PDA

View Full Version : AC Victory: Make or break? [Long read]



dimbismp
04-06-2015, 01:10 PM
I believe that ACV will be absolutely crucial for the franchise's future.Let me share my thoughts:


ACU,the first real next gen AC game had a problematic release full of bugs and performance issues.This enraged the vast majority of the gaming community,and even a part of the "hardcore fans"(=~the forums community)
As if this wasn't enough,the game itself wasn't perfect.A considerable amount of people were disappointed by the new gameplay mechanics,while others were not even nearly impressed by the story and the lack of MD.In other words,ofc there are people that really liked the game(apart from the bugs),but ACU did not manage to live up to the expectations and become the community's favourite game/the next Ac2/the next AC4/whatever you want to call it.
What really was not good though,was the infamous microtransactions,the locked chests,the preorder bonuses etc
The annualization of the series makes it more and more difficult to impress the gamers
Finally,someone could say that this period is not the bestvperiod that Ubi has ever seen.It is safe to say that the vast majority of the gaming community doesn't particularly like Ubi.

That said,i believe that this moment is the most crucial that the franchise has ever lived,even more crucial than the moment after AC3's release.The casuals have crowned the series as the"Historical COD".In the meanwhile,most of the "hardcore fans" are have already abandoned the series,or (claim that they)are at the brink of doing so,due to the reasons i mentioned above.I think that everyone is aware of the pattern:
AC:Meh
AC2:Great
AC3:Meh
AC4:Great
ACU/Ro:Meh

No matter how oversimplistic it may be,it is close to the truth.The fans are tired of unfinished buggy games,lackluster storylines,Ubi overhyping games and in the end ruining a franchise with great potential.
I may be overreacting,but the current situation makes me really sad.Everyday,as a gamer i see great games,far better than AC(and i bet this also occurs to you) and i wonder:"Why does AC limits itself to a 7/10 or 8/10?Is it demanding to expect a 9/10 or a 10/10 game?"

So,to get back to the topic:2015 and ACV will be really crucial for the series and even for Ubi.If they don't produce a good game in all areas(meaning performance,gameplay,story etc),then many fans(including me) will finally say:"This is OVER".I hate to say this,but even though i hope that ACV will deliver,i doubt it.

So,what to do you believe?Do you agree or disagree with me?Will ACV make or break the franchise?

The_Pashker-Man
04-06-2015, 02:22 PM
i think the main problem of unity it is that: "it isn't what we want- it is what we need".
let me explain...everything we ever dream of is in unity.
co-op, deep customization, stealth, harder combat, ezio, and more.
but ubi need to give us what we need, not what we want.
maybe giving new parkour mechanics with the grappling hook will look like "wtf this is not ac anymore" but after we will play the game our opinion will change?

make victory unique.
make me question if this is ac game, and my answer will be "no its 10/10 game of the year filled with passion and love!"
dont make it big in crowd or one big city *****ly, make it feel big, but in the same time make the protagonist bigger.
make a game that make you cry in the end, not because samuel died or that desmond coming back to life and died again.
no, make a game that in the end make you wipe your eye while saying "what a beautiful game- masterpiece!"


so acv will fail like unity.

king-hailz
04-06-2015, 05:20 PM
I didn't vote because it's really hard to say. Either way I don't trust ubisoft to create continuously great AC games, and if you do you are delusional... It doesn't matter if ACV is great or not because if it is the next one won't be, but that won't stop ubisoft form making them and making loads of money...

I want to find a franchise that has the great premise of AC but actually releases quality titles. Could you help me out there...

All I've got so far is the upcoming Patrice Desilets game...

Megas_Doux
04-06-2015, 05:26 PM
I believe that ACV will be absolutely crucial for the franchise's future.Let me share my thoughts:
AC:Meh
[/B]

You lost me there. However, Iīm TIRED of annualization and the fact Ubi treat their own games as tech demos, $60 tech demos for the next installment....... Unity could have been GREAT :(

VestigialLlama4
04-06-2015, 05:30 PM
So,what to do you believe?Do you agree or disagree with me?Will ACV make or break the franchise?

Well, UNITY has pretty much destroyed the core of Assassin's Creed in a systematic way. It's the kind of failure that is very hard to recover from. I think Assassin's Creed as a franchise will no longer go and make the big AAA epic adventure in the manner of AC1-to-Black Flag, its either too expensive or too hard to make and release annually.

So they are going for unambitious managable chunks for the foreseeable future. I mean VICTORY is essentially a fan-request, it has a built-in crossover appeal (everybody likes Victorians) but it makes zero sense as an AC setting. The only way Victory can restore the prestige is by being an exceptionally creative and innovative game. Being better-than-Unity is not good enough.

Megas_Doux
04-06-2015, 05:35 PM
Well, UNITY has pretty much destroyed the core of Assassin's Creed in a systematic way. It's the kind of failure that is very hard to recover from. I think Assassin's Creed as a franchise will no longer go and make the big AAA epic adventure in the manner of AC1-to-Black Flag, its either too expensive or too hard to make and release annually.


If anything, Unity attempt to return to the CORE: Open mission design, no just because filler mechanics in the likes of hunting, crafting and even naval. However the story didn't deliver and the game should have not been released at that state as well. Paris and the French Revolution wasted in the process.......

VestigialLlama4
04-06-2015, 05:42 PM
If anything, Unity attempt to return to the roots:

If they wanted to truly return to the roots, they should have gone back to the Crusades where the Assassins had a specific, fixed real-world function. You can't have that spared down gameplay "without hunting, crafting and naval" once you take Assassin into conspiracy mythology as a metaphorical agent of historical change. AC2 and AC3 were truer to the core than UNITY was, because they actually had to rethink the story and gameplay in a newly made context, expand the open-world as a result.

In these games, the gameplay can't be divorced from the story and setting. Otherwise, the gameplay is just HITMAN:MEDIEVAL EDITION, where there's no context to your actions, no dramatic tension to the missions and nothing relatable to anchor the gameplay around.


Paris and the French Revolution wasted in the process.......

And that waste is a bigger loss than a simplistic and poorly thought out attempt to "go back to AC1" gameplay.

Namikaze_17
04-06-2015, 05:46 PM
I'll just break the ice and say it'll be fine...

Unlike some, I don't expect perfection or **** in an upcoming AC game.

king-hailz
04-06-2015, 05:52 PM
I'll just break the ice and say it'll be fine...

Unlike some, I don't expect perfection or **** in an upcoming AC game.

You must be a very happy person... I'm jealous.

VestigialLlama4
04-06-2015, 06:08 PM
I'll just break the ice and say it'll be fine...

Unlike some, I don't expect perfection or **** in an upcoming AC game.

There never has been a perfect AC game, but there have been games which had surprises, intelligence, wit, style, fun and beauty. Unity has none of that.

Megas_Doux
04-06-2015, 06:10 PM
AC3 were truer to the core than UNITY was, because they actually had to rethink the story and gameplay in a newly made context, expand the open-world as a result.


Talking about gameplay only:

AC III????? You mean, linearity, QTEīs everywhere and the overall " warriorīs creed" feeling??????? In one word: No!!!!!





And that waste is a bigger loss than a simplistic and poorly thought out attempt to "go back to AC1" gameplay.

I will say it again, instead hunting, crafting and being nice to a bunch of people. I want to have open missions and ASSASSINATIONS and THEN the side stuff. AC is kinda unique franchise thanks to its "stealth" and the historical open world. Balance those two is NOT easy and because of it, time SHOULD be mandatory, annualization NEEDS to go:

1 Writers will eventually run out of stories.
2 From a technical standpoint is really hard to release them properly. Mostly when there are chances regarding the engine. AC III suffered and Unity, well you know........
3 You can go from exhausting customers, to plain annoying them.
4 You have to flood you game with side stuff - crafting, hunting and naval- instead of working on the CORE. In order to mask the shame of having one, or even TWO games per year. Or, like in Unity, when the open world was "sacrificed" favoring the core.

VestigialLlama4
04-06-2015, 06:22 PM
Talking about gameplay only:

Gameplay is inseparable from the story and style taken by the game, especially games like AC (Hardly a Portal or ICO-style minimalist story experience). The story and style provides the gameplay its conflicts, its dramatic tensions and all its emotional resonance. Without that foundation, the gameplay is hollow and pathetic. It's why Rogue sucks(Despite having the same gameplay as Black Flag and AC3).


...the overall " warriorīs creed" feeling??????? In one word:

...Precisely!!!!!!

It redefines what an Assassin means in a new situation and context. If Assassin's Creed was simply about Assassination missions and the like, then there wouldn't have been such a complex attempt to situate AC1 in a proper context, such care taken to show the Assassins brotherhood in a more accurate dimension than all other portrayals and a lot of other complexities in period detail. Assassin's Creed is about reinvention, bringing in elements that change the formula and changing genres.

Altair1789
04-06-2015, 06:23 PM
How are we supposed to vote? We haven't even seen a trailer. It could be the worst AC game yet, or it could be the best AC game yet, we have nothing that could indicate it'll be good or bad. This "pattern" is definitely not an indicator. I do agree that ACV will either make or break the series. I don't agree with your "great and meh" chart

Namikaze_17
04-06-2015, 06:23 PM
You must be a very happy person... I'm jealous.

Not exactly.

I just don't fall into the depths of pessimism as many here.

For some it's understandable, others it's just self-inflicting.

Altair1789
04-06-2015, 06:26 PM
Not exactly.

I just don't fall into the depths of pessimism as many here.

For some it's understandable, others it's just self-inflicting.

Eh, I think you're just optimistic, we haven't seen anything other than a few screenshots. Most people aren't saying it's going to be bad, most people are saying it might be bad. So you saying it wil be fine is more on the optimistic side than the not-pessimistic side

Namikaze_17
04-06-2015, 06:42 PM
Eh, I think you're just optimistic, we haven't seen anything other than a few screenshots. Most people aren't saying it's going to be bad, most people are saying it might be bad. So you saying it wil be fine is more on the optimistic side than the not-pessimistic side

I suppose so.

But seeing some vote on the 'it will fail' option just leads me to believe that.

I know these forum polls mean nothing, but still.

Megas_Doux
04-06-2015, 06:46 PM
It redefines what an Assassin means in a new situation and context. If Assassin's Creed was simply about Assassination missions and the like, then there wouldn't have been such a complex attempt to situate AC1 in a proper context, such care taken to show the Assassins brotherhood in a more accurate dimension than all other portrayals and a lot of other complexities in period detail. Assassin's Creed is about reinvention, bringing in elements that change the formula and changing genres.

We disagree, wholeheartedly.

To me assassinations, combat and parkour come first, then open world, which is I donīt like AC III. Well, being honest, itīs because the setting bores me to death- cities are a chore- the mission design is a HUGE bad joke and even the side stuff with the exception of naval is not that good either, hunting was just utterly embarrasing, for instance. Mostly after having played RDR......

AC II improved the open world from AC I indeed, but the core stayed the same. Patrice Desilets, God amongst men here, is guilty of it as well. He conceived this pretty original concept, but with AC II he turned it into a historical GTA. I donīt blame him though, money talks after all. Thing is I find super telling that Metal Gear solid, that game released on 1998, has way better stealth than even Unity. Iīm NOT asking for Hitman or even Metal gear standards, but a more solid core that is better applied as well.

Summarizing, I think both worlds can coexist. Howeve time is the key and thus, annualization MUST stop.....

VestigialLlama4
04-06-2015, 07:13 PM
To me assassinations, combat and parkour come first, then open world, which is I donīt like AC III. Well, being honest, itīs because the setting bores me to death- cities are a chore- the mission design is a HUGE bad joke and even the side stuff with the exception of naval is not that good either, hunting was just utterly embarrasing, for instance. Mostly after having played RDR......

Well, since I am seriously into classic western movies (the real ones and not the weak spaghetti westerns that are all the rage these days) I loathed RDR by and large for being a bag of cliches that contributed nothing new. AC3 however fascinated me since it showed a way more interesting landscape and terrain.


He conceived this pretty original concept, but with AC II he turned it into a historical GTA.

As per his own interviews, AC was always "Historical GTA", AC1 included. He stated that Parkour was intended to provide gamers the same sense of traversal as being in Liberty City. AC1 has a solid historical base its just not as self-advertised via database and stuff. AC2 isn't any sell-out game at all. The basic gameplay of AC1 may have been unchanged but the point is its simplicity allowed for flexibility in adapting to different contexts.


I donīt blame him though, money talks after all. Thing is I find super telling that Metal Gear solid, that game released on 1998,

Incidentally, Kojima also prefers AC2 to AC1.


Iīm NOT asking for Hitman or even Metal gear standards, but a more solid core that is better applied as well.

My point is AC1 is hardly a pure stealth game like Hitman. Jade Raymond explicitly stated in interviews that the Asssassin aesthetic was not like Hitman since so much depended on the Assassins believing that they are killing someone for a greater good and it had a philosophical bent, which by necessity means that the games are heavily story and context driven. Simply being a blind assassin (a name of a Hitman game I think) has never been what AC was about.

dimbismp
04-06-2015, 08:21 PM
How are we supposed to vote? We haven't even seen a trailer. It could be the worst AC game yet, or it could be the best AC game yet, we have nothing that could indicate it'll be good or bad. This "pattern" is definitely not an indicator. I do agree that ACV will either make or break the series. I don't agree with your "great and meh" chart



I am talking about critics' reviews.For example on metacritic(iirc):
AC1:70ish-almost 80
AC2:90
AC3:80-80ish
AC4:80ish-almost 90
ACU:70ish

And i agree that we cannot predict yet.We can't actually predict until the fame is out.All i ask is a rough feeling,based on Ubi's work all these years :)

Hans684
04-06-2015, 09:28 PM
It will be baked, Victory will be baked like a cake.

Altair1789
04-06-2015, 10:56 PM
I am talking about critics' reviews.For example on metacritic(iirc):
AC1:70ish-almost 80
AC2:90
AC3:80-80ish
AC4:80ish-almost 90
ACU:70ish

And i agree that we cannot predict yet.We can't actually predict until the fame is out.All i ask is a rough feeling,based on Ubi's work all these years :)

True, and I guess Ubisoft does seem to go based off majority opinion which is usually reflected in critics' scores

Based off a "rough feeling" I think I'll say it'll succeed. I think (or hope) Ubisoft knows this is their last chance for many people, so they'll either go for an AC2 clone that'll divide the community or make another widely liked AC game. I expect it to be comparable to the transition between AC3 and AC4. A lot of people hated AC3, but AC4 was a more refined version of AC3. I just hope they don't cave into the majority's feedback

SixKeys
04-07-2015, 05:01 AM
...Precisely!!!!!!

It redefines what an Assassin means in a new situation and context. If Assassin's Creed was simply about Assassination missions and the like, then there wouldn't have been such a complex attempt to situate AC1 in a proper context, such care taken to show the Assassins brotherhood in a more accurate dimension than all other portrayals and a lot of other complexities in period detail. Assassin's Creed is about reinvention, bringing in elements that change the formula and changing genres.

How is AC3's straight-forward kill-everyone-don't-bother-with-stealth approach somehow 'redefining' what it means to be an assassin, when we had already played Warrior's Creed in the three Ezio games preceding it? Especially ACB and ACR where the assassin was an over-powered, unstoppable killing machine. All AC3 did was embrace that approach wholeheartedly, throwing all pretense of having a stealth element out the window. "**** it, everyone knows these games are super-easy, let's just allow them to go wild". AC3 wasn't a reinvention of Warrior's Creed, it was a continuation and culmination of an ongoing trend.

VestigialLlama4
04-07-2015, 07:44 AM
AC3 wasn't a reinvention...

Since you are determined to give AC3 absolutely no credit at all, there's not much point answering. I have said all I did in earlier posts and don't have any more strength to remember and revive my old arguments. I don't judge games (or books or movies) by any hard and fast rules.

What matters is if games try something new or do something interesting and unique, actually engaging with the concept and taking a simple concept of secret societies in the Crusades to be something more interesting and appealing. Otherwise Assassin's Creed is only of interest to conspiracy morons and other jerks.

king-hailz
04-07-2015, 08:55 AM
If it does succeed I don't expect it to be that good still, it will be okay and probably won't beat the majority of people favorite game of the series (whatever that may be)... I highly doubt it will get over a 9 in any reviews... and probably won't win any game of the year awards... because those awards go to games that try something different with their stories or game play, and AC is going to always have the same story premise and the same game play with a few changes that are by NO means revolutionary.

Sushiglutton
04-07-2015, 03:07 PM
I don't think one game makes or break a franchise that is regulary selling like 10 million or whatever. Worst case scenario (which may actually be a good thing) is that they have to stop yearly releases should Victory fail. Then they may go back to the drawing board and reevaluate things before a comeback.

AC supplies something a lot of people want and they have almost monopoly in their genre.

SixKeys
04-07-2015, 03:37 PM
Since you are determined to give AC3 absolutely no credit at all, there's not much point answering. I have said all I did in earlier posts and don't have any more strength to remember and revive my old arguments. I don't judge games (or books or movies) by any hard and fast rules.

Very nice and intellectually honest of you to cut off the entirety of my actual argument and cherry-pick whatever you want from my response to form an argument I never actually made.

Two can play that game, you know.



I have said all I did in earlier posts ...
AC3 ... is only of interest to conspiracy morons and other jerks.
I don't judge games (or books or movies) by ... any .... thing .... interesting and appealing.
... give ... my old arguments ... no credit at all.

Wow, thanks VestigialLlama! I'm so glad we're finally seeing eye to eye! :rolleyes:

THE_JOKE_KING33
04-07-2015, 03:39 PM
If the combat is just as bad as it was in Unity (heck if the gameplay in general was just as bad as Unity's) and if the story/characters are Unity-level then I can safely say that Victory will break the AC franchise for me. ESPECIALLY because Victorian England was THE setting I wanted and if they mess this up, well, I just wouldn't be able to bring myself to buy any other AC games. =/

Shahkulu101
04-07-2015, 04:01 PM
Victory will build off the back of Unity and refine the best bits about that game as well as bringing some new features to the table but nothing game-changing. It will iron out Unity's main problems and will be considered a success.

The title after Victory will be completely different and start everything from scratch with some nice new ideas, but as a result of the big changes it will be unpolished and buggy and will receive a lukewarm reception.

This cycle will continue until the apocalypse, which will be brought about by mass suicide because nobody can stand AC any longer.

D.I.D.
04-07-2015, 04:12 PM
Since you are determined to give AC3 absolutely no credit at all, there's not much point answering. I have said all I did in earlier posts and don't have any more strength to remember and revive my old arguments. I don't judge games (or books or movies) by any hard and fast rules.

What matters is if games try something new or do something interesting and unique, actually engaging with the concept and taking a simple concept of secret societies in the Crusades to be something more interesting and appealing. Otherwise Assassin's Creed is only of interest to conspiracy morons and other jerks.

Well, on page one you refused to give any credit to Unity at all on any metric including aesthetics, which I think is ridiculous. I just went back into Unity after playing Rogue, having not played it since the Dead Kings expansion, and it's pretty hard to understand how you can have nothing good to say about it.

VestigialLlama4
04-07-2015, 06:28 PM
Two can play that game, you know.

Wow, thanks VestigialLlama! I'm so glad we're finally seeing eye to eye! :rolleyes:

You know that's actually quite funny. Touche.


Well, on page one you refused to give any credit to Unity at all on any metric including aesthetics, which I think is ridiculous. I just went back into Unity after playing Rogue, having not played it since the Dead Kings expansion, and it's pretty hard to understand how you can have nothing good to say about it.

Aesthetically speaking, UNITY is a game with very limited set of goals. In some ways its similar to the leap made by Rockstar when they went from San Andreas to GTA4. GTA4 scaled back a lot of the features in San Andreas, similar to UNITY vis-a-vis AC3-Black Flag. It also tried to make the hero a more grounded figure. Niko Bellic didn't allow the power fantasy of becoming Lord of Vice City or Lord of San Andreas. No matter how much money he made, he starts and ends the game the same way, he doesn't start his own gang or empire or anything. Logically its natural that they get tired of making the same Rise to Power story all the time In the AC franchise, already with Black Flag, they made it a personal story of a man taking responsibility, and Edward Kenway isn't the master or redeemer of Assassins that Altair, Ezio and Connor are. So they followed on again with Arno who is peripheral to the historical period, and the game tries to give a sense that Arno is just a cog in the wheel to things beyond his understanding, whose goals and actions are on a smaller scale. So the question is, by its own limited criteria, can UNITY be considered a success? I don't believe so.

For a game that is "solely about being-an-Assassin" in terms of gameplay, the Assassin brotherhood doesn't matter much to Arno and he enters not on merit but because he's a pre-annointed elite. Arno never is a cog-in-the-wheel, since he gets major assignments despite being a novice for two years. Arno's motivation to join the Assassins is plainly selfish. He wants to find out why his adopted daddy was killed and avenge it/atone for it. For Arno to be truly marginal, he should never go in conflict with the Grandmaster Templar's scheme, nor should he be independently conducting his investigation on the sidelines. His story should be "Okay the Templar grandmaster screwed you over, but he screwed other people too, so get in line and man up, we're sending a professional to get it done. If you make it past novice we might send you to whack a Grandmaster in the future too, now go and do rooftop patrol p-sspot". Amancio said that the game was about the conflict between love and duty. But Arno never faces real consequences, since he gets forgiven easily.For the game to work, Arno should have been chucked out of the Brotherhood after Mirabeau's death, and his ambiguous-Assassin status at the end of the game and later Dead Kings should be a bigger deal. His relationship with Elise should also have consequences, when Elise tells Arno to get bent after the King's execution, him getting drunk on-his-a** with her coming to him to get out of funk (translation: "I am a woman and only a man can help me avenge the Templar Grandmaster despite the fact that I was raised as a Templar from birth and trained all my life and I am pretty resourceful, I, Hot-Redhead-Cool-Templar, need you, Assassin-reject and Ezio knock-off, to help me help you help me") is totally lacking in tension.

If Unity succeeded on telling a story in a low key and if Arno was truly marginal, I wouldn't have minded the fact that the history is the background, that the characters have wretched English accents and if it was really good, I might have even forgiven the right-wing story distortions. The thing is if you are making a game set in the French Revolution and put that in the background to a small-scale story, that small-scale story should be good, logical and consequential. GTA4 went on a smaller, sober scale than San Andreas and it totally succeeded on its goals in telling a more intimate story. Unity did not. That is why it cannot be considered an aesthetic success since it failed on its own goals. Its historical recreation is so one-sided that it makes books like Scarlet Pimpernel and A Tale of Two Cities look like pro-Revolutionary pamphlets, its villains are a pack of psychopaths with less personality than the Borgia, as such it does not have any saving graces either.

On the metric of aesthetics (which isn't "Cool Graphics" but what purpose and overall function that serves with other elements), UNITY fails as an Assassin game, as historical fiction, as a love story. Technically speaking, UNITY (bugs-all-sorted) is hardly a pioneer. Most of the large crowd of NPCs don't serve any function or gameplay role. Paris is of course pretty and the Art Department should be proud for their Notre Dame recreations but so what? That's like praising Ubisoft for hiring talented employees, the end result is that their hard work was wasted on a bad game.

m4r-k7
04-07-2015, 07:23 PM
True, and I guess Ubisoft does seem to go based off majority opinion which is usually reflected in critics' scores

Based off a "rough feeling" I think I'll say it'll succeed. I think (or hope) Ubisoft knows this is their last chance for many people, so they'll either go for an AC2 clone that'll divide the community or make another widely liked AC game.

They don't know how to clone AC 2 nowadays. If they did, I think they would do it just to get the approval. Its like DICE with Battlefield: Bad Company 2. They recently said they don't know how to make a Bad Company 3 because they don't fully realise why Bad Company 2 is so good and why people loved it so much.

GoldenBoy9999
04-07-2015, 10:49 PM
Oh, most of us are taking the optimistic approach and saying that it will succeed, nice.

I personally think that it will succeed. Hopefully Ubisoft will learn from their mistakes of releasing an incomplete game, and keep micro-transactions away for good. I imagine Victory will use a lot of the same mechanics and the style of Unity, but in a more refined version. As some others have pointed out, we don't know what Victory's new "hook" is supposed to be, nor can we really imagine one.

It may not turn out to be the most ambitious title yet, but I still think it'll do good, and at least better than Unity.