PDA

View Full Version : The First Assassin's Creed Originally Had Co-Op



altairezio1993
02-04-2013, 05:04 PM
http://www.oxm.co.uk/49887/assassins-creed-once-had-huge-drop-in-co-op-mode-but-it-didnt-fit/?cid=OTC-RSS&attr=OXM-News-RSS

Interesting this has come up again with the recent questionnaire question on co-op, could ACIV find a way to make it work? Maybe one player plays as a Templar and the other an Assassin seeing as this alliance was touched upon in ACIIII and with the next game very likely having to find a way to defeat Juno, this could be interesting.

lothario-da-be
02-04-2013, 05:17 PM
Just saw it too, i hope ac4 has a descent co-op mode, and not like wolfpack.

DavisP92
02-04-2013, 05:36 PM
Ubisoft just makes more excuses. They removed features from the original AC game that I know a bunch of people who stopped playing AC would come back to the series of the game was similar to the x06 demo shown. Now they are saying co-op was also in it and we didn't know the story to their own game. Why not just make a separate co-op experience in the menu without the animus? Or why not have to descedente reliving the lives of two assassins who turn out to be in the same team of assassins. That way two people or even three can play together?

straty88
02-04-2013, 06:27 PM
Ubisoft just makes more excuses. They removed features from the original AC game that I know a bunch of people who stopped playing AC would come back to the series of the game was similar to the x06 demo shown. Now they are saying co-op was also in it and we didn't know the story to their own game.


It's normal to develop ideas before the story is planned out. In AC3 they decided to do the American revolution and that they would have a native american hero, so they developed tech for the frontier. The animus stuff probably came a bit later after they had the initial plans in place.

DavisP92
02-04-2013, 07:59 PM
It's normal to develop ideas before the story is planned out. In AC3 they decided to do the American revolution and that they would have a native american hero, so they developed tech for the frontier. The animus stuff probably came a bit later after they had the initial plans in place.

Well seeing how they ended up developing a "huge" co-op experience and just scrapped it, then add the fact that the had completely finished features in AC1 originally, including horses riding in cities, a better physics system, a better escape system, difficult beyond any of the AC games out now. And you could see all of it being played in the demo (obviously except for the co-op) and then removed it all and tried to bring it back in later tittles like it's an amazing new feature. And they didn't even bring them all back at the same level.

straty88
02-04-2013, 08:20 PM
Well seeing how they ended up developing a "huge" co-op experience and just scrapped it, then add the fact that the had completely finished features in AC1 originally, including horses riding in cities, a better physics system, a better escape system, difficult beyond any of the AC games out now. And you could see all of it being played in the demo (obviously except for the co-op) and then removed it all and tried to bring it back in later tittles like it's an amazing new feature. And they didn't even bring them all back at the same level.

Did you even read the article? He clearly says the engine couldn't support it at that time. Also "Co-op was one of those big things at the beginning​" Things change very quickly in game development, certain ideas/concepts can nearly be done then suddenly scrapped for several different reasons. Jade Raymond made a behind the scenes saying that NPCs will varied & look different in AC1, so you didn't see the same NPC over and over again. Yet if you played the game they had like 10.

It happens with pretty much every game that gets a sequel, they add features they couldn't get finished in the first game & refine current systems.

DavisP92
02-04-2013, 08:28 PM
Did you even read the article? He clearly says the engine couldn't support it at that time. Also "Co-op was one of those big things at the beginning​" Things change very quickly in game development, certain ideas/concepts can nearly be done then suddenly scrapped for several different reasons. Jade Raymond made a behind the scenes saying that NPCs will varied & look different in AC1, so you didn't see the same NPC over and over again. Yet if you played the game they had like 10.

It happens with pretty much every game that gets a sequel, they add features they couldn't get finished in the first game & refine current systems.

There is a difference between saying something will (might) be in the game and actually playing the game in front of people and showing amazing features. That were taken out last minute and never mentioned why it was. Look up the X06 demo of AC and you'll see what i'm referring to.

and then now we have to think about the fact that the next AC game may have co-op, but will it actually be good? Will it be as ambitious as they are saying it was going to be in AC1? if there isn't any customization no co-op moves, etc. then that would suck.

pacmanate
02-04-2013, 09:14 PM
You guys keep wanting a Co-Op mode but have you ever wondered how they would make it good? How can they give a brilliant AC experience with two players?

DavisP92
02-04-2013, 09:50 PM
You guys keep wanting a Co-Op mode but have you ever wondered how they would make it good? How can they give a brilliant AC experience with two players?

The same way Splinter Conviction's co-op was great. I've stated multiple times how Ubisoft could make a great co-op experience for 2-3 people

Edit: If you would like I could find my past post (IT'S HUGE) and post it here for you

Sushiglutton
02-04-2013, 10:05 PM
I have no interest in Co-op so I'm glad they skipped it. I hope they don't do it for 4 either and instead spend those resources improving the gameplay in the SP.

DavisP92
02-04-2013, 11:11 PM
I have no interest in Co-op so I'm glad they skipped it. I hope they don't do it for 4 either and instead spend those resources improving the gameplay in the SP.

well that's not going to happen, i mean i said the same thing for the MP and they didn't. In their perspective it's better that they add MP and Co-op because it pulls in more customers and well AC has been selling more and more with every installment, so i looks like they know what they're doing finance wise. Also if the article is true then that means they already have a lot of the co-op already done since AC1 and just wanted to figure out how to put it in.

straty88
02-04-2013, 11:12 PM
There is a difference between saying something will (might) be in the game and actually playing the game in front of people and showing amazing features. That were taken out last minute and never mentioned why it was. Look up the X06 demo of AC and you'll see what i'm referring to.

and then now we have to think about the fact that the next AC game may have co-op, but will it actually be good? Will it be as ambitious as they are saying it was going to be in AC1? if there isn't any customization no co-op moves, etc. then that would suck.

I've already watched the demo, it was the reason I became interested in AC. As for the features you mentioned, the horse riding was a bit weird but I don't mind as the horse has always been a bit crap in AC. The difficulty was changed because it would be too hard for most gamers, hence why all AC games are extremely easy. And features being removed even though they were in videos etc does happen a fair amount. :)

@Pacmate Not really, the only way I can think of is if they do it like AC:Liberation but have two people relive two important Assassin's etc but that just.... yeah :)

DavisP92
02-05-2013, 12:02 AM
I've already watched the demo, it was the reason I became interested in AC. As for the features you mentioned, the horse riding was a bit weird but I don't mind as the horse has always been a bit crap in AC. The difficulty was changed because it would be too hard for most gamers, hence why all AC games are extremely easy. And features being removed even though they were in videos etc does happen a fair amount. :)


Hah yea the horses in AC do suck, but the fact that they tried to make i sound amazing that you can now ride horses in cities when i was in the first game was lame. the difficulty being removed completely was a bad decision, that's why a large majority of the fans have been asking for more of a challenge. and the physics was far better in the demo than what they tried to do with ACR (using the hook blade to break a mini scaffold) and escaping the city makes more sense after assassinating your target in public than staying in the city.

But yes you are right, features being removed does happen to a lot of games, but i find that in ACs case it is quite sad because the features that they took out would have made the game even better. oh well

straty88
02-05-2013, 12:21 AM
Hah yea the horses in AC do suck, but the fact that they tried to make i sound amazing that you can now ride horses in cities when i was in the first game was lame. the difficulty being removed completely was a bad decision, that's why a large majority of the fans have been asking for more of a challenge. and the physics was far better in the demo than what they tried to do with ACR (using the hook blade to break a mini scaffold) and escaping the city makes more sense after assassinating your target in public than staying in the city.

But yes you are right, features being removed does happen to a lot of games, but i find that in ACs case it is quite sad because the features that they took out would have made the game even better. oh well

I was really hoping Alex Hutchinsons idea about and a new game + was going to come to fruition but it never did. However I can hope right? :) The extra physics were so small though, I mean you can break them in AC1 but using people instead of your sword. :D

Usually though features that are cut for whatever reason don't bother me, as they wouldn't really change the way I'd play the game. For instance if AC1 had horses in the city, I'd still only use the horse to get across the holy land. Even if the mechanics were refined to say, a Red Dead Redemption standard. Although in ACR I was really looking forward to the random events, even though it's there. ACR only had one random event and it didn't really add to the gameplay. :/

Back on topic I really don't see how co-op would work within the AC framework but they managed Multiplayer (I like it :D) so I'd love to give it a chance.

DavisP92
02-05-2013, 12:47 AM
I was really hoping Alex Hutchinsons idea about and a new game + was going to come to fruition but it never did. However I can hope right? :) The extra physics were so small though, I mean you can break them in AC1 but using people instead of your sword. :D

Usually though features that are cut for whatever reason don't bother me, as they wouldn't really change the way I'd play the game. For instance if AC1 had horses in the city, I'd still only use the horse to get across the holy land. Even if the mechanics were refined to say, a Red Dead Redemption standard. Although in ACR I was really looking forward to the random events, even though it's there. ACR only had one random event and it didn't really add to the gameplay. :/

Back on topic I really don't see how co-op would work within the AC framework but they managed Multiplayer (I like it :D) so I'd love to give it a chance.

except for the fact that it blocked the entire road and was HUGE. HUGEEEEEEEE, like GODZILLAAAAA. well not really, but the amount of wood that blocked the road was better than ACRs version.

Well if they had horses in the city and I had to escape the city I would use the horses to leave. I really liked the idea of escaping the city, that and I liked the eagle vision in that demo over what we have now.

I don't see how it would be that hard to make AC co-op story-wise. they can do it two different ways, they can have a section in the main menu for co-op in which it can either be a co-op story about two descendants that relive their ancestors that turn out to be brothers or sisters or on the same team of assassins. Now the other way is they could have co-op set up with the idea of you playing as a recruit (you'd start off as a recruit in the other way too) that goes on the missions you send your recruits in the SP. Remember in ACB there was a mission that was 5 stars in Alexandria, Egypt where you had to save the mentor there. This way if we're doing recruit missions like the ones in ACB, ACR, and AC3 they could continue releasing new missions in new locations as DLCs not only giving the fans new experiences and missions to play with but giving Ubisoft another form of income with AC

Littleweasel
02-05-2013, 12:48 AM
i think that the only way co-op would work in the AC series is if they had 2 different campaigns with 2 different main character 1 per campaign that intertwined for a good portion of the game, but also had its own story line, and side missions. meaning you would have to play both campaigns to get the full story of what has/is happening.
although i think that would be an awesome way to go with AC4, and even better if they do away with the competitive mp part of the game, but of course keep the wolf pack part 8)

DavisP92
02-05-2013, 01:23 AM
i think that the only way co-op would work in the AC series is if they had 2 different campaigns with 2 different main character 1 per campaign that intertwined for a good portion of the game, but also had its own story line, and side missions. meaning you would have to play both campaigns to get the full story of what has/is happening.
although i think that would be an awesome way to go with AC4, and even better if they do away with the competitive mp part of the game, but of course keep the wolf pack part 8)

I don't think anyone would be happy with only getting part of the story especially if they can't play co-op (no internet). But instead how about they do it like Splinter cell conviction? The co-op is a prequel to the SP, maybe the piece of eden we are looking for was found and hidden by the assassins we play as in the co-op.

Also they will never do away with the MP, but they are adding (maybe) sword combat and hand-to-hand combat, so that's cool.

Sushiglutton
02-05-2013, 01:34 AM
well that's not going to happen, i mean i said the same thing for the MP and they didn't. In their perspective it's better that they add MP and Co-op because it pulls in more customers and well AC has been selling more and more with every installment, so i looks like they know what they're doing finance wise. Also if the article is true then that means they already have a lot of the co-op already done since AC1 and just wanted to figure out how to put it in.

You mean that the co-op is self-sustainable and won't steal resources from any other part? I suppose that's true, but I still think the evolvment of the SP will suffer if they spend a lot of energy on a co-op mode. The only thing I really want from the sequel is that they finally lift the gameplay to a resonable standard given what other developers are doing. The reason AC3 is subpar compared to other games imo is that Ubi is trying to do too much. Adding a co-op mode would just mean another huge distraction.

But you are correct that what they are doing seems to work well financially, so I suppose pushing gameplay is pretty low on their list of priorities. And I wouldn't be suprised if they added a co-op mode.

SixKeys
02-05-2013, 01:56 AM
At this point the AC franchise needs something truly radical. Before AC3's launch, Alex Hutchinson kept saying that the team was treating the game almost as a new IP, but the end product didn't feel at all like such a major departure from tried and true mechanics that had been there at least for the past 3 games. The series needs a major face lift, some new concept that they haven't been able to work in before with the Desmond storyline, but now that his story is done, there's a whole slew of new possibilities for the Animus framing device. Personally I don't care about co-op, but something like that might just be a breath of fresh air. Imagine having two assassins with customizable gear and abilities working together, or an assassin and a Templar. Co-op could open up new story possibilities and that's important. It should of course be optional and the emphasis should still be on the single-player experince being gratifying on its own. Co-op should just be an enhancement, or maybe separate side missions in the form of assassination contracts. Kind of like how in MMO's you have missions that are always available whether you're in a party or on your own. You can choose to start them on your own, or you could choose for the option to allow others to join you when they see you're currently in a mission.

DavisP92
02-05-2013, 02:38 AM
You mean that the co-op is self-sustainable and won't steal resources from any other part? I suppose that's true, but I still think the evolvment of the SP will suffer if they spend a lot of energy on a co-op mode. The only thing I really want from the sequel is that they finally lift the gameplay to a resonable standard given what other developers are doing. The reason AC3 is subpar compared to other games imo is that Ubi is trying to do too much. Adding a co-op mode would just mean another huge distraction.

But you are correct that what they are doing seems to work well financially, so I suppose pushing gameplay is pretty low on their list of priorities. And I wouldn't be suprised if they added a co-op mode.

I do see where your concern comes from, I see it as well, but seeing how they have so many studios working on it they should be fine. The thing I want them to do in order to make the game better is make it as similar to AC1, in my eyes that was the best AC yet. The only negative thing was the repetitiveness to which i never even noticed until my 3rd playthrough.

As for co-op, they will put it in seeing how a lot of people are asking for it and the list is still growing.


At this point the AC franchise needs something truly radical. Before AC3's launch, Alex Hutchinson kept saying that the team was treating the game almost as a new IP, but the end product didn't feel at all like such a major departure from tried and true mechanics that had been there at least for the past 3 games. The series needs a major face lift, some new concept that they haven't been able to work in before with the Desmond storyline, but now that his story is done, there's a whole slew of new possibilities for the Animus framing device. Personally I don't care about co-op, but something like that might just be a breath of fresh air. Imagine having two assassins with customizable gear and abilities working together, or an assassin and a Templar. Co-op could open up new story possibilities and that's important. It should of course be optional and the emphasis should still be on the single-player experince being gratifying on its own. Co-op should just be an enhancement, or maybe separate side missions in the form of assassination contracts. Kind of like how in MMO's you have missions that are always available whether you're in a party or on your own. You can choose to start them on your own, or you could choose for the option to allow others to join you when they see you're currently in a mission.

yea it would have to be optional, i'm thinking co-op 2-3 players and a deep customization feature with new abilities that could even be put into the SP. Like shooting an arrow with a rope attached to it and making your own zipline.

BATISTABUS
02-05-2013, 03:32 AM
I hate "drop in/out" co-op. It always makes one of the experiences suffer, which is usually the single player (since you have to "take care" of an NPC). If you're gonna have co-op, do a separate story.

pacmanate
02-05-2013, 09:40 AM
I would still like to know how you would get a great cinematic experience with Co Op. The world would have to be smaller and everything would be crazily linear and closed off due to the nature of it being online. Even if it was split screen, wouldnt matter, its the same game.

dxsxhxcx
02-05-2013, 11:10 AM
At this point the AC franchise needs something truly radical.

a 2 years break before start developing the next game for 3 years (which means a 5 years break)?! :p