PDA

View Full Version : Steam and Slowmotion?



iN3krO
10-24-2011, 11:13 AM
So, my first question is:

In last Assassin's Creed if i buy physical copy of the game i'm not likely be able to activate it on steam.
Some games can be bought physicaly and then be activated on steam.
Will AcR be like those games? I would really like to get a special edition and have it on steam but i'm not likely buying it if i can't activate in steam :S

My second question:

Will final kills be in slowmotion or will i be able to disactivate it?
The game is getting more unrealistic in each installement and i don't like how it's envolving :S

lukaszep
10-24-2011, 01:36 PM
On options you can choose how often the action cam works. So if you want, it could be 10/10 or 0/10.

iN3krO
10-24-2011, 01:59 PM
Originally posted by lukaszep:
On options you can choose how often the action cam works. So if you want, it could be 10/10 or 0/10.

Could you provide some proof? Reference or Video would be cool.

Jexx21
10-24-2011, 02:09 PM
look at the past games options. there will be a setting for it.

ACR is not a steamworks game, you will not be able to activate it on steam.

superbalex
10-24-2011, 02:17 PM
Originally posted by Jexx21:
look at the past games options. there will be a setting for it.

ACR is not a steamworks game, you will not be able to activate it on steam.

then what is that button "activate non-steam product" for?

actually you CAN activate it on steam, you can with any game, you just need to activate it with an unused serial code

Jexx21
10-24-2011, 02:24 PM
that code isn't a steam code, it won't work.

I tried it before.

And that says "Activate a product on Steam"

the other one says "Add a non-steam game" which just means that you can put a shortcut into steam so that you can press the button and the game will be on the list and you'll be able to access the steam overlay in the game.

iN3krO
10-24-2011, 02:48 PM
Originally posted by Jexx21:
that code isn't a steam code, it won't work.

I tried it before.

And that says "Activate a product on Steam"

the other one says "Add a non-steam game" which just means that you can put a shortcut into steam so that you can press the button and the game will be on the list and you'll be able to access the steam overlay in the game.

That's why i asked if ubisoft decided to include this in steam...

Call Of Duty and Football Manager are games that comes with steam keys. Why can't AcR come with a steam key too? It wouldn't be a must for players to play thought steam but it would make ppl happier and help ubisoft raise money (i only buy games on steam or physical copies with steam keys), but i really want a special edition -.-

Sarari
10-24-2011, 02:50 PM
The game is getting more unrealistic in each installement and i don't like how it's envolving :S
^This

r4inm4n1991
10-24-2011, 02:59 PM
Unrealistic just beacause its slow-mo?
Thats only for the "Style", in doesnt happen to Ezio xD

Sarari
10-24-2011, 03:04 PM
No, not cause of the slow motion. Just the game in general. A lot of people don't seem to notice it though, which means they're just happy that the game is easier because of it....just a guess

LightRey
10-24-2011, 03:11 PM
Originally posted by Sarari:
No, not cause of the slow motion. Just the game in general. A lot of people don't seem to notice it though, which means they're just happy that the game is easier because of it....just a guess
The games don't get easier. The controls are just explained better with each installment. I guarantee you that if you know the mechanics AC1 is just as easy as ACII and ACB are.

iN3krO
10-24-2011, 03:19 PM
Originally posted by Sarari:
No, not cause of the slow motion. Just the game in general. A lot of people don't seem to notice it though, which means they're just happy that the game is easier because of it....just a guess

I feel like Jesus dude...

I first came up saying that Ac1 was better then Ac2. Everyone ignored me.

Then i came up saying that AcB was Worst then Ac2 and Ac2 worst then Ac1. Ppl bashed on me for saying Ac1 was better then Ac2.

Now i come to the forum to check news about PC and Steam and i see "everyone" talking how bad are the changes the game is taking.

r4inm4n1991: Who can be a lively tank and remain not notorious? Who can be injured at a point that he can't even run/climb and still can kill 3 guards in 5 seconds? Who can support the strike of an hidden blade without having his arm hurted? What hidden blade can survive the strike of a sword on it? What guard won't be able to stop those killstreaks of AcR? What ASSASSIN prefer aproach the enemies thought battles instead of remain hiden in the "shadows"?

Ac1 combat was only boring if you didn't get it as a challenge and if you want to feel an hero. New batman has a combat similar to AcB and i like it, becuz that combat fits that game but it doesn't fit the original idea of Assassin's Creed (read first topic of this forum, it's about what Ac is intended to be).

Quote: Assassin's Creed will be a trilogy that will inovate gaming.

Assassin's Creed 1 inovated it.
Assassin's Creed 2 rubish copy of GTA adapted to the timeline and with a different story type.
Assassin's Creed Brotherhood rubish copy of GTA with Prototype things adapted bla bla bla

Why could't they make changes that would fit that inovation concept instead of copying games for ******ed ppl?

@LightRey To have Ac1 as easy as Ac2 and AcB u must play it more then Ac2/B and THINK while playing. In AcB you can throw your controller to the wall as much times as you want that ezio will kill every guard...
In ac1 the faster way was being stealth. Realistic
In ac2/b the faster way was going to battle to kill every INNOCENT guard. STUPID!

They got easier and less brain-needed and that's what ****es me off the most on the changes.

LightRey
10-24-2011, 03:23 PM
I have slain countless guards in AC1 without thinking. It's really not that hard to combo kill.

iN3krO
10-24-2011, 03:26 PM
Originally posted by LightRey:
I have slain countless guards in AC1 without thinking. It's really not that hard to combo kill.

Good, you have played Ac1 enough to do it. Happy?... Did you do the templars battle in the roberto de sables assassination without thinking too? Did you use only counter attack? Did you ever think how make it look like if it was a movie and how would a real assassin aproach each situation?

In ac2/b you just can't make it look like a real assassin :S

LightRey
10-24-2011, 03:31 PM
Originally posted by daniel_gervide:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LightRey:
I have slain countless guards in AC1 without thinking. It's really not that hard to combo kill.

Good, you have played Ac1 enough to do it. Happy?... Did you do the templars battle in the roberto de sables assassination without thinking too? Did you use only counter attack? Did you ever think how make it look like if it was a movie and how would a real assassin aproach each situation?

In ac2/b you just can't make it look like a real assassin :S </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I did, but the same goes for ACII and ACB.
I am, thank you very much.
Yes of course, once you're that far it's not that hard anymore.
No, of course not, that takes way too long.
Because movies are realistic? The games are fine. Guards were generally not well trained, just hired muscle really, and they rarely became officers because they were good at fighting. A well trained assassin killing-machine with a hidden blade, who just happens to be the best of the best, would generally have no problem with city guards, especially not in groups that max out at about a dozen.

iN3krO
10-24-2011, 03:34 PM
Altair can still take out groups of guards and he isn't Op...

I'm glad to see you can play ac1 without thinking at all. I can't, i just inmerse in the game and feel really like if i'm in the game.

Ac2 and B failed doing that to me :S

Anyway, i'm not gonna change ur mind. I still think that the changes ubisoft made was to attrack kids (in a M+ rated or Peggi18 game, yes) or ******ed adults O.o

Sarari
10-24-2011, 06:19 PM
Ok, like right now, I have to many things to explain and list right here. But imma say some of it anyway.

I'm gonna go with realisticness for now.

ACR- How did Ezio fall down a cliff and slam into the rocks and still have the strength to climb back up the cliff and kill 3 guards. How did Ezio not get injured when he's sliding on dirt with stones on the ground while he's holding on to the carrage?? How did Ezio keep balance on that metal piece after he broke Leonardo's guns invention off the wagon? How did Ezio do most of this stuff? It might be epic at times but that's just over doing it.

We might not have had all these epic events happen in AC1, but if they stuck in the things they were doing with AC1 and just improved it along the way, it would've been amazing and "realistic" at the same time.

Fighting: Guys, Ezio is abnormally brutal now. Seriously. Go back and watch the combat trailer for him. All that stuff he does first of all can't be done by man. An example: He picked a guy up from the ground with his hookblade......stabbed him to the ground with the other blade, then slammed him to the ground. I'm pretty sure he's dead by the time you pick him up from the head with the hookblade. No need to over do the killing. Ubisoft thinks it's giving us more variety and makes it more cool but they over did the whole killing thing.

Also, I remember I was doing a kill streak in ACB, and I was going for a guy with a spear. So he had his spear ready to hit me, but guess what happened. I was going to kill him next in my streak and the guard LIFTED his arms up for me as if I had already made a move on him to do so. WTF??

Sorry if I'm being brutal about the whole thing but I'm just being totally honest here.

This is like 10% of what I wanna mention btw http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

xx-pyro
10-24-2011, 06:38 PM
I agree with the main point that LightRey had in his (first?) post. The combat was explained a lot better in each subsequent game- it taught you nothing about combat in AC1, and the only experimentation time you had was at the beginning (which was stupid because somehow Altair "forgets" everything he had learned when he was demoted.)

Sarari
10-24-2011, 07:45 PM
Originally posted by xx-pyro:
I agree with the main point that LightRey had in his (first?) post. The combat was explained a lot better in each subsequent game- it taught you nothing about combat in AC1, and the only experimentation time you had was at the beginning (which was stupid because somehow Altair "forgets" everything he had learned when he was demoted.)
Ikr, I didn't understand that. But it's w.e.
What happened happened lol. :P

Dagio12
10-24-2011, 07:48 PM
[quote]Now i come to the forum to check news about PC and Steam and i see "everyone" talking how bad are the changes the game is taking.

* first of all, "EVERYONE" is not talking about how the changes are bad, infact, thats probably a very small persentage of the AC community and a lot of them still appreciate a lot about the good stuff thats been added as i feel that the pros very much overpower the cons.

secondly...

""Who can be a lively tank and remain not notorious? Who can be injured at a point that he can't even run/climb and still can kill 3 guards in 5 seconds? Who can support the strike of an hidden blade without having his arm hurted? What hidden blade can survive the strike of a sword on it? What guard won't be able to stop those killstreaks of AcR? What ASSASSIN prefer aproach the enemies thought battles instead of remain hiden in the "shadows"?""

I think you really under estimate the human body. Even Altair supported the strike of his hidden blade without having his arm hurt, thats nothing new and i dont think the hidden blade is actually what is being used to block, and if it is sometimes, im sure its more then capable of withstanding a few blows from a sword ( as we saw in the E3 trailer... the blade did eventually crack and break under pressure)..

You have to understand its a game, and Ezio is a master assassins, and a special one at that and shouldnt have to much problem dealing with city guards.

And as far as surviving the fall... etc, etc... its very possible. You should read the book Lone Survivor, its about a Navy Seal Team that gets ambushed by over 100 enemies. The seal leader is the only one that survived but between them all they dispatched almost all enemy soldiers while getting shot up. The survivor was shot multiple times as well as being blown off a cliff with an RPG and continued to crawl to his comrades while still moving, and killing enemies when he should easily have been dead. Its an incredible story that really shows what our bodies can do. Anyways, sorry about that rant...

Moral of my story is that Ac is a game and you have to make certain exceptions and stretch your imagination a little to create a fun unique experience. As much as we all love AC1, I find it hard to believe that if were on game 4 and we were still limited in combat, moves, missions.. etc, that everyone would be fine with it. Id rather continue to expand and enjoy my video game experience with all the additions that provide so much variety and be able to look back at AC1 and better appreciate what that game did.

Sarari
10-24-2011, 07:57 PM
Originally posted by SF2themax:
[quote]Now i come to the forum to check news about PC and Steam and i see "everyone" talking how bad are the changes the game is taking.

* first of all, "EVERYONE" is not talking about how the changes are bad, infact, thats probably a very small persentage of the AC community and a lot of them still appreciate a lot about the good stuff thats been added as i feel that the pros very much overpower the cons.

secondly...

""Who can be a lively tank and remain not notorious? Who can be injured at a point that he can't even run/climb and still can kill 3 guards in 5 seconds? Who can support the strike of an hidden blade without having his arm hurted? What hidden blade can survive the strike of a sword on it? What guard won't be able to stop those killstreaks of AcR? What ASSASSIN prefer aproach the enemies thought battles instead of remain hiden in the "shadows"?""

I think you really under estimate the human body. Even Altair supported the strike of his hidden blade without having his arm hurt, thats nothing new and i dont think the hidden blade is actually what is being used to block, and if it is sometimes, im sure its more then capable of withstanding a few blows from a sword ( as we saw in the E3 trailer... the blade did eventually crack and break under pressure)..

You have to understand its a game, and Ezio is a master assassins, and a special one at that and shouldnt have to much problem dealing with city guards.

And as far as surviving the fall... etc, etc... its very possible. You should read the book Lone Survivor, its about a Navy Seal Team that gets ambushed by over 100 enemies. The seal leader is the only one that survived but between them all they dispatched almost all enemy soldiers while getting shot up. The survivor was shot multiple times as well as being blown off a cliff with an RPG and continued to crawl to his comrades while still moving, and killing enemies when he should easily have been dead. Its an incredible story that really shows what our bodies can do. Anyways, sorry about that rant...

Moral of my story is that Ac is a game and you have to make certain exceptions and stretch your imagination a little to create a fun unique experience. As much as we all love AC1, I find it hard to believe that if were on game 4 and we were still limited in combat, moves, missions.. etc, that everyone would be fine with it. Id rather continue to expand and enjoy my video game experience with all the additions that provide so much variety and be able to look back at AC1 and better appreciate what that game did.
You good sir have enlightened me........but I'm still not fully convinced that the series is heading in the right direction. It's like an instinct or something. I can't put that thought away.

Not saying that the series is a complete failure, but I feel like some many things could have been improved after AC2 http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

Jexx21
10-24-2011, 08:08 PM
Dude, I already told you why you won't get a steam key with the game! Because it's not a steamworks game!

A Steamworks game is a game that installs Steam mandatory, like Civilization V, CoD, Fallout: New Vegas, and the Football Manager you mentioned.

Dagio12
10-24-2011, 08:13 PM
hey, to each there own. I understand what you guys mean, dont get me wrong. I think as far as an overall picture, its moving in a great direction. Thats not to say I dont miss certain aspects of AC1. I would love for some guards to put up a little more of a fight, and I kind of enjoyed some of the investigations as well. They were a great way to feel like YOU were in control of the assassination. With that said, it was repetitive and sometimes felt useless. I felt as tho whether or not I did one investigation or 3 or 5, I still would have tackled the assassination the same way. They really didnt tell me that much info that i couldnt have figured out on my own. But it would be nice if they would include a few investigations randomly throughout the campaign. And who knows, maybe Revelations will have something like this at some points in the game. I also feel like what they did with AC1 worked great for THAT game and for THAT time period, but maybe wouldnt have worked as well to push the story in the renaissance.

I thought AC2 was pretty incredible and maybe the reason we arent seeing such a HUGE jump in improvements in brohood and revelations is because its basically just an expansion of the AC2 story and there needs to be some sort of cohesiveness between them. Ezio is Ezio, and you cant just make him like Altair randomly with a new game. Im sure AC3 will have a new feel to it with a lot of new improvements.

happy gameing sir http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

iNt0xiCaT3dSainT
10-24-2011, 08:17 PM
Slow motion should be an option. Notice the word should.

Jexx21
10-24-2011, 08:23 PM
Actually.. did you ever think about the new Eagle vision?

It requires us to look at the the people to determine whether they are a normal enemy or a target. That in my opinion is more along the lines of AC1, and it's something that I welcome with open arms.

In fact, if they ever remake AC1, I'm sure that that mechanic would be in place instead of the old eagle vision.

Also, didn't Ezio get the info on where to go to kill people from the other Assassins?

That's pretty much what Altiar did before AC1 also.. he was given the information by others, and he went and performed the assassination. In all actuality, he didn't do that much outside of AC1.

SirRaelix
10-24-2011, 08:37 PM
SF2, great posts bud.

I agree, this game has gone in a great direction. And for the better too. Don't get me wrong, I love AC1, but if something happened to your game, it was so dreadful to even think about re-doing all that work to get to where you were before. And sometimes to even finish the game. It was a game that you had to sit down for a while and a time to play and remember what you were doing, where you needed to go, and all of that stuff. It was very hard to put the game down and pick it back up a few days later and know what to do. Been there, done that. The last two installments were much more user friendly, to play the last two you didn't have to have much dedication at all and could play when it was convenient for you. I think it was a great move and brought a lot more recognition to the franchise.

Besides that I noticed a lot about the combat in ACB and the stealth I believe. Well, the combat and be overly easily if you chose to let it be, or it can be dragged out like it was in AC1. No one makes you use execution streaks, if you don't like the way the combat is now, feel free to sit back and spend more time than us fighting the AC1 way. No one is making use execution streaks, they are just fun. And stealth to be honest, besides some of the missions like romulous lairs and a couple others, it was very easy to play through as a stealth figure. Well, maybe not easy, but it wasn't overly hard to be sneaky in the game. You could easily choose to fight the fight or jump above their heads and take groups out at a time. I honestly spent a long time doing the Da Vinci Machines because it found it fun to eliminate the entire place undetected, while that was being sneaky and killing having a fun, there was definitely ways to get past them without killing so much as a fly. Just depends on how creative you are and how you could read the environment that was laid out before you.

All in all, I think Ubi made some key changes that really set these games apart from any other franchise and made most of the decisions that they needed to, to keep this franchise striving. Some things could still be changed, and some old things added back, but remember, its just a video game, it isn't a simulator or anything like that, it doesn't always reflect how a situtation would really occur and yea Ezio does cheat death a lot, but what Assassin doesn't?

Dagio12
10-24-2011, 08:40 PM
Originally posted by Jexx21:
Actually.. did you ever think about the new Eagle vision?

It requires us to look at the the people to determine whether they are a normal enemy or a target. That in my opinion is more along the lines of AC1, and it's something that I welcome with open arms.

In fact, if they ever remake AC1, I'm sure that that mechanic would be in place instead of the old eagle vision.

Also, didn't Ezio get the info on where to go to kill people from the other Assassins?

That's pretty much what Altiar did before AC1 also.. he was given the information by others, and he went and performed the assassination. In all actuality, he didn't do that much outside of AC1.

indeed sir. thats right on. The only reason we did half of what we did and why its not the same as Ezio is simply because he was forced to be a novice.. and not only that, but had to earn his place back. If it werent for that, he probably would have just gone to the city, went to location of the target, killed, and bailed.. and that would have been a very short game. lol.

I also love the new eagle sense and the way they are implementing it. Im really looking fwrd to that feature and what all we can do with it.

Sarari
10-24-2011, 08:48 PM
@SF2 great post man http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

@Jexx I'm really looking forward to the eagle sense because as you said, it makes you look for the target, not just having it automatically do it for you.

Also, just something I would like to say as an opinion :P, I actually kinda liked how Altair did many things on his own. I don't recall Ezio doing much on his own, in terms of investigation. He usually got what he needed from other assassins or friends.

That's something I like a little more in Altair than Ezio. That he's more independent.

Something I like in Ezio a little more though is his leadership. Even though I like stealthiness and independence in an assassin more, I still admire Ezio's ability to command people from Turkey all the way to Italy. It's quite amazing.

Dagio12
10-24-2011, 08:49 PM
@F3arTh3L3g3nd

I agree. Thats one of the beauties about this series... you really can tackle a lot of the game the way you see fit, and it seems that revelations will enhance that even more. Sure there are scripted moments, and full synch options, but a lot of those are story related and I welcome the challenge to "not be detected" sometimes. Im primarily a stealth player ( AC and Splinter Cell are my all time favorite franchises) and I take that approach whenever I play. I dont sprint through the entire city killing random guards for the heck of it.. although, thats fun sometimes.. lol.

The point you brought up about combat if right on as well. You dont have to use execution streaks if you dont want to. Its another option given to the player if they choose to. If I do use it, its for like 2 or 3 people tops. I try to vary my fight scenes with streaks, block, dodges... etc.. not just x,x,x,x,x,x,x,x,x counter, counter, counter... thats not fun for me. But tbh, if it werent for AC2 and ACB, I dont think I would appreciate AC1 like I do today.. and visa versa. They all give me a great experience in there own way.

Sarari
10-24-2011, 08:59 PM
@SF2 you make a very good point at the end. Without all the game changes, I wouldn't be able to appreciate what each game has/had to offer us.

With the combat, I feel like I'm leaving something out when I don't do the kill streak. It's such a big part of the game that I can't leave it out, no matter how much I hate it hahaha. But sometimes when I'm in the moment, I will go find like 30 guards and use the kill streak on them like in the e3 Revelations trailer :P

Speaking of the Revelations trailer, it would be out of this world amazing if Ubisoft made the combat like in the trailer. Non stop action. Not just one guy at a time sort of thing.

Ubisoft, if you did that, I'd literally cry of enjoyment. No joke.

Jexx21
10-24-2011, 09:06 PM
Originally posted by Sarari:
@SF2 great post man http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

@Jexx I'm really looking forward to the eagle sense because as you said, it makes you look for the target, not just having it automatically do it for you.

Also, just something I would like to say as an opinion :P, I actually kinda liked how Altair did many things on his own. I don't recall Ezio doing much on his own, in terms of investigation. He usually got what he needed from other assassins or friends.

That's something I like a little more in Altair than Ezio. That he's more independent.

Something I like in Ezio a little more though is his leadership. Even though I like stealthiness and independence in an assassin more, I still admire Ezio's ability to command people from Turkey all the way to Italy. It's quite amazing.

Altair only did that because he HAD to. He wasn't given the choice of just getting the info without working for it. He himself actually thought it was boring, it's explained in The Secret Crusade.

And also, Ezio was reliant on the other Assassins in AC2, but technically he was independent in ACB in a way. He could of got all the info himself, but he realized that he didn't have enough time. That's why he worked so hard to reunite the Assassins with the Courtesans, Thieves, and Mercenaries and got the heads to do the investigations while he got everything together.

Although, I do honestly hope that Ezio will do at-least one pick pocket, eavesdrop, or interrogation mission on ACR, if only as an easter egg to the times before. Hell, I wouldn't mind if it's just to find an assassin recruit.

iN3krO
10-24-2011, 11:40 PM
Originally posted by F3arTh3L3g3nd:
SF2, great posts bud.

I agree, this game has gone in a great direction. And for the better too. Don't get me wrong, I love AC1, but if something happened to your game, it was so dreadful to even think about re-doing all that work to get to where you were before. And sometimes to even finish the game. It was a game that you had to sit down for a while and a time to play and remember what you were doing, where you needed to go, and all of that stuff. It was very hard to put the game down and pick it back up a few days later and know what to do. Been there, done that. The last two installments were much more user friendly, to play the last two you didn't have to have much dedication at all and could play when it was convenient for you. I think it was a great move and brought a lot more recognition to the franchise.

Besides that I noticed a lot about the combat in ACB and the stealth I believe. Well, the combat and be overly easily if you chose to let it be, or it can be dragged out like it was in AC1. No one makes you use execution streaks, if you don't like the way the combat is now, feel free to sit back and spend more time than us fighting the AC1 way. No one is making use execution streaks, they are just fun. And stealth to be honest, besides some of the missions like romulous lairs and a couple others, it was very easy to play through as a stealth figure. Well, maybe not easy, but it wasn't overly hard to be sneaky in the game. You could easily choose to fight the fight or jump above their heads and take groups out at a time. I honestly spent a long time doing the Da Vinci Machines because it found it fun to eliminate the entire place undetected, while that was being sneaky and killing having a fun, there was definitely ways to get past them without killing so much as a fly. Just depends on how creative you are and how you could read the environment that was laid out before you.

All in all, I think Ubi made some key changes that really set these games apart from any other franchise and made most of the decisions that they needed to, to keep this franchise striving. Some things could still be changed, and some old things added back, but remember, its just a video game, it isn't a simulator or anything like that, it doesn't always reflect how a situtation would really occur and yea Ezio does cheat death a lot, but what Assassin doesn't?

i have no problem to go back to ac1..

Stealth were improved but it's no longer needed with this easy and fast-peaced combat system...

If i didn't like assassin's creed as a whole i wouldn't be here but i feel that ac2/b could have been better if ubisoft think twice before add/remove features, or, at least, work better on them to balance combat/stealth.

Dagio12
10-25-2011, 12:13 AM
Stealth were improved but it's no longer needed with this easy and fast-peaced combat system...


see, i think that is a terrible midset to have. Just because you CAN... doesnt mean you SHOULD or HAVE to. What I mean by that is just because you have the option to take a more fastpaced combat approach, doesnt mean you have to use that. Its there as an option... some people like to play like that, I dont really care to killstreak everything I see, but just because I dont play like that doesnt mean I should limit that possibility for people that do enjoy that. People want freedom in the AC universe, yet when they get it, they complain about it. if you dont like killstreaks and find it makes the game to easy, dont mash x and use regular combos and counters like you did with Altair. Its really quite simple.

ace3001
10-25-2011, 03:08 AM
To all the AC2 haters: AC1 is also easy. Fact.

The general consensus is, I believe, AC2 > ACB > AC1.

And even if AC1 was hard, it still is damn repetitive. No matter whether a game is hard or not, if it's repetitive, that's a big flaw. That is why AC2 and ACB are better.

Sarari
10-25-2011, 06:22 AM
Guys! So what if it was repetitive?! I bet most of the players out there didn't notice how repetitive it was until beaten or at least half way through the game. You know why? It's because the story of AC1 grabbed the people's attention. That's why. It might be repetitive, but it sure did have one hell of a intro story.

ACB focuses more on the gameplay than on the story. That's why it's not my favorite (one of many reasons).

In my opinion it's AC1 > AC2 > ACB.

iN3krO
10-25-2011, 07:55 AM
SF2themax, many ppl wants more freedoom then what they have in AcB and they claim they have more freedom in Ac1, even though in some missions you can't run over and kill al guards and in AcB you do...

Do you know why?

Because in Ac1 you needed skill to aproach missions in a more agresive way. Now, if you are to lazy, you will just be agresive and take everything out.

I don't know if i can explain my self. Some of you say combat in Ac1 was easy, maybe it was but it was no way easier then Stealth, but now it is.

In AcB the missions are: Go from A to B, from B to C, kill 1,2,3 and 4, Go to D and jump to the river.

In Ac1 the same mission would be: Kill 1,2,3 and 4 and go safe to the boreau.

In ac1 you needed to find your way out to the guards, in acB you can only go thought you way and the game FORCES you to go that way.
In ac1 you needed to think of how to run and get to the boreau fast (if you challenge your self), in AcB you are forced to climb that tower and jump to the river.

For me it's not the combat/stealth chose freedom that should be taken in consideration, it's the ways you have to do the missions.

Since in Ac1 you could do almost every mission in more agresive or passive style, you also needed to be a bit more skillfull to be agresive then to be passive. It's just like in reality. Why the war now is more about spies, etc, etc? Becuz it's easier then just go over with 100 men shoting each other.

You can still go with those 100 men (be agresive) but it will be harder and if you don't know how to combat properly then it will be better to use spies (be passive)

Same goes for bombs. They are USELESS in acR. If there were bombs in Ac1 and more guards it would be much more usefull.

Bombs will only make the game harder for those who use them cuz it will be much faster to go and slay everything in your way then stop, aim and throw the bomb.

When, in Ac1, they would speed up the game. Kill guards is much harder and time consuming. With a fragmention bomb you would lose (or not) time aiming well to not kill citizens but you would take them out easy.

Don't take me wrong, but for me Ac2/B freedoom is not the same freedoom we had in Ac1 as you can see http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

I want my freedoom from ac1 back and the skill restriction too. If they can have it back without removing the new features (that's what i'm talking about when saying they need to rework it to balance it), then everyone will be happy.

I won't say Ac1 was better then Ac2 cuz it clearly wasn't. But i prefer it over Ac2.
Ac2 was better cuz it was polished but i prefer Ac1 cuz it had a chance to be a perfect game if improved further (polished better)

Dagio12
10-25-2011, 09:36 AM
Daniel,

Well, I was mainly just talking about the choices we have as players to use or not use certain features... especially when talking about combat.. but anyways...

As an overall experience, I still find AC2/B to offer just as much if not more freedom then AC1. Not in all aspects, but some. Sure, there are more linear missions in AC2/B than AC1, but I actually like that to a degree. I like those moments to break up the game a little and give me a mission that also pushes a certain story element or makes me do something I might not otherwise do. Its a good way to pace a video game. While AC1 never really told one specific way of doing something, it really only had a few choices anyways. I knew, without a doubt I had to

A) go to the bureau
b) walk the streets to find 2 - 3 investigations that were ALWAYS the same
C) go back to the bureau
D) walk to the assassination marker, stand in the crowd and watch the Templar guy talk, and then either 1) run up and kill or 2) try to sneak around and assassinate him... then
D) run like hell back to the bureau.

rinse and repeat. it was the same cycle just in a different district. extremely predictable layout. Which, for what it was, was fine. But id rather have that variety and I would rather have the freedom that new weapons, combat moves, assassination techniques... etc give me even though that could make certain things easier. You have many more tools to choose from to push through the missions your way. Some are more scripted, but im personally ok with that as long as still get some that are not. ( i guess we can agree to disagree about mission layout like that.. lol)

at the end of the day, I am the one playing the game and its up to me to tackle it how I see fit, if killstreaks make combat easier and not fun for you, then go stealth or dont use the killstreaks, simple as that.

The only thing I will agree with is that I wouldnt mind if the guards were a little more aggressive to at least make me feel like they are putting up more of a fight then they sometimes do.

iN3krO
10-25-2011, 09:54 AM
SF2themax i think you did not get my point... many features of Ac2 would fit in Ac1. But in Ac2 those features felt useless and even more useless in AcB. Same **** will happen to AcR...

I did all investigations of Ac1 and i did not get it boring or repetitive cuz i had to think how to do some of them.

With the investigations information it's reasier for you to go stealth, kill the guy and run away faster. If you know the city you can also know where to run to despite the guards better. In ac2 there is no need of it, you don't have to gather information cuz ubisoft already GIVES it to u. I would prefer being "blind" in ac2/b missions instead of having ubisoft telling to me everything i have to do.
One good example is the mission where u save catarina sforza in both games.
In ac2: Hey dude, you cannot enter this ship to venecia. It pop ups in the map catarina sforza localization. how it should have been? You go to the city and search for investigation (eagle vision usefull in it?), there would be like 3 investigations, one of them you would find that catarina can give passes for who want to go to venezia, in other it would say that catarina likes appealing men and in other it would say catarina is a mini island waiting for help.
The player would get to the river and start to search for her instead of her being ping pointed in the map.

In acB: you need to enter pope's castle (can't remember name now). The game doesn't tell you enter the castle and find caratina. It just says you how to enter the castle like: jump from A to B, scale from B to C, drop from C to D, scale to E and see this useless cinematic, go to F kill those guards and then enter in G. -.-''

This is the freedoom everyone want, not useless gadgets. Look at Batman, all gadgets are needed, you can't do the whole game without using them all cuz they are all usefull. In acB you can do the entire game with hidden blade and you would still be sucessfull. In ac1 you can too, but it's way harder to do the whole game without throwing knifes and without sword/dagger.

I'm all against for full freedoom, i want skill based freedoom and Ac1 offered it much better.

PS - I want to combat too, i do it in Ac1. But i don't want easy combat. I want to be able to chose when to be stealth or when to run over to a combat based on my opponents, not just be based on what i want to do right now -.-'

LightRey
10-25-2011, 09:54 AM
Originally posted by SF2themax:
Daniel,

Well, I was mainly just talking about the choices we have as players to use or not use certain features... especially when talking about combat.. but anyways...

As an overall experience, I still find AC2/B to offer just as much if not more freedom then AC1. Not in all aspects, but some. Sure, there are more linear missions in AC2/B than AC1, but I actually like that to a degree. I like those moments to break up the game a little and give me a mission that also pushes a certain story element or makes me do something I might not otherwise do. Its a good way to pace a video game. While AC1 never really told one specific way of doing something, it really only had a few choices anyways. I knew, without a doubt I had to

A) go to the bureau
b) walk the streets to find 2 - 3 investigations that were ALWAYS the same
C) go back to the bureau
D) walk to the assassination marker, stand in the crowd and watch the Templar guy talk, and then either 1) run up and kill or 2) try to sneak around and assassinate him... then
D) run like hell back to the bureau.

rinse and repeat. it was the same cycle just in a different district. extremely predictable layout. Which, for what it was, was fine. But id rather have that variety and I would rather have the freedom that new weapons, combat moves, assassination techniques... etc give me even though that could make certain things easier. You have many more tools to choose from to push through the missions your way. Some are more scripted, but im personally ok with that as long as still get some that are not. ( i guess we can agree to disagree about mission layout like that.. lol)

at the end of the day, I am the one playing the game and its up to me to tackle it how I see fit, if killstreaks make combat easier and not fun for you, then go stealth or dont use the killstreaks, simple as that.

The only thing I will agree with is that I wouldnt mind if the guards were a little more aggressive to at least make me feel like they are putting up more of a fight then they sometimes do.
I absolutely agree with this.

Dagio12
10-25-2011, 10:58 AM
Daniel.

Im still having a hard time understanding how the "freedom" in AC1 was challenging..

""I did all investigations of Ac1 and i did not get it boring or repetitive cuz i had to think how to do some of them.""

I have a hard time believing you had to think how to sit on a bench or follow a dude a pickpocket him.. no offense, but all the investigations were identical and simple. The only thing hard about them was finding them if you turned off the mini map. but otherwise, they are marked on the map just like any other mission, side quest from the other games.

""With the investigations information it's reasier for you to go stealth, kill the guy and run away faster.""

The first time I played AC1 i wasnt really paying attention to what the people in the investigations were saying, nor did I even know you could look at the maps of guards when you pick-pocketed... and I was still able to tackle the assassinations just fine. Maybe I would have known about the scaffold and window before killing the doctor guy, but I saw it anyways and ran right out of there without even knowing about it. They added a little bit to the experience once i figured it out and gave me a little insight, but thats about it.

and if you know about the city in AC2/B it makes running from guards easier as well. thats nothing new.

As far as the checkpoint system telling you were to go on certain missions.. you cant really compare that with AC1 as the mission structure was so different. Theres plenty of mission in the newer games that just told you where someone was or where your target was you could approach him however you want. Some of the larger missions spanned a much larger area, so checkpoints are kind of necessary at that point. They can help guide the player as well as giving him a new starting point if he dies. Missions in AC1 were much more centralized and therefore didnt really need checkpoints as they happened in smaller areas. Most assassinations you are in eyesight of the target as soon as you enter the memory recording.

well, we just dont see eye to eye. which is fine. We are all entitled to our opinions. I personally dont think AC2/B are nearly as linear as you paint them out to be, but maybe I just play the game differently then you do. I guess i see some of the freedom of AC1 to be more "time consuming" than challenging....

Mr_Shade
10-25-2011, 11:10 AM
I have moved the thread to the PC forum.

This is due to the initial thread being related to Steam...

ace3001
10-26-2011, 08:56 AM
Originally posted by Sarari:
Guys! So what if it was repetitive?! I bet most of the players out there didn't notice how repetitive it was until beaten or at least half way through the game. You know why? It's because the story of AC1 grabbed the people's attention. That's why. It might be repetitive, but it sure did have one hell of a intro story.

ACB focuses more on the gameplay than on the story. That's why it's not my favorite (one of many reasons).

In my opinion it's AC1 > AC2 > ACB. AC1's star was the story. And the environment to a great extent. But when you consider the mission structure, except for the main assassinations themselves, everything else was crap. Just think. Some missions comprised of simply sitting on a bench and pressing the head button. And memory synched. That was just terrible.
Following an unarmed man into a dark place and beating him senseless came in a close second on that scale to me. It just took a little bit more time than sitting on a bench and pressing head button.
These missions were ones that you couldn't fail even if you tried. Does that add to good gameplay? No.
True, the main missions in AC1 are to date the best missions in the AC series. But there were only 9 of them. (Counting Maria, and not counting De Sable and Al Mualim cause those two missions threw out all the freedom out of the window.) You have to look at the game as a whole, counting those boring investigations as well. That is why the game's mission structure is horrible and repetitive. For each assassination, you have to eavesdrop and beat up a "despot". That's 18 crap missions for the game. Rinse and repeat. Only the story made me want to push further, even though I was horrendously bored.
Of course, all of us are entitled to our own opinions. Just saying that many people view AC1 in this manner, and they're quite entitled to, considering the flaws of that game.
You're right about ACB focusing mainly on gameplay rather than story. Ezio's story in particular felt rushed and overall generic, but Desmond's story more than made up for it. But most importantly, the game WASN'T repetitive. Which is why my scale is AC2>ACB>AC1. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

iN3krO
10-26-2011, 10:35 AM
Interesting you did not talk about combat and the features.

For me Ac1 was a very balanced game gameplay wise. You needed to use both combat, stealth or run away depending on the situation you are in.
However, in Ac2 it was significantly reduced the balance (stealth was improved but it became almost useless when you see how easier and faster is combat now). In AcB everything was useless, you just needed dagger with knifes, hidden blade and crossbow to do the whole game. You had smoke bombs, you could throw them, you had poison darts, normal poison (that it was usefull in ac2 thought), gun, sword, killstreaks (besides counter attacks are now SUPER easy), etc, etc... Why couldn't they have made the combat harder then it's now? Making combo's timming harder, making killstreaks require timming (maybe as hard as the combo's), change the timmings needed for it deppending on the weapon (hidden blade harder then dagger harder then sword). This would make crossbow more usefull and would force you to use gun when you run out of bolts, would also make posion usefull since you would sometimes prefer to avoid combat, or even smoke that would remove killstreaks ability but would be much easier. Those features became so useless due to the killstreaks, combos and counter attacks easyness that i started to hate the combat system that made stealth (and the improves made) FULL useless.

Ac1 sidemissions where BORING but for me, it was the biggest problem (beside the linear missions where really boring and slow-paced in the start of the game). Everything else was ok, not as good as it could be with a balanced version of ac2/b features but much better then ac2/b useless mechanics.

Would like to know what do u think about this subject? (please don't tell me it has been made to give more freedom to players when the freedom the players are asking for is storywise and not combat/stealth wise, i mean, ofc i want to feel free to play only with dagger, but i want it hard so i would prefer using a smoke bomb (like in real life).

Mr_Shade
10-26-2011, 10:47 AM
Glad to see you found the thread Daniel...

You should have got an email with my post, which stated the thread was moved to the correct forum.

Next time, I suggest you check your email for thread notifications (my post would have a link to the new location) your recent posts (which are listed on your profile )or ask a member of the mod team before accusing anyone of any underhand actions http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

iN3krO
10-26-2011, 01:10 PM
Originally posted by Mr_Shade:
Glad to see you found the thread Daniel...

You should have got an email with my post, which stated the thread was moved to the correct forum.

Next time, I suggest you check your email for thread notifications (my post would have a link to the new location) your recent posts (which are listed on your profile )or ask a member of the mod team before accusing anyone of any underhand actions http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Yeah Mr_Shade, i don't check my mail often :X
Next time i will be less upset until i see some email telling me what happened http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

ace3001
10-27-2011, 10:54 AM
Originally posted by daniel_gervide:
Interesting you did not talk about combat and the features. Sorry about that. But that is mainly because I agree with you when you say the combat was better. But mind you, AC1 is in no way a hard game. Once counter is unlocked, it's just **yaaaaaawn** counter **yaaaaaaawn** counter **yawn** **yaaaaaaaaaaawn** counter and so on. Combat was never AC's strong suit. Only they tried to make it strong by adding kill streaks in ACB, making things much easier in the process.

For me Ac1 was a very balanced game gameplay wise. You needed to use both combat, stealth or run away depending on the situation you are in.
However, in Ac2 it was significantly reduced the balance (stealth was improved but it became almost useless when you see how easier and faster is combat now). In AcB everything was useless, you just needed dagger with knifes, hidden blade and crossbow to do the whole game. You had smoke bombs, you could throw them, you had poison darts, normal poison (that it was usefull in ac2 thought), gun, sword, killstreaks (besides counter attacks are now SUPER easy), etc, etc... Why couldn't they have made the combat harder then it's now? Making combo's timming harder, making killstreaks require timming (maybe as hard as the combo's), change the timmings needed for it deppending on the weapon (hidden blade harder then dagger harder then sword). This would make crossbow more usefull and would force you to use gun when you run out of bolts, would also make posion usefull since you would sometimes prefer to avoid combat, or even smoke that would remove killstreaks ability but would be much easier. Those features became so useless due to the killstreaks, combos and counter attacks easyness that i started to hate the combat system that made stealth (and the improves made) FULL useless.

Ac1 sidemissions where BORING but for me, it was the biggest problem (beside the linear missions where really boring and slow-paced in the start of the game). Everything else was ok, not as good as it could be with a balanced version of ac2/b features but much better then ac2/b useless mechanics.

This is where my gripe with AC1 comes from. You may call them side missions. But when you need to do several of those yawn inducing things in order for your curious mind to know what happens next in the story, they are no longer SIDE missions, but missions that are necessary to progress. And when a majority of those are boring, well... all the good combat and stealth are down the drain.

Would like to know what do u think about this subject? (please don't tell me it has been made to give more freedom to players when the freedom the players are asking for is storywise and not combat/stealth wise, i mean, ofc i want to feel free to play only with dagger, but i want it hard so i would prefer using a smoke bomb (like in real life).

iN3krO
10-27-2011, 11:07 AM
Exatly, i agree with you, only that even thought counter attack was easy, now it's even easier. Besides, in Ac1 counter attack was the easiest but also the slower way to kill in Ac1.

In AcB they added many ways to kill faster then in ac1 using all the resources but the faster way of AcB is just killstreaks and that's why i think they should be harder :S

There are other combat things that needs to be tweeked but in AcB it was the worst gameplay wise change they did :S

Anyway, it's not like ubisoft will change it in AcR, let's just hope they don't do the 3rd ancestor as overpowered as ezio has been T_T

Jexx21
10-27-2011, 02:05 PM
Faster =/= the most fun option

Stop focusing on the fastest way to kill, and focus on having fun.

iN3krO
10-28-2011, 08:00 AM
Originally posted by Jexx21:
Faster =/= the most fun option

Stop focusing on the fastest way to kill, and focus on having fun.

In Ac1 i've always been searching for the faster option and it was always the funnies, why here the funniest option is one of those who take more time doing?... Having combat always being the faster thing sucks and removes variety if the player is just searching for doing games fast.

If there was more challenge i would also challenge my self. In ac1 i was incentivated to do challenges like play thought the whole game without HUD (did just the minium necesary to get to al-muhalim mission) thought i used the Map whenever i started the game or joint a new city/kingdoom. It was hard but i had tons of fun.

In ac2 i challanged my self to don't buy any armor, not get altair armor and use deflaut weapons.

In AcB whatever i do gives me no challenge at all T_T

The harder the game is the more it incentivate to challenge my self with harder things, have you noticed i didn't challenge my self to play without hud? I just got bored after the 3rd playthought. And i'm going to play it again just before AcR is out for PC.

I know this is my taste and i'm not requiring the game to be hard, i just want the hard option to be faster and the easiest to be slower so those who opt to do harder things are rewarded more, just not remove the hard option cuz now there is nothing hard in both combat or stealth, both are easy as **** and combat is much more rewarded with time saving then stealth (unlike it's in reality that stealth is rewarded).