PDA

View Full Version : Assassin's Creed: Ezio Collection PS4/Xbox One



Pages : 1 [2]

joelsantos24
09-15-2016, 05:37 PM
It's a nice artwork indeed,but i think that this is modern Rome.That huge monument in the bottom left area didn't exist during the Brotherhood years(i think).
I'm assuming you're talking of the big monument/building with the winged goddess Victoria statues on chariots, on the rooftops? That's the Altare della Patria, built to honour the first king of the unified Italy, Victor Emmanuel II. But you're right, it was inaugurated in 1911, so it's a picture of a more contemporary Rome, indeed. ;)

DarkApprent2012
09-15-2016, 06:44 PM
That picture looks amazing though!

joelsantos24
09-15-2016, 08:02 PM
That picture looks amazing though!
It does, definitely! :cool:

DarkApprent2012
09-15-2016, 09:49 PM
Oh yeah! When is Ubisoft going to release new information? What do you guys say?

ERICATHERINE
09-15-2016, 10:57 PM
I hope that when saying that all the dlc are included, it include the Auditore crypt, in the villa. ^-^

pacmanate
09-16-2016, 12:53 AM
Oh yeah! When is Ubisoft going to release new information? What do you guys say?

October

Namikaze_17
09-16-2016, 12:53 AM
The cover is pretty dope.

Not really interested in buying, though.

EDIT: Kinda wish they made a different pose for Ezio other than his AC2 one; but I understand since that's his most iconic (arguable, by some) game.

SixKeys
09-16-2016, 01:27 AM
It's a nice artwork indeed,but i think that this is modern Rome.That huge monument in the bottom left area didn't exist during the Brotherhood years(i think).

You mean with the angel and chariot? You could be right. I don't remember seeing a statue like that in ACB. OTOH it's not a big deal because we do visit modern day Rome in the Ezio trilogy, as Desmond. So it's not a mistake, it's the Animus, as they say. ;)

Moultonborough
09-16-2016, 02:47 AM
Ubisoft couldn't help themselves I guess. It's like an addiction they gotta have their yearly AC fix. Suppose that goes for some of us as well. Anyway, it does seem like a natural thing for Ubisoft to do and really was only a matter of time before it happened. It would be nice to see graphics updates I don't see (or hope) Ubisoft wasting time on it when they should be focusing on next years game.

Master-Lasse
09-16-2016, 01:37 PM
So what the hell is happening here? Shall I NOT buy this Ezio Collection and rather buy the games individually on the Xbox 360 and have them backwards compatible? Is this enhanced version worse outside of lacking multiplayer?

Fauux01
09-16-2016, 02:24 PM
So what the hell is happening here? Shall I NOT buy this Ezio Collection and rather buy the games individually on the Xbox 360 and have them backwards compatible? Is this enhanced version worse outside of lacking multiplayer?

Oh no, buy the collection. It's better than the last-gen version and it even includes the Copernicus DLCs if you missed out on them on PS3. We're mostly complaining about the lack of improvements compared to other remasters.

DynaRider
09-16-2016, 05:17 PM
I have, and have played all of the Creed games to date and have spent time standing in a cold, midnight line at Game Stop to grab a latest releases. I have both a PS3 and PS4 console in addition to my computer so I can play any of the games when the mood strikes. I checked out the game trailer and writeup for the Ezio Collection and I'm not sure I will want to buy it. It appears that it will just be a compilation of Ezio versions with enhanced graphics and game play but if I understand correctly it will just be the same games I have sitting on a shelf but mashed up into one release. Any ideas or thoughts about this release? Is it going to have anything new to offer? Will it be worth the price of admission or would I be just as well off playing one of the Ezio games I already have?

Fauux01
09-16-2016, 06:04 PM
If you have the games on a decent PC, it's not worth picking up since PC has the best version so far.

DarkApprent2012
09-16-2016, 06:56 PM
Everyone has the right to choose to buy or not to buy, i mean i think that some of it is looking great and awesome while some things did look better in the older versions but for me and some others it boils down to certain things being added that wasn't there before and certain glitches being fixed.

Reaper53800
09-16-2016, 07:49 PM
The Collector's Edition is so disappointing, the bust is ugly in my opinion. And why in November so close to WD2 and other AAA games?.

Does anyone know if the collectors edition is available in the U.S because I cant find it anywhere online....

I-Like-Pie45
09-17-2016, 01:02 AM
Does anyone know if the collectors edition is available in the U.S because I cant find it anywhere online....

The Collector's Edition is a Uplay Shop exclusive, have you checked that yet?

Markaccus
09-17-2016, 11:12 AM
My posts keep vanishing?

Ok I'll try again on desktop version....

Why am I just finding out about this now?
I Know many people have misgivings about this not having AC1 for the sake of making sense of the story. I don't personally think it matters. New people to AC can always go and web search altair and ac1s story. We may not agree on our favorite characters, but i do think most AC veterans would accept that Ezio is the ideal entry-level protag, and the games are the most addictive to the point of obsession. Good move by Ubi imo. Also, I have never played the Da vinci disappearance orCopernicus, so I will deffo be buying this collection. Sorry if this repeats other peoples previous comments. There is A LOT to read through :-D

pacmanate
09-17-2016, 01:15 PM
So what the hell is happening here? Shall I NOT buy this Ezio Collection and rather buy the games individually on the Xbox 360 and have them backwards compatible? Is this enhanced version worse outside of lacking multiplayer?

Depends, if you care about DLC then get the Enhanced edition. Otherwise the 360 versions are fine. Graphically there is minimal difference.

uggabugg
09-17-2016, 11:06 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_JNJ1rSreV0

there is some differences. assassins creed 2 looks a lot better imo


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QXkydrPbBps

Sushiglutton
09-17-2016, 11:26 PM
there is some differences. assassins creed 2 looks a lot better imo

Yeah it def looks better. It's still pretty minor upgrade though imo. And from what I understand no gameplay tweaks at all? I dunno, I wish they just went all in on AC2 instead. Given what a single modder is able to achieve in some games I think pros should be able to do more than this.

Locopells
09-17-2016, 11:53 PM
I've been staying outta this, as it doesn't really affect me, but you do raise an interesting point there...

For example:

http://kotaku.com/gorgeous-new-gta-v-mod-is-the-work-of-one-person-1786755380?utm_campaign=Socialflow_Kotaku_Twitter&utm_source=Kotaku_Twitter&utm_medium=Socialflow


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k10RdQU6Jxo



http://i.imgur.com/8kKFfrZ.jpg (https://support.ubi.com)
Thanks to strigoi1958 for the sig!

Fauux01
09-18-2016, 03:46 AM
Thanks for the comparison videos, uggabugg. Seeing them side by side, I've got to disagree with your opinion of AC2. The new lighting system kind of ruined the atmosphere of the game; its removes the artistic aesthetic of the scenery for something that's too saturated and just makes the game's dated graphics all too apparent, coupled with the inconsistent texture enhancements on some faces that stands out far more than I'd like it to. I rather have everyone share the same level of textures than one PS4-looking character awkwardly stepping into a PS2 game.

Tbh, I would have preferred if the enhancement was minimal like Brotherhood's. While it leaves a lot to be desired, they didn't compromise TOO MUCH on the original aesthetic design and it even made some scenes look better, like the one where Ezio and whatshisface was on the rooftop.

Ureh
09-18-2016, 04:13 AM
In the ACB comparison,

at 0:12 and 1:54
It looks like Ezio is wearing his vanilla spaulder in that scene. One of the early missions required the purchase of the Roman Pauldron so by the time Ezio is on the rooftop with Machiavelli in that late scene, he's usually wearing something else (usually seusenhofer). Maybe they included an actual button to remove any armor/weapon at anytime.

SixKeys
09-18-2016, 09:24 AM
Thanks for the comparison videos, uggabugg. Seeing them side by side, I've got to disagree with your opinion of AC2. The new lighting system kind of ruined the atmosphere of the game; its removes the artistic aesthetic of the scenery for something that's too saturated and just makes the game's dated graphics all too apparent, coupled with the inconsistent texture enhancements on some faces that stands out far more than I'd like it to. I rather have everyone share the same level of textures than one PS4-looking character awkwardly stepping into a PS2 game.

Tbh, I would have preferred if the enhancement was minimal like Brotherhood's. While it leaves a lot to be desired, they didn't compromise TOO MUCH on the original aesthetic design and it even made some scenes look better, like the one where Ezio and whatshisface was on the rooftop.

^ This.

PC still looks better to me. I hate how often an "enhanced" version of anything basically means oversaturating the colors. Rome looks too bright in the Collection shots. AC2 has some improved textures on metal and skin, but that's pretty much it.

DarkApprent2012
09-18-2016, 02:11 PM
I guess what it comes down to if it's going to be a hit or not or that people would want to buy it comes down to is appeal, buying it for being a fans sake, wanting to see what it looks like and to play the DLC that the fans never played before. For me and a few others there are some other things and reasons for us wanting to buy it.

ModernWaffle
09-18-2016, 02:58 PM
Yeah it def looks better. It's still pretty minor upgrade though imo. And from what I understand no gameplay tweaks at all? I dunno, I wish they just went all in on AC2 instead. Given what a single modder is able to achieve in some games I think pros should be able to do more than this.

Kind of embarrassing on Ubisoft's part if you ask me as for what it is, the collection is definitely not worth $60. Really wish they would drop all this side-content - remasters, countless spin-off games, the movie etc. and just focus on making the next main entry a critically acclaimed game. Instead of making one masterpiece every year that would help the franchise survive longer, they instead make two or three mediocre products to fill its place :/

Whilst it's far from my intention to crash on the enjoyment of fans who are looking forward to the other stuff, it just feels wrong to expand the franchise through several different side projects whilst the main (game) series is generally declining in both critical reception and sales.

uggabugg
09-18-2016, 03:18 PM
i dont know about this collection to be honest, they have upscaled the face textures for sure. but i tend to agree that the hole thing reek of lazy port syndrome. i would have prefered a proper remake, and would have happily paid full price for it,

SixKeys
09-18-2016, 05:13 PM
Kind of embarrassing on Ubisoft's part if you ask me as for what it is, the collection is definitely not worth $60. Really wish they would drop all this side-content - remasters, countless spin-off games, the movie etc. and just focus on making the next main entry a critically acclaimed game. Instead of making one masterpiece every year that would help the franchise survive longer, they instead make two or three mediocre products to fill its place :/

Whilst it's far from my intention to crash on the enjoyment of fans who are looking forward to the other stuff, it just feels wrong to expand the franchise through several different side projects whilst the main (game) series is generally declining in both critical reception and sales.

You talk as if creating a masterpiece is easy. Yes, Ubi need to stop cutting corners and focus on quality, but it's not like the devs want to make sub-par games. Every game developer wants to make the best game they possibly can with the resources they have. Even a long development cycle isn't a guarantee for a masterpiece, there are so many factors at play. The teams working on remasters are not the same people working on the next main title, let alone the people working on the movie or other transmedia.

pacmanate
09-18-2016, 05:35 PM
Gonna be honest, the AC2 PC version looked better that the enhanced to me. Sure the enhanced has a slight increase in graphics but its so minimal. No wonder its called Enhanced and not Remastered.


This reminds me of the PS3 vs 360 thing that use to go on. Where the 360 would have very slight graphical and framerate advantages. This is what this feels like.

ModernWaffle
09-18-2016, 07:02 PM
You talk as if creating a masterpiece is easy. Yes, Ubi need to stop cutting corners and focus on quality, but it's not like the devs want to make sub-par games. Every game developer wants to make the best game they possibly can with the resources they have. Even a long development cycle isn't a guarantee for a masterpiece, there are so many factors at play. The teams working on remasters are not the same people working on the next main title, let alone the people working on the movie or other transmedia.

Ok, maybe not masterpiece - bad wording on my behalf :P - but what I meant was that I'd prefer having one product that is more refined than having two or three at a lower standard than the former. For clarity I know it's not easy to make a good game - when I say 'more refined' I'm only including things that are to me, almost objectively bad such as glitches remaining or having the MD storylines of Unity/Rogue lead to nowhere etc. rather than aspects like specific story-writing, decided additions to game-play etc. which are subjective and hence much harder to handle.

Not placing this issue on the devs, who I'm sure put a respectable and genuine effort into making the games as good as they are - I'm complaining about those who make the big decisions on how the franchise is handled. For example, whoever finalised the decision to release Unity as it was even as they were aware that the devs needed more time to fix its technical problems or to the person/s that thought having: two Chronicle games, AC Identity, the Ezio Collection, the movie and then Bloodsail in early 2017 all in the period before the next main entry arrives was a good idea. Individually, I have no problem with any of these entries but together they show me that somewhere in Ubi someone is not taking the whole 'we need to take a proper year break from the AC franchise to rethink we're headed' seriously.

I appreciate that the teams working for the main series, remaster, movie etc. are mostly independent from each other but even though dropping 'X project' doesn't mean having 'X funds/resources' directly transferred to the main series, I think collectively having several projects instead of one/two means something is inevitably taken away from the main series unless Ubi manages everything efficiently which I don't believe they are currently doing.

Realise the long rant might say otherwise, but don't worry I still love the AC franchise, just have my weird way of expressing it ;)

DarkApprent2012
09-18-2016, 10:04 PM
Everyone here loves the franchise. I myself am just waiting for certain information to come before really deciding to buy it.

Alex_Rogan21
09-20-2016, 03:12 PM
Hi.I saw the trailer for this collection yesterday and I want to tell my suggestions for this "enhanced" versions of Ezio's trilogy (some of them already been suggested).

For AC2:
Adding the memory replay function (why you didn't included this before Ubisoft?)
Maybe making mission specific outfits,selectable in the outfits menu? (For Brotherhood and Revelations aswell)

For ACB:
Add AC2 outfit available as an unlockable outfit (maybe for owning AC2 on uplay?) without any armor though (except the default appearance of the second blade vambrace or atleast make it appear as a glove like it was supposed to) and no beard
A new way to unlock the Medici and Venetian Cape (cause Project Legacy is dead)

For ACR:
Fixing the damned bug in which Altair appears as the 63 years old version from the third memory of him (for the first 2 only obiviously)
Adding Ezio's outfit from Brotherhood (Plz no armor looks more badass without it)

Again these are my suggestions,but i doubt Ubisoft would care.

P.S If any grammar problems are present,I'm sorry

RexSeraphim
09-20-2016, 03:57 PM
Is the collector's case version available in North America?

cawatrooper9
09-20-2016, 07:20 PM
Hi.I saw the trailer for this collection yesterday and I want to tell my suggestions for this "enhanced" versions of Ezio's trilogy (some of them already been suggested).

For ACB:
Add AC2 outfit available as an unlockable outfit (maybe for owning AC2 on uplay?)

Why involve Uplay? It's a collection, you can pretty safely assume they own AC2 as well.

DarkApprent2012
09-20-2016, 09:09 PM
I think he meant this: In certain games you get content that you would otherwise need to unlock in the game but because you own the previous game in the series that content gets unlocked due to you owning the previous game. You get content that might otherwise be unable to get.

So that is what he meant by reward. Like if you would log into uplay or your UbiSoft account on Brotherhood you would get the ACII outfit/skin just because you own it and if you would play Revelations you would unlock both the ACII and Brotherhood outfits/skins.

ERICATHERINE
09-21-2016, 02:14 AM
Hi.I saw the trailer for this collection yesterday and I want to tell my suggestions for this "enhanced" versions of Ezio's trilogy (some of them already been suggested).

For AC2:
Adding the memory replay function (why you didn't included this before Ubisoft?)
Maybe making mission specific outfits,selectable in the outfits menu? (For Brotherhood and Revelations aswell)

For ACB:
Add AC2 outfit available as an unlockable outfit (maybe for owning AC2 on uplay?) without any armor though (except the default appearance of the second blade vambrace or atleast make it appear as a glove like it was supposed to) and no beard
A new way to unlock the Medici and Venetian Cape (cause Project Legacy is dead)

For ACR:
Fixing the damned bug in which Altair appears as the 63 years old version from the third memory of him (for the first 2 only obiviously)
Adding Ezio's outfit from Brotherhood (Plz no armor looks more badass without it)

Again these are my suggestions,but i doubt Ubisoft would care.

P.S If any grammar problems are present,I'm sorry

I don't know if you just forgot to mention it, but I would like to add that it would be great if they include ac ascendance or if it's already supposed to be the case, to tell us, because that way, Ezio's story would be even more complete, in this collection.

Also, please ubisoft, fix that bug. I just can't understand why you never fixed it in the original ac b. I mean, come on, it's the only chance we have to listen to a Desmond - Lucy conversation, in the last part of the game before the ending. Even the cutscene is bugged.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GOY70NVMkRM

DarkApprent2012
09-21-2016, 09:50 AM
I found what the conversation is all about after Desmond wakes up after the truth segment. I found it on the Assassin's Creed Wiki so if you want to read what it is on there just search for 21st century conversations. You can choose if you want, to wait until they fix the glitch and watch the conversation or read it on the wiki. But like you i also hope they fix that glitch and that they add memory replay to ACII.

SixKeys
09-21-2016, 10:45 AM
Does the glitch happen every time to all people who finish the glyphs before killing Cesare? I'm asking since I never encountered it on PC, but I don't remember in which order I did the story. Now I'm replaying ACB on a different platform (PS3) and I don't want to run into it, but would hate to miss the cut scene. :/ So does anyone know if it's rare and the people who get it are just unlucky or does it always happen?

DarkApprent2012
09-21-2016, 11:04 AM
Most people would seem to experience it. But do the truth before killing Cesare and see because maybe they patched it a few years back.

SixKeys
09-21-2016, 12:41 PM
Most people would seem to experience it. But do the truth before killing Cesare and see because maybe they patched it a few years back.

From what I gather, it's never been patched.

DarkApprent2012
09-21-2016, 12:51 PM
Hm then i don't know. It all depends if you want to gamble on it being patched or try to see if the glitch will happen.

Alex_Rogan21
09-21-2016, 02:12 PM
I think he meant this: In certain games you get content that you would otherwise need to unlock in the game but because you own the previous game in the series that content gets unlocked due to you owning the previous game. You get content that might otherwise be unable to get.

So that is what he meant by reward. Like if you would log into uplay or your UbiSoft account on Brotherhood you would get the ACII outfit/skin just because you own it and if you would play Revelations you would unlock both the ACII and Brotherhood outfits/skins.


Thank you for explaining it much better than me.I'm really terrible at explaining things lol

DarkApprent2012
09-21-2016, 02:33 PM
It's ok and no problem at all dude. By the way what you suggested in your first post here was really good ideas.

Locopells
09-21-2016, 04:56 PM
I've never done the Truth after the story, so can't comment, but it was still doing this around 2/3 years ago, so I doubt it's changed.

For me, I always get the dialogue, even if Des is glitched in the chair...



http://i.imgur.com/8kKFfrZ.jpg (https://support.ubi.com)
Thanks to strigoi1958 for the sig!

DarkApprent2012
09-21-2016, 05:28 PM
Well i did the truth after finishing the game so i did not get the glitch for obvious reasons but depending on the information we get on this collection that will be the deciding factor if i will buy it or not.

ERICATHERINE
09-21-2016, 11:57 PM
From what I gather, it's never been patched.

Exactly. It still wasn't patched when I did my last ac serie, which I made this year. :-\


I found what the conversation is all about after Desmond wakes up after the truth segment. I found it on the Assassin's Creed Wiki so if you want to read what it is on there just search for 21st century conversations. You can choose if you want, to wait until they fix the glitch and watch the conversation or read it on the wiki. But like you i also hope they fix that glitch and that they add memory replay to ACII.

Thanks, but I think I'll wait and see if it's patched in the remake. ^-^

It better be, ubi...

I just thinked of something about the Ezio collection.

What if the 3 games were fusioned together and with Ezio's story in the good order.

Some years ago, I got the splinter cell trilogy on 1 disc. So, the 3 first main games are all on the same disc, but to play one of those games you first need to choose which one you want to play, each time you use the disc, and go to the main menu of that original main game.

My idea is the following. What if, instead of those 3 main ac games which we would select which one we want to play each time we play the collection, we could have the 3 story as 1 massive story.

For exemple,I just finnished ac 2 with Desmond fleeing the base. Normaly, if it would be like my splinter cell trilogy, we would have to select the next game to start it. But instead of seeing the credits, we see a more or les long md cutscene which directly make a transition from ac 2 to ac b, before playing ac b and we would get the same thing with ac re.

Of course for the people wanting to directly play ac b or ac re, there could be an option in the menu. Like if we want to choose between playing a precise game instead of the entire trilogy. If we would choose a precise game, if we would choose ac 2 or ac re, we would get the md cutscene at the end of the game anyway.

As for Ezio's story in the good order, as some of you may know, the Chrystina missions were originally planed to be in ac ii. Well since ac ii and b would come together, why not put those missions in ac ii Itself.

What do you think about it? ^-^

ShadoeKat
09-22-2016, 03:39 AM
Hi, can anyone tell me if you have been able to pre-order the collectors edition in North America? A game lead who worked on it, from support said it would be exclusive to the Uplay Store, but haven't seen anything. Just looking to find out if I'm the only one having this issue. Thanks.

DarkApprent2012
09-22-2016, 11:22 AM
Hm... you got a very good point and idea there. Very nice indeed.

ERICATHERINE
09-22-2016, 12:24 PM
Hm... you got a very good point and idea there. Very nice indeed.

Thanks. After all, those 3 game all have Desmond in, so why not. ^-^

ShoryukenMan
09-22-2016, 11:28 PM
I can't seem to find a way to pre order the NA version. Looks like UK only.

D.I.D.
09-22-2016, 11:43 PM
Exactly. It still wasn't patched when I did my last ac serie, which I made this year. :-\



Thanks, but I think I'll wait and see if it's patched in the remake. ^-^

It better be, ubi...

I just thinked of something about the Ezio collection.

What if the 3 games were fusioned together and with Ezio's story in the good order.

Some years ago, I got the splinter cell trilogy on 1 disc. So, the 3 first main games are all on the same disc, but to play one of those games you first need to choose which one you want to play, each time you use the disc, and go to the main menu of that original main game.

My idea is the following. What if, instead of those 3 main ac games which we would select which one we want to play each time we play the collection, we could have the 3 story as 1 massive story.

For exemple,I just finnished ac 2 with Desmond fleeing the base. Normaly, if it would be like my splinter cell trilogy, we would have to select the next game to start it. But instead of seeing the credits, we see a more or les long md cutscene which directly make a transition from ac 2 to ac b, before playing ac b and we would get the same thing with ac re.

Of course for the people wanting to directly play ac b or ac re, there could be an option in the menu. Like if we want to choose between playing a precise game instead of the entire trilogy. If we would choose a precise game, if we would choose ac 2 or ac re, we would get the md cutscene at the end of the game anyway.

As for Ezio's story in the good order, as some of you may know, the Chrystina missions were originally planed to be in ac ii. Well since ac ii and b would come together, why not put those missions in ac ii Itself.

What do you think about it? ^-^

Nice idea. I really like the Cristina Memories as an element of ACB, because they add a little tragedy to Ezio's proper adult chapter, as a bitter reminiscence. They added a layer to the idea of Ezio growing as a person, and that he was haunted by these regrets. They gave the memories a magical soft-focus, a representation of his idealism of Cristina.

If you transplant those to the AC2 story, I think they'd feel really disjointed in terms of style and the story they tell. You'd need to fit some of them in before his older brother exits the story, and others would be appearing at very strange moments. I think it would be really baffling to new players in particular to have these things happen but not to see Ezio pursue them.

I like the idea of flowing the ends and beginnings of the games together though!

ERICATHERINE
09-23-2016, 02:54 AM
Nice idea. I really like the Cristina Memories as an element of ACB, because they add a little tragedy to Ezio's proper adult chapter, as a bitter reminiscence. They added a layer to the idea of Ezio growing as a person, and that he was haunted by these regrets. They gave the memories a magical soft-focus, a representation of his idealism of Cristina.

If you transplant those to the AC2 story, I think they'd feel really disjointed in terms of style and the story they tell. You'd need to fit some of them in before his older brother exits the story, and others would be appearing at very strange moments. I think it would be really baffling to new players in particular to have these things happen but not to see Ezio pursue them.

I like the idea of flowing the ends and beginnings of the games together though!

Thanks. ^-^

AlltaiRMentoR
09-23-2016, 04:02 AM
Hi brothers! anyone know if assassin's creed ezio collection will have support for various language subtitle? i want know to if assassin's creed 2 will come pt-br subtitle and the game go works with 30fps or more?

Thank you

TJ_Wylde
09-23-2016, 05:58 AM
Hmm idk about the NA. But it's not UK only. I live in the Netherlands and i pre-purchased the collectors edition here.

Edit. Did also just read an article that mentioned that you could pre-purchase the collector's edition for 79.99 dollars in NA. So it should be there. Maybe just search all collector's editions in the uplay store (website not launcher) or just on the Ezio name and sort by price high -> low.

DarkApprent2012
09-23-2016, 09:44 PM
It's too bad that Ubisoft hasn't given out or revealed new information about the collection yet even though the released the trailer a few days ago. I hope that we can get some answers soon because all we are doing now is speculating about what they have done to the games and what content that is in there, like for instance do we know if they have added:

Memory replay for ACII
The Bloodline weapons in ACII

The Project Legacy Capes in Brotherhood

No right. If there are any others i have missed to mention please let me know.

Alex_Rogan21
09-24-2016, 10:12 PM
Honestly this is impresive.See UbiSoft this outfit is a must have for Brotherhood,just DOOOO IT

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VaT6UV-yC9k

ajl2017
09-25-2016, 10:39 AM
I am happy with the collection. I saw some graphical comparisons and it looks different. I did not want it to look too different because it won't feel like the original games then. My expectations were improved graphics with DLC and the movies at a fair price and that's exactly what they did. Ac2 looks dated when I play it and all I wanted was for them to remaster it to the graphical level of brotherhood and just touch up brotherhood and revelations which they have done. to this day revelations looks stunning. I am excited to replay these games after not playing them for maybe a year or so with improved graphics. If there was a change i wanted to gameplay it would just be adding the faster fight system to ac2 so that it feels consistent throughout but even that is small. I think everyone has kept their expectations way too high, this is not like the master chief collection where the games were Xbox games, these were only last generation and still look great. I don't want them rebuilding the games because it will just be weird to play. Just improve the graphics, make the gameplay smoother and remove any bugs and its fine. This video explains it pretty well;


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6jXPnqLbpBg

Fauux01
09-25-2016, 04:52 PM
I am happy with the collection. I saw some graphical comparisons and it looks different. I did not want it to look too different because it won't feel like the original games then. My expectations were improved graphics with DLC and the movies at a fair price and that's exactly what they did. Ac2 looks dated when I play it and all I wanted was for them to remaster it to the graphical level of brotherhood and just touch up brotherhood and revelations which they have done. to this day revelations looks stunning. I am excited to replay these games after not playing them for maybe a year or so with improved graphics. If there was a change i wanted to gameplay it would just be adding the faster fight system to ac2 so that it feels consistent throughout but even that is small. I think everyone has kept their expectations way too high, this is not like the master chief collection where the games were Xbox games, these were only last generation and still look great. I don't want them rebuilding the games because it will just be weird to play. Just improve the graphics, make the gameplay smoother and remove any bugs and its fine.

I didn't have much expectations either. The issue for me is that these games don't even offer 60fps unlike other remasters barring Dishonored (which most fans disliked) and yet the graphical update is very minimal.

I would have been perfectly happy if they took the PC versions and delivered them at 1080p/60fps on current-gen consoles with the short films.

pacmanate
09-25-2016, 06:32 PM
I am happy with the collection. I saw some graphical comparisons and it looks different. I did not want it to look too different because it won't feel like the original games then.

Then why do you want a remaster/enhanced edition if you don't want it to look different to the originals?

ajl2017
09-25-2016, 06:58 PM
Then why do you want a remaster/enhanced edition if you don't want it to look different to the originals?

you missed a key word from my sentence, not sure if intentional or not. TOO different, you also ignored the rest of my post where I explain my reasoning. If they made it look like unity it would not feel like the original games and at that point I would prefer those resources be used to make a new game. If they improve the graphics a little and make the gameplay a little smoother I will be happy. It is CLEAR it is not the same as the original games, I have seen the side by side comparisons there is a clear difference. I don't understand why people were expecting them to remake the game. AC2 specially looks a huge step better, Brotherhood and Revelations have touch ups and those were incredibly beautiful to this day. I think when they release the next trailer it will be clearer. Same with the arkham remaster, people hated the first trailer but liked it on the second one when gameplay was shown. You and others have kept expectations too high and for what you're paying I think this is getting my moneys worth.

Fauux01
09-26-2016, 01:52 AM
If they made it look like unity it would not feel like the original games and at that point I would prefer those resources be used to make a new game. If they improve the graphics a little and make the gameplay a little smoother I will be happy. It is CLEAR it is not the same as the original games, I have seen the side by side comparisons there is a clear difference. I don't understand why people were expecting them to remake the game. AC2 specially looks a huge step better, Brotherhood and Revelations have touch ups and those were incredibly beautiful to this day. I think when they release the next trailer it will be clearer. Same with the arkham remaster, people hated the first trailer but liked it on the second one when gameplay was shown. You and others have kept expectations too high and for what you're paying I think this is getting my moneys worth.

I mean, I just bought Black Flag again today on PS4 because I wanted a newer, shinier case, so I'm not always one to talk about money :p, but the update is definitely not worth the $60 they're charging if we're being honest, low expectations or not. I can see new fans buying it if they haven't already played the originals, but I think this collection should cost $40 at most. The frame rate might be more stable, but it's still just 30fps (which is astounding since most low-end PCs weaker than the PS4/X1 can already run the trilogy at 60fps--heck, my weak sauce GTX 750 Ti can run the games at 4K DSR!) and the games on the PS360 already ran pretty consistently at that frame rate anyway. The anti-aliasing seems like 2x MSAA, so there's a lot of noticeable jaggies on the edges still, at least for AC2. Speaking of which, the changes made to AC2 are for the worse, imo, as it does more to ruin the artistic atmosphere of the game and only makes its aging all the more apparent. AC2 was never a pretty game, but it had a incredibly beautiful art design. The Ezio Collection instead takes it and over saturate the colors with its new lighting system, and the new textures are so inconsistent that it just stands out and makes the rest of the game look uglier than anything. Seriously, it's so weird having one character with a PS4 looking facial model, but with PS2 level body textures and everything else. I've said it before, but a fan's overhaul mod (http://www.moddb.com/mods/assassins-creed-ii-overhaul-mod) does a whole lot better job of enhancing the graphics while staying true to its original design than this collection.

I'm not sure if I think ACB or ACR look better at all, since their original atmosphere has been compromised somewhat, but I'll take it over 720p of the original on PS360 any day.

All in all, I didn't have much expectation for this collection. All I asked for was a port of the PC versions that fixed some of the graphical issues (maybe even improve the low draw distance, shadow resolution, and other subtle enhancement that makes image a lot cleaner) but instead we kind of got a half-baked enhancement version that does more to damage the original quality than improve it.

The best way to describe how I view the enhancements for the Ezio Collection is that they look more like a mod for a game that I probably commend for the effort but would never use because the enhancement is so sparingly used throughout the game and mostly just ruins the original aesthetics.

ERICATHERINE
09-26-2016, 02:39 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6jXPnqLbpBg

In fact I'm not angry and I still have things which I can hope to happen in that Ezio collection which I already talked about in this thread. The only thing I ever wished to get conscerning the ac remasters were simple port to the next console with all their dlcs and that's what I will get. Everything else will just be a bonus for me. The only other thing I wanted was lineage embers and ascendance. I already know lineage and embers will come with the games and as for ac ascendance one of my friend have a bluray of lineage which have ascendance in the bonus features and as far as I know ubisoft didn't say if it will come or not with the rest. So, unless ubisoft confirms that it will not come with the rest or that I see it with my own eyes I will still have hope and if it's not the case, ... Well youtube exist for thing like that, no? ^-^

Farlander1991
09-26-2016, 09:30 AM
but the update is definitely not worth the $60 they're charging if we're being honest

The question of value is always an interesting one. Let's put aside the fact that when it comes to things like games or other art forms, value lots of time is subjective. However, if we look at the package, then we have:
- 3 games.
- That haven't appeared on the console generation before (and this is important. I know people like to say 'oh PS4/X1 are closer to PC in architecture so porting isn't that big of a problem', and while a multiplatform PS4/X1/PC game might be less problematic that a PS3/X360/PC multiplatform game, there's still a lot of issues to make something work on all 3 platforms the same).
- That have been enhanced. You might argue that 'not enhanced enough' or 'destroys the artistic value', but there have been changes that can be considered improvements. (that, and we don't know the full amount of changes based on a 2 minute trailer alone).
- That altogether provide 45-115 hours of gameplay.
- 2 HD 30-minute films.

I'm not going to buy it for 60$, I'll probably get it when it's down quite a bit in price, but I also am not particularly interested in it other than to just have it in my PS4 collection eventually (I have the games anyway, it's not like I need them). But that aside, is the package REALLY not worth 60$? How value is defined? It's 3 games as opposed to 1. It's potential of 115 hours of gameplay as opposed to 20-40 a lot of 60$ release provide (some provide 10-20, some less). They might've looked better, but still, graphically they'll be up to par. If you ask me, that's worth 60$, if we think about it as objectively as possible. Now, subjectively, of course, it might not be. It's not worth 60$ not for me, not for you, not for quite a lot of AC fans I imagine. But that's a different case altogether.

ERICATHERINE
09-26-2016, 12:09 PM
- 3 games.
- That haven't appeared on the console generation before (and this is important. I know people like to say 'oh PS4/X1 are closer to PC in architecture so porting isn't that big of a problem', and while a multiplatform PS4/X1/PC game might be less problematic that a PS3/X360/PC multiplatform game, there's still a lot of issues to make something work on all 3 platforms the same).
- That have been enhanced. You might argue that 'not enhanced enough' or 'destroys the artistic value', but there have been changes that can be considered improvements. (that, and we don't know the full amount of changes based on a 2 minute trailer alone).
- That altogether provide 45-115 hours of gameplay.
- 2 HD 30-minute films.

That's without mentioning the fact that ubisoft never said (at least that's not the case for as far as I know) the Ezio collection will not come with ac ascendance. ^-^

Fauux01
09-26-2016, 12:11 PM
The question of value is always an interesting one. Let's put aside the fact that when it comes to things like games or other art forms, value lots of time is subjective. However, if we look at the package, then we have:
- 3 games.
- That haven't appeared on the console generation before (and this is important. I know people like to say 'oh PS4/X1 are closer to PC in architecture so porting isn't that big of a problem', and while a multiplatform PS4/X1/PC game might be less problematic that a PS3/X360/PC multiplatform game, there's still a lot of issues to make something work on all 3 platforms the same).
- That have been enhanced. You might argue that 'not enhanced enough' or 'destroys the artistic value', but there have been changes that can be considered improvements. (that, and we don't know the full amount of changes based on a 2 minute trailer alone).
- That altogether provide 45-115 hours of gameplay.
- 2 HD 30-minute films.

I'm not going to buy it for 60$, I'll probably get it when it's down quite a bit in price, but I also am not particularly interested in it other than to just have it in my PS4 collection eventually (I have the games anyway, it's not like I need them). But that aside, is the package REALLY not worth 60$? How value is defined? It's 3 games as opposed to 1. It's potential of 115 hours of gameplay as opposed to 20-40 a lot of 60$ release provide (some provide 10-20, some less). They might've looked better, but still, graphically they'll be up to par. If you ask me, that's worth 60$, if we think about it as objectively as possible. Now, subjectively, of course, it might not be. It's not worth 60$ not for me, not for you, not for quite a lot of AC fans I imagine. But that's a different case altogether.

It's funny because before yesterday, I would have also made the argument that this collection might worth it as well. However, I was out all day going to various Best Buys, Walmarts, and Gamestops looking for a game (DmCDE on PS4) and I've come across quite a lot of AC games. I don't know what they charge you where you live, but here in the US, you can pick up the Ezio Trilogy on PS360 for $20 new. Essentially, you're paying $40 for two short films that's on Youtube, 1080p, and some graphical enhancements (it's still important to mention that some fans aren't happy with it). Perhaps they fixed some glitches and bugs, which I hope so, but that's still not worth the value. Moving onto PC, which I still consider the definitive version of these games, comparatively, you can purchase them all for less than $10-15 when they're on sale, or on websites like G2A.

And that's just the Ezio games. As I said in my last post, I picked up Black Flag on PS4 again because I wanted a newer, shinier case. Well, it was $20. Right now, you can literally get BF, ACU, and ACS for the same price of the Ezio Collection. Each game provided me 100 hours each for 100% completion, so right there, not only are we getting thrice the hours of playtime, we're getting higher quality games as well.

ERICATHERINE
09-26-2016, 12:23 PM
- 3 games.
- That haven't appeared on the console generation before (and this is important. I know people like to say 'oh PS4/X1 are closer to PC in architecture so porting isn't that big of a problem', and while a multiplatform PS4/X1/PC game might be less problematic that a PS3/X360/PC multiplatform game, there's still a lot of issues to make something work on all 3 platforms the same).
- That have been enhanced. You might argue that 'not enhanced enough' or 'destroys the artistic value', but there have been changes that can be considered improvements. (that, and we don't know the full amount of changes based on a 2 minute trailer alone).
- That altogether provide 45-115 hours of gameplay.
- 2 HD 30-minute films.



That's without mentioning the fact that ubisoft never said (at least that's not the case for as far as I know) the Ezio collection will not come with ac ascendance. ^-^

And I just saw that we both forgot to mention that those 3 games comes with all their dlcs. ^-^

SixKeys
09-26-2016, 04:39 PM
And I just saw that we both forgot to mention that those 3 games comes with all their dlcs. ^-^

The PC versions have always had them, except for Copernicus missions in ACB and some special tombs depending on which version you got. Basically, if your PC can run them (and most modern ones should), the PC version is by far superior to these remasters. 60 fps, 1080p, includes almost all DLC and better textures than the old console versions, for half the price of the remaster collection.

Farlander1991
09-26-2016, 05:18 PM
It's funny because before yesterday, I would have also made the argument that this collection might worth it as well. However, I was out all day going to various Best Buys, Walmarts, and Gamestops looking for a game (DmCDE on PS4) and I've come across quite a lot of AC games. I don't know what they charge you where you live, but here in the US, you can pick up the Ezio Trilogy on PS360 for $20 new. Essentially, you're paying $40 for two short films that's on Youtube, 1080p, and some graphical enhancements (it's still important to mention that some fans aren't happy with it). Perhaps they fixed some glitches and bugs, which I hope so, but that's still not worth the value. Moving onto PC, which I still consider the definitive version of these games, comparatively, you can purchase them all for less than $10-15 when they're on sale, or on websites like G2A.

And that's just the Ezio games. As I said in my last post, I picked up Black Flag on PS4 again because I wanted a newer, shinier case. Well, it was $20. Right now, you can literally get BF, ACU, and ACS for the same price of the Ezio Collection. Each game provided me 100 hours each for 100% completion, so right there, not only are we getting thrice the hours of playtime, we're getting higher quality games as well.

The problem with your argument is that you're talking about releases that are at least a year old. And some of them are on a different line of consoles. So just because you can get Ezio's Trilogy for 20$ on last gen means that a remastered version of the trilogy on current gen needs to cost 20 now as well? It will so in a year or two. And let's not forget that it's retail that we're talking about that pushes used copies at a lower price (for comparison, on PSN for PS3 each game of the Ezio's trilogy costs 20$, and that's not including DLCs).

Speaking of PC, AC2+ACB+ACR in their digital deluxe/gold editions (that include all content) cost 70$ altogether on Steam now (though that also includes multiplayer content). Your argument is that you can get them cheaper when they're on sale, well, you have to WAIT until they're on sale, just as anyone would have to wait until something is cheaper at retail (either used copy or with officially lowered price). A year from now Ezio's collection would cost anywhere between 20 to 40 bucks.

A more apt comparison overall would be looking at the price of the BioShock collection. Which sits at 60$ on release. Nathan Drake Collection when released costed 60$. Batman Return to Arkham... well, ok, it costs 50$, but unlike those two its got 2 games :p (though it's also a change in engine, so there has been quite some work done there). And all the games that cost 20 bucks now, like BF, ACU, ACS, well, they costed 60$ at release! So when other collections containing 3 remastered titles cost 60$, when each new title on release costs 60$, why shouldn't Ezio's collection (that has, as mentioned before, 3 remastered titles in one package that haven't appeared on the new consoles before) on PS4/X1 cost 60$ at release?

Basically your whole argument rests on two things:
1) You don't value the collection at 60$, which is absolutely fine, as I said before I don't value it like that either, but this question is very subjective.
2) There are ways to get all of the games from the collection cheaper (though, in case of AC2/ACB/ACR, it should be noted that NOT on PS4/X1 where they don't exist at all), as well as other games from the series cheaper, which... I don't think that's a good argument when discussing how much the collection should be priced, for the reasons stated above.

Let's take a look at digital current digital prices of Ezio's trilogy (when not on sale), which for all intents and purposes are the most official prices and aren't muddled by murky retail practices.

AC2 Ultimate/Deluxe:
PS3 - 20$
PC - 10$

ACB:
PS3 - 20$
PC - 18$

ACB Ultimate/Deluxe:
PS3 - 28$
PC - 30$

ACR:
PS3 - 20$
PC - 25$

ACR Ultimate/Gold:
PS3 - 30$
PC - 30$

Total normal edition (AC2 still deluxe since other is not available):
PS3 - 60$
PC - 53$

Total ultimate editions:
PS3 - 78$
PC - 70$

So why a retail price at release for a remastered collection for PS4/X1 at 60$ (which doesn't include how prices will fall when there will be used copies, and when the official price will fall as well) is not fair? It will fall in price eventually (and be sold on sale) just like any other game does for those people who are not interested in it at that price, but if somebody wants to get it at release and everything suits them, then the collection is worth the 60$ at release price tag as far as I'm concerned, for the reasons mentioned in previous post.

Anyway, hope this does not look like me forcing my argument upon you. Just voice my opinion on the matter of price and value, because it's a very interesting topic.

m4r-k7
09-26-2016, 09:02 PM
The problem with your argument is that you're talking about releases that are at least a year old. And some of them are on a different line of consoles. So just because you can get Ezio's Trilogy for 20$ on last gen means that a remastered version of the trilogy on current gen needs to cost 20 now as well?

The problem that people have with the price isn't to do with it necessarily being more than the last-gen versions. Its the fact that the apparent graphics increase is so minimal and the fact that it remains 30 fps does not warrant an extra $40 when you can easily get these games for a quarter of the price on last-gen consoles (that play the game the same and have slightly worse graphics.)

If this was a properly remastered package with 60 fps then it would definitely be worth the $60.

I mean anyone can see that this is a quick cash grab for Ubisoft - Who can blame them? Ubisoft needs to make money as they are a massive company.

Fauux01
09-26-2016, 09:37 PM
The problem with your argument is that you're talking about releases that are at least a year old. And some of them are on a different line of consoles. So just because you can get Ezio's Trilogy for 20$ on last gen means that a remastered version of the trilogy on current gen needs to cost 20 now as well? It will so in a year or two. And let's not forget that it's retail that we're talking about that pushes used copies at a lower price (for comparison, on PSN for PS3 each game of the Ezio's trilogy costs 20$, and that's not including DLCs).

Speaking of PC, AC2+ACB+ACR in their digital deluxe/gold editions (that include all content) cost 70$ altogether on Steam now (though that also includes multiplayer content). Your argument is that you can get them cheaper when they're on sale, well, you have to WAIT until they're on sale, just as anyone would have to wait until something is cheaper at retail (either used copy or with officially lowered price). A year from now Ezio's collection would cost anywhere between 20 to 40 bucks.

Hey, I never said it needed to cost $20, I said charging a full $60 price is not worth it. It's a rip-off. If you read my posts, I said that $40 should be the most it should cost for the enhancements. Again, the package is pretty minimal; we aren't getting a top notch upgrade like other remasters. If I can pick up BF, ACU, and ACS for the same price, then there's a problem. Sure, those games are technically old, but dude, the Ezio games are faaaaaar older than they are, and the enhancement don't really make them compare to BF, ACU, and ACS in any aspect, whether it be graphics or gameplay. You're kind of saying that a company can toss out anything on the store shelves and demand full price simply because it's ''new''.

PC sales, especially on Steam, happens quite often. For example, there was a humble bundle last week to get AC2 Deluxe for 5 bucks and a Uplay sale right now to get it for 13 bucks. By the time the Ezio Collection is on store shelves, we would have dozens and dozens of opportunity to pick up the trilogy, in all of its glory, for far less than $60. Also, you neglected my other option, which you can literally, right now, buy the deluxe/gold editions of the entire trilogy for about $15-20 total.


A more apt comparison overall would be looking at the price of the BioShock collection. Which sits at 60$ on release. Nathan Drake Collection when released costed 60$. Batman Return to Arkham... well, ok, it costs 50$, but unlike those two its got 2 games :p (though it's also a change in engine, so there has been quite some work done there). And all the games that cost 20 bucks now, like BF, ACU, ACS, well, they costed 60$ at release! So when other collections containing 3 remastered titles cost 60$, when each new title on release costs 60$, why shouldn't Ezio's collection (that has, as mentioned before, 3 remastered titles in one package that haven't appeared on the new consoles before) on PS4/X1 cost 60$ at release?

If you're going to compare this collection with other remasters, then the reason should beveryobvious. The Ezio Collection simply does not offer enough improvements compared to those other remasters. Now, I'm not someone who likes remasters, but I can make the argument that each and every one of those remasters you mentioned might be worth the price, and that's because there's notable differences and enhancements. People literally needed a comparison video to understand the changes for AC2. :p The Nathan Drake Collection, for example (which I don't own, but I can already tell the differences just from the trailers) not only enhanced the graphics at a considerable rate, they also delivered 60fps and improved other gameplay elements like UC3's shooting. DmCDE is just one game and they didn't improve the graphics from its PC version, but the changes were considerable because the developers delivered new gameplay elements (such as a lock-on feature), new content, and other things that makes the experience a big improvement from its last-gen version. And also 60fps. Speaking of, DMC4SE charges $24 and it's only one game with no graphical enhancements from the vanilla PC version, but again, the gameplay improvements are notable. 60fps, 3 completely new characters, new costumes, new cutscenes, etc. The Ezio Collection locks the games at 30fps, AC2's graphical enhancement isn't very noticeable and the new textures are sparingly used, and ACB/R barely shows any differences. :p I did not want to beat a dead horse, which is why I avoided using other remasters in my earlier argument.

And yeah, 60fps does make a HUGE difference when it comes to porting old games onto current-gen consoles. It's the biggest factor; it's what everyone expects. xD Else, we're mostly just paying for more pixels.


Basically your whole argument rests on two things:
1) You don't value the collection at 60$, which is absolutely fine, as I said before I don't value it like that either, but this question is very subjective.
2) There are ways to get all of the games from the collection cheaper (though, in case of AC2/ACB/ACR, it should be noted that NOT on PS4/X1 where they don't exist at all), as well as other games from the series cheaper, which... I don't think that's a good argument when discussing how much the collection should be priced, for the reasons stated above.

1) It's not as subjective as you keep saying it is. Value is based on content, and while the Ezio games themselves are fantastic, the content they're delivering with this collection is not worth the asking price when you take into account other remasters and the prices of the other games. Just to repeat, it doesn't matter if BF, ACU, and ACS are old, the Ezio games are way older and this remaster doesn't offer enough improvements.

2) Yeah, I kind of debated this point already.


So why a retail price at release for a remastered collection for PS4/X1 at 60$ (which doesn't include how prices will fall when there will be used copies, and when the official price will fall as well) is not fair? It will fall in price eventually (and be sold on sale) just like any other game does for those people who are not interested in it at that price, but if somebody wants to get it at release and everything suits them, then the collection is worth the 60$ at release price tag as far as I'm concerned, for the reasons mentioned in previous post.


Well, if someone thinks something is worth their money, then more power to them. But that goes for everything else, so it doesn't mean that something isn't a rip-off if one person happens to think it's worth the money. In the case of the Ezio Collection, I've already made my points above about why it is not worth $60. And sure, it'll eventually go down in price, but so will the other games an deals as well. Eventually, you can pick up BF, ACU, and ACS for $30 if you wait long enough.

ERICATHERINE
09-26-2016, 11:52 PM
The problem that people have with the price isn't to do with it necessarily being more than the last-gen versions. Its the fact that the apparent graphics increase is so minimal and the fact that it remains 30 fps does not warrant an extra $40 when you can easily get these games for a quarter of the price on last-gen consoles (that play the game the same and have slightly worse graphics.)

If this was a properly remastered package with 60 fps then it would definitely be worth the $60.

I mean anyone can see that this is a quick cash grab for Ubisoft - Who can blame them? Ubisoft needs to make money as they are a massive company.

I don't know why everyone takes the "30 fps instead of 60" argument. I don't need 30 more fps. The old version of the Ezio games are all at 30 fps and I like them very much.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PLhPvS0hZSs

I just watched this vidéo and I just can't see any difference between 30 fps and 60 fps. So, from my point of view, it's just not a big deal. ^-^

Farlander1991
09-26-2016, 11:55 PM
The problem that people have with the price isn't to do with it necessarily being more than the last-gen versions. Its the fact that the apparent graphics increase is so minimal


The Ezio Collection locks the games at 30fps, AC2's graphical enhancement isn't very noticeable and the new textures are sparingly used, and ACB/R barely shows any differences. :p I did not want to beat a dead horse, which is why I avoided using other remasters in my earlier argument.

You know, out of all arguments this is the most baffling to me.

All comparison videos and screenshots that exist are between the PS4/X1 version and the PC version on Max settings. And then everybody complains how it looks the same as PC version at 1080p at max settings without any differences. That makes no sense to me. I mean.... isn't the whole point of the remaster that console players would be able to experience the game with graphical fidelity that's as good as PC, which they couldn't with the X360/PS3 versions? (while we're at it, Ubisoft doesn't even position this as a remaster, but as a release of the games on PS4/X1)

I'm sorry, but everybody on YouTube and online forums and comments compares the game with the wrong ****ing version. I haven't seen a single comparison yet between the PS4/X1 remaster and the original games on the actual previous console generation, PS3/X360.

Well, since we've established that the PS4/X1 has the same graphical fidelity as the PC version, I quickly took a couple direct screen captures of ACB PS3 version from Eurogamer, and the same locations from the PC version in direct capture as well (so there's no YouTube artifacts, but for consistency sake, I did compare the PC screens with what was shown in the trailer, and, yeah, they look pretty much the same). NOTE: The image is 2560x1440 in resolution, so open it up in a different window if the forum doesn't show it in full res.

http://i.imgur.com/OxPAubb.jpg

So - better resolution, better textures (though partially it's because of the better resolution), better shadows (and more of them since on PS3 a lot of shadows are missing), better vegetation, better anti-aliasing, and that's just based on those two screens. If you find more direct screen caps from X360 or PS3 you'll see how much improvement there actually is. I don't know, I've looked at a bunch of screens and can say for certain - PC version of ACB and what we've seen from PS4/X1 is a lot better visually than PS3/X360.

Everybody expects the remasters to look better than the PC version, but everybody forgets that PC version in the first place had better resolution, lighting, shadows, textures, anti-aliasing, LoD (except AC2, AC2 LoD is horrible everywhere :p :D ), effects than the PS3/X360 versions. And it's PS3/X360 versions that have to be compared to, not PC, because PC is already a lot better visually than the originals and is a benchmark for these particular games.

EDIT: Also, the remaster got rid of the freaking filters finally! Venice looks so much better when there's actual color and not a washed out blue palette.

ERICATHERINE
09-27-2016, 12:21 AM
Could everyone just stop saying "the gameplay didn't change that much", please?

Look at this vidéo.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YzjCC7Uwnj0

I watched it and calculated that there is only ... What? 4 seconds of gameplay in that trailer (and that's including the only second where we control Leonardo's flying machine). We can't judge the gameplay changes of 3 remastered version of games based on only 4 seconds. You can count yourself, but even if I missed, let's say, 5 seconds, We still couldn't judge them efficiently.

Sure we can see if there is changes in the cutscenes, but cutscenes isn't gameplay. So, if someone want to say "the gameplay didn't change that much", could he at least wait to see a trailer of the Ezio collection with more gameplay than that?

Sorry if I sound angry, guy, because I am not. It's just that what you say about (sorry to put it a 3rd time in the comment) "the gameplay didn't change that much" can't actually be proved, at the moment. ^-^

Farlander1991
09-27-2016, 12:24 AM
Could everyone just stop saying "the gameplay didn't change that much", please?

Nobody's arguing about gameplay though, we're arguing about graphical fidelity which can be judged based on that 2 minute video.

ERICATHERINE
09-27-2016, 12:42 AM
Nobody's arguing about gameplay though, we're arguing about graphical fidelity which can be judged based on that 2 minute video.

It seems you missed some part of what I readed. Here.


...not only enhanced the graphics at a considerable rate, they also delivered 60fps and improved other gameplay elements like UC3's shooting. DmCDE is just one game and they didn't improve the graphics from its PC version, but the changes were considerable because the developers delivered new gameplay elements (such as a lock-on feature), new content, and other things that makes the experience a big improvement from its last-gen version. Speaking of, DMC4SE charges $24 and it's only one game with no graphical enhancements from the vanilla PC version, but again, the gameplay improvements are notable.

I don't remember if someone else talked about it. I was just closing the subject of gameplay before someone else talk about it. ^-^

Fauux01
09-27-2016, 12:53 AM
You know, out of all arguments this is the most baffling to me.

All comparison videos and screenshots that exist are between the PS4/X1 version and the PC version on Max settings. And then everybody complains how it looks the same as PC version at 1080p at max settings without any differences. That makes no sense to me. I mean.... isn't the whole point of the remaster that console players would be able to experience the game with graphical fidelity that's as good as PC, which they couldn't with the X360/PS3 versions?

I'm sorry, but everybody on YouTube and online forums and comments compares the game with the wrong ****ing version. I haven't seen a single comparison yet between the PS4/X1 remaster and the original games on the actual previous console generation, PS3/X360.

Well, since we've established that the PS4/X1 has the same graphical fidelity as the PC version, I quickly took a couple direct screen captures of ACB PS3 version from Eurogamer, and the same locations from the PC version in direct capture as well (so there's no YouTube artifacts, but for consistency sake, I did compare the PC screens with what was shown in the trailer, and, yeah, they look pretty much the same). NOTE: The image is 2560x1440 in resolution, so open it up in a different window if the forum doesn't show it in full res.

http://i.imgur.com/OxPAubb.jpg

So - better resolution, better textures (though partially it's because of the better resolution), better shadows (and more of them since on PS3 a lot of shadows are missing), better vegetation, better anti-aliasing, and that's just based on those two screens. If you find more direct screen caps from X360 or PS3 you'll see how much improvement there actually is.

Everybody expects the remasters to look better than the PC version, but everybody forgets that PC version in the first place had better resolution, lighting, shadows, textures, anti-aliasing, LoD (except AC2, AC2 LoD is horrible everywhere :p :D ), effects than the PS3/X360 versions. And it's PS3/X360 versions that have to be compared to, not PC, because PC is already a lot better visually than the originals and is a benchmark for these particular games.

EDIT: Also, the remaster got rid of the freaking filters finally! Venice looks so much better when there's actual color and not a washed out blue palette.

Good comparison picture. I mean, understand your point, but it's not a very compelling argument to me because as I've argued before, other remasters have given far more considerable enhancements. Like I spoke about in my last post, it's not always about the graphics. DmCDE/DMCSE still has the same graphics as the vanilla games on PC, but nobody was complaining because they delivered in other aspects. With the Ezio Collection, they have not shown us any notable gameplay improvements at all. As far as we're concerned, graphical parity with the PC version is mostly what it is, and the games don't even have 60fps. I know I sound like a broken record with that, but I can't stress that part enough. If they aren't going to deliver 60fps, we at least expect the developers to step up the quality of the graphics to a certain degree to justify it.


Could everyone just stop saying "the gameplay didn't change that much", please?

Look at this vidéo.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YzjCC7Uwnj0

I watched it and calculated that there is only ... What? 4 seconds of gameplay in that trailer (and that's including the only second where we control Leonardo's flying machine). We can't judge the gameplay changes of 3 remastered version of games based on only 4 seconds. You can count yourself, but even if I missed, let's say, 5 seconds, We still couldn't judge them efficiently.

Sure we can see if there is changes in the cutscenes, but cutscenes isn't gameplay. So, if someone want to say "the gameplay didn't change that much", could he at least wait to see a trailer of the Ezio collection with more gameplay than that?

Sorry if I sound angry, guy, because I am not. It's just that what you say about (sorry to put it a 3rd time in the comment) "the gameplay didn't change that much" can't actually be proved, at the moment. ^-^

Oh, honestly, if they actually did some considerable upgrades to the gameplay, they would have advertised that like other remasters. The unfortunate fact that this announcement was low key and the trilogy will run at 30fps on current-gen consoles is also a dead giveaway. :p

As far as my expectations go with the gameplay improvements, I'm only expecting fixes for bugs and glitches, and perhaps the option to remove armor if we're lucky.

Farlander1991
09-27-2016, 01:11 AM
Good comparison picture. I mean, understand your point, but it's not a very compelling argument to me because as I've argued before, other remasters have given far more considerable enhancements.

Well, while we're at it, the Ezio Collection does not position itself as a remaster. It's a release of the game on PS4/X1 with enhanced graphics in comparison to PS3/X360. Yeah, we're calling it a remaster, but developers aren't. Positioning is very important in terms of expectations.


I know I sound like a broken record with that, but I can't stress that part enough. If they aren't going to deliver 60fps, we at least expect the developers to step up the quality of the graphics to a certain degree to justify it.

Well, I've already mentioned somewhere that 60 fps for open-world games on the current generation consoles is not as simple as it seems. I know you've mentioned how your rig runs AC2 on 60 fps, but you've also compared only your graphic cards and not all other hardware which plays a big role in getting 60 fps.

At any rate, the original games never had consistent 30 fps on consoles, it would go between 24-30 fps. I don't think even with its age in terms of graphical fidelity (even if up to PC standards, it's not ACU, for example), PS4/X1 can handle an urban open-world game at a consistent 60 fps (their upgrades - maybe). Even non-urban open-world games that try to get 60 fps don't get consistent 60. (and, I've already mentioned that graphical fidelity is not the only thing that goes into achieving consistent 60 fps, there are a lot of other factors, including how data is loaded, AI from NPCs, and many other things).

So if the collection is at 30 I imagine it would be because of that. It should be at consistent 30, though, unlike the PS3/X360 predecessors :p

ERICATHERINE
09-27-2016, 01:18 AM
Oh, honestly, if they actually did some considerable upgrades to the gameplay, they would have advertised that like other remasters.

Well, who knows. Maybe yes, maybe no. After all, they didn't mentionned ac lineage and embers in the trailer, just like as far as I know, ubisoft never said ac ascendance would not be part of the collection.


As far as my expectations go with the gameplay improvements, I'm only expecting fixes for bugs and glitches, ....

Yea, me too and those changes are by far the things I want the most as changes from the original to the remasters. So, in fact there is nearly no reason (if not not at all) to be angry with these remasters. ^-^

Edit. Sorry, that last sentence was only conscerning me. I don't know for other people. ^-^

Fauux01
09-27-2016, 02:30 AM
Well, while we're at it, the Ezio Collection does not position itself as a remaster. It's a release of the game on PS4/X1 with enhanced graphics in comparison to PS3/X360. Yeah, we're calling it a remaster, but developers aren't. Positioning is very important in terms of expectations.

All the more reason why it shouldn't cost $60. :p


Well, I've already mentioned somewhere that 60 fps for open-world games on the current generation consoles is not as simple as it seems. I know you've mentioned how your rig runs AC2 on 60 fps, but you've also compared only your graphic cards and not all other hardware which plays a big role in getting 60 fps.

At any rate, the original games never had consistent 30 fps on consoles, it would go between 24-30 fps. I don't think even with its age in terms of graphical fidelity (even if up to PC standards, it's not ACU, for example), PS4/X1 can handle an urban open-world game at a consistent 60 fps (their upgrades - maybe). Even non-urban open-world games that try to get 60 fps don't get consistent 60. (and, I've already mentioned that graphical fidelity is not the only thing that goes into achieving consistent 60 fps, there are a lot of other factors, including how data is loaded, AI from NPCs, and many other things).

So if the collection is at 30 I imagine it would be because of that. It should be at consistent 30, though, unlike the PS3/X360 predecessors :p

Rigs I've tested the games on:

Cheap A8 AMD CPU w/ 8GB 1600 RAM w/ GTX 750 Ti/760 - My brother's.

i7-4790K w/ 16 GB 2400 RAM w/ GTX 750 Ti/760 - Mine.

Lappy i7 w/ GTX 960M - Friend's gaming lappy.

i3 4150 w/ 8GB 1600 RAM w/ GTX 750 Ti - Friend's.

FX 8350 w/ 8GB 1600 RAM w/ GTX 650 Ti Boost/750 Ti/760 - Old PC.

(have also tested with more powerful GPUs, but not worth mentioning since we're only discussing low-end)

Intel CPUs, whether it's the i3 or my i7 interestingly doesn't make a difference in performance with the old AC games (AC1-ACR), as they seem to primarily be more GPU based. The A8 and my old FX 8350 AMD CPU, however, did have some fps drops in certain locations, like Monteriggioni in AC2, but nothing stopping it from keeping a consistent enough 60fps with the 750 Ti.

We kind of already argued this before, so I'll agree to disagree here and say that if they can't deliver 30fps on current-gen consoles, then they should deliver more graphical improvements elsewhere to make up for it.


Well, who knows. Maybe yes, maybe no. After all, they didn't mentionned ac lineage and embers in the trailer, just like as far as I know, ubisoft never said ac ascendance would not be part of the collection.

Well, if I'm wrong (which I hope I am), feel free to rub it in my smug little face.

ERICATHERINE
09-27-2016, 04:29 AM
Well, if I'm wrong (which I hope I am), feel free to rub it in my smug little face.

No, I'm not the kind of person who do that. Instead I'll probably say something like "And that's another one of my prediction that became reality". Thing is, I won't be able to know if it is a prediction as long as it won't happen IF it happen. I know I'm not in the subject, right now, but this kind of things happen to me very often, may it be if I dreamed the futur or when I say the first thing I think, for it to become reallity. I also never know when it will happen. It could happen from the moment I do my prediction to some yers years later. The only thing I know about my prediction is that it only concerns me and the persons that were with me in my prediction. For exemple I dreamed of me with my cat Garfield before I knew it existed (if not, when considering his age when I got him, before he was actually born). ^-^

BoBwUzHeRe1138
09-27-2016, 08:44 AM
I find it unlikely than any complaints about the game (that would be theoretically simple enough to fix) were addressed.

For instance, a huge complaints among players was that in every Ezio game, once you buy armor... you are stuck with armor on for the rest of the game. If you realize "oh I don't really like the look of armor and prefer the original, standard, armorless version then you're SOL.

It's a small thing but it was always such a mind boggling omission in the series. Like...why? Personally, I would have preferred something even more in depth, regardless of frames or fidelity. I would have vastly preferred it where the trilogy was combined into one mega game. In the same way you progress through AC2 and unlock Florence, other cities, then Venice... it wouldn't end and go to credits after finding Minerva and escaping as Desmond. Instead, it would seamlessly transition into the beginning of ACB. Heck, they could even have included the Cristina missions of ACB into their chronological positions during 2. In the same way you're able to travel between Florence and Venice and the other towns in 2, during the ACB section, you'd be allowed to, drumroll, travel between Roma, Venice, and Florence. In the same manner, after ACB completes and Desmond goes into the coma, it transitions seamlessly into ACR. You'd then be able to travel between Florence, Venice, Rome, and Constantinople freely if you so desire (meaning, yes, old Ezio would be able to visit Florence in his Revelations outfit.

Every one of Ezio's outfits would be usable (i.e. you can switch to the AC2 outfit during the events of ACB if you're not a fan of the new outfit and the same applies to both outfits for Revelations if you prefer them to his old age outfit.)

Heck, I'd probably include new ziplines around Florence, Venice, and Rome so you can even make use of the new abilities from ACR's hookblade. It would have been far more work but it would have been REALLY cool. But if that wasn't going to happen and they just needed to do a remaster, or whatever you want to call this, a rerelease, then at least do 1080p/60fps. The Master Chief Collection got a LOT of **** but that gave us 4 games, all at 1080p/60fps. 2 of the games were from the original Xbox (in other words, TWO console generations prior) had completely new graphics engines layred on top allowing you to play with either the original or completely remade graphics. While the multiplayer had a ton of problems... it still included every single map ever made (including PC-exclusive maps) and still allows the same split screen functionality that it did originally. And if that wasn't enough, one of the games had completely reworked cinematics by the wizards at Blur studios. And not only that, the Remastered Blur cinematics also included some new scenes as a framing device while keeping the original cinematics for the original game. They also fixed most of the worst issues regarding multiplayer even if it took longer than what would have been ideal. So as an apology, they also threw in a FIFTH game. It may not have been given the same treatment (no idea if it runs at 60fps as well and it may have not included Firefight mode, but it wasn't even planned originally. So in the end, FIVE games, most or all of which had distinct visual upgrades or at least were given 60fps.

Another comparison? Uncharted: The Nathan Drake Collection. Like the Ezio collection, it has three games and doesn't include the multiplayer. However, all of the games got clear graphical upgrades and were boosted to 60fps. They ditched poorly received mechanics such as shaking the controller to throw a grenade as well. The original Uncharted 3 was distinct in that it didn't have unlockable skins like the first two games and that was a controversial move on their part. So the remastered version actually includes all of the multiplayer skins AS single player skins allowing people to finally play as Doughnut Drake in UC3. There really isn't an excuse to leave it at 30fps or even fix small things people had with the games initially (this is me ASSUMING they didn't fix the armor criticisms and the like)

Pandassin
09-27-2016, 10:47 AM
For instance, a huge complaints among players was that in every Ezio game, once you buy armor... you are stuck with armor on for the rest of the game. If you realize "oh I don't really like the look of armor and prefer the original, standard, armorless version then you're SOL.

This. I never once bought armour in AC2 for the chest, or ACB either for that matter, because I just really didn't like the look of it. The Ezio Collection should at least have the option to remove armour or even better, the option to hide it.

Dieinthedark
09-27-2016, 08:18 PM
I find it unlikely than any complaints about the game (that would be theoretically simple enough to fix) were addressed.

For instance, a huge complaints among players was that in every Ezio game, once you buy armor... you are stuck with armor on for the rest of the game. If you realize "oh I don't really like the look of armor and prefer the original, standard, armorless version then you're SOL.

It's a small thing but it was always such a mind boggling omission in the series. Like...why? Personally, I would have preferred something even more in depth, regardless of frames or fidelity. I would have vastly preferred it where the trilogy was combined into one mega game. In the same way you progress through AC2 and unlock Florence, other cities, then Venice... it wouldn't end and go to credits after finding Minerva and escaping as Desmond. Instead, it would seamlessly transition into the beginning of ACB. Heck, they could even have included the Cristina missions of ACB into their chronological positions during 2. In the same way you're able to travel between Florence and Venice and the other towns in 2, during the ACB section, you'd be allowed to, drumroll, travel between Roma, Venice, and Florence. In the same manner, after ACB completes and Desmond goes into the coma, it transitions seamlessly into ACR. You'd then be able to travel between Florence, Venice, Rome, and Constantinople freely if you so desire (meaning, yes, old Ezio would be able to visit Florence in his Revelations outfit.

Every one of Ezio's outfits would be usable (i.e. you can switch to the AC2 outfit during the events of ACB if you're not a fan of the new outfit and the same applies to both outfits for Revelations if you prefer them to his old age outfit.)

Heck, I'd probably include new ziplines around Florence, Venice, and Rome so you can even make use of the new abilities from ACR's hookblade. It would have been far more work but it would have been REALLY cool. But if that wasn't going to happen and they just needed to do a remaster, or whatever you want to call this, a rerelease, then at least do 1080p/60fps. The Master Chief Collection got a LOT of **** but that gave us 4 games, all at 1080p/60fps. 2 of the games were from the original Xbox (in other words, TWO console generations prior) had completely new graphics engines layred on top allowing you to play with either the original or completely remade graphics. While the multiplayer had a ton of problems... it still included every single map ever made (including PC-exclusive maps) and still allows the same split screen functionality that it did originally. And if that wasn't enough, one of the games had completely reworked cinematics by the wizards at Blur studios. And not only that, the Remastered Blur cinematics also included some new scenes as a framing device while keeping the original cinematics for the original game. They also fixed most of the worst issues regarding multiplayer even if it took longer than what would have been ideal. So as an apology, they also threw in a FIFTH game. It may not have been given the same treatment (no idea if it runs at 60fps as well and it may have not included Firefight mode, but it wasn't even planned originally. So in the end, FIVE games, most or all of which had distinct visual upgrades or at least were given 60fps.

Another comparison? Uncharted: The Nathan Drake Collection. Like the Ezio collection, it has three games and doesn't include the multiplayer. However, all of the games got clear graphical upgrades and were boosted to 60fps. They ditched poorly received mechanics such as shaking the controller to throw a grenade as well. The original Uncharted 3 was distinct in that it didn't have unlockable skins like the first two games and that was a controversial move on their part. So the remastered version actually includes all of the multiplayer skins AS single player skins allowing people to finally play as Doughnut Drake in UC3. There really isn't an excuse to leave it at 30fps or even fix small things people had with the games initially (this is me ASSUMING they didn't fix the armor criticisms and the like)

I absolutely love this idea. Honestly I wished they wouldn't have released Syndicate and instead use that time for Syndicate, plus whatever they are now, for what you just proposed.

uggabugg
09-27-2016, 09:02 PM
I find it unlikely than any complaints about the game (that would be theoretically simple enough to fix) were addressed.

For instance, a huge complaints among players was that in every Ezio game, once you buy armor... you are stuck with armor on for the rest of the game. If you realize "oh I don't really like the look of armor and prefer the original, standard, armorless version then you're SOL.

It's a small thing but it was always such a mind boggling omission in the series. Like...why? Personally, I would have preferred something even more in depth, regardless of frames or fidelity. I would have vastly preferred it where the trilogy was combined into one mega game. In the same way you progress through AC2 and unlock Florence, other cities, then Venice... it wouldn't end and go to credits after finding Minerva and escaping as Desmond. Instead, it would seamlessly transition into the beginning of ACB. Heck, they could even have included the Cristina missions of ACB into their chronological positions during 2. In the same way you're able to travel between Florence and Venice and the other towns in 2, during the ACB section, you'd be allowed to, drumroll, travel between Roma, Venice, and Florence. In the same manner, after ACB completes and Desmond goes into the coma, it transitions seamlessly into ACR. You'd then be able to travel between Florence, Venice, Rome, and Constantinople freely if you so desire (meaning, yes, old Ezio would be able to visit Florence in his Revelations outfit.

Every one of Ezio's outfits would be usable (i.e. you can switch to the AC2 outfit during the events of ACB if you're not a fan of the new outfit and the same applies to both outfits for Revelations if you prefer them to his old age outfit.)

Heck, I'd probably include new ziplines around Florence, Venice, and Rome so you can even make use of the new abilities from ACR's hookblade. It would have been far more work but it would have been REALLY cool. But if that wasn't going to happen and they just needed to do a remaster, or whatever you want to call this, a rerelease, then at least do 1080p/60fps. The Master Chief Collection got a LOT of **** but that gave us 4 games, all at 1080p/60fps. 2 of the games were from the original Xbox (in other words, TWO console generations prior) had completely new graphics engines layred on top allowing you to play with either the original or completely remade graphics. While the multiplayer had a ton of problems... it still included every single map ever made (including PC-exclusive maps) and still allows the same split screen functionality that it did originally. And if that wasn't enough, one of the games had completely reworked cinematics by the wizards at Blur studios. And not only that, the Remastered Blur cinematics also included some new scenes as a framing device while keeping the original cinematics for the original game. They also fixed most of the worst issues regarding multiplayer even if it took longer than what would have been ideal. So as an apology, they also threw in a FIFTH game. It may not have been given the same treatment (no idea if it runs at 60fps as well and it may have not included Firefight mode, but it wasn't even planned originally. So in the end, FIVE games, most or all of which had distinct visual upgrades or at least were given 60fps.

Another comparison? Uncharted: The Nathan Drake Collection. Like the Ezio collection, it has three games and doesn't include the multiplayer. However, all of the games got clear graphical upgrades and were boosted to 60fps. They ditched poorly received mechanics such as shaking the controller to throw a grenade as well. The original Uncharted 3 was distinct in that it didn't have unlockable skins like the first two games and that was a controversial move on their part. So the remastered version actually includes all of the multiplayer skins AS single player skins allowing people to finally play as Doughnut Drake in UC3. There really isn't an excuse to leave it at 30fps or even fix small things people had with the games initially (this is me ASSUMING they didn't fix the armor criticisms and the like)


This is someting i have wanted for years.

DarkApprent2012
09-30-2016, 03:04 PM
This thread is going down the list so this is for it to be #1 again. Nice discussion though.

Dieinthedark
09-30-2016, 09:37 PM
It's okay, threads can die. We've already made up our minds that either A) we're happy to get to play the classics again or B) this remaster isn't of the quality of others as of lately

pacmanate
10-01-2016, 12:09 AM
Meh. I'm still disappointed by this.

Sure it's not called a remaster but why not just DO a remaster. I'm severely disappointed as a fan that hardly any effort has been put into this. I see it as a massive middle finger to AC fans that wanted some of the best AC games remastered on current gen.

ModernWaffle
10-01-2016, 01:32 AM
Meh. I'm still disappointed by this.

Sure it's not called a remaster but why not just DO a remaster. I'm severely disappointed as a fan that hardly any effort has been put into this. I see it as a massive middle finger to AC fans that wanted some of the best AC games remastered on current gen.

Strongly agree with this. Also, if they just focused on a proper AC2 (since it's arguably the most iconic entry in the whole series) remastered edition rather than an 'enhanced version' of the trilogy I think this would have increased overall unit sales for Ubi which would counteract the extra developing time costs. Obviously this is all speculative but even if they lose a bit more revenue through this path over what they've done with the Ezio Collection I still think it's worthwhile if it shows a better appreciation to their fans and more modest pride in their own work.

RedRanger71
10-01-2016, 11:47 PM
I would like to know any information regarding the "collectors case" edition for these games, i cannot find any link in the ubistore, wondering if anyone else knows? Ezio is by far my favourtite Assassin Creed's character, so I would love to own the ps4 collectible edition.

I cannot find an email address to directly email ubisoft, any help or information would be appreciated.....:confused:

ShadoeKat
10-04-2016, 07:18 PM
I would like to know any information regarding the "collectors case" edition for these games, i cannot find any link in the ubistore, wondering if anyone else knows? Ezio is by far my favourtite Assassin Creed's character, so I would love to own the ps4 collectible edition.

I cannot find an email address to directly email ubisoft, any help or information would be appreciated.....:confused:


I have been watching everything to see if it will be available for North America. Then I talked with someone at the Uplay Store, her name was Amanda, she said she worked on the game edition. She said they don't get dates of when they will go onsale but she thought we would get it. So really no answer as to yes we will. It's available in Europe on the Uplay Store but the link goes to the US store and is a dead page. I have asked on AC Facebook, AC Support, on this forum and no one has an answer/response. Needless to say, I'm disappointed. :(

RedRanger71
10-05-2016, 11:47 AM
I have been watching everything to see if it will be available for North America. Then I talked with someone at the Uplay Store, her name was Amanda, she said she worked on the game edition. She said they don't get dates of when they will go onsale but she thought we would get it. So really no answer as to yes we will. It's available in Europe on the Uplay Store but the link goes to the US store and is a dead page. I have asked on AC Facebook, AC Support, on this forum and no one has an answer/response. Needless to say, I'm disappointed. :(

Thanks for the reply, I have been doing the same thing, I messaged ubisoft on facebook, they told me it isn't available worldwide.....so it would seem there is no definitive answer, so I guess we will have to wait and see if it appears in the store. I too encountered the same thing when accessing the link it is as you say dead!! I am also very disappointed that if it is indeed the case that North America will not get the collectors case edition and that there seems to be very little information forthcoming from Ubisoft..:(

Nerdman3000
10-05-2016, 06:14 PM
So apparently in the Ezio Collection you won't be able to replay missions in AC2: https://www.egmnow.com/articles/news/the-ezio-collection-wont-fix-the-worst-thing-about-assassins-creed-ii/

That pretty much seals the fact I'm probably not going to buy this collection. If they had at least let you replay AC2 missions I might have bought it just for that, but they didn't even do that, and this whole game really just feels like there was no effort put in it. I already own all three games, so I have no need to really buy this collection, especially since it's not really adding anything worthwhile to buy it.

DarkApprent2012
10-06-2016, 04:26 PM
That settles it entirely for me. Not buying it because that was all i wanted!

ajl992015
10-06-2016, 06:43 PM
Why is everyone being so uptight over this? so many games don't have a replay feature but no one complains. I suspect that to include a replay feature must involve a huge amount of coding to change the base game (an opinion of a developer in the forums on this would be great to hear). I preordered the collection for £33 which is £11 per game for noticeably updated versions of each game WITH dlc AND with movies.....sounds like a decent enough deal to me. you probably spend £11 for a meal from a pizza place. People have set their expectations way too high, for what its worth they have made clear improvements and now I get to play one of my favourite trilogies with updated graphics on my ps4. key practice is to keep expectations in check. I also laughed when people spoke about uncharted collection and last of us remastered. I have played both on ps3 and ps4 and the difference is not THAT big, uncharted 1 was great but no where near as big as people make it out to be. Ezio collection is primarily for new fans like the uncharted collection, they have done a decent job. its not even that expensive, its not full price. You are definitely getting your money's worth.

ERICATHERINE
10-07-2016, 01:21 AM
People have set their expectations way too high, ... key practice is to keep expectations in check.

This, exactly. All I want is the games to have the bug of their old versions fixed. For me that's my biggest chance for it to ever happen. There's no way I'll be ...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cdEQmpVIE4A

^-^

Farlander1991
10-09-2016, 07:54 PM
Stumbled upon some official screenshots here. (https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/store/p/assassins-creed-the-ezio-collection/bq9s8zkct3q7#)

Look, we can all argue regarding how much these releases are an improvement really and how much they're worth... but I think that we can all (or 98.561% of us) agree that this:
https://images-eds-ssl.xboxlive.com/image?url=8Oaj9Ryq1G1_p3lLnXlsaZgGzAie6Mnu24_PawYu DYIoH77pJ.X5Z.MqQPibUVTcSVnHUMnQUsczmOnh7kGuBjdFp. Fl_KkNQp789zBFuW1cQITnuOkr5ZrX6.CW.N5tdRFRqkxrgxp4 o8miDeSh_4MGImBMd7iYWKpq5FbH3lOekQAZ6G6HG9eFg1UOFC tc33msLC66_Us9WzpvenYCf8xoaIK3nh23Povq1F9OauQ-&w=1440&h=810&format=jpg

Looks very similar to the original AC2 promo screenshots in terms of coloring:

http://assassins-creed.ru/uploads/images/ac2/screenshot/ac2_loc (14).jpg

Both of which are so much better than the, excuse me, watered down filtered **** we got in the final release:
http://assassins-creed.ru/uploads/images/ac2/screenshot/ac2_loc (108).jpg

MasterAssasin84
10-09-2016, 08:13 PM
Ok as a collectable yes its must have purchase and I will purchasing ! I mean at £65 its a bargain ! however i am thinking on the lines this is something ubisoft is releasing to keep the fanbase interest level stable along side the movie up until the announcement of the next game and I am very excited about the future for Assassins Creed .

m4r-k7
10-09-2016, 09:04 PM
Stumbled upon some official screenshots here. (https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/store/p/assassins-creed-the-ezio-collection/bq9s8zkct3q7#)


https://images-eds-ssl.xboxlive.com/image?url=8Oaj9Ryq1G1_p3lLnXlsaZgGzAie6Mnu24_PawYu DYIoH77pJ.X5Z.MqQPibUVTcSVnHUMnQUsczmOnh7kGuBjdFp. Fl_KkNQp789zBFuW1cQITnuOkr5ZrX6.CW.N5tdRFRqkxrgxp4 o8miDeSh_4MGImBMd7iYWKpq5FbH3lOekQAZ6G6HG9eFg1UOFC tc33msLC66_Us9WzpvenYCf8xoaIK3nh23Povq1F9OauQ-&w=1440&h=810&format=jpg


http://assassins-creed.ru/uploads/images/ac2/screenshot/ac2_loc (108).jpg

This screenshot is the only one where I can actually see an improvement in terms of colour and potential texture quality. I hope the top image is not another bull**** promo image and actually is representative of the game.

Farlander1991
10-09-2016, 10:41 PM
Not only we're gonna get an Ezio Collection game, we're also gonna get Ezio Collection novel (https://www.amazon.fr/Assassins-Creed-trilogie-Oliver-Bowden/dp/B01I4IG9HC/) which puts together all Ezio novels together. I guess with remastered fonts and better paper quality or something :D

SixKeys
10-09-2016, 11:54 PM
I seem to recall Assassin_M saying there's some mission involving the flying machine which doesn't have the blue filter and that the only way to get unfiltered screenshots in Venice is to freeroam during that mission. I forget which one it is though. Are we sure the top screenshot isn't from that mission and the rest still has the blue filter?

Personally I don't care as the filter never bothered me. In fact I prefer it, I like how the different colored filters give each city their own flavour. Venice feels cold and silvery like a diamond, whereas the earthy tones of Florence feel cozy.

Farlander1991
10-10-2016, 12:10 AM
I seem to recall Assassin_M saying there's some mission involving the flying machine which doesn't have the blue filter and that the only way to get unfiltered screenshots in Venice is to freeroam during that mission. I forget which one it is though. Are we sure the top screenshot isn't from that mission and the rest still has the blue filter?

Personally I don't care as the filter never bothered me. In fact I prefer it, I like how the different colored filters give each city their own flavour. Venice feels cold and silvery like a diamond, whereas the earthy tones of Florence feel cozy.

It's not a flying machine mission, it's the mission between the two flying machine ones.

Here you can see Venice without filter in original AC2. I think it's a bug where after the cutscene in Leonardo's workshop (where filters are turned off) they didn't get turned on.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ljinBJU8HP8

And here you can see how unfiltered Venice gets transformed into a filtered Venice after the cutscene in the mission after that one. The difference is fairly striking.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AH8fK4RD3Fs

It's not that it's wrong to have filters, AC1 uses them plenty (though I don't like the Jerusalem one there), but I think that with Venice they've gone overboard (with Jerusalem I have the same issue). There's too much blue, it looks weird. Another problem I have with filters is that when they change the change too suddenly (switching between regions in Rome, switching between country side and city in Toscana) and it's jarring for the eye. Transition needs to be smoother.

SixKeys
10-10-2016, 12:37 AM
The difference is clear, but I honestly don't think it looks better, just different. Matter of taste, I guess.

ERICATHERINE
10-14-2016, 11:36 AM
So, as there been any news about when the next trailer will arrive? I hope the next one will show more gameplay instead of just the less than 10 seconds of gameplay we saw in the only trailer we have for now. Sure, showing cutscenes is fine, but if this remaster is mostly made for the newcomers to the franchise, I wouldn't focus that much on the cutscenes while nearly not showing the gameplay. Now that ubisoft have showed the cutscenes differences I think they should show the gameplay visual difference. ^-^

ERICATHERINE
10-14-2016, 02:21 PM
I just found this. Is it the true second trailer or just fan made? ^-^


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GI7_zJxdBEA

Fauux01
10-14-2016, 09:26 PM
It's fake.

ERICATHERINE
10-15-2016, 01:20 AM
It's fake.

Ok, thanks. ^-^