PDA

View Full Version : If the next AC game takes place during the 18th century or in Europe/America..



Journey93
09-22-2014, 08:15 PM
I will be very disappointed and I probably won't buy it
Anyone agree? I mean with AC Ubisoft has so many different possiblities but they are staying with familiar stuff
especiallly the recent announcement of AC: Chronicles is a big disappointment
So China gets a half assed 2D game while France gets a whole title?

I really don't get why they are staying in Europe/America or in the 18th century
Is it because of greed? games in the same era (or continent for that matter) require less work because they can reuse stuff again
I imagine a game in China/Japan would require tremendous work with the different architecture etc.
There are so many interesting places to visit: India, Russia, Egypt, Ancient Rome, A game set in an african country etc.

After the Ezio Trilogy I was ready for unfamiliar territories because the concept of AC provides them with unlimited freedom I mean hell they were more daring with AC1
with taking place in Syria during the Crusades
I really don't know the exact reasons for this but its just annoying

Sushiglutton
09-22-2014, 08:24 PM
Nope, European history is very interesting to me and there are plenty of great places and eras yet to visit (like UK, Spain, Germany, Austria, Russia, Greece and so on)! That said there are obv tons of non-Eruopean settings that are very exciting as well.

I'm kind of open in terms of the choice of setting. Ubi has been able to realize them well in most cases.

ze_topazio
09-22-2014, 08:28 PM
From Asians perspective exotic European settings are more interesting than the familiar Asians ones, it's all a question of perspective, and since when were you under the impression they have any obligation to take the series to other continents?

Fatal-Feit
09-22-2014, 08:54 PM
Nope. I'm not fatigued just yet. There are a few more European settings that I want them to work on.

pacmanate
09-22-2014, 08:58 PM
As long as the Architecture is interesting I don't care when it's set.

I'm looking at you Boston and New York you boring pieces of ****.

D.I.D.
09-22-2014, 09:01 PM
We'll be going into the 19th century during Unity. I wouldn't be surprised at all if we're still in the early 19th century for the next one.

There are many accusations of reuse of assets, but not a lot of evidence of it (and sometimes people are mistaken). We've seen animations reused and a few minor things aside from that, but not to the extent that it's saving a vast amount of money. Obviously, when they are remaining in the same period then they might as well reuse the odd thing here and there - why make a brand new minor element if it's going to be the same thing anyway? I don't think that's why they keep a line going, though. I think they're just chasing epic status for the games by making little sagas within the series, which seems like a sensible move to me.

Ezio's one got us two Italian games and one in Turkey, the Americas got us the NE colonies, New Orleans and the Caribbean. I think there was quite a lot of variety in each one's setting, but the skeleton of the game hasn't changed as much as the locations.

pacmanate
09-22-2014, 09:04 PM
We'll be going into the 19th century during Unity. I wouldn't be surprised at all if we're still in the early 19th century for the next one.

There are many accusations of reuse of assets, but not a lot of evidence of it (and sometimes people are mistaken). We've seen animations reused and a few minor things aside from that, but not to the extent that it's saving a vast amount of money. Obviously, when they are remaining in the same period then they might as well reuse the odd thing here and there - why make a brand new minor element if it's going to be the same thing anyway? I don't think that's why they keep a line going, though. I think they're just chasing epic status for the games by making little sagas within the series, which seems like a sensible move to me.

Ezio's one got us two Italian games and one in Turkey, the Americas got us the NE colonies, New Orleans and the Caribbean. I think there was quite a lot of variety in each one's setting, but the skeleton of the game hasn't changed as much as the locations.


I really want them to go back. Every time we move forward in time I've noticed we get more OP weapons, more specifically guns/blunderbuss,bombs.

I want them to go back simply to explore more "less technologically" advanced stuff, if that makes sense.

For example, chloroform gloves for knocking out guards non lethally.

BoBwUzHeRe1138
09-22-2014, 09:05 PM
I probably won't buy it. I can't think of another 18th century event that I care about playing.

Europe is also meh. The only Europe I'd be open to right now (again, I love European history but I want to take a break from it for awhile and explore some new places) is Elizabethan England. Gunpowder Plot, the burning of the Globe, etc. It would probably feel like a spiritual successor to the Ezio trilogy because it was the time of the English Renaissance. Still... I'd rather wait on that and go somewhere else entirely. then when we inevitably RETURN to Europe down the road, have this be the game.

I'm itching for something fresh. China would have been that. The architecture, the landscape, etc. Inb4 anyone goes "but, but European architecture is wildly different!" It all stems from the same thing though. That's why the different types of Asian architecture share many similarities. The reason why I'd rather China over Japan despite the similar architecture? More dense, better for parkour.

But they could do Ancient Babylon (which could also allow them to reintroduce that air of mystique -- they'd have a bit more leeway than usual when designing the city but could still be somewhat historically accurate, it would be completely new and distinct, etc.)

There's also Egypt as a possibility or some place in South America (though that would most likely have to be 18th century so I'd rather wait a few games before returning to that time period again)

If I was making the games, I probably would do China, then Ancient Babylon, then maybe India?, then Elizabethan England. Not necessarily in that order.

Fatal-Feit
09-22-2014, 09:09 PM
I really want them to go back. Every time we move forward in time I've noticed we get more OP weapons, more specifically guns/blunderbuss,bombs.

I want them to go back simply to explore more "less technologically" advanced stuff, if that makes sense.

It doesn't. The tools in the older games were a lot more devastating.

Throwing Knives / Hidden Pistol > Guns

Crossbow / AC:R's Bombs > Blunderbuss / Air Rifle / Trip Mines

----------------------

Namikaze_17
09-22-2014, 09:12 PM
( Sigh) This again...

In all honesty, I'm 65/35 when it comes 18th Century. On one hand, I REALLY enjoy/ appreciate the setting for what it's done for this series. On the other hand, it is starting to become over-saturation a bit. Not that it's bad, I just think
that 18th Century has played it's part more ways than people think.

But don't leave until you give Connor & Co. Their respective Endings.


Plus that reminds me where Mega is atm? normally he'd be blowing a storm over 18th Century. ;)

pacmanate
09-22-2014, 09:13 PM
It doesn't. The tools in the older games were a lot more devastating.

Throwing Knives / Hidden Pistol > Guns

Crossbow / AC:R's Bombs > Blunderbuss / Air Rifle / Trip Mines

----------------------

Not really. Guns can kill in one shot to the head. Throwing knives vary 1+ hits depending on archetype.
Blunderbuss can kill many at once at is easier to aim in combat. Crossbow kills one, then have to reload.

D.I.D.
09-22-2014, 09:19 PM
I really want them to go back. Every time we move forward in time I've noticed we get more OP weapons, more specifically guns/blunderbuss,bombs.

I want them to go back simply to explore more "less technologically" advanced stuff, if that makes sense.

For example, chloroform gloves for knocking out guards non lethally.

Yeah, I'm happy to get away from these patterns too. I'd love games in other times and places.

(You can't have chloroform though! It wasn't synthesised until the 1830s, but I know what you mean - some kind of non-lethal, close-quarters thing would be a nice addition :) )

pacmanate
09-22-2014, 09:20 PM
Yeah, I'm happy to get away from these patterns too. I'd love games in other times and places.

(You can't have chloroform though! It wasn't synthesised until the 1830s, but I know what you mean - some kind of non-lethal, close-quarters thing would be a nice addition :) )

Yeah, basically :p. More hand to hand type things. Tbf you could have an alternative, like a poop stick.

Fatal-Feit
09-22-2014, 09:21 PM
Not really. Guns can kill in one shot to the head. Throwing knives vary 1+ hits depending on archetype.
Blunderbuss can kill many at once at is easier to aim in combat. Crossbow kills one, then have to reload.

Guns are dependent on your upgrades. Some of them requires 2-3 hits depending on the enemy archetypes. Headshots require aiming, and it's not viable in stealth. It basically sends guards to your direction. You also need to reload them, and you can only carry up to 4 bullets in a fight. That means 4 tool counters, and 4 double tool kills. You're also vulnerable during double tool kills.

With throwing knives, you can kill any archetype with one hit. You just have to hold it for half a second. And you can also kill any 3-4 enemies at once like that. (beating AC:IV's quadruple pistols) And you don't have to reload anything making double tool kills OP. And you're invulnerable during the animation so you can spam it, killing up to 50+ guards with the push of one button and holding it.

Regarding double tool kills, you can target any enemy archetype except Janissaries with it when you have throwing knives. With pistols, you can't use it on Brutes, Generals, or Jagers.

-------------------

The blunderbuss is restricted to one ammo and it's not viable in stealth. AC:R's bombs beats it by a milestone. Regarding the crossbow, I meant to pair it up against guns.

pacmanate
09-22-2014, 09:25 PM
Guns are dependent on your upgrades. Some of them requires 2-3 hits depending on the enemy archetypes. Headshots require aiming, and it's not viable in stealth. It basically sends guards to your direction. You also need to reload them, and you can only carry up to 4 bullets in a fight. That means 4 tool counters, and 4 double tool kills. You're also vulnerable during double tool kills.

With throwing knives, you can kill any archetype with one hit. You just have to hold it for half a second. And you can also kill any 3-4 enemies at once like that. (beating AC:IV's quadruple pistols) And you don't have to reload anything making double tool kills OP. And you're invulnerable during the animation so you can spam it, killing up to 50+ guards with the push of one button and holding it.

-------------------

The blunderbuss is restricted to one ammo and it's not viable in stealth. AC:R's bombs beats it by a milestone. Regarding the crossbow, I meant to pair it up against guns.

Holding down throwing knives throws more than one. Whereas a gun can kill anyone in one by just a headshot.

Also we werent even talking about stealth :S

D.I.D.
09-22-2014, 09:25 PM
I probably won't buy it. I can't think of another 18th century event that I care about playing.

Europe is also meh. The only Europe I'd be open to right now (again, I love European history but I want to take a break from it for awhile and explore some new places) is Elizabethan England [...]

Elizabethan England is perfectly set up by its history - good choice. "The English Renaissance", as it's often called! Immense wealth, no wars on English soil, loads of power struggles under the surface. The biggest reason to do it is the famous royal spying network, which would be as instant place to insert one or other (or both?) of the games' two factions, and the intrigue around John Dee's occultism. There are lots of "what ifs" to explore in gameplay, and it's pretty easy to imagine how to mess about with the Armada situation: if, say, it wasn't just the weather and luck that stopped all those ships ;)

pacmanate
09-22-2014, 09:28 PM
WOoooooooooooo England!!

http://word.oftheday.com.au/userimages/user756_1151727840.bmp

Fatal-Feit
09-22-2014, 09:30 PM
Holding down throwing knives throws more than one. Whereas a gun can kill anyone in one by just a headshot.

Also we werent even talking about stealth :S

A throwing knife can kill 1 enemy by holding onto it in combat without aiming and trying to get a headshot. In AC:IV, the AI will attack you if you aim in combat. But if you run and aim just right, you can manage it, but that's still a lot of work in comparison.

thewhitestig
09-22-2014, 10:21 PM
A rural Britain during the middle ages is interesting to wonder about but I guess it would not make up for a very interesting game. What I wanna see from Europe is most definitely Russia during Bolshevik times, the Roman Empire and Ancient Greece. Vikings too..buut I guess that wouldn't make up for an interesting game either. London I believe would definitely be in a future AC game. I'm 100% confident about that. I don't know in what era it will be set, but it will definitely come. Probably 17th or 18th century.


I The only Europe I'd be open to right now (again, I love European history but I want to take a break from it for awhile and explore some new places) is Elizabethan England. Gunpowder Plot, the burning of the Globe.

Remember, remember, the 5th of November
The Gunpowder Treason and plot;
I see of no reason why the Gunpowder Treason
Should ever be forgot.

BoBwUzHeRe1138
09-22-2014, 10:34 PM
Elizabethan England is perfectly set up by its history - good choice. "The English Renaissance", as it's often called! Immense wealth, no wars on English soil, loads of power struggles under the surface. The biggest reason to do it is the famous royal spying network, which would be as instant place to insert one or other (or both?) of the games' two factions, and the intrigue around John Dee's occultism. There are lots of "what ifs" to explore in gameplay, and it's pretty easy to imagine how to mess about with the Armada situation: if, say, it wasn't just the weather and luck that stopped all those ships ;)

Thanks! There's lots of neat things you could do with the time. I had the same thought about the Armada thing as well though the John Dee thing escaped me. Gah, it's so good. I even like the idea of Guy Fawkes having a tiny little Assassin symbol and he gets captured while you manage to slip away undetected as the Templars tighten control and bear down on the Assassins.


WOoooooooooooo England!!

http://word.oftheday.com.au/userimages/user756_1151727840.bmp

Pip pip jolly ho big ben 'ello

Kakuzu745
09-22-2014, 11:12 PM
If that happens I will kick someone...can you just please give me ancient eras already ffs?

SixKeys
09-22-2014, 11:18 PM
I hate the idea of "century sagas" like what they've been calling AC3, AC4 and ACRO. I want to see Europe in AC again, but not immediately after Unity. I want the games to jump unexpectedly back and forth between different eras and parts of the world. As much as I enjoyed AC4, it felt like the reason they didn't go further back in history was so that they could recycle assets. The same thing happened with the Ezio trilogy. I dread it will happen with Arno/Unity as well. I'd rather have jumps like Russia > Egypt > Mongolia in three consecutive games instead of 18th century France > early 19th century Belgium > mid-19th century Spain.

Megas_Doux
09-22-2014, 11:21 PM
I hate the idea of "century sagas" like what they've been calling AC3, AC4 and ACRO. I.

It make$ $en$e for them!!!!!

These periodic sagas allow Ubisoft to recycle assets and meet the deadline for the yearly games.

Journey93
09-22-2014, 11:25 PM
From Asians perspective exotic European settings are more interesting than the familiar Asians ones, it's all a question of perspective, and since when were you under the impression they have any obligation to take the series to other continents?

well the first game took place during the Crusades in Damascus Acre etc. (the so called holy land) so it has already moved to another continent
also the whole concept of the animus would be wasted if they stay in Europe/America or the 18th century
Another poster already had some very interesting settings in mind which would be unique and refreshing (China, Ancient Babylon and Egypt)
But Ubi is too greedy/lazy/afraid to move to fresh locations apparently

Journey93
09-22-2014, 11:29 PM
I hate the idea of "century sagas" like what they've been calling AC3, AC4 and ACRO. I want to see Europe in AC again, but not immediately after Unity. I want the games to jump unexpectedly back and forth between different eras and parts of the world. As much as I enjoyed AC4, it felt like the reason they didn't go further back in history was so that they could recycle assets. The same thing happened with the Ezio trilogy. I dread it will happen with Arno/Unity as well. I'd rather have jumps like Russia > Egypt > Mongolia in three consecutive games instead of 18th century France > early 19th century Belgium > mid-19th century Spain.

I agree switching to another Century/continent for AC4 would have been much better
Sadly they didn't and this means that whatever century comes next (if any) they will stay there for ca. 4 games
the 18th century and Europe/America would have been a lot more bearable if they constantly jumped around much more exciting

LoyalACFan
09-22-2014, 11:56 PM
I can understand not wanting the same century again if you're tired of the technology/architecture, but just writing off Europe entirely is one of the dumbest things I've heard fans request IMO. And I hear it all the time. Europe has 56 countries, and we've visited two of them. TWO. Does

Namikaze_17
09-22-2014, 11:59 PM
I can understand not wanting the same century again if you're tired of the technology/architecture, but just writing off Europe entirely is one of the dumbest things I've heard fans request IMO. And I hear it all the time. Europe has 56 countries, and we've visited two of them. TWO. Does

^ This.

ze_topazio
09-23-2014, 12:05 AM
I hate the idea of "century sagas" like what they've been calling AC3, AC4 and ACRO. I want to see Europe in AC again, but not immediately after Unity. I want the games to jump unexpectedly back and forth between different eras and parts of the world. As much as I enjoyed AC4, it felt like the reason they didn't go further back in history was so that they could recycle assets. The same thing happened with the Ezio trilogy. I dread it will happen with Arno/Unity as well. I'd rather have jumps like Russia > Egypt > Mongolia in three consecutive games instead of 18th century France > early 19th century Belgium > mid-19th century Spain.

I used to say that, I think they should jump between areas and centuries to vary a bit and avoid fatigue, but they don't seem interested.


XVIII France -> XVI century Japan -> Ancient Greece -> XVI century Morocco -> Medieval England -> XIX century China -> XIII century Egypt -> XVII century Brazil -> XV century Korea, etc...

something like this.

LoyalACFan
09-23-2014, 12:22 AM
I used to say that, I think they should jump between areas and centuries to vary a bit and avoid fatigue, but they don't seem interested.


XVIII France -> XVI century Japan -> Ancient Greece -> XVI century Morocco -> Medieval England -> XIX century China -> XIII century Egypt -> XVII century Brazil -> XV century Korea, etc...

something like this.

Would be nice, but you have to realize you'd be asking for a TON of new assets every year for an already rushed franchise. The only reason Black Flag was so great was because it stood on AC3's shoulders.

ze_topazio
09-23-2014, 12:41 AM
They could simply keep the assets and reuse them later.

Megas_Doux
09-23-2014, 12:43 AM
They could simply keep the assets and reuse them later.

Yearly releases NEED TO STOP.......................

Journey93
09-23-2014, 12:59 AM
I can understand not wanting the same century again if you're tired of the technology/architecture, but just writing off Europe entirely is one of the dumbest things I've heard fans request IMO. And I hear it all the time. Europe has 56 countries, and we've visited two of them. TWO. Does

wow we got a smartass here I'm talking about the NEXT AC game I'm not saying that we shouldn't visit Europe again in the future in fact I would like that (London in the Victorian era is interesting) but I'm just sick for staying in the same era/place for so long its time to move on for Ubisoft but I'm not sure they want to especially with all the effort that comes with it


Yearly releases NEED TO STOP.......................

I agree I can only imagine where the series would be now if not for these damm AC releases
I still buy the AC games (but mostly later on when they are cheaper) There definitely isn't that much excitment anymore sadly I love the series but Ubisoft is just milking it way too much
they need to take some years off and come back with something new and unqiue

Staying in the same century and place certainly isn't helping

LoyalACFan
09-23-2014, 02:25 AM
They could simply keep the assets and reuse them later.

It doesn't work like that. They can't just release innovative, groundbreaking games (AC3/Unity style revamps) multiple years in a row, then go back and reuse stuff from both on later games. You're still going to run into the problem of WHEN and BY WHOM are the 'rebuilt-from-the-ground-up' ones being made. Basically, they make a groundbreaking game, then for the next year or two one team is working on a smaller, more recycled game that refines elements of the previous year's release, while other teams work on the next groundbreaking one.

poptartz20
09-23-2014, 09:34 AM
I can understand not wanting the same century again if you're tired of the technology/architecture, but just writing off Europe entirely is one of the dumbest things I've heard fans request IMO. And I hear it all the time. Europe has 56 countries, and we've visited two of them. TWO. Does

This is very true! Agreed.

But at the end of the day it doesn't bother me too much! Also let's just come to the conclusion that AC will remain yearly for probably the rest of it's life cycle. :|

I personally hope that they will take that extra 6 mos or so, but hey it is what it is.

RinoTheBouncer
09-23-2014, 01:54 PM
Iíll be really disappointed as well. I donít care about how mainstream or important the location or even is. The games are starting to look all the same, especially that weíre always on top of the world, from building to building. We need a major change of setting and time period. PERIOD!

marvelfannumber
09-23-2014, 02:09 PM
Meh, I honestly could care less if it's still in the 18th century or not for the next game. As long as it's fun and interesting I could care less about the century and geographical area it's set in.

(thostillgimmedat1930'sACUbiIwantitsooobad)

GoldenBoy9999
09-23-2014, 02:25 PM
I feel like Ubi can provide good fun experiences so I probably won't care too much.

Hans684
09-23-2014, 03:32 PM
You got ACC: China, it's even as far back as 16th century and in Asia.

RinoTheBouncer
09-23-2014, 03:55 PM
You got ACC: China, it's even as far back as 16th century and in Asia.

Well that’s a good progress, but I hope the next step is a major game for current gen set in Asia, whether it stars Shau Jun or a new protagonist.

Hans684
09-23-2014, 04:28 PM
Well that’s a good progress, but I hope the next step is a major game for current gen set in Asia, whether it stars Shau Jun or a new protagonist.

Indeed, I wish her story was either told in Initiates, on Vita or comics but not this and it's a season pass limit making it worse.

*Shao Jun and agree, her having a major game or someone else in Asia would be much better.

Journey93
09-23-2014, 04:31 PM
You got ACC: China, it's even as far back as 16th century and in Asia.

you are kidding right?
a 2D ******** IOS game is not what we are talking about
but more like Unity a major release

Hans684
09-23-2014, 04:37 PM
you are kidding right?
a 2D ******** IOS game is not what we are talking about
but more like Unity a major release

I'm not kidding, I'm Hans.
Well it is not during the 18th century nor in Europe/America...
I know what your talking about.

pacmanate
09-23-2014, 04:39 PM
There definitely isn't that much excitment anymore sadly

Unfortunately I agree. I just expect it now. The day Ubisoft misses a year for AC I will probably flip my burger.