PDA

View Full Version : Forts: ACIV Black Flag, will there be any?



jayjay275
05-19-2013, 10:57 AM
I was wondering what Ubisoft could do to improve replay-ability after the campaign, as it was slightly poor when it came to City side missions and no ambeint music. However, one thing that I liked doing is infiltrating forts. I am anxious to know whether they will be included or not, and I think the following would be good:
Forts include music, like Restricted areas in ACR, ACB and ACII.
Once Forts are taken over, they can be attacked again by the French or British for example.
Forts could be attacked by sea, although it would be easy, it would be fun.
Forts could be larger, or guarded better.
More forts on the wide range of islands.
These are few ideas, but I think it would be good to implement these ideas.
What do you think?

ArabianFrost
05-19-2013, 11:00 AM
McDevitt already confirmed naval forts.

Sushiglutton
05-19-2013, 11:34 AM
Forts are in all Ubi games these days (FarCry, Watch Dogs, AC) for a simple reason: it's the perfect sandbox activity. I think it could be fun to have different kind of forts. For example a prison where you need to free prisoners that will then automatically be transfered to you crew (if they survive the rescue). Or a templar vault that will be locked if you get discovered, so you need to sneak in to get the treasure. Forts that can be infiltrated from underwater.

Most important improvement for forts would be to fix the spazzy enemy AI though.

jayjay275
05-19-2013, 12:40 PM
Hopefully side missions are more developed too. .____.

MasterAssasin84
05-19-2013, 01:05 PM
Hopefully side missions are more developed too. .____.


Now here is my input, obviously side missions are a must but i felt AC3 the game was swamped and in someways it digressed from the games main story and gameplay experience so i am hoping they will be kept to a minimum and focused more on the games main plotline and more importantly the side missions are relevent to the games story and progression.

Sushiglutton
05-19-2013, 01:35 PM
Now here is my input, obviously side missions are a must but i felt AC3 the game was swamped and in someways it digressed from the games main story and gameplay experience so i am hoping they will be kept to a minimum and focused more on the games main plotline and more importantly the side missions are relevent to the games story and progression.

I agree that many of the side missions in AC3 were generic, of low quality and overall made the game worse. But I don't think that is a reason to dismiss side missions alltogether and focus more on the campaign. What they should do imo is to have fewer types of side missions and up the quality of those. Forts, assassination contracts, ship battles, tombs/lairs, underwater, hunting, random events in the world. Build activities around the four core pillars: Stealth, Combat, Navigation and Naval.

FarCry3 had a fantastic balance between sandbox and campaign imo. The campaign was fairly linear and scripted with some very cool set pieces. That's ok. That's what a campaign is good at (the campaign in AC3 was waaaay too scripted though). The sandbox provided a lot of open ended missions with unique experiences and oppurtunities to be creative with various mechanics, as well as really cool random things that just happened in the world. That's what a sandbox is great at.

I think building a detailed open world without interesting activities to do in it is a huge waste. It doesn't make any sense to me.

MasterAssasin84
05-19-2013, 01:47 PM
I agree that many of the side missions in AC3 were generic, of low quality and overall made the game worse. But I don't think that is a reason to dismiss side missions alltogether and focus more on the campaign. What they should do imo is to have fewer types of side missions and up the quality of those. Forts, assassination contracts, ship battles, tombs/lairs, underwater, hunting, random events in the world. Build activities around the four core pillars: Stealth, Combat, Navigation and Naval.

FarCry3 had a fantastic balance between sandbox and campaign imo. The campaign was fairly linear and scripted with some very cool set pieces. That's ok. That's what a campaign is good at (the campaign in AC3 was waaaay too scripted though). The sandbox provided a lot of open ended missions with unique experiences and oppurtunities to be creative with various mechanics, as well as really cool random things that just happened in the world. That's what a sandbox is great at.

I think building a detailed open world without interesting activities to do in it is a huge waste. It doesn't make any sense to me.

Oh no in no way was i dismissing side missions i was just stating a point that i felt AC3 was over run with them which in some instances detached me from the overall plotline for example the Delivery requests and the Alamanac pages ? special inventions was very pretty to look at but the simple fact that they did absolutely nothing to the overall gameplay experience was a wast of oxygen. the homestead Missions but in some instances felt like i was more of a mother figure than a native American Assassins hunting down colonial templars which slightly pulled me away from the storyline and i really enjoyed the hunting but i felt that thinks like the frontiersman challenges, the Boston Brawlers That sort of thing was kind of digressing from what Assassins Creed is all about.

I am not putting AC3 down because i really love it but i do feel they should keep the side missions relevent to the over all experince and storyline and more importantly dont saturate the game so it becomes a generic roaming game.

jayjay275
05-19-2013, 01:53 PM
[QUOTE=MasterAssasin84;9078496]Oh no in no way was i dismissing side missions i was just stating a point that i felt AC3 was over run with them which in some instances detached me from the overall plotline for example the Delivery requests and the Alamanac pages ? special inventions was very pretty to look at but the simple fact that they did absolutely nothing to the overall gameplay experience was a wast of oxygen. the homestead Missions but in some instances felt like i was more of a mother figure than a native American Assassins hunting down colonial templars which slightly pulled me away from the storyline and i really enjoyed the hunting but i felt that thinks like the frontiersman challenges, the Boston Brawlers That sort of thing was kind of digressing from what Assassins Creed is all about.

I totally agree on the highlighted part.

SixKeys
05-19-2013, 02:33 PM
I really liked that in Revelations the forts could become contested and taken back by the Templars. Didn't care for Den Defense, but I loved being able to reclaim the forts after they had been lost. I wish they would bring that back for AC4.

Sushiglutton
05-19-2013, 02:33 PM
Oh no in no way was i dismissing side missions i was just stating a point that i felt AC3 was over run with them which in some instances detached me from the overall plotline for example the Delivery requests and the Alamanac pages ? special inventions was very pretty to look at but the simple fact that they did absolutely nothing to the overall gameplay experience was a wast of oxygen. the homestead Missions but in some instances felt like i was more of a mother figure than a native American Assassins hunting down colonial templars which slightly pulled me away from the storyline and i really enjoyed the hunting but i felt that thinks like the frontiersman challenges, the Boston Brawlers That sort of thing was kind of digressing from what Assassins Creed is all about.

I am not putting AC3 down because i really love it but i do feel they should keep the side missions relevent to the over all experince and storyline and more importantly dont saturate the game so it becomes a generic roaming game.

Ah, I think we pretty muich agree then. Boston Brawlers is also an example of the devs not knowing what the gameplay weaknesses are. It's a fun idea on paper, but the hand to hand combat is really, really poor. Designing several missions that draw attention to this mechanic is just wrong. It's the same flaw all the campaign missions that forces you to use a horse have.

Sushiglutton
05-19-2013, 02:36 PM
I really liked that in Revelations the forts could become contested and taken back by the Templars. Didn't care for Den Defense, but I loved being able to reclaim the forts after they had been lost. I wish they would bring that back for AC4.

Only if it's player initiated imo. It's annoying if things reset when you are spending time exploring the sandbox. The system in Revelations to connect it to notoriety was clever imo as you never got full notoriety by accident, but at the same time it felt organic. Notoriety is gone from AC4 if I remember correctly though. Just resetting the forts from a menu would be fine by me.

MasterAssasin84
05-19-2013, 02:37 PM
Ah, I think we pretty muich agree then. Boston Brawlers is also an example of the devs not knowing what the gameplay weaknesses are. It's a fun idea on paper, but the hand to hand combat is really, really poor. Designing several missions that draw attention to this mechanic is just wrong. It's the same flaw all the campaign missions that forces you to use a horse have.

Agreed !! not forgetting some of them was very time consuming and the reward for your troubles was just simply poor :nonchalance:

SixKeys
05-19-2013, 03:04 PM
Only if it's player initiated imo. It's annoying if things reset when you are spending time exploring the sandbox. The system in Revelations to connect it to notoriety was clever imo as you never got full notoriety by accident, but at the same time it felt organic. Notoriety is gone from AC4 if I remember correctly though. Just resetting the forts from a menu would be fine by me.

Yes, there should be a similar system in place in AC4 even if notoriety is gone. Maybe if you kill enough officials or lose too many battles or something. I don't know if we will have assassin recruits in AC4 that you can send to different cities to complete missions like in the last two games. Maybe their successes and failures could be tied to the forts. Hard to say what would be a good replacement for notoriety.

ProletariatPleb
05-19-2013, 03:11 PM
I really liked that in Revelations the forts could become contested and taken back by the Templars. Didn't care for Den Defense, but I loved being able to reclaim the forts after they had been lost. I wish they would bring that back for AC4.
There were forts in ACR? :p

SixKeys
05-19-2013, 03:15 PM
There were forts in ACR? :p

Dens, forts, towers....same difference.

ProletariatPleb
05-19-2013, 03:21 PM
Dens, forts, towers....same difference.
You didn't have to reply to that!

jayjay275
05-19-2013, 07:20 PM
We could also have more hostages inside the forts.

Rugterwyper32
05-19-2013, 07:27 PM
I do believe there will be more forts. Both in the cities (dunno how it'd work on Nassau, maybe make them possible after the game goes past 1718?) and in the sea itself. I would like them to go all the way to Guatemala, myself, and be able to raid Castillo de San Felipe. It was raided, looted and destroyed many, many times by pirates, so it could be a fun target. And hey, we're supposedly getting Mayan ruins, so I'd expect the Yucatan Peninsula in Mexico, the coast of Belize and hopefully the area of Izabal in Guatemala to be part of the game.
That's what I hope, at least

projectpat06
05-19-2013, 10:42 PM
They've stated we will attack many forts by sea at first like the naval fort mission in AC3 then have several ways to approach the fort on land to take it. Darby said the big ships we attack will have a set of objectives similar to the borgia towers where we can go about our own way to take the ship once we disable it.

STDlyMcStudpants
05-19-2013, 11:06 PM
I actually liked that side missions in AC 3 actually had life in them and had nothing to do with the main story....
I enjoyed carrying a pregnant lady on the back of my horse and i enjoyed searching for creatures of american tall tales...