PDA

View Full Version : Ok really, it's time to get back to AC2 style games now...



johnnyhayek
12-20-2011, 07:41 AM
Hey all. I recently finished ACR and most of the side stuff to do in it, and it was awesome! However, after 2 games of managing your guild, renovating a city, and buying shops, I think it's time Ubi stop and get back to AC2(or even AC1) style games. Seriously, I hate having to buy every shop I want to use. It's just really unnecessary. Also, I just want to get back to playing as a pure assassin, and not as its manager. AC2's villa system was great and enough! We don't need an entire city please! The managing stuff got old really quick.

Also, no more wars please! Taking over dens was alright, but again unnecessary. Den Defense was also bad. I don't want that war feeling anymore. I repeat, we need a pure assassin story again. War is getting old really fast.

So, basically, side missions and a system similar to the villa system would be enough in the next game besides the main quest. Please, no more city renovation, shop buying, wars, and faction managing. AC2 is needed again!

Do you agree or not?

deadly_thought
12-20-2011, 08:31 AM
AC1 style play for me its always been the one i enjoyed the most AC2 style play would be fine as well though

Assassin_M
12-20-2011, 08:52 AM
I`d like the Mystery and exoticism of being a lone Assassin, but I`d still like to have the managing Villa feature, hear me again "MANAGING VILLA" ok ? not managing the whole city and COUNTRIES..
The whole Mentor mechanic has been fun, but Im ready to move on..

ProdiGurl
12-20-2011, 08:55 AM
We're getting alot of threads on direction of AC3 so I'm not sure if I want to keep adding the same input on every one. I'll just paste what I've said before in other threads:


I'd still like my Q answered about a value system/treasure chests/economy - what do we buy with our money if not liberating the towns where Templars are suppressing the people.

I know it's the devs job to think up everything, but we don't seem to have any answers either... ?
But if people want buying shops & city landmarks to go, what do we do for a value/reward system?

I'd like this answer. One of my thoughts is to have to sink our $$/reward into Recruit upgrading: dens themselves, weapons & armor. Have it cost alot more - plus cost to level them up?

Games work best by either upgrading or buying things. The point of Liberating whole cities is that Templars are suppressing the people, you're job is to open it back up for them.

If you you spend it all on upgrading yourself & your weaponry, you get the same problem, Combat becomes easier which people have complained about.

Anyways, I'd like a good value/economic system to enjoy - if not liberation of shops/buildings, what?

I'm also not sure what we're "managing"? It's not like Strategy or RPG where you manage anything, you buy it once & it's done.

All you manage are Recruits and the Recruiting system is one thing I do not want them to remove.

Even in ACII Ezio worked w/ other networks of courtisans & thieves who belonged to the Order.
They are a network. & I love sole missions, but I also loved missions w/ the other Assassins in ACR alot too.


Lots & lots of Missions (long game)
Stealth - ability to crouch, duck etc.
Non-restrictive missions
Choice of Difficulty Level
Option to remove armor
Some Mystery (puzzle, codex, etc.)
Harder Combat/AI
Beautiful Graphics
Weather Changes (thunderstorm, snow, etc.)
Suspenseful, deep story
Kool weapons
More fun - less annoyance.
(possibly a mission or 2 with mass carnage).

Is that about right?

InfectedNation
12-20-2011, 09:09 AM
Originally posted by Assassin_M:

The whole Mentor mechanic has been fun, but Im ready to move on..

This.

luckyto
12-20-2011, 09:15 AM
Originally posted by deadly_thought:
AC1 style play for me its always been the one i enjoyed the most AC2 style play would be fine as well though

Yes. If I can't have one, give me a hybrid between 1 or 2.

johnnyhayek
12-20-2011, 09:17 AM
Originally posted by deadly_thought:
AC1 style play for me its always been the one i enjoyed the most AC2 style play would be fine as well though

I share your opinion as well. AC1 had great style, but AC2 had an amazing style as well. A blend of the best features from both would make a great game.

@Assassin_M: That is exactly what I'm talking about http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

@ProdiGurl: You definitely raise valid points. And I definitely shared your opinion when I played ACB. But after playing ACR, the whole templar war/city liberation style really got old. I don't know how to describe the feeling, but ACB I felt did the management system better. Maybe because it was a first-timer or for some reason I can't really find out. ACR I just couldn't enjoy liberating another city again. I mean upgrading your own stronghold is a great idea, but an entire city? I just can't anymore. The "war" feeling is just not as good as the revenge story of AC2(or even ACB which had a few revenge elements to it).

I just think the war in ACR was meaningless. I mean, you just wanted the Masyaf keys from Constantinople and you only needed Sofia for this. You didn't have to take over the city in this one. ACB's city liberation felt more meaningful, because your main goal was to weaken the Borgia in the game. But ACR's main goal is Altair's library, so you just didn't have enough motivation to take over the city in that one. It felt like a side side mission IMO.

So, if AC3 has a new ancestor, then the only reason they should use for including the city liberation mechanic is if the game's main story is centered around this. Otherwise, they should just forget it completely. But if AC3 is an all Desmond game, then I have no idea what to expect in this case.

ProdiGurl
12-20-2011, 09:27 AM
Originally posted by johnnyhayek:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by deadly_thought:
AC1 style play for me its always been the one i enjoyed the most AC2 style play would be fine as well though

I share your opinion as well. AC1 had great style, but AC2 had an amazing style as well. A blend of the best features from both would make a great game.

@Assassin_M: That is exactly what I'm talking about http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

@ProdiGurl: You definitely raise valid points. And I definitely shared your opinion when I played ACB. But after playing ACR, the whole templar war/city liberation style really got old. I don't know how to describe the feeling, but ACB I felt did the management system better. Maybe because it was a first-timer or for some reason I can't really find out. ACR I just couldn't enjoy liberating another city again. I mean upgrading your own stronghold is a great idea, but an entire city? I just can't anymore. The "war" feeling is just not as good as the revenge story of AC2(or even ACB which had a few revenge elements to it).

I just think the war in ACR was meaningless. I mean, you just wanted the Masyaf keys from Constantinople and you only needed Sofia for this. You didn't have to take over the city in this one. ACB's city liberation felt more meaningful, because your main goal was to weaken the Borgia in the game. But ACR's main goal is Altair's library, so you just didn't have enough motivation to take over the city in that one. It felt like a side side mission IMO.

So, if AC3 has a new ancestor, then the only reason they should use for including the city liberation mechanic is if the game's main story is centered around this. Otherwise, they should just forget it completely. But if AC3 is an all Desmond game, then I have no idea what to expect in this case. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

@ Johnny, I wasn't so into the War elements either. I just don't know if they're going to keep them in AC3 or not. If they are, I'd like to brainstorm some better implementation of it that we can be ok with is all.

The only management I felt I was doing was the Recruits - and that's almost a game in & of itself that shouldn't be removed. I know tons of people who love that system.
I esp. like how they turned into in a separate game & made it more relevant.

I just don't see what we're managing that's so laborious I guess is my main point.
We still need a value system if we're getting any treasure chests or bank rewards . . so what are we going to spend it on if not the shops & buildings?

Nobody seems to know but they all know what they want changed/removed.
How should Ubi work this? Should we remove our revenue & treasure chests entirely & not use any currency or reward?


Also, we don't know if the next Assassin is going to be a type of Mentor or not either. So I don't know what they'll be doing where that's concerned.

johnnyhayek
12-20-2011, 09:46 AM
Originally posted by ProdiGurl:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by johnnyhayek:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by deadly_thought:
AC1 style play for me its always been the one i enjoyed the most AC2 style play would be fine as well though

I share your opinion as well. AC1 had great style, but AC2 had an amazing style as well. A blend of the best features from both would make a great game.

@Assassin_M: That is exactly what I'm talking about http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

@ProdiGurl: You definitely raise valid points. And I definitely shared your opinion when I played ACB. But after playing ACR, the whole templar war/city liberation style really got old. I don't know how to describe the feeling, but ACB I felt did the management system better. Maybe because it was a first-timer or for some reason I can't really find out. ACR I just couldn't enjoy liberating another city again. I mean upgrading your own stronghold is a great idea, but an entire city? I just can't anymore. The "war" feeling is just not as good as the revenge story of AC2(or even ACB which had a few revenge elements to it).

I just think the war in ACR was meaningless. I mean, you just wanted the Masyaf keys from Constantinople and you only needed Sofia for this. You didn't have to take over the city in this one. ACB's city liberation felt more meaningful, because your main goal was to weaken the Borgia in the game. But ACR's main goal is Altair's library, so you just didn't have enough motivation to take over the city in that one. It felt like a side side mission IMO.

So, if AC3 has a new ancestor, then the only reason they should use for including the city liberation mechanic is if the game's main story is centered around this. Otherwise, they should just forget it completely. But if AC3 is an all Desmond game, then I have no idea what to expect in this case. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

@ Johnny, I wasn't so into the War elements either. I just don't know if they're going to keep them in AC3 or not. If they are, I'd like to brainstorm some better implementation of it that we can be ok with is all.

The only management I felt I was doing was the Recruits - and that's almost a game in & of itself that shouldn't be removed. I know tons of people who love that system.
I esp. like how they turned into in a separate game & made it more relevant.

I just don't see what we're managing that's so laborious I guess is my main point.
We still need a value system if we're getting any treasure chests or bank rewards . . so what are we going to spend it on if not the shops & buildings?

Nobody seems to know but they all know what they want changed/removed.
How should Ubi work this? Should we remove our revenue & treasure chests entirely & not use any currency or reward?


Also, we don't know if the next Assassin is going to be a type of Mentor or not either. So I don't know what they'll be doing where that's concerned. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think they should keep the currency system, only as I said, use it in a villa-like system similar to AC2 and not a city. Also, while recruits are useful, I would also like them to be removed. Let's just hope for a great AC3 no matter what they keep or remove http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif . I'm hoping for a new ancestor(as fully developed as Ezio was in AC2) and not a full Desmond game(though I wouldn't mind it).

ProdiGurl
12-20-2011, 09:54 AM
I think just for the sake of noobs to AC alone, the recruits should be there so they can call on them for help.
I sure appreciated it before I "mastered" the Kill Streak. lol

I might play ACII again after I finish ACB (I'm in Seq. 6) & see what exactly I liked about it.

I know I was into the whole Collect the Codex pages thing. I'd just like them to be harder to get to.
But the mystery is something I do miss.


I think they should keep the currency system, only as I said, use it in a villa-like system similar to AC2 and not a city.

Ok, are you talking about renovating just your own town or HQ? Like w/ Montergieni. (sp?)

YuurHeen
12-20-2011, 09:56 AM
no. it should be ac3. not ac1, not ac2, not acb, not acr but ac3. new and better than ever.

ProdiGurl
12-20-2011, 09:59 AM
Originally posted by YuurHeen:
no. it should be ac3. not ac1, not ac2, not acb, not acr but ac3. new and better than ever.

While I totally agree with that premise, there's still mechanics that have to be fleshed out in order to make it that way. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif
There's good things in all of them that we do love and may not want to see taken away.

You know, for a long time I've wished I was involved in helping create games, but after seeing alot of this, I think I'm happy I don't have to do that.
It's not as easy as people might think and it gets real ugly if you fail anything.
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

johnnyhayek
12-20-2011, 10:01 AM
@ProdiGurl: Yeah the recruits are no longer needed after you "master" the kill streak http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif. I played AC2 like twice after I played ACB. The only thing I felt missing was the fast combat system( kill streaks). Seriously, after you get used to the new combat system, the old one just seems so slow in comparison. And yes, mystery will be missed, but you got to get the answers eventually right?


Originally posted by YuurHeen:
no. it should be ac3. not ac1, not ac2, not acb, not acr but ac3. new and better than ever.

No argument there, as long as they actually know how to make it better. If they have no idea about how to make it better, then it should be like AC1 and AC2 as previously stated.

Inorganic9_2
12-20-2011, 12:01 PM
Originally posted by InfectedNation:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Assassin_M:

The whole Mentor mechanic has been fun, but Im ready to move on..

This. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

This.

Animuses
12-20-2011, 01:32 PM
Originally posted by YuurHeen:
no. it should be ac3. not ac1, not ac2, not acb, not acr but ac3. new and better than ever. A lot of game franchises suffer because they stray way from their roots. AC3 should bring back elements from AC1/2 and add some needed innovations along with necessary additions, not gimmicks.

YuurHeen
12-20-2011, 01:32 PM
Originally posted by ProdiGurl:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by YuurHeen:
no. it should be ac3. not ac1, not ac2, not acb, not acr but ac3. new and better than ever.

While I totally agree with that premise, there's still mechanics that have to be fleshed out in order to make it that way. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif
There's good things in all of them that we do love and may not want to see taken away.

You know, for a long time I've wished I was involved in helping create games, but after seeing alot of this, I think I'm happy I don't have to do that.
It's not as easy as people might think and it gets real ugly if you fail anything.
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

just like ac2 added a lot of stuff while it removed some old stuff i think ac3 should. only basis and some new stuff.

rileypoole1234
12-20-2011, 01:41 PM
I'd love to play as a low level Assassin. Much like AC2 or AC1. Those were the best to me.

Yairo809
12-20-2011, 08:53 PM
Originally posted by rileypoole1234:
I'd love to play as a low level Assassin. Much like AC2 or AC1. Those were the best to me.

Yes! that way you get to experience the evolution from weak to all powerful assassin.

nuncfluens
12-20-2011, 10:17 PM
This looks like a good opportunity to use an excerpt from a piece I was writing on the essence of Assassin's Creed as a series. I never finished it because I got a million paragraphs in and basically forgot what the hell I was writing about. Anyway, I think this applies:

"When AC first came out in 2007, I felt like Ubisoft leaked exclusive access to the unwritten history of mankind and that I was in on it. A big part of what drew me into the game was the feeling that what I was playing had really happened. There were no airs of fantasy and hardly any reminders that I was only playing a video game. Where Altair may have faltered in being a bit one-dimensional and unrelatable, he succeeded in imbuing the game with a sense of mystery and detachment becoming of an assassin. Also, the mission structure, for all its repetition, honestly helped me to better walk in the Shoes of Altair (+3 health, unbreakable). There was no glamour in being an assassin; it involved a lot gritty, ugly work and success meant only that you had carried out your duty to the order, but it was this sense of hardboiled realism that made it feel as though every swing of the sword and plunge of the hidden blade was altering the political landscape in a tangible way. Always strong in its convictions, AC was a truly unique and compelling experience, but it was not without shortcomings..."

Then I went on to explain how even though AC2 expertly managed to set a refreshing change of pace while honoring the original, it set a trend in motion where each new game would more aptly be named "Story of Ezio" than "Assassin's Creed." After AC2, the series forgot its tactful mystique and turned the Brotherhood from a clandestine band of high-flying ninja-philosophers to a bloodthirsty human resources office. It's not that I don't enjoy reaching out to others to share in the childlike glee of publicly disemboweling a church official, but with each shop I renovate it gets harder to believe that there's not a single paper trail hinting that Templar lackeys accidentally let the entire damn city slip into enemy hands while distracted by a few courtesans. I suppose the idea is to show that Ezio basically "runs ****" but I want to feel like a stealthy, knife-wielding freedom fighter, not Donald Trump.

In the end, I blame a release schedule that is based on pure corporate greed and not a lack of passion or talent by the developers. Unfortunately, barring some miracle, I think we'll only see the trend continue.

ProdiGurl
12-21-2011, 04:27 AM
Originally posted by Animuses:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by YuurHeen:
no. it should be ac3. not ac1, not ac2, not acb, not acr but ac3. new and better than ever. A lot of game franchises suffer because they stray way from their roots. AC3 should bring back elements from AC1/2 and add some needed innovations along with necessary additions, not gimmicks. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

While that's true, they first have to float the new ideas into a game to find out how fans react.
Look at the stuff we try to come up with here - it's hit & miss like anything else. Serrach's Lockpick idea - some thought it had possible potential, others cringed at the horror of the thought.
Same with adding "Kingdom". ??

Now that we've had different additions, we can pick & choose which we like & think worked the best.
Oh & by the way, I meant to thank you for your kind comment in that Troll thread last week.
I didn't expect it and I appreciated that.
http://media.ubi.com/us/forum_images/gf-glomp.gif


Originally posted by rileypoole1234:
I'd love to play as a low level Assassin. Much like AC2 or AC1. Those were the best to me.

I think that's becuz we were allowed to play as a Mentor & things came pretty easy to us becuz of it.

Honestly tho if we're lower level, are we going to be as lethal and skilled? Or would we expect to see that progress thru the game?

kriegerdesgottes
12-21-2011, 04:36 AM
Originally posted by Animuses:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by YuurHeen:
no. it should be ac3. not ac1, not ac2, not acb, not acr but ac3. new and better than ever. A lot of game franchises suffer because they stray way from their roots. AC3 should bring back elements from AC1/2 and add some needed innovations along with necessary additions, not gimmicks. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Exactly, ACII did an amazing job of keeping everything that was awesome about AC1 and making it much better. As long as they keep the main gameplay pillars of the franchise(free roam, social stealth, history, etc.) but make real changes to everything else (setting, ancestor, etc.), then ACIII could be amazing but like Animuses said, the changes can not just be small gimmicks like they were in ACB and ACR, they have to be real changes.

ProdiGurl
12-21-2011, 04:41 AM
Can anyone specify which elements you consider gimmicks?
I think the STalker thing is gimmicky but it's a great addition that most people enjoyed.

Noble6
12-21-2011, 05:17 AM
The good thing in Ac1 and Ac2 was that they were fresh and innovative. Ac3 should bring back the simplicity of first games.It shouldn't be built on top of the latest game. I mean that we need a new "house" not old "house" which has been decorated.

AC3 must have whole new gameplay elements and not just small additions like hookblade. I also hope that they will get rid of some stuff(den defence for example) to replace it with fresh ideas.

If we will go forward in time we propably need to use guns. Therefore we need gameplay mechanics for aiming the gun. I am fed up to auto aim system we have now.

lukaszep
12-21-2011, 05:47 AM
Originally posted by ProdiGurl:
Can anyone specify which elements you consider gimmicks?
I think the STalker thing is gimmicky but it's a great addition that most people enjoyed.

I'm not disagreeing with you i just want to know, why you think that is a gimmick?

(Ubisoft advertising AC soundtrack in the AC:R CE, then it turning out to be the "Best of" soundtrack was a gimmick, for sure. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/disagree.gif)

ProdiGurl
12-21-2011, 05:48 AM
Originally posted by Noble6:
The good thing in Ac1 and Ac2 was that they were fresh and innovative. Ac3 should bring back the simplicity of first games.It shouldn't be built on top of the latest game. I mean that we need a new "house" not old "house" which has been decorated.

AC3 must have whole new gameplay elements and not just small additions like hookblade. I also hope that they will get rid of some stuff(den defence for example) to replace it with fresh ideas.

If we will go forward in time we propably need to use guns. Therefore we need gameplay mechanics for aiming the gun. I am fed up to auto aim system we have now.

Absolutely it shouldn't be built on just messing around w/ different elements we just had & tweaking them to make them a little different.

I expected ACR to continue Ezio's style thru his Trilogy & not divert that much from it bcuz those elements were part of his style & fit his Historic time. The same should be true of each Assassin we play.

ACR did what it should & kept it's congruency w/ Ezio - AC3 should build other elements according to the new characters, surroundings and historic content.

I do think they need to keep certain elements from ACR & ACB also,
Recruits/Recruiting system/Tower Take-down, Master Assassins, separate Dens, random Stalkers/thieves/gangs who attack you,
Fast Travel, bombs if possible, solo & some sporadic missions w/ other assassins, Factions are fine - could add alot of side missions with them as in ACB ...
As long as the sync system isn't overly restrictive or annoyingly obnoxious, I like a good challenge to try to achieve too (ways I wouldn't do things on my own).

Then sprinkle in some of ACII's finest features (mystery, good character building, good writing - w/ emotional suspense, hopeful love interest.. & you have some great gameplay & story imo.

To me, just doing bare bones basics without any upgrading, one may as well just put in AC1 and enjoy the replay.

dxsxhxcx
12-21-2011, 05:49 AM
I doubt they'll remove killstreaks and the assassin's recruits, we may not start with them (the recruits) in the beggining of the game depending of our rank but they'll appear in the game sonner or later...

I hope they remove bombs, or at least don't focus too much on then like they did in ACR, 10~15 kinds of bombs (just to have some variety) are more than enough (I only used 1 or 2 of each and just because I remembered I had them because we don't really need them) and don't put those things to create bombs everywhere, there were bomb crafting stations even inside the places where we were searching for the seals...

IMO the bomb crafting stations should be only inside the assassins hideouts/dens, this make a lot more sense than have one in every corner in the city..

the same for the hookblade, to me that thing is something exclusive of the Ottomans Assassins and should stay that way, and don't try to bring something with a similar function, I want a new experience in AC3...


depending of the time period we'll play, I don't mind if they'll remove the sword and give us a rifle (similar to the one Nikolai has), the things that must stay IMO are the dagger, throwing knifes and the hidden blade, the rest is dispensable...

EDIT: oh, and if you'll continue to make pickpocket missions, bring back the way it was in AC1, just press space (PC player) near a target isn't fun or challenging...

Noble6
12-21-2011, 06:09 AM
Originally posted by dxsxhxcx:
I doubt they'll remove killstreaks and the assassin's recruits, we may not start with them (the recruits) in the beggining of the game depending of our rank but they'll appear in the game sonner or later...

I hope they remove bombs, or at least don't focus too much on then like they did in ACR, 10~15 kinds of bombs (just to have some variey) are more than enough (I only used 1 or 2 of each and just because I remembered I had them because we don't really need them) and don't put those things to create bombs everywhere, there were bomb crafting stations even inside the places where we were searching for the seals...

IMO the bomb crafting stations should be only inside the assassins hideouts/dens, this make a lot more sense than have one in every corner in the city..

the same for the hookblade, to me that thing is something exclusive of the Ottomans Assassins and should stay that way, and don't try to bring something with a similar function, I want a new experience in AC3...


depending of the time period we'll play, I don't mind if they'll remove the sword and give us a rifle (similar to the one Nikolai has), the things that must stay IMO are the dagger, throwing knifes and the hidden blade, the rest is dispensable...
Very good points. In fact I agree everything you said. I think kill streaks could be replaced with a bit more complex system that would preserve flow of the killstreak system.

I also think that healthsystem of ac1 should return. Other option could be that players weren't able to use medicine in a fight.

sassinscreed
12-21-2011, 12:56 PM
Originally posted by johnnyhayek:
Hey all. I recently finished ACR and most of the side stuff to do in it, and it was awesome! However, after 2 games of managing your guild, renovating a city, and buying shops, I think it's time Ubi stop and get back to AC2(or even AC1) style games. Seriously, I hate having to buy every shop I want to use. It's just really unnecessary. Also, I just want to get back to playing as a pure assassin, and not as its manager. AC2's villa system was great and enough! We don't need an entire city please! The managing stuff got old really quick.

Also, no more wars please! Taking over dens was alright, but again unnecessary. Den Defense was also bad. I don't want that war feeling anymore. I repeat, we need a pure assassin story again. War is getting old really fast.

So, basically, side missions and a system similar to the villa system would be enough in the next game besides the main quest. Please, no more city renovation, shop buying, wars, and faction managing. AC2 is needed again!

Do you agree or not?

i agree 100%

johnnyhayek
12-21-2011, 01:57 PM
I think we really need Jade Raymond and Patrice Desilets back. They're the ones who made AC1 and AC2.

SolidSage
12-21-2011, 02:07 PM
I don't think we need anyone 'back'. The deviations have occured because games in general feel the need to give us something 'new' with each outing. The 'new' in AC though, has kind of taken the focus off of the basics.
So I agree, focus has shifted and should be shifted back.

Med and Den defense were interesting, but I don't really (I mean this in a nice way) want them back.
I'm okay with city/store renovation, as it occurs in 'real time', not a different game package.
I also like the recruits.
I would suggest, in AC3, that we don't actually recruit them though. Instead have them be existing Assassin that we have to earn the right to call for assistance or something. And in Desmond time, it can be the same, we can call Shaun and he can throw a laptop at a Tamplar for us or something.

lukaszep
12-21-2011, 02:37 PM
Originally posted by johnnyhayek:
I think we really need Jade Raymond and Patrice Desilets back. They're the ones who made AC1 and AC2.

Patrice Desilets worked on AC:B. Jus' saying.

LightRey
12-21-2011, 02:43 PM
Originally posted by lukaszep:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by johnnyhayek:
I think we really need Jade Raymond and Patrice Desilets back. They're the ones who made AC1 and AC2.

Patrice Desilets worked on AC:B. Jus' saying. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
He did? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif
That must be a slap in the faces of quite a few people.

johnnyhayek
12-21-2011, 03:00 PM
Originally posted by lukaszep:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by johnnyhayek:
I think we really need Jade Raymond and Patrice Desilets back. They're the ones who made AC1 and AC2.

Patrice Desilets worked on AC:B. Jus' saying. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I know he did, but he also worked on AC2, which is my point here.

kriegerdesgottes
12-21-2011, 03:07 PM
Originally posted by ProdiGurl:
Can anyone specify which elements you consider gimmicks?
I think the STalker thing is gimmicky but it's a great addition that most people enjoyed.

BAM system
Hook blade
Bombs

I'm not saying we don't enjoy them but they are just small kind of pointless additions that are advertised as main additions to the games. I remember many interviews where someone would ask oh so what kinds of new weapons are in ACR!? and Alex or someone says....well...the hookblade is kind of a weapon lol. oh and it can help you slide...it's just a gimmick.

Yes Patrice did work on Brotherhood at the beginning but left before E3. They said his involvement with the game was "essentially done". He must not have been very happy with what was going on since he left in the middle of development.

lukaszep
12-21-2011, 03:16 PM
Originally posted by lukaszep:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by johnnyhayek:


Patrice Desilets worked on AC:B. Jus' saying.

I know he did, but he also worked on AC2, which is my point here. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Okay. It just sounds like you're implying AC:B and AC:R weren't as good (or in keeping of the AC2 style) because Patrice Desilets and Jade Raymond didn't work on them.


Originally posted by johnnyhayek:

I think we really need Jade Raymond and Patrice Desilets back. They're the ones who made AC1 and AC2.



My point was Patrice Desilets worked on AC:B aswell. So getting them back might not make a difference?

@kriegerdesgotte Yeah, that or he had gotten a job at THQ and so couldn't continue working on it? Or he just worked on the story, as it is essentially a continuation of AC2.

ProdiGurl
12-21-2011, 03:23 PM
BAM system
Hook blade
Bombs

I'm not saying we don't enjoy them but they are just small kind of pointless additions that are advertised as main additions to the games. I remember many interviews where someone would ask oh so what kinds of new weapons are in ACR!? and Alex or someone says....well...the hookblade is kind of a weapon lol. oh and it can help you slide...it's just a gimmick.

Ok ya, that's sort of what I had in mind when gimmick came up...
but again, all new video games go thru that and it's very normal to try out new ideas to possibly add permanent features to the series if it goes over well enough.


Hookblade seems to be more of an addition just for Ezio's time period, it probably wouldn't fit well in other era's.

De Filosoof
12-21-2011, 04:02 PM
Yes Patrice did work on Brotherhood at the beginning but left before E3. They said his involvement with the game was "essentially done". He must not have been very happy with what was going on since he left in the middle of development.

That's also my guess...
Especially after playing some missions in AC:R i understand why.
Don't get me wrong i really enjoyed the game but there was a lot of "hollywood bullsh*t" in there...Especially the Cappadocia part when he killed all those innocent people. That was not the way of the assassins in previous AC games.They should have extended that sequence to save most of the civilians. They could've made it a very tense and dramatic scene where he would almost sacrifice his own life for the civilians.
What's next? Free to kill civilians in the streets? I don't hope so.Also no mysterious conspiracy puzzles. Hope they will bring them back in AC3 but i doubt it...

luckyto
12-21-2011, 04:05 PM
Most everything (including crossbows, recruits and so on) added since AC2 has been "gimmicky" from where I stand. Only three really stand out as being a true complement to an Assassins' tookit; poison, bombs with crafting system, and stalkers.

I could give one game passes to recruits (but not the minigame for ranking) and the hookblade. Both of which would have been a nice change of pace.

SixKeys
12-21-2011, 04:36 PM
My problem with buying shops and renovating cities is that unlike in AC2, you don't see anything much change in your environment. In ACB there was at least somewhat of an effect, albeit a small one, when people went from wearing rags to rich clothing, but in ACR there was no indication whatsoever that you were doing the people a favor. In AC2 renovating the villa was a joy because the whole place changed over time, even the weather went from cloudy to sunny. It was manageable in AC2 because it was a small environment. Stretching it to a huge location like Rome simply wasn't workable because you couldn't have the whole city undergo major changes every time you opened up a tailor shop. I like the renovation option, but only when it visibly affects your environment. That's why I think that if they keep the renovations in AC3, they should go back to the villa idea: one small location that you can upgrade to your liking. One more reason it worked so well in AC2 was that the renovations were entirely optional. You could choose to open up the shops, guilds and banks at the villa, watch it grow more prosperous, feel like you were doing your family a favor and get discounts for weapons and medicine for yourself. On the other hand, if you didn't want to bother with the micro-managing, you could choose to ignore all that and just buy your equipment in the other cities. In ACB and ACR, if you don't open up all the shops in the city, you're just making things suckier for yourself as it means you'll have to travel back and forth between the ones you have opened. If you haven't liberated a Borgia tower or Templar den and don't have the equipment or time to do it right now, you'll be forced to travel to a different part of the city just for a shopping trip.

Another reason I hope they'll limit the renovations in AC3 is because that'll give the devs time to focus on giving us something really new. I'm okay with the renovations becoming more limited than they have been in the past two titles or even removed entirely if it means we'll get something fresh and exciting instead.

lukaszep
12-21-2011, 04:47 PM
Originally posted by thijs_bijlsma:

That's also my guess...
Especially after playing some missions in AC:R i understand why.
Don't get me wrong i really enjoyed the game but there was a lot of "hollywood bullsh*t" in there...Especially the Cappadocia part when he killed all those innocent people. That was not the way of the assassins in previous AC games.They should have extended that sequence to save most of the civilians. They could've made it a very tense and dramatic scene where he would almost sacrifice his own life for the civilians.
What's next? Free to kill civilians in the streets? I don't hope so.Also no mysterious conspiracy puzzles. Hope they will bring them back in AC3 but i doubt it...

Except, all the civilians in Cappadocia were templars, AND we didn't see any civilians die. In fact we see a lot of civilians escaping.

twenty_glyphs
12-21-2011, 05:06 PM
Revelations' gameplay elements feel like they are ready to collapse in on themselves. There's just too much going on now, and I'm sure it stems from the fact that these new systems were built on top of AC2 in just enough time to give us something new in only a year of development time. This is different than AC2, which had a lot of gameplay systems, but it was focused and obviously developed with more thought and time.

I hope AC3 goes back to the drawing board like AC2 did. The main 3 gameplay pillars need to stay, and each one evolved to be more interesting to use and also fit the new time period and location. They need to pick the best elements of the past games and discard what hasn't been working or no longer fits. A lot of ideas will probably flow from the history of the time period and location, like the concepts of collecting paintings, banks and an economic system were inspired by the Renaissance setting.

I'm tired of micromanaging stuff. Renovations, Assassin recruits, Mediterranean Defense, notoriety -- it's all getting really boring. AC2's renovation system was perfect because it was one small town that felt like it was your own. By the time of Revelations, it no longer has a story purpose and is just a nuisance instead of a fun mechanic. AC2 didn't require you to purchase each shop just to buy from them. The Assassins are a fun gameplay mechanic, but managing them is boring and pointless. I would prefer to keep the concept of Assassins that you can call on, but having a completely rethought leveling system that isn't just sifting through menus and waiting for them to be available again. Maybe even pare them down to just a handful of detailed characters that you can really customize instead of the huge numbers of generic people available in Revelations. Mediterranean Defense needs to go, because that was just annoying. I have more fun micromanaging stuff in Skyrim than the type of management you have to do in Revelations because the management has real meaning and consequences that you can see.

SixKeys
12-21-2011, 05:08 PM
Originally posted by lukaszep:
Except, all the civilians in Cappadocia were templars, AND we didn't see any civilians die. In fact we see a lot of civilians escaping.

But Ezio was still willing to take the chance and risk killing them all. He couldn't possibly have any way to ensure that all of them were able to escape. Most of the civilians were innocent. Why do players get desynchronized if they accidentally kill more than two civilians while free-roaming but calculatedly risking the lives of hundreds of innocents is a-okay?

JumpInTheFire13
12-21-2011, 05:37 PM
Originally posted by ProdiGurl:
Can anyone specify which elements you consider gimmicks?
I think the STalker thing is gimmicky but it's a great addition that most people enjoyed.

Things like bombs and the hookblade. While I did enjoy them, I think it was just something little that Ubisoft threw in there to lure more people to play. Like seriously, at E3 all they really said was "Ezio now has bombs at his disposal" and "Ezio can use the hooklblade to navigate faster and to fight guards"

JumpInTheFire13
12-21-2011, 05:44 PM
Originally posted by SolidSage:
And in Desmond time, it can be the same, we can call Shaun and he can throw a laptop at a Tamplar for us or something.

Hahahahahaha

De Filosoof
12-21-2011, 05:59 PM
Except, all the civilians in Cappadocia were templars, AND we didn't see any civilians die. In fact we see a lot of civilians escaping.

true...but they could have fleshed that sequence out more...Showing Ezio's good personality http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
Don't make him look like a coldblooded killer, at least make a cutscene where he regrets what he has done. It was just a missed opportunity to bring some emotion in that sequence in my opinion.

Bamminator
12-21-2011, 06:22 PM
Originally posted by johnnyhayek:
Hey all. I recently finished ACR and most of the side stuff to do in it, and it was awesome! However, after 2 games of managing your guild, renovating a city, and buying shops, I think it's time Ubi stop and get back to AC2(or even AC1) style games. Seriously, I hate having to buy every shop I want to use. It's just really unnecessary. Also, I just want to get back to playing as a pure assassin, and not as its manager. AC2's villa system was great and enough! We don't need an entire city please! The managing stuff got old really quick.

Also, no more wars please! Taking over dens was alright, but again unnecessary. Den Defense was also bad. I don't want that war feeling anymore. I repeat, we need a pure assassin story again. War is getting old really fast.

So, basically, side missions and a system similar to the villa system would be enough in the next game besides the main quest. Please, no more city renovation, shop buying, wars, and faction managing. AC2 is needed again!

Do you agree or not?
Agreed, I just started the game but I noticed how most mission always involving you leading a certain group to take on all the guards and it doesn't have that stealth elements of assassination to it no more, even ACB retain those elements but so far ACR is kind of a *in your face* kind of approach...
Of course, I'm not saying ACR is sub bar to ACB or anything, after all, is on my must have game list for this year and so far I do enjoy it.

tarrero
12-21-2011, 06:39 PM
One thing that I want to be for sure is a recruit, may be the next ancestor was a futureless thief, with lots of running skills and some sort of "strange sixth sense", he goes for a robbery, but gets caught within a skirmish between the templars and the assassins (that could be the trailer) which began because something huge was about to occur, French Revolution maybe????

And since he is the only witness/survivor alive, he is "kidnapped" into the Assassins Hideout, in which he is finally recruited...
Then, he does some missions like those one you see on the contracts and afterthat, the big plot is discovered.

Please, no more bulky armors, or den defense and 14 secuences, at least...

Animuses
12-21-2011, 07:31 PM
Originally posted by lukaszep:
Patrice Desilets worked on AC:B. Jus' saying. He had little to no contribution. Just saying.


Originally posted by lukaszep:
Okay. It just sounds like you're implying AC:B and AC:R weren't as good (or in keeping of the AC2 style) because Patrice Desilets and Jade Raymond didn't work on them. No Patrice was a huge reason why they weren't as good. AC was Patrice's creation, his vision. How can others capture what was his?

You can be surprised how much of a difference a few people can make.

lukaszep
12-21-2011, 09:28 PM
Originally posted by Animuses:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by lukaszep:
Patrice Desilets worked on AC:B. Jus' saying. He had little to no contribution. Just saying.


Originally posted by lukaszep:
Okay. It just sounds like you're implying AC:B and AC:R weren't as good (or in keeping of the AC2 style) because Patrice Desilets and Jade Raymond didn't work on them. No Patrice was a huge reason why they weren't as good. AC was Patrice's creation, his vision. How can others capture what was his?

You can be surprised how much of a difference a few people can make. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

How do you know how much of a contribution he made?
Of course, Patrice Desilets is the creator, but that doesn't mean his vision is perfect. AC1, by no means is the perfect game. In fact it's probably the most heavily criticized. His main focus was the story right? Well how come many found AC:R had the most powerful and compelling story of the series? Not to say i don't think he's good (and i hugely appreciate his work and his creation of the AC franchise), but i do think a lot of AC fans have a similar situation to Christopher Nolan and the Batman films going on. It's like he can do no wrong, and he is the master of his creation and no one can touch it and make it good.
We don't know how much of a contribution he made to AC:B, so fans criticizing it and blaming it on the fact Patrice didn't work on it, is unjust. It is entirely possible he has still been in contact with the team making the AC games. It's what any good director/creator of a franchise would do.

fyiByas
12-21-2011, 09:30 PM
I totally agree with the AC Series going back to it's roots.

Sometimes playing as an overpowered character isn't always interesting. A Hero should earn his honor and be vulnerable at all times. Thats what the first two Assassin's Creed showed and a little bit in Brotherhood.

I can honestly say in my opinion that Revelations is the worst. In the Alta´r memories, I felt like I was playing as Ezio except with a new skin. Lots of the Side missions I played had that "been there, done that" feeling. It felt a little rushed and there wasn't much content it had compared to AC2 and Bruddahood.

Not everything was bad, I just think that Revelations is OK. The sandbox exploring and secret locations are still awesome. Also the puzzles with Desmond were fun.

Regardless I hope Assassin's Creed 3 or whenever this new title comes out will innovate over the others.

Vex_Assassin
12-21-2011, 09:45 PM
At the moment, I couldn't agree more with you. I played Revelations back in November when it came out and it left me a bit disappointed. Don't get me wrong, it was a great game, but I guess I expected too much out of it. Also, once I got 100% completion, I didn't felt like playing it again.

On the other hand, when I played AC2 for the first time, I was just amazed by this awesome game and I went through it 3 times in like 2 weeks. I've been replaying AC2 for a couple of days now and I must admit, it's still my favorite of the AC series. The story, the feel, the emotions, the conspiracy, the truth puzzles, everything just fits perfectly together.

The only thing that makes AC2 not as good as the last 2 installments is the combat system. If AC2 had the combat system of ACB/ACR, it would be an even more awesome and epic game in my opinion.

JumpInTheFire13
12-21-2011, 09:50 PM
Originally posted by tarrero:
One thing that I want to be for sure is a recruit, may be the next ancestor was a futureless thief, with lots of running skills and some sort of "strange sixth sense", he goes for a robbery, but gets caught within a skirmish between the templars and the assassins (that could be the trailer) which began because something huge was about to occur, French Revolution maybe????

And since he is the only witness/survivor alive, he is "kidnapped" into the Assassins Hideout, in which he is finally recruited...
Then, he does some missions like those one you see on the contracts and afterthat, the big plot is discovered.

Please, no more bulky armors, or den defense and 14 secuences, at least...

This sounds like it would make an incredible game. Being brought into something you wanted nothing to do with

massmurdera_666
12-21-2011, 11:13 PM
i would like to see the Brotherhood and the Assassin's you recruit be totally overhauled. The games don't make it feel like an organization, it feels like a bunch of goons waiting around to be told to kill someone or steal something.

you would think Ezio would have thought ahead and said "Hmm, I get hurt alot, i've been stabbed a couple times and have also been on my deathbed before, maybe I should recruit a doctor that could come to my aid when I'm hurt."

i mean damn, the Mafia has doctors to fix up their people why can't the Brotherhood? i'm tiered of just taking some medicine and being instantly healed, that would add some difficulty to the game, not being able to heal if you don't have an available doctor on hand.

i like the idea of only having a handful of recruits and making each one special. give them a significant use, doctor, sniper, grenadier, heavy weapons specialist, anything. i know those are kind of generic but its an idea.

massmurdera_666
12-21-2011, 11:26 PM
Originally posted by JumpInTheFire13:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by tarrero:
One thing that I want to be for sure is a recruit, may be the next ancestor was a futureless thief, with lots of running skills and some sort of "strange sixth sense", he goes for a robbery, but gets caught within a skirmish between the templars and the assassins (that could be the trailer) which began because something huge was about to occur, French Revolution maybe????

And since he is the only witness/survivor alive, he is "kidnapped" into the Assassins Hideout, in which he is finally recruited...
Then, he does some missions like those one you see on the contracts and afterthat, the big plot is discovered.

Please, no more bulky armors, or den defense and 14 secuences, at least...

This sounds like it would make an incredible game. Being brought into something you wanted nothing to do with </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


this is a good idea but if you know the game and have beaten ACR SPOILER: <span class="ev_code_WHITE">Desmond is in New York and could possibly be set during the French and Indian War</span>
i like the idea of the French Revolution but also don't like it. the war i mentioned previously seems to fit, alot of great cultures mingling together not just the single one. AC1 and AC2 are a great example, even though they all acted the same, the cities and people looked different, but with the abilities Ubisoft has learned and the time they have, they can make each culture act exactly how they did in the past.

ProdiGurl
12-22-2011, 03:50 AM
Sometimes playing as an overpowered character isn't always interesting. A Hero should earn his honor and be vulnerable at all times. Thats what the first two Assassin's Creed showed and a little bit in Brotherhood.

For the most part as I see things, if gameplay is fun, the story is good & the character is likeable, it shouldn't matter if you play a novice or mentor . . I'm sure that will alternate as the series goes on w/ new Assassins.


One thing that I want to be for sure is a recruit, may be the next ancestor was a futureless thief, with lots of running skills and some sort of "strange sixth sense",

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif
By skills, I'm hoping you mean that those who can't race for crap will miraculously be able to outrun anyone and not continually fall off rooftops.

If they add more timed racing to AC3 I think I'll have a stroke.

johnnyhayek
12-22-2011, 01:02 PM
By posting this thread, don't think I didn't like ACR. It was really good, and its ending was awesome, but it simply felt too empty a lot of times. Sort of like a big side mission put on a disc. I always replay AC games at least 4 times. ACR just doesn't encourage me to do so anymore. It's missing the AC spirit of the previous games. Can't wait for AC3 to be revealed so that we find out what it's about and how it will play.

luckyto
12-22-2011, 01:16 PM
Originally posted by lukaszep:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Animuses:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by lukaszep:
Patrice Desilets worked on AC:B. Jus' saying. He had little to no contribution. Just saying.


Originally posted by lukaszep:
Okay. It just sounds like you're implying AC:B and AC:R weren't as good (or in keeping of the AC2 style) because Patrice Desilets and Jade Raymond didn't work on them. No Patrice was a huge reason why they weren't as good. AC was Patrice's creation, his vision. How can others capture what was his?

You can be surprised how much of a difference a few people can make. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

How do you know how much of a contribution he made?
Of course, Patrice Desilets is the creator, but that doesn't mean his vision is perfect. AC1, by no means is the perfect game. In fact it's probably the most heavily criticized. His main focus was the story right? Well how come many found AC:R had the most powerful and compelling story of the series? Not to say i don't think he's good (and i hugely appreciate his work and his creation of the AC franchise), but i do think a lot of AC fans have a similar situation to Christopher Nolan and the Batman films going on. It's like he can do no wrong, and he is the master of his creation and no one can touch it and make it good.
We don't know how much of a contribution he made to AC:B, so fans criticizing it and blaming it on the fact Patrice didn't work on it, is unjust. It is entirely possible he has still been in contact with the team making the AC games. It's what any good director/creator of a franchise would do. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I could not disagree with you more. I saw things completely opposite. AC1 is the best game of the series in terms of sheer gameplay: combat, mechanics and free roam. And it is dragged down mainly because it is missing few key game mechanics such as fast travel, or doesn't have "Hollywood"-style cinematics.

In terms of story, AC2 was the height of this franchise. With Brotherhood, it went WAY down. None of that story meant didly to me and it had the most disappointing mission sequences of the entire lot. Revelations was a step in the right direction, but it has nowhere near the tension or driving narrative that AC2 delivers.

Whether it is the lack of Patrice and Jade, or the one-year turn around, or the need to add lots of gimmicks; or more likely, a combination of all the above --- it is time to go back to roots.

lukaszep
12-22-2011, 03:36 PM
Originally posted by luckyto:

I could not disagree with you more. I saw things completely opposite. AC1 is the best game of the series in terms of sheer gameplay: combat, mechanics and free roam. And it is dragged down mainly because it is missing few key game mechanics such as fast travel, or doesn't have "Hollywood"-style cinematics.

In terms of story, AC2 was the height of this franchise. With Brotherhood, it went WAY down. None of that story meant didly to me and it had the most disappointing mission sequences of the entire lot. Revelations was a step in the right direction, but it has nowhere near the tension or driving narrative that AC2 delivers.

Whether it is the lack of Patrice and Jade, or the one-year turn around, or the need to add lots of gimmicks; or more likely, a combination of all the above --- it is time to go back to roots.

Okay, that's fair, i accept your opinion. But what i was trying to get at, is that the general fan feedback is that, AC1 has many flaws in terms of repetitive game play and lacked emotion, whereas AC:R had an amazing story driven by characters, and Patrice.D and Jade.R didn't work on AC:R.

I don't believe they have been adding "gimmicks", but just (in some cases slightly under-developed) new features to keep the game play fresh and prevent it from going stale. I agree that there was a lack of tension in AC:R, but that wasn't the story's problem, it was the pacing of the game, and lack of development was probably responsible.
My point is, Patrice Desilets and Jade Raymond are not essential to make a good AC game.

Animuses
12-22-2011, 03:42 PM
Imo, Patrice isn't essential to make a good game, but he is essential to make a good AC game.

In what sense is AC1 lacking emotion?

luckyto
12-22-2011, 04:05 PM
The only thing I'll give you is "the repetitive gameplay." It is pretty much the ONLY thing that popped up in all reviews and amongst other users. It is a valid point. And I still believe that perception is based almost entirely on the fact that you return to (and have to make the journey out of) Masyaf after each assassination. A big huge design mistake, no doubt. So big that it almost destroyed the franchise before it got off the ground because perception becomes reality. But that doesn't nearly top the excess of problems in ACB or ACR. And it's core game mechanics -- combat, enemy AI, environments and assassinations -- are radically superior to ACB or ACR.

ACR's story is at least good. And AC2's was tops. But gameplay matters more to me.

lukaszep
12-22-2011, 05:01 PM
The repetitiveness was from-
Travelling to a city.
Going to the Assassin's Bureau.
Playing 2 of 3 spying missions (Over hearing conversation etc.)
Finding your target.
Killing target.
Going to Masyaf.
x8

Not that i don't like AC1 (i love it) but i find the game play very repetitive.

@Animuses So in what way is AC1 emotional? Altair's only motivations for assassinations were because Al Mualim told him to. There were parts that were emotional, such as the slave trader memory. But nothing compared to AC2 and AC:R.