I said with a random useless comment.

I agree but saying Damascus is better than New York when stating an opinion is not necessarily an attack in NY. It is exactly that, an opinion.

Defensive =/= Disagreement/Discussion

You don't have to be so judgmental. Really, just leave this thread if you're not going to add to it.

Namikaze_17
09-19-2014, 11:16 PM
You are missing the point...i am not talking about the difference of opinion, I am talking about getting defensive when someone says New York is below the par compared to other cities. Is it really necessary? It is also just an opinion, that was my point...no need to feel like their precious NY is under attack.



Thanks for hiding your lack of understanding of what I said with a random useless comment.



I agree but saying Damascus is better than New York when stating an opinion is not necessarily an attack in NY. It is exactly that, an opinion.

NY is not "precious" to me...and I never said it was an attack.

My argument is notion, not a nation.

DumbGamerTag94
09-19-2014, 11:18 PM
NY during that period would be, MUCH more interesting architectural wise to me. And now that you ask, it is the greedy fact that is being used TWO time within a time frame of 15 years that bothers me.

This is valid. I don't know why they used the same city twice if not for Laziness/greed.

It's the 7 years war it should have been set in Quebec. Or at the very least a new British colonial city like Philadelphia.

Kakuzu745
09-19-2014, 11:41 PM
Defensive =/= Disagreement/Discussion

You don't have to be so judgmental. Really, just leave this thread if you're not going to add to it.

I am not being judgmental...whatever, apparently I cannot express myself in this thread.

Some of the replies were defensive but yeah...that is besides the point...I will let myself out ;)



NY is not "precious" to me...and I never said it was an attack.

My argument is notion, not a nation.

I was not referring to you my friend...apparently I seriously cannot express myself in this thread...I will gtfo now ;)

poptartz20
09-19-2014, 11:46 PM
I'm sure it will be improved.

but at the end of the day it's really hard to compare Rome to Colonial US.

it's like apples and Dinosaurs. I don't think that AC3 had the worst city designs. I just think it was a hard adjustment from coming from the cities that made it easy to parkour to where streets were very wide along with building being somewhat far apart and using a horse was your best way of getting around. it just didn't let the parkour aspect shine.

each city has it's strengths and weaknesses.

SixKeys
09-19-2014, 11:52 PM
I'm sure it will be improved.

but at the end of the day it's really hard to compare Rome to Colonial US.

it's like apples and Dinosaurs. I don't think that AC3 had the worst city designs. I just think it was a hard adjustment from coming from the cities that made it easy to parkour to where streets were very wide along with building being somewhat far apart and using a horse was your best way of getting around. it just didn't let the parkour aspect shine.

each city has it's strengths and weaknesses.

In your opinion, what were the strengths of AC3's cities?

Namikaze_17
09-20-2014, 12:03 AM
I am not being judgmental...whatever, apparently I cannot express myself in this thread.

Some of the replies were defensive but yeah...that is besides the point...I will let myself out ;)




I was not referring to you my friend...apparently I seriously cannot express myself in this thread...I will gtfo now ;)

You mistake what I'm saying...I was just expressing my view as all. I'm not angry or on the defensive.

Kakuzu745
09-20-2014, 12:18 AM
You mistake what I'm saying...I was just expressing my view as all. I'm not angry or on the defensive.

I know you were not, I was not talking about you...you know what, lets forget I ever posted anything.

Namikaze_17
09-20-2014, 12:24 AM
I know you were not, I was not talking about you...you know what, lets forget I ever posted anything.

Relax, no need to get tense man...It's cool. :)

poptartz20
09-20-2014, 12:40 AM
In your opinion, what were the strengths of AC3's cities?

It's a trap!

No but really, I felt that the cities in Ac3 had easy access points, I had less problems free running, then there were the added QTE of running though a house or a window to quickly get somewhere you needed to go it was still fairly easy to navigate, and The only problem I honestly had was I wasn't able to jump across the street from the next building at will, but that was just the architecture of the period.

DumbGamerTag94
09-20-2014, 01:02 AM
And there's the clothes lines you could use to get across

Assassin_M
09-20-2014, 01:51 AM
In your opinion, what were the strengths of AC3's cities?

Allow me to reply to that too, if I may. NY's only weakness was the lack of ambient music. I firmly believe that 90% of the general dislike of NY is because of the lack of music, now that said (Your case with AC III of course, not withstanding) Boston and NY were much better experiences for me than any city before them technically. NY was just as good as a standard as the one previous games set in terms of visual appeal, I loved NY.

in terms of crowd density, Boston and NY are PACKED and that's largely thanks to the new engine. Markets feel full and bustling with life, ports and harbors are filled with people working and slaving off. More actions, more animations, better AI, no group mentality = much better crowds to watch and blend with.

in terms of Parkour, both cities were just fine as I demonstrated in my Boston video (and as I'll demonstrate very soon in my NY video) there're enough clothlines, ropes, poles and trees that connect each building, the guards are MUCH more forgiving than AC II-ACR's guards. they're MUCH more consistent and there's A LOT less of them, especially around landmarks.
Finally for parkour, you can very easily descend from rooftop to pole or just anything on the side of buildings by simply holding the high profile button and circle. It's really a primitive "down" button that was fully realized in ACU. this provides a quick way to avoid guards without the whole ordeal feeling like a chore or that it broke the flow.

In terms of architecture, NY is really cool. it's just as good as Venice, Florence and Constantinople--it's simply a different taste of cool.

That's of course, without mentioning weather, seasons and animals.

Megas_Doux
09-20-2014, 02:21 AM
In terms of architecture, NY is really cool. it's just as good as Venice, Florence and Constantinople--it's simply a SMALLER taste of cool.

.

Fixed :p+

Being serious, I dont have any problem to parkour in NY or Boston per se from any technical point. It is just that I get bored of it rather quickly thanks to the lack of background music, something that I had to address myself, but more importantly, the absence of GRANDEUR architecture that can grab my interest and I dont find the style particularly eye candy either......

When I free roam there I miss Acre and Florence´s big cathedrals, Hagia Sophia, the Roman Ruins, Dome of the Rock, Castel Sant'Angelo or the just the sheer beauty of Venice and Florence You know, that kind of stuff.

Thank Azathoth a huge urban enviroment with big landmarks is back, and at 1:1 scale......

Namikaze_17
09-20-2014, 03:02 AM
At least they were accurate with the Cities...

Megas_Doux
09-20-2014, 03:10 AM
At least they were accurate with the Cities...

I wish they took more liberties, just like they did with Acre, Jerusalem, Rome and Florence, for instance.

SixKeys
09-20-2014, 03:11 AM
Allow me to reply to that too, if I may. NY's only weakness was the lack of ambient music. I firmly believe that 90% of the general dislike of NY is because of the lack of music.

We can agree to disagree on things like architecture and ambiance as that stuff is subjective, and I can respect differing opinions. What I don't appreciate is when you make blanket statements that directly contradict what people are actually saying.
"I firmly believe that 90% of the general dislike of NY is because of the lack of music." Saying something like this is disrespectful to the people who are giving their own reasons for disliking AC3's locations. Lack of ambient music is only one of the reasons I dislike AC3's locations, and a comparatively small reason at that. The insane amount of guards (and their telepathic abilities), wide streets and imprecise parkour are much more important, and many other people have cited those exact same reasons. Yet you flat-out dismiss those reasons and replace them with something completely arbitrary that you simply decided upon (ambient music). You do this with other things too, like claiming Ezio fans only like him because he's charismatic and funny, even when they've already told you those aren't the reasons they like him. Or that people who dislike full sync only hate it because they think it's too hard, even when they've already given completely different arguments.
"I don't like full sync because I don't think it supports player freedom.
-A-ha! You're only whining because you think the game was too hard!
-Uhh, that's not what I said."

Feel free to disagree and argue with other people's points if you think they're wrong, but don't just pull a strawman argument out of your *** and proceed to treat it like that's the only thing people have a problem with. Actually listen to what people are saying, and if you still disagree with them, that's fine. Going "no, you don't actually mean what you're saying, let ME tell you what you really think" is really arrogant and will only serve to piss people off.

Fatal-Feit
09-20-2014, 03:18 AM
It is just that I get bored of it rather quickly thanks to the lack of background music, something that I had to address myself, but more importantly, the absence of GRANDEUR architecture that can grab my interest and I dont find the style particularly eye candy either......

When I free roam there I miss Acre and Florence´s big cathedrals, Hagia Sophia, the Roman Ruins, Dome of the Rock, Castel Sant'Angelo or the just the sheer beauty of Venice and Florence You know, that kind of stuff.

Thank Azathoth a huge urban enviroment with big landmarks is back, and at 1:1 scale......

You added ambient music to AC:3? If you have, do PM me about it. :p

Anyway, I found the architectures of AC:3 to be good eye candy. They're very detailed and varied in comparison to the past titles. You get the feeling that people actually work and live in these places, not as though they've simply copy and pasted the same textured buildings over and over again. Add that to the organic and authentic day/night/weather system with the realistic and varying AIs that are still a lot better than AC:IV's and the cities themselves becomes both immersive and alive. (This goes for the frontier and homestead as well)

I think many of us are looking for different things when we free-roam. For me, I can't get immersed in a world that doesn't feel real enough. Or breathing, for that matter. When I jump into Venice or Florence, they make for a fun experience, but the kind of fun that's meant simply as an enjoyable game. They're levels with different filters, enemy archetypes, landmarks. Nothing to get fully immersed in as a world. (Although, this describe how I feel about the Ezio Trilogy, entirely) For example, the AIs are restricted to human adults that are robotic and lifeless, you'll learn and see all of their pattern after the first hour. Mercenaries, thieves, and courtesans do not lounge around like that. And store and shop owners do not all conduct business like that. There're just not a lot of realistic stuff to make it feel like an authentic breathing city. (Not trying to turn this into a city vs city argument) But with AC:3, I get most of what I want such as animals, vegetation, weathers, and other stuff I've probably already re:iterated a thousand time. Said enormous landmarks and unique architectures are great, but for me, they lose their charm in a world that isn't immersive, IMO. Sort of the way completing a new level does in a retro game. Hope this makes sense.

JustPlainQuirky
09-20-2014, 03:19 AM
I actually prefer historical accuracy over liberties.

Of course some liberties MUST be taken otherwise things like traveling long distances would become a massive nuisance.

Namikaze_17
09-20-2014, 03:43 AM
It's all a matter of perspective really...

I personally enjoy both Venice & The Frontier.

Is one just essentially better? Well that's perspective too.

SixKeys
09-20-2014, 03:49 AM
I think many of us are looking for different things when we free-roam. For me, I can't get immersed in a world that doesn't feel real enough. Or breathing, for that matter. When I jump into Venice or Florence, they make for a fun experience, but the kind of fun that's meant simply as an enjoyable game. They're levels with different filters, enemy archetypes, landmarks. Nothing to get fully immersed in as a world. (Although, this describe how I feel about the Ezio Trilogy, entirely) For example, the AIs are restricted to human adults that are robotic and lifeless, you'll learn and see all of their pattern after the first hour. Mercenaries, thieves, and courtesans do not lounge around like that. And store and shop owners do not all conduct business like that. There're just not a lot of realistic stuff to make it feel like an authentic breathing city. (Not trying to turn this into a city vs city argument) But with AC:3, I get most of what I want such as animals, vegetation, weathers, and other stuff I've probably already re:iterated a thousand time. Said enormous landmarks and unique architectures are great, but for me, they lose their charm in a world that isn't immersive, IMO. Sort of the way completing a new level does in a retro game. Hope this makes sense.

Immersion is, of course, highly subjective. I find your point of view interesting because it's basically the opposite of mine. I was just thinking back to how impressed I was (and still am) with AC2/ACB's NPC animations. There's one guy at the harbor in Venice that I will always remember because I just love his animation. He looks like he's waiting for a boat, just kind of hangs around idly. Sometimes he glances at his nails, then wipes them on his shirt, and suddenly seems to notice something stuck at the bottom of his shoe and starts shaking it. I absolutely love these lengthy animations for just a single character. Maybe it's just me, but I haven't found anything that detailed in AC3's NPC animations. M once talked about the citizens having their own routines and how cool and immersive it was to follow them around and watch them go about their daily lives. I tried doing the same thing once - picked a random woman from the crowd and started following her to see if she did anything interesting. I was hoping she'd do stuff like stop at market stalls unexpectedly, greet friends etc. Maybe I just picked the wrong person to follow because she didn't seem to have any kind of routine at all, did nothing interesting the whole time, and then glitched out at some point and just started walking in circles. One of my favorite things to do when roaming in the Ezio games is looking at the individual NPCs and imagine them having their own lives. In AC3 I didn't get that feeling from anyone. That's why the Ezio games, while having simpler graphics and less NPCs on-screen at the same time, feel more like living, breathing worlds to me. AC3, in contrast, feels like a technical marvel with its sheer number of NPCs, but they don't feel like real people, thus the world feels less alive as a result.

DumbGamerTag94
09-20-2014, 03:50 AM
I actually prefer historical accuracy over liberties.

Of course some liberties MUST be taken otherwise things like traveling long distances would become a massive nuisance.

I very much agree with you. I much prefer accuracy to changes.
Although AC always has very subtle changes. Things that are not historically accurate but suit the time period.
Stuff like The old north church being completed in AC3, the cathedral in Havana, the minarets of Hagia Sofia, the queens staircase in Nassau, the church in acre, the gold dome of the dome of the rock. Etc. Most of these being from the same century or even within 20-50 years of the setting so not out of place.

The most heinous and inaccurate was Rome's Baroque architecture. Off by a century+. Yet somehow it didn't "feel" out of place in the renaissance so ultimately didn't feel like such a crime.

But overall AC has been very good about staying true to the historic cities. With only subtle sensible changes.

I thing Unity's Paris has promise for being the most historically accurate city to date! A title previously held by New York and Boston.

Namikaze_17
09-20-2014, 03:58 AM
@Sixkeys

The Homestead townfolk do extended Animations if you follow them long enough.

Assassin_M
09-20-2014, 03:58 AM
We can agree to disagree on things like architecture and ambiance as that stuff is subjective, and I can respect differing opinions. What I don't appreciate is when you make blanket statements that directly contradict what people are actually saying.
Oh please, you quoted someone's post about AC III's focus on story and said "Haha, good one" Because that's not infringing on somebody else's opinion oh no:rolleyes:


"I firmly believe that 90% of the general dislike of NY is because of the lack of music." Saying something like this is disrespectful to the people who are giving their own reasons for disliking AC3's locations. Lack of ambient music is only one of the reasons I dislike AC3's locations, and a comparatively small reason at that.
No, it's not disrespectful. What i'm saying is my opinion too. My opinion is that the lack of ambient music sapped the city of all character. Things sometimes are beautified by other enhancing elements. Every city in AC to me is a dull cesspit without music, I notice A LOT of other things I don't like but when the music is on, it becomes much MUCH harder to point out things I don't like because the music is just that damn good.


The insane amount of guards (and their telepathic abilities), wide streets and imprecise parkour are much more important
As I have demonstrated in my videos, none of that exists in my game. I don't know about anyone else but like I mentioned in my post, your problems are not withstanding to everything I said about NY and Boston. Guards are not telepathic, there meter fill is consistent and they have no insta detect. Wide streets are connected by ropes and clothelines and Parkour is actually more precise than previous AC games. If you don't want to climb something, just let go of the high profile button momentarily.


and many other people have cited those exact same reasons. Yet you flat-out dismiss those reasons and replace them with something completely arbitrary that you simply decided upon (ambient music).
I did not dismiss them, I stated why I believe these things are more prevalent in AC III when they were there in AC II (like Guards and detection). I also demonstrated that my game has NONE of these problems--it's quite reasonable to assume that my game is NOT the only game without those problems.



You do this with other things too, like claiming Ezio fans only like him because he's charismatic and funny, even when they've already told you those aren't the reasons they like him.
What? I never did that to people here. I only refer to people on FB and YT i.e the fanboys. But to be honest....i'v really never heard any other reason why anyone likes him..not here, not anywhere.



Or that people who dislike full sync only hate it because they think it's too hard, even when they've already given completely different arguments.
"I don't like full sync because I don't think it supports player freedom.
-A-ha! You're only whining because you think the game was too hard!
-Uhh, that's not what I said."
It's 50% rustling jimmies and 50% being serious. How does something optional hinder player freedom? oh it doesn't. Any restriction is you placing it on yourself, does the game freeze if you don't do the optional objectives? does it lock you out? no.


Feel free to disagree and argue with other people's points if you think they're wrong, but don't just pull a strawman argument out of your *** and proceed to treat it like that's the only thing people have a problem with. Actually listen to what people are saying, and if you still disagree with them, that's fine. Going "no, you don't actually mean what you're saying, let ME tell you what you really think" is really arrogant and will only serve to piss people off.
Nobody got pissed off but you:p


Fixed :p+

Being serious, I dont have any problem to parkour in NY or Boston per se from any technical point. It is just that I get bored of it rather quickly thanks to the lack of background music, something that I had to address myself, but more importantly, the absence of GRANDEUR architecture that can grab my interest and I dont find the style particularly eye candy either......

When I free roam there I miss Acre and Florence´s big cathedrals, Hagia Sophia, the Roman Ruins, Dome of the Rock, Castel Sant'Angelo or the just the sheer beauty of Venice and Florence You know, that kind of stuff.

Thank Azathoth a huge urban enviroment with big landmarks is back, and at 1:1 scale......
Nah;)

Like I said, I don't think NY has any less eye candy than Acre, Florence or Venice. I liked a lot of buildings there and the architecture was really cool. That said, if I don't find something that was attractive to me in something, I try to look for something else that's attractive and i'm bound to find something. Just saying how I look at things.

Assassin_M
09-20-2014, 04:01 AM
Immersion is, of course, highly subjective. I find your point of view interesting because it's basically the opposite of mine. I was just thinking back to how impressed I was (and still am) with AC2/ACB's NPC animations. There's one guy at the harbor in Venice that I will always remember because I just love his animation. He looks like he's waiting for a boat, just kind of hangs around idly. Sometimes he glances at his nails, then wipes them on his shirt, and suddenly seems to notice something stuck at the bottom of his shoe and starts shaking it. I absolutely love these lengthy animations for just a single character. Maybe it's just me, but I haven't found anything that detailed in AC3's NPC animations. M once talked about the citizens having their own routines and how cool and immersive it was to follow them around and watch them go about their daily lives. I tried doing the same thing once - picked a random woman from the crowd and started following her to see if she did anything interesting. I was hoping she'd do stuff like stop at market stalls unexpectedly, greet friends etc. Maybe I just picked the wrong person to follow because she didn't seem to have any kind of routine at all, did nothing interesting the whole time, and then glitched out at some point and just started walking in circles. One of my favorite things to do when roaming in the Ezio games is looking at the individual NPCs and imagine them having their own lives. In AC3 I didn't get that feeling from anyone. That's why the Ezio games, while having simpler graphics and less NPCs on-screen at the same time, feel more like living, breathing worlds to me. AC3, in contrast, feels like a technical marvel with its sheer number of NPCs, but they don't feel like real people, thus the world feels less alive as a result.
How on earth did you pretend that the citizens of the Ezio games have lives? They had no complex behavior commands. They were only programmed to either walk in groups, walk alone or talk to each other. Heck, even their paths are preset loops meaning that they don't interact with anyone or anything else on their way.

Like I said, your AC III has problems...but i'd like the Ezio games you have, they sound really cool.

Namikaze_17
09-20-2014, 04:09 AM
Recently I was playing AC2, and I decided to turn off the music to hear the people, animals, etc.


And I just heard nothing...literally nothing.

At least with AC3, I could hear various sounds and people do their usual activities. And the Frontier, I see animals hunt/ run away from each other like a scene off Animal Planet or something.

Fatal-Feit
09-20-2014, 04:12 AM
Immersion is, of course, highly subjective. I find your point of view interesting because it's basically the opposite of mine. I was just thinking back to how impressed I was (and still am) with AC2/ACB's NPC animations. There's one guy at the harbor in Venice that I will always remember because I just love his animation. He looks like he's waiting for a boat, just kind of hangs around idly. Sometimes he glances at his nails, then wipes them on his shirt, and suddenly seems to notice something stuck at the bottom of his shoe and starts shaking it. I absolutely love these lengthy animations for just a single character. Maybe it's just me, but I haven't found anything that detailed in AC3's NPC animations. M once talked about the citizens having their own routines and how cool and immersive it was to follow them around and watch them go about their daily lives. I tried doing the same thing once - picked a random woman from the crowd and started following her to see if she did anything interesting. I was hoping she'd do stuff like stop at market stalls unexpectedly, greet friends etc. Maybe I just picked the wrong person to follow because she didn't seem to have any kind of routine at all, did nothing interesting the whole time, and then glitched out at some point and just started walking in circles. One of my favorite things to do when roaming in the Ezio games is looking at the individual NPCs and imagine them having their own lives. In AC3 I didn't get that feeling from anyone. That's why the Ezio games, while having simpler graphics and less NPCs on-screen at the same time, feel more like living, breathing worlds to me. AC3, in contrast, feels like a technical marvel with its sheer number of NPCs, but they don't feel like real people, thus the world feels less alive as a result.

I tried to make my post based on my personal opinion as much as possible so it didn't conflict with anyone's opinion of ''immersion''. Especially since there are people who unfortunately runs into a lot of glitches in AC:3 which ruins their ''immersion'' more than the previous titles. And/or prefers a simpler systematic world for ''immersion''.

Anyway, that's a surprisingly polar opposite experience, you and I. I've been free roaming Venice a lot this afternoon, and I could not find an NPC that intrigued me the way they have for you. With AC:3, something I loved was that the AIs are reactive and constantly shifting, even to match the current story events. I remembered first playing through TTOKW, and was absolutely blown away by the constant changes in AI. You would see some of the rebels fight against the natives, others holding their each other against the walls, and the major overhaul when the red-coats get involved. And the guard's animations are, for only one game, actually representative of the demos. Say what you will about the AI, but the animations of the guards in Unity needs to be like AC:3's. They're extremely varied and full of life. Walking into base camps or forts, you will see some of them tossing and turning around when speaking to one another. Some of them will casually hold their muskets against their upper back neck. The guards that aren't patrolling or guarding gates are doing activities such as checking the cannons, moving supplies, or holding off unwanted NPC guests. It's really fascinating, and it always leaves me with a bit of guilt for slaying thousands of them in the past.

And the homestead town-folks alone... If only all NPCs were like them.

I-Like-Pie45
09-20-2014, 04:19 AM
Majora's Mask livelier game than AC2

SixKeys
09-20-2014, 04:25 AM
Oh please, you quoted someone's post about AC III's focus on story and said "Haha, good one" Because that's not infringing on somebody else's opinion oh no:rolleyes:

Okay, I could have handled that without joking, I'll admit. My only defense is that I wasn't expecting to take further part in the discussion, since this topic has been done so many times before and people never seem to agree. But, of course, I find it difficult to actually keep away from discussions even when I tell myself it's not worth it...


No, it's not disrespectful. What i'm saying is my opinion too. My opinion is that the lack of ambient music sapped the city of all character. Things sometimes are beautified by other enhancing elements. Every city in AC to me is a dull cesspit without music, I notice A LOT of other things I don't like but when the music is on, it becomes much MUCH harder to point out things I don't like because the music is just that damn good.

As I have demonstrated in my videos, none of that exists in my game. I don't know about anyone else but like I mentioned in my post, your problems are not withstanding to everything I said about NY and Boston. Guards are not telepathic, there meter fill is consistent and they have no insta detect. Wide streets are connected by ropes and clothelines and Parkour is actually more precise than previous AC games. If you don't want to climb something, just let go of the high profile button momentarily.

Yes, YOUR opinion. Which is fine. But you said "90% of all complaints", meaning other people who in this very thread have mentioned several other reasons that have nothing to do with ambient music. I agree that music would have helped the game a lot, but it's only missing in freeroam. During missions there is generally ambient music, and even though it helps somewhat, it still doesn't get rid of all the other annoyances that I mentioned. I doubt I'm the only one whose game is broken since so many other people have named the exact same complaints. Even if for some reason I was the only person whose game had broken guard detection system and other copies of the game didn't, I still wouldn't be the only one complaining about wide streets. The fact that you're choosing to ignore 20 people who say "my problem is the wide streets" and say "no, it's not, here's what *I* think your problem is" is disrespectful.


What? I never did that to people here. I only refer to people on FB and YT i.e the fanboys. But to be honest....i'v really never heard any other reason why anyone likes him..not here, not anywhere.

Whenever people say something like "I enjoyed watching him grow emotionally", you go "he didn't have any character growth, you only like him because he was funny". I have my own problems with Connor, but if someone says they liked him because they thought he was interesting (while I think he's boring) or because his voice-acting was amazing (while I thought it was dull), I'm not going to tell them "no, you can't like him for those reasons, because I disagree with you. You only like him because of this reason that I'm going to name for you". That would be supremely arrogant of me. Even if I disagree with someone's assessment of a character, I'm not going to deny them their reasons for liking him/her.


It's 50% rustling jimmies and 50% being serious. How does something optional hinder player freedom? oh it doesn't. Any restriction is you placing it on yourself, does the game freeze if you don't do the optional objectives? does it lock you out? no.

That's the problem, it's so hard to tell when you're being serious and when you're just rustling jimmies. One moment you're saying AC2 is the worst game ever and the next you're talking about being on your 107th playthrough of it. I don't know anyone who plays a game they loathe that many times.

I'm not gonna get too deep into the optional objectives issue, that's a whole other topic. But you've been here long enough that you should know the arguments by now, even if you personally disagree with them. Some people feel that AC shouldn't place any restrictions whatsoever on the player, be it insta-desynch upon detection or optional objectives that tell you you only completed the mission 50% because you didn't do exactly what the devs had in mind. I don't have strong feelings on the issue either way as I don't mind OO's, but I can understand the people who dislike them. I also understand people who think OO's are just fine the way they are. What I won't do is tell people "nope, the arguments you just gave are dismissable because I disagree with them, here's the REAL reason why you dislike them". That kind of attitude doesn't encourage constructive discussion, it just starts endless debates about tone and "he said, she said".

SixKeys
09-20-2014, 04:31 AM
How on earth did you pretend that the citizens of the Ezio games have lives? They had no complex behavior commands. They were only programmed to either walk in groups, walk alone or talk to each other. Heck, even their paths are preset loops meaning that they don't interact with anyone or anything else on their way.

Like I said, your AC III has problems...but i'd like the Ezio games you have, they sound really cool.

Really? You missed the girls in ACB doing each other's hair? The lovers stargazing? The man bending down on one knee and praising/proposing to his girlfriend while she flirted with him? The couple at the graveyard crying and comforting each other? The group of friends having a picnic on a blanket? The guy with the lantern at night looking nervously around him? The street performer with a long, acrobatic routine where he sometimes successfully performs a trick and other times falls flat on his face? I'm sorry your game was missing all these, they were awesome.

AdamPearce
09-20-2014, 04:35 AM
I never really understood people who enjoyed following NPCs to check their daily routine, what is the point ? I love seeing animated crowds in the market, woman washing their clothes, kids playing, it feels awesome and immersive, but to select a single one to follow and just watch... god, I just couldn't. I believe that if something as a living crowd should be, than the concept must be pushed to it's best. Like selecting a handfull of NPCs, write about a hundred little stories (real short), and make them process trough the game. Like a kid in the beggining becoming the smith of the neighbourhood by the end, or some guy loosing a leg, etc etc etc. Really, if the objective is to create virtual lives, than to it right.

Also something that bugs is the lack of realism. I don't remember seeing any elders in the NPCs since AC1. Old women for sure, but old man ? Maybe it's me but, I don't know, seems strange. On the same end, since it's become technically impossible for us to kill random NPCs, maybe we could see some pregnant womans, childs with their parents, couples, and all the other social cast that weren't implemented in the previous games. I'm sure we are technically capable of creating a procedural city that can rebuilt itself after each game (a bit like the personal infos in Watch_Dogs, just in a must wider range).

M A K E I T H A P P E N !

SixKeys
09-20-2014, 04:44 AM
Anyway, that's a surprisingly polar opposite experience, you and I. I've been free roaming Venice a lot this afternoon, and I could not find an NPC that intrigued me the way they have for you. With AC:3, something I loved was that the AIs are reactive and constantly shifting, even to match the current story events. I remembered first playing through TTOKW, and was absolutely blown away by the constant changes in AI. You would see some of the rebels fight against the natives, others holding their each other against the walls, and the major overhaul when the red-coats get involved. And the guard's animations are, for only one game, actually representative of the demos. Say what you will about the AI, but the animations of the guards in Unity needs to be like AC:3's. They're extremely varied and full of life. Walking into base camps or forts, you will see some of them tossing and turning around when speaking to one another. Some of them will casually hold their muskets against their upper back neck. The guards that aren't patrolling or guarding gates are doing activities such as checking the cannons, moving supplies, or holding off unwanted NPC guests. It's really fascinating, and it always leaves me with a bit of guilt for slaying thousands of them in the past.

And the homestead town-folks alone... If only all NPCs were like them.

I agree about ToKW, that one definitely had livelier NPC animations than the base game. In general I preferred the darker atmosphere of the DLC, there was a lot of detail that felt missing from the main game (dead soldiers, wolves eating corpses, fighting everywhere). I also like the soldier animations in the main game, and the NPCs who are hauling around heavy luggage (I just wish you could bump into them and make them drop what they're carrying like in previous games). Other than those though, no individual routines stand out as memorable. I think you may be right that there's a difference in preference and expectations. I find games with static yet detailed NPC animations more immersive than ones where the NPCs may have routines, but they are only observable after following them around for half a day. I don't really care if NPC #473 lives their lives according to an actual in-game clock, most of the time I won't see them doing that stuff anyway. This is all the more apparent in the Homestead missions, where 90% of the time you'll see the inhabitants simply entering and exiting doors, only to start slowly walking to their next destination. I would much prefer it if they had a few set animations that they performed indefinitely, like every time I would visit Terry and Godfrey's house, I would find them fishing or chopping wood. They have those animations now, but you have to catch them at the right time if you want to see it, and I don't know about you, but I simply don't have the patience to wait around for 3 hours while Terry slowly walks from his outhouse to the bridge. Even if it's unrealistic, I'd prefer him to sit there fishing from dawn until dusk and only go back to his house at nightfall. That would give me a bigger chance of finding him doing something halfway interesting whenever I decide to pop down for a visit.

Fatal-Feit
09-20-2014, 05:03 AM
I agree about ToKW, that one definitely had livelier NPC animations than the base game. In general I preferred the darker atmosphere of the DLC, there was a lot of detail that felt missing from the main game (dead soldiers, wolves eating corpses, fighting everywhere). I also like the soldier animations in the main game, and the NPCs who are hauling around heavy luggage (I just wish you could bump into them and make them drop what they're carrying like in previous games). Other than those though, no individual routines stand out as memorable. I think you may be right that there's a difference in preference and expectations. I find games with static yet detailed NPC animations more immersive than ones where the NPCs may have routines, but they are only observable after following them around for half a day. I don't really care if NPC #473 lives their lives according to an actual in-game clock, most of the time I won't see them doing that stuff anyway. This is all the more apparent in the Homestead missions, where 90% of the time you'll see the inhabitants simply entering and exiting doors, only to start slowly walking to their next destination. I would much prefer it if they had a few set animations that they performed indefinitely, like every time I would visit Terry and Godfrey's house, I would find them fishing or chopping wood. They have those animations now, but you have to catch them at the right time if you want to see it, and I don't know about you, but I simply don't have the patience to wait around for 3 hours while Terry slowly walks from his outhouse to the bridge. Even if it's unrealistic, I'd prefer him to sit there fishing from dawn until dusk and only go back to his house at nightfall. That would give me a bigger chance of finding him doing something halfway interesting whenever I decide to pop down for a visit.

That would have helped with the homestead mission. But speaking of which, do they have alternate activities during different seasons like fall, or do they just change their clothes? I can't recall.

Assassin_M
09-20-2014, 06:25 AM
Yes, YOUR opinion. Which is fine. But you said "90% of all complaints", meaning other people who in this very thread have mentioned several other reasons that have nothing to do with ambient music. I agree that music would have helped the game a lot, but it's only missing in freeroam. During missions there is generally ambient music, and even though it helps somewhat, it still doesn't get rid of all the other annoyances that I mentioned. I doubt I'm the only one whose game is broken since so many other people have named the exact same complaints. Even if for some reason I was the only person whose game had broken guard detection system and other copies of the game didn't, I still wouldn't be the only one complaining about wide streets. The fact that you're choosing to ignore 20 people who say "my problem is the wide streets" and say "no, it's not, here's what *I* think your problem is" is disrespectful.
I didn't say 90% of the complaints. I said I BELIEVE THAT 90% OF THE DISLIKE. That's VERY different from complaints and I explained what I meant when I said it. I never said it was anything but my opinion either. I firmly believe that had ambient music stayed, NY nor Boston wouldn't have gotten as much hate as they do right now, that's not disrespectful at all.



Whenever people say something like "I enjoyed watching him grow emotionally", you go "he didn't have any character growth, you only like him because he was funny". I have my own problems with Connor, but if someone says they liked him because they thought he was interesting (while I think he's boring) or because his voice-acting was amazing (while I thought it was dull), I'm not going to tell them "no, you can't like him for those reasons, because I disagree with you. You only like him because of this reason that I'm going to name for you". That would be supremely arrogant of me. Even if I disagree with someone's assessment of a character, I'm not going to deny them their reasons for liking him/her.
I don't think I ever did that. Sure, like I said I do the whole objectivity thing but everybody knows i'm joking and nobody blows their top about it (well, except for you) because they know i'm joking when I say "It's a fact that Ezio sucks". That said, I have never seen anybody say that they like Ezio because of how they grow emotionally..no, really, I have never seen that here.



That's the problem, it's so hard to tell when you're being serious and when you're just rustling jimmies. One moment you're saying AC2 is the worst game ever and the next you're talking about being on your 107th playthrough of it. I don't know anyone who plays a game they loathe that many times.
And YOUR problem is ignoring ALL the times I say that I don't hate ANY of the AC games. You even said one logical post of mine trolling lol.


I'm not gonna get too deep into the optional objectives issue, that's a whole other topic. But you've been here long enough that you should know the arguments by now, even if you personally disagree with them. Some people feel that AC shouldn't place any restrictions whatsoever on the player, be it insta-desynch upon detection or optional objectives that tell you you only completed the mission 50% because you didn't do exactly what the devs had in mind. I don't have strong feelings on the issue either way as I don't mind OO's, but I can understand the people who dislike them. I also understand people who think OO's are just fine the way they are. What I won't do is tell people "nope, the arguments you just gave are dismissable because I disagree with them, here's the REAL reason why you dislike them". That kind of attitude doesn't encourage constructive discussion, it just starts endless debates about tone and "he said, she said".
I think you know that I'm one of the first people who'd contribute to a serious discussion or topic if one arises.


Really? You missed the girls in ACB doing each other's hair? The lovers stargazing? The man bending down on one knee and praising/proposing to his girlfriend while she flirted with him? The couple at the graveyard crying and comforting each other? The group of friends having a picnic on a blanket? The guy with the lantern at night looking nervously around him? The street performer with a long, acrobatic routine where he sometimes successfully performs a trick and other times falls flat on his face? I'm sorry your game was missing all these, they were awesome.
That's what I meant. it's all static. The girls do each others' hairs for ever, the lovers stargaze during the day (and continue forever) the man proposes to his girlfriend forever (god, she's so indecisive) the couple cry forever..etc And what's worse, they stop what they're doing if you get too close. How did you give life to static things? it's ALL they do...they don't do anything else. you can prefer this or whatever but AC III's system is simply more advanced and thus better.

cawatrooper9
09-20-2014, 04:01 PM
I would have much preferred a new city to NY again... Quebec, perhaps? However, seeing as we're getting NY, I hope they don't make too drastic of changes. Tweaking buildings for parkour's sake is fine (and probably necessary) but it would be weird if NY in Rogue is a completely different city than it was in ACIII.

SixKeys
09-20-2014, 05:01 PM
That's what I meant. it's all static. The girls do each others' hairs for ever, the lovers stargaze during the day (and continue forever) the man proposes to his girlfriend forever (god, she's so indecisive) the couple cry forever..etc And what's worse, they stop what they're doing if you get too close. How did you give life to static things? it's ALL they do...they don't do anything else. you can prefer this or whatever but AC III's system is simply more advanced and thus better.

I honestly do prefer it. My only problem is what you mentioned, the fact that they stop what they're doing if you get too close. I much prefer being able to walk around and actually see people doing things on every corner as I pass by, rather than to see people simply walking like lifeless zombies 90% of the time. They have animations, but due to the long day/night cycle, you have to follow them around for a long time until they start doing something interesting. I appreciate the static animation loops more because I actually get to see them, and as I'm passing by, I make up little stories about the people I see. If it's the same animation in the same place every day, I pretend that this one guy really is so desperate that he's determined to propose to his girlfriend every day until she says yes. Stuff like that. I guess it's just a preference thing. In the Homestead, I like stuff like Father Timothy reading letters to the townspeople and watching their reactions. I hate it when I've just arrived to listen to him reading and then he stops just as I get there and goes inside his house. If he stood there all day just reading letters, I wouldn't mind at all. I could make up stories as to why he's there at that very moment, even in the middle of the night. Like the couple who just came to him received an urgent note from their pregnant daughter and are desperate to hear if she's all right, and Father Timothy, being so kind and accommodating, will actually get out of bed to read the letter to them to put their minds at ease.

Assassin_M
09-20-2014, 10:09 PM
I honestly do prefer it. My only problem is what you mentioned, the fact that they stop what they're doing if you get too close. I much prefer being able to walk around and actually see people doing things on every corner as I pass by, rather than to see people simply walking like lifeless zombies 90% of the time. They have animations, but due to the long day/night cycle, you have to follow them around for a long time until they start doing something interesting. I appreciate the static animation loops more because I actually get to see them, and as I'm passing by, I make up little stories about the people I see. If it's the same animation in the same place every day, I pretend that this one guy really is so desperate that he's determined to propose to his girlfriend every day until she says yes. Stuff like that. I guess it's just a preference thing. In the Homestead, I like stuff like Father Timothy reading letters to the townspeople and watching their reactions. I hate it when I've just arrived to listen to him reading and then he stops just as I get there and goes inside his house. If he stood there all day just reading letters, I wouldn't mind at all. I could make up stories as to why he's there at that very moment, even in the middle of the night. Like the couple who just came to him received an urgent note from their pregnant daughter and are desperate to hear if she's all right, and Father Timothy, being so kind and accommodating, will actually get out of bed to read the letter to them to put their minds at ease.
Well, to each their own, I guess. I much prefer AC III's vibrant system to the static system of pre-AC III.

LieutenantRex
09-21-2014, 02:27 AM
Meh...I don't care about the Gameplay or Setting.

My hype is for the story & characters.

So you don't play a GAME for fun GAMEPLAY?

JustPlainQuirky
09-21-2014, 02:29 AM
to be fair I think AC gameplay aside from ACIV's is pretty meh.

Namikaze_17
09-21-2014, 03:22 AM
So you don't play a GAME for fun GAMEPLAY?

Well since the Gameplay is exactly like a previous game except worse, and the Setting is the same as another previous game except with added buildings...I have the need to say that.