Assassin's Creed: Unity announced 12 replies

  • 1
  • 2

Please wait...

Serio VIP Member

The Dane

149,846 XP

11th November 2006

3 Uploads

12,506 Posts

37 Threads

#1 4 years ago

I think it looks like an interesting setting. Ubisoft recovered some of my confidence in them with Black Flag, and the French Revolution could have a lot of potential. Hopefully they won't mess it up like they did with AC3.

There hasn't been much information released yet, but judging by the beginning, I think it's safe to say this'll be a new engine developed with Xbox One, PS4, and PC in mind. Time will tell, though.




Schofield VIP Member

om :A

319,554 XP

24th October 2007

1 Uploads

30,539 Posts

0 Threads

#2 4 years ago

I think I've had it with this series. They're releasing two Assassin's Creed games this year. It's worse than Call of Duty at this point. CoD has the tenacity to not pretend it's being innovative and bringing anything new to the table.

France?! I like France, but seriously.... Japan, Egypt, some other African nation, South America, Russia.....

Why the French revolution? It's going to be the same story as Assassin's Creed 3 but with a slightly different setting.

With the inclusion of a kill-streak system in Assassin's Creed Brotherhood, they've made the game so easy that a four year old smashing a controller on the ground could systematically kill every living thing in the game world and then accidentally beat the game itself.




Red Menace

SCHOFIELD DID 4/30

415,758 XP

10th August 2004

0 Uploads

40,364 Posts

1 Threads

#3 4 years ago

They have been putting them in interesting settings lately, but they are just pumping too many of these out now without any real improvement in game play. I mean, I'm all about story, so these keep piquing my interest but they are ultimately trying to sell me a repackaged version of the last five games and that doesn't sit well with me.

Maybe I'll go down to GameStop and pick up a few used copies for a $1.


sigpic82523_3.gif</div></body></html>



Totes

Misanthrope

92,890 XP

7th January 2011

0 Uploads

8,664 Posts

0 Threads

#4 4 years ago

Schofield;5731972I think I've had it with this series. They're releasing two Assassin's Creed games this year. It's worse than Call of Duty at this point. CoD has the tenacity to not pretend it's being innovative and bringing anything new to the table.

France?! I like France, but seriously.... Japan, Egypt, some other African nation, South America, Russia.....

Why the French revolution? It's going to be the same story as Assassin's Creed 3 but with a slightly different setting.

With the inclusion of a kill-streak system in Assassin's Creed Brotherhood, they've made the game so easy that a four year old smashing a controller on the ground could systematically kill every living thing in the game world and then accidentally beat the game itself.

Seems like the simple solution would be not to play them, then.




MrFancypants Forum Admin

The Bad

216,814 XP

7th December 2003

0 Uploads

19,996 Posts

6 Threads

#5 4 years ago

I like the setting. Did they upgrade the engine in the meantime or just prerender that trailer? It does look better than the last game.

Schofield;5731972 France?! I like France, but seriously.... Japan, Egypt, some other African nation, South America, Russia.....

Why the French revolution? It's going to be the same story as Assassin's Creed 3 but with a slightly different setting.

Probably an attempt to get most ouf of their previous investments. If they set it in 18th century France they can reuse a lot of stuff (combat animations, models etc.).




Schofield VIP Member

om :A

319,554 XP

24th October 2007

1 Uploads

30,539 Posts

0 Threads

#6 4 years ago
Totes;5732245Seems like the simple solution would be not to play them, then.

...

After playing Brotherhood when it came out, I knew what the franchise had become. I skipped Revelations and played the third game, just to conclude the story.

In the first game, you were given a name, and some background information - then you went to the city and found more information, and killed the target. It could have been fleshed out quite a bit more (although it was a new franchise, so I don't blame them for the unintended repetition). Altair was a mysterious man, we knew little of his history; all we knew is that he was a man of great justice, almost as if his life as an assassin had made him devoid of most human emotion which get in the way. Kind of like Batman.

The formula has been the same since the second game. The game takes us through an unbearably lengthy tutorial/introduction of character, over-saturates the plot with meaningless missions so we can like the character, and then ends the tutorial with the death of a loved one. Following that, you go from person to person doing petty missions for them until you find the person you were supposed to kill. That last part is the same as what you do in the Grand Theft Auto games - although they did it much better.

I'm not talk about how many wrong things there were in the third game, but I will mention that it probably has the most well written character in the franchise; Haytham Kenway, who had a far, far more interesting plot than Connor did.

The 'modern timeline' plot was one of the most convoluted things ever written in the history of things written. When they added in the "end of the world" plot, it fell apart. It was somewhat decent until then.

So I have vowed to stop playing the games, at least until there is some evidence that Ubisoft remembers why they called it "Assassin's Creed" in the first place. Voicing one's opinion is how things change though, if I simply stopped playing them and put it there, well I'm not exactly doing myself any favours if I watch a once-great franchise sink into the ground.




Nemmerle Forum Mod

Voice of joy and sunshine

298,291 XP

26th May 2003

0 Uploads

28,141 Posts

5 Threads

#7 4 years ago

The main thing I see when I look at the AC series is missed opportunities. There was a chance to take a tour of exotic locales, and talk about bits of history that some people had perhaps never heard of. Instead we get fairly run of the mill stories about, broadly, Western cultures. Even Revelations, which had a non-Western main character, ended up being primarily about Westerners and parts of history that we all know fairly well.

The meta story is just. Least said soonest mended, as the saying goes. I'll dwell no more on its awfulness beyond saying that picking the Templars has, to a certain extent, served to enforce the limited scope of the stories they can tell. If you want to have the Templars, then you need places the Templars might have been - and considering they were a Western organisation, that's pretty limiting.

#

So, game-play.

Where it's at its strongest is in planning your attack - muddling through when things go wrong. Conversely, where AC gameplay is, mostly, at its weakest is where it forces a particular approach on you. (Their execrable stealth sections spring to mind.)

Over time the approach seems to have been to dumb-down the combat, and to force more 'variation' (i.e. a set approach) on the player.

It's also worth noting that the combat requires a certain kind of environment to work well - I found the combat on ship in Black Flag rather tiresome. Frankly the whole ship part of it was rather trying - serving to extend the game unnecessarily.

#

*drums fingers*

On the whole, I'm inclined to be largely done with the franchise. I enjoyed the first one the most, and since then it's been kinda going down hill in a way that I don't think is salvageable. I don't think they have an ending in sight for the story, and suspect it has become another COD style thing where they'll churn them out as long as people will buy them.

But, hey, if people enjoy them they may as well go on enjoying them =p




MrFancypants Forum Admin

The Bad

216,814 XP

7th December 2003

0 Uploads

19,996 Posts

6 Threads

#8 4 years ago
Nemmerle;5732274The main thing I see when I look at the AC series is missed opportunities. There was a chance to take a tour of exotic locales, and talk about bits of history that some people had perhaps never heard of. Instead we get fairly run of the mill stories about, broadly, Western cultures. Even Revelations, which had a non-Western main character, ended up being primarily about Westerners and parts of history that we all know fairly well.

True, but what you cannot really expect much more from a big publisher trying to make money by selling games to western customers. If you keep that in mind their settings are pretty innovative.

There is ample room for improvement, but it could be much worse - just look at Hollywood and how US-centred all those movies are despite the big importance of European customers to those products.




Nemmerle Forum Mod

Voice of joy and sunshine

298,291 XP

26th May 2003

0 Uploads

28,141 Posts

5 Threads

#9 4 years ago

And people wonder why I don't go in much for mass market stuff ;)

European media.... Heh. Europe, I suspect, needs its own language.

The default audience for American films before they're localised is hundreds of millions of people, the audience for European films before they're localised is an order of magnitude less, while the costs remain the same.

It's an asymmetric problem. Not impossible to overcome, but relatively rarely done.

I don't much care if we pick one from among the available languages or if we make a new one (preferably one geared more towards efficiency than ease of learning.) But this problem is only going to get worse as time goes on.

Sadly, I suspect politicians lack the courage to support the idea that a common language be taught.




Schofield VIP Member

om :A

319,554 XP

24th October 2007

1 Uploads

30,539 Posts

0 Threads

#10 4 years ago

Nemmerle;5732274Where it's at its strongest is in planning your attack - muddling through when things go wrong. Conversely, where AC gameplay is, mostly, at its weakest is where it forces a particular approach on you. (Their execrable stealth sections spring to mind.)

Over time the approach seems to have been to dumb-down the combat, and to force more 'variation' (i.e. a set approach) on the player.

It's hard to mess up variation, but Ubisoft did it well. In an attempt to add more variety to the gameplay, they over-saturated the player with a bunch of different gadgets and equipment to use. Why do I need a poison blade if I have poison darts? Why do I need poison darts if I have a crossbow with a longer range more ammo? Why do I need daggers and swords if I can attack faster and with more precision via hidden blade?

The problem with this is that they gave variation but never really a choice. They give you missions where you either HAVE to use a gadget, or you don't have to use any because your sword will do everything faster and you'll suffer no consequences. When I'm trying to assassinate someone, I don't want to be forced into stealth. I want to try stealth and then deal with the consequences if I mess up.

Why does Ubisoft not allow this? If I want to take out a target with the hidden gun, but someone walks in front of them as I shoot - why do I need to restart? Why can't I hunt them down like I had to in Assassin's Creed 1 as they try and escape?




  • 1
  • 2