PDA

View Full Version : Can we stop talking about AC2?!



DreamerM
12-09-2007, 02:45 PM
Here you can talk about something OTHER then the endless sequel speculation.

It took over four years for Assassin's Creed to go from concept to reality. If they completely re-make the game's world (ESPECIALLY if they completely change the settings and characters) it'll be another four years before we'll see even the ghost of a sequel.

So lets stop crying about it. We won't have any concrete facts for a good long while.

So let's please talk about something else.

tuorg
12-09-2007, 03:05 PM
i think that desmond might summon you in AC2 and then shoot your thumb off

Tela
12-09-2007, 03:09 PM
Originally posted by tuorg:
i think that desmond might summon you in AC2 and then shoot your thumb off

......WHAT?!

@ DreamerM: I understand a wanting for people to stop talking about such, but they can't help but get excited, or worked up over the ending, considering it's a cliffhanger.

Gamewrecker
12-09-2007, 03:45 PM
Yeah. Really, anything can happen. If they wanna remake the whole game, then do it. If not, whats the difference. It will still definately be a great game. But they could fix some things and make the game a little more varyating.

ACfanboy12
12-09-2007, 03:49 PM
Yeah, the sequel won't take 4 years.

The first game only took 3 1/2 years (if that), and the reason for that is because they spent SO much time recreating the cities and kingdom, making a new engine, and brainstorming ideas for next gen consoles, even though there were NO next gen consoles!!!!!

And ummm, we can speculate if we want, k?

z4ch117
12-09-2007, 04:07 PM
I totally agree with the OP. Please, lets try to focus on now so we can get some new content soon. I mean, a little speculation is good and all, but we are gonna rush Ubi to start another game and then we wont see more content for a long long time. I, for one, would like to see Assassin's Creed improved upon so that we may remain occupied until the release of another game does come about.

DreamerM
12-09-2007, 04:39 PM
Originally posted by ACfanboy12:
The first game only took 3 1/2 years (if that), and the reason for that is because they spent SO much time recreating the cities and kingdom.


You want them to spend LESS time recreating the cities and kingdom? What makes this game so amazing is the sheer amount of organic detail put into every single frame. Without that artful eye for what makes a game world feel truly alive, this game wouldn't be worth much and I wouldn't be here on this forum. Are we really going to be satisfied with anything less in the sequel? 4 years is what it took to achieve that, and to re-invent the wheel in a whole new setting can be expected to take at least that long if we want the same kind of result.

I'd like to see them release an "Assassin's Creed: Director's Cut" in which they fix some of the most irritating nit-picks like skipping cutscenes, getting to the assasination missions faster, cutting the window for Counter attacks in half, and including some unlockables and maybe a bonus level or alternate ending. But that's just me.

ACfanboy12
12-09-2007, 04:46 PM
Originally posted by DreamerM:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ACfanboy12:
The first game only took 3 1/2 years (if that), and the reason for that is because they spent SO much time recreating the cities and kingdom.


You want them to spend LESS time recreating the cities and kingdom? What makes this game so amazing is the sheer amount of organic detail put into every single frame. Without that artful eye for what makes a game world feel truly alive, this game wouldn't be worth much and I wouldn't be here on this forum. Are we really going to be satisfied with anything less in the sequel? 4 years is what it took to achieve that, and to re-invent the wheel in a whole new setting can be expected to take at least that long if we want the same kind of result.

I'd like to see them release an "Assassin's Creed: Director's Cut" in which they fix some of the most irritating nit-picks like skipping cutscenes, getting to the assasination missions faster, cutting the window for Counter attacks in half, and including some unlockables and maybe a bonus level or alternate ending. But that's just me. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Actually, the small little buildings are NOT recreated perfectly, only the major landmarks are, in reality they made maybe 60 buildings, and they made them scatter so it looks all different. If you notice, you kind of see the same things reacure on it, rugs, poles, roof gardens, etc etc... they didn't go in to THAT much detail!!!!

The MAIN reasons why it took them 3 1/2 years to create the first game was because: they had no CONSOLE TO DEVELOP THE GAME FOR!!!! THEY WERE GUESSING!!!! They had no idea that there would have been a xbox 360 or PS3, or even what they might be capable of... so basically they brainstorming ideas for at least 1 year!!! The second main reason is because they created a whole new engine!!! The one that lets you grab anything that sticks out more then 2 inches!

And what makes you so sure they have to recreate the cities in the sequel anyway?! Maybe it will be in the modern time... you don't know that (when I say modern time I mean 2012).

And finally the reason why I!! want this game to come out soon is because I dont want to be ****ing 23 and playing the sequel... maybe you do... but Im going to college soon, and I wont have time for **** games.

Redfeather1975
12-09-2007, 04:50 PM
I doubt it'll take 4 years to make a sequel.
They aren't going to start from complete scratch and bug test every little thing over again and recode it all over again when they don't have to.
They'll take the core of what's already there and work on new storyboards, new voice recordings, new models, new level design, some new animations, redesign some gameplay elements, ect.

Tela
12-09-2007, 04:52 PM
Originally posted by ACfanboy12:
Actually, the small little buildings are NOT recreated perfectly, only the major landmarks are, in reality they made maybe 60 buildings, and they made them scatter so it looks all different. If you notice, you kind of see the same things reacure on it, rugs, poles, roof gardens, etc etc... they didn't go in to THAT much detail!!!!


But you see that in really ANY and/or EVERY game out! Play Oblivion. Go into caves. You'll see the same sections of cave in one near Anvil, as you will in a completely different one near Cheydinhal!(spelling?)

When you drive down the street, by houses, in most cities today, very few things are different between houses.

So, in a way, they WERE kind of being realistic.

AldirTheKnight
12-09-2007, 04:55 PM
Originally posted by Tela:
Cheydinhal!(spelling?)



that's perfectly spelled http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Tela
12-09-2007, 05:02 PM
Originally posted by AldirTheKnight:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Tela:
Cheydinhal!(spelling?)



that's perfectly spelled http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thank you! I was pretty sure there was an 'H' in there somewhere, but the name looked kinda odd for some reason....


I'm pretty sure that, while the game won't take AS long to make, it still will take AWHILE. I have a feeling there are at least a few people working on AC2 as we speak, but EVERYONE wont officially start until after their vacation. And then......maybe 1 1/2, to 2 years before the game comes out, or has a release date announced.

DreamerM
12-09-2007, 06:02 PM
Originally posted by ACfanboy12:

Actually, the small little buildings are NOT recreated perfectly, only the major landmarks are, in reality they made maybe 60 buildings, and they made them scatter so it looks all different. If you notice, you kind of see the same things reacure on it, rugs, poles, roof gardens, etc etc... they didn't go in to THAT much detail!!!!

They studied the surviving city maps from the period extensively and tried to re-create the city's layout as accurately as they could, as well as studying the kind of decoration they could dress the sets with and what LOOKED climbable.


The MAIN reasons why it took them 3 1/2 years to create the first game was because: they had no CONSOLE TO DEVELOP THE GAME FOR!!!! THEY WERE GUESSING!!!!

Untrue. Originally they were developing AC for the PS3 with early tests on PC computers running emulators. Three years ago they got the first dev kits from Sony and started building their game around that.

When the PS3 hit the market and underperformed, then they switched gears and took their game multiplatform. The 360 version plays better because it's more similar to the PCs the game was developed on then the PS3 is.



They had no idea that there would have been a xbox 360 or PS3, or even what they might be capable of...
When Sony first announced the PS3, it announced "Assassin's Creed" as one of the games that'd be comming for it. What that consisted of was unclear at that point.


so basically they brainstorming ideas for at least 1 year!!!

Yeah, that's what you gotta do if you want to make something original. You need to come up with ideas, test them, decide "nah, that's been done," toss it and come up with something else. One in every hundred or so ideas will be good.


The second main reason is because they created a whole new engine!!! The one that lets you grab anything that sticks out more then 2 inches!

The climbability of everything has more to do with the mapping of the cities and less with the engine. The engine is what makes everything shiney: the lighting, the shadows, the glue that makes the graphics work. DMC4 made a new engine too: it was mandatory for all Next-Gen games as the existing engines were all for older systems.


And what makes you so sure they have to recreate the cities in the sequel anyway?! Maybe it will be in the modern time... you don't know that (when I say modern time I mean 2012).

They're going to have to CREATE the cities regardless of where they set the game, and they made a big fuss over their historical plausibility with AC1. Making up a whole new city, even a Modern one, would require research into city-layout, consideration of the citizens daily lives, the sort of materials used, what would be climbable, so on and so forth. It's a time-consuming process.


And finally the reason why I!! want this game to come out soon is because I dont want to be ****ing 23 and playing the sequel... maybe you do... but Im going to college soon, and I wont have time for **** games.

I don't want it to take that long either, but if that's what making the next game will take (ESPECIALLY if the suggestion that it should be set somewhere other then the holy land (BOO!) is taken to heart, which would require a whole NEW binge of extensive research) then people are foolish to suppose it could realistically take any less.

Less time means inferior product. If we want to re-invent the game world, we need to give them time to do that.

if we want them to build on the world they have, that's another thing. Then we could expect a sequel in around two years or so...

Dragons_Pride87
12-09-2007, 07:29 PM
for the man who said that they where guessing...ur a retart.
the game WAS ment for the damn PS3 but...the damn 360 people started to complain so they held production of the game so they whiney *****es could get there wish to get it for a whole bunch of systems
plz ubisoft....make the 2nd one just for the oraginal game (the PS3).

Redfeather1975
12-09-2007, 07:36 PM
Originally posted by Dragons_Pride87:
for the man who said that they where guessing...ur a retart.
the game WAS ment for the damn PS3 but...the damn 360 people started to complain so they held production of the game so they whiney *****es could get there wish to get it for a whole bunch of systems
plz ubisoft....make the 2nd one just for the oraginal game (the PS3).

That's not true. There are different reasons to go multi platform. You're just saying mean things out of spite.
Why, I don't know. D:

Tela
12-09-2007, 08:08 PM
Originally posted by Dragons_Pride87:
for the man who said that they where guessing...ur a retart.
the game WAS ment for the damn PS3 but...the damn 360 people started to complain so they held production of the game so they whiney *****es could get there wish to get it for a whole bunch of systems
plz ubisoft....make the 2nd one just for the oraginal game (the PS3).

But that wouldn't be fair to EVERYONE, now would it? If I remember correctly, on a poll on an official site, it said that more people would be buying the 360 version, anyway. UBI would be losing quie a bit, methinks.

AldirTheKnight
12-09-2007, 08:18 PM
he's just an angry fanboy, I think all the error reporting speaks for itself

DreamerM
12-09-2007, 10:27 PM
Originally posted by AldirTheKnight:
he's just an angry fanboy, I think all the error reporting speaks for itself

Agreed. If they can't be bothered to type out their words properly, then I can't be bothered to read them.

Ekko128
12-10-2007, 01:12 PM
the game shouldnt take more than 3 years at the most because they wont have to Create and entire story because they already got one, Make everything from nothing and alot of other stuff they can keep no matter where the game is held (i personally wouldnt mind it being modern in a city or something)

and for the angry fanboy, even Ubisoft said it is better on 360 http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

ACfanboy12
12-10-2007, 01:26 PM
Yeah, they knew that they were making next gen consoles, but they didnt know how it would work exactly, and how they have to program it... It's completely diffirent thing haveing an idea of what next gen consoles would be like, and haveing one right infront of your face.

And once again, this game will NOT take that long, and if it will, then they will lose so much money, UBI Montreal would lose so much money because of the upset fans, that UBI itself will shut down.

Hi guys... I played AC1 for 10 hours, which took 4 years to develop, YAY! Lets wait another 4 years for a **** game!! YAY!

Tela
12-10-2007, 01:34 PM
Originally posted by ACfanboy12:
Hi guys... I played AC1 for 10 hours, which took 4 years to develop, YAY! Lets wait another 4 years for a **** game!! YAY!

......dude. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Just because it may not have taken YOU very long to speed through it, doesn't mean other people didn't take more time to enjoy the experience. Don't call the game ****, when this is your opinion. Or, if you must call it such, then STATE that it is your opinion.

Thank you.

DreamerM
12-10-2007, 01:48 PM
Originally posted by Ekko128:
the game shouldnt take more than 3 years at the most because they wont have to Create and entire story because they already got one, Make everything from nothing and alot of other stuff they can keep no matter where the game is held (i personally wouldnt mind it being modern in a city or something)

I would, unless the same care and eye for both archetectual detail and crowd dynamics came into play. What makes AC amazing it's it's living, unique, beautiful and wholy vibrant world. That's something at the core of it's appeal and MUST continue no matter what.

For example: if the next game ends up being a shooter where Desmond goes, alone, through hallway after hallway of inescapable battles through the bland, white sci-fi corridors to escape the compound, then AC is officially dead.

And yes, they WILL have to come up with an "all new" story. They have a good framework to build on, but the plot of the next game will have to be no less well-thought-out then this one was. That kind of thing takes time. A lot of time.

They have an engine to work with now, which means we can shave about a year off the development time. If they choose an all-new setting, historical or present-day, that location will have to be researched, the AI re-programed and improved, the combat revamped (especially if it stars a different character with a different skill-set), so on and so forth. If they decide to re-make their engine to take advantage of any technical advances between now and then, we can expect to get that year back plus some.

If you want a whole new game world, then you have to be willing to wait for it. They'll have to come up with a new hero with a design as immediately iconic as Altair's has become (people who've never even played the game have still made costumes of him and declared their everlasting fandom) and a setting as interesting and unique as the Assassin's during the crusades. And then they'll have to research that setting, double and triple check that research, run the emulators, build the cities, so on and so forth it takes a LONG TIME.

I don't want a watered-down, slap-dash sequel. I want a sequel that keeps all that was good about the first game and BUILDS ON IT. I expect the next one to be at LEAST as good as AC1 was, I'm just realistic about how long that may take.

ACfanboy12
12-10-2007, 02:05 PM
To Tela: why should I say it's my opinion? Everyone who posts continuasly on this AC forum must like the game, and why should I argue with people who like the game that I dislike it (which I dont). In fact, my little comment about the game wasnt for my self, it was for the millions of people who have done so... played 10 hours and they are doen... which is just un acceptable for something that was developed for so long! I mean look at Oblivion... I have played over 600 hours, and I sitll havent done all the sidequests, and only joined 2 guilds... this game... you have about 2 things you can do! NOT ACCEPTABLE!

As for myself, I have not finished the game yet, so I AM enjoying it very much (Im on the 2ed assassination)... for the for Millions of people who were dissapointed, I feel sorry, and I understand.

NotLordAtkin
12-10-2007, 02:08 PM
2.5 of total 4 years were spent on engine, if I'm not mistaken.

As far as I know, they made a whole new "Schimitar" engine, that's why the development was so long.

But they might have started to work on Ghosts of the past already...

DreamerM
12-10-2007, 02:28 PM
Originally posted by Kanuch:
Ghosts of the past

Who to the what now?

NotLordAtkin
12-10-2007, 02:30 PM
sems to be a new prince of persia sequel... just a rumours yet...

AirRon_2K7
12-10-2007, 02:34 PM
Originally posted by Dragons_Pride87:
for the man who said that they where guessing...ur a retart.
the game WAS ment for the damn PS3 but...the damn 360 people started to complain so they held production of the game so they whiney *****es could get there wish to get it for a whole bunch of systems
plz ubisoft....make the 2nd one just for the oraginal game (the PS3).

Yeah, and HE'S the ******. Spell correctly before you insult someone's knowledge. Especially when they're talking sense (something that cannot be associated with yourself).


2.5 of total 4 years were spent on engine, if I'm not mistaken.

As far as I know, they made a whole new "Schimitar" engine, that's why the development was so long.

But they might have started to work on Ghosts of the past already...

Agreed. You say that they weren't speculating (@ DreamerM) yet, it WAS 4 years... consoles haven't been actively available to develop for for that long... unless my internal clock stopped a few years ago. A lot of it was guesswork, since you believe the stuff that flops out of Jade's mouth. Believe it when she said that they spent a lot of time brainstorming, which was hard to do, since they didn't know that the next-gen consoles were going to be.

DreamerM
12-10-2007, 03:13 PM
They were talking about brainstorming gaming's potential and the sort of steps next-gen games could take, where were the logical ways to develop next-gen gaming, not guesswork as to the system's specifications.

It was more of a "how are we going to be able to do this and who would want to play it?" and less a "what tools to we have to work with" sort of deal.

They got their development kits LONG ago and were kept updated as the consoles moved closer and closer to their release dates.