PDA

View Full Version : I want AC to be more like MGSV than The Witcher



Civona
03-12-2016, 04:58 AM
In terms of level and mission design. Basically, less of a traditional RPG where environments are just set-dressing for very binary battle mechanics, and instead something where every detail of an environment is carefully tuned to present you with an opportunity or challenge to overcome, and forces you to adapt your strategy.

And more specifically, something that interests me about MGSV is that its systems incentivize you playing it as a mix of stealth, action, and evasion. It basically simulates an action movie or the much-discussed AC1 CG trailer, and even though you can go full combat or full stealth, it always feels like finding a middle ground is the more interesting approach.

It accomplishes this by making sure that there are enough game systems interacting in ways that encourage the player to use all the abilities they have at their disposal, and never making it "easy" to stick with a single tactic or approach to a situation. (though in most cases it's possible if you can figure out how to do it)

I think that while AC games have somewhat sloppy foundational mechanics, they are actually more interesting mechanically than most people ever realize, and the main reason for that is the game doesn't give you enough of a convincing or clear reason to be creative. It's not enough to remind people of the controls for certain actions, or give them optional objectives, each level needs to encourage experimentation intrinsically.

EDIT:

Well, I'm not sure where to begin, since the first response I got was someone denying the existence of good level design, lol.

I think to put it more simply, my main point is that I don't want the RPG elements of the next AC game to mean that each quest is set up as a fairly bland and scripted sequence that doesn't require much thinking about how to tackle it. AC Unity was already heading in this direction in a lot of its side content.

MGSV is not the exact same kind of game as Assassin's Creed, but its design philosophy can easily apply to a game that is focused on social stealth. People need to understand that taking inspiration from a game does not mean copying it, but instead thinking about how its designers would probably end up handling the problems of another game. (in this case, they'd think about ways to make social stealth just as valuable to experiment with as any other form of stealth)

---
In terms of theme and quality of writing/performance, I think The Witcher is an excellent inspiration to draw from. Geralt is a wanderer who hunts monsters and men, and he only accepts jobs he thinks are justified. That sounds a lot like an Assassin if you take out the monsters. And really, there is so much good writing in the Witcher games. It often gets marketed as being "morally grey" or whatever, but what that actually means is it's full of interesting and well-rounded people, with good intentions and evil ones. And despite being a lone wanderer, Geralt does have friends he meets from time to time, and is generally a good and likable person, despite his gruffness. Assassin's Creed has always aspired to that kind of balance, and never quite made it there.

VestigialLlama4
03-12-2016, 07:12 AM
I am quite sure there are other threads for "Be more Witcher 3 Ubi" before this one...sigh...


In terms of level and mission design. Basically, less of a traditional RPG where environments are just set-dressing for very binary battle mechanics, and instead something where every detail of an environment is carefully tuned to present you with an opportunity or challenge to overcome, and forces you to adapt your strategy.

These are meaningless phrases, buzzwords dolled up..."every detail of an environment is carefully tuned to present you with an opportunity or challenge to overcome, and forces you to adapt your strategy" is true of virtually every game. Yet why the hell don't we say, Be more Super Mario '64 Ubi what's the point of saying Be More Phantom Pain or Be more...<Insert Trendy Game 2016>.


In terms of theme and quality of writing/performance, however, I think The Witcher is an excellent inspiration to draw from.

So Ubisoft can make Assassin's Creed a worthless pile of fantasy cliches...no thanks.

Witcher 3 is technically a good game, it's a pretty game and it's a big fantasy but in terms of story, it's terrible and laughable. Yes, in mission structure it's interesting, with all these multiple quests you can follow in any order rather than one single narrative awkwardly shoehorned in, but this is an ongoing trend and not unique to Witcher 3. Open-world and other games of that kind are moving towards side-mission or discrete tree approach to missions. You see this in Shadow of Mordor, in GTA-V also (with all these various heists serving as an advancement), and also by the way in Assassin's Creed games. The Homestead Missions in AC3 which while separate from the main quest is essentially a separate narrative of quests you can follow and update in any order you like. You can start and finish it as per your desire. In SYNDICATE, certain quests like the Maxwell Roth one is separate from the main narrative, and the Side missions like Queen Victoria, and others are also discrete. So much so the game doesn't have credits either.

The problem with Assassin's Creed is that it has this amazing historical simulation and immersion. It has crowds, people, places and events to balance. It's easy to say be like Phantom Pain when you ignore the fact that the latter game takes place in Afghanistan and Central Africa and yet has no civilians and actual Afghanis to interact with.

A systems-based AC game would lead to Assassin's Creed sacrificing its strength of story in favor of gameplay that would basically be imitative of other works in the genre and not really representative at all of the game's core. You see this with the poorly concieved attempts at systematization in Unity and Syndicate.

Jessigirl2013
03-12-2016, 01:20 PM
As someone who hates the TW and MGS, Having AC turn into a copy of that sounds atrocious.:rolleyes:

Not that I hate anything particular about them but they are just not to my taste.

I wish people would stop saying they want AC like this game and that game.
I personally just want an AC game that's not copying other mechanics from games and instead comes up with new ones.:cool:

JamesFaith007
03-12-2016, 01:26 PM
I wish people would stop saying they want AC like this game and that game.
I personally just want an AC game that's not copying other mechanics from games and instead comes up with new ones.:cool:

Agreed.

It's quite irony that on one hand there are multiple returning threads "be more like this game and that game" and when new AC game came out it suddenly "you stole this feature from this game".

MikeFNY
03-12-2016, 01:54 PM
Agreed.

It's quite irony that on one hand there are multiple returning threads "be more like this game and that game" and when new AC game came out it suddenly "you stole this feature from this game".

Yes, I'm also surprised by all these threads, it seems that the ultimate objective of many is to turn AC into a game that it never was.

But it's understandable.

In another threads some were saying how they very rarely used the voltaic bombs, one of the new features introduced in Syndicate and that's because all that had to be done in the series has been done already. So in a way I can understand why many want such drastic changes to the series.

Farlander1991
03-12-2016, 02:29 PM
In another threads some were saying how they very rarely used the voltaic bombs, one of the new features introduced in Syndicate and that's because all that had to be done in the series has been done already. So in a way I can understand why many want such drastic changes to the series.

Voltaic bombs aren't a new feature in the series, though. An AoE bomb that stuns and deals damage? We've had that in ACR and ACU, ACS is just a new dressing effectively. Which is fine, but it's not new.

Also, I disagree on the notion that 'all that had to be done in the series has been done already'. The series still hasn't fleshed out the notion of systemic social stealth that originated in AC1. There a few small additions there and there (like, throwing coins make the systems distracted as you create a publicaly inappropriate situation), but ultimately social stealth in the series has been window dressing and thematic. Crowds, for all intents and purposes, are bushes.

Though, to be fair, social stealth is actually present in AC multiplayer where to be out of sight and unnoticed you essentially have to act like the systems, but human factor is also introduced there so it wouldn't be as complex as an open-world single-player social stealth.

m4r-k7
03-12-2016, 02:43 PM
So Ubisoft can make Assassin's Creed a worthless pile of fantasy cliches...no thanks.

Witcher 3 is technically a good game, it's a pretty game and it's a big fantasy but in terms of story, it's terrible and laughable.


LOL and the latest Assassins Creed stories haven't been?! The Witcher 3 is a fantasy game, AC isn't. There is no point even comparing the two, but to say The Witcher 3 has a terrible and laughable story is just ridiculous when we have just come from Unity and Syndicate. At least there was actually a point to the story in The Witcher 3. Assassins Creed has no point anymore. Each game is 'get this piece of eden', further the non-existent modern day storyline, dragging it out in a convoluted way. The Witcher 3 merged story telling and exploration in a much better way than AC does now.

MikeFNY
03-12-2016, 03:03 PM
Voltaic bombs aren't a new feature in the series, though. An AoE bomb that stuns and deals damage? We've had that in ACR and ACU, ACS is just a new dressing effectively. Which is fine, but it's not new..
To be fair I should have used the word "recycled" rather than "new".

And no, it's not fine, that was exactly my point on the voltaic bombs, an old feature given a new name with a small change in terms of execution but ultimately it's just that: recycling, something that has been done already.

Just like the throwing knives renamed to phantom blades in Unity.

As to why I believe that the designers have ran out of ideas, just analyse the truly unique new features introduced in Syndicate:

Carriage driving: Described by many as AC meets GTA
Rope launcher: Copied from Batman
Invisibility: Copied from "Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix"

I prefer to omit the comical scare tactics in JTR, hoping not to see anything like that in the future.

rob1990312
03-12-2016, 05:03 PM
there hasnt been an assassins creed game in a long time that you could compare to the same level of quality as the witcher 3
i could also see elements of mgs work too, both games have good and bad elements
i get the feeling here that people in here probably havent played the witcher 3 in entirety or even at all but will still say oh the witcher sucks, ac is the best story to ever have existed blah blah
it gets annoying in here after a while when it ends up with a small but vocal majority of the people on these forums are just ubisoft yes men/women and it is no wonder people find it amusing to troll you and it makes it harder to discuss opinions on the forums when the reply is mostly assassins creed is the bestest

Sorrosyss
03-12-2016, 07:41 PM
I myself am guilty of some of these threads. However, I don't think its necessarily a case of wanting Assassin's Creed to be exactly like another game. It's more that the competition in the open world market are doing new or innovative things, and as with any business you have to adapt and take on your opponent's ideas if they further the market.

I feel this is what people are looking for from Assassin's Creed, and it would be foolhardy of the developer to not look at other games for inspiration. If they come up with their own new novel idea then great. But a good idea is a good idea, and should be used if it is a benefit.

VestigialLlama4
03-12-2016, 07:43 PM
there hasnt been an assassins creed game in a long time that you could compare to the same level of quality as the witcher 3

Black Flag is better than Witcher 3 any day of the week. That's not a long time, that is 2013.


i get the feeling here that people in here probably havent played the witcher 3 in entirety or even at all but will still say oh the witcher sucks,

Look most games suck. Most games are overpraised. The fact is game writers need something to rally behind so if they find one or two things in a game that is otherwise mediocre, they will pardon and ignore flaws. It's not like they have a choice they need something to discuss in the coveted Game of the Year rankings, which is bull---- because most of these are not truly Game of the Year at all. I mean I looked at the rankings at the end of 2015, and very few sites had Bloodborne and Arkham Knight. Arkham Knight got a bad rating because the PC fascists whined about a copy that the developers didn't oversee mostly because their energies were devoted to optimizing the delicate console versions. There aren't many franchise license games as bold and gutsy as Arkham Knight, and if crap like Witcher 3 and MGS-V impresses them...well what can you say.


it gets annoying in here after a while when it ends up with a small but vocal majority of the people on these forums are just ubisoft yes men/women and it is no wonder people find it amusing to troll you and it makes it harder to discuss opinions on the forums when the reply is mostly assassins creed is the bestest

Well from my experience most people online and other websites don't actually give AC the respect it deserves and AC fans are a good deal more self-critical than fans of stuff like Uncharted, Witcher 3, MGS and other stuff. I mean Metal Gear Solid is bar none, the most overrated franchise in gaming history. It's pathetically uneven, horrible storytelling with only one genuinely decent game (Snake Eater) to its credit and yet somehow, mostly thanks to nostalgia and low standards, it has been made into something it's not.


The Witcher 3 is a fantasy game, AC isn't.

Being a fantasy game is no excuse for lacking creativity. The best fantasy games are Zelda (Ocarina of Time, Majora's Mask, Wind Waker, Twilight Princess), ICO and Shadow of the Colossus, and since this is Ubisoft I'd add Sands of Time and Beyond Good and Evil into the mix as well. I recently played the 2008 Prince of Persia game, which is actually quite good and anticipates so many recent trends in gaming with its open-world, systematized, streamlined approach to mission design.


As to why I believe that the designers have ran out of ideas, just analyse the truly unique new features introduced in Syndicate:

Carriage driving: Described by many as AC meets GTA
Rope launcher: Copied from Batman

Actually it's copied from Eagle Flight from Tyranny of King Washington as developers admitted (the team did work on that before taking Syndicate you know). Eagle Flight was itself a kind of take on Dishonored's Blink ability.

And grappling hook is older than Batman....you had the Hookshot from the Zelda games. In any case, the grappling hook in Syndicate is different from Batman Arkham's in many respects.


Invisibility: Copied from "Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix"

Well some might think of Crysis' invisibility shields or even Splinter Cell...and in any case Syndicate doesn't really have invisibility on that scale anyway.

rob1990312
03-12-2016, 08:11 PM
Black Flag is better than Witcher 3 any day of the week. That's not a long time, that is 2013.



Look most games suck. Most games are overpraised. The fact is game writers need something to rally behind so if they find one or two things in a game that is otherwise mediocre, they will pardon and ignore flaws. It's not like they have a choice they need something to discuss in the coveted Game of the Year rankings, which is bull---- because most of these are not truly Game of the Year at all. I mean I looked at the rankings at the end of 2015, and very few sites had Bloodborne and Arkham Knight. Arkham Knight got a bad rating because the PC fascists whined about a copy that the developers didn't oversee mostly because their energies were devoted to optimizing the delicate console versions. There aren't many franchise license games as bold and gutsy as Arkham Knight, and if crap like Witcher 3 and MGS-V impresses them...well what can you say.



Well from my experience most people online and other websites don't actually give AC the respect it deserves and AC fans are a good deal more self-critical than fans of stuff like Uncharted, Witcher 3, MGS and other stuff. I mean Metal Gear Solid is bar none, the most overrated franchise in gaming history. It's pathetically uneven, horrible storytelling with only one genuinely decent game (Snake Eater) to its credit and yet somehow, mostly thanks to nostalgia and low standards, it has been made into something it's not.



Being a fantasy game is no excuse for lacking creativity. The best fantasy games are Zelda (Ocarina of Time, Majora's Mask, Wind Waker, Twilight Princess), ICO and Shadow of the Colossus, and since this is Ubisoft I'd add Sands of Time and Beyond Good and Evil into the mix as well. I recently played the 2008 Prince of Persia game, which is actually quite good and anticipates so many recent trends in gaming with its open-world, systematized, streamlined approach to mission design.



Actually it's copied from Eagle Flight from Tyranny of King Washington as developers admitted (the team did work on that before taking Syndicate you know). Eagle Flight was itself a kind of take on Dishonored's Blink ability.

And grappling hook is older than Batman....you had the Hookshot from the Zelda games. In any case, the grappling hook in Syndicate is different from Batman Arkham's in many respects.



Well some might think of Crysis' invisibility shields or even Splinter Cell...and in any case Syndicate doesn't really have invisibility on that scale anyway.

although everyone is entitled to their own opinion i will never be able to take your comments seriously if you think black flag is better than the witcher 3
but out of all acs black flag would be the closest to it
also ac gets the respect it deserves online wheter its good or bad

VestigialLlama4
03-12-2016, 08:31 PM
although everyone is entitled to their own opinion i will never be able to take your comments seriously if you think black flag is better than the witcher 3

Whether you take it seriously or not is not my concern. My feeling about Witcher 3 being sub-adolescent trash is as firm as that of many people who believed Lance Armstrong was a fraud before he admitted it. It's not as good as the weakest of the Zelda major titles. So yeah...Skyward Sword is better than Witcher 3.


but out of all acs black flag would be the closest to it

Really, because from my eye the game was quite remiscent of Assassin's Creed 3...wide natural environment, rural base and low-ceilinged buildings. But then AC3 lacked the requisite Aryan appeal to measure in discussions of Very Serious Gamers. It's also got a fair bit of Red Dead Redemption going for it as well.

rob1990312
03-12-2016, 08:38 PM
Whether you take it seriously or not is not my concern. My feeling about Witcher 3 being sub-adolescent trash is as firm as that of many people who believed Lance Armstrong was a fraud before he admitted it. It's not as good as the weakest of the Zelda major titles. So yeah...Skyward Sword is better than Witcher 3.



Really, because from my eye the game was quite remiscent of Assassin's Creed 3...wide natural environment, rural base and low-ceilinged buildings. But then AC3 lacked the requisite Aryan appeal to measure in discussions of Very Serious Gamers. It's also got a fair bit of Red Dead Redemption going for it as well.

it pales in comparrisson to red dead redemption
ppft aryan appeal
the main charactar was far from the main problem it wasnt that good and not because people are racist

VestigialLlama4
03-12-2016, 08:57 PM
it pales in comparrisson to red dead redemption

Witcher 3 or Assassin's Creed 3?

Red Dead Redemption is another highly overpraised game. Technically skilfull and filled with beautiful moments (especially the sections with Bonnie MacFarlane and later with Marston's family), but the rest of the game is just bad. I mean the Mexican section is just incredibly racist and offensive and the whole plot structure they chose is antithetical to a satisfying open-world experience.

In terms of natural world lanscapes...AC3 is better than RDR. RDR has a fake Western landscape that looks like the backdrop of many Westerns clustered in the background. It's very much in the vein of SEGA games like Sunset Riders whereas AC3's Frontier has the look and texture of real forest. Something that Black Flag and Rogue have lost.

The problem with the recent trend for systemization in open-world games that you see is that it comes at the expense of aesthetics. So you have environments that increasingly look and feel gamey because developers want them to form connection with the map, synch areas and the like...


ppft aryan appeal
the main charactar was far from the main problem it wasnt that good and not because people are racist

You keep telling me that, and I will continue to take your denials as iron proof of guilt.

rob1990312
03-12-2016, 09:06 PM
Witcher 3 or Assassin's Creed 3?

Red Dead Redemption is another highly overpraised game. Technically skilfull and filled with beautiful moments (especially the sections with Bonnie MacFarlane and later with Marston's family), but the rest of the game is just bad. I mean the Mexican section is just incredibly racist and offensive and the whole plot structure they chose is antithetical to a satisfying open-world experience.

In terms of natural world lanscapes...AC3 is better than RDR. RDR has a fake Western landscape that looks like the backdrop of many Westerns clustered in the background. It's very much in the vein of SEGA games like Sunset Riders whereas AC3's Frontier has the look and texture of real forest. Something that Black Flag and Rogue have lost.

The problem with the recent trend for systemization in open-world games that you see is that it comes at the expense of aesthetics. So you have environments that increasingly look and feel gamey because developers want them to form connection with the map, synch areas and the like...



You keep telling me that, and I will continue to take your denials as iron proof of guilt.

assassins creed 3
take it as guilt all you want, i live in a country where racism isnt a problem or a big topic so whatever, i dnt care
also you are clutching at straws if that is your defence of why people didnt like ac3

VestigialLlama4
03-12-2016, 09:22 PM
also you are clutching at straws if that is your defence of why people didnt like ac3

Well it's one of the key reasons...people are more willing to appreciate mediocre games with a lot of the stuff AC3 has simply because those games have white heroes.

That's one of the main reasons why I as a rule despise most video game fans as barely sentient sub-humans who lack a tenth of the imagination and skill that goes into these products.

Kaschra
03-12-2016, 09:35 PM
Well it's one of the key reasons...people are more willing to appreciate mediocre games with a lot of the stuff AC3 has simply because those games have white heroes.

That's one of the main reasons why I as a rule despise most video game fans as barely sentient sub-humans who lack a tenth of the imagination and skill that goes into these products.

Sub-humans...? Seriously? What the **** is wrong with you?

And here I thought I couldn't loathe you more than I already do. Boy was I wrong.

rob1990312
03-12-2016, 09:39 PM
Well it's one of the key reasons...people are more willing to appreciate mediocre games with a lot of the stuff AC3 has simply because those games have white heroes.

That's one of the main reasons why I as a rule despise most video game fans as barely sentient sub-humans who lack a tenth of the imagination and skill that goes into these products.

boohoo some people are sub human racists, you also play video games so dnt consider yourself better than the rest, that type of general view isnt too far removed from racism
id say get back on point but there is no point
you are hell bent on saying assassins creed is better than every other game and criticizing the others
you have even went far enough to claim people dnt like ac because they are racist
just be realistic ac isnt that big a thing anymore

i didnt enjoy mgsv myself i didnt like how empty the world felt or how restricted it was but i did like the stealth

Civona
03-12-2016, 10:49 PM
Well, I'm not sure where to begin, since the first response I got was someone denying the existence of good level design, lol. And I suppose I should have expected it to devolve into whining about what game is more popular or whatnot.

I think to put it more simply, my main point is that I don't want the RPG elements of the next AC game to mean that each quest is set up as a fairly bland and scripted sequence that doesn't require much thinking about how to tackle it. AC Unity was already heading in this direction in a lot of its side content.

MGSV is not the exact same kind of game as Assassin's Creed, but its design philosophy can easily apply to a game that is focused on social stealth. People need to understand that taking inspiration from a game does not mean copying it, but instead thinking about how its designers would probably end up handling the problems of another game.

adding this to the OP.

PedroAntonio2
03-12-2016, 10:52 PM
''Red Dead Redemption is another highly overpraised game.''
''I mean Metal Gear Solid is bar none, the most overrated franchise in gaming history. It's pathetically uneven, horrible storytelling''

Is this guy trolling ? I really want this guy to be just a troll, because if he really meant it, what the hell is he doing in an Assassin's Creed forum ? If MGS have a horrible storytelling, then what game has a good storytelling for you ? Because I'm sure as hell AC doesn't have one in a long time. You have the right to don't enjoy MGS, it's your choice and opinion, but saying that is pathetic and has a horrible story ? I really want to know your standards for storytelling.

rob1990312
03-12-2016, 11:06 PM
Well, I'm not sure where to begin, since the first response I got was someone denying the existence of good level design, lol. And I suppose I should have expected it to devolve into whining about what game is more popular or whatnot.

I think to put it more simply, my main point is that I don't want the RPG elements of the next AC game to mean that each quest is set up as a fairly bland and scripted sequence that doesn't require much thinking about how to tackle it. AC Unity was already heading in this direction in a lot of its side content.

MGSV is not the exact same kind of game as Assassin's Creed, but its design philosophy can easily apply to a game that is focused on social stealth. People need to understand that taking inspiration from a game does not mean copying it, but instead thinking about how its designers would probably end up handling the problems of another game.

adding this to the OP.

a lot of the side missions in the witcher 3 are open ended and have consequences because of your actions it also has scripted ones too
i think the reason for ac roumored to be copying the witcher is because of its open world plan and combat that makes the player feel less restricted
the way side quests are handled in the withcher make them feel more spontaneous other than just go to this place and start the mission they are kind of like the random events in red dead just better
but at the same time the main story is fleshed out and very long, it makes it worth the money
i dont think ac will ever have the same elements as mgsv i dnt think that ubisoft really want ac to be a stealth game really unfortunately , it seems more to be an action adventure game for casual gamers
by now its probably obvious im a witcher3 fan but for those of you who havent played the game and im guessing thats a lot, dont be worried if ac copys it a bit its a good(in my opinion amazing) open world game

Megas_Doux
03-12-2016, 11:16 PM
Ermmm...NO!!!!!!


But well, this comes from a huge metal Gear fan who not only dislikes the game, but also loathe to no end some parts of it.

PedroAntonio2
03-13-2016, 12:38 AM
Back to the subject of the thread, why can't we have both ? Add a few elements from MGSV and TW3

I enjoy the infiltration style of MGSV, lots of ways to finish your mission, with a variety of options,items and weapons at your disposal. It would be a nice add if we had something like the Motherbase, the HQ for the Assassins, you can recruit a new assassin by incapacitating him and sending him to your base or doing a side-quest to find a lost soldier in a enemy base, you can train them after that, send them to a certain area of your base like the assault team, medical staff, information staff, etc. You can upgrade the base by creating new areas inside it or find resources to expand it.

About Witcher 3 influence, they could bring back the ACU combat system that reminds me a lot of TW3 combat, but a little more faster and fluid. Different types of enemy requiring different strategies of defeating them, the side-quests influencing more in the cities and characters, the skill tree really affecting the gameplay rather than being something you can full unlock until the end of the game, if I want to be a more stealthly player, then let me focus only on those type of skills. Find armor and different types of weapons and armor in the enviromnent, by stealing items from chests or doing a side-quest to obtain it.

Civona
03-13-2016, 01:21 AM
a lot of the side missions in the witcher 3 are open ended and have consequences because of your actions it also has scripted ones too
i think the reason for ac roumored to be copying the witcher is because of its open world plan and combat that makes the player feel less restricted
the way side quests are handled in the withcher make them feel more spontaneous other than just go to this place and start the mission they are kind of like the random events in red dead just better
but at the same time the main story is fleshed out and very long, it makes it worth the money
i dont think ac will ever have the same elements as mgsv i dnt think that ubisoft really want ac to be a stealth game really unfortunately , it seems more to be an action adventure game for casual gamers
by now its probably obvious im a witcher3 fan but for those of you who havent played the game and im guessing thats a lot, dont be worried if ac copys it a bit its a good(in my opinion amazing) open world game

Well I understand the value of the narrative consequences in The Witcher, but since AC isn't really about narrative decisions I'm focusing more on the actual gameplay of it. I certainly hope Ubisoft does want AC to be a stealth game, I think the blend of narrative and creative problem solving is really fun.

rob1990312
03-13-2016, 02:08 AM
Well I understand the value of the narrative consequences in The Witcher, but since AC isn't really about narrative decisions I'm focusing more on the actual gameplay of it. I certainly hope Ubisoft does want AC to be a stealth game, I think the blend of narrative and creative problem solving is really fun.

i dont think they do want it to be a stealth game like mgs to be honest they have had plenty of opportunities over the years to do it, ubisoft want ac to be an accessible game to casual gamers to increase their fanbase an sales, this just seems to be how it is

Xstantin
03-13-2016, 02:58 AM
Eh, TW3 was too big imo.

VestigialLlama4
03-13-2016, 05:52 AM
If MGS have a horrible storytelling, then what game has a good storytelling for you ?

Zelda Wind Waker, Ico, Shadow of the Colossus, Half-Life 2, Portal, Psychonauts. Among recent games, Arkham Knight is pretty special.


Because I'm sure as hell AC doesn't have one in a long time.

Black Flag was released in 2013. Not a long time at all. It's less than three years. And that was an annual title Ubisoft did in 2 years...whereas Phantom Pain was in development for what, half-a-decade!!!


MGSV is not the exact same kind of game as Assassin's Creed, but its design philosophy can easily apply to a game that is focused on social stealth.

Phantom Pain doesn't have crowds of people, it doesn't have society. So how can its design philosophy "easily apply to a game that is focused on social stealth". It takes place in military bases in the middle of a warzone...with no civilians. It's essentially the same military fantasy that a game like Spec Ops: The Line criticized.


People need to understand that taking inspiration from a game does not mean copying it, but instead thinking about how its designers would probably end up handling the problems of another game.

Well the fact is Metal Gear Solid and The Witcher 3 don't really have solutions to "the problems" of Assassin's Creed. They are not really the same kind of games, nor are they especially similar. Nor are they, I will add, especially worthy of inspiration.

The main thing about Witcher 3 is that it has this choice mechanic. That mechanic transforms the game, it determines mission design and characterization. Assassin's Creed does not have the choice mechanic, it cannot have the choice mechanic, it has no need for it, and it is a superior game for not having it. Choice mechanics affecting story is among the dumbest inventions in gaming history, a con to get players to play the game twice and offer the illusion of replayability. It's a very rare game that integrates it well...Dishonored comes to mind.

In any case, MGS, Witcher 3 are not especially original these days in games. It's part of an ongoing trend in AAA titles for systematizing, streamlining gameplay. You see this in Shadow of Mordor where the designers were inspired by sports games and basically itemized and boiled the game into distinct and separate chunks of actions which the players can do in any order. This is also there in Arkham Knight, via its side mission mechanic quest system. A game that in retrospect anticipated all this is the 2008 Prince of Persia which is a kind of open world platform game that can be done in any order, accessible from any point and streamlined to the extent that it's actually...ugh this evil word...seamless. The company that made the 2008 Prince of Persia is....Ubisoft. And Unity and Syndicate was systematized and itemized as part of this ongoing trend.

So Ubisoft themselves have a pretty good pool of resources for ideas and can look at their own games for inspiration. Their main problem is that they are easily bullied by online trolls and suffer from some kind of inferiority complex, so any time a game "fails", "gets bad notices" and the like, they decide not to look at it and learn from it: Beyond Good and Evil, 2008 Prince of Persia, Assassin's Creed III are examples.

Civona
03-13-2016, 07:40 AM
i dont think they do want it to be a stealth game like mgs to be honest they have had plenty of opportunities over the years to do it, ubisoft want ac to be an accessible game to casual gamers to increase their fanbase an sales, this just seems to be how it is

I think that the game could still be accessible while focusing on giving players a creative sandbox.

And I don't think that people who want games that are more about experiencing a story and managing RPG stats are "casual" (though I don't think that's a bad word) I just feel like AC's mission statement from the beginning has been to try and merge a compelling narrative with creative sandbox gameplay, and that it should learn from games that excel at each of those things. AC is an incredibly ambitious concept, and I'm sure the developers know they can't afford to ignore examples of games that have succeeded at any one of the things ubi is trying to combine into one.

Regardless of sales or strategies, I'm just talking about what I want to see.

VestigialLlama4
03-13-2016, 07:54 AM
I just feel like AC's mission statement from the beginning has been to try and merge a compelling narrative with creative sandbox gameplay, and that it should learn from games that excel at each of those things. AC is an incredibly ambitious concept, and I'm sure the developers know they can't afford to ignore examples of games that have succeeded at any one of the things ubi is trying to combine into one.

Their original mission statement was to do things no other game had done, tackle subjects that no other game touched upon and to a large extent they did succeed. Parkour and open-world climbing as you see in Assassin's Creed simply did not exist before AC. Social stealth while it has never quite fulfilled its potential was and still is a pretty gutsy idea, and it was a game that showed that open-world stealth in broad daylight was as exciting and tense as Stealth-In-Military-Base-Interiors (aka MGS-games). They also went further than anyone did in their recreation and development of a natural world, in building open-world cities with unique traversal systems where buildings are not scenery and decoration (as it largely was in GTA games) but actual blocks you can interact with.

They also broadened the subject matter in games, saying games didn't have to be Songs for the Military-Industrial Complex or a mash of Elric-GOT-LOTR cliches.

So frankly, ubisoft should stick to what made the franchise great, the instincts of their developers, who alone came up with Assassin's Creed rather than do Prince of Persia: Assassins, they also decided to change the scenery to Renaissance Italy, to the American Revolution and the Pirate era, neither of these settings were asked for.

It's only when they started listen to fan requests...aka suggestions by deeply untalented, uncreative and unpleasant individuals...it's only then they started suffering setbacks. The self-appointed online fans are the bane of gaming industry, they have no taste, wit and imagination and the minute a company gets bullied and taken hostage by this, their doom will come for them.

shobhit7777777
03-13-2016, 09:26 AM
On a very broad level AC could indeed take notes from The Witcher and MGSV

The Witcher 3 can be a very immersive experience where almost every mechanic and system is geared towards you being: Geralt, Expert Witcher. Take for instance the act of haggling for contract pay...in the large scheme of things, pointless...but as you argue with the NPC as to how much should you be paid for ghosting an Arch-Griffin...you feel like a Witcher. Everything in the game is informed by the setting and premise - from the architecture to NPC barks. Its an extremely immersive experience. I may be biased here since I absolutely adore the game and and the books.

MGSV on the other hand eschews world building in favour of gameplay. Its a very well designed game which has very robust gameplay. The rules are consistent and organically communicated. The AI is rock solid - not the smartest or most challenging - they are fun enough to make repeated experimentation an engaging act.

Both the games mentioned by OP are very very very different from AC, but there are some design philosophies that the AC team IMO can pick up from the two. I'd count the early AC games in as well when it comes to "Reference Material".

Another game the AC devs should take a long, hard look at is Hitman...as thats the closest game to AC when it comes to the core fantasy.

Hitman has gone the "Gameplay first" route and has updated many of its core gameplay systems to the point that its once again the only "Assassin" game on the market.

For me, the AC games are now ridiculously shallow and vapid...especially the later entries. They are dumb, insult my intelligence and often waste my time. The only thing going for them is the beautiful recreation of historic settings that I enjoy running around in. "Soulless", is the word that comes to mind when I think of some AC games.

MikeFNY
03-13-2016, 09:52 AM
For me, the AC games are now ridiculously shallow and vapid...especially the later entries. They are dumb, insult my intelligence and often waste my time. The only thing going for them is the beautiful recreation of historic settings that I enjoy running around in. "Soulless", is the word that comes to mind when I think of some AC games.

Yes, this is also my sentiment these days with the only difference that even running around the city doesn't feel special anymore.

I remember when I used to play Revelations every day even after achieving the 100% synchronisation, even if just for 15 minutes a day, just roaming around the beautiful city of Constantinople.

Going back to what I was saying earlier, make no mistake, I also believe AC could borrow something from other games, the design of side missions for example. Random side missions a la FallOut 3 would be nice, they would also give you a reason to explore every inch of the map.

Side missions in AC have "we are here, come back to us whenever you want" written all over them and I believe this could change.

Make me stop because a lady wants help because her husband was captured.

Make me stop because a child's father is being beaten by the bad guys.

Make me stop because I heard something in the distance.

And give me something useful in return such as having the saved victim join my brotherhood. No money, no silly experience points but useful help that I could use in the main story.

If multiple cities are to be re-introduced then you will need a guide to understand the danger of the city, where to go and where not to go and "saved victims" could give you tips on that.

When Ezio reached Constantinople he needed a guide, he needed Yusuf Tazim who told him almost everything there was to know about the city. And he was there, alongside him, for a good 80% of the game if my memory serves me right.

In Syndicate the Frye twins were given a 10 second introduction by Henry Green. After that, this "leader of the Assassins in the city" became the third wheel of the group.

ze_topazio
03-13-2016, 03:35 PM
Story wise Assassin's Creed supposedly bold themes have been "White man is evil, rich people are evil, Christianity is evil, nobles are evil, colonialism was evil, slavery was evil, conservatives are evil, minorities suffer and are all nice people, the poor suffer are all nice people, freedom is awesome, liberty is awesome, republics are awesome, governments are corrupt, etc..." all the trendy cliches you can find in modern media and entertainment, there's nothing brave, bold or risky about the themes AC uses, all the the stuff AC criticizes, everybody else does it already too, is the kind of thing hipsters like to say feeling very unique, edgy and risky not realizing many other millions say the same.

So call me when AC does something as profound, complex and different as Metal Gear Solid 2 or the MG series in general.

http://www.metalgearinformer.com/?p=16343

http://junkerhq.net/MGS2/

http://www.bigbluebullfrog.com/2012/01/2012-0125-mgs2-philosophy/

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/119999/Analysis_What_Metal_Gear_Solid_2_Teaches_Us_About_ The_Information_Age.php

http://nightmaremode.thegamerstrust.com/2012/01/04/metal-gear-solids-postmodern-legacy-part-1/

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1oFh2JEbdT0zliTGUP-xVz-11Wf87Jh1f9Fw6kYI8bo8/edit

Jessigirl2013
03-13-2016, 03:48 PM
Yes, I'm also surprised by all these threads, it seems that the ultimate objective of many is to turn AC into a game that it never was.

But it's understandable.

In another threads some were saying how they very rarely used the voltaic bombs, one of the new features introduced in Syndicate and that's because all that had to be done in the series has been done already. So in a way I can understand why many want such drastic changes to the series.

I don't really know as I love the game for how it is now.
But they seriously need to sort out the MD story and stop leaving it as an afterthought.



Voltaic bombs aren't a new feature in the series, though. An AoE bomb that stuns and deals damage? We've had that in ACR and ACU, ACS is just a new dressing effectively. Which is fine, but it's not new.

Also, I disagree on the notion that 'all that had to be done in the series has been done already'. The series still hasn't fleshed out the notion of systemic social stealth that originated in AC1. There a few small additions there and there (like, throwing coins make the systems distracted as you create a publicaly inappropriate situation), but ultimately social stealth in the series has been window dressing and thematic. Crowds, for all intents and purposes, are bushes.

Though, to be fair, social stealth is actually present in AC multiplayer where to be out of sight and unnoticed you essentially have to act like the systems, but human factor is also introduced there so it wouldn't be as complex as an open-world single-player social stealth.

Every AC nowadays has just been recycling old mechanics from past games and just repackaging them.
Doesn't every game call poison darts a different thing.:rolleyes:


there hasnt been an assassins creed game in a long time that you could compare to the same level of quality as the witcher 3
i could also see elements of mgs work too, both games have good and bad elements
i get the feeling here that people in here probably havent played the witcher 3 in entirety or even at all but will still say oh the witcher sucks, ac is the best story to ever have existed blah blah
it gets annoying in here after a while when it ends up with a small but vocal majority of the people on these forums are just ubisoft yes men/women and it is no wonder people find it amusing to troll you and it makes it harder to discuss opinions on the forums when the reply is mostly assassins creed is the bestest

You cant really compare the two fairly TW has tons more development time than an annual title.


I myself am guilty of some of these threads. However, I don't think its necessarily a case of wanting Assassin's Creed to be exactly like another game. It's more that the competition in the open world market are doing new or innovative things, and as with any business you have to adapt and take on your opponent's ideas if they further the market.

I feel this is what people are looking for from Assassin's Creed, and it would be foolhardy of the developer to not look at other games for inspiration. If they come up with their own new novel idea then great. But a good idea is a good idea, and should be used if it is a benefit.

The idea of AC being a RPG just sounds awful, as being someone who hated the idea of an XP system and still does. (WHY AM I STILL EARNING XP WHEN THERES NOTHING TO SPEND IT ON!):rolleyes:

Its why I haven't really given Identity a go as it seemed like they went in that direction with the combat.

VestigialLlama4
03-13-2016, 04:09 PM
...something as profound, complex and different as Metal Gear Solid 2 or the MG series in general.

A child can do something as profound, complex and different as MGS2, a game that was made up as it went along and added in a bunch of pretentious crap to disguise its poor gameplay, lame mission design and worse dialogue. Metal Gear Solid was never meant to be this post-modernist saga. It was a bunch of stealth games that unexpectedly became popular and which Kojima somehow improvised into a saga that could never truly satisfyingly sustain its big "themes" which by the way are mostly crap from bad science fiction. It was the LOST of games and Kojima knew that, which is why he kept insulting and abusing his fans for actually taking his stuff seriously.

The only actually great game in that series was Snake Eater where you actually have cool gameplay (the camo-in-the-jungle, the amazing boss-fights with The End and The Fury), a compelling story and where the over-the-top spy fiction James Bond spoof in the Cold War actually worked wonderfully. But the rest of the series is just awful and, in the case of MGS-2, it's practically unplayable today to casual gamers.


...all the trendy cliches you can find in modern media and entertainment, there's nothing brave, bold or risky about the themes AC uses, all the the stuff AC criticizes, everybody else does it already too, is the kind of thing hipsters like to say feeling very unique, edgy and risky not realizing many other millions say the same.

Which hipsters are these, if you mind telling me? And when has stuff like pointing out slavery in the Caribbean pirate era been trendy. It is so trendy that Sid Meier's Pirates,a game loved by Americans for teaching them geography and which is actually fairly well researched did not mention it once in the entire games. It isn't mentioned of course in Pirates of the Caribbean either.

You are right that AC is still a fairly "safe" game and it's only bold in comparison to the rest of the gaming industry. My argument is that games are an inherently backward medium, most titles are overpraised and in the course of time when the actual golden age of the medium comes, AC would probably be regarded as dated and silly. But until that time, AC is still pretty impressive as games go.

MikeFNY
03-13-2016, 04:41 PM
I don't really know as I love the game for how it is now.
But they seriously need to sort out the MD story and stop leaving it as an afterthought.
I also love the game but we have to be honest enough to admit that if every new game brings very little new to the table and that the very little is not good enough, then changes are a must.

But clearly, by this I'm not asking for magic spells, dragons or zombies.

Farlander1991
03-13-2016, 05:32 PM
To be fair I should have used the word "recycled" rather than "new".

And no, it's not fine, that was exactly my point on the voltaic bombs, an old feature given a new name with a small change in terms of execution but ultimately it's just that: recycling, something that has been done already.

Recycling isn't inherently bad. 95% of the games are built on recycling and iteration. What matters is the context of recycling.


Carriage driving: Described by many as AC meets GTA

Normal horses were also described as AC meets GTA. Especially when we got to use them in cities in ACB. And ships in AC4/Ro. This can apply to any for of transportation really :p Yeah, carriage driving is different as in Victorian London there are actual road systems and rules and AI, which btw to AC are all new, but broadly speaking would one expect anything different than it is now?


Rope launcher: Copied from Batman

Mechanically it's not entirely the same as Batman, but even if we say 'copied', before Batman's grappling hook we had Spider-Man's zipline ability that performed the same function (not to mention the other web-swinging stuff), and before that there were other games with hooks and what not, this kind of thing has evolved over time. I guess you can make a point that Batman is 'in' at the moment, which would be fair, but then you can also make a point that Batman took detective vision from AC :p


Invisibility: Copied from "Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix"

That's like the weirdest choice of 'copied' from possible. Why not Lord of the Rings, StarCraft, Deus Ex, or, while we're at it, AC's own multiplayer mode that's got Animus invisibility abilities that make you almost invisible to the players just like Evie becomes almost invisible to guards?

Anyway, the point I'm trying to get to, is if we're going to get into a discussion about which game took what from what or where something has been done in a different game in other or the same series, this will lead to a perpetual cycle of 'but this game did it first'.

Everyone's raving about Rocket League now, 'OMFG SOCCER WITH CARS, WHY DIDN'T NO ONE THINK OF THAT?!?!?!?!?!', and while Rocket League is awesome, that statement was always weird to me, as my early childhood was filled with playing the game Wild Wheels, which was precisely soccer with cars (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ybli2FfpKGw). And later I found out that there were actually a bunch of games like that inbetween, including a predecessor of Rocket League from the devs themselves. So Rocket League is not the first to do that, does that diminish its accomplishments somehow? No.

Everybody gets inspiration from everybody, there's no 'pure' new game or new mechanic, because even 'new' mechanics somehow take their inspiration from life, because ultimately we as human beings can't draw inspiration from anything but life. We're not that imaginative to think of something we have never seen a reference for in one way or another.

What matters is not 'recycled mechanics' or 'no new mechanics', what matters is the overall experience of the game, how it all fits together and creates a cohesive wholesome thing. AC4 is very successful not because it introduced a bunch of new things, it introduced very little, most of what it has is rehash or updates of what's been done before. But it takes all that and crafts a single cohesive experience which is why it got so well-met.

Syndicate in particular, in terms of overall mechanics and cohesive experience it's a hit and mix. I mean, it's my #3 AC game, but it's far from reaching the potential AC can. The issue though is not 'there's nothing new and mechanics are recycled'.

The issue is that there's a tool (voltaic bombs in this case) that doesn't have its own clean purpose and is pretty much useless in comparison to other tools we have. The issue is that the open-world doesn't react to changes happening in narrative - medicine being gone, transportation system ****ed up, etc. (weirdly enough, interview with Jeffrey Yohalem revealed that they wanted to do that originally), thus separating narrative and gameplay and not letting the player feel consequences of his own actions. The issue is that we spend less time with characters important for the theme of the game (Ned, Clara, even Henry - Abberline is the only normally used side-character) than with token historical characters. The issue is that social stealth is STILL just bushes in form of crowds, and that the game has more focus on the traditional stealth experience rather than social stealth one (though I gotta admit, I did love the Karl Marx mission where you have to get some Blighters out of the crowd without getting detected). And speaking of stealth experience, the AI is... not the best.

Basically, the issue is that the game has all these different parts that taken separately are good/can be called good, but when put together it's kinda stitched up and the overall experience is lacking. Recycled mechanics are not the issue.

GunnerGalactico
03-13-2016, 08:40 PM
Damn! One of those threads again. "I want AC to be more like Shadow of Mordor or GTA.", "I want to be able to make decisions like in ME", "I want the stealth mechanics of the Arkham franchise", "I want the hunting mechanics to be just like RDR"...etc. :rolleyes:

RA503
03-14-2016, 03:27 AM
I loved The witcher 3 at heart but jess, his plot is full of filler, example : remember that part you need to find character x in order to find character y in order to find character z...

and Assassins Creed franchise in a sence was a Metal Gear son,even the animus thing is reminiscent from all the meta in Sons of Liberty...

VestigialLlama4
03-14-2016, 05:33 AM
and Assassins Creed franchise in a sence was a Metal Gear son,even the animus thing is reminiscent from all the meta in Sons of Liberty...

There are some MGS references early on...the cardboard box in Brotherhood, Raiden in the training scenes of brotherhood. You can also compare Haytham's surprise prologue as a jokey inversion of MGS-2, where instead of advertising as Snake and then playing as Raiden for the rest of the game, it was advertised as Connor, you start by playing Haytham. But the Animus is not really about "meta"...I know that's this past-time, this games-about-games thing, but the Animus has always had clear rules and related well. The MGS references pertain to the MD lore, the whole conspiracy mythology and all that stuff.

In any case, this doesn't matter because Assassin's Creed is not a game about that. The MD is what, 5% of the entire games. Most of the game is the historical simulation. If we are to compare MGS2, well most of the game would have to be about the Tanker...with 5% dedicated to the rest. That's not what happens in MGS-2.

Fundamentally, the Animus, the MD, the Conspiracy Lore...none of that is what Assassin's Creed is actually about. It's actually about the historical simulation, it's about the architecture, building, events and people. The other stuff, that's just there to facillate the action and set the plot up, they are McGuffins but the games are about something different.

MikeFNY
03-14-2016, 12:56 PM
Anyway, the point I'm trying to get to, is if we're going to get into a discussion about which game took what from what or where something has been done in a different game in other or the same series, this will lead to a perpetual cycle of 'but this game did it first'.

Everyone's raving about Rocket League now, 'OMFG SOCCER WITH CARS, WHY DIDN'T NO ONE THINK OF THAT?!?!?!?!?!', and while Rocket League is awesome, that statement was always weird to me, as my early childhood was filled with playing the game Wild Wheels, which was precisely soccer with cars (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ybli2FfpKGw). And later I found out that there were actually a bunch of games like that inbetween, including a predecessor of Rocket League from the devs themselves. So Rocket League is not the first to do that, does that diminish its accomplishments somehow? No.

Everybody gets inspiration from everybody, there's no 'pure' new game or new mechanic, because even 'new' mechanics somehow take their inspiration from life, because ultimately we as human beings can't draw inspiration from anything but life. We're not that imaginative to think of something we have never seen a reference for in one way or another.

Yes, I absolutely agree with you on this one, I end up thinking the same when I read about games for IPAD/IPhone, many of which are just a replica of Age of Empires.

But to be honest the point I was trying to make is not really about who is copying who and whether it should be allowed or not. Incidentally, but I could be wrong here, AC2 featured "Air Assassinations" before Batman Arkham Asylum was released and in the latter you can indeed kill someone from above, and also from a ledge if my memory serves me right.

My point was: Are the new features making the game better or not?

In the case of AC, my personal answer is no. Another example is the disguise skill in Unity; it was comical. And if we are to dig deeper I wonder why more experienced assassins like Altair and Ezio couldn't done what a 25-year-old Arno could do.

Carriage races also bother me, destroying almost everything in front of you. I remember when the game was about hiding in plain sight, respecting the "Be unseen" philosophy, suddenly it's about destroying 5000 destructibles with your carriage.

So much for hiding in plain sight.

And this is why I said all that had to be done was already done, because these features don't belong to this game, at least for me, they were added to make the game more "fun", probably for those new to the series who don't care about what happened so far but are just after some hours of fun.

ze_topazio
03-14-2016, 03:10 PM
A child can do something as profound, complex and different as MGS2, a game that was made up as it went along and added in a bunch of pretentious crap to disguise its poor gameplay, lame mission design and worse dialogue. Metal Gear Solid was never meant to be this post-modernist saga. It was a bunch of stealth games that unexpectedly became popular and which Kojima somehow improvised into a saga that could never truly satisfyingly sustain its big "themes" which by the way are mostly crap from bad science fiction. It was the LOST of games and Kojima knew that, which is why he kept insulting and abusing his fans for actually taking his stuff seriously.

The only actually great game in that series was Snake Eater where you actually have cool gameplay (the camo-in-the-jungle, the amazing boss-fights with The End and The Fury), a compelling story and where the over-the-top spy fiction James Bond spoof in the Cold War actually worked wonderfully. But the rest of the series is just awful and, in the case of MGS-2, it's practically unplayable today to casual gamers.



Which hipsters are these, if you mind telling me? And when has stuff like pointing out slavery in the Caribbean pirate era been trendy. It is so trendy that Sid Meier's Pirates,a game loved by Americans for teaching them geography and which is actually fairly well researched did not mention it once in the entire games. It isn't mentioned of course in Pirates of the Caribbean either.

You are right that AC is still a fairly "safe" game and it's only bold in comparison to the rest of the gaming industry. My argument is that games are an inherently backward medium, most titles are overpraised and in the course of time when the actual golden age of the medium comes, AC would probably be regarded as dated and silly. But until that time, AC is still pretty impressive as games go.

I disagree with you, MGS2 to me is still very much playable, and so is MGS1 and MG and MG2, but then I'm into old school games, MGS3 is actually my personal favorite though, and The End boss battle is one of the greatest achievements in gaming history.

To begin with I appreciate videogames for what they are, videogames, I don't try to compare them to movies, books, etc..., I prefer Vanquish with its amazing fluid gameplay more than The Walking Dead, a good story in a good game is a nice extra, a bad story in a good game makes no difference, but no good story can save a bad game for me, I'm not saying The Walking Dead is bad game but it is certainly not my kind of game, I appreciate and praise the actual game part of a videogame, because that is what is unique to this media, I can praise a story, but you have stories in movies, books, plays, comics, etc..., gameplay is exclusive to games.

I open an exception for AC1, despite the dialogues being corny, I appreciate the philosophical discussions about their society, how they try to rationalize and understand why things are the way they are, instead of just pointing out something is bad or good, there are some exceptions in moments in the other AC games of course.

Let's say you have the Inquisition, I don't know about other places, but in Portugal, and more precisely in Lisbon, every time the Inquisition staged one of their autos da fé (acts of faith), the ceremony where the condemned would march in a procession and finally be burned alive, there was always huge crowds of civilians watching, celebrating, insulting the condemned, there would be merchants with stands selling food, drinks and other products, it was a huge festival, kinda like the gladiator fights in ancient Rome, where people enjoyed and celebrate the misery of others.

Common people occasionally accused others just out of spite, or to settle a grudge, or to get rid of someone they didn't like, etc..., falsely accused people usually would be set free after being investigated and proved innocent.

The acts of faith had the purpose of letting the condemned repent for their sins and the burning serve to clean their sins so that they could face God in a cleansed state and maybe be forgiven, there was also the purpose of sending a message to the rest of the population, "don't sin, or this is what expects you", but the population saw the acts of faith more as an entertainment than a message and religious ceremony.

In most AC games the Inquisition would be portrayed as the most evil thing ever, the Inquisitors as the most ruthless people ever, the acts of faith as super evil spectacles, the King in his palace would be shown laughing about all the oppression he can force upon his subjects, random nobles would be shown twirling their mustaches and members of the church smiling in a very evil way.

But AC games would never point the finger at the commoners and accuse them of being just as rotten as those who rule over them, they wouldn't point out how the ruling class is a reflection of the mobs and vice versa.

Also on the theme of slavery, I think AC would also shy away from showing that the African slaves were being sold to the Europeans by other Africans.

That's what I was trying to say, AC games blame the powerful of everything bad and rarely shows how the weak were just as bad, the themes AC uses are simplistic and one sided, blaming the rich and powerful for everything bad is trendy and always have been, they are just targeting what the average AC buyer wants to see, they never analyze society as a whole and try to understand why things are the way they are.

And those themes are very trendy in this day and age, especially among the more liberal inclined media, but not only.

So, yes, I think interpreting philosophical theories in form of a story is more risky than a story about how f*cked up past societies were and the still ongoing class warfare.

Articles about random trivia of the past, fact versus myth, are always very popular, especially if that trivia brings down some popular myth, so saying Washington was an incompetent general and not the American Julius Caesar, falls in that category, random trivia of the past that people appreciate.

By hipsters I meant those teens and young adults that dress in a certain way and make big claims about being original and different despite being dressed in the exact same manner as almost everybody their age.

And I think I wrote too much to the point I'm not sure if I was coherent or even made any sense, so I apologize if that's the case.

cawatrooper9
03-14-2016, 04:47 PM
Just to set the record straight, it's rumored that one of the devs mentioned that TW3 was part of the inspiration of this potential next game. Nothing more than that.

This is hardly worth bickering over, and I think a lot of people are misinterpreting the original purpose of this thread- to examine MGSV and TW3 and find value in what they could offer to AC. There's absolutely no reason for us to limit ourselves by only choosing one, and in fact, I hope they draw inspiration from elsewhere as well. Sometimes, the best ideas come from the most unlikely of sources. The Arkham combat system, which has been emulated by a huge portion of Third Person AAA titles recently, was originally based off of music and rhythm games! It's not hard, then, to see how some good ideas might come out of these games, which are already far more related to AC than Guitar Hero would seem to Batman.

VestigialLlama4
03-14-2016, 06:14 PM
It's not hard, then, to see how some good ideas might come out of these games, which are already far more related to AC than Guitar Hero would seem to Batman.

When Patrice Desilets made Assassin's Creed 1, his inspiration was acting. He modelled social stealth to the manner in which actors learn to prepare and control their body language. The thing is AC these days are keeping up with other games because they don't want to be seen as "out-of-date" so since Phantom Pain and Witcher 3 are talked about games, and Ubisoft has that envy to be "talked about", they want what those games are having. My feeling is that AC has no scarcity of good ideas and original ideas as well, it's just that the games with the original ideas, such as AC3, are the opposite of "talked about" games so there's this urge towards throwing the "good and the bad". This obsession with blank slates which has this massive inferiority complex.

Witcher 3 is actually not a terribly original game. It's not as original as Assassin's Creed which it has to be said is one of the most truly original concepts and franchises in gaming history, doing things that had never really been done before. Yes there was Parkour before AC, but was there ever a game where you could Parkour an entire city, where an open world game had buildings and every one of them, every nook, every cranny was climbable and not just background scenery...no there wasn't. That is actually still remarkably original and something that Rockstar games hasn't delivered with their huge maps but most of the houses and buildings are just scenery. Okay you can land your helicopter anywhere that is true, but that's not quite the same thing. In terms of story, no game, and I mean not one of them, ever tackled historical subjects in the way Assassin's Creed did. It also tackled history in a way that only video games can. I mean actually recreating the past with period research and the best guesses. Likewise, okay you had ship combat somewhat before, you had Sid Meier's Pirates but the kind of responsive, in-your-face naval gameplay that you have in AC3 and Black Flag was never really seen before.

It's actually shocking that you have fans and marketing people insisting that Ubisoft compromise on all its original qualities just to keep up with trends, and it's disappointing that Ubisoft are doing that, but then with the shareholders and the falling stocks, they can't be blamed.


So, yes, I think interpreting philosophical theories in form of a story is more risky than a story about how f*cked up past societies were and the still ongoing class warfare.

I think you are overselling how "liberal" the series is. Fundamentally AC is adventure games, it's Alexandre Dumas/Walter Scott for the digital age, and in the context of games as a medium it's pretty bold and original. But yes in a larger cultural sense it's probably not. You are also greatly misrepresentating how "popular" these ideas you claim are. They are common on internet chatrooms as you percieve it, but globablly it's not because what really counts ultimately is the audio-visual medium.

"Philosophical ideas" being tackled in games like MGS or for that matter Bioshock, an overpraised title that told the world that Ayn Rand's ideas would never work (Yes we really needed a humourless FPS with Art-Deco skins to tell us that!) are usually pseudo-philosophy that is compromised by the setting they use. At the end of the day, MGS is just a power fantasy about macho soldiers being abused by the system and their country. It's what people call the "male weepie" and it amounts to no more than Dirty Harry throwing his badge away or Rambo crying about those POWs still trapped in Vietnam (which by the way are not trapped there). If Metal Gear Solid wanted to be truly philosophical, it should show Snake and Big Boss actually committing war crimes and dealing with them, but it can't do that and go there because those two are still "good guys".

Spec Ops The Line, a flawed game is actually bolder than MGS in that respect.

cawatrooper9
03-14-2016, 07:36 PM
When Patrice Desilets made Assassin's Creed 1, his inspiration was acting. He modelled social stealth to the manner in which actors learn to prepare and control their body language. The thing is AC these days are keeping up with other games because they don't want to be seen as "out-of-date" so since Phantom Pain and Witcher 3 are talked about games, and Ubisoft has that envy to be "talked about", they want what those games are having. My feeling is that AC has no scarcity of good ideas and original ideas as well, it's just that the games with the original ideas, such as AC3, are the opposite of "talked about" games so there's this urge towards throwing the "good and the bad". This obsession with blank slates which has this massive inferiority complex.

Witcher 3 is actually not a terribly original game. It's not as original as Assassin's Creed which it has to be said is one of the most truly original concepts and franchises in gaming history, doing things that had never really been done before. Yes there was Parkour before AC, but was there ever a game where you could Parkour an entire city, where an open world game had buildings and every one of them, every nook, every cranny was climbable and not just background scenery...no there wasn't. That is actually still remarkably original and something that Rockstar games hasn't delivered with their huge maps but most of the houses and buildings are just scenery. Okay you can land your helicopter anywhere that is true, but that's not quite the same thing. In terms of story, no game, and I mean not one of them, ever tackled historical subjects in the way Assassin's Creed did. It also tackled history in a way that only video games can. I mean actually recreating the past with period research and the best guesses. Likewise, okay you had ship combat somewhat before, you had Sid Meier's Pirates but the kind of responsive, in-your-face naval gameplay that you have in AC3 and Black Flag was never really seen before.

It's actually shocking that you have fans and marketing people insisting that Ubisoft compromise on all its original qualities just to keep up with trends, and it's disappointing that Ubisoft are doing that, but then with the shareholders and the falling stocks, they can't be blamed.


Again, the Witcher comment that was made is nothing more than a rumor as far as we know- but even then, I'd argue that this isn't the world-ending abandonment of creativity that you suggest.

Take Dragon Age: Inquisition, for example. While in development for Dragon Age 3, Bioware's team reported that Skyrim was a major influence on the game. The final product of DA:I was kind of divisive among fans (mainly due to a rather weak story, especially by Bioware standards), but the connections to Skyrim were tenuous at best. They're both fantasy RPGs, but they're also very different RPGs. I think the closest DA:I came to Skyrim is that it featured a much larger and more open world than DA:Origins or Dragon Age 2. However, that was one of the elements of the games that ended up getting a ton of positive response.

In fact, it didn't really feel like Skyrim to me at all. TES games actually feature relatively small maps, then use weird smoke and mirror tricks to make their environments seem larger than they really are. Inquisition was just big. It wasn't perfect (many maps felt really empty) but considering how these large environments were connected via a more traditional Dragon Age world map, I think it's fair to say that the game was wildly unique in at least that one aspect.

So, I'll reserve my pessimism for the Witcher comment for now.

Jessigirl2013
03-14-2016, 07:58 PM
I also love the game but we have to be honest enough to admit that if every new game brings very little new to the table and that the very little is not good enough, then changes are a must.

But clearly, by this I'm not asking for magic spells, dragons or zombies.
Yeah the MD story needs to get a move on, BIG TIME!
And likewise I don't want S and R to be battling the undead or first civ dragons.:rolleyes:


Damn! One of those threads again. "I want AC to be more like Shadow of Mordor or GTA.", "I want to be able to make decisions like in ME", "I want the stealth mechanics of the Arkham franchise", "I want the hunting mechanics to be just like RDR"...etc. :rolleyes:

Its like when Watch dogs was announced and everyone was annoyed it wasn't like GTA...:rolleyes:


There are some MGS references early on...the cardboard box in Brotherhood, Raiden in the training scenes of brotherhood. You can also compare Haytham's surprise prologue as a jokey inversion of MGS-2, where instead of advertising as Snake and then playing as Raiden for the rest of the game, it was advertised as Connor, you start by playing Haytham. But the Animus is not really about "meta"...I know that's this past-time, this games-about-games thing, but the Animus has always had clear rules and related well. The MGS references pertain to the MD lore, the whole conspiracy mythology and all that stuff.

In any case, this doesn't matter because Assassin's Creed is not a game about that. The MD is what, 5% of the entire games. Most of the game is the historical simulation. If we are to compare MGS2, well most of the game would have to be about the Tanker...with 5% dedicated to the rest. That's not what happens in MGS-2.

Fundamentally, the Animus, the MD, the Conspiracy Lore...none of that is what Assassin's Creed is actually about. It's actually about the historical simulation, it's about the architecture, building, events and people. The other stuff, that's just there to facillate the action and set the plot up, they are McGuffins but the games are about something different.

Really?
I have to disagree on this.
Didn't you have anticipation of a MD title when playing the Desmond Saga?

cawatrooper9
03-14-2016, 08:14 PM
Really?
I have to disagree on this.
Didn't you have anticipation of a MD title when playing the Desmond Saga?

I absolutely did. I thought that was what it was all building toward.


But I understand people who think the focus of the series is historical content, too.

It's almost as if there is no definitive answer to what the series is or isn't "about", and it's actually a bit of a mixture between the historical content and the MD overarching storyline... :P

RA503
03-14-2016, 08:49 PM
MGS 2 tell the player that every media lies to you, this was a more valuable lesson tham anything that comes from AC...

Sons of Liberty age better tham snake eater,that cover system was awesome and the game have a awesome passing,Snake Eater is a bit slow and the Swamp parts was terrible and the game don't have a radar ! the bad dialogue was the series charm...

cawatrooper9
03-14-2016, 08:53 PM
MGS 2 tell the player that every media lies to you, this was a more valuable lesson tham anything that comes from AC...

"Nothing is true..."
:rolleyes:

RA503
03-14-2016, 08:57 PM
"Nothing is true..."
:rolleyes:

Oh yea I forget that...

cawatrooper9
03-14-2016, 09:00 PM
Oh yea I forget that...

Haha, it's fine. I'm just bracing myself for the inevitable deluge of people telling me that I'm interpreting the maxim wrong, as they ironically fail to see how they're trying to apply an objective definition to a statement about relative subjectivity.

RA503
03-14-2016, 09:06 PM
"There are no facts, only interpretations. '' that Nietzsche, quote in the ending of Phanton Pain...

Farlander1991
03-14-2016, 10:11 PM
Yes, I absolutely agree with you on this one, I end up thinking the same when I read about games for IPAD/IPhone, many of which are just a replica of Age of Empires.

But to be honest the point I was trying to make is not really about who is copying who and whether it should be allowed or not. Incidentally, but I could be wrong here, AC2 featured "Air Assassinations" before Batman Arkham Asylum was released and in the latter you can indeed kill someone from above, and also from a ledge if my memory serves me right.

Well, there were air assassinations in AC1 as well, and in Prince of Persia: Two Thrones before that as well, and I'm sure you can find more examples of aerial takedowns and kills.


In the case of AC, my personal answer is no. Another example is the disguise skill in Unity; it was comical. And if we are to dig deeper I wonder why more experienced assassins like Altair and Ezio couldn't done what a 25-year-old Arno could do.

Well, to be fair that's a special skill and in Unity those are of the 'Animus hack' variety like in AC multiplayer.


Carriage races also bother me, destroying almost everything in front of you. I remember when the game was about hiding in plain sight, respecting the "Be unseen" philosophy

Yes, attacking a small rural town, gathering an army of mercenaries and making a full out assault on one of the Venetian districts, exploding huge towers in the middle of districts, yelling 'Vittoria Agli Assassini' in front of crowds, setting a whole harbor on fire, and partaking in battles on the streets with freaking battering rams is a very 'be unseen' philosophy :rolleyes: I jest somewhat of course, but ever since AC2 the games were fairly liberal with the 'hide in plain sight' philosophy (and Unity lampshades that with Arno sarcastically remarking it after escaping huge explosions).


suddenly it's about destroying 5000 destructibles with your carriage.

Well, even the devs admit that was a foolish achievement.

-----------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------

On the topic of MGS and AC philosophy that I see starting here. I haven't played any of the MGS games, so I can't compare, though I do want to say that the things that I've seen are some of the corniest and most ridiculous things ever (and I'm pointing that out not to say MGS doesn't have layers, just to say that MGS is not without ridiculous things :p ), I think dismissing AC as being simple or safe or not providing any lessons or learnings is oversimplification of the matter and ignoring all the subtleties the series has.

And I wrote a huge post about this but Ubi forums decided to pull some trick on me and logged me out upon submitting reply and now I am too lazy to rewrite it all :p So... uhm, yeah, so much for constructive arguments, lol. Maybe soon-ish I'll feel like writing it all up again.

ze_topazio
03-14-2016, 10:39 PM
And while I was writing my post, my PC froze, after rebooting, fortunately, the post had been saved in the memory.

Anyway...

Metal Gear is corny, it is a Japanese product after all, corniness and exaggeration is their thing, is what they like, I appreciate that, some don't, is not for everybody no doubt, and the Japanese way of speaking doesn't always translates well in to other languages, making some dialogues seem too wordy, which certainly doesn't help.

I like AC, make no mistake, I appreciate the themes it tackles and the occasional philosophical discussions, but I've seen some people praise AC as the boldest, most provocative stories ever, which is something I don't fully agree with, since for the most part the things AC criticizes are things that most of us, in the western world at least, agree with.

VestigialLlama4
03-15-2016, 05:03 AM
MGS 2 tell the player that every media lies to you,

And you needed to be told that!! Wow you must be a highly sensitive and protected child. Everybody else knows the media lies about...two minutes after they understand what "media" refers to. MGS-2 is truly banal in its "critique".


Sons of Liberty age better tham snake eater,that cover system was awesome and the game have a awesome passing,Snake Eater is a bit slow and the Swamp parts was terrible and the game don't have a radar ! the bad dialogue was the series charm...

Snake Eater does have a Radar. It has battery and it's primitive (because it's set in the 60s and simulates technology of that time). MGS-2 still has that horrible camera system from MGS-1, which makes the game really hard to move around corridors and the like. It's only with Snake Eater that you had actually independent 3D camera.

And why do you need a cover system in Snake Eater when you have Camouflage. You have more options to hide in that game then in MGS-2.


Metal Gear is corny, it is a Japanese product after all, corniness and exaggeration is their thing, is what they like, I appreciate that, some don't, is not for everybody no doubt, and the Japanese way of speaking doesn't always translates well in to other languages, making some dialogues seem too wordy, which certainly doesn't help.

I am not sure there is any way to respond to that, but "corniness" is not ubiquitous to Japanese products. Dark Souls isn't corny, nor is Ico, Shadow of the Colossus, or for that matter Nintendo's games (which being child-friendly might strike some as "inherently" corny but it's not the same thing). In any case, the corniness of MGS' philosophy and the dialogues is not really Japanese it comes from Kojima's uncritical love for American action movies and cliches, which is what the entire games rephrase and retiterate. And ultimately the games never really work properly as a critique because it's still pivoted around the idea of America as "good guys".


I like AC, make no mistake, I appreciate the themes it tackles and the occasional philosophical discussions, but I've seen some people praise AC as the boldest, most provocative stories ever.

Only in the context of games. But as I said games are 97% trash most of the time and that trash includes Metal Gear Solid and The Witcher and other overpraised titles. So calling AC boldest and provocative in video games medium is damned by faint praise. AC at it's best numbers among the 3% of non-trash.

The ultimate reason why AC falls short of being truly provocative, and this by the way is true of all games...the main reason is that the games don't allow you to be a truly bad guy. Most games flirt with moral ambiguity, even GTA but ultimately it all falls apart because games still sell you the illusion that you are better by some degree or the other from the guys you are fighting against. Assassin's Creed is hampered by the whole "good-guy/bad-guy" dynamic that is basic to games...ultimately I think if the games remove Templars as bad guys, you could have true ambiguity. One day a game needs to be made where the player can do something truly evil and heinous, and be absolutely unpunished, live a comfortable life and get away with it with no negative karma at all.


Really?
I have to disagree on this.
Didn't you have anticipation of a MD title when playing the Desmond Saga?

It's hard to get hung over a section of the game that is basically what 4% of the game. When I play the AC games I saw Desmond as a conduit to Altair, Ezio and Connor. And that is how most people play these games. It has to be because Desmond and MD has never appeared in the trailers, posters, box-art and promotion of any AC title to this date.

RA503
03-15-2016, 05:40 AM
No is not banal tell people that the media lies,people still believes in biases point of view like ''foxnews'' as example and still post fake news and memes on facebook...

and kojima and ***ushima tells us that on 2001...

is cool a game that have influence in Dawkins and Carls Sagan's Demon-Haunted World,,,

cawatrooper9
03-15-2016, 02:27 PM
I'm gonna have to go with VL4 on this one- the idea that the media lies is pretty much such a part of our cultural zeitgeist already that the game's message may as well have been candy is delicious.

Don't get me wrong, it's not as if AC hit the nail on the head either. Kojima is a genius, I just don't think this is one of his best ideas.

Farlander1991
03-15-2016, 02:47 PM
I like AC, make no mistake, I appreciate the themes it tackles and the occasional philosophical discussions


The thing is, AC tackles not just philosophical themes, it tackles a lot of personal themes which, to me at least, make it so compelling.

The themes of finding your own place in this world in AC4 and of responsibility.
The theme of obsession of ACU (and by that I mean Arno's obsession. Feel free to disagree, but Elise's death didn't prove Arno right, it proved Elise right as she lived and died by her principles, while in the final speech Arno talks of his faults, not of faults of other people).
The themes of endurance, hope, of AC3.
The themes of legacy of ACR.

And that's just broadly speaking.

Yeah, AC, like any story, has a lot of oversimplifications or making things straightforward for simpler understanding, but it also has nuance and subtleties and ultimately is very human. Heck, I would say the human aspect is one of the most important aspects of AC as all the themes, philosophical and personal and what not, essentially revolves around the question of what makes us human.

VestigialLlama4
03-15-2016, 04:14 PM
Yeah, AC, like any story, has a lot of oversimplifications or making things straightforward for simpler understanding, but it also has nuance and subtleties and ultimately is very human. Heck, I would say the human aspect is one of the most important aspects of AC as all the themes, philosophical and personal and what not, essentially revolves around the question of what makes us human.

I agree with this. To me I like AC because it's not really reducible to one context and one theme. Like Metal Gear Solid is basically about Cold War era and post-Cold War era military industrial complex...and since the game doesn't really engage with that subject in any degree of reality (which is, difficult, because a lot of files are still classified), it mostly dances around things. The GTA games keep banging the same drum about the American Dream, about the gangsters-no-worse-than-politicians-cops-businessman that we see in endless crime movies. Even Arkham games keep playing the tired Batman song-and-dance about if the hero really is as destructive as his villains or as crazy...it's to the credit of Rocksteady that Arkham Knight actually resolved that by saying, Yes to both questions! But AC tackles with a wider variety of issues.

To me fundamentally, the AC games are about freedom. The idea of what freedom really means and how that changes. In AC1, this is a time when there's not a lot of freedom since you have tyrannical armies of faith, you have kings, and in the middle you have Altair who has some power and freedom within the Brotherhood but ultimately he's a puppet to Al Mualim and then he replaces Al Mualim with the Apple of Eden, so he's never really free except in the moments between his missions. In the Ezio games, he himself searches for some kind of freedom and justice but it never lasts...there's always a new Cesare Borgia coming to knock on your door, you can't really have true equality in that time and as far as the Renaissance advances, ultimately they will never solve all the problems they have come around to learn about. AC3 is about freedom being denied and betrayed and ultimately, not even remotely in the cards for you, despite all your best efforts. Of all the AC games, Black Flag explores, I think, most fulfillingly, this idea of various competing ideas of freedom. Edward has an idea of freedom that is different from that of ex-slave Adewale, women-pirates like Anne Bonny and Mary Read, while Blackbeard basically wants freedom from his past, and Hornigold wants some idea of the future. Ultimately nobody really gets what they want.

So in that respect AC games are really bleak. Freedom is always temporary, it never lasts and then you grow old and die with either all or most of your life's work undone. Almost no Assassin truly lives up to his Creed, just like almost no revolution, ideology and religion lives up to its ideals. But on the other hand the games have this optimism that history and life is really complex and diverse, that at any time literally anything is possible. Also unlike MGS where everything is about basically two characters: Big Boss (and his clone-children) and Ocelot...AC games for the fact that it lacks a single hero, that it doesn't have one main cast is I think much more radical. So the idea is that even if Altair goes, someone else will come along...that history isn't a one person show despite the great role individuals play in it.

And it's about a wider range of personal issues about responsibility and guilt, there's also ambiguity. Like at the end of Black Flag, is Edward truly redeeming himself. At the end of AC1, when Atlair grabs the Apple and Al Mualim tells him that Altair can destroy the Apple but he won't...well what does that tell us about Altair and that story. I mean in retrospect if this was a RPG game you would have a choice where Altair can choose to destroy or preserve the Apple. You can have two conclusions and inevitably the developers will say destroying the Apple was the right choice...that's how the choice dynamic works. But in life and history, actions do have consequences and you can't walk back choices, you have to live with it, and the thing about Altair is that he dies without knowing if he made the right choice or not ("If only I had the humility to say, I've seen enough for one life.") Aspects of this are there across the games.

VestigialLlama4
03-15-2016, 04:43 PM
I'm gonna have to go with VL4 on this one- the idea that the media lies is pretty much such a part of our cultural zeitgeist already that the game's message may as well have been candy is delicious.

Don't get me wrong, it's not as if AC hit the nail on the head either. Kojima is a genius, I just don't think this is one of his best ideas.

The Metal Gear Solid ideas are basically spoofy games. They are not really being serious, they are mostly jokes...at the expense of fans, who don't get they are being made fun off. Kojima is always parodying the expectations of fans hence these ridiculous twists that practically dares his fans to take it seriously...like a dude who gets the consciousness of a dead man via a transplant of same dead guy's arms. It's silly and funny, but fans take this seriously and Kojima just piles on more and more silliness...like MGS-2 has that Mission Control guy in the middle of nowhere confessing shameful soap opera trauma. The reason I like Snake Eater best is because that particular style, this parody of Cold War spy movies works overall because that era was itself this fantasy that everyone had about each other, where the Soviets were never as tough as everyone thought they were, where a lot of complex BS was spilled to justify doing horrible and sleazy work. So in that context, Kojima's spoofy style has real meaning and weight rather than an intellectual hipster posture because spies needing complex BS excuses to do crap is in line with fans seeking story reasons to mash buttons. Also it's a game that has really fun gameplay with the camouflage and blending in the forests and background. It has a real grapple with the spy fantasy.

The joke that Metal Gear Solid is having at its fans is that people who play video games are ultimately playing the games for a small series of repetitive actions but to make those actions feel different and unique, they want complex motivations and story...so Kojima piles crazier story motivations to justify a dude going in another country and playing a game of hide and seek. That's what he's been trying to do with MGS2 and recently Phantom Pain, which has a twist that is like a parody of a twist. The point is "Obviously I wrapped this story for you in MGS-4 but you wanted more so here's a MGS game that doesn't affect the continuity/lore/stuff that is so important yo you guys...so here you go...have your own private Big Boss."

Now to me conceptual art practical jokes like this...I am not saying they are entirely without purpose, but ultimately its condescending because at its root it's an expression of contempt from the creator to its public, but contempt without self-deprecation, without implicating the creator among the people being made fun off. I have the same problem with games like Bioshock 1 and Braid. In Bioshock 1, the developers obviously identify with Andrew Ryan who created Rapture, his own private utopia, so when Ryan pulls the rug under the player with Would You Kindly, it's the developer making fun of the player but somehow letting Ryan (and themselves off the hook). BRAID is a game that is fundamentally joyless and unfunny even if it has a lot of cunning ideas and puzzles, it's about how pathetic platform games are and that kind of emotion is a tunnel. Assassin's Creed works better because Ubisoft makes fun of itself. like Abstergo is basically Ubisoft...in Black Flag they modelled their own office on the in-game office and it's a huge joke and self-deprecating laugh at itself. Abstergo harvesting memories of the dead and turning that into cheapjack products is what Ubisoft do.

ze_topazio
03-15-2016, 06:44 PM
And you needed to be told that!! Wow you must be a highly sensitive and protected child. Everybody else knows the media lies about...two minutes after they understand what "media" refers to. MGS-2 is truly banal in its "critique".



Snake Eater does have a Radar. It has battery and it's primitive (because it's set in the 60s and simulates technology of that time). MGS-2 still has that horrible camera system from MGS-1, which makes the game really hard to move around corridors and the like. It's only with Snake Eater that you had actually independent 3D camera.

And why do you need a cover system in Snake Eater when you have Camouflage. You have more options to hide in that game then in MGS-2.



I am not sure there is any way to respond to that, but "corniness" is not ubiquitous to Japanese products. Dark Souls isn't corny, nor is Ico, Shadow of the Colossus, or for that matter Nintendo's games (which being child-friendly might strike some as "inherently" corny but it's not the same thing). In any case, the corniness of MGS' philosophy and the dialogues is not really Japanese it comes from Kojima's uncritical love for American action movies and cliches, which is what the entire games rephrase and retiterate. And ultimately the games never really work properly as a critique because it's still pivoted around the idea of America as "good guys".



Only in the context of games. But as I said games are 97% trash most of the time and that trash includes Metal Gear Solid and The Witcher and other overpraised titles. So calling AC boldest and provocative in video games medium is damned by faint praise. AC at it's best numbers among the 3% of non-trash.

The ultimate reason why AC falls short of being truly provocative, and this by the way is true of all games...the main reason is that the games don't allow you to be a truly bad guy. Most games flirt with moral ambiguity, even GTA but ultimately it all falls apart because games still sell you the illusion that you are better by some degree or the other from the guys you are fighting against. Assassin's Creed is hampered by the whole "good-guy/bad-guy" dynamic that is basic to games...ultimately I think if the games remove Templars as bad guys, you could have true ambiguity. One day a game needs to be made where the player can do something truly evil and heinous, and be absolutely unpunished, live a comfortable life and get away with it with no negative karma at all.



It's hard to get hung over a section of the game that is basically what 4% of the game. When I play the AC games I saw Desmond as a conduit to Altair, Ezio and Connor. And that is how most people play these games. It has to be because Desmond and MD has never appeared in the trailers, posters, box-art and promotion of any AC title to this date.


I agree with this. To me I like AC because it's not really reducible to one context and one theme. Like Metal Gear Solid is basically about Cold War era and post-Cold War era military industrial complex...and since the game doesn't really engage with that subject in any degree of reality (which is, difficult, because a lot of files are still classified), it mostly dances around things. The GTA games keep banging the same drum about the American Dream, about the gangsters-no-worse-than-politicians-cops-businessman that we see in endless crime movies. Even Arkham games keep playing the tired Batman song-and-dance about if the hero really is as destructive as his villains or as crazy...it's to the credit of Rocksteady that Arkham Knight actually resolved that by saying, Yes to both questions! But AC tackles with a wider variety of issues.

To me fundamentally, the AC games are about freedom. The idea of what freedom really means and how that changes. In AC1, this is a time when there's not a lot of freedom since you have tyrannical armies of faith, you have kings, and in the middle you have Altair who has some power and freedom within the Brotherhood but ultimately he's a puppet to Al Mualim and then he replaces Al Mualim with the Apple of Eden, so he's never really free except in the moments between his missions. In the Ezio games, he himself searches for some kind of freedom and justice but it never lasts...there's always a new Cesare Borgia coming to knock on your door, you can't really have true equality in that time and as far as the Renaissance advances, ultimately they will never solve all the problems they have come around to learn about. AC3 is about freedom being denied and betrayed and ultimately, not even remotely in the cards for you, despite all your best efforts. Of all the AC games, Black Flag explores, I think, most fulfillingly, this idea of various competing ideas of freedom. Edward has an idea of freedom that is different from that of ex-slave Adewale, women-pirates like Anne Bonny and Mary Read, while Blackbeard basically wants freedom from his past, and Hornigold wants some idea of the future. Ultimately nobody really gets what they want.

So in that respect AC games are really bleak. Freedom is always temporary, it never lasts and then you grow old and die with either all or most of your life's work undone. Almost no Assassin truly lives up to his Creed, just like almost no revolution, ideology and religion lives up to its ideals. But on the other hand the games have this optimism that history and life is really complex and diverse, that at any time literally anything is possible. Also unlike MGS where everything is about basically two characters: Big Boss (and his clone-children) and Ocelot...AC games for the fact that it lacks a single hero, that it doesn't have one main cast is I think much more radical. So the idea is that even if Altair goes, someone else will come along...that history isn't a one person show despite the great role individuals play in it.

And it's about a wider range of personal issues about responsibility and guilt, there's also ambiguity. Like at the end of Black Flag, is Edward truly redeeming himself. At the end of AC1, when Atlair grabs the Apple and Al Mualim tells him that Altair can destroy the Apple but he won't...well what does that tell us about Altair and that story. I mean in retrospect if this was a RPG game you would have a choice where Altair can choose to destroy or preserve the Apple. You can have two conclusions and inevitably the developers will say destroying the Apple was the right choice...that's how the choice dynamic works. But in life and history, actions do have consequences and you can't walk back choices, you have to live with it, and the thing about Altair is that he dies without knowing if he made the right choice or not ("If only I had the humility to say, I've seen enough for one life.") Aspects of this are there across the games.


The Metal Gear Solid ideas are basically spoofy games. They are not really being serious, they are mostly jokes...at the expense of fans, who don't get they are being made fun off. Kojima is always parodying the expectations of fans hence these ridiculous twists that practically dares his fans to take it seriously...like a dude who gets the consciousness of a dead man via a transplant of same dead guy's arms. It's silly and funny, but fans take this seriously and Kojima just piles on more and more silliness...like MGS-2 has that Mission Control guy in the middle of nowhere confessing shameful soap opera trauma. The reason I like Snake Eater best is because that particular style, this parody of Cold War spy movies works overall because that era was itself this fantasy that everyone had about each other, where the Soviets were never as tough as everyone thought they were, where a lot of complex BS was spilled to justify doing horrible and sleazy work. So in that context, Kojima's spoofy style has real meaning and weight rather than an intellectual hipster posture because spies needing complex BS excuses to do crap is in line with fans seeking story reasons to mash buttons. Also it's a game that has really fun gameplay with the camouflage and blending in the forests and background. It has a real grapple with the spy fantasy.

The joke that Metal Gear Solid is having at its fans is that people who play video games are ultimately playing the games for a small series of repetitive actions but to make those actions feel different and unique, they want complex motivations and story...so Kojima piles crazier story motivations to justify a dude going in another country and playing a game of hide and seek. That's what he's been trying to do with MGS2 and recently Phantom Pain, which has a twist that is like a parody of a twist. The point is "Obviously I wrapped this story for you in MGS-4 but you wanted more so here's a MGS game that doesn't affect the continuity/lore/stuff that is so important yo you guys...so here you go...have your own private Big Boss."

Now to me conceptual art practical jokes like this...I am not saying they are entirely without purpose, but ultimately its condescending because at its root it's an expression of contempt from the creator to its public, but contempt without self-deprecation, without implicating the creator among the people being made fun off. I have the same problem with games like Bioshock 1 and Braid. In Bioshock 1, the developers obviously identify with Andrew Ryan who created Rapture, his own private utopia, so when Ryan pulls the rug under the player with Would You Kindly, it's the developer making fun of the player but somehow letting Ryan (and themselves off the hook). BRAID is a game that is fundamentally joyless and unfunny even if it has a lot of cunning ideas and puzzles, it's about how pathetic platform games are and that kind of emotion is a tunnel. Assassin's Creed works better because Ubisoft makes fun of itself. like Abstergo is basically Ubisoft...in Black Flag they modelled their own office on the in-game office and it's a huge joke and self-deprecating laugh at itself. Abstergo harvesting memories of the dead and turning that into cheapjack products is what Ubisoft do.

Their anime, their manga, their tv series, their movies and I could be here all day listing games.

I don't think you understand MG at all, is more than that, a lot more, in fact most of the things you and Farlander said about AC apply to MG too, but whatever man, to each his own.

If you think 97% of games are trash, either you need to play more games, including less mainstream stuff, or maybe games ain't for you, you don't seem to appreciate what games are and offer, and that's fine, different strokes for different folks.




The thing is, AC tackles not just philosophical themes, it tackles a lot of personal themes which, to me at least, make it so compelling.

The themes of finding your own place in this world in AC4 and of responsibility.
The theme of obsession of ACU (and by that I mean Arno's obsession. Feel free to disagree, but Elise's death didn't prove Arno right, it proved Elise right as she lived and died by her principles, while in the final speech Arno talks of his faults, not of faults of other people).
The themes of endurance, hope, of AC3.
The themes of legacy of ACR.

And that's just broadly speaking.

Yeah, AC, like any story, has a lot of oversimplifications or making things straightforward for simpler understanding, but it also has nuance and subtleties and ultimately is very human. Heck, I would say the human aspect is one of the most important aspects of AC as all the themes, philosophical and personal and what not, essentially revolves around the question of what makes us human.

Yes, I understand all that, maybe I simplified things a bit, but we weren't really discussing everything, only a couple themes.

VestigialLlama4
03-15-2016, 10:00 PM
Their anime, their manga, their tv series, their movies and I could be here all day listing games.

The Japanese movies I know (mostly from the classic era) are pretty sober. There isn't much that is corny in Akira Kurosawa for instance.


If you think 97% of games are trash, either you need to play more games, including less mainstream stuff, or maybe games ain't for you, you don't seem to appreciate what games are and offer, and that's fine, different strokes for different folks.

My opinion is far kinder than Jonathan Blow, developer of Braid and The Witness. It's possible to love the medium and hate the message. I like gaming itself, I like playing and interacting with the consoles and the interactivity but I don't think most games I have played are good, certainly not the narrative game genres (platform, FPS, stealth, RPG, sandbox, action-adventure). When I said 97%, I only meant these kind of games...as opposed to sports games like FIFA which are pretty fun, leave alone racing games which is usually about smashing cars than actual driving (for that there is Forza and it is to yawn) and it's pretty fun. For some reasons most debates about games don't include sports games and racing games when for a great majority of casual gamers, these are the only titles they play and form a core part of multiplayer. It's the bread and butter of Electronic Arts. In fact you can make a case that most of the games discussed in fan sites and best games ever list comprise a tiny privileged vocal minority of the gaming industry.

In terms of narrative games: I'd say Super Mario '64 is good, Zelda's big four games (Majora's Mask, Ocarina, Wind Waker, Twilight Princess) are good, Valve is good, Dark Souls, Ico and Shadow of the Colossus is good. I'd add some old SEGA favorites like the totally forgotten Quackshot which is one of my all-time favorite Action-Adventure games and the best Indiana Jones game until Uncharted (And I will say Donald Duck is more likable than Nathan Drake...;)). Psychonauts, Thief, Arkham games, San Andreas. I will even plug in the underrated James Bond game, Everything or Nothing (which actually anticipated the combat mechanics used by Uncharted games) on PS2. Ubisoft of course have made a lot of games I liked: Donald Duck Goin' Quackers (yes I like this game, but I am a big Carl Barks fan), Beyond Good and Evil, Rayman, Sands of Time, Prince of Persia 2008, the AC games.

So 3% actually includes something like 30 titles. That's not so bad. Games that I used to like but don't anymore, include Max Payne though I kind of love the bad guys Vinnie Gognitti and especially Vladmir Lem, a much better Russian gangster than what we got in GTA4. I liked the first two Call of Duty games set in WW2, those games had you toggle between American,English and Soviet campaigns and to me a multi-character campaign and storyline is something I like a lot of and want to see.

Jessigirl2013
03-16-2016, 10:27 PM
I absolutely did. I thought that was what it was all building toward.


But I understand people who think the focus of the series is historical content, too.

It's almost as if there is no definitive answer to what the series is or isn't "about", and it's actually a bit of a mixture between the historical content and the MD overarching storyline... :P

The way I see it AC would not be where it is without MD. If you take out all the MD references and input out then the whole story crumbles...

"Nothing is true..."
:rolleyes:

:cool: