PDA

View Full Version : New Darby interview



AlphaAltair
10-07-2013, 11:27 AM
Looks like Edward wont be an Assassin for the majority of the game :(

The Assassins want him to join but he turns them down (repeatedly?).

Darby describes Edward as more like one of the mercenaries that Ezio would've hired.

Also my money is on Hornigold for main villain.

http://cramgaming.com/assassins-creed-4-interview-darby-mcdevitt-lead-script-writer-11286/

pirate1802
10-07-2013, 11:36 AM
Looks like Edward wont be an Assassin for the majority of the game :(

Awesome!!

Sushiglutton
10-07-2013, 11:47 AM
Awesome!!

Agree, it doesn't have to be a bad thing at all. On the contrary it sounds like something fresh. I like Darby he has sold me on his vision for this story :).

Farlander1991
10-07-2013, 11:56 AM
Also finally some public recognition for Hutchinson in form of starting the whole naval thing (without which AC4 wouldn't be possible the way it is) :D Hopefully that is going to lighten-up the Alex-bashers at least a little bit, he doesn't deserve the negativity he gets from a lot of people in this community.

Sushiglutton
10-07-2013, 11:59 AM
Also finally some public recognition for Hutchinson in form of starting the whole naval thing (without which AC4 wouldn't be possible the way it is) :D Hopefully that is going to lighten-up the Alex-bashers at least a little bit, he doesn't deserve the negativity he gets from a lot of people in this community.

I hardly ever see his name mentioned at all, is he really getting that bashed? I know AC3 is, but noone knows which ideas/philosophys were his (except for naval and boardgames, both good).

roostersrule2
10-07-2013, 12:02 PM
I hardly ever see his name mentioned at all, is he really getting that bashed? I know AC3 is, but noone knows which ideas/philosophys were his (except for naval and boardgames, both good).He's blamed for cutting stuff from AC3 etc. who knows who's ideas they were.

pirate1802
10-07-2013, 12:07 PM
Agree, it doesn't have to be a bad thing at all. On the contrary it sounds like something fresh. I like Darby he has sold me on his vision for this story :).

Agreed. We've been playing as Assassins, and a small part as a Templar, I think its fresh that we're going to have a look from someone's point of view who is part of neither groups.

Farlander1991
10-07-2013, 12:08 PM
I hardly ever see his name mentioned at all, is he really getting that bashed? I know AC3 is, but noone knows which ideas/philosophys were his (except for naval and boardgames, both good).

Well, it doesn't happen as much anymore I suppose, but back when AC3 was released (which was also approx. the time when I became active on these forums) there was a lot of that going on, and even after AC4 was announced from time to time you'd see that in an AC3-related discussion.

AlphaAltair
10-07-2013, 01:12 PM
Awesome!!

Given your username that doesn't surprise me.

I think it sucks, I buy Assassins Creed to be an Assassin.

It would be like if the new Batman game was mostly street racing as Bruce Wayne and you only became Batman at the end.

roostersrule2
10-07-2013, 01:18 PM
Given your username that doesn't surprise me.

I think it sucks, I buy Assassins Creed to be an Assassin.

It would be like if the new Batman game was mostly street racing as Bruce Wayne and you only became Batman at the end.Batman Begins.

The third best Batman movie.

Anyway he still has all the moves of an assassin so he is physically an assassin just not officially part of the creed.

SixKeys
10-07-2013, 01:23 PM
Batman Begins.

The third best Batman movie.

I think you mean THE best Batman movie.

roostersrule2
10-07-2013, 01:28 PM
I think you mean THE best Batman movie.After The Dark Knight and The Dark Knight Rises, yes.

SixKeys
10-07-2013, 01:34 PM
After The Dark Knight and The Dark Knight Rises, yes.

Batman Begins > The Dark Knight > The Dark Knight Rises

silvermercy
10-07-2013, 01:36 PM
This thread has now convinced me to see all Batman films. lol

roostersrule2
10-07-2013, 01:38 PM
Batman Begins > The Dark Knight > The Dark Knight RisesNo.

They were all amazing but I disagree.


This thread has now convinced me to see all Batman films. lolYes do it right now, they're so good.

Anyway AC4, Darby etc.

Mr_Shade
10-07-2013, 01:47 PM
and topic?

SixKeys
10-07-2013, 01:51 PM
Didn't read the interview since it sounds spoilery. :p

pirate1802
10-07-2013, 01:51 PM
Given your username that doesn't surprise me.

I think it sucks, I buy Assassins Creed to be an Assassin.

It would be like if the new Batman game was mostly street racing as Bruce Wayne and you only became Batman at the end.

Go cry somewhere else.

Hans684
10-07-2013, 02:01 PM
Given your username that doesn't surprise me.

I think it sucks, I buy Assassins Creed to be an Assassin.

It would be like if the new Batman game was mostly street racing as Bruce Wayne and you only became Batman at the end.

I like the idea, it's more original compared to the Ezio and Connor who went trough personal troubles and then joined the order without question like said in the interview.

AssassinHMS
10-07-2013, 02:39 PM
Given your username that doesn't surprise me.

I think it sucks, I buy Assassins Creed to be an Assassin.

It would be like if the new Batman game was mostly street racing as Bruce Wayne and you only became Batman at the end.

I agree but Edward probably has assassin skills from the beginning of the game just like Ezio and Connor could climb and perform a leap of faith without any training whatsoever (which is a nonsense).

On the other hand, if they're smart enough, they'll ditch naval gameplay after AC4 and focus on the assassin's creed stuff to actually improve what matters in the franchise. So, if you wait around, you might actually live long enough to see a proper return to the roots, or not.

lothario-da-be
10-07-2013, 02:46 PM
I agree but Edward probably has assassin skills from the beginning of the game just like Ezio and Connor could climb and perform a leap of faith without any training whatsoever (which is a nonsense).

On the other hand, if they're smart enough, they'll ditch naval gameplay after AC4 and focus on the assassin's creed stuff to actually improve what matters in the franchise. So, if you wait around, you might actually live long enough to see a proper return to the roots, or not.
Or they make a full pirate game next year.

AssassinHMS
10-07-2013, 02:50 PM
Or they make a full pirate game next year.

And give "AC" a rest? Preposterous :)

SixKeys
10-07-2013, 02:54 PM
Or they make a full pirate game next year.

I doubt they would bring out three games where naval is a big part of the experience. I expect them to keep moving in new directions and justifying their decisions by making the plot somewhat AC-related as opposed to the other way around. In every interview the devs have been saying how they'd been wanting to make a pirate game for years. Not "we'd been wanting to make an Assassin's Creed game set in the pirate era for years", just A pirate game. AC gave them an excuse to do an open-world pirate game. Similarly, if Ubisoft wanted to do a western game like RDR, they would write the AC bits around the setting instead of using the lore itself as a justification for a particular era.

AssassinHMS
10-07-2013, 03:06 PM
I doubt they would bring out three games where naval is a big part of the experience. I expect them to keep moving in new directions and justifying their decisions by making the plot somewhat AC-related as opposed to the other way around. In every interview the devs have been saying how they'd been wanting to make a pirate game for years. Not "we'd been wanting to make an Assassin's Creed game set in the pirate era for years", just A pirate game. AC gave them an excuse to do an open-world pirate game. Similarly, if Ubisoft wanted to do a western game like RDR, they would write the AC bits around the setting instead of using the lore itself as a justification for a particular era.

Exactly! When they wanted to make an open world Uncharted game they named it AC3. But when will they want to make a real Assassin's Creed game? It's been 6 years since the last one...

Stealth Gamer92
10-07-2013, 03:07 PM
After The Dark Knight and The Dark Knight Rises, yes.

There are other, better, Batman movies. My #1(I always forgett the title though) is the one with Poison Ivy, Arnold as Mr. Freeze, and that one had the real Bane not the new movie Bane ripoff.

Stealth Gamer92
10-07-2013, 03:15 PM
I agree but Edward probably has assassin skills from the beginning of the game just like Ezio and Connor could climb and perform a leap of faith without any training whatsoever (which is a nonsense).

On the other hand, if they're smart enough, they'll ditch naval gameplay after AC4 and focus on the assassin's creed stuff to actually improve what matters in the franchise. So, if you wait around, you might actually live long enough to see a proper return to the roots, or not.

Thats what we were told Ubi was doing with Splinter Cell Blacklist. They did it to a degree but they added completely unstealthabe parts and a spot where(possible SC plot spoiler) you're own UAV gets hacked and starts fireing missles at you so you have to run/escape the buildings Hollywood movie style.

dxsxhxcx
10-07-2013, 03:18 PM
I doubt they would bring out three games where naval is a big part of the experience. I expect them to keep moving in new directions and justifying their decisions by making the plot somewhat AC-related as opposed to the other way around. In every interview the devs have been saying how they'd been wanting to make a pirate game for years. Not "we'd been wanting to make an Assassin's Creed game set in the pirate era for years", just A pirate game. AC gave them an excuse to do an open-world pirate game. Similarly, if Ubisoft wanted to do a western game like RDR, they would write the AC bits around the setting instead of using the lore itself as a justification for a particular era.


I believe lothario-da-be was talking about a new IP and not another AC game, (assuming this is the case) I would like this as well (maybe not next year), they have a pretty solid naval mechanic (judging by AC3) and it would be a shame to let it die with AC or worse, keep adding this to any AC just for the sake of doing it, IMO with a new IP they'll have more freedom to improve it and explore its full potential...

Hans684
10-07-2013, 03:18 PM
Exactly! When they wanted to make an open world Uncharted game they named it AC3. But when will they want to make a real Assassin's Creed game? It's been 6 years since the last one...

Out of couriousity what is a real AC game? Or since all you have said so far is opinion what is a real AC game to you?

I-Like-Pie45
10-07-2013, 03:24 PM
This thread has now convinced me to see all Batman films. lol

not really

you can skip

batman returns (maybe)
batman forever
batman n robin

shobhit7777777
10-07-2013, 03:31 PM
Edward has a hood, stealth kills, freerunning and can climb stuff real good. Who GAF if he has a business card with "Assassin" on in it or an Assassin's Guild Member ring.

Sounds interesting.

AssassinHMS
10-07-2013, 03:50 PM
Out of couriousity what is a real AC game? Or since all you have said so far is opinion what is a real AC game to you?

I'll tell you what isn't an AC game to me:
A game that has almost no main assassinations, not enough open ended assassination missions, no reliable stealth, no investigation missions, bad rooftop navigation, where killing everyone is easier than using stealth, where the focus is mindless action, etc.
A game that leaves the previous aspects (that I put in bold) untoched, ignored or wasted while focusing on naval battles, on the size of the world, on Hollywood moments and other trivialities...
In other words, a game that relies, not on quality, but on quantity and that focuses too much on aspects that have nothing to do with AC.

And then there is the charm and mistery that comes from: big beautiful cities, awesome ambient music and puzzles, all with an assassin's creed twist.

While we're at it, what is an AC game to you?

SixKeys
10-07-2013, 04:04 PM
Out of couriousity what is a real AC game? Or since all you have said so far is opinion what is a real AC game to you?

A real AC game is a game where assassinating is the first priority. Every side quest is related to bringing you closer to your goal, not just doing random crap for no reason (beating up cheating spouses, crafting dolls, playing board games etc.). In ACB every side quest had something to do with your ultimate goal: liberating Rome from Templar influence. Even the beat-up missions were explained by you wanting to gain the trust of the Thieves' or Courtesans' Guild to help you in your quest. Abstergo Agents were working for the Borgia. Romulus lairs were packed with treasure that would otherwise have ended up in Templar hands. Collecting flags was a symbol of removing Borgia influence. Restoring buildings was a way to boost the city's economy and give the people hope.

In ACR and AC3 there was a lot of side stuff that didn't have anything to do with...well, anything. You had to craft random stuff like buttons and meat pies for some person on the street because....why? You collected trinkets for Peg Leg because....he asked you to? In ACR you collected ancient tomes like Aesop's fables just so you could stick them in a library and not even read them. None of this had anything to do with assassinating people. Actual assassinations seem to be becoming more like an afterthought, considering AC3 only had one or two that weren't cut scenes or quick-time events.

silvermercy
10-07-2013, 04:10 PM
I actually agree with the above ^ even though AC3 and ACR are still my faves in the series.

However I still liked the board games and even some non-assassination related events. I felt like it helped me more with having a bigger game immersion. At least for me.

johnrimmer1998
10-07-2013, 04:18 PM
Just going to point out that Connor wasn't an assassin for a large part of the game as well.

SixKeys
10-07-2013, 04:20 PM
IMO things like board games should be character- or plot-related if they are to be included. I don't have a problem with Connor playing games with the Homesteaders, for example, especially Achilles. In a small way it establishes something about the relationship the character has with those people, not the game itself. In contrast, I didn't see the point of Connor gambling with some random stranger in a tavern in the big cities. He doesn't seem like the gambling type to me. Games to him are social events, a way to bond with the people he respects. For a competitive and greedy character like Edward board games would be much more fitting. That's what I mean when I say side activities should be built around the story and character rather than simply throwing in everything you can think of.

silvermercy
10-07-2013, 04:26 PM
Yes, I think you have a point. Some activities should be able, if possible, to make sense when it comes to the actual character's personality.

Shahkulu101
10-07-2013, 04:34 PM
I really hope AC5 is focused primarily on assassinations - I like the focus on entertaining action to an extent though I need a break, but would it be so good? In my opinion the stealth mechanics have never been that solid. Even in AC1, that was basically just hold X to win. I know it was all about the freedom and I absolutely loved that but they have yet to create a very good stealth experience. AI was too dumb in AC1-ACR and in AC3 they were near telepathic.

Stealth Gamer92
10-07-2013, 04:35 PM
The crafting thing was cool. Wonder if you can still buy like crafting material or suit pieces?

adventurewomen
10-07-2013, 04:49 PM
Just going to point out that Connor wasn't an assassin for a large part of the game as well.
Connor became an Assassin from the age of 15 in Sequence 6 & by the end of the game Connor is 27 yrs old.

It seems like you're forgetting Connor was still a teenager and that he was a young man by the end of AC3.

I-Like-Pie45
10-07-2013, 04:55 PM
Ezio wasn't inducted into the Assassins until Sequence 11

Shahkulu101
10-07-2013, 04:59 PM
Ezio wasn't inducted into the Assassins until Sequence 11

Yz bt he wasz troo assazzin cause from tht point hd edwird IZ a seLfiSh pyrit and at leeezt thur is creed in ACz 2.

pacmanate
10-07-2013, 05:53 PM
Why does him not being an Assassin mean hes going to be 6 years old then a teenager? *Cough* AC3 *COUGH*

Him not being an Assassin doesnt mean he doesnt know how to fight. Him being an Assassin means he gets a hidden blade and probably the blow pipe. He's still a pirate, he still has weapons.

lothario-da-be
10-07-2013, 06:01 PM
Why does him not being an Assassin mean hes going to be 6 years old then a teenager? *Cough* AC3 *COUGH*

Him not being an Assassin doesnt mean he doesnt know how to fight. Him being an Assassin means he gets a hidden blade and probably the blow pipe. He's still a pirate, he still has weapons.
He probably gets those weapons already before he becomes an Assassin.

Rugterwyper32
10-07-2013, 06:01 PM
I'll tell you what isn't an AC game to me:
A game that has almost no main assassinations, not enough open ended assassination missions, no reliable stealth, no investigation missions, bad rooftop navigation, where killing everyone is easier than using stealth, where the focus is mindless action, etc.
A game that leaves the previous aspects (that I put in bold) untoched, ignored or wasted while focusing on naval battles, on the size of the world, on Hollywood moments and other trivialities...
In other words, a game that relies, not on quality, but on quantity and that focuses too much on aspects that have nothing to do with AC.

And then there is the charm and mistery that comes from: big beautiful cities, awesome ambient music and puzzles, all with an assassin's creed twist.

While we're at it, what is an AC game to you?

I'll just add my take on it here, gonna go through the various parts:

Main assassinations and open ended assassinations: Agreed. But I still think one mission with no assassination and one or two that you actually have to fight your way through are still acceptable, like AC1 did. Say, if there's 12 sequences, I want to see at least 9 open ended assassinations, preferably 11 and a boss fight type target (I definitely don't mind that for a climactic moment).

Reliable stealth: I think this part will be one that I have issues with. I don't feel the series has ever had the most reliable stealth system, and as much as I don't want light/shadow stealth, I think some elements of it would be good to add so long as going for those actually had an effect breaking your cover if you do it in locations you shouldn't. The main thing the stealth system needs to improve though, I think, is AI. Get some decent AI and I think stealth will go a long way for there combined with navigation, and you can still leave a part open for the combat pillar.

Investigation missions: I still feel investigation missions don't work that well for a gameplay element so far besides the "do this guy a favor and he gives you something". One thing I was thinking could be interesting: Let's take sequence 6 from AC3 for an example here. Do the missions leading up to the main assassination, a good variety of missions that take advantage of the main pillars of the game. Sequence 6 was my favorite of the bunch because it used the main pillars for the missions and didn't try adding elements that you wouldn't see ever again or that were badly designed. It felt like the most polished one. But now, how I'd have changed it: Before the assassination itself, make it so Connor learns where the meeting will take place and when before it does and he scouts the area beforehand, maybe overhear things the people living around the area have to say, and put that table that he used in sequence 11 to plan the attack on Fort George to use for more than that: Have notes there, a map of the location and things like that so you can plan on how to strike if you want. Or just go in blind if you so desire. That adds the investigation element while keeping variety and length in the main mission.

Rooftop navigation: Let's not just think rooftops. Let's think navigation overall. Because, let's face it, navigation has issues: Moving on ground with horses has never been exactly the greatest thing, and so far I feel controlling the ship is one of the things they've handled best. I still feel naval should stay: The Caribbean is basically all I wanted from the Kingdom back in AC1 just that with a ship instead of a horse, and I think we're not gonna see a "city only" approach, but cities mixed in with other types of locations. Just as I think we'll see naval when the time period works with it as we'll see horse riding when it calls for it. But even then, navigation can still be improved. And if we're gonna see cities with wide streets and the such, it should still be so you can stay on rooftops the majority of the time without having to go all the way around to that one rope over two rooftops. Previous AC games had all these parts under construction and the such that made navigation work, AC3 didn't have all these beams all over the place connecting multiple roofs or the planks being held over the streets that made it possible to move easier. Bring those back, and even wide streets shouldn't be an issue to deal with.

A combination of architectural and natural beauty, great ambient music (which seems AC4 already has!) a return of interesting puzzles (I'd even hope that one day for secret locations we have puzzles that make you use your items in different ways), I think would make things work out perfectly. A main mission that takes advantages of the main pillars and side missions that focus on each particular pillar or combinations of them would work, too.


A real AC game is a game where assassinating is the first priority. Every side quest is related to bringing you closer to your goal, not just doing random crap for no reason (beating up cheating spouses, crafting dolls, playing board games etc.). In ACB every side quest had something to do with your ultimate goal: liberating Rome from Templar influence. Even the beat-up missions were explained by you wanting to gain the trust of the Thieves' or Courtesans' Guild to help you in your quest. Abstergo Agents were working for the Borgia. Romulus lairs were packed with treasure that would otherwise have ended up in Templar hands. Collecting flags was a symbol of removing Borgia influence. Restoring buildings was a way to boost the city's economy and give the people hope.

In ACR and AC3 there was a lot of side stuff that didn't have anything to do with...well, anything. You had to craft random stuff like buttons and meat pies for some person on the street because....why? You collected trinkets for Peg Leg because....he asked you to? In ACR you collected ancient tomes like Aesop's fables just so you could stick them in a library and not even read them. None of this had anything to do with assassinating people. Actual assassinations seem to be becoming more like an afterthought, considering AC3 only had one or two that weren't cut scenes or quick-time events.

I agree with this. ACB had the right idea when it came to sidequests. You could go on happily along the main story not doing any of them, but you felt there was a good reason to go for it. They had a real purpose, and they all took advantage of the pillars of the game.
ACR and AC3 pretty much lost track of that, and AC3 had the potential but it simply didn't live up to it with sidequests. They kinda feel like placeholders that had to be added simply because they ran out of time while developing them, which, knowing how development for it went, wouldn't surprise me. And ACR was originally meant to be a 3DS game, so it feels like all that stuff was last moment additions.

Hans684
10-07-2013, 06:20 PM
I'll tell you what isn't an AC game to me:
A game that has almost no main assassinations, not enough open ended assassination missions, no reliable stealth, no investigation missions, bad rooftop navigation, where killing everyone is easier than using stealth, where the focus is mindless action, etc.
A game that leaves the previous aspects (that I put in bold) untoched, ignored or wasted while focusing on naval battles, on the size of the world, on Hollywood moments and other trivialities...
In other words, a game that relies, not on quality, but on quantity and that focuses too much on aspects that have nothing to do with AC.

And then there is the charm and mistery that comes from: big beautiful cities, awesome ambient music and puzzles, all with an assassin's creed twist.

While we're at it, what is an AC game to you?


"A game that has almost no main assassinations"

The Game Director(of AC3) said in an interview that it hard to find many assassination targets in the AR, so everyone was warned. He also said they wanted to tell the story in a way Uncharted did, yet another warning.
And let's not forget the main reason for so little assassination targets was becouse it is history and those we assassinated did die more or less in that time and place, if you can't handle the history part. Why continue to by the games? Your sig ever says AC is dead to you.

"not enough open ended assassination missions"

That part you have to blame partly on the Game Director, mission designers, lead script writher, other writhers & fore the grand finally...history. But i agree in a way the assassination should be more open ended, unless history is in the way. That's why i've always said that AC should take the stealth system of the Hitman series.

"no reliable stealth"

We have more stealth mechanics that before, but if the missions allows it is something else. If it don't they blame the Game Director, mission designers, lead script writher, other writhers & history.

"no investigation missions"

Just becouse some missions isn't called investigation missions does not mean their not there. And i judging by everything you have said so far you have played AC3, something that means you know what missions have investigation or not. So i don't have to point them out for you.

"bad rooftop navigation"

Opinion, just becouse you have some trouble navigating the rooftops in AC3 does not mean it's bad. It means you are bad. I travel the rooftops of every AC without trouble, that means AC3 too. And when i say without trouble i mean without getting in a fight. In the old games you could run like a midless dog on the rooftops but in AC3 you have tink and run.

"where killing everyone is easier than using stealth, where the focus is mindless action, etc"

There is the main problem. People are to lazy to think for themselfs so they do what the game say is easy, then cry and complain.
Let's say a person that can be used in an AC game as a Templar dies in a battle, would you not have it in the game? It is history and history is the playground of AC either you like it of not.

"A game that leaves the previous aspects (that I put in bold) untoched, ignored or wasted while focusing on naval battles, on the size of the world, on Hollywood moments and other trivialities...
In other words, a game that relies, not on quality, but on quantity and that focuses too much on aspects that have nothing to do with AC."

For what is cut or added in the games is the choice of the Game Director, lead script writher, other writhers & history.
As for aspects that have something to do with AC, everything about ACIVBF except the fiction. Naval Battles = History = AC, Pitrates = History = AC, Battles = History = AC, Smugles = History = AC ect.

"While we're at it, what is an AC game to you?"

Expected this.

History: That includes the modern day, the assassin/templar war, TWCB, the fictional part & every time period and country. History is their playground, so why should Ubisoft limit them self becouse some fans claim some time periods does not 'suit' AC.

The Modern Day: Without modern day there would not be a reason to back in time, it drives the entire series. Moder day includes the Animus, the maskin that makes it possible to go back to all those time periods and countrys.

The assassin/templar war: It includes history, every place and time visited so far has bean part of history. Then we have the templar/assassin ideals, they are in every time period/country battle or not fighting, theire creeds collide. They have the same goal but diffrent ways of reaching theire goals, something that has made them fight thought history.

TWCB: It is the reason we use the Animus to go back in time, theire POE's. When a templasr want something TWCB related the assassins will try to stop them, in short another reason the assassin/templar war never ends.

Without any of those there would we no AC. Sure you want stealth but if one of the main pillars of AC is in the way(history) and you continue to cry and complain. Why bother playing the series. Opinion has nothing to do with what AC is, it is about what you like/dislike with AC. Everything you said was within the performance, mission design & what the game should give you freedom to not the concept of AC. It is the concept History, Modern Day, The Assassin/Templar War, TWCB & everything within those pillars that makes AC AC. Take only one of those away and it is not AC. AC without history is not AC, AC without the assassin/templar war is not AC, AC without modern day is not AC & AC without TWCB is not AC. Also going This does not make it more valid.

lothario-da-be
10-07-2013, 06:24 PM
"A game that has almost no main assassinations"

The Game Director(of AC3) said in an interview that it hard to find many assassination targets in the AR, so everyone was warned. He also said they wanted to tell the story in a way Uncharted did, yet another warning.
And let's not forget the main reason for so little assassination targets was becouse it is history and those we assassinated did die more or less in that time and place, if you can't handle the history part. Why continue to by the games? Your sig ever says AC is dead to you.

"not enough open ended assassination missions"

That part you have to blame partly on the Game Director, mission designers, lead script writher, other writhers & fore the grand finally...history. But i agree in a way the assassination should be more open ended, unless history is in the way. That's why i've always said that AC should take the stealth system of the Hitman series.

"no reliable stealth"

We have more stealth mechanics that before, but if the missions allows it is something else. If it don't they blame the Game Director, mission designers, lead script writher, other writhers & history.

"no investigation missions"

Just becouse some missions isn't called investigation missions does not mean their not there. And i judging by everything you have said so far you have played AC3, something that means you know what missions have investigation or not. So i don't have to point them out for you.

"bad rooftop navigation"

Opinion, just becouse you have some trouble navigating the rooftops in AC3 does not mean it's bad. It means you are bad. I travel the rooftops of every AC without trouble, that means AC3 too. And when i say without trouble i mean without getting in a fight. In the old games you could run like a midless dog on the rooftops but in AC3 you have tink and run.

"where killing everyone is easier than using stealth, where the focus is mindless action, etc"

There is the main problem. People are to lazy to think for themselfs so they do what the game say is easy, then cry and complain.
Let's say a person that can be used in an AC game as a Templar dies in a battle, would you not have it in the game? It is history and history is the playground of AC either you like it of not.

"A game that leaves the previous aspects (that I put in bold) untoched, ignored or wasted while focusing on naval battles, on the size of the world, on Hollywood moments and other trivialities...
In other words, a game that relies, not on quality, but on quantity and that focuses too much on aspects that have nothing to do with AC."

For what is cut or added in the games is the choice of the Game Director, lead script writher, other writhers & history.
As for aspects that have something to do with AC, everything about ACIVBF except the fiction. Naval Battles = History = AC, Pitrates = History = AC, Battles = History = AC, Smugles = History = AC ect.

"While we're at it, what is an AC game to you?"

Expected this.

History: That includes the modern day, the assassin/templar war, TWCB, the fictional part & every time period and country. History is their playground, so why should Ubisoft limit them self becouse some fans claim some time periods does not 'suit' AC.

The Modern Day: Without modern day there would not be a reason to back in time, it drives the entire series. Moder day includes the Animus, the maskin that makes it possible to go back to all those time periods and countrys.

The assassin/templar war: It includes history, every place and time visited so far has bean part of history. Then we have the templar/assassin ideals, they are in every time period/country battle or not fighting, theire creeds collide. They have the same goal but diffrent ways of reaching theire goals, something that has made them fight thought history.

TWCB: It is the reason we use the Animus to go back in time, theire POE's. When a templasr want something TWCB related the assassins will try to stop them, in short another reason the assassin/templar war never ends.

Without any of those there would we no AC. Sure you want stealth but if one of the main pillars of AC is in the way(history) and you continue to cry and complain. Why bother playing the series. Opinion has nothing to do with what AC is, it is about what you like/dislike with AC. Everything you said was within the performance, mission design & what the game should give you freedom to not the concept of AC. It is the concept History, Modern Day, The Assassin/Templar War, TWCB & everything within those pillars that makes AC AC. Take only one of those away and it is not AC. AC without history is not AC, AC without the assassin/templar war is not AC, AC without modern day is not AC & AC without TWCB is not AC. Also going This does not make it more valid.
You make some good points, but others show you don't know what you are saying.

Hans684
10-07-2013, 06:30 PM
You make some good points, but others show you don't know what you are saying.

Enlighten me then or would you have me read your mind?

shobhit7777777
10-07-2013, 06:43 PM
I'll tell you what isn't an AC game to me:
A game that has almost no main assassinations, not enough open ended assassination missions, no reliable stealth, no investigation missions, bad rooftop navigation, where killing everyone is easier than using stealth, where the focus is mindless action, etc.
A game that leaves the previous aspects (that I put in bold) untoched, ignored or wasted while focusing on naval battles, on the size of the world, on Hollywood moments and other trivialities...
In other words, a game that relies, not on quality, but on quantity and that focuses too much on aspects that have nothing to do with AC.

And then there is the charm and mistery that comes from: big beautiful cities, awesome ambient music and puzzles, all with an assassin's creed twist.

While we're at it, what is an AC game to you?


A real AC game is a game where assassinating is the first priority. Every side quest is related to bringing you closer to your goal, not just doing random crap for no reason (beating up cheating spouses, crafting dolls, playing board games etc.). In ACB every side quest had something to do with your ultimate goal: liberating Rome from Templar influence. Even the beat-up missions were explained by you wanting to gain the trust of the Thieves' or Courtesans' Guild to help you in your quest. Abstergo Agents were working for the Borgia. Romulus lairs were packed with treasure that would otherwise have ended up in Templar hands. Collecting flags was a symbol of removing Borgia influence. Restoring buildings was a way to boost the city's economy and give the people hope.

In ACR and AC3 there was a lot of side stuff that didn't have anything to do with...well, anything. You had to craft random stuff like buttons and meat pies for some person on the street because....why? You collected trinkets for Peg Leg because....he asked you to? In ACR you collected ancient tomes like Aesop's fables just so you could stick them in a library and not even read them. None of this had anything to do with assassinating people. Actual assassinations seem to be becoming more like an afterthought, considering AC3 only had one or two that weren't cut scenes or quick-time events.


IMO things like board games should be character- or plot-related if they are to be included. I don't have a problem with Connor playing games with the Homesteaders, for example, especially Achilles. In a small way it establishes something about the relationship the character has with those people, not the game itself. In contrast, I didn't see the point of Connor gambling with some random stranger in a tavern in the big cities. He doesn't seem like the gambling type to me. Games to him are social events, a way to bond with the people he respects. For a competitive and greedy character like Edward board games would be much more fitting. That's what I mean when I say side activities should be built around the story and character rather than simply throwing in everything you can think of.

http://files.sharenator.com/funny_gifs_batman_approves_Gifs_D_2-s480x368-266373.gif


There is SOOOOOO much potential in the original premise. A proper Assassin-blade-in-the-crowd experience.

Assassin's Creed has the potential to be an extremely unique and refreshing game devoid of the usual tropes associated with open world experiences thanks to its premise and free from the usual bombastic cinematic moments that punctuate almost every other game.

A truly believable, interactive, living breathing city which is so well fleshed out that it adds to the gameplay in terms of actually having systems based on real life which can be exploited by the player.

The actual act of putting together the pieces for an assassination and then carrying it out the way YOU want to

Blending in, mingling with, manipulating smart NPCs which make the city feel alive and open up options for YOU to exploit.


There is so much depth in the core concept which I feel is untapped. Pirate ships just don't excite me at that level. Not when the assassin loop has been largely untouched. Black Flags has me excited because it is at least acknowledging some of these issues - of restrictions and rigid missions. I am happy that they are making the game's mechanics more robust...but at the same time I also lament the slow erosion of the core "Assassin" experience.

On a deeper level....the satisfaction of piecing together a target's location and then taking him out by creative manipulation of the game's principles is infinitely more engaging and exciting than diving underwater in and harpooning Sharks....for me at least.

Come on ACBF! Bring the magic back!

Jexx21
10-07-2013, 06:47 PM
No.

They were all amazing but I disagree.
.

I give The Dark Knight trilogy an 8.

pacmanate
10-07-2013, 06:50 PM
I honestly think AC1 was the best setting for AC. The clothes weren't out of place and the hidden blade was only used for assassinations and not for combat. You really did feel like someone who blended in with the crowd in pure sight.

I've always felt that Ezios and Connors outfits just didnt fit in with the time period. They always have their hoods up for one, and they are the only people in the whole of the cities that have hoods. In AC1 at least you had monks, it was more believable, minus the having a sword and short sword.

Jexx21
10-07-2013, 06:56 PM
I really hope AC5 is focused primarily on assassinations - I like the focus on entertaining action to an extent though I need a break, but would it be so good? In my opinion the stealth mechanics have never been that solid. Even in AC1, that was basically just hold X to win. I know it was all about the freedom and I absolutely loved that but they have yet to create a very good stealth experience. AI was too dumb in AC1-ACR and in AC3 they were near telepathic.

AC3 actually has the best stealth mechanics in the series, but they were very under-utilized.



Rooftop navigation: Let's not just think rooftops. Let's think navigation overall. Because, let's face it, navigation has issues: Moving on ground with horses has never been exactly the greatest thing, and so far I feel controlling the ship is one of the things they've handled best. I still feel naval should stay: The Caribbean is basically all I wanted from the Kingdom back in AC1 just that with a ship instead of a horse, and I think we're not gonna see a "city only" approach, but cities mixed in with other types of locations. Just as I think we'll see naval when the time period works with it as we'll see horse riding when it calls for it. But even then, navigation can still be improved. And if we're gonna see cities with wide streets and the such, it should still be so you can stay on rooftops the majority of the time without having to go all the way around to that one rope over two rooftops. Previous AC games had all these parts under construction and the such that made navigation work, AC3 didn't have all these beams all over the place connecting multiple roofs or the planks being held over the streets that made it possible to move easier. Bring those back, and even wide streets shouldn't be an issue to deal with.



AC3 actually had a lot of connecting pathways between buildings. I can probably get from one end of the cities to the other without touching the ground. People just never looked around to see the fact that there's a clothesline going across a street.


I honestly think AC1 was the best setting for AC. The clothes weren't out of place and the hidden blade was only used for assassinations and not for combat. You really did feel like someone who blended in with the crowd in pure sight.

I've always felt that Ezios and Connors outfits just didnt fit in with the time period. They always have their hoods up for one, and they are the only people in the whole of the cities that have hoods. In AC1 at least you had monks, it was more believable, minus the having a sword and short sword.

Again.. Connor's outfit was actually pretty close to what other half-native hunters wore in that day and age, and they even had hoods.

Shahkulu101
10-07-2013, 06:59 PM
AC3 actually has the best stealth mechanics in the series, but they were very under-utilized.

Thus, rendering the mechanics to a point when they are not very useful in missions - they could perhaps have done a better job on this.

johnrimmer1998
10-07-2013, 07:36 PM
In AC1 at least you had monks, it was more believable.

Monks also existed in AC2 and during the Bonfire of the Vanities they were actually prominent. As well monks only appeared in Acre in AC1. The other people you are probably referring to were actually Muslim Ascetics, who were in Damascus and Jerusalem.

Rugterwyper32
10-07-2013, 07:40 PM
AC3 actually had a lot of connecting pathways between buildings. I can probably get from one end of the cities to the other without touching the ground. People just never looked around to see the fact that there's a clothesline going across a street.

That much is true, but we also have to remember how this series has focused on ease of navigation for so long. I've mentioned it before, I like the cities in AC3, but there's something about them that feels off. And that which feels "off" for me is the reduced amount of parts that simplify moving from one side to another. Maybe you're being chased by a guard and there's rooftop guairds closer to the clothesline and that makes things more complicated. I'm not saying there isn't, I just feel there's not enough compared to what there could be, specially looking back at AC1 and seeing all the planks hanging over streets and things like that which were extra options. There are options, but having more wouldn't hurt, specially considering the scale of the cities in AC3 (I mean, those cities are huge). East New York got it almost perfect, in my opinion.
Rooftop guard AI is something that also needs to be on check, because those guys go berserk and navigating from rooftop to rooftop becomes a bunch of avoiding those annoying guys.

AssassinHMS
10-07-2013, 07:50 PM
"A game that has almost no main assassinations"

The Game Director(of AC3) said in an interview that it hard to find many assassination targets in the AR, so everyone was warned. He also said they wanted to tell the story in a way Uncharted did, yet another warning.
And let's not forget the main reason for so little assassination targets was becouse it is history and those we assassinated did die more or less in that time and place, if you can't handle the history part. Why continue to by the games? Your sig ever says AC is dead to you.

Warnings and History are no more than bad excuses for the lack of assassinations. Assassin’s Creed is about the history behind History and doesn’t need and shouldn’t be restricted by realism or History itself. When the developers choose a setting for an AC game they must remember that any Assassin’s Creed title requires many assassinations but they weren’t thinking about AC when they made AC3. Finally, those kinds of warnings are meaningless when the game is called Assassin’s Creed as the name itself implies assassins and assassinations not mindless action and lack of assassinations.
You clearly don’t understand my sig. AC is not dead to me.



"bad rooftop navigation"

Opinion, just becouse you have some trouble navigating the rooftops in AC3 does not mean it's bad. It means you are bad. I travel the rooftops of every AC without trouble, that means AC3 too. And when i say without trouble i mean without getting in a fight. In the old games you could run like a midless dog on the rooftops but in AC3 you have tink and run.

Maybe I didn’t express myself correctly. What I meant is that the assassin’s playground are the rooftops, not the streets. In AC3, rooftops weren’t enjoyable to traverse as they were full of guards and they were useless as it was easier, more reliable and much more fluid to travel through the streets which is a bad choice for an AC game. The assassins are supposed to be the “eagles” watching the prey from above (rooftops) striking when the time is right. That can only be achieved if the rooftops are fun and interesting to traverse which wasn’t the case in AC3.




That part you have to blame partly on the Game Director, mission designers, lead script writher, other writhers & fore the grand finally...history.
For what is cut or added in the games is the choice of the Game Director, lead script writher, other writhers & history.

I’m not looking for someone to blame; only to discuss ways to improve the franchise.



"While we're at it, what is an AC game to you?"

Expected this.

History: That includes the modern day, the assassin/templar war, TWCB, the fictional part & every time period and country. History is their playground, so why should Ubisoft limit them self becouse some fans claim some time periods does not 'suit' AC.

The Modern Day: Without modern day there would not be a reason to back in time, it drives the entire series. Moder day includes the Animus, the maskin that makes it possible to go back to all those time periods and countrys.

The assassin/templar war: It includes history, every place and time visited so far has bean part of history. Then we have the templar/assassin ideals, they are in every time period/country battle or not fighting, theire creeds collide. They have the same goal but diffrent ways of reaching theire goals, something that has made them fight thought history.

TWCB: It is the reason we use the Animus to go back in time, theire POE's. When a templasr want something TWCB related the assassins will try to stop them, in short another reason the assassin/templar war never ends.

Without any of those there would we no AC. Sure you want stealth but if one of the main pillars of AC is in the way(history) and you continue to cry and complain. Why bother playing the series. Opinion has nothing to do with what AC is, it is about what you like/dislike with AC. Everything you said was within the performance, mission design & what the game should give you freedom to not the concept of AC. It is the concept History, Modern Day, The Assassin/Templar War, TWCB & everything within those pillars that makes AC AC. Take only one of those away and it is not AC. AC without history is not AC, AC without the assassin/templar war is not AC, AC without modern day is not AC & AC without TWCB is not AC. Also goingThis does not make it more valid.

In case you haven’t noticed you only talked about what makes the AC’s story. I’m talking about gameplay.
The three pillars are stealth, navigation and combat. History is where and when AC takes place which adds vibe, feel, immersion and atmosphere.
Yes they are connected but just because History says there were only two people who died in this time period doesn’t mean the developers can’t add more. Like I already said, AC is about the history behind History.





Main assassinations and open ended assassinations: Agreed. But I still think one mission with no assassination and one or two that you actually have to fight your way through are still acceptable, like AC1 did. Say, if there's 12 sequences, I want to see at least 9 open ended assassinations, preferably 11 and a boss fight type target (I definitely don't mind that for a climactic moment).
Agreed.


Reliable stealth: I think this part will be one that I have issues with. I don't feel the series has ever had the most reliable stealth system, and as much as I don't want light/shadow stealth, I think some elements of it would be good to add so long as going for those actually had an effect breaking your cover if you do it in locations you shouldn't. The main thing the stealth system needs to improve though, I think, is AI. Get some decent AI and I think stealth will go a long way for there combined with navigation, and you can still leave a part open for the combat pillar.

Then again it was up to the other games to improve stealth after AC1. I for one would like light/shadow stealth. Social stealth has a ton to improve.
AC’s stealth has a lot to evolve. I already explained that in other posts where I gave some ideas that would really improve stealth. If I find them I’ll show you because, right now I don’t have time to put those ideas on paper.




Investigation missions: I still feel investigation missions don't work that well for a gameplay element so far besides the "do this guy a favor and he gives you something". One thing I was thinking could be interesting: Let's take sequence 6 from AC3 for an example here. Do the missions leading up to the main assassination, a good variety of missions that take advantage of the main pillars of the game. Sequence 6 was my favorite of the bunch because it used the main pillars for the missions and didn't try adding elements that you wouldn't see ever again or that were badly designed. It felt like the most polished one. But now, how I'd have changed it: Before the assassination itself, make it so Connor learns where the meeting will take place and when before it does and he scouts the area beforehand, maybe overhear things the people living around the area have to say, and put that table that he used in sequence 11 to plan the attack on Fort George to use for more than that: Have notes there, a map of the location and things like that so you can plan on how to strike if you want. Or just go in blind if you so desire. That adds the investigation element while keeping variety and length in the main mission.
Investigations have a ton of potential that can’t be revealed in a few missions like in AC3.
Imagine if, just by walking down a street (in free roam), you hear a group of people talking to each other and decide to eavesdrop or maybe you spot a suspicious looking guy (expensive clothes, dark look, maybe a Templar cross) and you decide to spy on him/tail him. By doing one of this things you discover the location of some treasure in a guy’s basement, the location of a Templar lair or unlock an assassination contract previously locked. This allows for a world that feels alive and where you never get bored because you know you may find something really cool just by spying on people’s lives, just by investigating.

pirate1802
10-07-2013, 07:53 PM
Well, if you don't have that many assassination targets to choose from, why would you set your game in such a barren era?

Rugterwyper32
10-07-2013, 08:16 PM
Well, if you don't have that many assassination targets to choose from, why would you set your game in such a barren era?

Even then, a lot of assassination targets have been fictional. Look back at AC1: 5 of them were real (The Acre ones, Robert and Al Mualim) even though some have inaccuracies on how old they'd look (William de Montferrat) or when they died (Garnier, who in other records fought alongside Robert and King Richard at the battle of Arsuf), the rest either based on real figures but not quite being them or outright fictional. So even if the setting doesn't have that many targets at that point, it's not like they haven't moved things around to fit before, or created new targets. They still do, just not enough.

LoyalACFan
10-08-2013, 12:41 AM
Why is it such a huge deal that he's not an Assassin for most of the game? Connor wasn't an Assassin until halfway through AC3, and Ezio wasn't an Assassin until the last twenty minutes of AC2... As long as it doesn't restrict the gameplay, who cares whether he's got a branded ring finger or whatever? He's got the hood, the blades, and performs assassination contracts. He's an Assassin in all but name.

The problem with Connor not being an Assassin until so late in the game was that the entire game up until that point was a prologue. Haytham only had one map open to him and he couldn't tree-run, then kiddie Connor couldn't do Assassin stuff until a few sequences into his segment of the game; meaning we only got 7 sequences of full-blown Connor gameplay (and two of them were ridiculously short). With AC4 that doesn't look like it will be a problem, since we're starting off with a fully-grown and battle-hardened Edward. Even before he gets his robes/blades, it should hopefully feel much less restricted. Unless they pull another bullcrap surprise protagonist thing again, in which case I'll be severely annoyed.

Layytez
10-08-2013, 01:08 AM
He's a pirate. You really think he'd join the Assassins so quickly ? He's in-between the Templars and Assassins and something will happen that will cause him to join them.

Lonnie_Jackson
10-08-2013, 03:37 AM
My guess is that whatever Edward finds, whatever the Templars are searching for pushes him to join the Assassins. If some fans haven't read Forsaken I would recommend it before playing the game. I think the way this chapter in the Kenway Saga is written it would be more beneficial to said people.

I get why Darby is writing the character this way, to keep things fresh as far as main character(s) go, but like most what I worry about is the assassination of Templars. Is Edward doing the killings for his own gain or does he start them for a little of both? The creed and gain? This is going to be the longest wait since I'll be getting the PS4 version...:)

pirate1802
10-08-2013, 03:45 AM
Why is it such a huge deal that he's not an Assassin for most of the game? Connor wasn't an Assassin until halfway through AC3, and Ezio wasn't an Assassin until the last twenty minutes of AC2... As long as it doesn't restrict the gameplay, who cares whether he's got a branded ring finger or whatever? He's got the hood, the blades, and performs assassination contracts. He's an Assassin in all but name

But we bught the geam 2 ply as an asasyn not as a evul pyrit ubisoft y u do dis ;_;

DisbandedBox359
10-08-2013, 03:53 AM
Just waiting for the revelation Edward just likes wearing a hood and has no affiliation to the assassins ;)

pirate1802
10-08-2013, 05:13 AM
So that's the reason his hood doesnt have a beak. Because he isn't an assassin.

LieutenantRex
10-08-2013, 05:16 AM
I think that by this time in the series, the hood has turned into something symbolic. It hides your identity, somewhat, which is something that the Assassins stride for much.

Farlander1991
10-08-2013, 07:21 AM
Unless the series gets a free year so there would be time to refocus, I don't think we'll see any kind of actual investigation missions.

So far AC4 seems like taking and combining the best of the AC trilogy in terms of gameplay (and I've already made a point that AC investigation missions for the most part are investigations only in overlying theme, not mechanics or actual mission content, which is a problem). You may argue that naval is going against AC principles, but naval is really in this case just the horse. On which you can battle on, travel to far distances, and jump off any time to silently approach something (another 'horse', for example :p ).

But something like proper investigation requires design work that's simply not that feasible with a yearly structure, even if it takes 2 years to make the game. I really, REALLY hope that we won't get a new console AC next year (AC:Liberation excluded).

AlphaAltair
10-08-2013, 07:44 AM
Go cry somewhere else.

Mate, this a public forum and i'll say what I like!

Dont have a little hissy fit because someone disagrees with your opinion.


Edward has a hood, stealth kills, freerunning and can climb stuff real good. Who GAF if he has a business card with "Assassin" on in it or an Assassin's Guild Member ring.

Sounds interesting.

Actually for most of the game Edward wont be wearing his hood either.

roostersrule2
10-08-2013, 08:07 AM
I give The Dark Knight trilogy an 8.Yes, because that was relevant wasn't it?

@AlphaAltair, he was most likely joking haha.

pirate1802
10-08-2013, 08:15 AM
Mate, this a public forum and i'll say what I like!

Dont have a little hissy fit because someone disagrees with your opinion.

Actually it seemed it was you who threw a hissy fit first. "Oh your username is pirate so no wonder you like all this crap blah blah" And that in response to my comment where I liked the direction. Seems like you have a problem dealing with other's opinions.

Pot, kettle etc..


Actually for most of the game Edward wont be wearing his hood either.

Where did ya get this from?

pacmanate
10-08-2013, 08:43 AM
Actually it seemed it was you who threw a hissy fit first. "Oh your username is pirate so no wonder you like all this crap blah blah" And that in response to my comment where I liked the direction. Seems like you have a problem dealing with other's opinions.

Pot, kettle etc..



Where did ya get this from?

apparently his clothes are stolen from a past assassin. It said so in the leaked outfit pictures that came out

AlphaAltair
10-08-2013, 08:46 AM
Actually it seemed it was you who threw a hissy fit first. "Oh your username is pirate so no wonder you like all this crap blah blah" And that in response to my comment where I liked the direction. Seems like you have a problem dealing with other's opinions.

Pot, kettle etc..






Nice rewrite! All I said was "Given your username that doesn't surprise me."

Then you seem to get all defensive and tell me "dont cry about it here" as though saying anything remotely negative about the game isn't allowed........anyway, I really dont care how you see it.

I'm glad you're hyped for the game. I used to get hyped for them too, but now I'm realistic.

I just think that, for what it's worth, having a character who for most of the game is not an Assassin in an AC game is a bad move. It's like they have no more Assassins Creed ideas left and went "Hey naval's working out / testing well, lets run with it!! Now lets throw heaps of side stuff in to pad it out! Cha-ching.Done"

I really hope I'm wrong but until I hear "This AC game has as many assassinations as AC2 and they are all open ended" I'll be waiting for the reviews.

pirate1802
10-08-2013, 08:47 AM
apparently his clothes are stolen from a past assassin. It said so in the leaked outfit pictures that came out

But where does that imply that he will be hoodless for "most of the game" ? Seems to me that he will be hooded in the cities, restricted areas and during missions while hoodless while exploring the Caribbean.

roostersrule2
10-08-2013, 08:49 AM
But where does that imply that he will be hoodless for "most of the game" ? Seems to me that he will be hooded in the cities, restricted areas and during missions while hoodless while exploring the Caribbean.Indeed, I still think it should be up to the player.

pirate1802
10-08-2013, 09:00 AM
Nice rewrite! All I said was "Given your username that doesn't surprise me."

Then you seem to get all defensive and tell me "dont cry about it here" as though saying anything remotely negative about the game isn't allowed........anyway, I really dont care how you see it.

No need to get your panties in a bunch, as rooster said, I wasn't serious. Somehow, people who are disappointed at something are far easier to piss off. Connor fangirls, you etc. I can say given your username this doesn't surprise me either, but whats the point. I don't care much about how you see my comment either. As you said this is a free forum, so I'll say what I want as well. Deal?


I just think that, for what it's worth, having a character who for most of the game is not an Assassin in an AC game is a bad move.

Connor was initiated halfway through the game, Ezio wasn't officially an aassassin until the *** end of AC2. Hardly a new thing. As Shobhit said, the fact that whether the guy is or isn't an assassin doesnt matter in the slightest to the gameplay. You can be a non-assassin and the gameplay can still feel very assassinlike. Case in point: The Haytham sections.

pacmanate
10-08-2013, 09:04 AM
But where does that imply that he will be hoodless for "most of the game" ? Seems to me that he will be hooded in the cities, restricted areas and during missions while hoodless while exploring the Caribbean.

idk, depends what his outfit is I guess.

AlphaAltair
10-08-2013, 09:06 AM
Indeed, I still think it should be up to the player.

I agree, how hard could it be?

Ubisoft are VERY clever marketers, and are VERY careful about the words they use to paint a picture which can be misleading imo. So far they've said BF will have as many assassinations as AC1, which isn't very reassuring as that could include contracts, and that they strived to make them open ended, which is better but still not definitive. As I said on the previous page, until I hear hard facts I will be very sceptical.

roostersrule2
10-08-2013, 09:09 AM
I agree, how hard could it be?

Ubisoft are VERY clever marketers, and are VERY careful about the words they use to paint a picture which can be misleading imo. So far they've said BF will have as many assassinations as AC1, which isn't very reassuring as that could include contracts, and that they strived to make them open ended, which is better but still not definitive. As I said on the previous page, until I hear hard facts I will be very sceptical.I'm starting to think that it's not up to the player because it's part of the characters personality.

Like Altair never taking his off, Ezio doing it only around his closest friends and family, Cunar doing it kind of like Ezio but with more leeway and Edward doing it where ever the **** he likes, mainly in restricted zones etc.

pirate1802
10-08-2013, 09:13 AM
lol Cunar

AlphaAltair
10-08-2013, 09:13 AM
No need to get your panties in a bunch, as rooster said, I wasn't serious. Somehow, people who are disappointed at something are far easier to piss off. Connor fangirls, you etc. I can say given your username this doesn't surprise me either, but whats the point. I don't care much about how you see my comment either. As you said this is a free forum, so I'll say what I want as well. Deal?
.

Very maturely put . Good luck with the rest of high school ;D

pacmanate
10-08-2013, 09:14 AM
I'm starting to think that it's not up to the player because it's part of the characters personality.

Like Altair never taking his off, Ezio doing it only around his closest friends and family, Cunar doing it kind of like Ezio but with more leeway and Edward doing it where ever the **** he likes, mainly in restricted zones etc.

http://media.tumblr.com/22d4ed03d5a1ffd46985dbc127c71a21/tumblr_inline_mqfunl31Vc1qz4rgp.gif

roostersrule2
10-08-2013, 09:14 AM
Very maturely put . Good luck with the rest of high school ;DHaha time for some of Pirates popcorn

roostersrule2
10-08-2013, 09:15 AM
http://media.tumblr.com/22d4ed03d5a1ffd46985dbc127c71a21/tumblr_inline_mqfunl31Vc1qz4rgp.gifThat pun was not intended, but it is now.

pacmanate
10-08-2013, 09:17 AM
That pun was not intended, but it is now.

Really? I thought you did it on purpose, it was just too good!

roostersrule2
10-08-2013, 09:18 AM
Really? I thought you did it on purpose, it was just too good!Nope, maybe I did it subconsciouslee.

pacmanate
10-08-2013, 09:27 AM
Nope, maybe I did it subconsciouslee.

Yeah, probablee.

pirate1802
10-08-2013, 10:12 AM
Very maturely put . Good luck with the rest of high school ;D

lolol this guy is funny xD

AlphaAltair
10-09-2013, 04:11 PM
*Massive troll ignoring eye roll*


Here's another Darby Interview!!!

And a better one too!


http://www.gaminglives.com/2013/10/09/assassins-creed-iv-black-flag-interview-with-lead-writer-darby-mcdevitt/