PDA

View Full Version : Assassinations HAVE to be performed with a Hidden Blade in AC Unity



pacmanate
10-12-2014, 05:27 PM
Not sure how I feel about this, I guess it does make some sense seeing as thats what the hidden blade is for.

I remember a while back some people were talking about their playstyles, some being snipers etc.

NOT ANYMORE.

So much for no constraints, this is a pretty big one and I know its going to annoy some of you.

(4:25)


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZR8ymWDQ1-I&feature=youtu.be&t=4m29s

rprkjj
10-12-2014, 05:40 PM
I have this idea in the back of my head that the reason they're not showing pistol gameplay is because it's just as overpowered as before, almost defeating the purpose of not being able to take on 5 guys at once. This is probably their way around that.

bitebug2003
10-12-2014, 05:40 PM
Could it just be for this mission?

KagenoTatsumaki
10-12-2014, 05:41 PM
I'm kinda happy about this because I've always assassinated targets with the hidden blade (except AC3 because, duh! TOMAHAWK!) and I hated having to go back through again just because one of the optional's was something like "kill target with explosive barrel" or something.

It also kinda gives meaning back to the blade as well.

But I can see how it would annoy others as well.

rprkjj
10-12-2014, 05:42 PM
Could it just be for this mission?

It'd probably be an optional objective if that were true.

pacmanate
10-12-2014, 05:44 PM
Could it just be for this mission?

Don't think so. The objective is "Assassinate (guys name)". And the text says "AssassinationS". I think it safe to say that any assassination targets need to be killed via hidden Blade.

Kaschra
10-12-2014, 05:58 PM
What the..? This is... disappointig :/
I want to choose the weapon for an assassination myself, and not be forced to use the hidden blades.
Why the restriction?

Shahkulu101
10-12-2014, 05:59 PM
Well that's a bit ridiculous. Why constrain the player like that? I take it we can't kill them in combat either then... :confused:

It's weird too. Arno must have to be required to kill them with the hidden blade by order of the Assassin's as some sort of tradition. But why would the Assassin's attach themselves to pointless tradition like that? There could be another reason for it I suppose - or maybe it's just for this mission.

pacmanate
10-12-2014, 06:04 PM
Well that's a bit ridiculous. Why constrain the player like that? I take it we can't kill them in combat either then... :confused:

It's weird too. Arno must have to be required to kill them with the hidden blade by order of the Assassin's as some sort of tradition. But why would the Assassin's attach themselves to pointless tradition like that? There could be another reason for it I suppose - or maybe it's just for this mission.

Again, Assassinate is an objective and it's highlighted in caps, and that text across the screen has plural of Assassinate. Meaning it means for more than 1, aka all. The text would say "Assassinate guy with hidden blade" instead if it wasn't for all.

lothario-da-be
10-12-2014, 06:04 PM
Not seamless.
Amancio, I am dissapoint.

m4r-k7
10-12-2014, 06:08 PM
I am not upset. Every assassination that I do in AC games is with the hidden blade, unless they spot me and are fighting me with their weapons. Apart from snipers, what other way would you kill your target, if most assassinations are meant to be done stealthily anyway?

rprkjj
10-12-2014, 06:09 PM
It might actually be only for the demo. Hopefully.

pacmanate
10-12-2014, 06:13 PM
I am not upset. Every assassination that I do in AC games is with the hidden blade, unless they spot me and are fighting me with their weapons. Apart from snipers, what other way would you kill your target, if most assassinations are meant to be done stealthily anyway?

Poison? Not even sure if that is in Unity. Or even the Phantom Darts.

m4r-k7
10-12-2014, 06:15 PM
Poison? Not even sure if that is in Unity. Or even the Phantom Darts.

Possibly poison, but thats basically poisoning them with your hidden blade. The phantom blade isn't for very long range.

SpiritOfNevaeh
10-12-2014, 06:22 PM
Hmmm, kinda disappointing that you HAVE to use a hidden blade to perform assassinations.

Would be nice to choose my own weapon, specifically a long range one, just in case I can't reach my target.

Maybe that'll change before the game comes out or maybe it's for certain missions. Who knows.

pacmanate
10-12-2014, 06:37 PM
Hmmm, kinda disappointing that you HAVE to use a hidden blade to perform assassinations.

Would be nice to choose my own weapon, specifically a long range one, just in case I can't reach my target.

Maybe that'll change before the game comes out or maybe it's for certain missions. Who knows.

A real Assassin would reach his target ;)

Jarek23
10-12-2014, 06:44 PM
I thought Unity was supposed to give us a lot more freedom in terms of how we want to tackle missions and assassinate our targets? I'd probably use the hidden blade 80% of the time, but still a let down if true.

m4r-k7
10-12-2014, 06:48 PM
It may have been just for this one mission as its Arno's first assignment as an Assassin.

Aphex_Tim
10-12-2014, 06:50 PM
I suppose it has something to do with the mindreading thingy introduced in AC:U... Like, Arno has to be close to his target for it to work or something.
It was always a bit weird in previous AC games if you killed a target with a ranged weapon from a tree trunk, you would suddenly be right next to him to exchange some words, then be right back on the tree trunk immediately after and no one would know you were there...
I even had it happen with a crocodile once. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wJNJoZhhLZk)

Xstantin
10-12-2014, 07:15 PM
It doesn't really bother me, but variety is always nice.

zkorejo
10-12-2014, 07:38 PM
I dont mind this. I always assassinate with the hidden blade anyways.

I believe the reason for that is so the player doesnt kill all his targets with a ranged weapon. You have to get close to your target and finish him off and escape. Its kind of like AC 1. I for one like this limitation.

I also wish that if you are detected by the assassination target they start running away. I liked that in AC1, where you had to chase them down the street and kill them in public Hashashin style.

m4r-k7
10-12-2014, 07:40 PM
I dont mind this. I always assassinate with the hidden blade anyways.

I believe the reason for that is so the player doesnt kill all his targets with a ranged weapon. You have to get close to your target and finish him off and escape. Its kind of like AC 1. I for one like this limitation.

I also wish that if you are detected by the assassination target they start running away. I liked that in AC1, where you had to chase them down the street and kill them in public Hashashin style.

Agreed. This is really reminiscent of AC 1 which I absolutely love!

zkorejo
10-12-2014, 07:44 PM
Agreed. This is really reminiscent of AC 1 which I absolutely love!

Awesome signature! Its like it was made for this thread.

SixKeys
10-12-2014, 08:05 PM
Actually, if it really works the way I think it does, it's brilliant.

Previous ACs had a problem with instant desynch upon detection. This was an attempt by the devs to encourage stealth and to make the assassinations actually difficult. Some people didn't like the desynch, so the devs tried to address it by removing it in AC4. Now every assassination could be completed any way you wanted, but this removed all challenge. You could complete every single mission by simply shooting your target from a distance, so there was zero difficulty involved.

Assassinations MUST be high-risk. It's imperative to good mission design. Insta-desynch allows devs to create challenging levels but is restrictive by design. Total freedom makes the game easy to the point of boredom and every mission ends up the same.

If the hidden blade is a must, then the player MUST get close to their target, allowing the devs to design challenging levels. You can no longer sit comfortably 200 meters away and snipe every target from a distance. You have to explore every corridor and dodge all enemies. This is a good change.

GunnerGalactico
10-12-2014, 08:17 PM
I'm actually not that disappointed by this. Hidden blades were always primarily used to perform air assassinations and stealth kills in AC1 onwards to ACR, it was only in AC3, L and AC4 that we have used other weapons for assassinations. Adjusting to just hidden blades (for assassinations) wouldn't be that much of a problem for me.

Xangr8
10-12-2014, 08:22 PM
Actually, if it really works the way I think it does, it's brilliant.

Previous ACs had a problem with instant desynch upon detection. This was an attempt by the devs to encourage stealth and to make the assassinations actually difficult. Some people didn't like the desynch, so the devs tried to address it by removing it in AC4. Now every assassination could be completed any way you wanted, but this removed all challenge. You could complete every single mission by simply shooting your target from a distance, so there was zero difficulty involved.

Assassinations MUST be high-risk. It's imperative to good mission design. Insta-desynch allows devs to create challenging levels but is restrictive by design. Total freedom makes the game easy to the point of boredom and every mission ends up the same.

If the hidden blade is a must, then the player MUST get close to their target, allowing the devs to design challenging levels. You can no longer sit comfortably 200 meters away and snipe every target from a distance. You have to explore every corridor and dodge all enemies. This is a good change.

Interesting... I guess that's totally how it should be.

Hans684
10-12-2014, 08:27 PM
I'm going to try anyway and with a gun. I expect something like this.

http://media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/7f/fa/c7/7ffac727fef64c5d6eb797a634887abc.jpg

Shahkulu101
10-12-2014, 08:29 PM
Hopefully it's only main assassination missions. It would be nice to experiment with things like sniping and so on, so hopefully we can do so in Assassination Contracts and with lesser main mission targets.

m4r-k7
10-12-2014, 09:10 PM
Awesome signature! Its like it was made for this thread.

Thanks. Yeah haha!

projectpat06
10-12-2014, 09:41 PM
A person can survive a gun shot wound. It was less likely back then but you have to considered guns were not very accurate. A person isn't very likely to survive a blade to the throat, head, or heart. It makes more sense to only assassinate targets with the blade in order to be sure that the job is done.

F3nix013
10-12-2014, 09:59 PM
I love this. I am an old school AC player that loves using the hidden blade every chance I get. I can see why they do it too because if you keep assassinating from a distance using a pistol or whatever, then you pretty much defy the point of having the hidden blade in the game. It may constrain players a little bit but they want people to go back to the roots of what being an assassin is.

Of course, to make people happy i think they should make the use of non-hidden blade assassinations as optional objectives for a couple of missions, but the main weapon IS the hidden blade. If people keep veering off what the original way of assassinating is, then you would pretty much have the community dictating how the game should be which would inevitably screw the game up for future titles, case in point...COD.

RinoTheBouncer
10-12-2014, 10:49 PM
I’d be really disappointed if this is the case. One moment they’re promising more freedom and now forcing us to use a single weapon? I do realize that this is the signature weapon of the Assassin and that it was made for a reason which is discretion, but if that’s the case, then he shouldn’t be using any other weapons AT ALL, to make sure that he never causes trouble nor raise awareness to himself or his brotherhood.

On a side note, at 4:25, the game is so realistic and well programmed that you can see Arno slipping through the banner. LOL.

Megas_Doux
10-12-2014, 10:53 PM
I like this!

F3nix013
10-12-2014, 11:29 PM
I’d be really disappointed if this is the case. One moment they’re promising more freedom and now forcing us to use a single weapon? I do realize that this is the signature weapon of the Assassin and that it was made for a reason which is discretion, but if that’s the case, then he shouldn’t be using any other weapons AT ALL, to make sure that he never causes trouble nor raise awareness to himself or his brotherhood.

Not necessarily. Its not like you wont be able to use pistols or muskets in street fights against guards or anything. They just want people to go back to the originality of the art of assassination.

This cuts down on the amount of people that, sorry for saying it but, want to take the easy way out and assassinating from a distance. That makes it way too easy and NOT what the game is about.

GoldenBoy9999
10-12-2014, 11:34 PM
In AC4's contracts it seemed I could always use the blow pipe but I always got up close and got him with the hidden blade. I remember one time it was really difficult to get past the guards but it was totally worth it. So now that I think about it, I always use hidden blades to assassinate people.

The thing is, with this AC I wanted to try to be a sniper now that you can equip rifles. I like how each AC is pretty much going forward in history and I wanted to take advantage of the prevalence of guns.

This is good though because in that mission's video you could just shoot the guy with a rifle from long range and run away. It allows the missions to be more thought out and strategic.

doogsy91
10-12-2014, 11:46 PM
I like this a lot for reasons already mentioned.

What I don't like, however, is the new optional objectives:
- Don't trigger any alarms.
- Kills from hiding spots 0/2.

Since when have these been a thing? They weren't in the gamescom demo. I thought we'd dispensed of them in return for the mod mission objectives.

I've got to say I'm pretty disappointed by this.

GoldenBoy9999
10-12-2014, 11:50 PM
The things like get the keys, kill this guy, and kill him in the confessional booth is reminding me a lot of Dishonored and that's a good thing.

Do both optional objectives and side objectives contribute to synch?

pacmanate
10-12-2014, 11:50 PM
Yeah those OO's are disappointing. Havent changed one bit.

AdamPearce
10-13-2014, 12:44 AM
So basically it's just comming back to AC2's system in which you coudn't assassinate with a sword without keeping low profile. looOk why not, I don't really care since the animation is still crappy and we still don't have bloody interactive cameras which SUCKS.

bring back the interactive cameras for god's sake !!!!

SixKeys
10-13-2014, 03:44 AM
I like this a lot for reasons already mentioned.

What I don't like, however, is the new optional objectives:
- Don't trigger any alarms.
- Kills from hiding spots 0/2.

Since when have these been a thing? They weren't in the gamescom demo. I thought we'd dispensed of them in return for the mod mission objectives.

I've got to say I'm pretty disappointed by this.

I'm not 100% sure, but I think OO's now give you sync points which you can use to upgrade your assassin. So hopefully instead of a big red "You FAILED" text we simply lose the chance to earn some upgrade points. Which I think is fine. It would mean OO's are more of an incentive rather than a pointless requirement.

Namikaze_17
10-13-2014, 04:05 AM
I don't mind as long as it's not restricting.

Whatever to get back to the roots. :)

RuNfAtBoYrUn740
10-13-2014, 04:08 AM
I don't think they actually mean it in the sense that all the main assassinations have to be performed with the hidden blade.

What it means I think is that when performing air assassinations etc you have to use the hidden blade. Like you can't air assassinate with a sword, or a rifle, or a spear.

Like if the target was under you. If you wanted to perform an air assassination, you would have to use the hidden blade, but you can still jump down I think and fight him with a mace or whatever. When they say "assassinations" I don't think it means like the main story ones, I think it just means in general.

I think they're just saying that because you were able to air assassinate with other weapons in 3 and 4 black flag. Edward could do air assassinations with his swords, whereas in this game I think you can only do that with the hidden blade.

However I would be surprised if it didn't take a few pistol shots or whatever to get the kill. Perhaps with the rifle you would need to free aim a headshot for a 1 hit kill.

I'm 99% sure they wouldn't restrict you into 1 weapon for killing these guys.

Fatal-Feit
10-13-2014, 04:15 AM
*shrug* I'm not bothered. From what we've seen, there are some new interesting ways of assassinating with the hidden blade. e.i confession room

For now, I'll trust in Alex Amancio's decisions because from all we've seen, he's doing a damn good job of ''rebooting'' the franchise.

dxsxhxcx
10-13-2014, 05:26 AM
I'm not 100% sure, but I think OO's now give you sync points which you can use to upgrade your assassin. So hopefully instead of a big red "You FAILED" text we simply lose the chance to earn some upgrade points. Which I think is fine. It would mean OO's are more of an incentive rather than a pointless requirement.

(assuming you're correct) what makes the whole thing worse than already was because now we are basically being forced to complete them if we want to take full advantage of the "new" skill system, Ubisoft never ceases to amaze me... :nonchalance:

LoyalACFan
10-13-2014, 06:09 AM
This is quite disappointing if true. It reminds me of the BS in AC3 that automatically reverted you to the hidden blades for aerial kills if there were two nearby targets instead of letting you use the tomahawk. Only this is on a whole new level.

@SixKeys there are other ways of balancing the difficulty without arbitrarily saying "you MUST use this one particular weapon!" In fact, it's even lazier than insta-desync from a design perspective. So if I aim a gun at the target, the reticle will just turn grey and not let me fire? Yeah, no, that's not intelligent, reasoned design, it's just adding the illusion of challenge. I'm of the school of thought that says it's more important for the assassinations to be OPEN rather than HARD, and this is the complete antithesis of that. Let's face it, Assassin's Creed will never produce a difficult game, it's a complete escapist power fantasy and always has been. So if I want to stand in the rafters and shoot my target in the head, I should bloody well be allowed to.

RinoTheBouncer
10-13-2014, 07:46 AM
Not necessarily. Its not like you wont be able to use pistols or muskets in street fights against guards or anything. They just want people to go back to the originality of the art of assassination.

This cuts down on the amount of people that, sorry for saying it but, want to take the easy way out and assassinating from a distance. That makes it way too easy and NOT what the game is about.

To be perfectly honest, the whole assassination and detection thing in AC has always been flawed. One moment they tell you that youíre free to do what you want and to choose one out of different ways to do so.

Itís very hypocritical cause itís not like Iíll be delivering a killer blow with the hidden blades while Iím hidden and people will only see him fall to the ground and die, only to discover that heís been stabbed later, but rather force me to use one weapon even if it means watching me fall from the ropes above, performing an air assassination. In that case, itís irrelevant whether I used a gun, a bow, a hidden blade, a musket or a rocket launcher, cause everybody will have seen me do it publicly. It wonít be any more scandalous if I aimed a pistol from a distance or a poisonous phantom blade arrow.

Another thing is the whole detection system. I wouldíve said that itís better to say ďDo not be detectedĒ to make sure you be stealthy when you do it or putting it as an optional objective to use hidden blades, but then again, both systems have been highly flawed. Most of the time I encounter a guard and I stab him and he detects me a moment before getting stabbed, and I get instantly desynchronized (or fail an optional objective) why? because he saw me, but then in reality, he saw me and died, he couldnít scream or call for help or anything, so technically, Iím as undetected as I am if I stabbed him from behind before him turning around to see me.

So I donít know. I feel like the game is trying to give you the illusion of freedom, when in reality, thereís only one way and also giving you the illusion of difficulty, when in reality, few missions into the game and youíll get the hang of it. I personally believe that the game should put in you in challenging atmospheres and situations and not literally try to force you to use a certain method of assassination whether itís through optional objectives or main mission requirements.

Xangr8
10-13-2014, 10:17 AM
The things like get the keys, kill this guy, and kill him in the confessional booth is reminding me a lot of Dishonored and that's a good thing.

Do both optional objectives and side objectives contribute to synch?

From what I've read, optional objectives are no more constrains that force you to do the mission as they demand. Instead they provide more Creed Points which help you further enhance your skills. So if you want more Creed Points you can go for the optional objectives but, I don't think if they're compulsory for full sync. I don't think if there's a 100% sync anymore.

SixKeys
10-13-2014, 01:29 PM
(assuming you're correct) what makes the whole thing worse than already was because now we are basically being forced to complete them if we want to take full advantage of the "new" skill system, Ubisoft never ceases to amaze me... http://static5.cdn.ubi.com/u/ubiforums/20130918.419/images/smilies/nonchalance.png

I think it's fine. You get sync points throughout the game, so if you miss out on a few, it just means you might not be able to upgrade Arno to 100% in all areas. Which I really don't mind, since the whole point of skill trees is to specialize in one or more particular skills. In previous games full sync was basically pointless (except for when it rewarded you with extra missions, like the Cristina stuff in ACB). So the "FAILED" text was extra insulting because not only were you being told you performed the mission "wrong", you didn't even receive anything meaningful if you did it "right". Reaching full sync therefore became an arbitrary chore, grinding for the sake of grinding. Being rewarded with extra sync points is a proper incentive.

There's also some uncertainty still regarding the difference between sync points and Creed points. According to Eurogamer (http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2014-10-06-assassins-creed-unity-takes-a-daring-leap-back-to-the-series-origins), sync points are earned by progressing in the story and those are used to purchase new skills. Then they mention Creed points, "earned by successfully performing Assassin actions such as silent kills, double takedowns and after you stealthy parkour down from great heights". Those sound like OO's to me, but the article doesn't mention what you can purchase with Creed points. It may be that Creed points are used to buy new gear and customization pieces, whereas sync points are reserved for buying skills. If that's the case, then ignoring OO's simply means you might not get a shiny new pair of pants, but the game has over 300 other customization pieces or something like that, so who cares?



@SixKeys there are other ways of balancing the difficulty without arbitrarily saying "you MUST use this one particular weapon!" In fact, it's even lazier than insta-desync from a design perspective. So if I aim a gun at the target, the reticle will just turn grey and not let me fire? Yeah, no, that's not intelligent, reasoned design, it's just adding the illusion of challenge. I'm of the school of thought that says it's more important for the assassinations to be OPEN rather than HARD, and this is the complete antithesis of that. Let's face it, Assassin's Creed will never produce a difficult game, it's a complete escapist power fantasy and always has been. So if I want to stand in the rafters and shoot my target in the head, I should bloody well be allowed to.

We'll have to agree to disagree then. I was really excited when AC4 brought back open assassinations and I still think it was the right approach. But the missions were so open I soon realized there was no challenge. You had poison and berserker darts with ridiculous range plus guns that somehow gave you a "stealth" bonus after alerting the entire neighborhood.

Think back to AC2. That game had some great mission design. Do you think it was bad just because it didn't allow you to use the gun on every target? Remember infiltrating the Vatican at the end? How boring would it have been if you could have just berserked all the guards along the way and watch them kill each other? Those guards standing watch at the Pope's doors? Instead the game made you get up close and personal. You had to hide among monks, watch the guards' patterns and sneak by. To me that was excellent mission design, better than anything in AC4.

This decision also supports co-op. Like it or not, co-op is a huge part of the game and mission design has to support it. Think how it would be if every co-op mission ended with one of your mates simply sniping the target from the rafters. The mission would be over before it began. One person getting the glory for the kill. The point of co-op is working together and surrounding your target like we saw in the E3 demo.

Farlander1991
10-13-2014, 01:43 PM
For some reason I think that message may be a bit misinterpreted. To me it seems like it just means that hidden blade is the only option that leads to an instant target death, while everything else leads to an open combat/chase scenario. So nothing prevents you from shooting Sivert, but it will take at least two shots so be ready for what's to come.

Or heck, maybe if we shoot him, he will lie in one place, and we have to get up close to finish him off (think Jacobo from AC2).

Has anybody from those who played over there have tried killing Sivert in a way other than hidden blade?

Bastiaen
10-13-2014, 03:56 PM
Wow, I'm surprised people are just noticing this now. Back in the gamescom demo you could see in the hud that you automatically switched contextually between sword and hidden blade depending on the situation. I like this. While I've enjoyed some of the other kinds of assassinations, this is a nice return to what things were.

TheArcaneEagle
10-13-2014, 04:17 PM
Heres my take on it:


They said they wanted to go back to the roots of AC. Take AC1 for example; the hidden blade was about the only weapon you could assassinate with. The assassins are defined as a blade in the crowd not the flintlock in the crowd. It is supposed to reinforce a stealthy approach which is what Ubisoft want players to utilise since they have recoded that pillar for Unity. They want players to play the proper way without restricting them too much. Sure, you can only assassinate with the hidden blade, but it's your freedom to execute that assassination through any means via mod missions and black boxes.

Sure they had some ranged weapons and others such as a sword in AC1 but even still, it wasn't the best way to go about a kill. Going in with a sword would guarentee in open combat. Now imagine that in Unity wherein the combat is alleged to be harder. Arno would get shredded. Assassins are supposed to be (sorry for the repetition but it's what they are) the blade in the crowd and then escape without detection. Ubisoft want the player to experience as minimal frustration as possible by not entering open combat when it isn't needed. It isn't feasible anyway. The hidden blade will probably be embellished in this game because of this which is a good thing since most people were complaining that Edward wasn't a true assassin at least not until the end. I am unsure that the Phantom blade will register as a hidden blade kill but it is always a possibility.

So yeah.

lothario-da-be
10-13-2014, 04:32 PM
After thinking about this for a while I am not even mad at this. It will feel like a true and "pure" AC again. I killed almost all my main targets with the hidden blade anyway. It will also make the hidden blade feel special again. In the latest games the hidden blade was becoming more of a gimmick than the Assassin's main weapon. In AC1 the hidden blade felt truly special and it was the Assassin's signature weapon. I also hate how in ac4 I could kill all my targets with ranged weapons that had too much ammo. I still feel like this limits freedom though, but I can't help but feel some nostalgia coming back with this news.

hood3dassassin5
10-13-2014, 04:37 PM
After thinking about this for a while I am not even mad at this. It will feel like a true and "pure" AC again. I killed almost all my main targets with the hidden blade anyway. It will also make the hidden blade feel special again. In the latest games the hidden blade was becoming more of a gimmick than the Assassin's main weapon. In AC1 the hidden blade felt truly special and it was the Assassin's signature weapon. I also hate how in ac4 I could kill all my targets with ranged weapons that had too much ammo. I still feel like this limits freedom though, but I can't help but feel some nostalgia coming back with this news.

viva la revolution!

topeira1980
10-13-2014, 04:53 PM
i dont mind the need to go up close and personal, but i sure hope you could kill the target with a melee weapon as well.

i agree that if you melee the mark or aim at him something magical happen and he doesnt die, like the crosshair turns grey or the sword doesnt swing or something mechanical and artificial like this. it's immersion breaking.


For some reason I think that message may be a bit misinterpreted. To me it seems like it just means that hidden blade is the only option that leads to an instant target death, while everything else leads to an open combat/chase scenario. So nothing prevents you from shooting Sivert, but it will take at least two shots so be ready for what's to come.

Or heck, maybe if we shoot him, he will lie in one place, and we have to get up close to finish him off (think Jacobo from AC2).

i also like what's written above. maybe you CAN shoot the target but you HAVE to hidden blade him afterwards, so theoretically you can shoot and disable him, run away from all the guards and mess you created and then return to the scene of the crime , hidden blade the target, get the hidden memories of the mark and get out again.


also i would like the idea that if you want mroe points to unlock stuff than you can do OO's. if you dont do these OOs than you still get "experience" but you could get more. and if you can replay missions mid-game just to earn these extra XPs than that's even cooler.

Sushiglutton
10-13-2014, 08:15 PM
I think that's fine tbh. It's my prefered method anyway. HB kills are the coolest, most iconic kills. Sniping a main target with a musket just feels wrong.

Very depressed to see some horrible optional objectives return though. This game lives and dies with its HUD customiztion options....

m4r-k7
10-13-2014, 08:22 PM
Very depressed to see some horrible optional objectives return though. This game lives and dies with its HUD customiztion options....

Where are the optional objectives. I thought they were just "opportunity objectives" or something like that

Sushiglutton
10-13-2014, 08:26 PM
Where are the optional objectives. I thought they were just "opportunity objectives" or something like that

They are different it seems. At the start you can see the opportunities. After Arno has entered ND (say at 4:30) you can see the two OO (don't cause alarm, kill two from hiding spots).

MnemonicSyntax
10-13-2014, 08:38 PM
They are different it seems. At the start you can see the opportunities. After Arno has entered ND (say at 4:30) you can see the two OO (don't cause alarm, kill two from hiding spots).

Yeah but this time, you don't "fail" if you don't do them, you just get a chance to earn extra uh... credits or whatever they're called.

Dead1y-Derri
10-13-2014, 10:37 PM
I don't know how I feel about this.

On one hand it is going to add a challenge to these missions and make us think more tactically. On the other it does mean that we can't be creative and we're restricted. Overall maybe its because of the cutscene at the end of each assassination.

In AC2 for example you got a cutscene of you talking with the person, even if you had killed them with a throwing knife while on top of a building.

Will_Lucky
10-13-2014, 11:01 PM
Disappointed generally, I've always gone about my assassinations in the most brutal and efficient method possible. I don't exactly want to have to use stealth but this sounds like it isn't an option, or its an option where thanks to the new combat system I die everytime I try to charge the target.

Xstantin
10-14-2014, 12:08 AM
Disappointed generally, I've always gone about my assassinations in the most brutal and efficient method possible. I don't exactly want to have to use stealth but this sounds like it isn't an option, or its an option where thanks to the new combat system I die everytime I try to charge the target.

Smoke bombs are still there. Plus you can probably make Arno a tank with all those skill points/boosts/gear

Moultonborough
10-14-2014, 12:51 PM
I usually kill with the Hidden Blade anyways so I don't care much about that. However, with the Optional Objectives Alex's words saying it was free just went out the window. Kinda sucks.

Farlander1991
10-14-2014, 01:01 PM
Shadow of Mordor has got optional objectives in its missions, and the only thing they're for is additional Miriam (currency that upgrades your character's attributes), and I noticed that I don't really care much about those objectives.

While I do hate OOs as they're traditionally implemented in AC (and in SoM they're no different in that regard, all pretty arbitrary stuff), as long as it's not required for a full completion stat, I won't be too mad about it.

topeira1980
10-14-2014, 01:47 PM
Shadow of Mordor has got optional objectives in its missions, and the only thing they're for is additional Miriam (currency that upgrades your character's attributes), and I noticed that I don't really care much about those objectives.

While I do hate OOs as they're traditionally implemented in AC (and in SoM they're no different in that regard, all pretty arbitrary stuff), as long as it's not required for a full completion stat, I won't be too mad about it.

i take OOs as i always did - with complete disregard. i just dont do them. im not a completionist. i dont mind not having 100% in a game. the only missions and activities i do in a game are the ones that are fun for me. everything else i ignore. i tested all the side activities in watch dogs but i only did the gang hideouts and the convoy missions and most of the fixer contracts since these were the only fun ones IMO. screw all the other side content that are not a part of what i consider the reason for buying a game.

so if a OO in ACU is doing something that doesnt seem like fun - im not doing it.
in SOM i sometiems felt like doing the missions with OO in mind and sometimes not. depends on my mood ATM. yeah, i got less miriam, but i had WAY more than enough miriam for everything i wanted, and if i needed more miriam than i'd just kill uruk captains and sell their runes, which to me was WAY more fun than doing a secondary objective that didnt feel entertaining.

Farlander1991
10-14-2014, 02:00 PM
i take OOs as i always did - with complete disregard. i just dont do them. im not a completionist.

It's not a matter of being a completionist, really. It's a matter of psychology and approach to choice. When the game tells you that you actually haven't completed this mission, you only completed it for 50-80% because you didn't do an arbitrary constraint, what it does it tells you you're playing the game the wrong way, that you actually haven't beaten that part properly, and that's a ****ty feeling which is why a lot of people dislike OOs in AC games (but then there are games like SoM where it's just a small bonus, which you may choose or not choose to get, and that's a different matter entirely... also, notice that SoM when you complete the mission doesn't tell you when you haven't completed a bonus objective, it just tells you that you got Miriam for the bonus objective if you've completed it, which sends a totally different message to the player than the AC way does).

topeira1980
10-14-2014, 02:46 PM
It's not a matter of being a completionist, really. It's a matter of psychology and approach to choice. When the game tells you that you actually haven't completed this mission, you only completed it for 50-80% because you didn't do an arbitrary constraint, what it does it tells you you're playing the game the wrong way, that you actually haven't beaten that part properly, and that's a ****ty feeling which is why a lot of people dislike OOs in AC games (but then there are games like SoM where it's just a small bonus, which you may choose or not choose to get, and that's a different matter entirely... also, notice that SoM when you complete the mission doesn't tell you when you haven't completed a bonus objective, it just tells you that you got Miriam for the bonus objective if you've completed it, which sends a totally different message to the player than the AC way does).

i understand what you are saying. whether i feel like you do or not is completely subjective and i see where you are coming from. it's a good point.
i do believe this way of portraying OOs might be a bit problematic for some.... just not for me.
i see OOs like "dares". the game is telling me "i dare you to complete the mission without being detected" and just like if a friend told me such a thing i am replying (in my mind. im not crazy): "i dont care what you dare me. i just dont want to do it this way. i want to kill ppl because i really enjoy combat" or im saying: "hmm. ok. i'll try" and if i fail and the game tells me: "you loser. you didnt do what i dared you to" i say back (again - in my mind. i usually dont talk back to my electronics.... only to my food.... but its constantly taunting me it isnt delicious): "i seriously dont care what you think. i completed the mission, the gameplay gave me some nice and fun moments and looking back at the experience i just had i feel it was a lot of fun and i dont wish to undermine it by succumbing to your childish dares and doing it again as if the fun never happened."

just like some on this thread i find OOs to be a cheap way by UBI to inject a challenge. i dont like this. i dont respond well to cheapness :-P

but i welcome other's point of view on the subject. i think this thread is the most clever thread on these forums.

dxsxhxcx
10-14-2014, 03:40 PM
It's not a matter of being a completionist, really. It's a matter of psychology and approach to choice. When the game tells you that you actually haven't completed this mission, you only completed it for 50-80% because you didn't do an arbitrary constraint, what it does it tells you you're playing the game the wrong way, that you actually haven't beaten that part properly, and that's a ****ty feeling which is why a lot of people dislike OOs in AC games (but then there are games like SoM where it's just a small bonus, which you may choose or not choose to get, and that's a different matter entirely... also, notice that SoM when you complete the mission doesn't tell you when you haven't completed a bonus objective, it just tells you that you got Miriam for the bonus objective if you've completed it, which sends a totally different message to the player than the AC way does).

well put Farlander, and now not only these objectives are back but it seems they'll reward the player with skill points, what means that if we want to take full advantage of the skill system we'll need to complete these "optional" objectives...

Sushiglutton
10-14-2014, 05:00 PM
well put Farlander, and now not only these objectives are back but it seems they'll reward the player with skill points, what means that if we want to take full advantage of the skill system we'll need to complete these "optional" objectives...

So you are saying OO will actually play a more prominent role in Unity than ever before? Way to put me down :(

dxsxhxcx
10-14-2014, 05:27 PM
So you are saying OO will actually play a more prominent role in Unity than ever before? Way to put me down :( http://forums.ubi.com/showthread.php/932002-Assassinations-HAVE-to-be-performed-with-a-Hidden-Blade-in-AC-Unity?p=10269675#post10269675 It is just a rumor but I wouldn't be surprised if this end up happening...

topeira1980
10-14-2014, 05:43 PM
well put Farlander, and now not only these objectives are back but it seems they'll reward the player with skill points, what means that if we want to take full advantage of the skill system we'll need to complete these "optional" objectives...

i dont understand why you think that. if completing the OOs grants you mroe XP than you would by completing the mission without OOs than it just means you earn that XP a tad bit later. not NOT AT ALL. you get full advantage of the skill system but maybe an hour of gameplay later instead of NOW!
i think it's a good system and i see no problem with this. just like in batman:arkham - if you fight better you gain XP faster and level up sooner. that's it. you dont HAVE to fight better.

i dont see what the fuss is about when it comes to XP gain.

also lets not jump into the conclusion that the skill system in AC is all that, OK? from what i've seen in the official costumization video the skill system includes about 6 moves in each category. that's hardly something to get really excited about. and im sure the game is long enough to excell in all categories at one point or anohter.

aznassassin159
10-14-2014, 08:13 PM
Fine with me. I always use hidden blade anyways.

I hated how in Black Flag you could get away with just shooting your contract target, or berserk-darting them and letting the guards do the work for you. Though I can imagine some will be disappointed by this limitation, but oh well. More old-school assassinations is winner winner chicken dinner for me.

dxsxhxcx
10-14-2014, 08:17 PM
i dont understand why you think that. if completing the OOs grants you mroe XP than you would by completing the mission without OOs than it just means you earn that XP a tad bit later. not NOT AT ALL. you get full advantage of the skill system but maybe an hour of gameplay later instead of NOW!
i think it's a good system and i see no problem with this. just like in batman:arkham - if you fight better you gain XP faster and level up sooner. that's it. you dont HAVE to fight better.

i dont see what the fuss is about when it comes to XP gain.

also lets not jump into the conclusion that the skill system in AC is all that, OK? from what i've seen in the official costumization video the skill system includes about 6 moves in each category. that's hardly something to get really excited about. and im sure the game is long enough to excell in all categories at one point or anohter.

like if being an intrusive system wasn't enough now it'll punish me even more for not doing what it gives me the "option" to do (it doesn't matter if I'll be able to get those skill points later, why should I be punished for doing something I was given the option to not to?), that's my problem with it, you don't see me complaining about these games achievements because I'll only be aware of their existence if I complete them or if I go to a specific menu to know what I have to do, these so called "optional" objectives are all over the screen telling me what to do, the game even freezes at the end of each mission to give me a score about the mission's "optional" objectives. (probably the most immersion breaking thing they already added to this game)

Don't get me wrong, I'm not completely against this sytem, IMO if done right it can provide a lot of replay value and add a little extra challenge to the game, I'm all for replayability, but the way it's being handled now IMO is the wrong way..

LeAssassin36
10-15-2014, 10:29 AM
It's possibly for symbolism. The real life Assassin order (yes, there was one) relied heavily on the symbolism of their murders to strike fear into their opponents. It seems like they're doing that with this.

Or, it's just this one mission, where you in fact assassinate two Templars trying to meet eachother, and your trainer talks about the ways Altair did it back in the olden days, which was symbolically. I honestly don't mind this, as it'll only be a somewhat medium setback since all the classes are actually specialized in part by melee despite what Ubisoft have shown us about the "ranged" class. Ranged isn't all about the guns.

shobhit7777777
10-15-2014, 11:05 AM
On one hand...it does feel more Assassiny

On the other hand....are you effing kidding me?

On the third hand....This has yet to be confirmed.

ACU, perhaps the most robust and systemic AC game since years....and you're restricted to the hidden blade for assassinations? I seriously doubt it. Thats two steps forward and 1 back. Its probably only for a certain mission.

RinoTheBouncer
10-15-2014, 11:09 AM
I still don’t know how to feel about this. I mean from one angle it’s cool that they’re giving the Assassin-y feeling back to Assassinations, but why bother giving us all these weapons, the phantom blade, the spears, the swords and daggers and all when all we’re gonna need to perform the main goals is the hidden blade? I would’ve immediately approved of this and welcomed it, had this been a Sumerian, Babylonian or Ancient Egyptian setting where there’s only a dagger or a variation of the Hidden Blade that was used in those times, and we rely mainly on skill, being a light and fast running assassin with this simple and efficient hidden blade to perform the deed.

However, my theory about AC is confirmed now which is that they always give you too much more than you really need. I mean are we really gonna need all these weapons to fight off guards in the streets and all these outfits and customizations to level up if we’re just gonna use a hidden blade to assassinate our main targets? are the enemies in the streets really gonna be that challenging a diverse that they need such a variety in customizations? I don’t think so.

Locopells
10-15-2014, 11:31 AM
On one hand...it does feel more Assassiny

On the other hand....are you effing kidding me?

On the third hand....This has yet to be confirmed.

ACU, perhaps the most robust and systemic AC game since years....and you're restricted to the hidden blade for assassinations? I seriously doubt it. Thats two steps forward and 1 back. Its probably only for a certain mission.

What are you, Tevye?!

The_Kiwi_
10-15-2014, 12:31 PM
@aznassassin
Being able to take out your target using whatever means necessary in order to do the kill is extremely assassiny, using berserk darts and pistols was extremely perfect for an assassin game

Restricting assassinations to hidden blades is an atrocious decision
I loved using dual swords to kill people, especially with aerial kills
And running kills with dual swords in slow mo is unbelievably badass

Farlander1991
10-15-2014, 12:40 PM
On one hand...it does feel more Assassiny

On the other hand....are you effing kidding me?

On the third hand....This has yet to be confirmed.

ACU, perhaps the most robust and systemic AC game since years....and you're restricted to the hidden blade for assassinations? I seriously doubt it. Thats two steps forward and 1 back. Its probably only for a certain mission.

As anything with pre-release footage it's subject to change, of course, but in the camrip the message is quite clear, 'ASSASSINATIONS have to be performed with the Hidden Blade'. What it really means, however, is not certain.

We can presume that the objectives have a differentiation between 'assassinate' and 'kill'. In the Sivert mission, the mod objective is 'KILL Deschaneau', but the main objective is 'ASSASSINATE Sivert'. I think that means that when we have 'KILL', the target can be killed with absolutely anything, but for 'ASSASSINATE' it's Hidden Blades, and 'ASSASSINATE' objectives probably applies only to main targets.

However, what I hope this 'assassinations have to be performed with the blade' thing is, that you CAN shoot the target, for example, but you have to approach it to finish it off with the Hidden Blade anyway, rather than block the 'fire' button when targeting assassination target.

shobhit7777777
10-15-2014, 01:10 PM
What are you, Tevye?!

I'm Batman


As anything with pre-release footage it's subject to change, of course, but in the camrip the message is quite clear, 'ASSASSINATIONS have to be performed with the Hidden Blade'. What it really means, however, is not certain.

We can presume that the objectives have a differentiation between 'assassinate' and 'kill'. In the Sivert mission, the mod objective is 'KILL Deschaneau', but the main objective is 'ASSASSINATE Sivert'. I think that means that when we have 'KILL', the target can be killed with absolutely anything, but for 'ASSASSINATE' it's Hidden Blades, and 'ASSASSINATE' objectives probably applies only to main targets.

However, what I hope this 'assassinations have to be performed with the blade' thing is, that you CAN shoot the target, for example, but you have to approach it to finish it off with the Hidden Blade anyway, rather than block the 'fire' button when targeting assassination target.

Could be. I'm hoping its goofed up text.

If they do want to push for hidden blade kills, make it so that hidden blade assassinations give you more points/xp.

ace3001
10-15-2014, 01:12 PM
I don't get it. What's going to happen if you shoot the target or slash through with a sword? Instant desynchronization? This sounds like a very bad idea.

GoldenBoy9999
10-15-2014, 01:37 PM
I wouldn't like it if I aimed at the target with my rifle and it grayed it out. I want people to be allowed to approach missions how they want. I wouldn't like it if mission designers started getting lazy though.

There should be a message that pops up and suggests that you assassinate with the blade or offer an incentive like skill points ,a weapon, or maybe some customization piece.

aznassassin159
10-15-2014, 04:15 PM
Ya know, the more I think about it, the less I like it. How exactly is this supposed to work if you get detected? Do you just engage in combat with your target, hit him a few times, then switch to your hidden blade halfway through and finish him off? That sounds very clumbsy...

topeira1980
10-15-2014, 04:17 PM
As anything with pre-release footage it's subject to change, of course, but in the camrip the message is quite clear, 'ASSASSINATIONS have to be performed with the Hidden Blade'. What it really means, however, is not certain.

We can presume that the objectives have a differentiation between 'assassinate' and 'kill'. In the Sivert mission, the mod objective is 'KILL Deschaneau', but the main objective is 'ASSASSINATE Sivert'. I think that means that when we have 'KILL', the target can be killed with absolutely anything, but for 'ASSASSINATE' it's Hidden Blades, and 'ASSASSINATE' objectives probably applies only to main targets.

However, what I hope this 'assassinations have to be performed with the blade' thing is, that you CAN shoot the target, for example, but you have to approach it to finish it off with the Hidden Blade anyway, rather than block the 'fire' button when targeting assassination target.

The way you interpret KILL and ASSASSINATE is a deep one and one that should be used by a big professional company like UBI, which makes me thing you are right. there is a difference between KILL and ASSASSINATE and it wouldnt surprise me that you can KILL anyway you chose but ASSASSINATE with the HB only to varify a kill or to prove that the assassins were the ones that killed the target and no one else.

and for those who wonder why we are given so many tools like bombs, poison, guns, swords yet we are compelled to assassinate with the HB only - you can kill 99% of the enemies in the game however you chose. that single 1% is saved for the hidden blade. i can live with that.

shooting a target with the gun yet having to finish him off with the HB is fine by me. you shoot the target, run away, lead the AI away from the nearly dead target and then go back to him and finish him off to get all his memories etc.

Xangr8
10-15-2014, 04:58 PM
I guess most people here don't get the reason for making assassination the hidden blade a compulsion. I know it limits freedom but, guess it'll do no harm in explaining. Could be spoiler-y stuff:
Okay, so in ACU, Arno kind of works like the Animus. Like you can see in the Gamescom gameplay, now there are no more memory corridor talks after assassination. Instead, after you assassinate your target Arno uses his blood to look through his memories and extract info. I don't remember the reason why he's able to do it, though.

JustPlainQuirky
10-15-2014, 05:00 PM
No way this is true.

The devs aren't that stupid.

pacmanate
10-15-2014, 05:29 PM
No way this is true.

The devs aren't that stupid.

At the same time, it could make sense. Someone mentioned here about the mind reading thing Arno does to his targets after they die. He couldnt possibly do it from 50m away with a gun. It must be through touch I think.

JustPlainQuirky
10-15-2014, 05:31 PM
With that logic, half of the white rooms in AC don't make sense.

Though I never believed they made much sense to begin with.

SlyTrooper
10-15-2014, 05:46 PM
The white rooms had nothing to do with eagle vision, though. The white rooms were made by the animus, right? Arno gets visions because of his eagle vision.

And this doesn't bother me at all. I plan to play stealthily anyway.

JustPlainQuirky
10-15-2014, 05:49 PM
I always go full rambo first.

If I can rambo, then I don't bother with stealth.

m4r-k7
10-15-2014, 05:59 PM
The weird thing is that during the Gamescom demo (which is the one this guy is playing), Amancio said you can walk in right through the doors to kill your target. How does that work? Maybe the target starts running and you have to chase and assassinate him? If thats the case then it could be true, but if the target has his own weapon, how are you supposed to get into a fight with the guy with just your hidden blade?

SlyTrooper
10-15-2014, 06:04 PM
I assume that if you get into a melee fight, Arno will automatically switch to the hidden blade when the target is vulnerable. We already know that it no longer needs to be selected & is only context-sensitive, so it won't be that difficult to do. It will likely just be like a finisher.

dimbismp
10-15-2014, 07:44 PM
Like some of you mentioned,the ideal would be that if you shoot your target,he won't die and this will result in a fight/chase.I think the message is not understood well.IEven though it is assassiny,it would be quite dumb to do something like this.Anyway,i think most of the people who reacted would do the assassinations with the HB anyway.As for sword assassinations(AC4),i think that it is unrealistic cause it makes too much noise and it is not practical.If you want to kill somebody with the sword,kill him via a duel.