PDA

View Full Version : DO YOU WANT THE 100% SYNC GOALS IN ACR?



Turkiye96
05-29-2011, 11:06 AM
Ok while i found it somewhat challenging i felt it just made the game repetative having to replay the memories in an exact way! If you ask me, Assass?ns Creed Relevat?ons should no have th?s so we can have the freedom to do what we want just as long as ?n follows a general story.

What do you think and why?

Turkiye96
05-29-2011, 11:06 AM
Ok while i found it somewhat challenging i felt it just made the game repetative having to replay the memories in an exact way! If you ask me, Assass?ns Creed Relevat?ons should no have th?s so we can have the freedom to do what we want just as long as ?n follows a general story.

What do you think and why?

crash3
05-29-2011, 11:13 AM
i like how 100% sync gives you an objective to do within an objective if you get my meaning

however some of these 100% syncs really did constrain the variety and the freedom of missions, especially timed missions and dont get detected missions

surely the incentive of not being detected would be if you get detected chances are you will be killed, but unfortunately the game isnt hard enough for that so they put this 100% sync thing into place just to give us something to fail at and repeat to achieve it

kriegerdesgottes
05-29-2011, 11:22 AM
I like the concept of 100% synch more than I did actually doing it. It just got annoying and there's nothing more irritating than seeing in big words across your screen FAILURE even if it doesn't effect whether you win or lose. I personally have every single part of the game including the copernicus missions 100% synched but I'll be honest I could do without it next time.

Mic_92
05-29-2011, 11:27 AM
It was good on paper but sucked hard in the game.
They should remove it.

As it was said before, succeeding a mission only to be told you FAILED and only did half of it is like a humongous YOU from the heavens.
I'm also pretty sure I'm not the only one who absolutely hated the fact that you have to start missions all over again because of that.

If they keep it, they should make it more reasonable by adding checkpoints and no stupid goals that force you to go through the memory several times like finishing in 8 minutes.

<span class="ev_code_RED">Please do not bypass the Language Filter.</span>

What do you mean bypass? I censored the word. Anyway, anybody who's older than 6 already knows that word and probably uses it.

crash3
05-29-2011, 11:52 AM
100% sync in ACB is very frustrating if you fail and theres no real incentive to achieve it

the only mission which i dont have 100% sync in is the tank mission, i always seem to get hit last minute which reall grinds my gears as the mission itself is fairly easy but that one lttle constraint of not taking damage while using the tank is really frustrating

so i think 100% sync should be removed

Kaxen6
05-29-2011, 11:53 AM
The 100% synch goals really irritated me, but I'm also probably the most incompetent gamer on this forum. &gt;_&gt;

I basically can't stand anything resembling a time limit.

DavisP92
05-29-2011, 12:06 PM
I can tell that ubisoft made it to make the game more challanging, but by doing that to stripped us from our freedom in the game. Which AC1 was great at, and the others weren't.

ACR should try to get what AC1 had, the idea of killing the target the way u want. maybe provide us with different options but don't force an action on us.

What i really liked was the ability to kill the archers b4 u went after the target. it allowed u to plan an escape route b4 the assassination

crash3
05-29-2011, 12:07 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Kaxen6:
The 100% synch goals really irritated me, but I'm also probably the most incompetent gamer on this forum. &gt;_&gt;

I basically can't stand anything resembling a time limit. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

it doesnt matter how good or bad you are at a game, matters is your opinions of the game and i agree with yur opinion of 100% syns being irritating

we want the game to be genuinely harder so it excites us/gives us thrill/rush if we succeed. we dont want a game that puts annoying little constraints on missions that really frustrate/irritate us if we fail

Black_Widow9
05-29-2011, 12:15 PM
I voted yes. I played the game like I normally would and some of the 100%'s I got. Going back for more only gives it more replay value IMO. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

iN3krO
05-29-2011, 12:21 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Black_Widow9:
I voted yes. I played the game like I normally would and some of the 100%'s I got. Going back for more only gives it more replay value IMO. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I voted i guess... it explains very well...

they made the game a bit more challenging but killed the freedoom...

Black_Widow please don't give us SPOILERS on Acr what i think ur signature is giving :X

sfin1994
05-29-2011, 12:56 PM
i love em, although i think the 8 min thing for the tombs should be changed

Mutant524
05-29-2011, 01:07 PM
Takes the freedom out.

I'm doing the mission where you have to find the Machine Gun. The 100% Sync target is NOT TO KILL ANYONE before you locate the MG.

That's impossible as far as I've seen. Easy enough to get past the guards who are just standing there, but the ones which are patrolling are much harder. In my last attemopt I thought "balls to this, I'll just kill all the guards".

I'm also not sure if the Sync targets actually add anything to the game except getting an achievemnt (for Xbox anyway).

Mr_Stunner
05-29-2011, 01:46 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Black_Widow9:
I voted yes. I played the game like I normally would and some of the 100%'s I got. Going back for more only gives it more replay value IMO. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

QFT

Turkiye96
05-29-2011, 01:50 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Black_Widow9:
I voted yes. I played the game like I normally would and some of the 100%'s I got. Going back for more only gives it more replay value IMO. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

well considering im obsessed i have to get 100% full sync in the whole game ( I LOOOOOOOVVVVVVVEEEEEE the Assassin's Creed franchise), i feel dissapointed when i cant it and while i have played the fun missions over and over i find some ( the tank) missions cool the first time annoying the second ( if only they added cheackpoints so when u screw up 100% you can go back a bit). But for replay value i ( and im sure many others )start a second or third game. but ACB's story was fit for a big DLC but dragged out to a full game. so we found it a little boring ( but outside the animus it was interesting).

Freedom + story ( lots of it) = fun
Fun = people resarting the game = replay value
Gaming maths :P
( i might be completly wrong as i suck at math http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif )

crash3
05-29-2011, 02:46 PM
maybe s an alternat 100% sync system, we could just be given a list of tasks to do within each mission which result in us being payed more after or getting our hands on some pretty cool equipment or templar intel, just any incentive to do certain things within the mission that might add a challenge to the mission, but if you dont do them it shouldnt say you failed, maybe just have a tick list stating what tasks you accomplished within each mission

if anyone wants to add to that please do coz my idea is admittedly pretty vague

DavisP92
05-29-2011, 04:14 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Black_Widow9:
I voted yes. I played the game like I normally would and some of the 100%'s I got. Going back for more only gives it more replay value IMO. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well seeing how i replayed AC1 and 2 a lot more then ACB, the synch. system was just a let down. It took away from a big concept that made AC1 and AC2 fun.

The idea of keeping the synch. system the way it is would only make me feel dissapointed in ACR. Still will get it, but i don't think I would like it like how i did in AC2.

iN3krO
05-29-2011, 04:16 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Pdavis3:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Black_Widow9:
I voted yes. I played the game like I normally would and some of the 100%'s I got. Going back for more only gives it more replay value IMO. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well seeing how i replayed AC1 and 2 a lot more then ACB, the synch. system was just a let down. It took away from a big concept that made AC1 and AC2 fun.

The idea of keeping the synch. system the way it is would only make me feel dissapointed in ACR. Still will get it, but i don't think I would like it like how i did in AC2. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don't understand why u disagree with 100% sync.... i just think it should be more awarding than just 100% and that's all..

DavisP92
05-29-2011, 04:33 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">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 Pdavis3:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Black_Widow9:
I voted yes. I played the game like I normally would and some of the 100%'s I got. Going back for more only gives it more replay value IMO. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well seeing how i replayed AC1 and 2 a lot more then ACB, the synch. system was just a let down. It took away from a big concept that made AC1 and AC2 fun.

The idea of keeping the synch. system the way it is would only make me feel dissapointed in ACR. Still will get it, but i don't think I would like it like how i did in AC2. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don't understand why u disagree with 100% sync.... i just think it should be more awarding than just 100% and that's all.. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

In AC1 ubisoft gave the gamers the choice to kill the target in different ways, ways provided by the missions.

In ACB there are missions like don't touch the ground, which aren't that bad (or hard). But then there are some like kick a guard, why the hell should i kick a guard. i mean really that's dumb.

Then there are some like do the mission in 8 minutes, really why do i have to be rushed. can't i explore the lair.

but there are pointles ones like send the mercenaries into a fight, when i'd rather call my assassins to get the exp.

The basic idea is that Ubisoft created Assassin's Creed with the idea of freedom. and if they keep going on the road they have laid out then sooner or later they're going to tell us what to do 24/7. They already are telling us how to kill our targets (kill him on a bench, yea that's cool but what if i wanna kill him in a crowd. or shoot him from far away.)

Bruno_Berg
05-29-2011, 04:48 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Pdavis3:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">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 Pdavis3:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Black_Widow9:
I voted yes. I played the game like I normally would and some of the 100%'s I got. Going back for more only gives it more replay value IMO. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well seeing how i replayed AC1 and 2 a lot more then ACB, the synch. system was just a let down. It took away from a big concept that made AC1 and AC2 fun.

The idea of keeping the synch. system the way it is would only make me feel dissapointed in ACR. Still will get it, but i don't think I would like it like how i did in AC2. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don't understand why u disagree with 100% sync.... i just think it should be more awarding than just 100% and that's all.. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

In AC1 ubisoft gave the gamers the choice to kill the target in different ways, ways provided by the missions.

In ACB there are missions like don't touch the ground, which aren't that bad (or hard). But then there are some like kick a guard, why the hell should i kick a guard. i mean really that's dumb.

Then there are some like do the mission in 8 minutes, really why do i have to be rushed. can't i explore the lair.

but there are pointles ones like send the mercenaries into a fight, when i'd rather call my assassins to get the exp.

The basic idea is that Ubisoft created Assassin's Creed with the idea of freedom. and if they keep going on the road they have laid out then sooner or later they're going to tell us what to do 24/7. They already are telling us how to kill our targets (kill him on a bench, yea that's cool but what if i wanna kill him in a crowd. or shoot him from far away.) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The thing is though, you're not forced to "kill him on a bench", especially not since the mission replay was implemented. You can do it in any way you like and should you later want the achievement or whatever, go for it. It doesn't unlock anything useful anyway.

DavisP92
05-29-2011, 04:57 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Bruno_Berg:
The thing is though, you're not forced to "kill him on a bench", especially not since the mission replay was implemented. You can do it in any way you like and should you later want the achievement or whatever, go for it. It doesn't unlock anything useful anyway. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yea u can do it in a way u can but u don't really complete the mission unless u do it their way, 100% complete.

E-Zekiel
05-29-2011, 05:16 PM
They could "relax" things a bit for the whiny babies but honestly the more high profile you are the less professional you are as an assassin so I can't honestly say I care that much. I prefer them being in place. You can always choose to not get 100% anyway.

I LIKED having that extra aspect of potentially being even more "in synch" with how things actually went down. I just like it, what can I say. To see how the real person actually did it, specifically.

Bruno_Berg
05-29-2011, 05:25 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Pdavis3:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Bruno_Berg:
The thing is though, you're not forced to "kill him on a bench", especially not since the mission replay was implemented. You can do it in any way you like and should you later want the achievement or whatever, go for it. It doesn't unlock anything useful anyway. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yea u can do it in a way u can but u don't really complete the mission unless u do it their way, 100% complete. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

So you really need those numbers to enjoy the game? I mean, as long as completing them doesn't have any impact on the gameplay what so ever, why give a damn? It's just a number showing up or not showing up, doesn't change a thing.

IIwangcarsII
05-29-2011, 05:38 PM
No I hated 100% sync missions! Well, I diden't mind them until you had to get them all 100% to get an achievement! I would prefer them have something like the red dead missions where you can get bronze, silver or gold. Like the animus training. Then you could even compare missions with you're friends!

DavisP92
05-29-2011, 05:39 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Bruno_Berg:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Pdavis3:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Bruno_Berg:
The thing is though, you're not forced to "kill him on a bench", especially not since the mission replay was implemented. You can do it in any way you like and should you later want the achievement or whatever, go for it. It doesn't unlock anything useful anyway. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yea u can do it in a way u can but u don't really complete the mission unless u do it their way, 100% complete. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

So you really need those numbers to enjoy the game? I mean, as long as completing them doesn't have any impact on the gameplay what so ever, why give a damn? It's just a number showing up or not showing up, doesn't change a thing. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

seeing how i'm one of those gamers that likes to do everything in the game, and do it to the best i can. and seeing how the more of "those numbers" u get the more more rewards u get (that is what the developers said. however it was only the repressed memories, but those were fun. so yea i'm gonna try to get "those numbers", but i'd rather the game not say oh well since u didn't do it the way we told u then, even though u did the mission, we're gonna show u that u didn't do it right.

TwentyGlyphs
05-29-2011, 06:55 PM
Like other people, I liked the concept of 100% synch but the implementation was not quite right. I'd like to see it returned but tweaked. There are two main problems with it some of the goals are ridiculously frustrating, and the big "Full Synch Failed" message was really annoying when playing through for the first time. It should be relatively easy to fix the frustrating stuff with some feedback from the existing ones and some play testing.

I saw someone on these forums bring up the point about how could Rebecca know what the full synchronization requirements were before Desmond played the memories if they didn't know what actually happened in the memories? I'd like to see a system where you don't know the full synch requirement the first time you play a memory. When you complete the memory, it shows you a message saying full synch achieved if you happened to do it that way, but otherwise doesn't say "full synch failed." They could also show a message just saying "this is how Ezio did it" on the screen when you finish a memory, but just leave out the failed message the first time you play. This might keep us playing the memories how we want at first, and address the annoyance of getting a failure message even though you finish the memory successfully. Then you only really need to worry about full synch if you intentionally go replay the memory to try to achieve full synch.

Combine that with a bigger incentive than Christina memories to get full synch, and it might be a good system. Otherwise, I wouldn't mind seeing the system go if they made sure there was enough choice in how to complete memories like in AC1.

DavisP92
05-29-2011, 08:23 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by coryplayspiano:
Like other people, I liked the concept of 100% synch but the implementation was not quite right. I'd like to see it returned but tweaked. There are two main problems with it some of the goals are ridiculously frustrating, and the big "Full Synch Failed" message was really annoying when playing through for the first time. It should be relatively easy to fix the frustrating stuff with some feedback from the existing ones and some play testing.

I saw someone on these forums bring up the point about how could Rebecca know what the full synchronization requirements were before Desmond played the memories if they didn't know what actually happened in the memories? I'd like to see a system where you don't know the full synch requirement the first time you play a memory. When you complete the memory, it shows you a message saying full synch achieved if you happened to do it that way, but otherwise doesn't say "full synch failed." They could also show a message just saying "this is how Ezio did it" on the screen when you finish a memory, but just leave out the failed message the first time you play. This might keep us playing the memories how we want at first, and address the annoyance of getting a failure message even though you finish the memory successfully. Then you only really need to worry about full synch if you intentionally go replay the memory to try to achieve full synch.

Combine that with a bigger incentive than Christina memories to get full synch, and it might be a good system. Otherwise, I wouldn't mind seeing the system go if they made sure there was enough choice in how to complete memories like in AC1. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

that's an interesting idea, but i wouldn't like that.

Razrback16
05-29-2011, 08:30 PM
Yes I did end up enjoying the 100% sync missions more and more as the game went on. In certain cases I felt like they made no logical sense to do them the 100% sync method and so I would do them my way in those, but as long as they made logical sense within the situation, I would do the 100% sync method.

DavisP92
05-29-2011, 09:02 PM
all i can say is that the sync. system doesn't really make sense in the series (a few things don't).
In brotherhood they say to get 100 synch. then we need to do everything the way ezio did. and if we don't we get 50 percent synch. Except the animus is supposed to re-live the memory not alter it. so it doesn't make sense in terms of fighting or anything else really. So it made more sense to not have it and say whatever we did is what the ancestor did.

Jakob4242
05-29-2011, 09:10 PM
I was hoping there would be more objectives to fulfill. The only thing that annoyed me was being notified during the mission, and the message at the end. Something less apparent would be nice; It was the visual equivalent of the loud sound of the assassin's mission be a success.

Vey03
05-30-2011, 01:33 AM
Oh for pity's sake people, get a grip. You don't want to do 'em, then don't.
They don't take away your freedom. What the? You don't have to do them to finish the game! They don't unlock anything or give you anything.
Just some Uplay points.

The whole point of them, as i see it, was to make it more challenging, and to show you other ways of doing something that you might not have thought of. Which in some cases did for me.
Not being able to kill anyone, or having to perform a specific task, or assassination made me think about my approach and how i was going to do it.
Which in my opinion makes you a better player...a better assassin.

Yes, some were frustrating as hell, and yes, i'm thinking of that damn tank, but in situations like this, there should have been a checkpoint half way through.
Especially that all the stuff leading up to the actual tank was run-of-the-mill, and/or a bunch of platforming, which was boring and monotonous doing it 1million times over.
So this should be fixed.

Also, on a deeper level, maybe think of it as Desmond learning, and not doing something full sync might mean he is actually a mission his way, not following exactly what Ezio did.

So, no, no way should they be removed. Just tweaked a little.

AntiChrist7
05-30-2011, 02:32 AM
yes, i want it back it was more rewarding. you can always replay the mission the way you want

crash3
05-30-2011, 06:21 AM
i want genuine difficulty, like being killed in combat if you get detected

i dont want frustrating difficulty, which is what the 100% sync does, it doesnt make me feel special for carrying out a task the way ezio did, it just feels as if im doing a task given to me by the animus that is annoying to fail

if the game has genuine difficulty it makes it mre exciting to attempt more than once and get a rush once you comlete the task, because it was hard, not frustrating

Bruno_Berg
05-30-2011, 07:06 AM
What I really can't understand is why people want to remove it. I can understand that not everyone likes the 100% sync just like they should be able to understand that some people DO like it. Since you're not forced to finish missions in a specific way there is no reason to start yelling "REMOVE IT, IT RUINS THE GAME". It's an optional thing, if you don't like it then just don't do it.

DavisP92
05-30-2011, 08:16 AM
well idk why other ppl want it out, maybe it's for the same reason idk. But it's not a question of if we don't want to do it then don't do it, we have to do it. Because we all love Assassin's Creed and we want to get all the possible missions (repressed missions).

However it is odd, that ppl do not notice the lack of freedom and how AC is becoming more of a linear game. This is something that most ppl that truly love the first AC will be displeased with.

@Mouse03 U obviously don't know what they do, they give u the repressed memories. And duh Ubisoft made the system to make it more challanging but it honestly doesn't do it most of the times. like kick a guard that's kinda dumb when i could just as easily throw a smoke bomb and assassinate him or call an arrow shower.

I wasn't really frustrated with it while playing it, I get wha tu mean by the tank thing but after replaying it my second time i got the 100%.

And there IS NO DESMOND WAY, the animus is like a window that allows u to see in the the past. It does not allow you to alter the past and do things like u want, so the sync. system doesn't make sense. That's why it should be taken out so that we can do it our way (without the game saying oh.. well that's not how Ezio did it) with no penalty.

I can make do with it staying (i'll still get the game) but if it does then it should be completely reworked. however I don't see how they would change it and make it better

PhiIs1618033
05-30-2011, 09:33 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Bruno_Berg:
What I really can't understand is why people want to remove it. I can understand that not everyone likes the 100% sync just like they should be able to understand that some people DO like it. Since you're not forced to finish missions in a specific way there is no reason to start yelling "REMOVE IT, IT RUINS THE GAME". It's an optional thing, if you don't like it then just don't do it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
It's not that simple. If you complete the mission your way, the game displays this huge "FAILED" message, completely taking away the satisfaction you get from doing the mission in a nice way. Then there's the DNA menu, where everything you haven't completed 100% sync is only half-filled.
To me, this feels messy. I like my things in order. I always complete a game 100%, because I then it's finished.

The 100% sync did, in ways, ruin my game experience. It feels like I'm no longer allowed to do whatever I wish, and if I do, I'm some kind of misbehaving kid.

Turkiye96
05-30-2011, 09:36 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Mouse03:
Oh for pity's sake people, get a grip. You don't want to do 'em, then don't.
They don't take away your freedom. What the? You don't have to do them to finish the game! They don't unlock anything or give you anything.
Just some Uplay points. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
we wouldnt if the had made an achivement to get 100% :P and bonus material ( who would miss out on the cristina missions?)

Turkiye96
05-30-2011, 09:39 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Bruno_Berg:
What I really can't understand is why people want to remove it. I can understand that not everyone likes the 100% sync just like they should be able to understand that some people DO like it. Since you're not forced to finish missions in a specific way there is no reason to start yelling "REMOVE IT, IT RUINS THE GAME". It's an optional thing, if you don't like it then just don't do it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
nobody is yelling that, they just beleive that the game would be less annoying without it...

Turkiye96
05-30-2011, 09:47 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">And there IS NO DESMOND WAY, the animus is like a window that allows u to see in the the past. It does not allow you to alter the past and do things like u want, so the sync. system doesn't make sense. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
you are right but the animus allows you to relive Altair's and Ezio's memories in your own way so just as long as you make something similar to Altair's memories it should fit but if you dont eg. kill innocent people you loose sync. ( so you dont EXACTLY relive their memories) or else if you kill just 1 civilian you would de-sync but it gives you 3 chances. is there is a limit to just how much you can be de-synced with the memories

DavisP92
05-30-2011, 10:00 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Turkiye96:
you are right but the animus allows you to relive Altair's and Ezio's memories in your own way so just as long as you make something similar to Altair's memories it should fit but if you dont eg. kill innocent people you loose sync. ( so you dont EXACTLY relive their memories) or else if you kill just 1 civilian you would de-sync but it gives you 3 chances. is there is a limit to just how much you can be de-synced with the memories </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

not really, because it is a game it allows u to do things obviously, but in AC1 and AC2 what u did was what the ancestors did. because the animus is meant only to look at their lives. of course because it is a game made to have a lot of freedom it needs it's limits, the killing innocent ppl part. but the idea of oh ezio did it this way when we're playing and we should do it that way even though we have a better way to kill someone is kinda pointless

SixKeys
05-30-2011, 11:05 AM
I liked the 100% sync feature. I could live without it, but it made it worthwhile to return to certain missions after finishing the game. The timed ones are annoying, like finishing the Lairs of Romulus in 8 minutes. AC is such a beautiful game I like to take my time admiring my surroundings instead of rushing through them. But some of the more creative ones added to the challenge and made it more fun trying to figure out another way of approaching the situation. If you don't like doing full sync, it's possible to avoid it altogether and finish your mission however you want, so it doesn't take away from the freedom. If there was too much linearity in Brotherhood, it was due to the level design rather than 100% sync.

DavisP92
05-30-2011, 11:57 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SixKeys:
I liked the 100% sync feature. I could live without it, but it made it worthwhile to return to certain missions after finishing the game. The timed ones are annoying, like finishing the Lairs of Romulus in 8 minutes. AC is such a beautiful game I like to take my time admiring my surroundings instead of rushing through them. But some of the more creative ones added to the challenge and made it more fun trying to figure out another way of approaching the situation. If you don't like doing full sync, it's possible to avoid it altogether and finish your mission however you want, so it doesn't take away from the freedom. If there was too much linearity in Brotherhood, it was due to the level design rather than 100% sync. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

it actually does take away ur freedom if u want to complete the game 100%.

iN3krO
05-30-2011, 12:26 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Pdavis3:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SixKeys:
I liked the 100% sync feature. I could live without it, but it made it worthwhile to return to certain missions after finishing the game. The timed ones are annoying, like finishing the Lairs of Romulus in 8 minutes. AC is such a beautiful game I like to take my time admiring my surroundings instead of rushing through them. But some of the more creative ones added to the challenge and made it more fun trying to figure out another way of approaching the situation. If you don't like doing full sync, it's possible to avoid it altogether and finish your mission however you want, so it doesn't take away from the freedom. If there was too much linearity in Brotherhood, it was due to the level design rather than 100% sync. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

it actually does take away ur freedom if u want to complete the game 100%. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yeah, but after doing the mission thought game way you can REPEAT the mission and do it your way... you can repeat it endless times until it stays up to ur likes and you can RECORD it as you would like to do if you were an REAL assassin :P...

I takes away the freedom while u try to do them 100%... than it doesn't change anything...

cless711
05-30-2011, 12:29 PM
I was fine with the 100% synch but the only kind of it that i did not like was the timed missions. If they got rid of the timed missions I would be perfectly fine with the 100% synch.

zeejay21
05-30-2011, 12:47 PM
Though it is challenging but I rather do a more GTA thing in AC.

sfin1994
05-30-2011, 03:21 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Mutant524:
Takes the freedom out.

I'm doing the mission where you have to find the Machine Gun. The 100% Sync target is NOT TO KILL ANYONE before you locate the MG.

That's impossible as far as I've seen. Easy enough to get past the guards who are just standing there, but the ones which are patrolling are much harder. In my last attemopt I thought "balls to this, I'll just kill all the guards".

I'm also not sure if the Sync targets actually add anything to the game except getting an achievemnt (for Xbox anyway). </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

100% sync in all missions unlocks Desmond to play with in the animus, i no this, because i have done this, you want this....

dchil279
05-30-2011, 05:16 PM
Keep the 100% sync, but allow there to be checkpoints.

DavisP92
05-30-2011, 05:29 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by dchil279:
Keep the 100% sync, but allow there to be checkpoints. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

they were already going to keep, checkpoints would be an improvement. but i still say revamp it or remove it

Keksus
05-30-2011, 05:35 PM
Hell no. 100% sync was totally senseless. Less freedom and you always had the weird feeling when you only got 50%. And it also didn't made the game challenging. It only said: "Hey: You were able to kill your target with a sword in an open fight instead of skillfully assassinate it undetected. You're great!" Just stupid if you ask me.

I just want one thing: Less skripts for the assassinations. They should let us choose how to kill the target. It should be possible to use the gameplay elements the game ALREADY HAS. This wasn't really possible in AC2 or AC:B.

SleezeRocker
05-30-2011, 07:43 PM
I didn't really like the full snycro parameters.
IT felt really limited. Sometimes I rather assassinate from high in the air,rather than have my gang of brothers do it and what not. If they come back, whatever, personally I don't really look forward to it

ian1706
05-31-2011, 03:00 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Black_Widow9:
I voted yes. I played the game like I normally would and some of the 100%'s I got. Going back for more only gives it more replay value IMO. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>I agree with this.

It can become annoying trying to get 100% synch and i'm personally only at like 92% in ACB at the moment but it has definitely kept me going back.

crash3
05-31-2011, 03:24 AM
i always get to 99% sync ten for some reason i keep failing 100% sync on the tank mission, its soooo frustrating and annoying now!

DavisP92
05-31-2011, 08:19 AM
idk am i the only one that thinks that ubisoft lied about the length of the game. they said 50+ hours to get 100%. yet i beat the game and got 100% in about 25 hours.

I hope this one is longer and the synch. system didn't really make me redo missions. I only redid the missions i like, regardless of the synch system. Except for the Tank mission, i had to redo that mission so i can get 100%.

But when it comes to which games, to me, have more replay value i think AC2's story and AC1's gameplay brings me back. While ACB, i feel like stands in the shadow of the other two. Still love the game, here's to hoping that ACR is better then all three

ILLusioNaire
05-31-2011, 10:09 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ian1121:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Black_Widow9:
I voted yes. I played the game like I normally would and some of the 100%'s I got. Going back for more only gives it more replay value IMO. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>I agree with this.

It can become annoying trying to get 100% synch and i'm personally only at like 92% in ACB at the moment but it has definitely kept me going back. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

But at what cost? Cheap, repetitive and narrow-minded gameplay? The problem with the sync system is that it requires you to play one way, instead of completing the sequence the way you want. Sure, you could always go back and do it anyway you want, but we shouldn't be subjected to this method of replayability. We should replay it simply because we WANT to not because we HAVE to. And believe me, it makes all the difference.

I would like the sync system to go away and never return again. It's a system that forces the user to abandon their own likened methods, which may be better, and probably are I might add, and resort to a possibly baser method of completion. By not completing the assassination or mission the way Ubi wants us to, it's depriving us of our sense of freedom in a self-professing freedom-based game. Not cool.

cw3214
05-31-2011, 09:18 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by crash3:
i always get to 99% sync ten for some reason i keep failing 100% sync on the tank mission, its soooo frustrating and annoying now! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I had the same problem. It is pretty difficult at the end. I completed this but I have to admit that I cheated. If you want to just get 100% synch out of the way I would suggest backing up when the two opposing tanks are activated. You will be in an unavailable area, but as long as you stay fairly close to the front you will not de-synchronize.

The trick is that the tanks will aim at you, but not fire. Just shoot the first tank normally. Then get the second take to come closer and do the same thing with it. Stay in the unavailable area. If you de-sychronize by backing up too much the game will start you right before you are about to fight the two tanks. It is much easier than having to restart over and over again.

Hope this helps.

xCr0wnedNorris
05-31-2011, 10:47 PM
I just thought I'd throw this out there and say I find it humurous that a lot of people are saying that AC:B is too easy, then they go on here and say they don't like 100% sync because it sometimes makes things too challenging.

cavemanIWHAP
06-01-2011, 12:17 AM
I liked that it made it harder but also agree that they were repetitive so variety would be good if they keep it. Would be great if they could add the difficulty another way (dont really have any suggestions though). Also I found the timed missions rather frustrating too but i think that check points would make it less frustratin.

sassinscreed
06-01-2011, 02:17 AM
they should remove it because when its there you have feeling that you have to do it but that removes some fun and freedom

Nachdarkone
06-01-2011, 03:36 AM
I hope they keep it. I really really hope so. To me it increased the replay value and made it more of a challenge and fun for the hardcore side of the players.

What I don't understand is why people keep saying drop it. Everyone on this board keeps saying that it removes freedom, how so? you can still do it your own way, your just not getting 100 percent complete. Think of it as getting a silver trophy. Besides, 100 percent completing the game didn't grant you anything besides personal accomplishment, so why hate on it?

Although I guess I could understand some people saying how it says "failed" each time when you don't complete it 100 percent (although I believe they are overeating to the situation a bit), with this They could just say "50 percent in sync completed" instead of saying full sync failed. So that works and I'm fine if they do that.

But yeah, I want it to stay, and still don't understand why people are hating it so much. If anything Assassin creed 1's dna line with all the optional stuff you could do was WAY MORE ANNOYING and frusterating. Get 100 hidden flags with no help whatsoever? now that was frusterating, and in that game the dna completion was required for more material then this DNA sync that they have going on AC2.

Also To the people who are saying its too hard? usually completing a game 100 percent should be hard. It wouldn't be right if they just handed you the 100 percent as easily as pie on a silver platter....

cptn_k
06-01-2011, 04:45 AM
While some of the sync conditions were tedious or frustrating to do, having to repeat memories to get collectibles and the 100% sync, I understand why they did it, as the 100% sync is how Ezio would have actually performed.

If they can be tweaked to give somewhat more freedom, and not HAVE to replay a memory more than once to get 100% (eg. can be done on one play through if done right) then I think the system should stay.

If they make more ridiculous conditions then this takes away from the freedom that makes AC so good, therefore making it more like a linear game, which spoils the whole point of the game, and I don't want that.

So I voted 'I guess, it was good that it was harder but removed some freedom'.

SquarePolo27
06-01-2011, 05:18 AM
I remember watching the first gameplay of the original assassin's creed. You could go into a city, find your target (Not thorugh investigations) and assassinate him however you wished. 100% sync has taken away the freedom of AC.

Turkiye96
06-01-2011, 12:47 PM
its funny how nobody voted ''i dont care'' :P

cless711
06-01-2011, 02:14 PM
The only reason I haven't voted was because I am fine with the 100% sync, but there is no option saying that the timed missions made you feel rushed xD

TheMusingMoose
06-01-2011, 09:20 PM
I honestly do not care.

kriegerdesgottes
06-01-2011, 09:51 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by xCr0wnedNorris:
I just thought I'd throw this out there and say I find it humurous that a lot of people are saying that AC:B is too easy, then they go on here and say they don't like 100% sync because it sometimes makes things too challenging. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

LOL such a good point. good call!

DavisP92
06-01-2011, 11:42 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by kriegerdesgotte:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by xCr0wnedNorris:
I just thought I'd throw this out there and say I find it humurous that a lot of people are saying that AC:B is too easy, then they go on here and say they don't like 100% sync because it sometimes makes things too challenging. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

LOL such a good point. good call! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

lol too bad i don't see anybody actually saying that. It's more like they're saying the combat is too easy, and we can't die at all. and the sync. system takes away our freedom. two completely different things

wapikas
06-02-2011, 02:02 AM
It's weird that everyone wanted game to be harder and when they add 100% sync everybody starts complaining that missions are impossible to finish with 100% and they take away your freedom. Actually they don't take away your freedom, ACB is sandbox game and you basically have endless ways to complete mission, with 100% sync or not. 100% sync gives to you extra challenge without ruining the story and overall gameplay. You can finish your mission without 100% sync and on go on with game and if you wish, you can later replay the mission and complete it with 100% giving to game replay value. It would suck more if ubisoft makes game harder without 100% and only option is that you finish mission or not. And I believe that lot of you guys who don't like 100% sync option couldn't then finish game at all.

I somewhat agree that message "mission completed sync failed" is little bit strong perhaps, but don't be such a spolied brat and suck it up and finish mission with 100% if you don't like it. But I can agree that they could just display message how much you was synced with mission.

Personally I find that it was cool ubisoft added it to game but I wish that they could make 100% harder being more specific. Instead of just saying, don't get hit or finish the mission within the time limit 100% could be achieved by doing so called extra missions inside missions. Like, kill guard with red hat, don't touch the ground and don't be detected before assasinating main target, thou giving you three different objectives and when you manage to complete mission doing them all you achieve 100% sync. and when you are able complete only 2 tasks, you killed guard with red hat, and didn't touch the ground but you were detected you achieve only 66% sync with mission. Then there wouldn't be only 50% or 100% and it would add more challenge to game.

MCRMJ
06-02-2011, 03:52 AM
In some cases the 100% sync was a good idea, but then you get into the realm of silly objectives that really have no bearing on being an Assassin.

Completing a lair in less than 'x' mins, kick a guard and everyones favorite, the take no damage in the tank.

It just seemed a little tacked on or in some cases a bit unfair, why add a stipulation to playing a 20 min memory right at the end of it.

The trophy for 100% sync could still be there without the need for the this system, but implement it into the game proper, meaning you have to complete every mission in the game (some people I know haven't bothered with doing all the contracts/thief/courtesan missions), AND complete the guild challenges (where you can throw the kick a guard/kill from a ledge style objectives).

That way you'd have the best of both worlds, challenges for those that want to master the game, while still leaving you free to tackle the main story as you like.

DavisP92
06-02-2011, 09:46 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by wapikas:
It's weird that everyone wanted game to be harder and when they add 100% sync everybody starts complaining that missions are impossible to finish with 100% and they take away your freedom. Actually they don't take away your freedom, ACB is sandbox game and you basically have endless ways to complete mission, with 100% sync or not. 100% sync gives to you extra challenge without ruining the story and overall gameplay. You can finish your mission without 100% sync and on go on with game and if you wish, you can later replay the mission and complete it with 100% giving to game replay value. It would suck more if ubisoft makes game harder without 100% and only option is that you finish mission or not. And I believe that lot of you guys who don't like 100% sync option couldn't then finish game at all.

I somewhat agree that message "mission completed sync failed" is little bit strong perhaps, but don't be such a spolied brat and suck it up and finish mission with 100% if you don't like it. But I can agree that they could just display message how much you was synced with mission.

Personally I find that it was cool ubisoft added it to game but I wish that they could make 100% harder being more specific. Instead of just saying, don't get hit or finish the mission within the time limit 100% could be achieved by doing so called extra missions inside missions. Like, kill guard with red hat, don't touch the ground and don't be detected before assasinating main target, thou giving you three different objectives and when you manage to complete mission doing them all you achieve 100% sync. and when you are able complete only 2 tasks, you killed guard with red hat, and didn't touch the ground but you were detected you achieve only 66% sync with mission. Then there wouldn't be only 50% or 100% and it would add more challenge to game. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

i like how u take maybe 2 or 3 posts out of 10 or 11 and say that everyone is saying what ur saying. again i have to say people want the game to be harder, meaning they want to be able to die sometimes. they don't want to be a walking tank forever, and if u can't understand that then that's sad.

They are not saying that the 100 sync is too hard and impossible to do, for u to say that at all seems silly.

What is really odd is i don't understand how a lot of ppl are blind to the fact that ACB does take away your freedom and is a lot easier then AC1. the sync. system removes the option to complete the mission ur way and getting the complete reward. i understand Ubisoft wanting to add replay value, in fact i'm glad they are trying to do it. however they shouldn't force us to replay a mission and do it their way at all.

Regarding the making the game harder, everyone stop saying that the sync system is connected to the combat really. yea maybe there are those don't get damaged goals, but honestly they are really easy. ppl want the game to be harder in the way of finding the target, killing him, escaping and most importantly fighting the guards off. However with with AC2 and ACB the game started to remove in somce cases the need to escape.

If u think the game is hard or something then pls tell me how many times you've died in the game. And have a number that includes and excludes the number of times u've died from some weird gameplay mistake when u were jumping. that should already tell u that the game is really easy and it's not the sync. system, because the amount of deaths u probably had in AC2 is most likely lower then the amount of deaths in ACB.

and if u think the sync. system is justified then ur completely wrong (unless you have proof i'll gladly change my opinion). When in the series did the animus allow the person in it to change the past. In AC1 and 2 what ever we did made it appear like that is how the ancestor really did do it, even if we messed up hah. But in ACB it's not like that, we can't change the past even though it says it is wrong or have right. that still doesn't make sense, seeing how the animus is a window and that's it.

sassinscreed
06-02-2011, 10:10 AM
why it sucks:

you are on your mission
but before you do anything you first check what you need to do for 100%
you just think of doing that goal and not doing it your way so it takes some fun
and if you don't after you complete mission you see that ugly 50% synch 100% synch failed

just takes fun from missions

SixKeys
06-02-2011, 03:43 PM
So what's wrong with FIRST doing the mission with 100% sync (if it bothers you so much) and then when you have it, you can replay the level again and do it any way you want?

CptCrackpot96
06-02-2011, 04:10 PM
I dont know why anybody is complaining about the 100% sync you didnt have to do it like the first play through I just did the missions the way i wanted to do them then the second play through i did them 100% sync if anything it adds replay value

ILLusioNaire
06-02-2011, 04:29 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by CptCrackpot96:
I dont know why anybody is complaining about the 100% sync you didnt have to do it like the first play through I just did the missions the way i wanted to do them then the second play through i did them 100% sync if anything it adds replay value </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The fact that Ubisoft has demonstrated initiative to implement replay value in ACB is good on its own. However, forcing us to do things they way they want them done in order to achieve 100% sync, diminishes the orginal AC experience of doing things they way WE want them done the first time around.