PDA

View Full Version : Do People Here Like Assassin's Creed Bcoming More RPG?



Abelzorus-Prime
07-05-2017, 01:12 PM
How do you feel about the RPG implementation in Assassin's Creed Origins, and how would you feel if this became constant for the next consecutive games in the series?

Should Assassin's Creed become a more RPG game franchise?

cawatrooper9
07-05-2017, 02:59 PM
That's a pretty good question.

I think it's actually a pretty complex issue, too.

Weapons

For example: the most praised aspect of AC Unity may well be its customization options. We had tons of items, gear, and weapons to customize, and it tended to go over pretty well. That's very RPG-like, especially given the stats of them.

That being said, Origins is improving on this. In Unity, many items were quickly made useless as items at a higher tier were relatively easily obtained. In Origins, it appears that there are only three tiers, but variation within those tiers to allow for reasonable weapons exchange throughout the game.

With weapons, too, it seems like the game might be a little less the typical RPG, in that Bayek is allowed a melee weapon and a bow, both with their own buttons mapped.

Perhaps the most RPG aspect of this is that clearly has some people worried is that the hidden blade, depending on some factors, is no longer necessarily an instant kill.

edit: Forgot to mention, armor is apparently not going to be as closely tied to stats, so players won't have to wear a specific outfit just to max stats. I think that was a really good call- weapons can be aesthetic, too, but robes are far more so, and having to settle for robes that one doesn't like the look of just to get good stats can be a frustrating choice in any RPG

Skills
This, I think, is where people are a little more torn.
Some of the community seems to want skills to be more tied to the narrative- think Ezio learning assassination techniques in Leonardo's courtyard.
Personally, I think that could get repetitive in some ways. We really don't need a mission to learn how to do a double air assassination each game- that's something that I think could be either available from the beginning, or behind a skill wall.

On the other hand, consider if Bayek has a skill that allows for Senu to attack an enemy (like the owl in Far Cry). It might be neat to see their relationship develop where Bayek and his bird learn how they can do this together, as it adds to both of their characters- something that would be absent if it was just locked behind an ability wall.

Ideally, I think RPG skills could be handled like this:
- Previous "staple skills" (like Air assassination) are either unlockable from skill points or present from the beginning

-Narrative events (including, perhaps even the ability to freerun in the beginning) are unlocked naturally from completing events in the game's story.

Now, keep in mind that as this game examines the Creed's "origins", perhaps even these "staple skills" shouldn't be discounted, as their original implementations might be interesting.

SixKeys
07-05-2017, 04:55 PM
It really depends on how enjoyable Origins turns out to be, but so far the changes sound promising.

What I'm worried about is that they won't dare to go far enough to create a true, balanced RPG experience. Ubisoft are too eager to make their games accessible to everyone and they think the way to do it is to hand out everything on a platter. Unity and Syndicate dabbled in skill points, but they only served to make the games too easy. Instead of forcing the player to choose one branch (with advantages and disadvantages balancing each other out), they made it possible to gain every single skill point eventually. They even tied trophies to it, so if you were a completionist you HAD to purchase every skill.

Like Cawatrooper mentioned, having to integrate the standard air-assassinate, haystack kills etc. tutorials into the narrative starts to feel artificial at some point. It already felt a little contrived when AC4 had the enemies asking Edward to show them his assassin moves. I prefer the idea of having to invest skill points into special assassination moves. It feeds into the idea that every player crafts their own, unique experience. If you want to be a marksman, invest in some fancy bow skills, at the cost of brutal combat executions or superior stealth abilities.

flambeau2
07-05-2017, 07:41 PM
^
Couldn't had worded it better. And to think that it could be easily solved with the good old fashioned easy-normal-hard modes done right (and not only by making enemies bullet sponges). It baffles me how devs/publishers are trying hard to massify an experience that should be unique to each player.

AnimusLover
07-05-2017, 08:07 PM
^
Couldn't had worded it better. And to think that it could be easily solved with the good old fashioned easy-normal-hard modes done right (and not only by making enemies bullet sponges). It baffles me how devs/publishers are trying hard to massify an experience that should be unique to each player.

No, No, No! I HATE difficulty modes because anything less than the hardest one undermines any achievement. Ubisoft's restraint from difficulty settings in the AC games is the one consistent good thing about the series. The difficulty of the game should be determined by what you do and don't do in the world and the choices you make. They kind of alluded to this with the optional objectives but this was very checklisty and not nearly deep enough.

In regards to whether going full RPG is a good thing or not, it's hard to tell until I start playing but, upon first impressions, it feels like putting a rug over a big scratch on the laminated floor. Sure, the rug is masking it but the problem remains. With Black Flag, rather than fixing the problems in the series that became apparent after Revelations, they gave you a shiny new ship and a big old ocean to play around in. The RPG element is basically the Jackdaw, the shiny new toy to distract everyone from the franchise's ever growing problems.

AC not being an RPG is not the problem and making it one does not automatically guarantee success. AC needs a good story with likeable characters, like it had before, and needs to be a world that is ambiguous to the player's presence and invites us to explore.

LoyalACFan
07-05-2017, 09:58 PM
To be honest, I'm still not totally sold on it. I greatly enjoyed the bits that I played at E3, but I didn't really have to deal with any painstaking stat balancing and shuffling gear, which is what I typically hate about RPG's. Always seems like busywork to me. The new quest system is really promising, as it'll hopefully remove the terrible side mission sludge we've been seeing more of since Unity, but on the other hand, I don't know how rewarding those quests will be if you don't really have control over the outcome. That's what's fun about RPG side quests; the actual role-playing. TW3's quests wouldn't have been nearly as well-received if you didn't have a large amount of control over how they turned out. So, ultimately, I don't know.

cawatrooper9
07-05-2017, 10:30 PM
To be honest, I'm still not totally sold on it. I greatly enjoyed the bits that I played at E3, but I didn't really have to deal with any painstaking stat balancing and shuffling gear, which is what I typically hate about RPG's. Always seems like busywork to me. The new quest system is really promising, as it'll hopefully remove the terrible side mission sludge we've been seeing more of since Unity, but on the other hand, I don't know how rewarding those quests will be if you don't really have control over the outcome. That's what's fun about RPG side quests; the actual role-playing. TW3's quests wouldn't have been nearly as well-received if you didn't have a large amount of control over how they turned out. So, ultimately, I don't know.

Yeah, I think it really boils down to "we'll have to see what it really ends up being", but I definitely get the impression that inventory management isn't going to be a tedious as most RPGs. Probably something similar to Unity, but with simply more options and looting. Get an item, compare it to your equipped, and use or trash it.

Kiroku
07-05-2017, 10:55 PM
I actually like the RPG way of the AC series. At least the idea since I havent played origins yet.

The reason why is because of the possibilities to explore the world with all those mysteries and history. Also the potential is really huge since you can form quests just to get to your target you have to assassinate. For example having 2 or 3 possible quests and you can decide which one of them you want to do. All quests will give you different informations about the target. So how, where and when you face your target depends on the quests you chose which would be awesome.

The second reason why I wanted the RPG style for so long now (like after black flag) was the time we play the protagonist. Because of the varity and quantity of side quests you have more time to understand the character you play and by time you maybe feel more connected to him. We played Desmond in 5 Games and Ezio through 3 games and thats why we love both of them so much. We had enough time to build a connection to them. And the RPG style is perfect for that. Same for the modern day. Depending on what the new MD protagonist will be we could have more time to talk to the old characters like shaun and rebecca to learn more about them and especially about their feelings after what happend in the games before.

For me.. I love the connection one can build between you and the protagonist and characters that are around for such a long time. It makes the game more immersive.

Another reason is that you can choose your way to play in a more specific way. You can decide where to go when to go and how you do it. Following the creed and sneak with the shadows and be a silent death bringer and peacemaker or go like spartacus god of the arena and slay everyone just because you can. Going for a specific weapon type like just the hidden blade, the bow, a spear, prepare for quests and think about a strategy how to take down your target successfully.

Overall it feels like a great journey with a character you follow the whole time. And thats what makes it absolutely wonderfull.

After the release of Witcher 3 (sorry for comparing like dozens of others but I have to) I played the game and thought wow.. this open world rpg style connected to the AC series would be a really good solution and bring some good new opportunities to it. I dont know if I am right.. maybe.. maybe not. We will see. But I have a good feeling about this one after a long time..

The only thing I am still missing so far and still hope that some day they will implement it is a "FEAR SYSTEM" like in the Ezio collection. Enemies see their mates getting killed one by one and run for their lives. Regardless if you kill them sneaky and they notice like "oh im alone? where is everyone? hello? someone?" or in a real fight face to face. That would be great. And people then talking about a mysterious assassin being around seeking for justice.

Megas_Doux
07-06-2017, 12:52 AM
If that improves combat, then so be it! Besides I think it kinda suits the setting.

ohoni
07-06-2017, 01:02 AM
I think the franchise has already been pretty RPG since Black Flag (or maybe 3?). I don't have strong feelings about that one way or the other, so long as it doesn't get in the way of the game playing like an Assassin's Creed game. A problem that has been raised about how AC:O handles it, however, is that you can't assassinate enemies that are significantly higher level than yourself (at least not without heavy investment that you can't reasonably make while at low levels), which means that there will likely be plenty of scenarios in which enemies cannot be assassinated until you grind out more levels, and that just seems completely anathema to how an AC game should work. If your blade can reach them, it should kill them. Always.


No, No, No! I HATE difficulty modes because anything less than the hardest one undermines any achievement.

Agreed, the game should ONLY have the easiest mode, that the widest possible number of players can complete. There's no need for a "normal" or "hard" mode.

joelsantos24
07-06-2017, 10:14 AM
It really depends on how enjoyable Origins turns out to be, but so far the changes sound promising.

What I'm worried about is that they won't dare to go far enough to create a true, balanced RPG experience. Ubisoft are too eager to make their games accessible to everyone and they think the way to do it is to hand out everything on a platter. Unity and Syndicate dabbled in skill points, but they only served to make the games too easy. Instead of forcing the player to choose one branch (with advantages and disadvantages balancing each other out), they made it possible to gain every single skill point eventually. They even tied trophies to it, so if you were a completionist you HAD to purchase every skill.

Like Cawatrooper mentioned, having to integrate the standard air-assassinate, haystack kills etc. tutorials into the narrative starts to feel artificial at some point. It already felt a little contrived when AC4 had the enemies asking Edward to show them his assassin moves. I prefer the idea of having to invest skill points into special assassination moves. It feeds into the idea that every player crafts their own, unique experience. If you want to be a marksman, invest in some fancy bow skills, at the cost of brutal combat executions or superior stealth abilities.
Yeah, I think the change from simply having some RPG elements to being a full RPG, is much welcome. However, there are some worrying signs:

- They're still very secretive about the specifics of the gear (or loot) system;
- We even get the idea that gear won't have attributes and properties, to strengthen and enforce or approach or play style;
- There's also the strong possibility of gear not even dropping as loot and being only upgradable through crafting, which doesn't contribute, at all, for build (and play style) diversity;
- The skill tree being apparently too mono-dimensional (most stealth skills appear to be linked or even tied to the bow and it's use, so everything is always combat-oriented, even stealth, ironically);

These are some very bad notions, in my opinion, and they're not doing much to clear our minds or enlighten our doubts.


Yeah, I think it really boils down to "we'll have to see what it really ends up being", but I definitely get the impression that inventory management isn't going to be a tedious as most RPGs. Probably something similar to Unity, but with simply more options and looting. Get an item, compare it to your equipped, and use or trash it.
But isn't that at the core of every full RPG experience? That's the point, it's a role-playing game, so heavy inventory (gear; weapons; crafting resources; abilities; etc) management is always welcome because, having much to do and to choose from, promotes diversity and variability in the approach and play style. It appears that gear might not drop from killing NPC's, besides weapons, which means that we're probably going to have all the same gear, upgradable only by crafting.

A good RPG would have different gear sets, with different attributes, properties or talents, which would complement our own personal approach, in correspondence with the skills we choose to unlock. We don't know much about anything, because they're not saying or showing much, but the skill tree is riddled with combat-oriented skills (namely the stealth one's, if you can believe that), gear will be generic, it seems, and not drop from NPC's or caches, and it won't have any properties, attributes or talents, so, how are we going to specialise at a particular approach or play style?

dxsxhxcx
07-06-2017, 12:12 PM
Agreed, the game should ONLY have the easiest mode, that the widest possible number of players can complete. There's no need for a "normal" or "hard" mode.

Kinda selfish don't you think? I for one would love to have different difficulty options to choose and I'm certain a lot of people would like that as well..

I don't know how the option to choose a different difficulty can harm other people's experience other than hurting their ego, make the easy mode the current AC experience, normal a little harder and hard even harder, Ubisoft shouldn't add achievements to these options though because that would force completionists to play a certain difficulty they may not want to.

and before the "the animus' nature don't allow difficulty settings" people arrive:

1. This is a game for Christ' sake;
2. The option to choose the difficulty would be available before you even begin the story-mode;

Name suggestions for the options (to avoid hurting some people's ego and because they kinda make sense):

Easy/default AC experience = Master Assassin;
Normal = Assassin;
Hard = Apprentice;

Abelzorus-Prime
07-06-2017, 12:57 PM
I am definitely not in favour for difficulty settings in Assassin's Creed. Though I do think they should implement elements in the games that reward more skilled players.

dxsxhxcx
07-06-2017, 01:03 PM
I am definitely not in favour for difficulty settings in Assassin's Creed. Though I do think they should implement elements in the games that reward more skilled players.

Assuming the different options would only enhance the experience by adding more challenge to it (no achievements or exclusive content attached to them) and the current default AC experience would still exist as it is and be one of the options available, can you please tell me why you're against it?

I'm just trying to understand how an OPTION that won't affect your experience in any way can be a problem.

joelsantos24
07-06-2017, 01:16 PM
Kinda selfish don't you think? I for one would love to have different difficulty options to choose and I'm certain a lot of people would like that as well..

I don't know how the option to choose a different difficulty can harm other people's experience other than hurting their ego, make the easy mode the current AC experience, normal a little harder and hard even harder, Ubisoft shouldn't add achievements to these options though because that would force completionists to play a certain difficulty they may not want to.

and before the "the animus' nature don't allow difficulty settings" people arrive:

1. This is a game for Christ' sake;
2. The option to choose the difficulty would be available before you even begin the story-mode;

Name suggestions for the options (to avoid hurting some people's ego and because they kinda make sense):

Easy/default AC experience = Master Assassin;
Normal = Assassin;
Hard = Apprentice;
Yeah, well... Some people think they know better what AC is or should be.

Anyway, I totally agree with you. Moreover, being a full RPG, one of the goals is to grind for gear and weapons. Even though it seems gear won't even drop from killing NPC's, it appears we'll be just grinding for rewards, whatever those might be. In an RPG, replaying missions or quests (secondary missions), wouldn't even be acceptable without different difficulty levels, let alone engaging or captivating. The fundamental purpose, is to keep the fanbase engaged and playing for longer periods of time. Therefore, I'm pretty confident different difficulty modes will be included in the game, since it's an accepted standard for an RPG.


I am definitely not in favour for difficulty settings in Assassin's Creed. Though I do think they should implement elements in the games that reward more skilled players.
Well, increasing difficulty levels are more than expected in RPG's. The term "grinding" is the key.

Why should I, or any other player for that matter, be forced to play missions at a very easy level, if I enjoy or desire a much more challenging standard? It's important not to lock rewards behind more challenging obstacles, if some players don't enjoy those. So, if you want hard or more challenging modes, they should simply grant us a higher number of rewards, instead of better (or different) ones. Nonetheless, the hardcore players shouldn't have to suffer because of the casual players, and vice-versa. Fair options for all players, is the appropriate answer.

dxsxhxcx
07-06-2017, 01:23 PM
Yeah, well... Some people think they know better what AC is or should be.


the funny thing is that I don't even consider myself a hardcore player and I usually play games at the default difficulty, but I enjoy having the option to challenge myself after my first playthrough or go easy and just have fun with the game, difficulty settings alone add tons of replay value to a game.

joelsantos24
07-06-2017, 01:58 PM
the funny thing is that I don't even consider myself a hardcore player and I usually play games at the default difficulty, but I enjoy having the option to challenge myself after my first playthrough or go easy and just have fun with the game, difficulty settings alone add tons of replay value to a game.
Exactly. Which is why they're a crucial focus on RPG's.

ohoni
07-06-2017, 02:02 PM
Kinda selfish don't you think? I for one would love to have different difficulty options to choose and I'm certain a lot of people would like that as well..

Well, like Animuslover said, having multiple difficulties kind of ruins it, so if you're only going to have a single difficulty mode, it needs to be the one that the broadest spread of people can complete, the easiest version possible, like "story mode" in a Bioware game. Sure, if you were going to have multiple difficulty modes then you could also include ones that are really difficult, and players who were into that sort of thing could take pride in having completed the more difficult version, but where's the fun in that? People like Animuslover wouldn't want anything like that, they just want the single, easy mode version.



Anyway, I totally agree with you. Moreover, being a full RPG, one of the goals is to grind for gear and weapons. Even though it seems gear won't even drop from killing NPC's, it appears we'll be just grinding for rewards, whatever those might be.

Weapons do drop, we know that, just probably not armor. Probably enemies also drop crafting mats, animals definitely do.

cawatrooper9
07-06-2017, 02:05 PM
But isn't that at the core of every full RPG experience? That's the point, it's a role-playing game, so heavy inventory (gear; weapons; crafting resources; abilities; etc) management is always welcome because, having much to do and to choose from, promotes diversity and variability in the approach and play style. It appears that gear might not drop from killing NPC's, besides weapons, which means that we're probably going to have all the same gear, upgradable only by crafting.

A good RPG would have different gear sets, with different attributes, properties or talents, which would complement our own personal approach, in correspondence with the skills we choose to unlock. We don't know much about anything, because they're not saying or showing much, but the skill tree is riddled with combat-oriented skills (namely the stealth one's, if you can believe that), gear will be generic, it seems, and not drop from NPC's or caches, and it won't have any properties, attributes or talents, so, how are we going to specialise at a particular approach or play style?

I'm not sure it's that simple.

First, we don't know how "RPG" this game really is yet.

Second, I don't think RPG necessarily translates to "heavy inventory management". True, there's a ton of overlap between the two, but as pointed out in the HB thread, there are plenty of RPGs where this isn't really as much of a factor.

joelsantos24
07-06-2017, 02:19 PM
I'm not sure it's that simple.

First, we don't know how "RPG" this game really is yet.

Second, I don't think RPG necessarily translates to "heavy inventory management". True, there's a ton of overlap between the two, but as pointed out in the HB thread, there are plenty of RPGs where this isn't really as much of a factor.
I also didn't mean it as some sort of direct translation. But if you do have balance between the gear sets, talents, attributes and abilities, having much to choose from does contribute towards variability in player builds.

As far as Origins is concerned, we don't have gear sets. Gear, apparently, doesn't drop from NPC's. Gear pieces don't appear to have statistics, nor talents, nor properties, nor major or minor attributes, for that matter. Abilities are biased towards a specific approach, it seems. So I ask again, where will we get this highly customisable character and corresponding play style? Where or how, I might add?

cawatrooper9
07-06-2017, 03:00 PM
I also didn't mean it as some sort of direct translation. But if you do have balance between the gear sets, talents, attributes and abilities, having much to choose from does contribute towards variability in player builds.

As far as Origins is concerned, we don't have gear sets. Gear, apparently, doesn't drop from NPC's. Gear pieces don't appear to have statistics, nor talents, nor properties, nor major or minor attributes, for that matter. Abilities are biased towards a specific approach, it seems. So I ask again, where will we get this highly customisable character and corresponding play style? Where or how, I might add?[

Well, obviously no one here knows.

But I still think we're trying to "Skyrim" this game a little too much. We know we're getting skill trees. We know we're getting weapons with stats. But I really don't think this game is going to be as intensive of an RPG as people seem to believe at the moment. It's still Assassins Creed.

joelsantos24
07-06-2017, 03:21 PM
Well, obviously no one here knows.

But I still think we're trying to "Skyrim" this game a little too much. We know we're getting skill trees. We know we're getting weapons with stats. But I really don't think this game is going to be as intensive of an RPG as people seem to believe at the moment. It's still Assassins Creed.
Yeah, I was being sort of rhetorical... :cool:

Anyway, I just have many doubts creeping in, about this whole RPG experience. I love RPG's, and all the RPG's I play, have a strong emphasis on variability and multi-dimensionality, as far as customisation, play styles and approaches are concerned. Out of the sudden, however, we're being told that, apparently, we're getting a full RPG out of Origins, but without any gear (gear statistics and attributes) to collect and choose from, or even the possibility to ultimately play the way we want, because abilities are, either way, combat-oriented.

I admit that I thought, well, I'll take whatever I can from the skills and complement with gear attributes and talents. But then, I discover that we don't get any gear, there's no gear in the game and what we have seems to be merely aesthetical (WTF?), and it doesn't have any properties or talents, to begin with.

So, we're scre***!

SixKeys
07-06-2017, 04:50 PM
But isn't that at the core of every full RPG experience? That's the point, it's a role-playing game, so heavy inventory (gear; weapons; crafting resources; abilities; etc) management is always welcome because, having much to do and to choose from, promotes diversity and variability in the approach and play style. It appears that gear might not drop from killing NPC's, besides weapons, which means that we're probably going to have all the same gear, upgradable only by crafting.

Inventory management should cater to your playstyle but not create the feeling that you have to stop to change your gear every 5 minutes. This is what The Witcher 3 did and I hated it, although in fairness, that game also had degradeable weapons and armor, forcing you to micro-manage a lot more than some other RPGs.

I only want to change weapons if they feel suited to my playstyle (i.e. using a certain type of bow or sword more than others) or because I like the way they look. I don't want to go through a long side quest that leads to an extra special legendary super duper weapon, only to emerge out of the tomb, run into a bandit, and loot a sword that already has better stats. It's like saving up all your money for a year, buying the latest iPhone for $800, only to hear the next day that a newer, better model is already on its way and yours just went down in price. I want to enjoy my achievements. I want the gear I find to be meaningful in some way, not just disposable trash.

Inventory management is only enjoyable in games that offer limited resources, like The Last of Us. That game forced you to seriously consider what was absolutely necessary vs. what was luxury. Do you craft a health kit or a bomb? A bomb or a molotov? Which one will come in more useful in your current situation? It also encouraged switching up weapons depending on the situation. The bow was a handy stealth weapon against even the toughest enemies, but should you conserve your arrows for now, since they're much more rare than bullets? Admittedly, TLoU wasn't an RPG, I'm just giving an example of inventory management that is less about shuffling things around just to keep a clear overview and more about each item having a function.


Well, like Animuslover said, having multiple difficulties kind of ruins it, so if you're only going to have a single difficulty mode, it needs to be the one that the broadest spread of people can complete, the easiest version possible, like "story mode" in a Bioware game. Sure, if you were going to have multiple difficulty modes then you could also include ones that are really difficult, and players who were into that sort of thing could take pride in having completed the more difficult version, but where's the fun in that? People like Animuslover wouldn't want anything like that, they just want the single, easy mode version.

Suddenly your earlier comments about how you don't like challenge make sense. It sounds like you would remove combat entirely if that were an option, since you seem to just want the story and nothing in the way of actual obstacles. But AC is not a Telltale game.


Yeah, I was being sort of rhetorical... :cool:

Anyway, I just have many doubts creeping in, about this whole RPG experience. I love RPG's, and all the RPG's I play, have a strong emphasis on variability and multi-dimensionality, as far as customisation, play styles and approaches are concerned. Out of the sudden, however, we're being told that, apparently, we're getting a full RPG out of Origins, but without any gear (gear statistics and attributes) to collect and choose from, or even the possibility to ultimately play the way we want, because abilities are, either way, combat-oriented.

I admit that I thought, well, I'll take whatever I can from the skills and complement with gear attributes and talents. But then, I discover that we don't get any gear, there's no gear in the game and what we have seems to be merely aesthetical (WTF?), and it doesn't have any properties or talents, to begin with.

So, we're scre***!

I don't recall the devs making statements about ACO being a "full" RPG, just that it has more RPG elements than before. Claiming it was a full RPG would be completely false already on the basis of lacking dialogue trees. From what I've seen, I think I prefer the direction they've taken. They're integrating some popular RPG elements whilst keeping one foot planted in the traditional action-adventure genre, where narratives are straightforward and sticking to that one weapon you like throughout the game is a valid approach.

cawatrooper9
07-06-2017, 05:04 PM
Remember, too- a lot of the "skills" that many people seem to like are probably not going to so much be traditional RPG-style skills. Sure, there may be a few that upgrade damage for a specific type of weapon, but a lot might be stuff that simply lets you get more money when looting, or gives you alternative types of takedowns. If you really want to ignore the skills for the most part, it's probably somewhat doable.

But again, you'd have to acknowledge that you're playing an RPG-esque game in a way it wasn't meant to be played. Doable doesn't mean it'll be easy.

Rugterwyper32
07-06-2017, 06:48 PM
I only want to change weapons if they feel suited to my playstyle (i.e. using a certain type of bow or sword more than others) or because I like the way they look. I don't want to go through a long side quest that leads to an extra special legendary super duper weapon, only to emerge out of the tomb, run into a bandit, and loot a sword that already has better stats. It's like saving up all your money for a year, buying the latest iPhone for $800, only to hear the next day that a newer, better model is already on its way and yours just went down in price. I want to enjoy my achievements. I want the gear I find to be meaningful in some way, not just disposable trash. .

I'd say that boils down a lot more to the dreaded level scaling. Oblivion, for instance, is absolutely guilty of things like that. Which is a reason I'm pretty much entirely against level scaling. I want to bring up two of my favorite games, one that's properly an RPG and another one with RPG elements, that pull that off right and that Origins could learn from to deal with that. First is Morrowind. As far as RPGs go, the main issue I feel it has is the (pretty bad) dice roll combat. But if it gets one thing right, it's the fact that things don't scale. Enemies in the overworld in general are pretty consistent, so with the exception of a few areas you can explore freely and with ease. Then you have dungeons, in which enemies are usually tougher and the game pretty much tells you "come back here later", but because things don't scale and loot's properly placed, you can be assured that returning to that location will contain a good reward. There's a good sense of satisfaction to getting certain loot and usually after getting it you knew it was worth keeping. Or, if you couldn't use it, just sell it to the Museum of Artifacts if you could indeed do that, sometimes getting a weapon or armor type you wouldn't use was still worth it because it'd earn you a hell of a lot of money.

And then there's the other game, one that's not an RPG but has RPG elements. The Metroidvania game Castlevania: Aria of Sorrow. Unlike Morrowind, in this one you don't have to worry about having certain skills at a certain level for certain items to be useful. But between the different types of factors depending on the weapon (vertical or horizontal slice, range, speed, if there's elemental damage...) getting new weapons was consistently worth it. And then you have the souls, your side weapons, which depending on your preference you'll be trying different things. The way the game paces things, you have this constant flow of new weapons, armor, and souls (though RNG does make getting some a bit more complicated than it needs to be) and because all of them have some value and progression feels rather natural, there's satisfaction to most things you get. And because of how the game plays out, you'll end up testing out other weapons at many points. You'd think that after getting stronger weapons, Hrunting wouldn't be as useful, for instance, but as it turns out the fact it's poison elemental and hits fast makes it worth coming back to even if you have stronger physical attack weapons.

I dunno what I'm trying to get to here, to be honest, but that's the sort of progression I'd like to see in this game. I've accepted the fact that dealing with higher level camps in early levels is nearly downright impossible, for instance, but I want them to look at games like those two and make it so your progression feels satisfying rather than "I cleared up another camp and got closer to unlocking x thing, yay". Even if we don't get gear per-se and what we obtain for gear is mostly cosmetic, I'd like to at least get, say, the upgrade plans to improve my gear rather than have to grind for materials to upgrade something.

Yeah, this is a bit messy but it's just some musings that came to mind from that little comment of yours. In conclusion: I want no silly level scaling than renders your obtaining gear something pointless (like in the case of Oblivion), but rather some level of natural progression and a proper reason to keep me away from taking down certain camps/outposts rather than just an arbitrary "we don't want you in this area yet because reasons" take on it. If I'm gonna be kept out of a location due to level, make it for a reason.

joelsantos24
07-06-2017, 06:58 PM
Inventory management should cater to your playstyle but not create the feeling that you have to stop to change your gear every 5 minutes. This is what The Witcher 3 did and I hated it, although in fairness, that game also had degradeable weapons and armor, forcing you to micro-manage a lot more than some other RPGs.
Absolutely. I also don't find it enjoyable, having to pause every 5-10 minutes, in order to change a few things in my build. Having Loadouts helps, that is, different builds with different combinations of gear pieces, talents and attributes. That way, the change doesn't get too bothersome.


I only want to change weapons if they feel suited to my playstyle (i.e. using a certain type of bow or sword more than others) or because I like the way they look. I don't want to go through a long side quest that leads to an extra special legendary super duper weapon, only to emerge out of the tomb, run into a bandit, and loot a sword that already has better stats. It's like saving up all your money for a year, buying the latest iPhone for $800, only to hear the next day that a newer, better model is already on its way and yours just went down in price. I want to enjoy my achievements. I want the gear I find to be meaningful in some way, not just disposable trash.
Except the weapons are not the only pieces we will carry. We have gear equipped, but at the same time, apparently, we won't have anything on. Or at least, nothing that will function beyond the aesthetical boundary, so it'll be just like vanity items (which is even more nonsensical). We'll all have the same generic gear; we'll all have the same upgrades; we'll all move in the same, linear, boring development path. I said before that this is a truly lazy option, as RPG's are concerned. I still think that way.


I don't recall the devs making statements about ACO being a "full" RPG, just that it has more RPG elements than before. Claiming it was a full RPG would be completely false already on the basis of lacking dialogue trees. From what I've seen, I think I prefer the direction they've taken. They're integrating some popular RPG elements whilst keeping one foot planted in the traditional action-adventure genre, where narratives are straightforward and sticking to that one weapon you like throughout the game is a valid approach.
Well... Whatever, I'm absolutely tired of this "RPG vs. RPG elements" discussion. I just don't care about it anymore.

Making it an RPG and then not even creating different gear sets for different play styles, not allowing gear to drop from NPC's and caches (but then again, all the gear is the same, or there's no gear to begin with, so I suppose it makes sense at least), forcing the same, straightforward crafting option on all players, etc, just killed all the enthusiasm I had about the game.

Abelzorus-Prime
07-06-2017, 09:59 PM
Assuming the different options would only enhance the experience by adding more challenge to it (no achievements or exclusive content attached to them) and the current default AC experience would still exist as it is and be one of the options available, can you please tell me why you're against it?

I'm just trying to understand how an OPTION that won't affect your experience in any way can be a problem.

Too be honest I'm not fervantly against It as I wouldn't really care if they did implement it, it's just that I'm not accustomed to it in AC and I don't see any reason why it needs to be their, when playing AC I'm never yearning for an easier or harder difficulty mode. I have had some problems with all 9 AC's and a difficulty setting wasn't one of them.

SHADOWGARVIN
07-06-2017, 10:19 PM
I From what I've seen, I think I prefer the direction they've taken. They're integrating some popular RPG elements whilst keeping one foot planted in the traditional action-adventure genre, where narratives are straightforward and sticking to that one weapon you like throughout the game is a valid approach.

I completely agree.

ohoni
07-07-2017, 12:58 AM
Suddenly your earlier comments about how you don't like challenge make sense. It sounds like you would remove combat entirely if that were an option, since you seem to just want the story and nothing in the way of actual obstacles. But AC is not a Telltale game.

No, personally, I like a little challenge. If it were up to me, the AC games would remain roughly as challenging as previous iterations. But Animuslover was arguing that the game should have only a single difficulty level, and when you think about it, a game with only a single difficulty level would need to have a difficulty level that the broadest number of players could pass through, right?


Well... Whatever, I'm absolutely tired of this "RPG vs. RPG elements" discussion. I just don't care about it anymore.

Um, dude, that's entirely your discussion. You're like the only one insisting that there is a distinction to be made there.

SixKeys
07-07-2017, 03:31 AM
Except the weapons are not the only pieces we will carry. We have gear equipped, but at the same time, apparently, we won't have anything on. Or at least, nothing that will function beyond the aesthetical boundary, so it'll be just like vanity items (which is even more nonsensical). We'll all have the same generic gear; we'll all have the same upgrades; we'll all move in the same, linear, boring development path. I said before that this is a truly lazy option, as RPG's are concerned. I still think that way.


Well... Whatever, I'm absolutely tired of this "RPG vs. RPG elements" discussion. I just don't care about it anymore.

Making it an RPG and then not even creating different gear sets for different play styles, not allowing gear to drop from NPC's and caches (but then again, all the gear is the same, or there's no gear to begin with, so I suppose it makes sense at least), forcing the same, straightforward crafting option on all players, etc, just killed all the enthusiasm I had about the game.

The problem is that you keep insisting that ACO is an RPG. If you think of it like that, I can understand the disappointment, but the idea that it's a "real" RPG, as opposed to an AC game that simply integrates some RPG-like elements, is what you made out of it. They're not "making [it] an RPG", hence they're not doing RPG wrong.

Fatal-Feit
07-07-2017, 04:13 AM
I'm pretty sure Ashraf have claimed Origins to be a full-fledged RPG multiple times, on many different videos. If I'm not feeling lazy later today, I'll try to do some digging.

ohoni
07-07-2017, 06:27 AM
Except the weapons are not the only pieces we will carry. We have gear equipped, but at the same time, apparently, we won't have anything on. Or at least, nothing that will function beyond the aesthetical boundary, so it'll be just like vanity items (which is even more nonsensical). We'll all have the same generic gear; we'll all have the same upgrades; we'll all move in the same, linear, boring development path. I said before that this is a truly lazy option, as RPG's are concerned. I still think that way.

Um, there's nothing "nonsensical" about this. The clothes you wear should have negligible impact on your performance. I mean, the armor of the time was limited at best, and as a stealth assassin you aren't likely to have the strongest Roman armor on anyway. Beyond that, if you aren't in a magical fantasy setting where armors are actually enchanted, or a sci-fi one where they're powered, there really is no reason why armor would provide any difference to your stats beyond trading your existing stealth and stamina away in exchange for higher damage absorption.

cawatrooper9
07-07-2017, 02:47 PM
there really is no reason why armor would provide any difference to your stats beyond trading your existing stealth and stamina away in exchange for higher damage absorption.

Actually, I kind of like that idea.

Instead of each piece of armor having tangible stats, perhaps there could just be outfit classes (not unlike Liberation).

A heavy class could include all of the more heavily armored outfits (like the awesome looking Medieval robes in Unity) and would let the player take more of a beating while granting less stealth bonuses, while an Infiltration class could be more prone to being wounded but also was easier to be stealthy in.

Maybe we could have a few other classes too, but I like that dichotomy. That way, you still have a good degree of freedom per outfit, but with at least some logic behind it.

joelsantos24
07-07-2017, 07:25 PM
The problem is that you keep insisting that ACO is an RPG. If you think of it like that, I can understand the disappointment, but the idea that it's a "real" RPG, as opposed to an AC game that simply integrates some RPG-like elements, is what you made out of it. They're not "making [it] an RPG", hence they're not doing RPG wrong.
Well, I'm just responding to the claims that the developers have made (https://www.gamespot.com/articles/e3-2017-assassins-creed-origins-is-a-true-open-wor/1100-6450770/). To create this game as an RPG, and that's exactly the premise that was promoted, and then make the gear function merely as vanity items, is nonsensical, to say the least. I mean, the weapons carry a full set of attributes and properties, but gear doesn't. Seriously?


I'm pretty sure Ashraf have claimed Origins to be a full-fledged RPG multiple times, on many different videos. If I'm not feeling lazy later today, I'll try to do some digging.
Exactly. The developers have pushed this notion more than once.


NOTE: One more thing, when I talk about gear, I'm referring to the chest piece, the holster, the vambraces, the greaves, etc. I'm not talking about clothing, for God's sakes. A chest piece isn't a sweater. And a pair of vambraces aren't bracelets. Gear is gear. Clothes are clothes. Gear has a performance-oriented purpose. Clothing, besides theoretically providing more or less social blending, do not. Some people are talking about gear, myself included, and others come "running and shouting" about clothing and vanity items. I don't know what these people are thinking, and I'm not really interested, but those are two very much different concepts. I know some people are giving their best, trying to rationalise the fact that gear, apparently, has no attributes, properties or even statistics whatsoever, in and RPG, no less, but that doesn't require mixing two very different notions.

AnimusLover
07-07-2017, 08:40 PM
No, personally, I like a little challenge. If it were up to me, the AC games would remain roughly as challenging as previous iterations. But Animuslover was arguing that the game should have only a single difficulty level, and when you think about it, a game with only a single difficulty level would need to have a difficulty level that the broadest number of players could pass through, right?

re BIB Not necessarily what I meant :) you could have a single difficulty and have it be extremely hard but the things you do in the world e.g. optional side missions,
obtaining special items, doing favours for people etc can make it easier like Dark Souls 2 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MM2dDF4B9a4).
This makes it feel more organic and makes the player feel more connected with the world.
Basically, the real reason I hate difficulty settings is because it's lazy and feels like a crutch for developers to not come up with creative ways for players
to overcome that difficulty via the mechanics. It also means that if you're a bit OCD like me, you'll always play on the hardest difficulty anyway.