PDA

View Full Version : Am I the only one that thinks Assassin's Creed 4 sucked?



Pages : [1] 2

Sun.Tzu.GE
11-26-2013, 01:38 AM
I remember 2007 when I first played AC 1 everything fascinated me.The innovative combat,the building climbing,the conspiracies,the war fought in shadows by two secret orders,the philosophical ideas,the modern day story,etc...

I instantly fell in love with the Assassin's Creed universe.It was a great time to be a gamer !

Then came the Ezio saga with most of the gameplay being the same but much more polished,better story,more interesting characters and renaissance Italy which had the most fascinating and beautiful cities ever.The cities felt so alive,authentic and the architecture was splendid.I felt so immersed in the beauty of Florence,Venice and Rome.

AC Revelations didn't have the same charm but it made up for it by giving us great closure.It was very emotional living the final days of Altair and seeing the end of Ezio's journey.I can still remember the beginning cutscene:

"My story is one of many thousands,and the world will not suffer if it ends too soon" -Ezio
That line is just completely awesome. Shows how mature and wise Ezio has become.I swear I dropped a tear just now when remembering this quote.

Now we finally arrive to the dark days of AC3 and AC4. I will completely neglect to speak about AC 3 because that game was a disgrace but sadly AC 4 wasn't far from it either.
It's like they forgot what Assassin's Creed was all about and they completely abandoned the spirit of the franchise.Naval combat was tedious,the story was mediocre and just like in AC 3 it felt rushed,uninteresting characters,no charm,no interesting locations(just ugly islands),something about the combat felt annoying,major glitches,Edward wasn't even an assassin,most missions were boring and repetitive.I'm not going into details because this is not a review.

I used to love this franchise so much but now it's just a disappointment and I don't think I will ever play an Assassin's Creed game ever again.

ze_topazio
11-26-2013, 01:40 AM
No, there are others, but nobody cares, stay tunned, maybe Assassin's Creed 5 will be awesome for you.

DetroitPlaya
11-26-2013, 01:44 AM
I'm assuming this is a trolling post, because...


most missions were boring and repetitive.

What would you call AC (1) then..?

There was no repetition in IV compared to the first AC. You literally did the same again and again. IV made the missions be far more different than in the past.

And that's not an opinion. Look at the missions and you will see it's a fact.

SleezeRocker
11-26-2013, 01:51 AM
Nah you're not theo nly one but for every Like, there will always be a Dislike.
Just numerous like AC3, but I don't. I like AC2, but numerous don't. So you're not the only one ;)

Landruner
11-26-2013, 01:54 AM
I would say AC 1 was repetitive, but it was the first one - I just think AC4 has still repetition in the gameplay, Alas... and I forgive less this time. It is still a good game though, but it is far of being a legendary game that it could have been. That is my opinion and certainly some others as well, please respect it!

DetroitPlaya
11-26-2013, 01:56 AM
I would say AC 1 was repetitive, but it was the first one - I just think AC4 has still repetition in the gameplay, Alas... and I forgive less this time. It is still a good game though, but it is far of being a legendary game that it could have been. That is my opinion and certainly some others as well, please respect it!

I respect people saying AC 1 was a better game than AC IV, but you can't call AC 1 less repetitive than AC IV. There's a LOT more variation now, and they make things optional.

Sun.Tzu.GE
11-26-2013, 02:02 AM
AC 1 was indeed repetitive but it was the first one.It certainly made up for repetitiveness with the innovative climbing and free running plus everything I've mentioned in my first post.If I were to play AC 1 now for the first time it would definitely suck but at that time it was amazing.

DetroitPlaya
11-26-2013, 02:03 AM
AC 1 was indeed repetitive but it was the first one.It certainly made up for repetitiveness with the innovative climbing and free running plus everything I've mentioned in my first post.If I were to play AC 1 now for the first time it would definitely suck but at that time it was amazing.

Ah in that way, that's reasonable then! :)

Thanks for clearing that up. I still disagree that IV is more reptitive, but we can disagree on that just fine.

SleezeRocker
11-26-2013, 02:05 AM
Yeah AC1 can be repetitive but because it's the first one, I forgive it since without it, we would not be playing Black Flag or previous before it. Also it was 1 of my first 3 games I got when I got a PS3 for holidays so that means something right? ;)

MnemonicSyntax
11-26-2013, 02:14 AM
AC 1 was indeed repetitive but it was the first one.It certainly made up for repetitiveness with the innovative climbing and free running plus everything I've mentioned in my first post.If I were to play AC 1 now for the first time it would definitely suck but at that time it was amazing.

But there was loads of innovative free running and climbing in 4. I had a blast doing the free running in this game.

Perk89
11-26-2013, 02:19 AM
Anyone who says they need to make the series more like the first game just needs to be banned.

Landruner
11-26-2013, 02:24 AM
I respect people saying AC 1 was a better game than AC IV, but you can't call AC 1 less repetitive than AC IV. There's a LOT more variation now, and they make things optional.

Like I previously told you in another thread "all the tastes are the nature" I respect that you liked AC4. and I can understand that, but AC4 did not do it for me and did not do it for some others as well, it is okay it is just a game and earth is still turning, but please just accept that AC4 did not do it for some other people. I am not like the OP go to say that AC4 sucked, I don't think AC4 sucks, but It does not work for me as I was hoping for - that is all.

Besides I did not write that AC1 was less repetitive than AC4, I just wrote that I forgave that repetition in AC1 because it was the first one, after 6 games and they still serve you almost the same soup for the assassin gameplay scenario (tailing, ears dropping, tailing again, desynchronized...) I am sorry, it does not do it for me, I want something else for some good assassin gameplay with some innovative variations in the assassin parts of the gameplay.

ace3001
11-26-2013, 03:04 AM
Probably not, but you're probably in the minority.

As for AC1, I'd play AC4 10 times over than replay AC1 just once, even though AC1 had a much, much better story. I guess I've passed the point of playing AC games for the story.

ace3001
11-26-2013, 03:06 AM
Like I previously told you in another thread "all the tastes are the nature" I respect that you liked AC4. and I can understand that, but AC4 did not do it for me and did not do it for some others as well, it is okay it is just a game and earth is still turning, but please just accept that AC4 did not do it for some other people. I am not like the OP go to say that AC4 sucked, I don't think AC4 sucks, but It does not work for me as I was hoping for - that is all.

Besides I did not write that AC1 was less repetitive than AC4, I just wrote that I forgave that repetition in AC1 because it was the first one, after 6 games and they still serve you almost the same soup for the assassin gameplay scenario (tailing, ears dropping, tailing again, desynchronized...) I am sorry, it does not do it for me, I want something else for some good assassin gameplay with some innovative variations in the assassin parts of the gameplay.
What is repetitive in AC4 except for the tailing missions, though? Comparatively, in AC1, the only non-repetitive missions were the main assassinations which were done really well. But those don't add up to more than a couple of hours of game time. Hell, AC1 had "eavesdropping" missions where all you had to do was go sit on a bench and press a button. I'd pick the tailing missions of AC4 over those, despite them being my least favourite type of missions in it.

phoenix-force411
11-26-2013, 03:38 AM
That's like saying "Am I the only one who thinks Zelda is repetitive as heck?" which it is, if you look at it plainly. I gave up on that series already, because I felt like I was playing the same thing. I've enjoyed all AC games up till now, and they've all amazed me. ACIII is just underrated by far. Give it some time and it can sink in, but I won't lie that the Story missions were boring than the side missions. Homestead Missions > Story Missions.

ACIV was definitely a step up from ACIII, and I enjoyed it despite the lack of missions in all 12 sequences. I don't include the 13th sequence since that is only an ending sequence.

itsamea-mario
11-26-2013, 03:39 AM
Yes.

Landruner
11-26-2013, 03:43 AM
What is repetitive in AC4 except for the tailing missions, though? Comparatively, in AC1, the only non-repetitive missions were the main assassinations which were done really well. But those don't add up to more than a couple of hours of game time. Hell, AC1 had "eavesdropping" missions where all you had to do was go sit on a bench and press a button. I'd pick the tailing missions of AC4 over those, despite them being my least favourite type of missions in it.

Hello how are doing?! :pWell, like you wrote and I wrote the tailing missions are repetitive and they are many not just 2hours like you wrote (in fact most of the missions are build with those, and I am not the only one that said that neither)... but I didn't say the game sucks like the OP said no because the game does not suck in my book, and I never mentioned that they were better in AC1 neither - I just wrote that the game was not working for me, and I explained why, it is a good game, but I was expecting something else, especially about the assassin parts - that it! end of the story, no big deal or big drama, that is cool, no one will die because I wrote this - ;) you guys are a bit over touchy, I feel like a traitor now for having writing my stuff above...LOL!

SaltyDog03
11-26-2013, 03:59 AM
The atmoshpere of AC1 was simply breathtaking at the time. The story was amazing.

and I will never forget this trailer:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cc-ClutaN_I

This is honestly the most memorable trailer of anything that I can recall.

The thing about AC1 is that the story was mature, the world gritty, and just seemed to be a more hardcore game. However, I still enjoy AC4 more in terms of entertainment. As authentic as they try to make the pirate theme, there's always a glorified and sensationalized stigma associated with that era. AC1 will always have the memories of riding horse back through the dreary and dangerous terrain with prophets clamoring in the background. The first time I climbed up the dome in Damascus with the sun glimmering off the bronze sphere was just breathtaking.

The nostalgic feeling of AC1 will always reside in me and rightfully so. It had so many innovations for that time. But nostalgia and innovation aside, AC4 is just more enjoyable. The naval battles are done with great care. The world is beautifully recreated. There's a ton of content packed into this game to keep a person entertained for a long time.

FrankieSatt
11-26-2013, 04:15 AM
Black Flag is definitely not as good as ACI, ACII, Brotherhood or Revelations. It's SLIGHTLY better than ACIII but only for the fact that the Naval part of the game, which is 95% of the game, is pretty good.

The story line for the Ancestor is horrible, the one for the Present Day is even worse. Edward is right there with Connor as the worst Ancestor in the series, I think it's a a tie, and what they decided to do for the Present Day, as far as you the player being the character, is just down right atrocious.

The only saving face for Black Flag is the Naval game play and just as I knew it would be before the game even came out the game is pretty much a Pirate Simulator.

My score of this game is a 5 out of 10, and the 5 is only because of the Naval Game play.

As far as an Assassin's Creed game, it's a complete failure and I refuse to use the name Assassin's Creed or the initials AC with this game from this point forward.

Sushiglutton
11-26-2013, 04:17 AM
Golden rule of the internet: "If you think something sucks, you are never alone!"

xCHEMISTx
11-26-2013, 04:23 AM
Jeez all the critics are coming out of the woodwork now.

Gi1t
11-26-2013, 04:26 AM
That's like saying "Am I the only one who thinks Zelda is repetitive as heck?" which it is, if you look at it plainly. I gave up on that series already, because I felt like I was playing the same thing. I've enjoyed all AC games up till now, and they've all amazed me. ACIII is just underrated by far. Give it some time and it can sink in, but I won't lie that the Story missions were boring than the side missions. Homestead Missions > Story Missions.

ACIV was definitely a step up from ACIII, and I enjoyed it despite the lack of missions in all 12 sequences. I don't include the 13th sequence since that is only an ending sequence.

So you're saying that you gave up on Zelda, but this person should not give up on AC and keep playing to let it "sink in" that it's not repetitive? Because that seems contradictory to me.
Zelda reiterates itself in each installment, meaning the enemies, places and enemies that reappear are not simply cut, recolored and pasted from the previous game. I think the same thing you've said about AC here could apply just as well to the Zelda series. Repetition, in general is still a staple of game design and almost every game is repetitive if you think about it a certain way (it differs depending on the game. In Zelda's case, I'd say it's your goals that keep repeating themselves. If it had a shooter style "objective list" you'd see the same stuff over and over again.) People get into them anyway because they put themselves in the context the game presents. So I'd say that definitely works for AC4, but Zelda isn't an exception to that rule either. (Doesn't mean you have to like it, but you don't have to like a game just because it's great, nor do you have to justify why you don't.)

wheelhouse413
11-26-2013, 04:30 AM
Yeah AC1 can be repetitive but because it's the first one, I forgive it since without it, we would not be playing Black Flag or previous before it. Also it was 1 of my first 3 games I got when I got a PS3 for holidays so that means something right? ;)

For me, AC1 was so bad (the gameplay) that after about 4 hours I put it down and never touched an AC until AC4.

I've completed AC4 (like 94% total sync) and, for the most part, loved it. I did think the Kenway story was laughably bad, and that many of the main missions were artificially restricted (not talking about the bonus constraints) and more frustrating than fun or challenging.

BATISTABUS
11-26-2013, 04:35 AM
Then came the Ezio saga with...better story,more interesting characters
Sorry, you lost me here.

phoenix-force411
11-26-2013, 04:43 AM
So you're saying that you gave up on Zelda, but this person should not give up on AC and keep playing to let it "sink in" that it's not repetitive? Because that seems contradictory to me.
Zelda reiterates itself in each installment, meaning the enemies, places and enemies that reappear are not simply cut, recolored and pasted from the previous game. I think the same thing you've said about AC here could apply just as well to the Zelda series. Repetition, in general is still a staple of game design and almost every game is repetitive if you think about it a certain way (it differs depending on the game. In Zelda's case, I'd say it's your goals that keep repeating themselves. If it had a shooter style "objective list" you'd see the same stuff over and over again.) People get into them anyway because they put themselves in the context the game presents. So I'd say that definitely works for AC4, but Zelda isn't an exception to that rule either. (Doesn't mean you have to like it, but you don't have to like a game just because it's great, nor do you have to justify why you don't.)

Yes, each game must keep up a certain trend or repetition that defines itself without giving off lacking reason.

Zelda, for me, I used to play it a like it like no other game. Each major installment had a different story to tell, but when it came down to the core elements of temples/dungeons and Master Sword trend, it just wasn't clicking anymore. But I won't lie that I did get a bit over myself when I was talking about giving up on Zelda...

phoenix-force411
11-26-2013, 04:45 AM
For me, AC1 was so bad (the gameplay) that after about 4 hours I put it down and never touched an AC until AC4.

I've completed AC4 (like 94% total sync) and, for the most part, loved it. I did think the Kenway story was laughably bad, and that many of the main missions were artificially restricted (not talking about the bonus constraints) and more frustrating than fun or challenging.

AC1 had challenging A.I.s for a first game, but learn how to master it and enemies become mooks.

DetroitPlaya
11-26-2013, 04:51 AM
People will likely hate me for this, but frankly; AC IV: BF is the first AC where I felt the characters were memorable. Someone like Vane I will actually remember in some years time.

Ezio was likeable, but his character progression was very illogical (at least in II and Brotherhood), and couldn't pull through Brotherhood, The first 1/3 is nice, but then it's the same reptitive crap we are used to.

Like wheelhouse413, I didn't finish AC - I got it when it came out, then after sinking LOTS of hours in it was too much of a chore, and I quit until some months ago - where I picked up AC II, Brotherhood, III, and IV (I skipped Revelations, as it was just unbearable to keep playing with those controls - and really didn't enjoy the gameplay - so I just kept myself up-to-date with the story).

Altaïr I have no issue with storywise, though.

AC III... was a tutorial for the great, great IV: And tutorials are never amazing, but can be good/decent.

I enjoyed the ending of IV (Kenway-period), as I felt it wrapped it up nicely. I went in with the expectation of learning how Haytham's father was and how he progressed as a person; which I did (and in a much better way than Ezio, I might add!). Modern day.. I like it because of the security feed post-game, but other than that - it isn't anything "whoaa!!" Definitely better than III, II, and Brotherhood. (I don't know about Revelations - I know the story, but.. parts of it I don't really know how to feel about :/)

Megas_Doux
11-26-2013, 04:54 AM
No, of course not!

xCHEMISTx
11-26-2013, 04:57 AM
Someone like Vane I will actually remember in some years time.

His story is quite memorable that's for sure. He actually did appose a kings pardon and get betrayed by Calico Jack in real life too. They found him marooned on an island and took him to the gallows.

phoenix-force411
11-26-2013, 04:57 AM
People will likely hate me for this, but frankly; AC IV: BF is the first AC where I felt the characters were memorable. Someone like Vane I will actually remember in some years time.

Ezio was likeable, but his character progression was very illogical (at least in II and Brotherhood), and couldn't pull through Brotherhood, The first 1/3 is nice, but then it's the same reptitive crap we are used to.

Like wheelhouse413, I didn't finish AC - I got it when it came out, then after sinking LOTS of hours in it was too much of a chore, and I quit until some months ago - where I picked up AC II, Brotherhood, III, and IV (I skipped Revelations, as it was just unbearable to keep playing with those controls - and really didn't enjoy the gameplay - so I just kept myself up-to-date with the story).

Altaïr I have no issue with storywise, though.

AC III... was a tutorial for the great, great IV: And tutorials are never amazing, but can be good/decent.

I enjoyed the ending of IV (Kenway-period), as I felt it wrapped it up nicely. I went in with the expectation of learning how Haytham's father was and how he progressed as a person; which I did (and in a much better way than Ezio, I might add!). Modern day.. I like it because of the security feed post-game, but other than that - it isn't anything "whoaa!!" Definitely better than III, II, and Brotherhood. (I don't know about Revelations - I know the story, but.. parts of it I don't really know how to feel about :/)

Assassin's Creed: Revelations is heavily underrated. Preferred it more than Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood in terms of story and vibrant environments.

wheelhouse413
11-26-2013, 04:58 AM
AC1 had challenging A.I.s for a first game, but learn how to master it and enemies become mooks.

I don't remember if it was hard or easy - all I remember is that AC1 was boring. And I didn't give it much time, to be honest.

I still have the disc (360 version), but my 360 has been put away for now, so doubt I'll ever go back to it.

Megas_Doux
11-26-2013, 05:00 AM
Sorry, you lost me here.

This!

The narrative is very appealing, and well carried in AC2/ACB, because I find the story and characters as deep as a Scooby doo episode, a story for kids, literally... .. Cliche, cartoonish, and one dimensional characters through and through.....

A VEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEERY easy approach.

xCHEMISTx
11-26-2013, 05:04 AM
Assassins Creed needed some more light hearted characters. AC3 was getting way to deep and meaningful in my personal opinion.

DetroitPlaya
11-26-2013, 05:10 AM
Assassin's Creed: Revelations is heavily underrated. Preferred it more than Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood in terms of story and vibrant environments.

Oh, I meant that I just couldn't get myself through more of the same gameplay, as I really hated it. AC III was causing insane amount of rage, too - especially with the addition of a broken parry system.

AC IV: BF I have 100% everything I can (missing the Initiates shanty, and the community items). And I could play it all again; so clearly they do something right - as it's not just the same again and again.

Overall, I just want more focus on the progression of the assassin's (or templar's) character, as really.. the only good one was Edward - partially because he doesn't just approve of the creed immediately. (I know people say Ezio and Altaïr also questioned the creed, but not in the same way - and also way too late for it to truly have a significance (to me))

Landruner
11-26-2013, 05:14 AM
AC3' story was not that bad actually, the problem is that the execution did not support it at all and it did not help the main character to be likable neither. I agree with xCHEMISTx that some parts had been over exaggerated in some clumsy deep ways toward an unnecessary drama and personal dilemma, that was not working like it was intended since it did not support the character (If it is what xCHEMISTx meant?)

Landruner
11-26-2013, 05:19 AM
Assassin's Creed: Revelations is heavily underrated. Preferred it more than Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood in terms of story and vibrant environments.

I did not preferred over ACB , but I agree with you that ACR is underrated

xCHEMISTx
11-26-2013, 05:19 AM
unnecessary drama and personal dilemma

Definitely seemed to be to some of that. I'm not sure exactly but about the only laugh I got from AC3 was talking to Peg Leg.

xCHEMISTx
11-26-2013, 05:34 AM
Achilles Davenport did have some light hearted moments as well though and was a likable character :)

Landruner
11-26-2013, 05:49 AM
Definitely seemed to be to some of that. I'm not sure exactly but about the only laugh I got from AC3 was talking to Peg Leg.

Sadly the scene of the weeding made me laugh a lot (just because of the execution and direction), and the ending of Charles Lee was the worst - it was first a bug with the carriage just before entering the tavern and I could stop laughing so I was not even on it...but then; that ending around that table and the way it was executed made me laugh so bad that I had to leave the game....

xCHEMISTx
11-26-2013, 06:02 AM
Sadly the scene of the weeding made me laugh a lot (just because of the execution and direction), and the ending of Charles Lee was the worst - it was first a bug with the carriage just before entering the tavern and I could stop laughing so I was not even on it...but then; that ending around that table and the way it was executed made me laugh so bad that I had to leave the game....

Ok maybe it wasn't as serious as I made out but I definitely am finding AC4 abit more laid back sailing around with my crew singing shanties. I also forgot how funny it was to see the redcoats attacked by wolves and having an achievement pop up.

Landruner
11-26-2013, 06:15 AM
Ok maybe it wasn't as serious as I made out but I definitely am finding AC4 abit more laid back sailing around with my crew singing shanties. I also forgot how funny it was to see the redcoats attacked by wolves and having an achievement pop up.

No that was tragic LOL!!!!
The funniest part I got with AC4 is when I felt asleep while playing it with Edward and its crew in the middle of the sea with the shanties (lalalalal) and I started dreaming I was a pirate, and I when suddenly woke up, I started wondering where I was, LOL even my dog was laughing LOL!

xCHEMISTx
11-26-2013, 06:27 AM
The crew crack me up all the time. I wonder if they are drunk while on the job actually. Harpooning and Naval Battles bring out the best of them. The Shanties they sing are quite interesting though. I wonder if they are actually written by the crews of the actual pirates or just sailors in general.

DetroitPlaya
11-26-2013, 06:28 AM
The crew crack me up all the time. I wonder if they are drunk while on the job actually. Harpooning and Naval Battles bring out the best of them. The Shanties they sing are quite interesting though. I wonder if they are actually written by the crews of the actual pirates or just sailors in general.

You can look up the story of every single shanty.. :)

xCHEMISTx
11-26-2013, 06:33 AM
You can look up the story of every single shanty.. :)

Great! I have still to do that. Adewale is also funny how he is always seems to be trying to take the wheel from me and is obsessed with upgrading the ship every time we steal some wood or metal. I could go on and on. This AC just seems to be a lot of fun.

Dev_Anj
11-26-2013, 09:51 AM
It's like they forgot what Assassin's Creed was all about and they completely abandoned the spirit of the franchise.Naval combat was tedious,the story was mediocre and just like in AC 3 it felt rushed,uninteresting characters,no charm,no interesting locations(just ugly islands),something about the combat felt annoying,major glitches,Edward wasn't even an assassin,most missions were boring and repetitive.I'm not going into details because this is not a review.


Uhh, how is the naval combat tedious? If you don't have powerful weapons, battles can be a bit too long sure, but otherwise there is quite some depth in the naval combat.
How does it feel rushed? There is a huge world filled with a lot of meaningful content. Also, honestly no interesting locations? Havana isn't a vibrant city? Nassau isn't a rough crime laden pirate haven? And many of the islands are well detailed. Maybe you don't like exploring small islands, but calling them ugly is an overstatement.

What major glitches are you talking about? From what I've been hearing, it's mostly polished and has fewer glitches than most open world games, although there are still some noticeable ones.

The combat in both Assassin's Creed 3 and Assassin's Creed 4 has been technically improved a lot from the previous Assassin's Creed titles. Now you actually need a little strategy to take down many enemies. Previous games were jokes as far as combat was concerned. Either you could spam different sorts of counters, or there were overpowered guard breaks that you could spam to bring down even the toughest of enemies. Maybe you liked slaughtering many guards without effort, but you can't deny that it was unbalanced and required some fine tuning to actually be worth more than just a few minutes of entertainment.

Honestly, it's fine to not like the game, but try and raise sensible points. Don't insult anything for the sake of it.

Sun.Tzu.GE
11-26-2013, 11:33 AM
Uhh, how is the naval combat tedious? If you don't have powerful weapons, battles can be a bit too long sure, but otherwise there is quite some depth in the naval combat.
How does it feel rushed? There is a huge world filled with a lot of meaningful content. Also, honestly no interesting locations? Havana isn't a vibrant city? Nassau isn't a rough crime laden pirate haven? And many of the islands are well detailed. Maybe you don't like exploring small islands, but calling them ugly is an overstatement.

What major glitches are you talking about? From what I've been hearing, it's mostly polished and has fewer glitches than most open world games, although there are still some noticeable ones.

The combat in both Assassin's Creed 3 and Assassin's Creed 4 has been technically improved a lot from the previous Assassin's Creed titles. Now you actually need a little strategy to take down many enemies. Previous games were jokes as far as combat was concerned. Either you could spam different sorts of counters, or there were overpowered guard breaks that you could spam to bring down even the toughest of enemies. Maybe you liked slaughtering many guards without effort, but you can't deny that it was unbalanced and required some fine tuning to actually be worth more than just a few minutes of entertainment.

Honestly, it's fine to not like the game, but try and raise sensible points. Don't insult anything for the sake of it.

Huge world indeed but useless if there's nothing interesting to do in it.I'm looking for a great story in a game.I could care less about the huge world and the pointless exploration if I don't have a good story to drive me forward and get me emotionally invested in the game.I think it was really annoying that they force you to do side missions and look for supplies jut to get money and upgrade your ship.Maybe we don't all like the naval battles and don't wish to spend time upgrading the ship.But nooooooooooo...they just had to force us.If you didn't upgrade your ship,main story missions were almost impossible.Quite frankly I abandoned the game near the very end because I couldn't progress since my ship wasn't strong enough and I really felt like spending all that time looking for supplies and money was a chore.I ended up watching the final hour of the game on youtube.

What glitches ?I'm not even gonna mention the glitches present in all open world games because those are understandable. I'll give you just one good example. Well for some reason at one point in the game I found myself without my swords equipped and I didn't even notice because I liked using mostly the hidden blades in combat.At the beginning of sequence 12 the game froze at the loading screen forever because in the cutscene Edward was leaving his swords on the table and since I didn't have them equipped ,they couldn't load the cutscene.I spent days trying to figure out how to move past that point until I found an answer on the forums.And I wasn't the only one who had this problem.

xCHEMISTx
11-26-2013, 11:42 AM
The game has been rated highly by pretty much every review that players take notice of so take it or leave it. AC 4 will not be accepted as a game that sucked.

Omegatr0n
11-26-2013, 12:53 PM
I have to agree with the OP. Been playing these games from the beginning. Not going into the repetitive part but storywise in my opinion the Altair and Ezio story line were awsome. I really liked the storyline and i think they gave it a lot of thought. The storyline kept me going but then AC3 came out and well....i did not liked what they did with the storyline (including desmond). I havent finished AC4 yet, i really like it as a pirate game but it shouldnt been called Assassin's Creed anymore.

Storywise i hope they will go back to the mystical stuff. Storywise for me it looks like they pulled a George Lucas Star Wars prequel. "lets make it for a bigger audience" They only had to put in Jar Jar Binks in Assassins Creed to finish it off.

silvermercy
11-26-2013, 01:10 PM
Sorry, you lost me here.
LOL I do the same now when I read this kind of quotes. Learned my lesson.

xCHEMISTx
11-26-2013, 01:38 PM
I havent finished AC4 yet, i really like it as a pirate game but it shouldnt been called Assassin's Creed anymore.

That's a fair point and I admit they did take a drastic step away from tradition but naval battles have been built up for awhile now so it's good that they fleshed it out for at least one title. I'm sure we will move away from the 'pirate' theme again in the next instalment.

ExtremeOutsider
11-26-2013, 04:34 PM
AC 4 has a lead character that you can relate to . As well its nice that he is not some Assassin living by a code that makes no sense at all . I think some on here hate AC 4 cause Edward is not a yes man to the Assassins and he does as he dam well wants to do . but hey if you like playing as a yes man to the assassins then AC 1 - 3 as well AC revelations is the game you should play

AvK KiNgKoBrA
11-26-2013, 04:47 PM
"Just ugly Islands" U do realize ACIV was set in the Carribean not Italy right? Naval Combat was amazing, but ii do agree on the whole Edward not being an Assassin thing

xCHEMISTx
11-26-2013, 04:59 PM
Adewale is about the only one of the rowdy pirate mob who even looks like being accepted as a true assassin.

Omegatr0n
11-26-2013, 05:02 PM
AC 4 has a lead character that you can relate to . As well its nice that he is not some Assassin living by a code that makes no sense at all . I think some on here hate AC 4 cause Edward is not a yes man to the Assassins and he does as he dam well wants to do . but hey if you like playing as a yes man to the assassins then AC 1 - 3 as well AC revelations is the game you should play

Hi, first off everyone is entitled to his own opinion. I agree Edward is a fun character, imo a lot better then Conner but i dont agree that its nice that its about someone not living by the code of the Creed. The game is called Assassin's Creed afterall. As I said before im still playing so dont know how its going to end but im 30% ingame and I really dont get the Assassins Creed part. yes he has hidden blades but thats it. AC 1- AC revelations imo was about the creed. AC3 im not so sure about, more about a indian with daddy issues. AC 4 is about a pirate bumping into the Creed.

I dont know but im getting the feeling it was a marketing strategy aswell, they know that if they put "Assassin's Creed" in front of it then more people will get exicted about it then "hey this is our new game called Edward -The Life of A Pirate".

Maybe I'm just a sucker for the AC lore, who knows haha but i hope they will go back to the lore, for me thats what i really liked (but they kind of killed it with the lame desmond ending in AC3).

I still hope that some day we will get an Assassin's Creed game set in Japan. I wanna go Samurai.

xCHEMISTx
11-26-2013, 05:14 PM
I still hope that some day we will get an Assassin's Creed game set in Japan. I wanna go Samurai.

Samurai assassins? God help us all :p

FrankieSatt
11-26-2013, 06:38 PM
AC 4 has a lead character that you can relate to . As well its nice that he is not some Assassin living by a code that makes no sense at all . I think some on here hate AC 4 cause Edward is not a yes man to the Assassins and he does as he dam well wants to do . but hey if you like playing as a yes man to the assassins then AC 1 - 3 as well AC revelations is the game you should play

You know the name on the box is "Assassin's Creed" and because of that we expect to play as an Assassin, not a Pirate who's only interest is his own and doesn't give a damn about anything else but what could make him richer.

The "Code" in which you so lazily refer to it is the whole meaning and definition of what the Assassin's are all about and since you don't care about it, by the tone of your post, why did you even play AC 1-3 along with Brotherhood and Revelations, assuming you did?

We the fans wanted an Assassin's Creed game not a Pirate simulator.

shobhit7777777
11-26-2013, 07:10 PM
One thing I didn't really see was Edward warming to the Creed and embracing it towards the end. Initially his business-only-where-ma-money-at attitude was great and a breath of fresh air....but as I delved deeper...it become annoying. Edward felt a bit flat.

The metamorphosis towards the end was indeed emotional (to me atleast) but still felt abrupt (partially because it spanned over so many years) and unconvincing. Overall it lacked the 'oomph' I was expecting.

Game is and was a lot of fun though.

Landruner
11-26-2013, 07:11 PM
I come back on the train in posting on that thread again - I said yesterday that I was disappointed for the Assassin parts of this game because of the repetitive tasks for the ASSASSIN 's mission design that did not really changed since AC1 - I believe that after 6 ACs the assassin mission designs will have been more elaborated than just being trapped in that over used scenario template/ type (tail that guy/ type) and AC4 used that mission type a lot and way too many for any part relating the assassin Parts of the gameplay - Even so, the tailing mission(s) and their gameplay did not really change or did not even get improved since the first ones, years ago.

I believe that during development the development teams should have envisaged more focus on re-working deeply on those Assassin type scenarios with different type of scenario and then combine it with the story or combine those around or directly from the story, and then, make them match with the rest of the gameplay (Pirate Parts) for better repartition and harmony in the gameplay - I am pretty sure that AC4 will have been hands down a winner contender for that franchise over the previous title and put a lot of fans in the same ship for a general acclaim among AC fans.

Obviously, like a lot of other fans I am sure, I feel like AC4 is a hybrid in the franchise or sort off, and I am pretty sure that it will take its own departure for getting its own spin-off being defendant from the AC series and as a pirate game only with AC mechanics (I see that coming up big time!). The game is good, fun and interesting for its adventure part, but this is not the best AC ever made, and I don't think it is.

Anyway nothing is lost, you have plenty of people that gave their opinions or critics, and multiple wonderful list of ideas over the past weeks.

Ubisoft dev/teams just need to pay attention to those, and perhaps can use some future AC4/DLCs (? don't think?...but who knows?) but at least, they have a general idea and plenty of good concepts given by their fans in order to take them in consideration and bend over those, and hopefully start studying what is possible for them to do for a next AC with those ideas.

FrankieSatt
11-26-2013, 07:20 PM
One thing I didn't really see was Edward warming to the Creed and embracing it towards the end. Initially his business-only-where-ma-money-at attitude was great and a breath of fresh air....but as I delved deeper...it become annoying. Edward felt a bit flat.

The metamorphosis towards the end was indeed emotional (to me atleast) but still felt abrupt (partially because it spanned over so many years) and unconvincing. Overall it lacked the 'oomph' I was expecting.

Game is and was a lot of fun though.

I actually agree with you about the game being fun. It is a fun game, if you don't look at it as an Assassin's Creed game and if you don't think about or worry about the Story Line any and just do the side quests and exploring and plundering and pillaging.

I was just hoping to see an actual Assassin's Creed game and what we got fell extremely short of that.

Hans684
11-26-2013, 07:31 PM
We have never played a full assassin from the begging to the end.

Altaïr lost his assassin rank at the begging of the game and gott it back after killing Rober.

Ezio joined the order in Venice, 1476. Close to the ending, ACB, ACR is just and expansion of the story of AC2.

Connor become an assassin early, but we played as Haytham in half of the game.

Edward joined the order before hunting down Woodes Rogers, Robers & Torres and in the ending in the opera he is an assassin.

Landruner
11-26-2013, 07:45 PM
We have never played a full assassin from the begging to the end.

Altaïr lost his assassin rank at the begging of the game and gott it back after killing Rober.

Ezio joined the order in Venice, 1476. Close to the ending, ACB, ACR is just and expansion of the story of AC2.

Connor become an assassin early, but we played as Haytham in half of the game.

Edward joined the order before hunting down Woodes Rogers, Robers & Torres and in the ending in the opera he is an assassin.

I agree with you and you are right, but I believe that is a bit the Assassin missions/scenario and their design's templates that start being not innovative, redundant and repetitive that kills the thing for some - I am pretty sure they will have come with new concept with those (Using deeper social stealth; environment stealth and a better AI, more innovative variant in the structure of those missions and the all with more innovation in the Assassin gameplay) the game will have met more positive reactions regarding being an AC or not - despite the orientation of Ed, the main character, and the story.

Hans684
11-26-2013, 08:24 PM
I agree with you and you are right, but I believe that is a bit the Assassin missions/scenario and their design's templates that start being not innovative, redundant and repetitive that kills the thing for some - I am pretty sure they will have come with new concept with those (Using deeper social stealth; environment stealth and a better AI, more innovative variant in the structure of those missions and the all with more innovation in the Assassin gameplay) the game will have met more positive reactions regarding being an AC or not - despite the orientation of Ed, the main character, and the story.

If Ubisoft want to improve their sosial stealth they need to take the sosial stealth from the Hitman series. Give us the ability to use enemy clothing, Ashraf said they tried, they should try again but this time they should:

Return the blend button, make it limited like the instinct from Hitman.

Ability to take enemy clothing/armor.

The detection system can be one out of two:

Either the kind of guard you take the clothing from can detect you or a special guard that is made for trying to find you.

Hitman: Same mission design for assassination missions & sosial stealth.

Splinter Cell: Same mission design for infiltration missions, idetical system to choose gear and weapons before missions & stealth.

Thief: Not identical but a harder combat system.

mikeyf1999
11-26-2013, 11:52 PM
Will people please stop talking about how Edward was never an assassin until the end
Yes, you're entitled to your opinion, but the main character is YOU not an Assassin, I bet that if it was someone like Desmond, they would've (the Assassins) explored Edward's life until Haytham was born but because the character is you and you're working for Abstergo Entertainment you're main job is to find the Observatory
So please people think about this, I don't think the templars want to explore the entire life of this Assassin just this certain moment
Oh and I take offense to you saying "We the fans" because I feel as if you're saying that i'm not a AC fan and I've been playing this game series and enjoyed every game in the series, no matter what others think
Don't hate on me but please respect this opinion

ReverseDoddo
11-27-2013, 12:03 AM
noo its not only uu this game sucks its like a pairet game not assassin game AC1 and Ezio story was the best!

ze_topazio
11-27-2013, 12:03 AM
With Edward they gave us a third party perspective on the conflict, considering this series have like one million games and will get even more i don't see the problem with having one single game with a main character like Edward.

Shahkulu101
11-27-2013, 12:17 AM
I liked seeing the conflict from a neutral perspective, in fact, if anything he's one of the 'truest' assassins yet. He wasn't born into it, nor did he join for personal reasons but found out where he belonged, his place in the world - with the assassins. He just wanted to make things right, he had ruined everything around him and found solace in a cause he once exploited for his own gain.

FrankieSatt
11-27-2013, 12:42 AM
Will people please stop talking about how Edward was never an assassin until the end
Yes, you're entitled to your opinion, but the main character is YOU not an Assassin, I bet that if it was someone like Desmond, they would've (the Assassins) explored Edward's life until Haytham was born but because the character is you and you're working for Abstergo Entertainment you're main job is to find the Observatory
So please people think about this, I don't think the templars want to explore the entire life of this Assassin just this certain moment
Oh and I take offense to you saying "We the fans" because I feel as if you're saying that i'm not a AC fan and I've been playing this game series and enjoyed every game in the series, no matter what others think
Don't hate on me but please respect this opinion

You have your opinion, and that is fine. I disagree. I wanted to play a game called Assassin's Creed not a game where the ancestor doesn't give a damn about the Assassin's and where in the Present Day the character is you the player with not personality whatsoever and has nothing to do but play stupid hacking mini games and hand off information.

DetroitPlaya
11-27-2013, 12:47 AM
You have your opinion, and that is fine. I disagree. I wanted to play a game called Assassin's Creed not a game where the ancestor doesn't give a damn about the Assassin's and where in the Present Day the character is you the player with not personality whatsoever and has nothing to do but play stupid hacking mini games and hand off information.

Edward does give a damn about the creed eventually, though.

It's called CHARACTER PROGRESSION. Something AC was horrible at prior to this.

Also find it funny how many people complain about the fact he's not an assassin - but it was fine playing as a templar in the past.

mikeyf1999
11-27-2013, 12:57 AM
That's what I like it's all about the fact that he starts off not caring about the war but after he's lost everything is when he realizes that the Assassins will be the right path for him
Of course the player doesn't have a personality as it's YOU. It's not like Ubisoft can predict how everybody in the world acts and (if i may) what was the hand off information that you mention as while I can think of one, i can't think of anymore?

projectpat06
11-27-2013, 01:14 AM
Maybe it's bc of how much I like the worlds of AC3 and 4, but they are my favorite. I also think the overall mechanics are better. The stories are ok. It's really just the mission structure that hasn't really reached that epicness yet. It's getting better. My only let downs for ac4 were the lack of varied side events in the cities (random encounters), the blending capabilities between any two people, the lack of recruits abilities aka ambushing, sniping, disguised guards, etc (they could have replaced the assassin recruits with your pirates).

going along with that last statement, they could have really done the whole assassin recruits with 5 or 6 unique pirates who eventually become assassins like edward and adewale.

mikeyf1999
11-27-2013, 01:23 AM
They probably did want to do that but Ubisoft removed the brotherhood system so as to keep people from easily skipping challenging missions (stay undetected etc.)

BoBwUzHeRe1138
11-27-2013, 04:14 AM
Sigh...Still don't know what to do. I'm definitely waiting until I get a next gen console before getting the game but seeing so many conflicted opinions... lol

I'm okay with Edward not truly being an Assassin; "(his) story is just one of many thousands...and the world will not suffer if (it happens that he's not quite exactly an Assassin the entire game.)"

What I'm most hesitant of is number one; the gameplay. I find AC1 very repetitive (surprise), but the parkour in that game was revolutionary and it's still fun to run around Jerusalem or Acre or Damascus... not much to do and the combat is meh and the voice of Altair is meh...and the gameplay is meh (aside from the parkour obviously), but the story was great. It was mysterious and ended on an aggravating cliffhanger that made me want to know how it continued.

AC2 is my favorite in the series: the missions were overhauled and were no longer so repetitive, it was set during a time period I absolutely adore, the parkour was even better with cities like Venice and Florence being among the best cities of the series to date. Desmond's story also continued along nicely as he trains to be an Assassin.

Brotherhood was a nice addition to Ezio's life. It felt more like AC2's true ending that was just cut off during production so it didn't feel too out of place. Ezio now had his own robes (still my favorite outfit of the series), gameplay was streamlined further in numerous ways, etc. Rome was fun to free run around though it was not as fun as the cities in AC2. The further adventures of Desmond Miles shows him progressing nicely.

Revelations felt a bit more...filler than ACB did since it changes setting entirely, has Desmond make a complete stop in his story for the entire game more or less, etc. Constantinople is more interesting than Rome was thanks to the sloped nature of the city and the sheer density of it and the ziplines were a nice addition but the climbing became way too quick and automated with the dang hookblade.

AC3 then gives us...well a horrible conclusion IMO to Desmond's plot, Boston and NY -- virtually identical cities that were both boring to free run around due to the designs being tOO accurate to the time and too boring, and a plot that once again made the Templars out to be less than pure evil and simply have a different ideological view. So basically: Desmond's story sucked and went nowhere, Connor's story was interesting and sad and good, gameplay was boring. As for the naval aspect...even worse than the land stuff as it felt so out of place and disconnected from the rest: go to boat, press button, start mission, in random part of the ocean, fight boats, mission ends, back at the homestead. Yawn.

So for AC4... I don't know what to think: the modern story seems odd and that might be because of how Desmond's finished. Hard to get excited about THAT aspect of AC when the other one crash and burned so awfully. But then you look at the ancestor and idk... I'm not fond of the setting, being only a few decades prior to the Revolution and Connor -- I;m over the 1700's... I want a brand new time period: Feudal Japan, Ming Dynasty in China, Elizabethan England, whatever! I don't want redcoat brits, near or in the americas, muskets and bayonets and pirates and all of it. Sooo over it haha. But then you look at gameplay and the naval stuff does indeed look better than AC3's since it now applies a similar idea as the land-based stuff of all the AC's to the ocean, giving us free roam. You cna let go of the wheel at any time, board enemy ships whenever you want provided they're damaged enough, etc. Looks a lot more fun than AC3 but that's not what AC is to me so I won't be spending too much time there. Moving on we get to the cities. From what I've seen of Nassau -- it barely counts as a city and is more of this game's version of Forli...or one of the small cities from AC2 or something. It doesn't look too great for parkour. Kingston...basically a prettier looking Boston or NY and with better placed trees to facilitate movement throughout it more. So it looks slightly better than the cities from AC3. Then we come to Havana and Havana looks more or less like an AC2-era city. I can't quite tell what the density is but aside from the cathedral and maybe one or two more spots...there doesn't seem to be many large towers to climb and those were prevalent in AC2, heck even in AC1. Havana obviously looks a LOT better than anything in AC3 but I still just can't tell how it stacks up against AC2, ACB, or ACR. As for the parkour itself... hard to say for sure since I've yet to play but if it's the same as AC3...itwill feel too automated and I hope that doesn't hurt how fun Havana actually is. I miss when we still had to do SOMETHING and would have to occasionally press A to leap up and then hold B to grab a higher up ledge. Now the game just automatically does it. As for Edward's story... not sure. I liked Altair's, Ezio's, and Connor's so to this date, the historical story has not disappointed. It'll be odd to play as primarily a pirate instead of an assassin for most of the game but if this is the only time or at least the last time for awhile where they give us a story of a more neutral party...so be it.

ExtremeOutsider
11-27-2013, 04:39 AM
[QUOTE=Omegatr0n;9401557]Hi, first off everyone is entitled to his own opinion. I agree Edward is a fun character, imo a lot better then Conner but i dont agree that its nice that its about someone not living by the code of the Creed. The game is called Assassin's Creed afterall. As I said before im still playing so dont know how its going to end but im 30% ingame and I really dont get the Assassins Creed part. yes he has hidden blades but thats it. AC 1- AC revelations imo was about the creed. AC3 im not so sure about, more about a indian with daddy issues. AC 4 is about a pirate bumping into the Creed.

I dont know but im getting the feeling it was a marketing strategy aswell, they know that if they put "Assassin's Creed" in front of it then more people will get exicted about it then "hey this is our new game called Edward -The Life of A Pirate".

Maybe I'm just a sucker for the AC lore, who knows haha but i hope they will go back to the lore, for me thats what i really liked (but they kind of killed it with the lame desmond ending in AC3).

I still hope that some day we will get an Assassin's Creed game set in Japan. I wanna go Samurai.[






AC 4 has a bad *** who actually does what he wants . More games need characters like Edward

Landruner
11-27-2013, 07:18 AM
If Ubisoft want to improve their sosial stealth they need to take the sosial stealth from the Hitman series. Give us the ability to use enemy clothing, Ashraf said they tried, they should try again but this time they should:

Return the blend button, make it limited like the instinct from Hitman.

Ability to take enemy clothing/armor.

The detection system can be one out of two:

Either the kind of guard you take the clothing from can detect you or a special guard that is made for trying to find you.

Hitman: Same mission design for assassination missions & sosial stealth.

Splinter Cell: Same mission design for infiltration missions, idetical system to choose gear and weapons before missions & stealth.

Thief: Not identical but a harder combat system.

That could be an opening to something new and if re-worked with the AC mechanics it could give something new and more interesting for the Assassin Parts whatever the character can do or be on the side.

Landruner
11-27-2013, 07:29 AM
Maybe it's bc of how much I like the worlds of AC3 and 4, but they are my favorite. I also think the overall mechanics are better. The stories are ok. It's really just the mission structure that hasn't really reached that epicness yet. It's getting better. My only let downs for ac4 were the lack of varied side events in the cities (random encounters), the blending capabilities between any two people, the lack of recruits abilities aka ambushing, sniping, disguised guards, etc (they could have replaced the assassin recruits with your pirates).

going along with that last statement, they could have really done the whole assassin recruits with 5 or 6 unique pirates who eventually become assassins like edward and adewale.

I agree with you about the mission structures and their lack of variation ( Besides they are totally recycled since the past games without really having changer or improved) - I also regret the lack of event encounters in the cities and the absence of new abilities for the social Blend and some other stuff I already mentioned in some other threads as well - Anyway the game is still fun, enjoyable and it does not suck, I include it in my list of good games, but that is not a winner.

Hrafnagud72
11-27-2013, 07:50 AM
AC3 was atrocious. I nearly didn't buy AC4 because of it I was on the fence about it. And I am now really unsure about buying another AC title.

AC4 was an improvement on AC3, but only barely. I like that they brought back the armor system, I like that they had some more interesting outfit. The weapon system was improved; I did notice that it is harder to take down enemies in open combat with inferior weapons. I did like what they did with the notoriety system, with the hunter ships and such. I like that when in combat with guards and I run out of their range other guards I run past do not attack me. I always found that illogical in the past as they would have no way to communicate to each other that there is an enemy on the run. It feels more realistic. I also like the pistols and the chain shots, it did help to break the enemies up and make it easier to kill them. Especially useful for when you are swarmed. The side activities did have some nice elements, the harpooning, underwater treasure, etc. I do wish there were more assassin contracts though. I liked the hunting animals to upgrade but I do feel like you are kinda forced into it. Woulda be nice to be able to buy them too. I like that they brought back some of the mystery with the Mayan and Templar armor sets. Though those would been nice if they had been more secretive like the Ezio versions. Also some variety in finding the items woulda been nice. Climbing on top of a stone pillar and then looking under a rock a bunch of times is kinda boring. The templar missions were nice.

Edward was on ok character. I didn't find him all that amazing, I liked him better than Connor but his story was flat. I found his story hard to follow and connect with. The story line seemed kind of broken. It could possibly be because of the long intervals between missions where I am forced to hunt ships in order to upgrade my own for the mission. Either way, I could not connect to the character and I found myself lost in what was happening in the story because it was boring. I'm not big on the ships; I expected it because it is after all a pirate but I didn't really enjoy the ships. I didn't really feel like an assassin when firing cannons at enemy ships. The sailing kind of feels a lot like the boring horseback riding from city to city in AC1. The upgrading system was a bit annoying. Forcing me to hunt ships down for metal so I could upgrade. Boarding ships was also kind of annoying. I felt that there should have been a set limit of people aboard the ship and you need to kill a percentage of them to take over the ship. However, I can stand in one spot and enemies will spawn and swarm me until I can complete the missions. I did find it overwhelming at times when on enemy ships. I also felt like the crew was kinda useless. They didn't help too much when boarding so I don't really know what I needed them for.

The animus fragments and hacking computers, what was the point of this other than for an achievement?

And the story line in the modern day...wtf? So boring that I don't even remember the characters name. Did they even tell you what it was? I found this story line extremely boring and confusing. There was no closure on Desmond except for a small video from a computer you hack. Obviously her saved the world, but how did the rest of the story play out? How did Abstergo take over? How did this guy get where he is? Who in the hell is this guy? And the small appearances of Shaun and Rebecca? What did that have to do with anything? I'm guessing they are going to play that out in the next one? The modern day felt aimless and pointless.

The ending...came out of no where. It played out over several years and it was sudden. I wasn't expecting it. I was surprised the game was over. I felt like I was just starting to get into the character and really becoming something and it just ends.

I play games for the story line, not for the side stuff. That is stuff I do after I have finished the game because I like the game so much I want to keep playing. I want the main storyline(s) to be great. And this is just lacking. I didn't feel like it was worthy of the title Assassin's Creed. I didn't feel like an assassin, I didn't connect with anyone in the game, and besides Edward, Ade, and Kidd, I don't really remember any other characters names. I felt confused and wondering aimlessly in the modern storyline.

So...That's how I feel. I am disappointed, again. The game is better than the previous but not by much. The story is boring, the modern story is flat and confusing. The game play is almost there but the story needs so much work. The characters need so much work and more depth. Let's have an assassin next time. I am tired of playing children and whining characters. It would be awesome if we could get into a different era, I am not feeling the colonial era. Something Asian would be cool or something in Europe. Maybe Germany, Spain, or Ireland.

HiddenKiller612
11-27-2013, 07:56 AM
Wah wah wah.

DarktheMagister
11-27-2013, 08:11 AM
The modern day story is a LOT deeper than people give it credit for. But I guess most people don't care about that kind of thing. Its an expanded universe now. There's books, comics, websites, online games, etc. and they all tie in to the modern story.

But most people are just playing the game for the content on the disc, so I can see why they'd feel that its a "let down".... but thats what you get when you only look at one piece of the puzzle.
Expanded universes are like that. If you're not REALLY invested in it....you miss the bus.

For example.... most people who play AC only for the Single Player... probably didn't know who Daniel Cross even was in 3. Most of those that don't play the Multiplayer don't know who Laetitia England is.... or Juhani Otso Berg..... even though these characters are kind of big players in the modern day story. If you don't immerse yourself in all the content that the universe (or even just the games (Single and Multiplayer)) have to offer there are a lot of things that will feel lackluster.

DarktheMagister
11-27-2013, 08:15 AM
The ONLY complaint I can throw at the Modern Day Story is that I feel the way they handled the removal of Lucy Stillman from the plot was.....sloppy and possibly damaging to the plotline. But I assume that had more to do with the actual voice actress and Ubi scrambling to fix it. IMO hiring a different VA and not radically altering the plot makes more sense.

xCHEMISTx
11-27-2013, 08:18 AM
The time period and setting seems to be a reoccurring topic from this critic of the game. I agree that the era seems to be overdone now after AC3 and AC4 both now have been from roughly around the same time periods. I'm sure we will return to a earlier period in the next instalment but AC4 is what it is and overall it is a great game with good reviews so although there is a small majority that may be upset with the game it most definitely shouldn't be remembered as a game that 'sucked'. Maybe someone should start another thread with some ideas and suggestions for AC5.

DarktheMagister
11-27-2013, 08:33 AM
I'm still thinking AC5 will be the British Raj.

Its got a lot of things going for it that they've already worked on:
jungle environments
huntable animals
impressive architecture
ruins
heavily populated cities
a large gap between rich and poor
a proper setting for naval combat
the ability to reuse Red Coat enemies again
black powder level technology so they can keep guns
piracy
AND an oppressive military regime.

BoBwUzHeRe1138
11-27-2013, 08:55 AM
I'm still thinking AC5 will be the British Raj.

Its got a lot of things going for it that they've already worked on:
jungle environments
huntable animals
impressive architecture
ruins
heavily populated cities
a large gap between rich and poor
a proper setting for naval combat
the ability to reuse Red Coat enemies again
black powder level technology so they can keep guns
piracy
AND an oppressive military regime.

What time period is it? If it's 1700's...do not want. Not that the idea is bad and actually, from what you said, sounds at LEAST decent if not pretty awesome but I'm tired of this time period. I want to move to something different and then come back to this later on.

Kagurra
11-27-2013, 09:05 AM
What time period is it? If it's 1700's...do not want. Not that the idea is bad and actually, from what you said, sounds at LEAST decent if not pretty awesome but I'm tired of this time period. I want to move to something different and then come back to this later on.

I want something different. Something foreign again. Asia or Russia, or someplace in Europe that isn't anywhere near Italy, or Spain and England (enemies in AC4). I don't know.

xCHEMISTx
11-27-2013, 09:21 AM
What time period is it? If it's 1700's...do not want.

The British Raj was in India in the period from 1858 to 1947.

BoBwUzHeRe1138
11-27-2013, 09:37 AM
I want something different. Something foreign again. Asia or Russia, or someplace in Europe that isn't anywhere near Italy, or Spain and England (enemies in AC4). I don't know.

I'd be down with Elizabethan England but not Victorian England, not England during the 1700's... The only reason Elizabethan England would be fun is that it'd be similar to the Ezio trilogy -- it'd be during England's Renaissance, you've got Queen Elizabeth, William Shakespeare, the Globe Theatre, Tudors, Guy Fawkes, Gun Powder Treason and Plot, Spanish Armada, stuff with the Protestan Reformation, Stonehenge would easily be a site important to TOWCB, Roanoke (if we want a brief return to the New World for a single mission), reintroduction of outfit dyes, armor could make a return in the same way it was in AC2 only hopefully they will have made it possible to FREAKING UNEQUIP, guns would be available but not as widely used as they are in the 1700's, and lots of things would be ripe for an AC game. It'd be somewhat nostalgic for AC2/ACB because of the Renaissance flair but still different since the cultures of England and Italy were different plus it'd be set quite awhile after Ezio's time (he was in the late 1400's/early 1500's whereas this would be late 1500's/early 1600's. If you want to connect the games more, you could have an Auditore, a son or daughter or whatever of Ezio's visiting England during one memory.

I would love Asia though... Ming Dynasty or various other times in China, Feudal Japan, I'm down.

shobhit7777777
11-27-2013, 09:42 AM
British Raj would be epic. But I don't think we'll ever see it.

Omegatr0n
11-27-2013, 10:28 AM
I would love Asia though... Ming Dynasty or various other times in China, Feudal Japan, I'm down.


+1

DarktheMagister
11-27-2013, 11:30 AM
British Raj would be epic. But I don't think we'll ever see it.

You think so? I mean... the patterns are there.... and there have been comments made by devs saying they'd like to do one in that time period.

Not to mention the current AC Brahman comics.

ze_topazio
11-27-2013, 12:49 PM
I'm kind of getting tired of killing British soldiers, a third game in a row with British soldiers as the main enemies may me a little too much.

DarktheMagister
11-27-2013, 08:07 PM
It's not something that can really be avoided. They did kind of get themselves everywhere.

OR in the immortal words of one CGP Grey:

"Because EMPIRE!!!!"

RoBg03
11-27-2013, 10:53 PM
I think a lot of people kinda got spoiled because, ezio was such a great character, and we've been trying to recapture that feeling ever since. personally i liked ac3, i don't get all the hate i see on here for it...again i think its the ezio hangover effect. i think i've enjoyed ac4 the most of any ac game since 2. it was a fresh take on things and breathed some life into the series. I'm a big history buff, and while black flag didn't have the same historic locales, and the cities paled in comparison to rennisance italy, playing pirate in the age of tall ships was great. I also liked that edward was more pirate than assassin. i don't think we needed another stoic character like altair/conner.

Getout22
11-28-2013, 01:53 AM
I never finished AC1 after the 3 city of doing the same thing over and over I was done with it. I got ac2 as a gift and never opened it. When the PS4 was announced I put a hold on watch dogs. ACBF was not even on my radar. WHen they pushed back watch dogs I thought I was screwed. I do not play sports games, Some driving games, and 1st person shooters I only play on the PC. So I decided to get ACBF. Started of in Havan and was like this is going to be just like AC1 but with better graphic. Then I got out in the open Sea and had a blast. I do not 100% any games but with ACBF I am close. I just beat the 4 legendry ships last night and only have some random stuff to pick up out at see.

I really enjoyed ACBF.

Dev_Anj
11-28-2013, 04:50 AM
IThe sailing kind of feels a lot like the boring horseback riding from city to city in AC1.

An exaggeration. In the ocean, you don't get randomly attacked for sailing too fast. In Assassin's Creed 1, I honestly don't remember battles breaking out dynamically between the warring factions in the Kingdom, the weather changing dynamically and affecting your visibility or movement, animals moving about, shops to visit in between, sidequests of any kind being present outside of climbing viewpoints which was generally more tedious than challenging, especially considering how so many of them used the same layout, and collecting King Richard flags which was more of a pixel hunt, except throughout a huge land rather than one or two rooms as is the case with most adventure games. I also don't remember being able to capture any forts in the Kingdom and being able to control them to defeat my enemies. Now, I did like the Kingdom as a well detailed environment, and it did show the various villages and settlements scattered throughout the land, while giving off the feeling of a war torn country, but it was honestly incredibly empty on its own, and a big joke if you compare it to the open world of any other Assassin's Creed game, even though up till this point most of them had a lot of pointless sidequests as content. I get that if you sail for too long, it can get boring, but the world is honestly much more filled with appropriate content, and besides you can fast travel to your missions any time you want, unlike Assassin's Creed 1.

Please try and post reasonable statements.

Hrafnagud72
11-28-2013, 05:52 AM
An exaggeration. In the ocean, you don't get randomly attacked for sailing too fast. In Assassin's Creed 1, I honestly don't remember battles breaking out dynamically between the warring factions in the Kingdom, the weather changing dynamically and affecting your visibility or movement, animals moving about, shops to visit in between, sidequests of any kind being present outside of climbing viewpoints which was generally more tedious than challenging, especially considering how so many of them used the same layout, and collecting King Richard flags which was more of a pixel hunt, except throughout a huge land rather than one or two rooms as is the case with most adventure games. I also don't remember being able to capture any forts in the Kingdom and being able to control them to defeat my enemies. Now, I did like the Kingdom as a well detailed environment, and it did show the various villages and settlements scattered throughout the land, while giving off the feeling of a war torn country, but it was honestly incredibly empty on its own, and a big joke if you compare it to the open world of any other Assassin's Creed game, even though up till this point most of them had a lot of pointless sidequests as content. I get that if you sail for too long, it can get boring, but the world is honestly much more filled with appropriate content, and besides you can fast travel to your missions any time you want, unlike Assassin's Creed 1.

Please try and post reasonable statements.

That is a reasonable statement. And also an opinion. I did not say anything about being randomly attacked. Actually mentioned nothing at all comparing naval and horseback battles. What I did say was that I found sailing boring, which I also found horseback boring. While I appreciate the fast travel, the initial traveling to those island was boring to me. But I did also find the naval battles, which you are forced to do if you want to upgrade you ship, which you have to do if you want to do the missions, very tedious. Which is also the case on horseback. Again, opinion. Didn't ever say this was the case for every one.

And besides the comment of horseback, I mentioned nothing else of AC1. I liked the story line of AC1 but it is one of the lesser games in the line up. Obviously under AC4 in terms of game play. But you should expect that in a series like this, there should always be improvements.

Dev_Anj
12-02-2013, 04:27 AM
I still don't really understand the complaints of people about the story of Assassin's Creed 4, especially in comparison to Assassin's Creed 2, Brotherhood, and Revelations. All of them had typical Hollywood blockbuster storytelling, with predictable storytelling, sudden shifts in pacing, and problematic characterization. In comparison to Assassin's Creed 1, I'd agree that Assassin's Creed 4's story has problems, because Assassin's Creed 1 atleast had some effort put into characterizing the Templars and showing how Altair's morals conflicted with his tasks and changed him. It still wasn't a great story and had problems, but it did have some standout lines.

I guess it's because people identify with an aristocrat more, or maybe they appreciate the themes of a person coming of age over a person slowly learning lessons and correcting himself(but in some ways Assassin's Creed 4 story could also be considered a coming of age story).

FZeroHero
12-04-2013, 03:08 AM
Agree with the OP 100% to the letter, literally my exact thoughts. While character development was much better in ACBF and I truly felt like a pirate, the character wasn't really cool, he wasn't special in any way, I cared nothing for his wife/family back home and him not being an assassin felt like a major nuisance throughout the entire game. On top of that Naval missions/warfare in general is extremely tedious and completely aggravating at some points.

delta_79_echo
12-04-2013, 03:31 AM
AC 1 was indeed repetitive but it was the first one.It certainly made up for repetitiveness with the innovative climbing and free running plus everything I've mentioned in my first post.If I were to play AC 1 now for the first time it would definitely suck but at that time it was amazing.

i played the first ac when i got revelations and it really wasn't bad. in fact, i enjoyed it. although it repeated the same assassination missions at least 5 times, i liked it, and the story makes way more sense when you play the first one. the reason i play black flags is because of the more different opportunities it offers and to me that what makes black flags great to me

thegreathoo
12-04-2013, 05:26 AM
No. I do too. I bought it for PC and it's terrible. It glitches all the time, and I have the latest i7 PC. I think it's a rip off for PC personally. Also there are controller issues for PC. I feel like I wasted $60. It may be better for consoles.

DarktheMagister
12-04-2013, 05:29 AM
yup it is

TheSpong
12-04-2013, 10:18 AM
I can't say Black Flag sucks, but I can say it's the first AC game I've not bought.

Firstly, Ubi have killed my interest with their cash cow approach. A game a year is too much, and a quick glance here at what has become the traditional bug threads makes it seem as though Ubi can't cope with it either. Secondly, all the boats and pirate stuff simply isn't AC as far I'm concerned, I was mortified when I first heard AC4 was born out of what was nothing more than a mini-game in AC3. Thank God Den Defence in Revelations was universally hated otherwise that would've probably taken up 80% of AC3.

For the time being, I'm out of the series. While it's not solely Black Flag's fault, it sure as hell contributed to my decision.

Furious_Lunatic
12-04-2013, 04:31 PM
I've actually played much, much worse...

luckyto
12-04-2013, 05:19 PM
AC 1 was indeed repetitive but it was the first one.It certainly made up for repetitiveness with the innovative climbing and free running plus everything I've mentioned in my first post.If I were to play AC 1 now for the first time it would definitely suck but at that time it was amazing.

I am a HUGE fan of AC1. My absolute favorite in the series, but Black Flag is a very close second. Free running and climbing are still present, and for the most part, are more versatile than ever before.

The only thing that Black Flag has suffered on is combat. And it suffers woefully.

But I just fail to see how the other complaints are valid --- though I respect your right to have your opinion. But I just don't see it.

TAZ427
12-04-2013, 06:52 PM
Well everyone has there opinion. Personally, I'd put this as one of my favorites.

AC1 - while fresh and I loved it in general, grew boring and tedious and is the only one of the series I did not complete.
AC2 - The best one IMHO. What AC1 should have been. They learned to not make things too monotonous and great world.
AC2 B and R - Both great extensions with some annoyances added in that just didn't work.
AC3 - Probably 2nd worst of the game, the Naval battles felt like a chore and not an experience. The game was too much of 'gotta do a ton of boring crap to do anything', traveling around was a major PIA.
AC4 - The 2nd best one IMHO. Yeah, you might not like something, but you can quickly switch it up. Go here, go there, do some of this, do some that, basically a much for free to do what you wanted. The Naval combat didn't feel like a chore to be done, nothing really felt like a chore to be done, but even if it was, you could do a little bit of it, and go do something else, come back and do a little bit more, all with a very good fast travel system that gets you to right what you want to do after you've been to areas. That's the genius of this. Especially on PS4 as it takes a couple seconds and you're there as opposed to what felt like forever on previous AC games (which is quicker, running across 1/3 of Boston or Fast Traveling - Things like that was annoying but non-existent at least on the PS4.)

Alepa132
12-30-2013, 11:22 PM
I think Assassins Creed IV sucked compared to Assassins Creed II. The combat in AC 4 is boring. Why can you only use the sword and the hidden blades? In AC 3 you could use knives, axes, tomahawks and bluntweapons! Even in AC 2 and 1 you could use a knife. The combat is also really boring and annoying. There are enemies that you can only beat by countering. That is something that they seriously should change. In AC 3 you could take down different enemies with different weapons, which was awesome, and made the combat amusing, even though it was a bit too easy as well. The only game where the combat was hard enough and really good was AC 1. It acquired skill. You could not just rape the buttons, you had to press the right time to get combos.
The guns are not fun to use, and when used on, they are annoying as ****. If someone shoots, they can never miss. You can run, you can jump, but they always hit you. Once I jumped from the mast of a ship while a solider was aiming at me, and i died in the ****ing air.

Secondly, why did they have to base the game on sailing? Yes, I know they are pirates, but I feel like the only thing I do when I'm not in combat is sailing and ****ing eavesdropping, which also kinda sucks.

The map is also really boring. It seriously had potential, but no. When I played the first mission and chased the assassin, I though that you would be able to sprint around in the jungle for real, but you can only walk through certain paths in it. It's like playing ****ing Crash Bandicoot (always following paths) and that was fun when I was a kid. If you think about it, there is not a lot of open world experience on foot, because the paths are often pretty similar on most of the islands, and they also always lead only to one place. It would be more fun if at least the paths could sometimes split into two or three paths leading into different parts of the island (this may exist in the game in some island, but if it does, it should be more of it. I have so far only walked in boring one way only jungle paths.)

The story is annoying. It feels like nothing is happening. I think I have played through 50-60% of the story, and the only cool thing so far was the beginning, the meeting with the assassins, and also maybe the first time I hacked a computer. Do not argue with me about this, because this is only my opinion. In the future, nothing interesting is happening. You get some info about Desmond, which could have been cool, but the info you get has nothing to do with anything. I have access to level 2 doors now, and I would not say that listening to Desmonds phone or stories from the past has been very interesting. The only really interesting part, was the video you got to see when you hacked the first computer. I also look forward to see why the tech guy is using me, but I'm not sure if I want to play through the game anymore. It seems that they run out of ideas a bit. In AC 3 so many missions had action, and they felt so much more meaningful (even though every AC game so far has had a couple (or sometimes more) uninteresting missions).

This is only a few of the things I find annoying about AC 4. As I play, I could probably write an essay about things that make the other AC games better and more fun to play than AC 4
I am aware that I had some strong opinions here, but this is just what I feel when I play the game. Don't hate me :P

SeanC_1967
12-31-2013, 12:02 AM
Of course not but for me, this is the best AC yet. I know in terms of the Assassins v Templars and the whole mystery behind it was less explored in this one but it doesn't bother me. Other than AC3, I've really enjoyed every installment yet, although they were very repetitive - the combat, the big cities with big buildings etc. But they were fun and had a good story to them. Then when AC3 came along, I couldn't wait. The fact that they were moving away from cities with huge buildings had me excited because it was different, but that game was a disappointment.

AC4, though, is just so much fun. The map is huge, and being able to just sail about, island to island, is amazing. I agree that most of the islands are boring and not interesting, that's probably my biggest problem with it. But it surprises me that so many aren't a fan of the game. Yes the story isn't as good as some of the others game but the characters involved, including Blackbeard, Mary etc. are excellent.

I personally prefer Edward to Ezio as well.

oliacr
12-31-2013, 12:11 AM
This is the best AC yet-gameplay wise. The rest is. Just a quote.

But that's a long tale for another day, Mr. Faulkner.

Honey-McBadger
12-31-2013, 12:17 AM
I'm just going to pick up on one main point from the original post - taking a quote of context is usually unfair, but I've heard it a lot, so I think it's fair enough in this case.

Edward wasn't even an assassin,
The approach this game took to the Creed was always going to be controversial. For most of the game, that quoted statement is right. He's a pirate, not an assassin. An element of that decision was because it makes for better gameplay, and so better reviews/sales. When they have a valid reason for doing that, I don't see how it's a problem. I think that valid reason is that it provided a new look at the Creed - which is why this game has been controversial among the fans on the forum.

I think the game's purpose really suffered from the lack of investigations in sequence 12, which were meant to be included (Darby McDevitt's Initiates Q&A). If they were present, the message may have been clearer. Darby McDevitt has said he wanted to show why the Creed was important in this game.

For most of the game, the accusations Edward faces from his opponents are spot on - he is just selfish and in it for the money. What was the result? To quote a song that's relevant for a reason,
"And all the harm that e'er I've done
Alas it was to none but me"
When he finally accepts and understand the Creed, it gives Edward what's he's been missing, and the beneficial results of this can be seen in the final sequences of the game. As I said, the new perspective the order was viewed with was a risky move in terms of keeping the main fans happy, but for one, I'm glad to see some different angles on the story - as long as they are done right, as I feel was the case with AC4.

Basically, the point of AC4 is that we see the benefits of him becoming an assassin.

MnemonicSyntax
12-31-2013, 12:21 AM
Not only that, but people say "he wasn't an Assassin."

Well, dang. Altair wasn't an Assassin. He had his rank taken away. Ezio didn't become an Assassin until nearly the end of AC2. Like Edward! Connor didn't become an Assassin until the latter half of AC3 because you spent the first half playing his daddy.

"Enzio 4 evvvaaaa!!!!!11!!1!111"

silvermercy
12-31-2013, 12:35 AM
Not only that, but people say "he wasn't an Assassin."

Well, dang. Altair wasn't an Assassin. He had his rank taken away. Ezio didn't become an Assassin until nearly the end of AC2. Like Edward! Connor didn't become an Assassin until the latter half of AC3 because you spent the first half playing his daddy.

"Enzio 4 evvvaaaa!!!!!11!!1!111"
lol

But, true, I don't understand the complaint either, especially since it seems like all other assassins were not exactly operating as real assassins until a considerable time had passed.

marcbryan
12-31-2013, 02:22 AM
Better than 2 and Brotherhood in my opinion. I do agree however that the 'jungles' were disappointingly linear. Although, the jungle is extremely dense and would not be very easy to get through in real life. Also, assassin's aren't real sooooooooo…….

zI_Deadshot
12-31-2013, 02:28 AM
Nope, the singleplayer isn't really that intriguing for me and when the multiplayer isn't disconnecting me from the match the whole game is crashing. not desirable.

pirate1802
12-31-2013, 04:31 AM
I liked seeing the conflict from a neutral perspective, in fact, if anything he's one of the 'truest' assassins yet. He wasn't born into it, nor did he join for personal reasons but found out where he belonged, his place in the world - with the assassins. He just wanted to make things right, he had ruined everything around him and found solace in a cause he once exploited for his own gain.

For this post, I want to hug you. He indeed is the only one who is not born into the Order, not pushed into it by a tragedy or a cause, but observes both Orders from an outsider's perspective and after weighing them both decides to join one. His cause is the truest.

Shahkulu101
12-31-2013, 08:36 AM
For this post, I want to hug you. He indeed is the only one who is not born into the Order, not pushed into it by a tragedy or a cause, but observes both Orders from an outsider's perspective and after weighing them both decides to join one. His cause is the truest.

I thank you for this belated reply, HUG ME BRUTHA!

pirate1802
12-31-2013, 08:49 AM
*huge bear hug*

M0nsterSkillz
12-31-2013, 02:00 PM
I see what your saying here & in some ways i agree, however i would put it down to the series moving forward in time more to the present day which is why it will feel different, there is always conspiracies in AC, i mean take black flag for example, all the mayan culture art & stones throughout the game. Some of the things the characters talk about lead to conspiracies etc, i believe it's what you make of the game. My favorite of them all was brotherhood & revelations.

inferno33222
12-31-2013, 07:30 PM
I can understand if you didn't like the heavy focus on naval or the pirate storyline. But to say it sucked? It's a game that is fantastic at what it does. I think you need to take your fanboy-hat off. It certainly doesn't suck, even if it wasn't what you were looking for in an AC game.

ali-severi
12-31-2013, 07:44 PM
AC3 was atrocious. I nearly didn't buy AC4 because of it I was on the fence about it. And I am now really unsure about buying another AC title.

AC4 was an improvement on AC3, but only barely. I like that they brought back the armor system, I like that they had some more interesting outfit. The weapon system was improved; I did notice that it is harder to take down enemies in open combat with inferior weapons. I did like what they did with the notoriety system, with the hunter ships and such. I like that when in combat with guards and I run out of their range other guards I run past do not attack me. I always found that illogical in the past as they would have no way to communicate to each other that there is an enemy on the run. It feels more realistic. I also like the pistols and the chain shots, it did help to break the enemies up and make it easier to kill them. Especially useful for when you are swarmed. The side activities did have some nice elements, the harpooning, underwater treasure, etc. I do wish there were more assassin contracts though. I liked the hunting animals to upgrade but I do feel like you are kinda forced into it. Woulda be nice to be able to buy them too. I like that they brought back some of the mystery with the Mayan and Templar armor sets. Though those would been nice if they had been more secretive like the Ezio versions. Also some variety in finding the items woulda been nice. Climbing on top of a stone pillar and then looking under a rock a bunch of times is kinda boring. The templar missions were nice.

Edward was on ok character. I didn't find him all that amazing, I liked him better than Connor but his story was flat. I found his story hard to follow and connect with. The story line seemed kind of broken. It could possibly be because of the long intervals between missions where I am forced to hunt ships in order to upgrade my own for the mission. Either way, I could not connect to the character and I found myself lost in what was happening in the story because it was boring. I'm not big on the ships; I expected it because it is after all a pirate but I didn't really enjoy the ships. I didn't really feel like an assassin when firing cannons at enemy ships. The sailing kind of feels a lot like the boring horseback riding from city to city in AC1. The upgrading system was a bit annoying. Forcing me to hunt ships down for metal so I could upgrade. Boarding ships was also kind of annoying. I felt that there should have been a set limit of people aboard the ship and you need to kill a percentage of them to take over the ship. However, I can stand in one spot and enemies will spawn and swarm me until I can complete the missions. I did find it overwhelming at times when on enemy ships. I also felt like the crew was kinda useless. They didn't help too much when boarding so I don't really know what I needed them for.

The animus fragments and hacking computers, what was the point of this other than for an achievement?

And the story line in the modern day...wtf? So boring that I don't even remember the characters name. Did they even tell you what it was? I found this story line extremely boring and confusing. There was no closure on Desmond except for a small video from a computer you hack. Obviously her saved the world, but how did the rest of the story play out? How did Abstergo take over? How did this guy get where he is? Who in the hell is this guy? And the small appearances of Shaun and Rebecca? What did that have to do with anything? I'm guessing they are going to play that out in the next one? The modern day felt aimless and pointless.

The ending...came out of no where. It played out over several years and it was sudden. I wasn't expecting it. I was surprised the game was over. I felt like I was just starting to get into the character and really becoming something and it just ends.

I play games for the story line, not for the side stuff. That is stuff I do after I have finished the game because I like the game so much I want to keep playing. I want the main storyline(s) to be great. And this is just lacking. I didn't feel like it was worthy of the title Assassin's Creed. I didn't feel like an assassin, I didn't connect with anyone in the game, and besides Edward, Ade, and Kidd, I don't really remember any other characters names. I felt confused and wondering aimlessly in the modern storyline.

So...That's how I feel. I am disappointed, again. The game is better than the previous but not by much. The story is boring, the modern story is flat and confusing. The game play is almost there but the story needs so much work. The characters need so much work and more depth. Let's have an assassin next time. I am tired of playing children and whining characters. It would be awesome if we could get into a different era, I am not feeling the colonial era. Something Asian would be cool or something in Europe. Maybe Germany, Spain, or Ireland.

THIS!

I agree with you. I like Edward, I mean, he was funny and not so stupid as Connor was. I didn't like Connor in fact I think Haytham was better charcacter. But I really don't get the Modern Day story line. Really, I thought that they were going to explain to us WTF was happening, but no. WTF happened with Desmond for real? Who was this guy? Why he has his memory? What's the connection between Edward and Desmond????
Is this guy DESMOND someway? Because Connor is his ancestor and so is Haytham and Edward. But why this guy has his memory?? Why is Shaun and Rebecca with this guy? So many questions!
And the end... Well, the end was... strange. I don't know what I think about it.

And I think that Mary was a great character.

silvermercy
12-31-2013, 07:56 PM
I like Edward, I mean, he was funny and not so stupid as Connor was
I give up on life... -_-

adventurewomen
12-31-2013, 08:08 PM
I like Edward, I mean, he was funny and not so stupid as Connor was.
*Facepalms*

http://i1161.photobucket.com/albums/q514/Hysmofyteligok/Gifs and sparkly stuff/1275389857_naked-gun-facepalm.gif

I-Like-Pie45
12-31-2013, 08:21 PM
adventurewomen, you remember what the forum drama queens did the last time you posted something like that...

killzab
12-31-2013, 08:42 PM
adventurewomen, you remember what the forum drama queens did the last time you posted something like that...

Not this again ... but I agree with her, Connor had his flaws but he wasn't stupid ...

MnemonicSyntax
12-31-2013, 08:56 PM
I find it pretty funny that people state AC2 is better than Black Flag. Besides gameplay mechanics, both Assassins are quite similar in many ways.

ali-severi
12-31-2013, 09:09 PM
Sorry people lmao
I really don't like Connor, but hey... that's how life is. :rolleyes:

AMS_AGENT_000
01-01-2014, 10:01 PM
I wouldn't go as far as to say that ACIV sucks. In-fact, I think it's no more innovative than the other AC titles were during their year in the spotlight. IMO, ACIV copy and pastes all the on-land systems of AC3 and is overrated simply because of its expanded naval element. All the core issues that plague the series still exist here and everyone is apparently so impressed by the naval aspect that everything else is forgotten and forgiven.

EDIT: I like Connor much more than Edward. Sure, Connor is a morose, brash, and introspective guy but he is also a noble man who help all with their troubles assuming they are not templars or redcoats. Edward is a money-grubbing, selfish, foul-mouthed liar who does nothing for others.

SixKeys
01-01-2014, 10:25 PM
I wouldn't go as far as to say that ACIV sucks. In-fact, I think it's no more innovative than the other AC titles were during their year in the spotlight. IMO, ACIV copy and pastes all the on-land systems of AC3 and is overrated simply because of its expanded naval element. All the core issues that plague the series still exist here and everyone is apparently so impressed by the naval aspect that everything else is forgotten and forgiven.


I was more impressed by stealth than naval, frankly. Perhaps "impressed" is too strong a word, there are still many problems with stealth but at least I was able to have fun with stealth again unlike in AC3.

AMS_AGENT_000
01-01-2014, 10:31 PM
I can agree that stealth seems a bit more feasible here because of the increase in stalking zones and more flexibility with some objectives. However, the actual mechanics of stealth have not changed from and are the exact same as AC3. The social stealth,corner grab, aerial assassinations, unarmed chokes, moving bodies, silent weapons (blow-dart or bow and arrow), and stalking zone + haystacks all existed in AC3. In fact most if not all of the on-foot assassin mechanics have not been altered in any way since AC3. Also, the AI is still just terrible for stealth (and combat).

mikeyf1999
01-01-2014, 10:38 PM
But in the end how did Connor come into existence

mikeyf1999
01-01-2014, 10:40 PM
Desmond's DNA is taken and sampled
If u want wtf happened did u hack the computers (all)
I completely understood wat happened

dave25969
01-20-2014, 04:31 AM
i wouldnt say that AC4 sucks, its actually a very good game, but i do somewhat agree with the OP myself.. i like AC, i like pirates, and i even have all of the Pirates of the Caribbean movies, but i just dont like the 2 combined.. i honestly just dont like the naval missions.. the parts of the game that are on land i thoroughly enjoy.. it just feels like its more about being a pirate than anything and could almost be its own IP.. i salute Ubisoft for trying new things and its quite a good game, just doesnt fully do it for me..

Dev_Anj
01-20-2014, 04:42 AM
Why did this thread need to be brought back? Isn't it clear that the original post just a complaint with no constructiveness in it?

Landruner
01-21-2014, 06:19 AM
Why did this thread need to be brought back? Isn't it clear that the original post just a complaint with no constructiveness in it?

And why not? - Dave25829 wrote an interesting response to an interesting thread and in my book I am glad to see that threat back on the top of the topics.
I did not think that the original OP and thread was irrelevant or even complaining about anything - it was an just opinion, with a clumsy title that is all!
The author of that thread was making a point and even if I do not totally agree with what he/she wrote, i respect that opinion and point. I believe and I bet that the OP probably moved on since especially after reading the lame posts from the fantards flaming that thread or any opinion some weeks ago, and we can't blame the OP for doing so...

Assassin_M
01-21-2014, 06:22 AM
And why not? - Dave25829 wrote an interesting response to an interesting thread and in my book I am glad to see that threat back on the top of the topics.
I did not think that the original OP and thread was irrelevant or even complaining about anything - it was an just opinion, with a clumsy title that is all!
The author of that thread was making a point and even if I do not totally agree with what he/she wrote, i respect that opinion and point. I believe and I bet that the OP probably moved on since especially after reading the lame posts from the fantards flaming that thread or any opinion some weeks ago, and we can't blame the OP for doing so...
There did seem to be some sort of "craze" towards AC IV naysayers and critics. Hypocritical, really...since some of those who flamed the OP whine about some Connor fans who don't want anything negative said about Connor...

Landruner
01-21-2014, 06:37 AM
There did seem to be some sort of "craze" towards AC IV naysayers and critics. Hypocritical, really...since some of those who flamed the OP whine about some Connor fans who don't want anything negative said about Connor...

Well, i just remember that thread for being one of the first responding to it and getting then into some arguments with some people for just mentioning that I understood the OP' s opinion. I did not read all the other comments then. I just remember that back in time, (You were gone) and it was hard for anyone daring writing something negative about AC4 or a world of pain for anyone having some new idea of gameplay for the future games.

cjdavies
01-21-2014, 12:20 PM
I remember 2007 when I first played AC 1 everything fascinated me.The innovative combat,the building climbing,the conspiracies,the war fought in shadows by two secret orders,the philosophical ideas,the modern day story,etc...I instantly fell in love with the Assassin's Creed universe.It was a great time to be a gamer !

Then came the Ezio saga with most of the gameplay being the same but much more polished,better story,more interesting characters and renaissance Italy which had the most fascinating and beautiful cities ever.

Edward wasn't even an assassin,most missions were boring and repetitive.I'm not going into details because this is not a review.

I can't take you seriously, as AC1 had repetitive missions but no mention of it.

Landruner
01-21-2014, 02:45 PM
I can't take you seriously, as AC1 had repetitive missions but no mention of it.

I am not sure that OP "Sun Tzu GE" meant to say this this way - I understood that AC1 introduced elements, which had been carried over and over without really meeting improvement.
Honestly like i wrote some weeks ago on that same thread, AC1 was an introduction to a new concept and IP - Did the game met the universal acclaim,? No, not really since its missions where the main piece of the game, and they were all build upon the same template.

Sure after 3 missions anyone saw where the game was going, and it was a miss of opportunity. AC2 got the things together and it expanded the concepts in a better way for the game with more variety and side activities. However; post AC2 and ACB, the things did not really changed.

Sure we had different time periods and we met some epic moments and we had a lot of different things to do, but the assassin gameplay did not change much and it is where I feel a weakness in that series. It is not in changing the heroes, the time period and the side activities that people will feel a difference in the evolution of the games.

If AC5 is located in China or Egypt at a different time period,and a different hero that is great, but if the main missions only consist at tailing some guys in the streets, a lot will feel like the new same game did not improve comparing to its predecessors.
Imagine how AC4 would have been if they combined that excellent Pirate side activities with some trilling assassin (part) activities and missions?

TheNerdClub
02-13-2014, 10:05 AM
I agree it is the short game in the series i have spent weeks playing 3's story and i 100% assassin's creed 4 in 6 days from the day it was released. I like that they didn't add fantasy like in george washington dlc in 3

Dome500
02-14-2014, 04:36 PM
One thing I didn't really see was Edward warming to the Creed and embracing it towards the end. Initially his business-only-where-ma-money-at attitude was great and a breath of fresh air....but as I delved deeper...it become annoying. Edward felt a bit flat.

The metamorphosis towards the end was indeed emotional (to me atleast) but still felt abrupt (partially because it spanned over so many years) and unconvincing. Overall it lacked the 'oomph' I was expecting.

This


Obviously, like a lot of other fans I am sure, I feel like AC4 is a hybrid in the franchise or sort off, and I am pretty sure that it will take its own departure for getting its own spin-off being defendant from the AC series and as a pirate game only with AC mechanics (I see that coming up big time!). The game is good, fun and interesting for its adventure part, but this is not the best AC ever made, and I don't think it is.


I agree with you and you are right, but I believe that is a bit the Assassin missions/scenario and their design's templates that start being not innovative, redundant and repetitive that kills the thing for some - I am pretty sure they will have come with new concept with those (Using deeper social stealth; environment stealth and a better AI, more innovative variant in the structure of those missions and the all with more innovation in the Assassin gameplay) the game will have met more positive reactions regarding being an AC or not - despite the orientation of Ed, the main character, and the story.

And this.


With Edward they gave us a third party perspective on the conflict, considering this series have like one million games and will get even more i don't see the problem with having one single game with a main character like Edward.

I agree on the 3rd party perspective. But Edward was just interested in money and infamy, nothing else. He was charming, sure, but his motives felt too flat. And the end of the game, where he joins the Assassins could have been longer. There was a lot more potential here.

I hope they continue the "looking at the Assassin/Templar conflict from a neutral perspective" concept, but I hope that next time the motivations of the main character are not as flat as the ones of Edward.


I agree with you about the mission structures and their lack of variation

Me too.

Loved plantations though.

Also, I'd like to see being able to approach a mission in different ways next time. Forts for example (i know they might not be in the next game, but take it as example for any other side activity like this) should not only be attackable but I should also be able to infiltrate them, disable/sabotage their defensive measures, kill the generals and then call my crew in to conquer it.

Or boarding ships, they should have developed a way to jump off your won ship. climb at another one close by and kill everyone silently and then call my crew to board it.

More variety.

Do this missions either in one way, or another.

But I also agree with you on more variety in the NATURE of specific missions.


The ending...came out of no where. It played out over several years and it was sudden. I wasn't expecting it. I was surprised the game was over. I felt like I was just starting to get into the character and really becoming something and it just ends.

This.

First I though of a sequel, but considering Edward ................sailed back to England and died 11 years after the ending of AC4 (see Assassins Creed wikia) this is very unlikely.

Farlander1991
02-14-2014, 04:58 PM
This has to do a lot with personal perspective (as any opinion is, so that should go without saying), but I think calling Edward's motives flat and boiling them down to just money and fame is... well, a misunderstanding of Edward as a character.

Of course, yes, he wants money and fame, and if you want to boil down him to just a few words, I guess that's fair, but that's also a gross oversimplification. Edward's main motivation is to become a man of quality, and there's a BIG difference. He doesn't want to be just rich, he wants to be somebody worthy and wants to be a part of something he can call family. Yes, Edward's a selfish kinda bastard, but his character arc we see in the game couldn't exist if his motivation was just money. (And on a side note, he's as stubborn as hell and keeps failing and keeps trying, and, ironically enough, as a young Game Designer trying to find my place in the industry (with varying degrees of success) I can absolutely relate to that).


And that goes well with the overlying theme of AC4, which is to find your place in the world and the way to live in it, by exploring the Creed and other philosophies as well. Pretty much almost every character tries to do this, tries to find themselves, tries to find the way they want to live by - from Stede Bonnet's yearning for adventure and a more exciting life, to Hornigold wanting order and being disappointed with the Pirate Republic, to Bart Roberts' main motto.

Dome500
02-14-2014, 05:18 PM
Edward's main motivation is to become a man of quality, and there's a BIG difference.

Sure, but it all comes down to money in the end.

And a lot of what he does opposes what the things he says he wants, like becoming a man of quality.
That's where he falls flat.

Yes he says he wants to make this, but then he goes again and only cares about money in situations.
Then he starts to make something good, explores those philosophies, and abandons them again.
He is so impulsive and the only thing that can hold him longer than a few hours is the thought of treasure and fame.

Sure, I see it as a cool interpretation of human nature. We say and want one thing, but we do the other.

And in the end, I agree, he even finds what he wanted to find all along. The problem is (for me personally) that this very end part where he finds what he wants is too short for me.

dbzk1999
02-14-2014, 11:08 PM
Oh great and I hoped to never see this thread again oh well.......

Dome500
02-14-2014, 11:16 PM
Oh great and I hoped to never see this thread again oh well.......

I have a question. If you never wanted to see this thread again, why do you look in here and post a pointless comment? The thread won't disappear because of your comment. Just saying.

;)

dbzk1999
02-14-2014, 11:55 PM
I have a question. If you never wanted to see this thread again, why do you look in here and post a pointless comment? The thread won't disappear because of your comment. Just saying.

;)
I'm just screwing with ya to be honest I could care less and if u couldn't see it I was joking
Thank you and have a nice day

Delvor
02-18-2014, 10:14 PM
My first post i think.
Just completed black flag and while I don't believe it sucked, I felt let down by the present day storyline which throughout had been my favourite part of the saga.
Now after the disappointing ending of AC3 I hoped for some sort of return for Desmond, who was my favourite character.
Instead we got a faceless avatar who was supposed to be 'us' but i felt it backfired at least for me a I didn't feel connected in any way with this 'avatar' (Will say avatar as its not even a character) you don't get a voice to say anything and that led me not to be so immersed in the gameplay. It was a bit like how the GTA 3's silent character was never as good as the later characters who actually had a personality.

Perhaps my issues with the game stem from preferring the present day storyline as i found that more intriguing and involving us as the players. That Desmond wasn't retrieved by Cryo or something was annoying but I guess i was clutching at straws.

(Sorry if font sizes are at issue or any problems with post, it was hard to read as I was typing at the default size.)

Pr0metheus 1962
02-19-2014, 12:22 AM
Edward wasn't even an assassin,most missions were boring and repetitive.I'm not going into details because this is not a review...

I agree with you on all the other games, but you're way off base with this one.

MasterAssasin84
02-19-2014, 12:43 AM
I remember 2007 when I first played AC 1 everything fascinated me.The innovative combat,the building climbing,the conspiracies,the war fought in shadows by two secret orders,the philosophical ideas,the modern day story,etc...

I instantly fell in love with the Assassin's Creed universe.It was a great time to be a gamer !

Then came the Ezio saga with most of the gameplay being the same but much more polished,better story,more interesting characters and renaissance Italy which had the most fascinating and beautiful cities ever.The cities felt so alive,authentic and the architecture was splendid.I felt so immersed in the beauty of Florence,Venice and Rome.

AC Revelations didn't have the same charm but it made up for it by giving us great closure.It was very emotional living the final days of Altair and seeing the end of Ezio's journey.I can still remember the beginning cutscene:

"My story is one of many thousands,and the world will not suffer if it ends too soon" -Ezio
That line is just completely awesome. Shows how mature and wise Ezio has become.I swear I dropped a tear just now when remembering this quote.

Now we finally arrive to the dark days of AC3 and AC4. I will completely neglect to speak about AC 3 because that game was a disgrace but sadly AC 4 wasn't far from it either.
It's like they forgot what Assassin's Creed was all about and they completely abandoned the spirit of the franchise.Naval combat was tedious,the story was mediocre and just like in AC 3 it felt rushed,uninteresting characters,no charm,no interesting locations(just ugly islands),something about the combat felt annoying,major glitches,Edward wasn't even an assassin,most missions were boring and repetitive.I'm not going into details because this is not a review.

I used to love this franchise so much but now it's just a disappointment and I don't think I will ever play an Assassin's Creed game ever again.




No it did not suck because i am enjoying AC4 but i don't think that it actually warrants the title Assassins Creed 4 as Edward is only an Assassin the last what 3 sequences !

I would say its a very detailed Pirate Game which offers a very unique exploration experience, however i do think the developers have delivered on Edwards character because he is exactly as Ashraf and Derby described before the game was released so i pretty much knew what to expect .

I still prefer AC3 to Black Flag and IMO i think it would have been better suited as an Assassins Creed spin off .

Dome500
02-19-2014, 02:43 AM
No it did not suck because i am enjoying AC4 but i don't think that it actually warrants the title Assassins Creed 4 as Edward is only an Assassin the last what 3 sequences !

I would say its a very detailed Pirate Game which offers a very unique exploration experience, however i do think the developers have delivered on Edwards character because he is exactly as Ashraf and Derby described before the game was released so i pretty much knew what to expect .

I still prefer AC3 to Black Flag and IMO i think it would have been better suited as an Assassins Creed spin off .

Agreed.

Really less Assassin.

Refreshing for 1 game, but it should have been a spin-off and I hope they'll go back to less pirate and more Assassin next time around.

AC2_alex
02-19-2014, 08:59 AM
Agreed.

Really less Assassin.

Refreshing for 1 game, but it should have been a spin-off and I hope they'll go back to less pirate and more Assassin next time around.

100% agree.

Fatal-Feit
02-19-2014, 10:06 AM
Agreed.

Really less Assassin.

Refreshing for 1 game, but it should have been a spin-off and I hope they'll go back to less pirate and more Assassin next time around.


No it did not suck because i am enjoying AC4 but i don't think that it actually warrants the title Assassins Creed 4 as Edward is only an Assassin the last what 3 sequences !

I would say its a very detailed Pirate Game which offers a very unique exploration experience, however i do think the developers have delivered on Edwards character because he is exactly as Ashraf and Derby described before the game was released so i pretty much knew what to expect .

I still prefer AC3 to Black Flag and IMO i think it would have been better suited as an Assassins Creed spin off .

Why the hell should AC:IV be considered a spin-off? It's one of the most ''Assassin's Creed'' of the franchise. It took on the Assassin's Creed and argued both its meaning and integrity, while involving the Templar VS Assassins conflicted in most of its sequences. Edward's development may have not been the cliche Assassin from beginning to end that that we're used to, but that doesn't mean it didn't involve Templars, Assassins, their Creed, or pieces of Eden. I sometimes question if fans can even understand sequels that're more convoluted and less straight forward than the Ezio's Trilogy. And not to mention, there was more stealth than the entire Medieval Saga.

So what if Edward wasn't an Assassin until the last 3 sequences. Last I checked, in AC:2 Ezio became an Assassin in sequence 13, which was followed by 2 missions and then the ending credits. And until then, there was no Assassin's Creed, no real philosophical conflict other than the bland, black & white nature of humanity. Only pure revenge. Which was also followed by AC:B. This franchise is called Assassin's Creed, not Assassins Warriors. Wearing a conspicuously armored white robe and chanting ''Vittoria per gli Assassini!'' while casually holding up a piece of Eden in the middle of the street should be the bigger offender.

Too much piracy in gameplay and plot? Are you guys serious? In the entire Ezio Saga, piracy was Ezio's means to an end. You bought treasure maps, you killed guards protecting loot, you explored entire regions (while discovering hidden messages, collectibles, and loots around every crack & crevices), you've used a boat (took down entire fleets with one too), you've even explored dozens of hidden catacombs and lairs for lost treasures (while killing one too many innocent guards), you helped and supported robbing of the thief guilds, you robbed gold from citizens and guards walking about, and for god's sake, you even loot ammo and supplies from dead/knocked-out victims. And does it need to be an reminder that AC:IV takes place in the Golden Age of Pirates. Yes, pirates.... Yarrrrr-- How dare they make them relevant. I've already explained this in another thread. Pirates were no doubt second in development.

Of all the games to flag for a spin-off, AC:IV should not be the only offender. I'm sorry but I can't help but cringe full heartedly every time I read a ''hurr durr pirate's creed'' post. As a fan, I find these criticism hilariously hypocritical and it leaves a disgusting taste in my mouth.

BK-110
02-19-2014, 10:48 AM
I still don't get how anyone can think that the Ezio trilogy had a better story and more interesting characters than the rest. To me it was the low-point of the series in those aspects. The story was decent enough, no doubt, but the characters, especially Ezio and just about every damn antagonist, were bland good guys and bad guys and philosophies in those games were so disappointingly black-and-white...

Shahkulu101
02-19-2014, 04:52 PM
^ The last two posts - so much yes. People have their idea of a perfect AC game, the heroic Assassin, an epic story from start to finish, some cheesy crap with a golden apple. In short, they want generic blood and thunder. Nobody gives a rats arse about the finer philosophies of the Creed, and ridiculously exclaim that the Creed can only be explored through a 'pure' Assassin - whatever TF that is. Yet, they are fine and dandy with the Ezio games, which apart from ACR (written by a man who is completely and unfairly berated, despite his writing being absolutely top notch and relevant to the games themes, messages and moral discussions), do not touch upon the Creed at all.

There are far too many shallow fans, and that's all I have to say.

I-Like-Pie45
02-19-2014, 05:03 PM
but yer forgetting something, shahk101

pirates and indians can't be assassins, lolz

pluz moral grey is stoopid templars have to be eevee and assass has to be gud

theres forumtific poof that dis iz true!

Dome500
02-19-2014, 08:48 PM
So what if Edward wasn't an Assassin until the last 3 sequences. Last I checked, in AC:2 Ezio became an Assassin in sequence 13, which was followed by 2 missions and then the ending credits.

I think in that specific context he meant that Edward did not have any kind of special training. Which is very weird especially in the beginning where he can do all the assassin moves flawlessly.

He is also not very involved in the Assassins and Templars. In the end he has no real opinion on both sides for 90% of the game, he only follows his own goals.

Like I said, for one game that was pretty cool, and I do as sure as hell not want another "traditional assassins path" and I do also want them to look at it from different perspectives. But you can not deny, even if pirates and assassins were similar in the core philosophy and their wish for freedom, that Edwards life was pretty disconnected to the Assassins throughout the game.


As a fan, I find these criticism hilariously hypocritical and it leaves a disgusting taste in my mouth.

That was... a little too aggressive.

Sorry I stepped on your toes mate, but in the end a lot of the gameplay was naval, and a lot of the game was boarding ships and fighting ships and such.
I don't say it's bad, but I say as a story that is rather less connected to the Assassins overall it could have been a spin off.
I doesn't have to be.
And like I said it was refreshing for a game.


some cheesy crap with a golden apple

Wrong.

For me a perfect AC game would be a game in which you feel like a real Assassin.
Of course that involves actually having and OPINION on the Assassins and Templars. I don't need the traditional Assassin, the pieces of Eden or the traditional Templar (though I wouldn't mind a game as a Templar either). The character can shift between Assassins and Templars liek a jo-jo for all that I care. He can start as Templar and end as Assassin or start as Assassin and end as Templar. I don't care. I just felt - and that was my personal experience - that there was less that connected Edward to the Assassins other than Kid/Mary and money...

Also, a real AC - for me personally - involves lots of social stealth and LOS stealth.

I know AC4 had more - and I LOVE it.
I'd just like to feel like the blade in the crowd again, the deadly shadow.

And AC4 and AC3 have not given me this, they rather gave me a brutal side to the Assassin.

I understand in the Era of Piracy killing people and boarding ships was an essential part of a Pirates life, and that is why I fully accept this.
And it was refreshing for a change. But I just hope (again, my personal humble hope) that next time around there is less slice and dice and (even) more possibility for Stealth. That is what I'd like to see. (No forced Stealth mind you - only the possibility for it in most of the missions).

Mr_Shade
02-19-2014, 08:53 PM
arrr - but they are only assassin moves, since we have seen them before ;)

Alot of his moves - free running - are explained due to him being a privateer - and don't forget that 'training' he had - showing off the moves, Edward is a fast learner - so someone saying 'show me how you double assassinate from the roof' = he put two and two together - only so much you can do on a roof with blades.. ;)


That's my explanation - and I'm sticking to it..

Hans684
02-19-2014, 09:33 PM
I think in that specific context he meant that Edward did not have any kind of special training. Which is very weird especially in the beginning where he can do all the assassin moves flawlessly.

Didn't need it either, he was a privateer. That involve fighting, climbing, stealth and almost everything an assassin would do. The training he gott was about the creed itself.


He is also not very involved in the Assassins and Templars. In the end he has no real opinion on both sides for 90% of the game, he only follows his own goals.

Well he is a pirate, so it make sence. Look at Blackbeard.They live a free life where they do as they please.


That was... a little too aggressive.

One more point to my other thread then.


Sorry I stepped on your toes mate, but in the end a lot of the gameplay was naval, and a lot of the game was boarding ships and fighting ships and such.
I don't say it's bad, but I say as a story that is rather less connected to the Assassins overall it could have been a spin off.
I doesn't have to be.
And like I said it was refreshing for a game.

Don't forget the Templars, assassins isn't the only thing needed. As for it being a spin of becouse of little assassin screen time is something I don't understand but opionion is opionion, I respect it either way.




Wrong.

For me a perfect AC game would be a game in which you feel like a real Assassin.
Of course that involves actually having and OPINION on the Assassins and Templars. I don't need the traditional Assassin, the pieces of Eden or the traditional Templar (though I wouldn't mind a game as a Templar either). The character can shift between Assassins and Templars liek a jo-jo for all that I care. He can start as Templar and end as Assassin or start as Assassin and end as Templar. I don't care. I just felt - and that was my personal experience - that there was less that connected Edward to the Assassins other than Kid/Mary and money...

No such thing as wrong with opionion involved.

As much as I respect it, what is a true assassin?
Edwards aim is to become a man of quality, money is just a tool he consider needed to become that.


And AC4 and AC3 have not given me this, they rather gave me a brutal side to the Assassin.

Assassins isn't exactly engels either, they kill, torture ect... I personally love to see the bad side of the assassins. They run around killing... In the name of pace, freedom and all that.

Fatal-Feit
02-19-2014, 10:26 PM
I think in that specific context he meant that Edward did not have any kind of special training. Which is very weird especially in the beginning where he can do all the assassin moves flawlessly.

He is also not very involved in the Assassins and Templars. In the end he has no real opinion on both sides for 90% of the game, he only follows his own goals.

Like I said, for one game that was pretty cool, and I do as sure as hell not want another "traditional assassins path" and I do also want them to look at it from different perspectives. But you can not deny, even if pirates and assassins were similar in the core philosophy and their wish for freedom, that Edwards life was pretty disconnected to the Assassins throughout the game.



That was... a little too aggressive.

Sorry I stepped on your toes mate, but in the end a lot of the gameplay was naval, and a lot of the game was boarding ships and fighting ships and such.
I don't say it's bad, but I say as a story that is rather less connected to the Assassins overall it could have been a spin off.
I doesn't have to be.
And like I said it was refreshing for a game.

But as I've said. Assassin's Creed is about the Assassin's Creed, not Assassins Warriors. Regardless of your opinion on the game, it does not justifying AC:IV as a spin-off.

First, as a public statement, not directed at you. The Eagle Vision is unique to Eve's human descendants, not specially Assassins. The Assassins in AC are also humans, sort of like us, except less awesome. Everything an Assassin can do, except Eagle Vision, is not a fictional thing. People in real life can climb, fight, parkour, and fence. Search it on Youtube if anyone wants proof. Sorry, it just seems necessary at this point.

Edward's early capabilities have already been answered. He was a skilled and talented privateer. A privateer so skilled that he have already gotten the attention of James Kidd who is an Assassin, and both Edward Thatch & Ben Hornigold who are also well-known, infamous pirates. He have also had the Eagle Vision since he was a little lad. And The Hidden Blades don't require too much hand's on training either. They're not complicated and the Templar early in the story have given him training exercises.

I'm actually surprise that it's still a complaint. Both Ezio and Connor had their Eagle Visions at a very young age. Ezio at age 17 was able to parkour through the entire Florence and climb ridiculous heights with ease, just as Connor is able to do the same at a similar age. And like Edward, they both could pick up the hidden blade for the first time and use it marvelously with just a few rag dolls as guinea pigs.

If the fact that Edward killed an Assassin in the first 5 minutes of the game is what's confusing, keep in mind that Edward was already a capable fighter and the Assassin was injured. Assassins aren't super humans, realistically speaking.

Secondly, Edward was literally caught in the middle of the Assassins & Templar conflict in almost every sequence. He have met with both side, supported each side, damaged each side, and have without a doubt, plenty of opinions for each side. I'm starting to question if you've even played Assassin's Creed IV. I'm not trying to poke at you, really, it's just you're just bringing up points that shouldn't be bothered with. Sure, Edward was selfish for a majority of the game, but that was basically the point of the game. It's an entirely new and innovative perspective. It's a story of a self-reckless pirate's who's journey have brought him to understanding the Assassin's Creed, its purpose, and why it's important. Having a non-stop tea party with Assassins would ruin the whole point. Just like the Assassins, Edward needed the Templar early in his path to understand their side, their goals, and their involvement. And just like the previous two, he needed time as a pirate himself. To understand his own goals, his side, and his involvements. All of these are needed in order for Edward to develop to who he was at the end.

But in case you're still wondering, pirates can't be Assassins. Their means to an end aren't the same. They both believe in freedom, liberty, equality, share similar philosophy even, but their methods and goals are not alike. You can't have an Assassin pillage a village for money and rum. And you certainly can't have a pirate do the same vice versa. That's the reason why Adewale quit to join the Assassins, and Ben Hornigold for the Templars. If you look at the game from a close point of view, you won't realize it. The Assassin's Creed franchise requires you to be open-minded. And by doing so, you can see that the entire story, or journey if you will, of Edward Kenway was more than adequate.

And third, how does naval change the story? If Altair's or Ezio's saga had consisted of 40% naval, it wouldn't changed anything. (Trivia: Much of Ezio's Trilogy involved sailing across seas & remember that one time with Greek Fire? :rolleyes:.) You're going to have to admit sailing was simply Edward's means to an end, just as it was for Ezio and Connor. So what if they made it more accessible? All they added was boarding and 3 options after you boarded. Wow! Such Notorious! Much Piratey! So UnCreed!

Farlander1991
02-20-2014, 10:02 AM
He is also not very involved in the Assassins and Templars. In the end he has no real opinion on both sides for 90% of the game, he only follows his own goals.

The way you always say about lack of opinion about any of the sides and that it makes it less of an 'AC' game (or an Assassins game) kinda baffles me. Yes, he follows his own goals (just like Ezio follows his own goals of revenge which was the only reason he ever aided the Assassins in the first place), but that doesn't instantly mean he hasn't an opinion.

He has a real opinion on both the Assassins and Templars. The Templars are posh gits of the likes of kings and nobles (and as he puts to Hornigold once, "the very kind we once hated") who try to make the world spin for themselves and make it harder for the likes of Edward and the like, and Assassins are some weird mystics who try to tell him how to live even though their creed says 'Everything is permitted', so why he should care. You want to say that's NOT an opinion? And by the end, via talks from them, talks about them, and 'the reason you suck' speeches, he CHANGES his opinion of both sides (as evidenced, at the least, by talk with Ah Tabai and Torres death speech), which is more than a game like AC2 did, where Ezio's opinion on the Templars was always 'they killed my family and they're evil!' and at one point was not sure why he was even hunting them (and the person thanks to whom Ezio fully learned about the nature and importance of free will was not a Templar at all!)

Also, the only part of the story that doesn't have neither Assassin or Templar involvement is Sequence 6 and 8 (though, Sequence 8 is part of the whole Observatory arc which is the Assassin and Templar goal as well).

Dome500
02-20-2014, 06:30 PM
Assassins isn't exactly engels either, they kill, torture ect... I personally love to see the bad side of the assassins. They run around killing... In the name of pace, freedom and all that.

That's not what I meant.

I meant open aggressiveness VS discreet and quiet killer.

Edward and Connor were all action and combat most of the time.


Everything an Assassin can do, except Eagle Vision, is not a fictional thing. People in real life can climb, fight, parkour, and fence.

Which normally involves some kind of training.

I mean imagine you are playing as an Assassin and you have to kill some sailors. Would you expect them to beat you in killing? Would you expect them using haystacks, making air assassinations, using smoke bombs, hiding in the crowd and killing in plain sight? I wouldn't.

Of course he would have basic skills. But Assassins were always labeled as being better in most things. Including Stealth, Combat and their special ways of killing and free running. I would have expected to be at least introduced to the "advanced techniques". But Edwards seems to know that all by himself, although his fellow sailors or Pirates can not do the same... Yeah.


and the Templar early in the story have given him training exercises

NO, they basically expected him to show them how it works and he did of course know it all from the get-go...


Both Ezio and Connor had their Eagle Visions at a very young age.

Who the hell is talking about Eagle Vision? I never talked about Eagle Vision.


Secondly, Edward was literally caught in the middle of the Assassins & Templar conflict in almost every sequence.

Sure... I guess you count the Pirate VS Military fight to the Assassin VS Templar story? I don't. Not directly at least.


you're just bringing up points that shouldn't be bothered with

YOUR personal subjective opinion.


And just like the previous two, he needed time as a pirate himself. To understand his own goals, his side, and his involvements. All of these are needed in order for Edward to develop to who he was at the end.


See? And that's also a point. It's EDWARDS story. Not the Assassins. And to be honest, I'm tired of this Conflict which does not change in the least. Nothing happens with the Assassins or Templars in the end. That's my perspective on it.


But in case you're still wondering, pirates can't be Assassins. Their means to an end aren't the same.

No one ever said that, and I do really not know why you assume I did...


They both believe in freedom, liberty, equality, share similar philosophy even, but their methods and goals are not alike.

Sure. They are like a 3rd group in between. They want what the Assassins want (freedom, peace) but use the methods the Templars use (violence, chaos)


And third, how does naval change the story? If Altair's or Ezio's saga had consisted of 40% naval, it wouldn't changed anything.

Yes it would have.
It changes the way you perceive the game and it changes the atmosphere and gameplay.


Much of Ezio's Trilogy involved sailing across seas & remember that one time with Greek Fire?

Yes. A minority of the Ezi Trilogy.


but that doesn't instantly mean he hasn't an opinion.

Yeah maybe. But he rarely shares that opinion.

Anyway.....

Maybe I just grew out of the Assassin story. Maybe I shouldn't play the games anymore, because apparently I do not have the feeling for it anymore. At least if the next game will be like Black Flag...

Farlander1991
02-20-2014, 07:17 PM
Yeah maybe. But he rarely shares that opinion.

Well, it's not like other Assassins share their opinion that often either. Sure, your targets do it more often for their 'reason you suck' speeches, but there's that of plenty in AC4 as well.


Maybe I just grew out of the Assassin story. Maybe I shouldn't play the games anymore, because apparently I do not have the feeling for it anymore.

Mate, you're on the forum of a series the main motto of which is 'Nothing is true, everything is permitted'. There's no truth other than the one that you choose, and all arguments are a sharing of opinions and trying to understand each other, so if you don't agree with us and we argue with you (or you argue with us, because arguments rise only when opinions and chosen truths don't mesh), don't feel like we're trying to prove you wrong.

Codarsnacht
02-20-2014, 07:31 PM
I haven't read this entire thread, just a few of the posts on the last few pages.

While I understand the "Edward not being an Assassin, even though this is Assassin's Creed" argument, this is how I look at it: the story of Edward, character & development so on so forth, proves that not every assassin has to be this loyal, diligent, selfless person. Of course, that is the ideal character - Altair, Ezio, Connor, whoever. I enjoyed Edward as a character because he was different. He showed us that not every assassin is the same, not all their lives are devoted to the creed from the moment they are children/born.

I think the contrast between his life as a pirate, and (briefly when we see it at the end) as an assassin is so, so important because it shows the power of the creed. His whole life changed when he realised his true vocation as an assassin. While characters such as Ezio and Connor discovered the brotherhood at an earlier age, Edward proves to us that no matter what age, what kind of person you are, or what kind of morals you have, the creed can still reach out to you.

Personally, Edward's conversion from amoral pirate to devoted assassin really interested me, mainly due to the fact that it was so different from Altair, Ezio or Connor. It would've been a bit boring and predictable if Edward was induced into the brotherhood in the earlier sequences - I mean, even his initial relationship with the brotherhood gave us a completely different view on the assassins and templars alike.

Just my input, I felt I had to.

Oh, and BTW, no; I don't think AC4 'sucked'. It was different, sure, and while the main storyline was rather flat at times, I think it has kept the series above water. Literally. :)

dbzk1999
02-21-2014, 01:28 AM
That's not what I meant.

I meant open aggressiveness VS discreet and quiet killer.

Edward and Connor were all action and combat most of the time.



Which normally involves some kind of training.

I mean imagine you are playing as an Assassin and you have to kill some sailors. Would you expect them to beat you in killing? Would you expect them using haystacks, making air assassinations, using smoke bombs, hiding in the crowd and killing in plain sight? I wouldn't.

Of course he would have basic skills. But Assassins were always labeled as being better in most things. Including Stealth, Combat and their special ways of killing and free running. I would have expected to be at least introduced to the "advanced techniques". But Edwards seems to know that all by himself, although his fellow sailors or Pirates can not do the same... Yeah.



NO, they basically expected him to show them how it works and he did of course know it all from the get-go...



Who the hell is talking about Eagle Vision? I never talked about Eagle Vision.



Sure... I guess you count the Pirate VS Military fight to the Assassin VS Templar story? I don't. Not directly at least.



YOUR personal subjective opinion.



See? And that's also a point. It's EDWARDS story. Not the Assassins. And to be honest, I'm tired of this Conflict which does not change in the least. Nothing happens with the Assassins or Templars in the end. That's my perspective on it.



No one ever said that, and I do really not know why you assume I did...



Sure. They are like a 3rd group in between. They want what the Assassins want (freedom, peace) but use the methods the Templars use (violence, chaos)



Yes it would have.
It changes the way you perceive the game and it changes the atmosphere and gameplay.



Yes. A minority of the Ezi Trilogy.



Yeah maybe. But he rarely shares that opinion.

Anyway.....

Maybe I just grew out of the Assassin story. Maybe I shouldn't play the games anymore, because apparently I do not have the feeling for it anymore. At least if the next game will be like Black Flag...
That's really overestimating the assassins I respect your opinion but look at Darby's podcast
If you haven't seen it he states that in the end the assassins are still humans they may be better than most but that doesn't mean they're better than everyone
It's possible for a non assassin or Templar to have more skill than them
It's unlikely but still very possible

Megas_Doux
02-21-2014, 02:27 AM
Meh!!!!

AC IV´s story is a little bit bland if you compare it with the likes of AC I and AC III, but I think it was refreshing to see a character that had, literally, NO relantionship with either Assassins or Templars -unlike Altair, Ezio, Nikolai and Connor- at the beggining of his arc, he just stumbled into them by accident.

Sure! his character development felt kinda rushed towards the ending game, instead of being a slow progression, but I like the idea of him not joining out vengeance- Ezio and Connor- or mere duty -Altair and Nikolai-.

Now, in regards of the "skills" issue, I think the deveps did not want another "training filler arc",however I do agree that it required more explanation.

Fatal-Feit
02-21-2014, 05:19 AM
Sure! his character development felt kinda rushed towards the ending game, instead of being a slow progression, but I like the idea of him not joining out vengeance- Ezio and Connor- or mere duty -Altair and Nikolai-.

Now, in regards of the "skills" issue, I think the deveps did not want another "training filler arc",however I do agree that it required more explanation.

But he didn't join out of vengeance. He joined for redemption, absolution, atonement. At that point, he understood the Creed's importance. And the Connor's Saga have never involved vengeance. The only games with vengeance were AC:2 & AC:B.

As for Edward's early capabilities, like I said. Why is AC:IV the target? He was a both a skilled and talented privateer who've already journeyed across the sea and ventured with other infamous pirates. We literally don't need anymore explanations. If you want to target characters for something like that then look at Ezio and Connor. Both could climb, use Eagle Vision, and take down armies in their teens, whereas Edward was already a grown adult when we started with him.

Fatal-Feit
02-21-2014, 06:33 AM
That's not what I meant.

I meant open aggressiveness VS discreet and quiet killer.

Edward and Connor were all action and combat most of the time.

Tell me, when was the last time you've played the old games? Because this is BS. 90% of the Kenway's missions had them plan things out strategically and even when push comes to shove they all played their role stealthily. Even in ToKW, regardless of super powers, Connor was stealthy through and through. Ezio's entire Trilogy is the biggest offender. In addition to my paragraph about his piracy, he wasn't stealthy in most of his ventures. He used over a dozen War Machines to take down armies, including using a boat to take down an entire fleet, which even Edward didn't do. He jumps into the middle of a warfare attempting to stab Cesare, whereas Connor went around to assassinate Pitcairn. And let's not forget about the all-dramatic-cliche battle he had with Cesare at the end. He didn't even try to sneak and assassinate Ahmet during the hostage situation, oh no, instead he decide to play negotiation, placing himself and the other Assassins in danger, which as also followed by Ezio taking down guards while soaring through the air, strapped to the back of a caravan and then followed by another Micheal Bay action sequence where he's battling Ahmet while falling from a cliff. I could literally go on for days, considering I've replayed his trilogy not long ago.


Which normally involves some kind of training.


I mean imagine you are playing as an Assassin and you have to kill some sailors. Would you expect them to beat you in killing? Would you expect them using haystacks, making air assassinations, using smoke bombs, hiding in the crowd and killing in plain sight? I wouldn't.

Of course he would have basic skills. But Assassins were always labeled as being better in most things. Including Stealth, Combat and their special ways of killing and free running. I would have expected to be at least introduced to the "advanced techniques". But Edwards seems to know that all by himself, although his fellow sailors or Pirates can not do the same... Yeah.

But this is not news. All of the Assassins have always been skills, talented, and have a knack for everything. You iterates points that I've always tackled. Ezio & Connor used haystacks long before they met the Assassins. And smokes bombs aren't exclusive to Assassins. The world, including Templar have used them. We even have them in real life. And that includes killing in plain sight. Dude, we've already witnessed plenty of contracts and Templar doing the same damn thing in the previous games. They kill a guy and then parkours off just like Assassins.

As I've already said many times. Edward is skilled and talented. Just like Ezio and Connor. They've have a knack for these things, long before training. Edward is possibly the most explained protagonists thus far.

And for the last time. Assassins aren't superheroes. They aren't superman, they aren't batman, and they certainly aren't immortal. Since Assassin's Creed 1, we're seen both Templar & non-Templar kill Assassins. In the data entries, including MP, we've read and heard stories of slain Assassins. If Assassins were immortal they would be dominating the world. They wouldn't be resorted to hiding, or sending off Altair or Ezio out to do their errands. This should be common knowledge in the world of Assassin's Creed. Having someone like Edward take down one injured Assassin shouldn't be jaw dropping.


NO, they basically expected him to show them how it works and he did of course know it all from the get-go...

So what do you want? An entire whole sequence with him training? As I've already mentioned, both Ezio and Connor were able to learn from the get-go too. During Ezio's training course, he didn't have two people blatantly spelling out how to proceed and all those pre-built courses. They gave him 3 guinea pigs that's it. Edward is smart, keen, capable, and have already killed people. Using something like the hidden blade to stab a few rag dolls is not rocket science for him.


Who the hell is talking about Eagle Vision? I never talked about Eagle Vision.

You are, considering you keep complaining about him having the abilities of Assassins early in the game.


Sure... I guess you count the Pirate VS Military fight to the Assassin VS Templar story? I don't. Not directly at least.

So let's just forget about AC:2-AC:R's militia, thieves, courtesans, nobles, and contracts, shall we?


YOUR personal subjective opinion.

Um, no. These are something somebody wouldn't bother with if they've already played the entire AC saga from beginning to end. You bag on AC:IV with topics that the previous games have done the most offense. Specifically AC:2-AC:R.


See? And that's also a point. It's EDWARDS story. Not the Assassins. And to be honest, I'm tired of this Conflict which does not change in the least. Nothing happens with the Assassins or Templars in the end. That's my perspective on it.

What?! Are you kidding me? So AC:2 & AC:B meant nothing to you? You highlighted those games in other threads but frankly, those games had nothing new or anything to do with Assassins and Templar. It was all militia, thieves, and courtesans. And anything related to Assassins and Templar was mostly about Ezio and revenge. And his story aside, about 95% of the side missions were unrelated to Assassins, Templar, Pieces of Even, or the Creed.


No one ever said that, and I do really not know why you assume I did...

That's to help clearify the topic about the lack of Assassins.


Sure. They are like a 3rd group in between. They want what the Assassins want (freedom, peace) but use the methods the Templars use (violence, chaos)

Not exactly. The Templar's methods aren't about violence or chaos. All they did was kidnap one guy and that's it. If we're to point fingers, look at the Assassins.


Yes it would have.
It changes the way you perceive the game and it changes the atmosphere and gameplay.

If you understand that much then why is it a crime? This is a sequel that takes place on the open seas during the Golden Age of Pirates. Gameplay aside, it doesn't change the story one bit. If they eliminated sailing and gave us fast travel like the past games, the only thing that changed would be the lack of innovation.


Yes. A minority of the Ezi Trilogy.

No, it's a majority of his story. Rome, Venice, Florence, and Constantinople, and the various of other places weren't next door. All Ubisoft did was cut those segments out.


Yeah maybe. But he rarely shares that opinion.

Dude, he've shared his opinion most than once during his campaign. Have you considered using subtitles? And if the last 3 sequences meant nothing to you, then I don't know how the previous games have done you justice... Specifically AC:2.



Anyway.....

Maybe I just grew out of the Assassin story. Maybe I shouldn't play the games anymore, because apparently I do not have the feeling for it anymore. At least if the next game will be like Black Flag...

Maybe you should just replay the old games to understand my point. I'm not normally this vulgar but in the other threads, you seem to be discouraged by AC:IV for hypocritical reasons. I could swallow opinions, but you're criticisms aren't opinions, they're just unnecessary complaints that you keep repeating.

Fatal-Feit
02-21-2014, 06:55 AM
ANYWAY... I'll stop being pretentious and leave this here.

I recommend you guys watch these podcasts. They're enjoyable and they explain a lot of things.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bSfw5R3sWos&list=UUfB8dJdMxEofkcybwAskjqQ
This one is the deleted scenes with Darby McDevitt on AC:IV's story but it highlights a lot of important things.

luqmanhkmm
02-21-2014, 11:32 AM
Feedback
i was a huge fan of Assassin's Creed since the first game, but what makes me a little disappointed is seeing Assassin's Creed game franchise is being so mainstream and 'not special' by time, so here's my feedback on Assassin's Creed IV Black Flag

Gameplay

the stealth is well improved, but personally i hate AC4's tagging system, it's somehow feel ******ed when you can see enemies throught the wall clearly, i'd prefer Far Cry 3's tagging system which is only the symbol is visible, and i don't really like it when you just turn your eagle vision and the guy who owned the Warehouse key is suddenly become gold, i'd prefer ACR's eagle sense which is you gotta identify them first, it's far more realistic, and please Ubisoft... make some memorable missions like what you did on Assassin's Creed II, i'm disappointed because on AC4, there's too many 'tail the target' or eavesdrop missions, it feels so repetitive and boring, and Ubisoft... don't get me wrong, the naval gameplay is great but this is an Assassin's Creed game, instead of making a naval gameplay you gotta make an "assassins-feel-like" gameplay

Combat

until now, my favorite combat is on Assassin's Creed II, if you buy a sword that has a great damage, the enemies are easier to kill, if you buy a sword that has a great deflect, it will be easier for you to counter enemies, etc but since ACB, there's no different between the sword damage, deflect, & speed.... kick enemies, attack them twice, finishing move, it feels not challenging anymore, but that's okay until there's Assassin's Creed III combat, it's so stupid to slash & puncture enemies over and over again but without finishing moves, the enemies are like didn't feel anything, let's just compare it to any previous Assassin's Creed before AC3, the enemies are still blocking Altair/Ezio's attack even when they are taking damage, at least they are blocking it until their defense are down and Altair/Ezio can do a finishing move, it's far more realistic, and please make the enemies are like afraid of the assassins, i wan't it when there's a bunch of guards and they are dead one by one killed by the assassin until there's only one guard remaining, i wan't the remaining guard to be scared and run away or perhaps calling an reinforcement

about Assassin's Creed IV Black Flag's combat, it's still so stupid to slash & puncture enemies over and over again but without finishing moves, the enemies are like didn't feel anything, please make it more realistic, the dual sword killing animation is lame too and the transition between attacking moves & finishing moves are so stiff not so fluid, the double counter is rare to happen, there's a jerk slowmotion when you're killing the last enemy, and sometimes the sfx from the sword is just disappeared, and where's the blunt weapon?

but comparing to Assassin's Creed III, AC4 has deadly awesome finishing move (especially when you're using hidden blade or one handled sword), AC4 also has a better way to kill special enemies like the brute or captain, the slow mo is reduced, etc

Story

Assassin's Creed IV Black Flag's story is good and there's bunch of memorable moment, the characters are great and emotional, the voice acting is good, overall... it's great, but i didn't feel like an assassin when i play this game, it's more like a pirate, there's no assassin ceremony, or a deep conflict between the assassins and the templars, etc i hope the next Assassin's Creed will be more "assassinly" awesome

Music & Sound

the sound quality is good especially when you're sailing on the sea or in the middle of the city, but the sfx on combat is really broken, sometimes the weapon sfx is just disappeared, overall the sfx of the combat is unrealistic, i'd prefer Assassin's Creed Revelations weapon sound effects because it's so realistic and makes you be like "ouch! that must be really hurt" especially when i hear the crushing skull sfx if you kill enemies with a blunt weapon/warhammer

the music is good, it feels really good to walk around the cities with an ambience music playing, i really enjoy that, but the theme music is gotta be more emotional i think

Conclusion

Assassin's Creed IV Black Flag is not a bad game, but it's still far from perfect, there's so many thing that can be improved, there's still so many cons, there's still so many thing that fans expect to see but it's wasn't happen, well at least AC4 is better than AC3

and i think Ubisoft gotta slow down, collecting some inovative ideas, fix the broken things on Assassin's Creed IV, listening to the fans, etc it's better to wait 2 - 4 years to see a far better Assassin's Creed than to wait only 1 year to see a "not so different" Assassin's Creed with lacks of inovative ideas, i'd prefer Assassin's Creed to be not 'yearly released' game, i'd prefer Ubisoft to learn from Naughty Dog or Rockstar Games which is making games that took so long to wait but it's near perfect when it's released

Things i wan't for the next Assassin's Creed

1. Moddable Engine

what makes a game that durable and will never boring? yes that's right, MODS, take a look at Grand Theft Auto, Skyrim, Half-Life, etc those games are not boring because of Mods, i hope that someday we can mod Assassin's Creed and create custom combat animations, custom outfit, custom freerunning animations, custom cities, etc i swear to God it will be never boring

2. Low-Profile

i was so disappointed when the low-profile mode on Assassin's Creed III is not exist, i mean, it's so stupid when you are peeking the target on corner of the wall then suddenly you just randomly climbing the wall, or when you're chasing the target until accidentially you just wallrunning on the wall, it's really annoying, and i like it when it comes to combat, you can hold High Profile (the default is low profile) to be more careful and walk slowly to be more focus in countering enemies, it's just feel so breathtaking and challenging but sadly Low-Profile feature is only exist on AC1, AC2, ACB, & ACR, also i wan't a Low-Profile running (not freerunning) because it feels good to do a small-running around the cities

3. More Feared Guard Types

one of the things that i loved from AC1 & AC2 is you will be scared to be detected by enemies because the enemies are not so easy to kill, but the problem with the latest Assassin's Creed is the guards are not challenging anymore, you will be like "oh i was detected by guards, good, now i will kill them all" instead of "oh damn i was detected by guards, time to run or hide" it's feel like you're a god since you can easlily kill the guards out of your way, now i wan't the challenge from AC1 & AC2 back, i wan't there's more guard types like Janissaries or Papal Guards, i wan't the next Assassin's Creed to be more challenging

4. a better Leap of Faith

regarding Leap of Faith is one of the symbol of the Assassins, i wan't the next Leap of Faith to feel like "dangerous" or "risky" thing to do, on the first AC, you will be suprised of the first Leap of Faith because it feels so scary to jump off the high tower into the haystack, but now, Leap of Faith is like not a risky thing to do, it's like "everyone can do it", what can make the Leap of Faith even more scary? i think it's the camera position, i think it will be scary if the camera is like letting the assassin fell away into the haystack then the camera will zoom in to the assassin again.


etc

RinoTheBouncer
02-21-2014, 01:48 PM
Not really, thousands of us think it sucked so bad especially with the reductive modern day missions.

abcdelm45084
02-21-2014, 02:16 PM
I really enjoyed the game as ive enjoyed all of them to date. Some minor complaints though.

AI. The game doesnt punish you enough the guards can see you clearly for like seconds and when you go out of sight they just forget that they see. Its embarrasing. Also combat is to easy. But its Always ben like that.

Optional objectives. Not much to say really. Just let me play the game the way i want to play it. Do anyone even like this bullshi.... ?

Modern day. They lost it. That was really exiting in AC and AC2. But it seems like they dont have anything planned out. They make up kinda as they go. To many plot holes, loose ends, things being dropped and never returned. Gameplay wise it wasnt that fun either just a bunch of minigames. Would have ben interesting how they planned the modern day stuff from the beginning. No way they were planning all this juno bullcrap from the start just something they came up with so they could make more games.

Even though i like the game and all games so far and will buy the coming ones i miss the the feeling of the first 2. With all assassins vs templars. and playing as the good side, assassins. Now ur playing as a dam templar and pirates and all out of nowhere sages appear.

dbzk1999
02-21-2014, 05:51 PM
The assassins aren't the "good guys"
Heck even Shaun mentions it when Desmond called them that
"We're assassins which means we assassinate people
I don't see why people consider the assassins good and Templars evil
It's in you opinion but in the end there is only that
I understand what the Templars want I know some would consider it bad
But face it'll be a long while before natural law takes
But while I.understand them, doesn't mean I would want that
Now I understand with the Borgia but still .........

abcdelm45084
02-21-2014, 06:10 PM
The assassins aren't the "good guys"
Heck even Shaun mentions it when Desmond called them that
"We're assassins which means we assassinate people
I don't see why people consider the assassins good and Templars evil
It's in you opinion but in the end there is only that
I understand what the Templars want I know some would consider it bad
But face it'll be a long while before natural law takes
But while I.understand them, doesn't mean I would want that
Now I understand with the Borgia but still .........

Even if people dont consider assassins the "Good side" u were put on their side in this assassins vs templar "war". And for me atleast ubisoft portraited the assassins as the good guys who fight for freedom while the templars are the bad wanting to Control people.

TheArcaneEagle
02-21-2014, 07:20 PM
I thought it was pretty decent. I didn't expect much from AC3 though. I hope the future AC titles will be overhauled with new mechanics much like AC3 was.

frodrigues55
02-21-2014, 10:11 PM
Developers clearly had trouble developing a convincing way to fit the assassins skills into the plot/Edward.

They claim he didn't need any training because he had large experience as a privateer - yet we had a whole sequence listening to Hornigold teaching such skilled and experienced privateer how to use a ship.

I know it was needed for us as players, but it doesn't mean it fits the plot lol. A flashback sequence would make more sense.

That was one of the problems I had with Blag Flags' main campaign though - it feels like a game manual, where the plot is always interrupted by some weird tutorial mission. A bunch of sequences are dedicated to teach you how to do something, to the point where the game is still giving you new tools as late as the final memories.

dbzk1999
02-22-2014, 01:32 AM
Even if people dont consider assassins the "Good side" u were put on their side in this assassins vs templar "war". And for me atleast ubisoft portraited the assassins as the good guys who fight for freedom while the templars are the bad wanting to Control people.

In the end it was called the assassins creed not Templars creed so we are going to see more assassin side than Templar side
So I understand your point

Fatal-Feit
02-22-2014, 05:38 AM
Developers clearly had trouble developing a convincing way to fit the assassins skills into the plot/Edward.

They claim he didn't need any training because he had large experience as a privateer - yet we had a whole sequence listening to Hornigold teaching such skilled and experienced privateer how to use a ship.

I know it was needed for us as players, but it doesn't mean it fits the plot lol. A flashback sequence would make more sense.

But as Hornigold said, Edward had never been a captain, so his lectures were necessary. And Edward didn't swallow it either, he fussed in the beginning and during the plunder scene, he gave Hornigold that ''screw-up'' smirk. The entire sequence wasn't much of a tutorial either, story wise. We only got about a couple dialogues of ''do this''. It was mostly the player's introduction to Edward's relationship with Hornigold and Thatch.


That was one of the problems I had with Blag Flags' main campaign though - it feels like a game manual, where the plot is always interrupted by some weird tutorial mission. A bunch of sequences are dedicated to teach you how to do something, to the point where the game is still giving you new tools as late as the final memories.

This is a problem with all of the games, though. I have not came across any AC titles where I've unlocked everything while having an ample amount of sequences to do, except maybe for AC:R. The series need to start lengthening the sequences by a considerable amount.

I think what the developers want us to do is complete the campaign FIRST, then do the side contents... But that's not the formula we play by.

jlkill3r
03-17-2014, 10:58 AM
Developers clearly had trouble developing a convincing way to fit the assassins skills into the plot/Edward.

They claim he didn't need any training because he had large experience as a privateer - yet we had a whole sequence listening to Hornigold teaching such skilled and experienced privateer how to use a ship.

I know it was needed for us as players, but it doesn't mean it fits the plot lol. A flashback sequence would make more sense.

That was one of the problems I had with Blag Flags' main campaign though - it feels like a game manual, where the plot is always interrupted by some weird tutorial mission. A bunch of sequences are dedicated to teach you how to do something, to the point where the game is still giving you new tools as late as the final memories.

Coming from someone that works under a captain of a ship, I can easily say that there is a strong learning curve to it. Seriously, did you think that it was something you should already know without even training? Being a privateer, it makes perfect since that he'll need to learn the basics of commanding. There are basic military requirements (BMR) as well as fundamentals to the ship itself. It's not a walk in the park and I am a Chief Engineer on a ship so, I do have a source as well as work under a captain.

frodrigues55
03-17-2014, 12:30 PM
Coming from someone that works under a captain of a ship, I can easily say that there is a strong learning curve to it. Seriously, did you think that it was something you should already know without even training? Being a privateer, it makes perfect since that he'll need to learn the basics of commanding. There are basic military requirements (BMR) as well as fundamentals to the ship itself. It's not a walk in the park and I am a Chief Engineer on a ship so, I do have a source as well as work under a captain.

Yeah, but he seemed to do a fine job in the memories before the "training" so it still feels forced, especially when such memories include storms and enemy ships firing at you. They did have an excuse, it was just a poor one. That's what I meant to say - working on a ship apparently gave Edward assassin and parkour habilities but he not captain's skills.

The game had a lot of nice flashback moments, this could be one of them. He already knew Hornigold and Tatch, so I'm sure they could develop their relationship through the flashback.

frodrigues55
03-17-2014, 12:37 PM
Coming from someone that works under a captain of a ship, I can easily say that there is a strong learning curve to it. Seriously, did you think that it was something you should already know without even training? Being a privateer, it makes perfect since that he'll need to learn the basics of commanding. There are basic military requirements (BMR) as well as fundamentals to the ship itself. It's not a walk in the park and I am a Chief Engineer on a ship so, I do have a source as well as work under a captain.

Yeah, but he seemed to do a fine job in te memories before the "training" so it still feels forced. But that wasn't even the point, I was just saying that they went through the trouble of finding some kind of excuse to fit his training with ships into the plot but couldn't find a convincing way to put the assassin stuff too. Working on a ship apparently gave Edward assassin like skills and parkour habilities but he needed help on how to command a ship.

Nobody would notice if his ship training didn't happen in game, as you could easily connect dots and think he maybe learned it on his years of experiences on the sea. But you can't help to wonder how the help that helped him to climb churches with such ease.

pirate1802
03-17-2014, 12:40 PM
Yeah, but he seemed to do a fine job in the memories before the "training" so it still feels forced, especially when such memories include storms and enemy ships firing at you. They did have an excuse, it was just a poor one. That's what I meant to say - working on a ship apparently gave Edward assassin and parkour habilities but he not captain's skills.

Working on a ship, hell even piloting it is a whole lot different than captaining it, deciding which targets are worth going after and which are not, how and when to repair you ship and keep the crew number up. Because you are adept at climbing masts and killing people or even driving a ship doesnt mean you automatically also know the other things. Hornigold didnt have to teach him how to pilot a ship or the basic stuff, you'll notice. He was teaching him how to conduct a raid and get away with it. He was teaching him things he couldnt have known as a privateer.

Its a fair enough excuse for me..

frodrigues55
03-17-2014, 05:15 PM
Working on a ship, hell even piloting it is a whole lot different than captaining it, deciding which targets are worth going after and which are not, how and when to repair you ship and keep the crew number up. Because you are adept at climbing masts and killing people or even driving a ship doesnt mean you automatically also know the other things. Hornigold didnt have to teach him how to pilot a ship or the basic stuff, you'll notice. He was teaching him how to conduct a raid and get away with it. He was teaching him things he couldnt have known as a privateer.

Its a fair enough excuse for me..

I edited that post to express myself better but I guess I was too late, lol.

What I meant to say is I feel like they didn't direct any effort whatsoever to explain Edward's skills and parkour habilities, yet they went through the trouble of coming up with an excuse to teach you how to use a ship.

If anything, if they had to chose one, teaching how to be an assassin would make more sense to the plot. I'm sorry, but you just don't go out all stealth climbing forts or huge constructions just because you worked on a ship.

On the other hand, if they didn't show Edward's ship training, you could easily assume he found his way based on experience.

Cut that sequence off and I doubt people would open threads wondering how he learned to be a captain.

I know that sequence was important for us as players but the whole conversation started based on the plot:


Developers clearly had trouble developing a convincing way to fit the assassins skills into the plot/Edward.

This is what I meant. They couldn't find a proper way to do it, yet they managed to at least find something to justify his lack of captaining skills, which was far less needed to the story they were telling.

Templar_Az
03-18-2014, 07:16 AM
^ Yeah like at the begining of the game when you meet those templars and scarface asks you to show him your Assassin skills im like where he learn that?

*apologise for not remembering names I forgot everyones names except for the pirates.

Hans684
03-18-2014, 04:31 PM
^ Yeah like at the begining of the game when you meet those templars and scarface asks you to show him your Assassin skills im like where he learn that?

*apologise for not remembering names I forgot everyones names except for the pirates.

And before you do the "Assassin" move the Templars say what move they want him to do.

mikeyf1999
03-18-2014, 04:42 PM
^ Yeah like at the begining of the game when you meet those templars and scarface asks you to show him your Assassin skills im like where he learn that?

*apologise for not remembering names I forgot everyones names except for the pirates.
Yeah cause you know the Templars didn't state what they wanted him to do lol

Farlander1991
03-18-2014, 04:51 PM
I dunno, we have stuff like Ezio parkouring like a pro from the get go which apparently is a normal thing amongst Florentine noble youth now?

I know that he was secretly prepared (at least that's implied), but to me that's no less valid than Edward using his privateering skills + learning on the go (like in the case of Hidden Blades he just figures out as he goes along based on what the Templars say).

The only 'Assassiny' thing that may look out of place is the Leap of Faith. But then again, is Edward REALLY not reckless enough that he wouldn't do that?

pirate1802
03-18-2014, 05:19 PM
I dunno, we have stuff like Ezio parkouring like a pro from the get go which apparently is a normal thing amongst Florentine noble youth now?

But that is AC2 bro, the game whose every fault is excusable!!


Also this idea that you have to be trained for years before being able to parkour like that, some people are naturally good. Remember that lady in Revelations whom Ezio recruits as an assassin and she is already leaving Ezio behind before she was even recruited? Yeah..

I got the impression that Edward was equally confused and was improvising as he went along. His replies were like nervous, yet showing on surface that he's in full control. Might just be me.

frodrigues55
03-19-2014, 02:15 AM
It's not really fair to imply that we are all a bunch of AC2 fanboys just because there's different opinions regarding that aspect of Black Flag, though. We can open a thread to discuss AC2's flaws, I was just giving my opinion on AC4 because that's what this thread is about, isn't it? ;)

I guess we will just have to disagree on this one.

@pirate1802, if you don't mind me asking, do you post on the Tomb Raider Forums?

TO_M
03-19-2014, 02:34 AM
I think OP accidently typed a 4 instead of a 3 when creating this topic.

pirate1802
03-19-2014, 04:44 AM
I was not implying you're a fanboy :p but I feel people in general ignore a lot of AC2's problems which when occur in AC4 again, they no longer ignore.. thats all.

yes i post there, by the same name. :D

Farlander1991
03-19-2014, 09:31 AM
We can open a thread to discuss AC2's flaws

I've made one (though not about AC2's flaws directly, but about things that I got disappointed with in time), it got fairly heated fairly quickly :D

frodrigues55
03-19-2014, 12:00 PM
I was not implying you're a fanboy :p but I feel people in general ignore a lot of AC2's problems which when occur in AC4 again, they no longer ignore.. thats all.
yes i post there, by the same name. :D

I think people tend to automatically lean against AC4 just because of the whole pirate thing, so I understand how that can be a little frustrating. I personally have my own observations regarding the assassins x templars plot on AC4, but in general, the game did way more rights than wrongs in my opinion. That is regardless of my personal opinion on AC2 - which is indeed my favorite :p but not without its problems either.

Figured you were tha same from TRF forums :o You're the one who had the avatar of Lara with sunglasses, right? I don't post there, though, l only lurke. I was such a TR fan back then, but the quality of the writting added with the new Lara's bio and character in general made me not feel that looooove anymore :(


I've made one (though not about AC2's flaws directly, but about things that I got disappointed with in time), it got fairly heated fairly quickly :D

LOL I guess that's certified hit thread material. That and threads about how Connor suck.

pirate1802
03-19-2014, 03:27 PM
I was such a TR fan back then, but the quality of the writting added with the new Lara's bio and character in general made me not feel that looooove anymore :(

:p Its exactly the opposite to me xD Different opinions yo!

Farlander1991
03-19-2014, 03:31 PM
Kinda same, I've played several TR games before (the first three plus Legend/Anniversary/Underworld), but they were just kinda alright to me, didn't become a TR fan until the latest reboot :D Waiting for the second game in that series.

frodrigues55
03-19-2014, 04:58 PM
:p Its exactly the opposite to me xD Different opinions yo!


Kinda same, I've played several TR games before (the first three plus Legend/Anniversary/Underworld), but they were just kinda alright to me, didn't become a TR fan until the latest reboot :D Waiting for the second game in that series.

LMAO. It's that I grew up playing Tomb Raider - the only games that I actually played - so everything that has made me so into the series and into Lara is barely there anymore. I'm not saying they shouldn't change, it's just that they decided to change everything that made me fall in absolute love with it lol.

Still, it's one of those series that I will always support no matter what, even if I don't really like the new direction. Right now, AC is giving me everything I expected from the newer Tomb Raiders on storywitting, character design and development, and gameplay. It was a breath of fresh air to me, as I discovered AC once I couldn't fully connect to Tomb Raider anymore.

pirate1802
03-19-2014, 05:02 PM
I played my first real videogame in 2006. I'm a kid by comparison. :o

frodrigues55
03-19-2014, 05:05 PM
I played my first real videogame in 2006. I'm a kid by comparison. :o

I feel so old :eek: That's when I started to get really pissed at Tomb Raider.

pirate1802
03-19-2014, 05:24 PM
that feel when you are old(er) butstill a kid in gaming

Farlander1991
03-19-2014, 05:51 PM
I played my first real videogame in 2006. I'm a kid by comparison. :o

I started playing video games in 1991. You might ask, "But Farlander, isn't that the year you were born in, judging by your nickname?"

Well yes, yes it was :p I started playing these things when I got 6 months old. My parents tell me that I couldn't beat anything at that point, but I sure as hell would try!!!!!!! :p :D (They also would try to give me non-plugged in joysticks just so I would mess with them and feel like I'm playing, but I wouldn't fall for that trick)

On the flip side, I have no memory of my first video game. When my memory functions kicked in they were already pretty much always a part of my life. On the plus side, my choice of profession has a poetic feel to it :D

EDIT: And speaking of Tomb Raider, I played my first TR game in around 1997-1998

pirate1802
03-19-2014, 06:08 PM
I meant 2006 was the year when I got my PC and played my first game on it. Age of Empires 2. It was awesome, and still is. If I add all games then probably 2000.. duckhunt on my gameboy :(

MnemonicSyntax
03-19-2014, 09:13 PM
God, I feel old now. First game I ever played was Jungle Hunt on the Commodore 64. Back in 84.

pirate1802
03-19-2014, 09:14 PM
I wasnt even born then :eek:

Moar baby moments for me.

luckyto
03-19-2014, 09:48 PM
Tomb Raider has NOT forsaken everything that it is. By a long shot. It has certainly morphed. And I miss the more quiet puzzle-solving and platforming elements, but the original had plenty of action and gunplay. The new one definitely has the Tomb Raider spirit IMO.


God, I feel old now. First game I ever played was Jungle Hunt on the Commodore 64. Back in 84.

Haha.. I remember that game. I had a 64. And the VIC20 before it. And an Atari 2600.

luckyto
03-19-2014, 09:53 PM
What I meant to say is I feel like they didn't direct any effort whatsoever to explain Edward's skills and parkour habilities, yet they went through the trouble of coming up with an excuse to teach you how to use a ship.

Fighting with swords, shooting guns, climbing masts. Why do they even need to explain that? Those are basic pirate skills. It baffles me that some people think that a Pirate can't kill as well - or better - than an Assassin. It baffles me even further than some people think all Assassin's are equally bad-***.

frodrigues55
03-19-2014, 11:00 PM
One tip to avoid being so baffled at other people's opinions and perceptions is being more open to them ;)

Farlander1991
03-19-2014, 11:51 PM
One tip to avoid being so baffled at other people's opinions and percepctions is being more open to them ;)

And hey, what do you know, this is pretty much precisely what the series that we are fans of is about! :D Nothing is true!

frodrigues55
03-20-2014, 12:03 AM
And hey, what do you know, this is pretty much precisely what the series that we are fans of is about! :D Nothing is true!

Unless EZIO says so #teamezio #godzio #booconner

MCShortstuff86
03-20-2014, 09:08 PM
Sorry, but I don't think that any of the AC games have really been that bad. I really enjoyed AC1, and I was begging for a sequel after being about a quarter of the way through the game. AC2 was, in my opinion, the biggest step up from all of the games, and I absolutely loved that. Brotherhood was brilliant as well, but I was a little disappointed by Revelations. Don't get me wrong, I still think it's a hell of a good game; just not enough of a step up, or different enough, from Brotherhood. I really enjoyed AC3, although it did have it's weaknesses - the architecture, story and the fight system spring to mind every time I think about them. I love the hunting system from AC3, as well as finally being able to climb trees. I was fed up with being in control of a man who could climb a tall vertical building, but not a tree. AC4 is also, in my opinion, a damn good game, even if I was less than impressed with Ah Tabai.

Can anyone point me to a suggestions thread for future AC games please? I'm a newbie here. Many thanks :)

JustPlainQuirky
03-21-2014, 01:47 PM
The story in AC4 was awful. But the gameplay was super fun. It was the opposite problem of AC3.

RinoTheBouncer
03-21-2014, 02:03 PM
I remember 2007 when I first played AC 1 everything fascinated me.The innovative combat,the building climbing,the conspiracies,the war fought in shadows by two secret orders,the philosophical ideas,the modern day story,etc...

I instantly fell in love with the Assassin's Creed universe.It was a great time to be a gamer !

Then came the Ezio saga with most of the gameplay being the same but much more polished,better story,more interesting characters and renaissance Italy which had the most fascinating and beautiful cities ever.The cities felt so alive,authentic and the architecture was splendid.I felt so immersed in the beauty of Florence,Venice and Rome.

AC Revelations didn't have the same charm but it made up for it by giving us great closure.It was very emotional living the final days of Altair and seeing the end of Ezio's journey.I can still remember the beginning cutscene:

"My story is one of many thousands,and the world will not suffer if it ends too soon" -Ezio
That line is just completely awesome. Shows how mature and wise Ezio has become.I swear I dropped a tear just now when remembering this quote.

Now we finally arrive to the dark days of AC3 and AC4. I will completely neglect to speak about AC 3 because that game was a disgrace but sadly AC 4 wasn't far from it either.
It's like they forgot what Assassin's Creed was all about and they completely abandoned the spirit of the franchise.Naval combat was tedious,the story was mediocre and just like in AC 3 it felt rushed,uninteresting characters,no charm,no interesting locations(just ugly islands),something about the combat felt annoying,major glitches,Edward wasn't even an assassin,most missions were boring and repetitive.I'm not going into details because this is not a review.

I used to love this franchise so much but now it's just a disappointment and I don't think I will ever play an Assassin's Creed game ever again.

I completely agree with you. And AC:R? man it’s my favorite, it’s a tie between ACII and AC:R being my top AC games. Just so powerful, emotional, and full of surprises. I’m really sad that the last two games came up short in being on the same level the previous games were on. ACIII had more interesting modern day missions but a very badly directed ending. Not to mention way too many locations, assets, characters, and loose end than the game length could possibly handle.

tristanoxnam
03-26-2014, 10:27 PM
why is it in assassins creed III it is reloading one at a time but black flag **** logic reloading one reloads ALL AT ONC
and my black flag disc broke well not litterly that it broke just stoped working and i had it for a long time but there is a problem it quits when i click on anything after i open it and when i tried to download it i dont know wat to do so i can play it there is no launch function so wat do i do
and its for my pc so yea HELP

RuairiJ
03-26-2014, 10:52 PM
And I thought I was the only one! I felt especially bumped off in ac4 as for a large portion of the game the modern day story just seems to be ignored! I'm finding it very difficult as I love the series too much to just turn my back on it, but after two dissapointing games maybe it's time we realised that revelations was the pinnacle of the series :(

Aphex_Tim
03-26-2014, 10:56 PM
but after two dissapointing games maybe it's time we realised that revelations was the pinnacle of the series :(

We?
Nothing is true. Everything is subjective.

frodrigues55
03-26-2014, 10:57 PM
maybe it's time we realised that revelations was the pinnacle of the series :(

Well, you could see the bright side. It seems you enjoyed one game more than a the people who are still stuck in Brotherhood.

Assassin_M
03-27-2014, 12:19 AM
We?
Nothing is true. Everything is subjective.

Lets start our own group...we'll call it the Order of the Subjectives..

shobhit7777777
03-27-2014, 07:36 AM
that feel when you are old(er) butstill a kid in gaming

Started proper when I was 8

What did I play at that tender age?

Commandos: Beyond the Call of Duty

Ever see a 8 year old craft a devious series of sneaky murders - its a sight to behold. Although the maps with "Kill this guy here with ____" on my notebooks didn't go down well with the teachers. (Protip...the mathematics notebooks - with the grids - are excellent because you have a better sense of scale, distance and placement of enemies...its more accurate)

8 year old Shobhit was badass.....23 year old Shobhit is a sensitive ***** who can't sit through Tomb Raider becau- OMG! DID CROFT JUST GET IMPALED ON A BRANCH!!...AGAIN!!

I used to play Doom as well...when I was 6....still remember the cheats - IDDQD and IDKFA

Does anyone here remember a shooter - Heretic?

Assassin_M
03-27-2014, 07:50 AM
Does anyone here remember a shooter - Heretic?
*raises hand*

Would watch my cousin play it on his rig when I was 4 then he let me play it when I became 6. I loved doom so much so I instantly fell in love with this..

shobhit7777777
03-27-2014, 08:06 AM
*raises hand*

Would watch my cousin play it on his rig when I was 4 then he let me play it when I became 6. I loved doom so much so I instantly fell in love with this..

Good man!

*fist bump*

I'd play it with a friend and we would collectively **** ourselves whenever the winged buggers made an appearance. 10 years later we were still ****ting ourselves..albeit the game was FEAR and the laxative in this case was - Alma, the creepy ghost of a girl

Assassin_M
03-27-2014, 08:12 AM
Good man!

*fist bump*

I'd play it with a friend and we would collectively **** ourselves whenever the winged buggers made an appearance. 10 years later we were still ****ting ourselves..albeit the game was FEAR and the laxative in this case was - Alma, the creepy ghost of a girl
*fist bump*

I think it's the inclusion of better sound of effects. those guys had the most annoying screeches ever but it's the golem-like things that would REALLY make me **** myself..
I was more of a silent hill guy 8P didn't play FEAR

Dome500
03-27-2014, 05:51 PM
Oh I hate it that you get more and more eccentric and demanding regarding games when you get older, up to a point where it is a unbelievable hard decision if you want to buy a game because often enough you end up asking yourself 10 times "Is it worth it for that price?".

Back in the days? New Game - SHUT UP AND TAKE MY MONEY.
Now? Story + Gameplay Analysis - Is it worth the money? - strongly conflicted....

:( Good ol times.....

Hans684
03-27-2014, 07:48 PM
Oh I hate it that you get more and more eccentric and demanding regarding games when you get older, up to a point where it is a unbelievable hard decision if you want to buy a game because often enough you end up asking yourself 10 times "Is it worth it for that price?".

Back in the days? New Game - SHUT UP AND TAKE MY MONEY.
Now? Story + Gameplay Analysis - Is it worth the money? - strongly conflicted....

:( Good ol times.....

We're all doomed.

tristanoxnam
03-30-2014, 10:34 PM
why is it in assassins creed III it is reloading one at a time but black flag **** logic reloading one reloads ALL AT ONC
and my black flag disc broke well not litterly that it broke just stoped working and i had it for a long time but there is a problem it quits when i click on anything after i open it and when i tried to download it i dont know wat to do so i can play it there is no launch function so wat do i do
and its for my pc so yea HELP
with that above i have tried hundreds litterly HUNDREDS OF SITES NONE WORK HELP ME PLEASE THIS IS ANNOYING ME none actaully work as in open and one that DOESN'T require a activation code can you please help me
and i bought another assassins creed black flag and it doesnt work i have gone to 12+ STORES this is pissing me off
NOW MY BLOODY ACIII AUTOMATICLY QUITS ON ME WHEN I CLICK MULTIPLAYER UBISOFT STORE OR EVEN LOAD ONE OF MY GAMESSAVES

lawsoniscool4
10-04-2015, 04:46 PM
Ancient thread but I agree with you, AC4 is imo the most disappointing AC game in the series. Not even 3 was because it actually had a great story that had to do with the AC order until the ending sort of ruined the mystery the previous games provided with the story. When I play Assassin's Creed I play it for the Assassin vs Templar storyline that the first 5 games (including Brotherhood and Revelations) did so well.

AC4 feels like it has almost nothing to do with the Assassin's order and story until towards the end of the game which left me bored and wanting to skip almost every cut scene in the game because it just consists of witty dialogue between two characters that really goes no where other than setting up and doing another repetitive objective be it tailing someone or to take over an outpost/capture a ship.

Again, I could care less about pointless dialogue between blackbeard and edward about going and capturing an outpost, i'd rather hear about the apple of eden and the mysteries of it like in the previous games. What i'm really trying to say here is that AC4 story felt so disconnected form the series as a whole and most of the "story" there is pointless dialogue about nothing to move forward the plot. In other AC games you're constantly going after something interesting with little to no filler. In AC4 there's so much stalling just to get to the end.

All in all AC4 also has the most tailing missions out of any AC game as well as the most ship battles which get so repetitive that I had to force myself to finish the game. I honestly don't get what people see in Edward imo he's just a generic Welshmen with little to no character development/backstory and a generic storyline of "i need to turn my life around and pursue something other than money" which is more generic than the revenge story in other AC games. At this point I just feel like Ubisoft is just trying too hard to make another Ezio character with the best charm. I just don't give two **** about Edward as his backstory is almost non existent in game with him being able to fight Assassin's and do Assassin moves flawlessly like it's nothing. Yet other AC characters had to work to get their skills. Ubisoft made Edward a straight up badass right out the box instead of pacing his story well with progression that makes you work to become a badass.

I even liked rogue better than AC4 as the protagonist actually gets a decent backstory, not as a child but decent enough to where he progresses into a badass.

TLDR: AC4 feels like it's not even an AC game and the main protagonist is no where near as well paced as previous protagonists were and the game is too easy and uninteresting to me because of it.

Journey93
10-04-2015, 05:05 PM
No it was great. The story was awesome, we got the perspective of an outsider. Edward's character development/arc was very well done.

I do wish that we had more time to play as Edward the Assassin. Thats my only gripe. An expansion or so in London with Edward the Master Assassin would have been awesome!

Its the only good AC game we have since the conclusion of Ezio and Altair's story.

Pr0metheus 1962
10-04-2015, 05:17 PM
Well, everyone has their opinion about which AC game is better, but the aggregate ratings from players and professional reviewers place AC4 ahead of AC3. In terms of game ratings, highest to lowest, for the main console games, the results are as follows:

AC2 - 89%
ACB - 89%
AC4 - 85%
AC3 - 84%
AC1 - 81%
ACRev - 79%
ACRog - 73%
ACU - 71%

LieutenantRex
10-04-2015, 07:02 PM
AC4 is one of the worst games I have ever played. Initial playthroughs are fine, but when replaying it after playing AC3 and ACB extensively, I realized how pitifully shallow it was. It's inconsistent and off putting. I can go from ACB to AC3 with little to no problem, but the switch to AC4 is near impossible to not be disorienting. It's a disgusting and odious game, crafted by the officious wretches at Ubisoft Montreal who wanted to allay concerns following the critical travesty that was AC3.

Journey93
10-04-2015, 07:05 PM
Well, everyone has their opinion about which AC game is better, but the aggregate ratings from players and professional reviewers place AC4 ahead of AC3. In terms of game ratings, highest to lowest, for the main console games, the results are as follows:

AC2 - 89%
ACB - 89%
AC4 - 85%
AC3 - 84%
AC1 - 81%
ACRev - 79%
ACRog - 73%
ACU - 71%

This isn't that far off from my own opinion. I would put ACRev higher but thats it.

Journey93
10-04-2015, 07:13 PM
AC4 is one of the worst games I have ever played. Initial playthroughs are fine, but when replaying it after playing AC3 and ACB extensively, I realized how pitifully shallow it was. It's inconsistent and off putting. I can go from ACB to AC3 with little to no problem, but the switch to AC4 is near impossible to not be disorienting. It's a disgusting and odious game, crafted by the officious wretches at Ubisoft Montreal who wanted to allay concerns following the critical travesty that was AC3.

One of the worst games ever? Disgusting? lol talk about exaggerating.

Pr0metheus 1962
10-04-2015, 07:22 PM
One of the worst games ever? Disgusting? lol talk about exaggerating.

Maybe he dropped it in a pool of urine. That would certainly make it disgusting and odious. But if not, I suspect his critical judgment is malfunctioning if he thinks a game generally rated by critics at a solid 85% is "pitifully shallow, one of the worst games he's ever played, and disgusting and odious".

As for me, I enjoyed it a lot. So I think maybe he's mistaken. Whatever the problem is, it didn't stop me enjoying it.

dread_stone
10-04-2015, 07:38 PM
Assassin's Creed IV: Black Flag is undoubtedly the worst Assassin's Creed installment in the franchise.

It saddens a long-time Assassin's Creed fan to see that so many pseudo fans and sham reviewers continue to praise this game incessantly, with the general claim that "Black Flag is great because being a pirate and sailing the ocean blue is awesome! A great pirate action-adventure game!" This is precisely why this game is rubbish — it's fraudulent. I bought this game knowing that I would have to be a pirate—and quite frankly didn't mind the idea of being one—but thinking that I would still predominantly be an Assassin, as the main title on the cover is "[Assassin's] Creed IV". I was wrong; the subtitle sadly has much, much higher precedence than the aforementioned main one; in Assassin's Creed IV: Black Flag, YOU DO NOT PLAY AS AN ASSASSIN AT ALL. Neither from a story perspective or a gameplay one.

Edward Kenway was marketed as a "A Pirate Trained By Assassins". That tagline is deceitful and out of sync with the storyline and the real origins of Edward's skills. Let's just say that Edward's tenure as an Assassin is momentary at best. For nearly the entire duration of the game, you will be playing as a pirate, plundering ships as you will and fighting for a liberated Pirate Republic alongside prominent sailors of the Golden Age of Piracy. That's all fine and dandy... if you want to only play as a pirate in a game marketed under the franchise name "Assassin's Creed". Do not—I repeat DO NOT—expect to play as an Assassin in this Assassin's Creed title. See how oxymoronic that sounds? Well, that's precisely what Assassin's Creed IV is — a glorified and fraudulent oxymoron in the form of a video game.

Despite the obvious focus on piracy and open conflict, a rudimentary, mock stealth system has been implemented to ensure that the game isn't a complete scam. You are equipped with an inadequate and poorly-designed stealth implementation, yet still expected to go through some missions undetected. This shoddy attempt to incorporate an Assassin experience is only further hindered by the abysmal level design, which clearly lends itself towards open conflict. Assassin's Creed IV's main missions are surprisingly more linear than its predecessors' and have little to no variation; you'll either be working as best you can with the horrendous stealth implementation while tailing or sneaking on land or recursively immobilizing and boarding ships on the high seas. Either way, you will be met with a slew of missions containing very little variation and even less focus on any variant of stealth whatsoever — that is to say that social stealth is well-nigh non-existent in this game.

Edward Kenway is a nice addition and is quite a likeable character, in a one-dimensional way, however. He's likeable by virtue of being a prototypical pirate — greedy, rebellious and selfish. Besides also being one of the funnier Assassins in the series, that's really all there is to like about him. Edward severely lacks the substance of his Assassin forerunners (Altaïr and Ezio) and his story isn't even remotely an interesting one; it's more entertaining than it is compelling or inspiring. His character development has no pace and occurs at the turn of a dime towards the game's conclusion, and as such, felt rushed and forced more than anything. Overall, Edward Kenway is an enjoyable character deprived of the quality and substance that made his predecessors (chronologically; not including Connor) memorable.

In conclusion, Assassin's Creed IV: Black Flag is neither a good pirate or Assassin's Creed game, though the severe lack of the former seems to be a prominent reason as to why this game is being treated as the savior of the franchise. In truth, it is the ground zero of the series' demise, in which all following games will consist of repetitive open conflict and mundane stealth sequences; the death of Assassin's Creed and birth of Warrior's Creed, if you will.

If you aren't a true fan of Assassin's Creed, want to play a game that deviates from the series' roots and story, and want a primitive, pirating simulator rather than a stealth-orientated, assassination simulator, you probably will find this game to be the best in the series, since it's not even remotely an Assassin's Creed game. It's fun for what it is, however, and is arguably the second best game that happens to be marketed under the series name, but it is far and away the worst Assassin's Creed game to date.

saw2097
10-04-2015, 07:51 PM
Assassin's Creed IV: Black Flag is undoubtedly the worst Assassin's Creed installment in the franchise.

It saddens a long-time Assassin's Creed fan to see that so many pseudo fans and sham reviewers continue to praise this game incessantly, with the general claim that "Black Flag is great because being a pirate and sailing the ocean blue is awesome! A great pirate action-adventure game!" This is precisely why this game is rubbish — it's fraudulent. I bought this game knowing that I would have to be a pirate—and quite frankly didn't mind the idea of being one—but thinking that I would still predominantly be an Assassin, as the main title on the cover is "[Assassin's] Creed IV". I was wrong; the subtitle sadly has much, much higher precedence than the aforementioned main one; in Assassin's Creed IV: Black Flag, YOU DO NOT PLAY AS AN ASSASSIN AT ALL. Neither from a story perspective or a gameplay one.

Edward Kenway was marketed as a "A Pirate Trained By Assassins". That tagline is deceitful and out of sync with the storyline and the real origins of Edward's skills. Let's just say that Edward's tenure as an Assassin is momentary at best. For nearly the entire duration of the game, you will be playing as a pirate, plundering ships as you will and fighting for a liberated Pirate Republic alongside prominent sailors of the Golden Age of Piracy. That's all fine and dandy... if you want to only play as a pirate in a game marketed under the franchise name "Assassin's Creed". Do not—I repeat DO NOT—expect to play as an Assassin in this Assassin's Creed title. See how oxymoronic that sounds? Well, that's precisely what Assassin's Creed IV is — a glorified and fraudulent oxymoron in the form of a video game.

Despite the obvious focus on piracy and open conflict, a rudimentary, mock stealth system has been implemented to ensure that the game isn't a complete scam. You are equipped with an inadequate and poorly-designed stealth implementation, yet still expected to go through some missions undetected. This shoddy attempt to incorporate an Assassin experience is only further hindered by the abysmal level design, which clearly lends itself towards open conflict. Assassin's Creed IV's main missions are surprisingly more linear than its predecessors' and have little to no variation; you'll either be working as best you can with the horrendous stealth implementation while tailing or sneaking on land or recursively immobilizing and boarding ships on the high seas. Either way, you will be met with a slew of missions containing very little variation and even less focus on any variant of stealth whatsoever — that is to say that social stealth is well-nigh non-existent in this game.

Edward Kenway is a nice addition and is quite a likeable character, in a one-dimensional way, however. He's likeable by virtue of being a prototypical pirate — greedy, rebellious and selfish. Besides also being one of the funnier Assassins in the series, that's really all there is to like about him. Edward severely lacks the substance of his Assassin forerunners (Altaïr and Ezio) and his story isn't even remotely an interesting one; it's more entertaining than it is compelling or inspiring. His character development has no pace and occurs at the turn of a dime towards the game's conclusion, and as such, felt rushed and forced more than anything. Overall, Edward Kenway is an enjoyable character deprived of the quality and substance that made his predecessors (chronologically; not including Connor) memorable.

In conclusion, Assassin's Creed IV: Black Flag is neither a good pirate or Assassin's Creed game, though the severe lack of the former seems to be a prominent reason as to why this game is being treated as the savior of the franchise. In truth, it is the ground zero of the series' demise, in which all following games will consist of repetitive open conflict and mundane stealth sequences; the death of Assassin's Creed and birth of Warrior's Creed, if you will.

If you aren't a true fan of Assassin's Creed, want to play a game that deviates from the series' roots and story, and want a primitive, pirating simulator rather than a stealth-orientated, assassination simulator, you probably will find this game to be the best in the series, since it's not even remotely an Assassin's Creed game. It's fun for what it is, however, and is arguably the second best game that happens to be marketed under the series name, but it is far and away the worst Assassin's Creed game to date.

What exactly gives you the authority to decide who the real fans are and aren't?

Assassin's Creed 4 had a outstanding stealth system and had some of the best game play in the franchise, it had all the bells and whistles of a Assassin's Creed game.

Its the story of someone seeing the Assassin and Templar war from the outside and looks down on both sides before eventually having a change of heart and picking a side.

Its a great Assassin's Creed game.

dread_stone
10-04-2015, 08:00 PM
What exactly gives you the authority to decide who the real fans are and aren't?

Assassin's Creed 4 had a outstanding stealth system and had some of the best game play in the franchise, it had all the bells and whistles of a Assassin's Creed game.

Its the story of someone seeing the Assassin and Templar war from the outside and looks down on both sides before eventually having a change of heart and picking a side.

Its a great Assassin's Creed game.
All of that is just my opinion on the matter. I'm not going to post "IMO" after everything I say just to appease people like you who jump the gun and assume I'm posting something as fact. Unless I explicitly say I'm posting something as a fact, then it's an opinion I hold. It's my opinion that if you aren't a true fan of the series, you will absolutely love Assassin's Creed IV, plain and simple, just as it's your opinion that it's a great Assassin's Creed game, where it's my opinion that it's the worst Assassin's Creed in the entire franchise, including mobile and handheld games.

Don't take it too seriously.

Kaschra
10-04-2015, 08:02 PM
If you aren't a true fan of Assassin's Creed, want to play a game that deviates from the series' roots and story, and want a primitive, pirating simulator rather than a stealth-orientated, assassination simulator, you probably will find this game to be the best in the series, since it's not even remotely an Assassin's Creed game. It's fun for what it is, however, and is arguably the second best game that happens to be marketed under the series name, but it is far and away the worst Assassin's Creed game to date.

So first you state your opinion about AC1 is a fact an not just an opinion, and now you act like you can decide who is a TRUE AC fan or not.
No.
Just... stop.

Hans684
10-04-2015, 08:07 PM
So first you state your opinion about AC1 is a fact an not just an opinion, and now you act like you can decide who is a TRUE AC fan or not.
No.
Just... stop.

People with campaigns against something they hate won't just stop. They are blinded by their own hatred after all.

Shahkulu101
10-04-2015, 08:11 PM
"True" fan.

"True" Assassin's Creed game.

Fetch me a ****ing bucket, I'm retching.

Kaschra
10-04-2015, 08:12 PM
People with campaigns against something they hate won't just stop. They are blinded by their own hatred after all.

Yeah, sadly that's true...

Hans684
10-04-2015, 08:14 PM
Yeah, sadly that's true...

And that's where the Templars come in ;)

Pr0metheus 1962
10-04-2015, 08:16 PM
If you aren't a true fan of Assassin's Creed, want to play a game that deviates from the series' roots and story, and want a primitive, pirating simulator rather than a stealth-orientated, assassination simulator, you probably will find this game to be the best in the series, since it's not even remotely an Assassin's Creed game. It's fun for what it is, however, and is arguably the second best game that happens to be marketed under the series name, but it is far and away the worst Assassin's Creed game to date.

I don't really care if you consider me a "true fan of Assassin's Creed" or not. I like good games, and I've played every Assassin's Creed game from AC1 to AC:Unity. Unlike you, I don't need AC games to feature a main character who is an Assassin, because what job the main character does DOESN'T MATTER.

I'm also a Judge Dredd comic book fan. The Judge Dredd story considered to be the best (America) doesn't even feature Judge Dredd and the main character isn't even a judge. Why? Because the story is what matters - not the person playing the lead role in the series and not the job the lead character in the story does. Those things are irrelevant.

You're focusing on an issue that isn't important.

The story they wanted to tell in AC4 was set in the AC universe, but it was told from the standpoint of an outsider. Telling the story from that outsider viewpoint freshened up a series that was getting stale. You might not like it, but it gave AC a breath of fresh air it desperately needed.

Shahkulu101
10-04-2015, 08:22 PM
Saying it was the worst 'Assassin's Creed' game makes no sense anyway. The stealth was very good, in terms of AC standards - and the story is about a lost soul finding his true calling with the Creed and the Assassin's.

dread_stone
10-04-2015, 08:23 PM
So first you state your opinion about AC1 is a fact an not just an opinion, and now you act like you can decide who is a TRUE AC fan or not.
No.
Just... stop.
*sigh*

All of that is just my opinion on the matter. I'm not going to post "IMO" after everything I say just to appease people like you who jump the gun and assume I'm posting something as fact. Seriously, I'm not posting "IMO" after every solitary thing I say, so, you shouldn't look forward to its inclusion in my posts anytime soon.

It's simply my belief that if ACIV is your favorite Assassin's Creed game, then you not only have no idea what Assassin's Creed is about, but also aren't a true fan of the series either. It's like your favorite football game being Dark Souls; you obviously haven't the slightest clue what a football game is, which is why your opinion is essentially moot (not you, Kaschra; just a quick example).

Don't take it too seriously. I'm just some random guy on the internet.


I don't really care if you consider me a "true fan of Assassin's Creed" or not.
Splendid.

Pr0metheus 1962
10-04-2015, 08:28 PM
It's simply my belief that if ACIV is your favorite Assassin's Creed game, then you not only have no idea what Assassin's Creed is about, but also aren't a true fan of the series either.

Newsflash: another person on the internet found to be wrong.

dread_stone
10-04-2015, 08:35 PM
Newsflash: another person on the internet found to be wrong.
So, you aren't tolerant of others' opinions? My opinion is wrong by virtue of being unpleasant to you?

Hans684
10-04-2015, 08:42 PM
So, you aren't tolerant of others' opinions? My opinion is wrong by virtue of being unpleasant to you?

Calm down mate and in case you don't know but even opinions can be wrong. Yours is nothing but a fan definition of a "true" AC, it has no merit against Ubisoft's actions regarding this series. And fans are fans, having different opinions won't change that. You're a random lad/las on a random forum like everyone else here. However give me the BS reply as you've given all else, then I won't bother replying.

Journey93
10-04-2015, 08:59 PM
All of that is just my opinion on the matter. I'm not going to post "IMO" after everything I say just to appease people like you who jump the gun and assume I'm posting something as fact. Unless I explicitly say I'm posting something as a fact, then it's an opinion I hold. It's my opinion that if you aren't a true fan of the series, you will absolutely love Assassin's Creed IV, plain and simple, just as it's your opinion that it's a great Assassin's Creed game, where it's my opinion that it's the worst Assassin's Creed in the entire franchise, including mobile and handheld games.

Don't take it too seriously.

I won't take it too seriously since you are blowing things way out of porportions just because Edward wasn't a "real" Assassin for most of the game. That was part of his story though.
If he was already an Assassin since the beginning we would just have another typical AC game. Instead we got the unique perspective of an outside who got caught up in the Assassin conflict.
Much better than wannabe Assassins like Connor and Arno who never felt like they really believed in the creed (same seems to be the case with Jacob) but were still kind of Assassins.

You can hate it all you want but don't make silly claims like true fans wouldn't like AC IV

Aphex_Tim
10-04-2015, 09:00 PM
What's with all the necromancers on the forums lately?

This thread in particular is being raised from the dead a lot and it always ends in heated argument. Doesn't really look like were getting anywhere...

Namikaze_17
10-04-2015, 09:04 PM
What's with all the necromancers on the forums lately?

This thread in particular is being raised from the dead a lot and it always ends in heated argument. Doesn't really look like were getting anywhere...

We're all trapped in the infinite tsukuyomi unfortunately.

Now we're stuck in limbo talking about tired topics and reoccurring threads from the dead. :rolleyes:

Kaschra
10-04-2015, 09:40 PM
*sigh*

All of that is just my opinion on the matter. I'm not going to post "IMO" after everything I say just to appease people like you who jump the gun and assume I'm posting something as fact. Seriously, I'm not posting "IMO" after every solitary thing I say, so, you shouldn't look forward to its inclusion in my posts anytime soon.

Expect that you outright SAID that AC1 being the best AC game is a fact and not an opinion.


It's simply my belief that if ACIV is your favorite Assassin's Creed game, then you not only have no idea what Assassin's Creed is about, but also aren't a true fan of the series either. It's like your favorite football game being Dark Souls; you obviously haven't the slightest clue what a football game is, which is why your opinion is essentially moot (not you, Kaschra; just a quick example).

Fun fact: AC4 IS my fave AC game, and yes, it is an Assassin's Creed game.
And the use of "true" fan makes me want to vomit. And I want to vomit even more since you think you can decide who is a fan or not.
Now what, are you gonna tell me that I don't have any idea what the series is about?

BananaBlighter
10-04-2015, 09:49 PM
Expect that you outright SAID that AC1 being the best AC game is a fact and not an opinion.



Fun fact: AC4 IS my fave AC game, and yes, it is an Assassin's Creed game.
And the use of "true" fan makes me want to vomit. And I want to vomit even more since you think you can decide who is a fan or not.
Now what, are you gonna tell me that I don't have any idea what the series is about?

Thank you, completely agree, AC4 is my fav too...so far.

strigoi1958
10-04-2015, 10:03 PM
I love AC 3 but whenever I introduce new "recruits" to AC I show them ACIV... so nice to see new people stare in amazement at a game the same way I did the first time I saw it. I think ALL the AC games were great and there's not much in it but 3 and 4 are my favourites...

BananaBlighter
10-04-2015, 10:25 PM
I love AC 3 but whenever I introduce new "recruits" to AC I show them ACIV... so nice to see new people stare in amazement at a game the same way I did the first time I saw it. I think ALL the AC games were great and there's not much in it but 3 and 4 are my favourites...

Yeah AC4 was my first AC (I'd played bits of AC3 beforehand, loved the parkour, the combat, so got AC4) and I absolutely loved it. That's probably why I say it's my favourite, because every thing felt new and fresh and amazing. After all that time staring at my friend with AC3 I finally got to explore an expansive open world on my own, slowly working out everything along the way was an incredible experience. Being a noob feels awesome, now it's just weird going back for me. Having achieved 100% sync I just don't know what to do. Going round killing people is sorta fun I guess...but it's nothing like that great feeling of discovery. I remember that shipwreck that led to a hideout and I swear I was so overjoyed when I finally found my way in. I wish so badly that as well as replayable story missions we had replayable side missions too. Those legendary ships were ******* amazing. Developing a unique strategy for each one, and after countless attempts and improvements, watching each one sink made me feel...EPIC.

strigoi1958
10-04-2015, 10:37 PM
The first time I was sunk by a legendary ship just made me more determined to upgrade to full... fighting the 2 Legendary ships was incredibly difficult but nothing beats the feeling of satisfaction and achievement when finally winning... even with just the smallest bit of health left :D.

I used to leave the ship sailing on screen like an animated wallpaper just listening to the shanties... such a great game.

dread_stone
10-04-2015, 10:44 PM
Calm down mate and in case you don't know but even opinions can be wrong. Yours is nothing but a fan definition of a "true" AC, it has no merit against Ubisoft's actions regarding this series. And fans are fans, having different opinions won't change that. You're a random lad/las on a random forum like everyone else here. However give me the BS reply as you've given all else, then I won't bother replying.
I have already stated, "All of that is just my opinion on the matter."

Care to tell me anything else I already know?


Expect that you outright SAID that AC1 being the best AC game is a fact and not an opinion.
That was pertaining to this thread, as I was trying to stay on topic. Anways, I'm not arguing over facts; ACI is the best Assassin's Creed game. I'm not going to explain why again.


Now what, are you gonna tell me that I don't have any idea what the series is about?
No, but I am going to tell you that, in my book, you aren't a true Assassin's Creed fan, not even remotely so.

Why do you care if I don't even remotely consider you to be an Assassin's Creed fan? It's like you all are trying to change my judgement of what I've personally deemed to be psuedo fans who think Assassin's Creed IV is the best Assassin's Creed in the series, and that simply isn't going to happen.

LieutenantRex
10-04-2015, 10:54 PM
I believe the sensitive minority is jumping on Dread here simply because he stated a half-truth. AC4 is indeed a terrible Assassin's Creed game. Now, while I disagree with his claim that AC1 was the best in the series, I acknowledge that this is merely a claim, an opinion, and I move on. If you believe that he is coming off as condescending or judgmental, that's because you are allowing yourself to perceive his words as such.

Pr0metheus 1962
10-04-2015, 10:55 PM
I have already stated, "All of that is just my opinion on the matter."

Yeah, but your opinion on the matter is based on a well-known fallacy - the "No true Scotsman" fallacy. It's an attempt to retain an unreasoned assertion. Your opinion hinges on a lack of reason.