PDA

View Full Version : Should I play ACU with the HUD off?



KrYpToNiC95
10-21-2014, 11:55 AM
Having played every AC with the HUD on I really havent been able to achieve a sense of exploration by getting lost in any of the cities. With ACU im hoping to play with all the HUD off in order to make it a far more immersive experience. Does anyone here who has played with the HUD off recommend it?

Also so if I recall correctly there seemed to be a feature where on rooftops we can press a button and icons show where key points are on the map. Does that also mean that we can use that to gather our bearings when trying to do missions but without having to have all the intrusive features on screen?

ze_topazio
10-21-2014, 12:01 PM
That's up to you, some people like to play like that, personally I just find it annoying.

LoyalACFan
10-21-2014, 12:02 PM
Also so if I recall correctly there seemed to be a feature where on rooftops we can press a button and icons show where key points are on the map. Does that also mean that we can use that to gather our bearings when trying to do missions but without having to have all the intrusive features on screen?

As I understand it, the High Ground feature is basically replacing the Location Info button from AC4. You go to a rooftop, press R1, and you'll see a floating 3D icon of every nearby mission/object you can interact with. And presumably, waypoints will be in 3D again just like AC3 and 4. So yes, you can play without the minimap. The rest of the HUD is pretty unimportant anyway, so you should be able to turn that off as well.

Aphex_Tim
10-21-2014, 01:00 PM
I'm not sure but I'm definitely gonna be experimenting with it!
If the High Ground feature works as I hope it does, the only HUD element I'll need turned on is the SSI (which also seems to be less intrusive than in previous games).
If the minimap does turn out to be necessary, I seriously hope we'll be able to reduce its size because as of right now, there's nothing mini about that big, ugly square!

GoldenBoy9999
10-21-2014, 01:26 PM
I'll try it without the HUD. I tried that in AC4 and it made Havana seem completely different.

Fatal-Feit
10-21-2014, 02:11 PM
Unity looks near impossible to play without the HUD.

SixKeys
10-21-2014, 02:23 PM
AC1 is the only game so far that is completely playable without HUD. I'll probably experiment with it in Unity, but I can't imagine the whole game being playable like that.

LoyalACFan
10-21-2014, 03:55 PM
AC1 is the only game so far that is completely playable without HUD. I'll probably experiment with it in Unity, but I can't imagine the whole game being playable like that.

Doesn't that make stuff really hard to find though? Especially the bureaus. With AC3/4's 3D waypoints, I find that those games are fully playable without any HUD elements. Though I keep the minimap on in AC3 because of the enemy AI, I like to just avoid red blips altogether.

Megas_Doux
10-21-2014, 03:59 PM
I only use the mini maps.

cawatrooper9
10-21-2014, 04:02 PM
This may be a dumb question, but is it possible to play with the HUD off in a console version?

Megas_Doux
10-21-2014, 04:05 PM
This may be a dumb question, but is it possible to play with the HUD off in a console version?

Yes.

Ooption, HUD and that is it.

zkorejo
10-21-2014, 06:07 PM
I will also try to play without the HUD for the first time. The game looks beautiful and the HUD is hideous. Mini map is way too big for my liking and is taking too much space. If it turns out to be completely unplayable, I will turn it back on.

topeira1980
10-21-2014, 06:27 PM
how do you guys play without the HEALTH BAR?
ok, i know - you dont really need health bar in AC because you never die cuz the game is easy as sleeping after 48 hours of being fully awake, but i assume ACU will be harder and you WILL need to know when to fight and when to flee and when to use medicine etc...


but in general - playing without the minimap is cool. you really notice every detail in the environment because you look at it. i wish AC had a compass like in skyrim. all i need to see is the NORTH. everything else can be seen in the full map. i still find it hard to play with no mini map even though its a lot of fun.

Xstantin
10-21-2014, 06:35 PM
how do you guys play without the HEALTH BAR?
ok, i know - you dont really need health bar in AC because you never die cuz the game is easy as sleeping after 48 hours of being fully awake, but i assume ACU will be harder and you WILL need to know when to fight and when to flee and when to use medicine etc...


The screen changes when you go into critical state so you know you need to run and heal

topeira1980
10-23-2014, 08:13 AM
The screen changes when you go into critical state so you know you need to run and heal

this wont be the case in ACU since , unlike other AC games, when you reach zero health - you die. no grace period.

Farlander1991
10-23-2014, 01:29 PM
AC1 is the only game so far that is completely playable without HUD. I'll probably experiment with it in Unity, but I can't imagine the whole game being playable like that.

PC version, sadly, has got missions which are more tricky and annoying without HUD (like rooftop race where we need to go from point A to B, we don't have any idea where that point is), so you still have to open the map and look for a location there.



Doesn't that make stuff really hard to find though? Especially the bureaus.

The bureaus have a huge Assassin insigna on their rooftops which can be visible from viewpoints, especially those that are not far from the bureau. Which you can easily find based on eagles.
And the bureau leader tells you where in the city to find missions (direction from the bureau and what the location is, i.e. market, garden, mosque, etc.), which you then pinpoint either by audio cues or eagle vision.
You actually learn the city layout really well without the HUD.

LatinaC09
10-23-2014, 02:15 PM
Actually now that I'm thinking about it...you really don't need the HUD at all. If you want to know where to go you can just go into the map and highlight the memory/area/mission. I've been turning different parts of the HUD off for a while in the past AC games. This time I think it's completely going off.

SixKeys
10-23-2014, 02:40 PM
Doesn't that make stuff really hard to find though? Especially the bureaus. With AC3/4's 3D waypoints, I find that those games are fully playable without any HUD elements. Though I keep the minimap on in AC3 because of the enemy AI, I like to just avoid red blips altogether.

Not really. AC1 has a lot of really tall landmarks and the cities are smaller compared to the sequels, so finding the bureau is never that hard. It's always somewhere near the center of the city and they all have the same green dome. The bureau leaders always give you hints where to start your search (the market, mosque, etc.) and you can navigate by sound.

I prefer to play AC1 completely HUD:less unless I just wanna breeze through. In the other games I usually turn off health, money and controls. Sometimes SSI and weapons too, but in AC3/AC4 these are a pain since the weapons have a tendency to automatically switch to something else between cut scenes.


PC version, sadly, has got missions which are more tricky and annoying without HUD (like rooftop race where we need to go from point A to B, we don't have any idea where that point is), so you still have to open the map and look for a location there.

True, but you can see from the unique icons in your normal map what type of mission you're approaching. In my last playthrough I just avoided the rooftop race and timed assassination missions.

Farlander1991
10-23-2014, 02:48 PM
Btw, as an additional evidence of just how awesome AC1 is without HUD. You can see all the throwing knives you've got on Altair. If you use a knife, it will be removed from the holster. It's funny how knives being constantly in Ezio's holsters is one of the first things I noticed in AC2, 'why does it keep happening like that?!?!?!?!?!?!' :D

SixKeys
10-23-2014, 02:51 PM
Btw, as an additional evidence of just how awesome AC1 is without HUD. You can see all the throwing knives you've got on Altair. If you use a knife, it will be removed from the holster. It's funny how knives being constantly in Ezio's holsters is one of the first things I noticed in AC2, 'why does it keep happening like that?!?!?!?!?!?!' :D

I actually never noticed that in AC1 until I read it here on the forums. I tried to pay attention to it last time I played, I'm sure it's in the game, but honestly I just don't see it.

Farlander1991
10-23-2014, 03:27 PM
I actually never noticed that in AC1 until I read it here on the forums. I tried to pay attention to it last time I played, I'm sure it's in the game, but honestly I just don't see it.

Hard to find suitable comparison screens, but, for example, compare Altair's shoulder holsters in the two images.
http://i5.minus.com/ib1KQJleV7hGxv.jpg
http://www.assassins-creed.ru/uploads/images/ac1/screenshot/screenshot85.jpg

You can notice that in the first one, Altair has got only three throwing knives, and in the second one - five. Same applies to all holsters, like the ones on the belt are emptied once you use them.

AssassinHMS
10-23-2014, 03:36 PM
how do you guys play without the HEALTH BAR?
ok, i know - you dont really need health bar in AC because you never die cuz the game is easy as sleeping after 48 hours of being fully awake, but i assume ACU will be harder and you WILL need to know when to fight and when to flee and when to use medicine etc...


but in general - playing without the minimap is cool. you really notice every detail in the environment because you look at it. i wish AC had a compass like in skyrim. all i need to see is the NORTH. everything else can be seen in the full map. i still find it hard to play with no mini map even though its a lot of fun.

Well, in real life, you never know if your opponent’s next attack will be fatal and there is no health bar telling you when to run. That’s why generally I like games where you can die in 2 or 3 hits if you fail to respond or if you choose to keep fighting when you should have ran and where there are no bars to help you. This makes the game more interesting and fights riskier. It’s also a good way to promote stealth.



I wish games in general and AC especially, would stop cheapening the gameplay with mindless arrow markers. The adventure shouldn’t consist on getting to the arrow on the map and doing whatever there is to do. The journey and, most importantly, the discovery should be more important than the destination.
AC is a huge open world game, yet it uses arrow markers to “point the way” like a bloody linear game. Worse, most of the time, it’s nigh impossible to find the destination without the markers since the game doesn’t provide enough information. This, plus the easy fast travel option, turns an open world experience into a “follow the arrow; go there, do that” game. It’s a waste of the world’s potential.

All the information should be provided by the game, not in the form of pointers, but by NPCs, books/parchments, etc.
Doing a mission should consist on more than bringing up the map, looking for an arrow marker, fast traveling there and starting the mission. AC has a huge world, why not use it? Why not encourage exploration, not in the form of mindlessly roaming in hopes of finding the mission marker, but by making sure that such a rich and wide open world has all the information available as long as the player is willing to look for it and investigate.
Exploring the world should be key in games like this but instead, the only reason to do it, is to collect some feathers or flags after the story is over (and even some of those collectibles appear on the map).

SixKeys
10-23-2014, 03:54 PM
All the information should be provided by the game, not in the form of pointers, but by NPCs, books/parchments, etc.
Doing a mission should consist on more than bringing up the map, looking for an arrow marker, fast traveling there and starting the mission. AC has a huge world, why not use it? Why not encourage exploration, not in the form of mindlessly roaming in hopes of finding the mission marker, but by making sure that such a rich and wide open world has all the information available as long as the player is willing to look for it and investigate.

Probably because they tried that with AC1 and most players hated it. They were pretty much forced to include a mini-map and other HUD elements.

Not saying you're wrong, necessarily, but not everyone plays games for the same reasons. Many people are happy to just relax and follow markers, others like exploration. I just wish the option was there, like in AC1. Some of the later games even make it impossible to turn off mission markers which is my only real complaint.

Sushiglutton
10-23-2014, 04:19 PM
My advice is to start with the full HUD on. When you have understood the mechanics and the type of content the game has to offer you can start to shut things off. That's what I do anyway.

AssassinHMS
10-23-2014, 04:27 PM
Probably because they tried that with AC1 and most players hated it. They were pretty much forced to include a mini-map and other HUD elements.

Not saying you're wrong, necessarily, but not everyone plays games for the same reasons. Many people are happy to just relax and follow markers, others like exploration. I just wish the option was there, like in AC1. Some of the later games even make it impossible to turn off mission markers which is my only real complaint.

I noticed, but I don’t think AC1 quite nailed it. IMO, the whole discovery part lacked depth. Finding the destination should have been treated more like a fundamental part of the experience and less like an option for those who don’t want to use HUD. What I mean, is that there should have been more ways to find a particular location in the city (through informants perhaps or simply by asking civilians) and the game should have focused on adding more in-game clues to help the player find his way (such as random conversations between NPCs that could point the player in the right direction for example).
Thing is, exploring the cities in AC1 was quite pointless. There was no information scattered around and you couldn’t really interact with NPCs. The cities looked alive but they felt dead providing no information whatsoever and I think this is one of the main reasons why finding the way without HUD wasn’t very gratifying or interesting to most players.

As for the “not everyone plays games for the same reasons” argument, I’d say that’s why there are different types of games. AC doesn’t have and shouldn’t try to be an every-game or to please everyone. There are other linear, more relaxing games out there. Maybe not historical games though.
AC should strive to be the best at what it does (core mechanics, Assassin simulator, open world, etc.) and not the game that everyone can play because that’s a HUGE waste of potential.

Megas_Doux
10-23-2014, 05:33 PM
I noticed, but I don’t think AC1 quite nailed it. IMO, the whole discovery part lacked depth. Finding the destination should have been treated more like a fundamental part of the experience and less like an option for those who don’t want to use HUD. What I mean, is that there should have been more ways to find a particular location in the city (through informants perhaps or simply by asking civilians) and the game should have focused on adding more in-game clues to help the player find his way (such as random conversations between NPCs that could point the player in the right direction for example).
Thing is, exploring the cities in AC1 was quite pointless. There was no information scattered around and you couldn’t really interact with NPCs. The cities looked alive but they felt dead providing no information whatsoever and I think this is one of the main reasons why finding the way without HUD wasn’t very gratifying or interesting to most players.

As for the “not everyone plays games for the same reasons” argument, I’d say that’s why there are different types of games. AC doesn’t have and shouldn’t try to be an every-game or to please everyone. There are other linear, more relaxing games out there. Maybe not historical games though.
AC should strive to be the best at what it does (core mechanics, Assassin simulator, open world, etc.) and not the game that everyone can play because that’s a HUGE waste of potential.

Cant say I disagree with you, at all. Thing is, that kind of game would be "too much" of an acquired taste for many people. Take Hitman games for instance, that according to Eidos the franshise "has suffered" to meet expectations in terms of sales.....

AssassinHMS
10-23-2014, 06:01 PM
Cant say I disagree with you, at all. Thing is, that kind of game would be "too much" of an acquired taste for many people. Take Hitman games for instance, that according to Eidos the franshise "has suffered" to meet expectations in terms of sales.....

Maybe.
Perhaps, what they should do, is to improve the games in the way I suggested but create options to help players who aren’t that committed to the game.
For example, make world exploration essential but create the option to show map markers, directional pointers or maybe a special eagle vision function that highlights the path to the information. However these things should be optional, labeled and treated as “gameplay helpers” and obviously initially disabled.

What Ubisoft has done so far is the opposite which is either to not include anything for those who actually want to immerse themselves in the game and give some use to the world they created, or to make it a lame and underdeveloped option.
Besides, it’s about time Ubisoft starts experimenting with AC and puts the franchise just a little bit above their desire for cheap, quick cash.