PDA

View Full Version : Unity has far too much pointless content.



LoyalACFan
11-23-2014, 12:39 PM
So, I think we all know that Unity is a big game with a lot of stuff to see and do. Some of it is awesome, most of it is just OK. We've all seen the map, and the absolutely ridiculous number of icons it displays. At first glance it's enticing, showing off a plethora of activities to sink your teeth into. But once you actually get into the heart of it, that's not exactly how it plays out.

There are three hundred chests in Paris. Three. Freaking. Hundred. On top of that, there are dozens of Paris Stories, several Cafe Contracts and Helix Rifts, over a dozen each of the Murder Mysteries and Nostradamus Riddles, and God knows how many cockades (I collected 100 for the black dye but they just keep coming). Now, while all of that stuff is theoretically okay, it must be said that the quality of the core game has been widely criticized. Despite massive improvements to all of the series' mechanics, Unity seems to be nobody's favorite. And it's probably because the main sequences aren't very good.

The story should be the heart of the game. Everything else is extra. And that's fine, extra stuff is cool, however, with Unity, the ratio of main:side content is more out of whack than it's ever been. Unity has 26 story missions. AC4 had 45, AC3 had 46, AC2 had 71. The quality is, of course, subjective; AC2's story has been called bloated while AC3's has been called poorly paced. But they provide a useful comparison; all four of those games try to cover a similar amount of material; young guy joining the Brotherhood and maturing along the way over the next few years. Say what you want about AC2, but it had some of the franchise's most memorable characters and it's still looked upon favorably by a majority of fans. Why? Probably because it took its time with the story, didn't rush anything (it could even be argued that it bordered on stagnation for a while) and we clearly saw Ezio's character arc unfold in his interactions with other characters. Unity tries to squeeze a similar arc into about 1/3 of the time.

But that isn't to say it's a short game; on the contrary, you could easily sink 100 hours into this game and still not finish everything. The problem is, like 90% of this content does NOTHING to make us care about our hero, his allies, or even the time period. The Paris "Stories" are mostly just "hey, I'm a historical figure and I want to to do something for me! -Quest Accepted." We're lucky if we even get one line of dialogue out of Arno. The missions themselves aren't badly designed by any means, but wouldn't it serve the overall game better if the devs spent their efforts beefing up the main storyline with more content and character interaction instead of making a bunch of disconnected side missions that basically just serve as historical footnotes? Hell, the Paris Stories could constitute an entire game on their own, and that would be awesome if the main storyline wasn't so sorely lacking. Don't get me wrong, I'm not dissing the Paris Stories at all, I think they're mostly great. It's just that it's probably a poor idea to add a ton of side content to a foundation that's so bare-bones. Instead of SEVENTY unconnected Paris Stories/Cafe Contracts and a short main mission strand, why not have a few small sequences of Paris Stories (think Templar Hunts from AC4; maybe one for Madame Tussaud, one for Chevalier d'Eon, one for Cassini, and one for the Scarlet Pimpernel) and a long main campaign that doesn't rush through the story?

Most of Unity's sequences are only two memories long; one to figure out where your target is, and one to kill him/her. Wouldn't it have done the story so much more justice if there would have been a few more story levels in there for us to spend some time with people like Elise, Pierre, Mirabeau, and Napoleon so we actually get invested in them as characters? Even if it meant they had to dig up a few more historical figures for us to assassinate to prolong the game; God knows I would have loved a few more of those awesome assassination missions. I realize that story missions are more complex to design than any of the side missions, but I feel like there's so much content in the game, they could have easily had enough manpower to beef up the campaign had they not made so much filler.

Assassin's Creed devs have got to start trimming the fat. AC3 suffered from the exact same problem; a rushed, short, disjointed narrative (for Connor's part at least) and an absolute sh*t ton of useless side content. Like I mentioned earlier, over four hundred freaking chests and cockades clogging up the map isn't "content," it's junk. Clutter. The illusion of scope. Though these kinds of things don't take much more effort for the devs than simply dropping them onto the map and maybe scripting a few guard patrols around them, they need to be axed forever. Nobody wants to piss around with little lockpicking puzzles for a measly 750 livre just to get the icon off their map.

RobertMcSassin
11-23-2014, 12:49 PM
*Puts hand up*...It's my favourite...Then again, I'm a huge fan of the amount of c***(ade)-ing about there has been in the last few AC games...That's not to say I don't agree that the main story should be very much up to scratch, but I have done hardly any of that so far...

I'm, personally loving the volume of extra stuff that I can do in Unity...Especially as it makes me explore the map thoroughly from one side to the other...Not that I didn't do that in the first AC, but it just feels like I have something more fun to do with it when I get there...

I hope that future installments will bring the balance of story to extra more in line, just so everyone can be happy... :D ...

Though, I will complain about the Companion App stuff and the Initiates stuff...Put them in the game, rather than separate and it'd be absolutely perfect for me...The thing that bothers me most is the lack of the Brotherhood Missions stuff, I always loved sending the Assassins off and all that...Money, money, money...Always funny... ;) ...

Dragula
11-23-2014, 12:49 PM
i dont mind the collection stuff, aslong as its added on to a good story, the story was poor so it feels like im collecting things for nothing. like it was feathers in ac3 which in a way made sense, in unity im what? picking up trash people dropped?

RA503
11-23-2014, 01:19 PM
Objection.,AC 2 is big but somethings like the venetian arc looks like filler,I know that fly with leonardo machine and the carnival minigames are cool but for plot viewpoint is filler,and I love side content with plot relevance is because of that that peace walker is my favorite metal gear solid,because his side content always unlock something to analyse like tapes to hear,the past metal gear has very little to do after beat main history,also, games like GTA the side content is more important tham the main and people never complains.

LoyalACFan
11-23-2014, 01:29 PM
games like GTA the side content is more important tham the main and people never complains.

That's because you play GTA to do crazy stuff, blow sh*t up, drive fast cars, and massacre cops. It always has been, at least since it went 3D. AC has always been more serious about its story and lore, even though GTA games are, generally, better-crafted and more detail-oriented IMO.

Chook1980
11-23-2014, 01:59 PM
I didn't think the side missions were pointless, I loved the paris stories some of them had there own unique little story to tell.

LoyalACFan
11-23-2014, 02:04 PM
I didn't think the side missions were pointless, I loved the paris stories some of them had there own unique little story to tell.

But that's my point, wouldn't you rather sacrifice a few little side stories for a good central story that doesn't suck? I mean, Unity's main story positively reeked of cut content; especially that time Arno was like "I'm going to have to vent to Napoleon about this" or whatever... Who? You mean that random guy you met once for five minutes?

Chook1980
11-23-2014, 02:14 PM
But that's my point, wouldn't you rather sacrifice a few little side stories for a good central story that doesn't suck? I mean, Unity's main story positively reeked of cut content; especially that time Arno was like "I'm going to have to vent to Napoleon about this" or whatever... Who? You mean that random guy you met once for five minutes?

Yeah i can see your point, there were some that were a bit odd, I still didn't mind them. I did find it funny those two became such good friends after one moment together XD.

Sushiglutton
11-23-2014, 05:05 PM
Excellent post again!

The thing is that there's a small group of actually skilled and talented developers sitting in Montreal. They make the basic building blocks and the main missions (this is my theory anyway). Then Ubi has an enormous amount of people working in other studios, factory making content for the OW based on these building-blocks. Naturally this stuff is of much lower quality and most of it is frankly junk.

I think Ubi is in the fortunate position where they can scale down substantially (lower cost) and actually end up with a much higher quality project. Why they don't is beyond me, but the management seems to think it's about the number of hours you can get people to play, not their satisfaction from the experience.



games like GTA the side content is more important tham the main and people never complains.

An important difference is that R* don't flag their junk. Sure there are collectibles in GTA V, but there are no icons on the map. R* understands that by flagging something they are saying: "Hey com here and try this", which is something you only should do for content you have confidence in.

Ubisoft flags everything. What this means is that they are actively encouraging players to do boring things. This is not only annoying, but also kills the lust for exploration in their games as you know there's nothing to discovered that they havn't allready thrown in your face.

Assassin_M
11-23-2014, 05:22 PM
I only agree with the overwhelming aspect. Ubisoft games these days just throw EVERYTHING at your face, EVERYTHING. It makes everything seem like a shopping list. Even their random encounters, they happen SO frequently, too frequently. I think cockades and chests should be found via exploration, not something that appears on the map instantly when you sync a view point. Murder Mysteries should be found by talking to Vydock and Paris stories should be run into organically with no symbols on the map.

Oh and Unity is my favorite from what I played of it.

Sushiglutton
11-23-2014, 05:29 PM
I only agree with the overwhelming aspect. Ubisoft games these days just throw EVERYTHING at your face, EVERYTHING.

I'm really curious as to why they think this is the right thing to do.

My guess is that studies show that flagging all content leads to a larger fraction of the players completing it. However I think that's a flawed way of looking at it. You have to go by overall satisfaction, not the number of hours player spent (since Ubi is not really making any money from that anyway).

It's also interesting that R* has not come to the same conclusion as Ubi. I think R*'s approach is way superior.

topeira1980
11-23-2014, 05:32 PM
i find no joy in collecting stuff for the sake of collecting and the chests do very little for me. as well as the cockades.

but i love side content. Farcry 4 has SO much side content and it's amazingly fun to look at the map and thinking "hmmm, what do i wanna do next? it's so fun to chose".

i think an open world game should provide with a self contained story that can be completed in a reasonable amount of time (say 12 hours? 15 hours?) so ppl who just wanna see the story through can do that, but ppl who want more can explore and do side stuff. i havent finished ACU (since im waiting for PC optimization to make it more playable) but i guess the story is roughly that long, no?

oh, and inspide of what you said - technical issues aside - it's my favorite AC as well. the changes they made are what i seriously needed to like AC games. all the previous were just too shallow and easy and this is the first AC (since ac2) that i actually enjoy for how the game plays.

I-Like-Pie45
11-23-2014, 05:33 PM
I think it's fine.

It's what you, the Gentry, desired of the series. You begged, and so they delivered.

Now drink your Kool-aid.

Assassin_M
11-23-2014, 05:33 PM
I'm really curious as to why they think this is the right thing to do.

My guess is that studies show that flagging all content leads to a larger fraction of the players completing it. However I think that's a flawed way of looking at it. You have to go by overall satisfaction, not the number hours player spent (since Ubi is not really making any money from that anyway).
I don't know, it just seems like Ubisoft has VERY short term goals. It's in every decision they have made since 2009. Player satisfaction is WAY more important than completing everything because people who complete everything don't necessarily LIKE doing that. They may see it as a chore and obligation to ace everything. It's just so confusing.

Sushiglutton
11-23-2014, 05:40 PM
I don't know, it just seems like Ubisoft has VERY short term goals. It's in every decision they have made since 2009. Player satisfaction is WAY more important than completing everything because people who complete everything don't necessarily LIKE doing that. They may see it as a chore and obligation to ace everything. It's just so confusing.

Exactly! I can only look at my own behaviour. I was thinking of buying Watchdogs earlier this year. Then I saw the map with all the "stuff" and I just felt sick to my stomach and have never touched the game. I just knew I would do a ton of that stuff and have a really bad time doing it, so I rather not get the game at all.

Assassin_M
11-23-2014, 05:47 PM
Exactly! I can only look at my own behaviour. I was thinking of buying Watchdogs earlier this year. Then I saw the map with all the "stuff" and I just felt sick to my stomach and have never touched the game. I just knew I would do a ton of that stuff and have a really bad time doing it, so I rather not get the game at all.
They manage to turn off WAY more customers with this approach as time goes by. R* does indeed use a more superior approach.

Shahkulu101
11-23-2014, 07:20 PM
I get that they don't flag it on the map, but there's an absolute ton of mundane pointless junk in GTAV. So much it blows my mind - there's an actual chain of side missions dedicated to driving a bloody tow truck and a main mission where you work at an industrial site driving a stupid crane. The fact that most players miss this stuff out because the 1% of the game is so enjoyable is a problem don't you think? How many people watched an entire movie in the cinema? Went on a tour through LS on the tour bus? Like...less than 1% of the people who played it. There's so, so much boring, repetitive, purposeless content in GTAV but it gets a free pass because hey R* are the best. At world building, they absolutely are. But they get a free pass when it comes to bad side content and tbh, pretty standard core gameplay.

As for the OP (boy I went off on a tangent) I agree. It was disappointing to see after AC4 done such a good job of keeping the side content at a good level of quality (the collectible junk being the exception). There was a lot of stuff but it felt like worth doing for the most part. Unity throws tons of stuff at you, and while the Paris stories are fun - they are all very similar in design. Not bad per se, but they eventually get boring due to repetition and there's an insane amount of them. Same goes with Social club missions. The murder mysteries in my opinion just suck; go to green circle, activate eagle vision, interact with gold objects/people, accuse very obvious suspect. Pretty meh if you don't have a particular interest in detective stuff, which I certainly don't. As for the Nostradamus missions, well I don't have a Master's in French history so I left those out. :rolleyes:

EDIT: Oh but co-op's pretty damn fun!

D.I.D.
11-23-2014, 07:31 PM
Despite massive improvements to all of the series' mechanics, Unity seems to be nobody's favorite.

It's my favourite!

The best of the side content here - and that's a big chunk of the side content, despite there still being a lot of filler - beats the best of the main content in other ACs (perhaps even the majority of other ACs' main content?), just because everything's set up to make me try harder than I ever did before. I have never felt less like "side content" meant "b-grade" content, to the point that I don't even think the division is right anymore. The so-called "side content" is story content now. If I had the opportunity to slim down the game to remove the worst missions, sure, I'd do it and I think it would be to the game's benefit. I certainly agree that the map was overstuffed.

If I had to choose between a great story with dull gameplay, or great gameplay and an okay story, I'm going with the latter every time. I want to care about what I'm doing in that moment more than I need to care about the long haul. It'd be nice if the story was better, but not essential. AC has never told a truly excellent story.

SixKeys
11-23-2014, 07:33 PM
Unity is my favorite AC and Arno my favorite assassin after Altair.

I guess the main story is a bit on the short side, but I'm the type of person who plays through all side content before finishing the campaign, hence I'm still in sequence 9.
The story doesn't feel short to me because I'll play through one or two main missions and then get lost for hours doing side quests. And the side content is GOOD in this game.



If I had to choose between a great story with dull gameplay, or great gameplay and an okay story, I'm going with the latter every time. I want to care about what I'm doing in that moment more than I need to care about the long haul. It'd be nice if the story was better, but not essential. AC has never told a truly excellent story.

^ So much this. I've come to realize that I'm more of a gameplay than a story person. AC1, ACB and ACU had the simplest stories and they're my favorite games. AC3 and AC4 had fairly complex plots with lots of characters and I kept losing track why I should care about these people again. Maybe it's my attention span. I tend to space out during cut scenes (happens with movies too), so I sometimes miss vital information. The simpler the plot, the easier it is to stay focused.

D.I.D.
11-23-2014, 07:46 PM
Exactly! I can only look at my own behaviour. I was thinking of buying Watchdogs earlier this year. Then I saw the map with all the "stuff" and I just felt sick to my stomach and have never touched the game. I just knew I would do a ton of that stuff and have a really bad time doing it, so I rather not get the game at all.

Watch Dogs isn't as overstocked as it looks. There is story material, there are abstract mode minigames, and there are set piece missions related to different types of gameplay ("fort" jobs, driving jobs, hijack jobs). It really does need everything it's got, and it's a good balance. The game's also got a nice ability to keep generating new missions within its parameters.

The story is a bit soulless in Watch Dogs, but the game is good. The Bad Blood DLC improves and refines the game in every way, and manages a better approach to its story and characters as well.

When you're actually playing them, it's not so overwhelming because it's not like other games with a big map. You're not meant to do everything, and less than half of the icons can be cleared anyway, so it's really about finding the things you like to do and doing those, or trying out something else if you fancy a change.


I'm really curious as to why they think this is the right thing to do.

I guess it's because every forum and comments box is going to be filled with this question:

"How many hours?"

Or comments about how some other game is 30 hours, or even 100 hours in the case of something like Dragon Age. I've seen people complain about the gameplay time of the new WoW today, when the estimated 1000 hours of gameplay works out at 23 cents an hour.

So, for those people, I guess that's why they fold so much stuff into AC. Like you, I wish they didn't. I'd prefer a tight game I want to play 2 or 3 times than a huge one that I might not enjoy all the way once.

cawatrooper9
11-23-2014, 07:51 PM
But that's my point, wouldn't you rather sacrifice a few little side stories for a good central story that doesn't suck?

I feel like that's kind of a false dichotomy, though. Why can't resources be spent on both?
I mean, I can see how you could argue that the gameplay mechanics themselves were rushed, but the storyline seemed pretty solid (though a bit lackluster).

TheIronLotus420
11-23-2014, 08:01 PM
If I had to choose between a great story with dull gameplay, or great gameplay and an okay story, I'm going with the latter every time. I want to care about what I'm doing in that moment more than I need to care about the long haul. It'd be nice if the story was better, but not essential. AC has never told a truly excellent story.

But do the two need to be mutually exclusive? Is it too much to ask for one of the biggest AAA publishers in the world to have a solid balance of both?

I agree wholeheartedly that AC has NEVER had anything more than a mediocre story. The reason I love the franchise so much, and I'm sure it's also why many others do as well, is that the concept of the whole thing is just so extremely captivating. The fantasy of being an Assassin, traveling back throughout history, etc. The execution of these ideas is where the franchise stumbles over itself, suspect A being the convoluted mess we all know as modern day.

SixKeys
11-23-2014, 08:26 PM
Unity's story is kind of a curious case in the AC series. In the other games there's always one central goal and the plot builds up to the culmination of that struggle. I thought the love story between Elise and Arno and their clash of ideologies would be the driving force for Unity's plot, but I'm up to sequence 9 and so far they've barely even had any scenes together. ACU feels much more disjointed and unfocused than previous entries.

On the one hand it could be criticized for lacking focus, and I don't blame those who do. But on the other hand, I'm not entirely sure I dislike it either, and here's why:

There's often a disconnect between the main narrative and the side missions in AC games. You're supposed to be plowing through the story and everything you're doing is supposed to be a stepping stone on your way to becoming a master assassin. But then you've got side missions that feel really out-of-place for an assassin: letter deliveries, beating up cheating husbands, board games, harpooning whales, solving murder mysteries (while being a murderer yourself) etc. The side content is usually where the most fun is to be had in these games, though. I love Brotherhood, but whenever I'm playing through the story, there comes a moment somewhere around sequence 7 or so, where it just feels WRONG to let Ezio go and race with thieves for fun when the story is getting really intense. You could technically play one memory where Pantasilea gets kidnapped and then go and do some totally unrelated fun stuff before rescuing her, but the disconnect there is too strong. I HAVE to save her before continuing on with the side content. Otherwise there's this nagging feeling that Ezio is just playing around while Bartolomeo mourns for his missing wife.

Unity doesn't have this problem (at least so far). Arno has his little redemption thing going on, but it's so downplayed it's easy to forget he even HAS an ultimate goal. Elise only shows up from time to time, they have coffee, and then they go and do their own thing separately again. There is no sense of urgency like there was in the other games.

On the one hand it could be argued this is poor storytelling, but whenever I'm playing, I can't help but feel almost grateful for that lack of urgency. It means there's no jarring disconnect between the main story missions and the side missions. Like D.I.D said, the divide between story content and "B content" is more blurred. I can do a main story mission where I'm helping Napoleon, but once I'm done helping him, I'm free to go and do some fun stuff again, without worrying that the story is somehow 'paused' in my absence.

D.I.D.
11-23-2014, 08:28 PM
But do the two need to be mutually exclusive? Is it too much to ask for one of the biggest AAA publishers in the world to have a solid balance of both?

I agree wholeheartedly that AC has NEVER had anything more than a mediocre story. The reason I love the franchise so much, and I'm sure it's also why many others do as well, is that the concept of the whole thing is just so extremely captivating. The fantasy of being an Assassin, traveling back throughout history, etc. The execution of these ideas is where the franchise stumbles over itself, suspect A being the convoluted mess we all know as modern day.

I think the mistake people make is to think that if they spent less time on [x] they could make a better [y], which is almost never true. [x] and [y] will be their own separate factors with different staff, and not balances in a zero-sum problem.

Another is to see a bad story and think a game must have had a bad writer. As writers will sometimes telegraph, in veiled ways so as not to wound their employers, a games writer does more game healing than game creation. Major plot points are often decided by creative teams involved in level design, and the writer is brought in later to tie these things together and make them make sense in a way that the creative director finds satisfying. We can certainly see bad writing at times in the quality, but the actual storyline is a less reliable measure of the writer's worth. We know the writing in Portal 2 is among the best the field has ever had because the proportion of "just great writing" to "stuff the game needs" is weighted so heavily towards the former, but when Rhianna Pratchett was brought in late in the day to try and repair Thief there was very little she could do.

http://www.polygon.com/features/2014/9/3/5850182/rhianna-pratchett-rise-of-the-tomb-raider


"Generally, writing for games tends to be hugely iterative as you're always reacting to the needs of gameplay and level design," she says. "Therefore your story and characters spend quite a bit of time being a bit blobby and flexible until things start solidifying. Even then elements can still get pulled apart by the wild horses of games development." [...]

"When you're a contract writer, there's no time you're in charge. You're just trying to do the best you can with what's available and trying to steer things the best way you can. It's like watching someone else drive a car and going, 'You probably want to turn left now,' rather than being able to drive the car yourself. ... Ed [Stern, lead writer at Splash Damage] has a great analogy for it. He says it's like being a feng shui consultant. People have heard that [feng shui is] a good thing ... but they don't really understand what you're doing, and fundamentally they think it's a bit strange."

Darby McDevitt hinted at big pieces of story that got cut from AC4, because their attendant missions weren't working out. If you play a game and feel like there's a big chunk missing here, or that this part doesn't comfortably connect to that, it's probably because of something like this. The writer has to be selfless in their role and not become too precious about any of it. Might you not also expect that a writer who accepts this reality ends up not supplying their best work? The natural inclination would be towards a blanket standard of "alright": not too many things you care about too much, as few gambles as possible about sinking more time into one aspect than another.

This is a huge problem for games writers. It's very rare for a writer to be part of the creative core, and for the team to keep involving him/her. We can imagine that the team responsible for the cut scenes keeps coming back to the writer and asking, "Hey, what do you think of this? Are we getting it right? How should we change it?", but this is not how it works. The writer comes in either too late or too early (and most often, too early). The writer does their work, leaves it with the studio, and many months later a game appears.

It would be great if the whole culture in games production changed, and the industry brought in writers in a writer/director role at the centre of the project. Part of me would love to see someone like Steven Knight, writer/director of Peaky Blinders, come into a video game project and be treated the same as he is when making that show. Another part of me is noticing that my blood runs cold at the idea, and would rather see him making more great TV, but this is what games need if they're going to produce truly worthwhile narratives. Maybe the games industry and the necessary people don't feel like they need each other.

SixKeys
11-23-2014, 08:52 PM
snip

http://i629.photobucket.com/albums/uu19/Sharkathi/36243-slow-clap-citizen-kane-orson-w-bJkI.gif


I'll admit to sometimes criticizing certain game writers, but this is a great explanation of how the development process works and how it's not always any individual person's fault when a game fails to come together. Writing for open-world games is a lot more challenging than linear games. Focus on the story too much and you end up with AC3, which may have worked well as a movie but was too restrictive for a sanbox game. Focus too little on the story and you get Unity, which people say isn't involving enough.

TheIronLotus420
11-23-2014, 09:07 PM
Very informative post, D.I.D. It's easy as a gamer playing the final product to criticize the nuanced plot holes, or just frankly having a negative opinion about something. I'm sure almost all video game script writers wish they could have more creative control over the final product they produce, and put their name and reputation on the line with.

JustPlainQuirky
11-23-2014, 09:50 PM
It's not entirely the writers fault.

But the whole premise of AC Unity's story isn't good to begin with.

It could be good with the right execution/presentation but that also falls flat. That part I blame on the dev team in general.

Pr0metheus 1962
11-23-2014, 10:12 PM
Unity's missions - all of them - are boring compared to any other AC game. They're all "Go here, kill guards, find this, go here, kill guards, talk to this guy, go here, protect these guys". It's so BORING! Even AC3 had more interesting missions than Unity.

rprkjj
11-23-2014, 10:15 PM
Would definitely trade quantity over quality. I remember someone made a thread breaking down how in Black Flag Ubi basically tricked people into taking the time to do menial things like leave their ship to go to an island because data fragments and chests; 2 incredibly mundane collectibles, were strategically placed there. It should stop. I want beefy, quality side content that can satisfy me, not just the completionist in me. I love the idea of Paris stories becoming like Templars Hunts with historical figures. 5 or so beefy, storied quest lines would be great, next to traditional assassination contracts. Rifts and Murder Mysteries are a good start and should 100% return along with time anomalies.

Sushiglutton
11-23-2014, 10:26 PM
I get that they don't flag it on the map, but there's an absolute ton of mundane pointless junk in GTAV. So much it blows my mind - there's an actual chain of side missions dedicated to driving a bloody tow truck and a main mission where you work at an industrial site driving a stupid crane. The fact that most players miss this stuff out because the 1% of the game is so enjoyable is a problem don't you think? How many people watched an entire movie in the cinema? Went on a tour through LS on the tour bus? Like...less than 1% of the people who played it. There's so, so much boring, repetitive, purposeless content in GTAV but it gets a free pass because hey R* are the best. At world building, they absolutely are. But they get a free pass when it comes to bad side content and tbh, pretty standard core gameplay.

I think not flagging it on the map makes a huge difference though. Ubi seems obsessed with getting every player to do everything to get the maximum bang for the buck or something. R* on the other hand have such a rich world that they can confidently let the majority of players miss some content because they understand that it makes the excitement for those who do find it that much greater.




I guess it's because every forum and comments box is going to be filled with this question:

"How many hours?"

Or comments about how some other game is 30 hours, or even 100 hours in the case of something like Dragon Age. I've seen people complain about the gameplay time of the new WoW today, when the estimated 1000 hours of gameplay works out at 23 cents an hour.

So, for those people, I guess that's why they fold so much stuff into AC. Like you, I wish they didn't. I'd prefer a tight game I want to play 2 or 3 times than a huge one that I might not enjoy all the way once.

Yeah, I guess you got a point there. I mean if I had a nickel for everytime someone asked: "How big is the world?"....



I remember someone made a thread breaking down how in Black Flag Ubi basically tricked people into taking the time to do menial things like leave their ship to go to an island because data fragments and chests; 2 incredibly mundane collectibles, were strategically placed there.

It may have been me :rolleyes:: http://forums.ubi.com/showthread.php/893784-How-to-make-the-player-visit-a-sandbank-%28a-lesson-in-self-defeating-design%29-Forums

rprkjj
11-23-2014, 10:34 PM
Yep, that's the one. :p

Sushiglutton
11-23-2014, 10:38 PM
Yep, that's the one. :p

Thanks for remembering :D!


Ha, now that I reread, I actually think it's a pretty great thread lol :o.

luck7s15
11-23-2014, 10:56 PM
To be honest I think this is the state of the computer games industry at the moment, games are coming out focusing less on the single player and more on the online multi-player side of things. Every new game I buy seems to make me wonder why I play because I'm not a huge online gamer, so to actually make me play online it has to be in a format I enjoy, unity if I get ever get online again makes me more inclined to play co-op as I didn't like the multiplayer package in previous AC's. Even the co-op is flawed as there is usually some idiot running around like a headless chicken causing havoc (usually me). It just seems to me that the story in games is less important now and more about multi-player where it is not important where it is kill each other or NPC's for no real reason. Just my opinon.

Some of the other posts have been comparing Unity to previous incarnations so I thought I would put me own opinions in to this and about side content with the exeception of AC1. I never really got in to it as I started playing from AC2 and did buy a copy of AC but never got in to it. If I had started with AC 1 I would have completed it but starting with the sequel never stood a chance. All I will say is I found Altair a very arrogant unlikeable charachter.

AC2 - This is my favorite, Ezio is a great charachter and his story is a joy to watch it unfold, if they ever make an Assassin's Creed movie it should be Ezio. You don't feel like you missed any event in his life no matter how big or small. There were no collectables cluttering my map but you knew if you collected all the feathers in the district because it told you in the map, so while my friends were cheating by getting maps online I knew it might take awhile but knew where not to waste my time looking. It has to be said Ubisoft must have liked him as well, following up with Brotherhood and Revelations. The Renaissance is dubbed the Golden Age and I think this was AC's as well, Ubisoft should consider developing a character again in the same fashion over 2/3 games rather than jumping from one to another.

AC3 - Connor was just a bit of cry baby, before I get slated yes the treatment of the native americans is terrible and shocking but for the love of god all he did was whine, was that his special ability. The story was lacking in my opinion, the War of Independance was barely even a footnote in the game. I think I remember it starting in the game then I blinked and the United States of America was born (very disappointing considering what we were promised that it would show it in a different way and not just British bashing). This was probably the start of what I wish call the Magpie Effect, look shiny things. What I mean by that they gave us all these side missions that blinded us and the storyline was poor and sadly predictable at times (I don't want to get to the punchline before the comedian it needs to be unexpected).

AC4 - Edward purely driven by money (greed should have been a Templar) until one day he wakes up and completely changes right near the end (WTF). The story was disjointed and I really have no idea what was going on in that saga, Ubisoft just gave us what we wanted which was free roam naval action which they teased us with in AC3.

Unity - Haven't got very far in this game yet as I like to take my time but cursed by the error message at the moment so not wanting to play much until resolved. Visually it looks amazing but with all the issues if you take a closer look the paint is flaking off and the wallpaper has started to come away from the wall. It looks like look what we can do on next-gen but it is lacking substance.

In regards to side content it should add something to the game and not be separate and unrelated, I think Ubisoft put the collectables on the map because too many people hate having to go and find them.

The Assassin's Creed series was established on a great story mixing historical characters with fact and fiction, sadly I think it has lost its way and needs to find its way back to the art of storytelling.

Thats just my opinion you may agree or disagree.

johnsmith145
11-26-2014, 12:36 AM
Wow OP, took the words right out of my mouth you did. :)

Dev_Anj
11-26-2014, 02:09 AM
To be honest I think this is the state of the computer games industry at the moment, games are coming out focusing less on the single player and more on the online multi-player side of things....

I don't see why this post was put here, this was supposed to be about Unity having far too much pointless content. But if you ask me, the magpie effect started from AC 2, where they gave a huge number of simplistic sidequests, put many more collectables which were essentially assassin flags in different formats, and generally aimed at using the GTA format for open world adventures. As for AC:2's story, that's for another place.

Freyr1983
11-26-2014, 03:28 AM
I do not think the side content is pointless in ac unity . i am enjoying it :D

Rafe Harwood
11-26-2014, 04:38 AM
I have yet to play unity (just did everything possible in Rogue and loved that one), but just wanted to ask if maybe the reason they flag everytihng is because the flags in AC1 (which were not marked) were such a pia to find.

I still find myself plugging in AC1 every now and then to have another couple of hours trying to find the bloody things. But I enjoy that stuff :)

Keep with the filler! It's all good ;)

Ygdrasel
11-26-2014, 05:45 AM
The games have been filled with "pointless" content since Brotherhood, at least. It's how Ubisoft fills out the world. Certainly better than having jack to do between main missions.

SoulTrain75
11-26-2014, 08:22 AM
I agree with everything the op said about the story. i think thats a big problem in games lately. they lack a good story. back when i played as ezio i loved those stories because they were told so well. i wish they would combine a great story from the ezio days along with the fun that 4 was and that would be an awesome game.

Rafe Harwood
11-26-2014, 09:01 AM
I think it worth mentioning that in recent years, story has taken a back seat to multiplayer lets-kill-each-other type play.

Games have been heading in that direction for years.

Unfortunate, but you can't have both. Time has to be invested into either the campaign or the multiplayer.

Ygdrasel
11-27-2014, 01:29 AM
Unfortunate, but you can't have both.

Yes you can.

EmptyCrustacean
11-28-2014, 01:04 AM
So, I think we all know that Unity is a big game with a lot of stuff to see and do. Some of it is awesome, most of it is just OK. We've all seen the map, and the absolutely ridiculous number of icons it displays. At first glance it's enticing, showing off a plethora of activities to sink your teeth into. But once you actually get into the heart of it, that's not exactly how it plays out.

There are three hundred chests in Paris. Three. Freaking. Hundred. On top of that, there are dozens of Paris Stories, several Cafe Contracts and Helix Rifts, over a dozen each of the Murder Mysteries and Nostradamus Riddles, and God knows how many cockades (I collected 100 for the black dye but they just keep coming). Now, while all of that stuff is theoretically okay, it must be said that the quality of the core game has been widely criticized. Despite massive improvements to all of the series' mechanics, Unity seems to be nobody's favorite. And it's probably because the main sequences aren't very good.

The story should be the heart of the game. Everything else is extra. And that's fine, extra stuff is cool, however, with Unity, the ratio of main:side content is more out of whack than it's ever been. Unity has 26 story missions. AC4 had 45, AC3 had 46, AC2 had 71. The quality is, of course, subjective; AC2's story has been called bloated while AC3's has been called poorly paced. But they provide a useful comparison; all four of those games try to cover a similar amount of material; young guy joining the Brotherhood and maturing along the way over the next few years. Say what you want about AC2, but it had some of the franchise's most memorable characters and it's still looked upon favorably by a majority of fans. Why? Probably because it took its time with the story, didn't rush anything (it could even be argued that it bordered on stagnation for a while) and we clearly saw Ezio's character arc unfold in his interactions with other characters. Unity tries to squeeze a similar arc into about 1/3 of the time.

But that isn't to say it's a short game; on the contrary, you could easily sink 100 hours into this game and still not finish everything. The problem is, like 90% of this content does NOTHING to make us care about our hero, his allies, or even the time period. The Paris "Stories" are mostly just "hey, I'm a historical figure and I want to to do something for me! -Quest Accepted." We're lucky if we even get one line of dialogue out of Arno. The missions themselves aren't badly designed by any means, but wouldn't it serve the overall game better if the devs spent their efforts beefing up the main storyline with more content and character interaction instead of making a bunch of disconnected side missions that basically just serve as historical footnotes? Hell, the Paris Stories could constitute an entire game on their own, and that would be awesome if the main storyline wasn't so sorely lacking. Don't get me wrong, I'm not dissing the Paris Stories at all, I think they're mostly great. It's just that it's probably a poor idea to add a ton of side content to a foundation that's so bare-bones. Instead of SEVENTY unconnected Paris Stories/Cafe Contracts and a short main mission strand, why not have a few small sequences of Paris Stories (think Templar Hunts from AC4; maybe one for Madame Tussaud, one for Chevalier d'Eon, one for Cassini, and one for the Scarlet Pimpernel) and a long main campaign that doesn't rush through the story?

Most of Unity's sequences are only two memories long; one to figure out where your target is, and one to kill him/her. Wouldn't it have done the story so much more justice if there would have been a few more story levels in there for us to spend some time with people like Elise, Pierre, Mirabeau, and Napoleon so we actually get invested in them as characters? Even if it meant they had to dig up a few more historical figures for us to assassinate to prolong the game; God knows I would have loved a few more of those awesome assassination missions. I realize that story missions are more complex to design than any of the side missions, but I feel like there's so much content in the game, they could have easily had enough manpower to beef up the campaign had they not made so much filler.

Assassin's Creed devs have got to start trimming the fat. AC3 suffered from the exact same problem; a rushed, short, disjointed narrative (for Connor's part at least) and an absolute sh*t ton of useless side content. Like I mentioned earlier, over four hundred freaking chests and cockades clogging up the map isn't "content," it's junk. Clutter. The illusion of scope. Though these kinds of things don't take much more effort for the devs than simply dropping them onto the map and maybe scripting a few guard patrols around them, they need to be axed forever. Nobody wants to piss around with little lockpicking puzzles for a measly 750 livre just to get the icon off their map.


Yep, great post. Story wise, Unity feels as if the developers thought of a couple of story beats (in the vain of Ezio's) and just made sure it hit those beats. Everything in between is rushed. You have the foundations here with all the characters but relationships are never given time to breathe. For instance, Arno's love for his adoptive father is strange because we never saw their relationship, in fact we only ever saw him ban Arno from the party and refuse him access to Paris.
Bellec's was supposed to be a 'shocker! Al Muliam betrayed us!' moment but I felt no impact because their relationship was never really developed. I never felt the bond and so the betrayal meant nothing; it wasn't earned. It was a great idea that somebody in the Brotherhood is wiling to take a stand against uniting with Templars but it never goes anywhere. The whole time the game is pretending it's going back to its roots. It even pretends to have the self awareness that AC3 lacked - that is, an assassin joining the ranks for his own personal goals. In this game it acknowledges this character flaw, tries to act as if it's part of Arno's arc. But he doesn't get his priorities right until the very, very end when he's already lost everything. Whereas with Ezio you see his development gradually You are 100% right that the side missions do nothing to develop Arno's character. They're just there to fill out the world and get in a few cameos. So much potential squandered. :(

KG_NOx
11-28-2014, 04:31 AM
Unity's missions - all of them - are boring compared to any other AC game. They're all "Go here, kill guards, find this, go here, kill guards, talk to this guy, go here, protect these guys". It's so BORING! Even AC3 had more interesting missions than Unity.

Which is fun repetitive stuff just like ACII, BH, and Revelations in terms of game engine and core gameplay( stealth, navigation, investigation and combat) but forget it, this so off topic anyway

Freyr1983
11-28-2014, 05:57 AM
(off topic)

I wish people do not use Ezio as a template of how the assassin should be like.

is like different age and era.

Dun get me wrong. i did not said Ezio is bad . just that do not use him a template :(

Ok back to topic ,

I still think the side content is great in unity :)

UniteUnderPower
11-28-2014, 09:37 AM
I would have gladly sacrificed some of that side content for a long and better story. A lot of the main missions felt bland in the game. I didn't mind Arno as a character and I LOVED the love story the game told, but it all was over and done with so quickly with only a few stand-out missions in the entire game. Paris was great as a city and kind of surprised me, but a lot of things lacked in the game that led to pure disappointment.

johnsmith145
11-29-2014, 03:55 PM
I'm all for collectibles, if they balance three things:

1. Provide a reward that feels worthwhile. A skin for solving 20 ridiculously nerdy history puzzles is hardly enough reward. (even so, omfg black alta´r outfit) ya know its carnellions but wth

2. Showcase a game mechanic. Cockades should have been fewer and required the use of specific parkour moves. Not just placed in an alley on a beam. The ones that required laps of faith or back ejects were good. Make no cockade showcase the same mechanic as another, it is unnecessarily repetitive.

3. Have a story impact. Well done with the fragment thing in Rogue but the reward was pratcically nothing. We knew that already. See (1).

egriffin09
11-29-2014, 06:36 PM
I liked the side content of Unity the most out of all the AC console games. I think it's the most involved side content atleast.

Black Flag's side content was great, most of it revolved around collecting chest (Smuggler caves & underwater while fun were just chest collection quest), even exploring the islands & sandbanks were just collecting chest. The templer hunts were really fun and assassination contracts were what you would expect them to be.

With Unity, with the addition of the paris stories atleast they added a narrative element, they feel like an improved version of the homestead missions in AC 3. I just appreciate Murder mysteries because Ubi is trying to added something different to the side content. Even the 5 cafe theater missions had some sort of narrative element to them. The social club missions just feel like the AC II/AC:B assassination contracts basically. Plus Unity has the collecting chest and collectibles like all the other AC games.


This is my list for "quality" side content:
1. Unity
2. AC IV:Black Flag
3.AC:B
4. AC II
5. AC III
6. AC: R
7. AC I

RinoTheBouncer
11-29-2014, 07:00 PM
We might not always agree about a lot of stuff, but I wholeheartedly agree with this. I don’t hate Unity, but I just can’t put it above any other main AC title. I didn’t really face any game-breaking bugs but I did face problems with the structure and the story. I loved Elise and Arno to death, but I just hate the ending they were given and how the sequences were so short and the percentage of story compared to side quests is just too much. I personally don’t feel motivated to continue the Paris Stories nor the Nostradamus Enigma missions nor collect random chests that give me 150F when I can get 25,000 from a single Heist.

It’s like they crammed everything they could think of in this game and expected the response to be positive. But I’m sorry, I’d rather have only main missions with a truly well made and detailed story than tons of side missions that don’t really add anything to the experience nor has any significance for them in the story of an Assassin. I would’ve loved to spend more time with Arno tracking his father’s killer (the protagonist from the previous game. Something which was totally ignored in ACU) than just do some short, repetitive and plot-less side missions for some historical figures.

I wish characters like Bellec, Elise’s father, Marquis as well as the mentors of the brotherhood were given enough time to develop and be introduced to us, rather than just getting straight to the point.

ACII and the rest of Ezio’s trilogy might have had so many pointless side quests like beat up events or races..etc. but the main story of the game had enough to keep me interested, and no it’s not just Ezio’s sexiness and his charisma, but it’s the whole story, the things that were going on in MD, First Civ. stories, rifts and glyphs with smart and entertaining puzzles to solve, not to mention so many conspiracy theories. Those were enough to keep me interested even when there were others that were pointless. But to go around solving dozens of murder mysteries or finding symbols to unlock an outfit that I do not need or get some weapons that are much weaker than the Sword of Eden, not to mention no story, then no, I’ll pass.

There are games that offer side missions, like Mass Effect, and these side missions, despite being you now ‘side' missions and totally optional, they force you to go and play them cause they’re all related to the characters and are full of story value and brilliantly made cutscenes and iconic phrases, not to mention how they’re made as a part of the game, not as an extra to keep you playing longer and they even affect the ending, which in turn, affects the story of the next game. That’s they type of side missions I like. I’m not saying AC should have multiple endings, but there’s a big difference between side missions that matter, and filler missions.

I finished the game long ago and I rarely faced any glitches, except for some weird animations or one of the NPC was flying once, but I laughed at those rather than got irritated by them. My main problem is the story and the structure and I don’t think there’s a patch for that.

monoman32
11-29-2014, 10:55 PM
Seems like the developers spent a majority of the time creating a new engine, climbing system, stealth system, crouching, cover system, combat, the cool free assassination missions, creating Paris in general than creating a good story. That by the end they were like crap we need a story and rushed it a little. I wish they could have taken some of the Paris stories or some of the co-op missions and incorporate them into the main story. It feels like AC3 a little to me with the rushed story due to adding many different new systems that I listed above, so I hope the next AC can make the improvement that Black Flag did.

GoldenBoy9999
11-29-2014, 11:16 PM
We might not always agree about a lot of stuff, but I wholeheartedly agree with this. I don’t hate Unity, but I just can’t put it above any other main AC title. I didn’t really face any game-breaking bugs but I did face problems with the structure and the story. I loved Elise and Arno to death, but I just hate the ending they were given and how the sequences were so short and the percentage of story compared to side quests is just too much. I personally don’t feel motivated to continue the Paris Stories nor the Nostradamus Enigma missions nor collect random chests that give me 150F when I can get 25,000 from a single Heist.

It’s like they crammed everything they could think of in this game and expected the response to be positive. But I’m sorry, I’d rather have only main missions with a truly well made and detailed story than tons of side missions that don’t really add anything to the experience nor has any significance for them in the story of an Assassin. I would’ve loved to spend more time with Arno tracking his father’s killer (the protagonist from the previous game. Something which was totally ignored in ACU) than just do some short, repetitive and plot-less side missions for some historical figures.

I wish characters like Bellec, Elise’s father, Marquis as well as the mentors of the brotherhood were given enough time to develop and be introduced to us, rather than just getting straight to the point.

ACII and the rest of Ezio’s trilogy might have had so many pointless side quests like beat up events or races..etc. but the main story of the game had enough to keep me interested, and no it’s not just Ezio’s sexiness and his charisma, but it’s the whole story, the things that were going on in MD, First Civ. stories, rifts and glyphs with smart and entertaining puzzles to solve, not to mention so many conspiracy theories. Those were enough to keep me interested even when there were others that were pointless. But to go around solving dozens of murder mysteries or finding symbols to unlock an outfit that I do not need or get some weapons that are much weaker than the Sword of Eden, not to mention no story, then no, I’ll pass.

There are games that offer side missions, like Mass Effect, and these side missions, despite being you now ‘side' missions and totally optional, they force you to go and play them cause they’re all related to the characters and are full of story value and brilliantly made cutscenes and iconic phrases, not to mention how they’re made as a part of the game, not as an extra to keep you playing longer and they even affect the ending, which in turn, affects the story of the next game. That’s they type of side missions I like. I’m not saying AC should have multiple endings, but there’s a big difference between side missions that matter, and filler missions.

I finished the game long ago and I rarely faced any glitches, except for some weird animations or one of the NPC was flying once, but I laughed at those rather than got irritated by them. My main problem is the story and the structure and I don’t think there’s a patch for that.

Great post! I wish they focused on the story more as well. Since I joined this forum I've begun to appreciate and focus on story more and it lacks in this game. I don't think we were introduced to our targets long enough. It's also bizarre how Arno goes after his new father's killers but does not with his actual dad.


Seems like the developers spent a majority of the time creating a new engine, climbing system, stealth system, crouching, cover system, combat, the cool free assassination missions, creating Paris in general than creating a good story. That by the end they were like crap we need a story and rushed it a little. I wish they could have taken some of the Paris stories or some of the co-op missions and incorporate them into the main story. It feels like AC3 a little to me with the rushed story due to adding many different new systems that I listed above, so I hope the next AC can make the improvement that Black Flag did.

I agree. It seems they may have focused on some things a little too much, and less on others. Some things are very refined, while others aren't. It reminds me of AC3 how nice the rock climbing was.

johnsmith145
11-30-2014, 05:29 PM
I’d rather have only main missions with a truly well made and detailed story than tons of side missions that don’t really add anything to the experience nor has any significance for them in the story of an Assassin.
I think this summarizes my view on the AC games lately. Must be that I've become bored with collecting the same things over and over game after game. And the plummet in historical accuracy (http://forums.ubi.com/showthread.php/954025-ACU-History-A-list-of-demonstrable-lies-and-inaccuracies-SPOILERS-Forums) left a bad taste in my mouth after previous games. If Unity was an attempt to reboot and dumb down the game, it did it in all the wrong ways. The only thing it got right were core mechanics and the return to open-ended missions.

Shahkulu101
11-30-2014, 06:04 PM
This is the first game where I'm not bothering with all the side activities. Paris Stories are alright, but there's an absolute ton of them and they are all very repetitive - I enjoyed them at first but my God there's so many and they lack any sort of substance whatsoever. Murder Mysteries are pretty neat actually, but again there's far too many and they all feel like they need more fleshed out. There's a Murder Mystery style mission in the main story, with cutscenes, a generally large scale and a more interesting story behind it. If there were five or six Murder Mysteries of that quality, rather than 20 or so rather mediocre ones, the game would be better for it. Social Club missions are like the Paris Stories in terms of gameplay, so playing through them is really hit and miss. The rift missions, as far as I'm concerned, are just the most boring idea for a side activity ever conceived in an AC game.The time anomaly locations are cool, but having us just run around collecting 'stuff' is a rather dull, and frankly uncreative decision.

I miss ACB. The side activities were all focused, fleshed out, and purposeful. We had high quality missions like the Romulus Lair's, Leo's war machines and the fantastic Borgia Towers (Which have found their way into every Ubisoft game such I was the quality of them, albeit reskinned to suit the games' purpose). Nothing was there simply to place a false value for money on the product, the map wasn't littered with filler quests with no story or production value. One thing I can't knock the Ezio trilogy for was at least they were less about a false sense of scale. The games didn't vary wildy in quality from one side mission to the next, the main story missions were generally on par with all the extra stuff. Then we moved on to AC3, which had you free running our a burning fort one minute and collecting flowers the next. Unity has great assassination missions and co-op, but it's not much good at anything else to be frank. On further thought, Unity as a whole has rather disappointed me. I'm not finished yet but I doubt my opinion will change. The core mechanics and mission design however, are something to build on.

RinoTheBouncer
12-01-2014, 12:58 AM
I think this summarizes my view on the AC games lately. Must be that I've become bored with collecting the same things over and over game after game. And the plummet in historical accuracy (http://forums.ubi.com/showthread.php/954025-ACU-History-A-list-of-demonstrable-lies-and-inaccuracies-SPOILERS-Forums) left a bad taste in my mouth after previous games. If Unity was an attempt to reboot and dumb down the game, it did it in all the wrong ways. The only thing it got right were core mechanics and the return to open-ended missions.

Yeah. Like especially the father part an Elise’s fate. Those two really ruined the experience for me. I mean I swear I could give the blinded to any glitches, cause honestly, I rarely suffered any glitches and never any game-breaking ones. I love the chemistry between Elise and Arno, I loved Arno and Elise as individuals, I loved the graphics, the city and the gameplay. But I just hated the ending with passion. I wish that instead of filling the game with that many side missions (more than the missions of the game itself, which are even less than any other AC game, in total) and instead, wrote a better ending and fewer side missions that contribute to the story.

I think if the game ended with the Balloon sequence, I would’ve given it 10/10, I swear to God. But no, instead we got an unnecessary death, a terrible conclusion, a pointless Sage story and a very rushed and predictable finale. It’s really sad that they can’t make patches for these stuff cause those are the stuff that really matter to me in game.


Great post! I wish they focused on the story more as well. Since I joined this forum I've begun to appreciate and focus on story more and it lacks in this game. I don't think we were introduced to our targets long enough. It's also bizarre how Arno goes after his new father's killers but does not with his actual dad.

Thank you :)

Yeah. I mean for a person who keeps looking at his father’s watch, I imagined that we’ll eventually get to meet Shay, hell even Assassinate him, but no. Nothing about that was ever mentioned and that really bothered me cause the two games could’ve easily aced the whole inter-connected stories thing. It would’ve even furthered helped promoted both games since both rely on one another.

ze_topazio
12-01-2014, 01:24 AM
I'm trying to collect everything in Rogue and it's tiring, I already felt this a bit in AC4 but Rogue exaggerates, too many settlements that look almost exactly the same that I'm visiting just to collect an absurd amount of chests and animus fragments, these games are getting bigger and bigger maps but the story hardly uses them, and collectibles are there just to artificially enlarging the length of the game, I'm with Shahkulu101, Brotherhood was the best game as far as side content goes.

nachdenki
12-01-2014, 01:38 AM
Yeah, I agree mostly. Except I found all the stories pretty pointless since AC3 (the end of BF kind of had the old vibe for a second, but that's it), and while I like Arno better than Connor or Edward, the story feels so rushed that I can't really appreciate it.

I actually like the collectible stuff in AC, but unity really overdoes it. Its just too much. The thing with the chests is just crazy - in particularly considering that you have way too much money in the game anyway, so collecting them is actually just a completion thing and adds absolutely nothing to the game. Even for the ******* feathers in AC2 we at least got a ten second character-relevant scene. I love the Nostradamus Enigmas, but 18 of them? Considering that some of them are really hard and can easily take 2-3 hours to complete, that's just insane. And when I am done with all 18 of them, I played through the game anyway and can't really appreciate the armor they unlock.
I love murder mysteries, but the paris stories feel mostly pointless - both from a story standpoint, but also from a gameplay standpoint. "Go to the green circle, identify your target, kill it, get anonymous". We have been doing that for the past 7 years. I would have rather seen a third of the paris stories, but each mission really does something unique. Or, just to add another example: The helix rifts are great and a new idea and all, but why do I have to complete the same rift 2-3 times to unlock all the assassin intel? If I like it, I WILL play it again. But making me play the same content 3 times just to unlock story is badly designed in my opinion.

But considering the state Unity was released, I think its safe to say that they simply ran out of time in development. I suppose its kind of with the first AC: They introduces a bunch of new stuff here, lets hope they will iterate this now and the next AC will be as good, innovative and diverse as AC2.