PDA

View Full Version : So, remind me why I am supposed to buy AC:U at $60 right away, instead of waiting...



Pryotra
08-12-2014, 07:03 PM
Because frankly, without MP, I don't see a reason to get it immediately. It's not like the single player will get worse if I wait, and without a competitive MP, I don't see a reason to get it early. I can easily wait till Steam sells it and all DLC for it combined under a price tag of $20 bucks, so honestly I don't know why I would get it until then.

If it is a single only story experience, it has to have Elder Scrolls levels of replay-ability in order to be worth the big price tag. While the AC series has nice single player, I simply don't see my self repeatedly playing it in order to feel worth the $60. I mean, ACB still has a community, and you don't see them playing the single player. Who here still plays AC 1 or 2?

pacmanate
08-12-2014, 07:07 PM
Honestly... none of us work for Ubisoft so we don't care if you buy it now or not haha

Jexx21
08-12-2014, 07:08 PM
I still play AC1 and AC2. I'm playing AC2 right now.

And it's easy to get 60 hours out of AC games without replaying them much.

Also, there's co-op.

And Skyrim has hundreds of hours worth in it, games don't need to reach that point to be worth $60.

MnemonicSyntax
08-12-2014, 07:10 PM
So... wait then?

I still play AC1 and 2. Every summer I start from the beginning and play through. I don't play Multiplayer at all.

If you only play for MP, then I'd just wait.

DumbGamerTag94
08-12-2014, 07:10 PM
I actually just finished AC2 as u read this haha. And AC1 a few weeks ago. I'm in the midst of replaying all the games in the run up to ACRogue and Unity.

Debating weather I should hold off on AC3 until after rogue

D.I.D.
08-12-2014, 07:13 PM
You already know the answer to your own question. If you want it on day one, buy it then (and if you shop cleverly, you can get it cheaper). If you don't want it on day one, don't buy it on day one.

I try playing the MP, but I never see anything fun about it. I just buy AC for the SP, and I've played most of the series at least twice. I don't even think that's a factor relevant to price, given that whether you'll play a game again is entirely subjective and almost impossible for the creators to bake in. There are some games I'll only ever play once, and they were just as worthwhile.

Sushiglutton
08-12-2014, 07:17 PM
Suppose there are a few reasons like avoiding spoilers, being able to talk to others about it while it's fresh and stuff like that.

AherasSTRG
08-12-2014, 07:18 PM
Ummm, what about waiting then...? If it is so tragic to spend 60$, then, just wait. None of us in these forums care. Neither does Ubisoft in that matter...

Sesheenku
08-12-2014, 07:19 PM
Who said you were supposed to?

If you don't like it don't buy it. Simple.

If you do like it then it's obvious why you would spend 60 dollars.

Why'd you even make this thread? To ***** about MP?

Assassin_M
08-12-2014, 07:20 PM
uhhh....you're not supposed to? wait then...

SixKeys
08-12-2014, 07:21 PM
I replay AC1 and AC2 all the time. I love AC multiplayer, but single-player should always be the priority in this franchise. Multiplayer hasn't really changed radically since ACR and Ubi just can't seem to be arsed to fix the same old problems. If they're not going to do MP properly, might as well not even bother anymore. If you think that means you shouldn't get the game at launch, then....don't?

Pryotra
08-12-2014, 07:23 PM
I still play AC1 and AC2. I'm playing AC2 right now.

And it's easy to get 60 hours out of AC games without replaying them much.

Also, there's co-op.

And Skyrim has hundreds of hours worth in it, games don't need to reach that point to be worth $60.

I'm glad that you and others still play those games. Thing is, Once I max out a game, unless there is some form of replay-ability, I tend to never pull it out again. When it comes to the AC series, All there is after the storyline is collectables and creating tidle waves of money into your pocket. Once that is done, there is nothing. Games like this, no matter how good, tend to drop in price REALLY quickly.

While you are right in that it doesn't need Skyrim levels of depth, it needs more than a weeks worth of playing for me to plop down $60 on it. And without an MP, AC simply doesn't have it. BTW, Wolfpack, or whatever they want to call it now, was never good, and even implementing it into the storyline just seems forced rather than good. While I won't talk trash on something that hasn't been released, it simply isn't attractive in any way so far, so I can't see it being good enough in the next game. Hopefully I will be wrong, but honestly, I just don't see it happening.

lothario-da-be
08-12-2014, 07:23 PM
Cool story OP. Tell me about your MP adventures on cod.

AherasSTRG
08-12-2014, 07:25 PM
See what you did there, Jexx? You gave him food for a reply.

ZakMc.
08-12-2014, 07:26 PM
I understand where you're comming from. I cant pay 60 dollars for another ac game, only because I know there will be something wrong it, story will be bad or lame gameplay like revelations. However, if the story is good and the games a hit ill go out and buy it after launch. Just wait till November.

Assassin_M
08-12-2014, 07:29 PM
MP doesn't have an infinite life cycle, OP. It's just as finite as single player. Most of us here would argue that SP has more to it than MP ever will and it's not just because of collectables and story missions.

LoyalACFan
08-12-2014, 07:38 PM
MP doesn't have an infinite life cycle, OP. It's just as finite as single player. Most of us here would argue that SP has more to it than MP ever will and it's not just because of collectables and story missions.

Exactly. I really don't get when people say "ZOMG single-player is so repetitive!" and then proceed to play their 142312th team deathmatch. If OP doesn't want to buy it straightaway, more power to him, but the argument that a game has to have hundreds of hours worth of content to be worth $60 doesn't hold up. I mean, doesn't a ticket to a two-hour movie cost like $8 per person?

JustPlainQuirky
08-12-2014, 07:45 PM
>buying AC for the multiplayer

You're doing it wrong, brah.

Sushiglutton
08-12-2014, 07:48 PM
MP doesn't have an infinite life cycle, OP. It's just as finite as single player. Most of us here would argue that SP has more to it than MP ever will and it's not just because of collectables and story missions.

Well I've played a total of 0.0 seconds of AC MP, so yeah I would argue that :)

EmbodyingSeven5
08-12-2014, 07:49 PM
uh........ wait then? im kind of happy that I don't have a next gem system yet because when I finally get one I can binge on all the next gen AC releases!!

Pryotra
08-12-2014, 07:52 PM
Exactly. I really don't get when people say "ZOMG single-player is so repetitive!" and then proceed to play their 142312th team deathmatch. If OP doesn't want to buy it straightaway, more power to him, but the argument that a game has to have hundreds of hours worth of content to be worth $60 doesn't hold up. I mean, doesn't a ticket to a two-hour movie cost like $8 per person?

Not asking for infinite life cycle. Nothing is infinite but human stupidity and the universe, and I'm not so sure about the universe. ;)

However, every multiplayer match is different than the last. Maybe you don't see it initially, but every person has their own flavor in this game. Some people like to be Santa clause, click-click-click on the rooftops, while others like to blend in, or even ride a civi group around, just enjoying the view. And of course there are those who do some combination, and those that do neither. There are those that are set in their ways, and those that can adapt over the course of a game. Every match plays differently than the last, and as a result it can be replayed thousands of times without getting old (assuming you are having fun)

Meanwhile, the Campaign just doesn't change playthrough to playthrough. It's not like the flags move around to new hiding spots, it's not like the AI radically improves in any way. The story is the same, without alternative endings, but I honestly don't want that in this sort of game. The next 50 guards will go down just as easily as this 50 you are currently slaughtering. The flags become something of a course you can run to quickly nab 'em all each time you get to the area, or all at once at the very end.

Don't get me wrong, I enjoy the stories of this franchise. I really do. But not at $60 a ride. I can wait, like I can wait for a DVD/Bluray of a movie. Unless of course, it's date night. Unfortunately, unless the co-op is couch co-op, I don't see myself picking this up immediately.

poptartz20
08-12-2014, 07:53 PM
umm.. well. okay then wait then ? I don't think anyone here will really try to convince you of anything.

also, I just recently picked back up AC2 as well.. I would play 1 but I don't currently have it.

Sesheenku
08-12-2014, 07:57 PM
Not asking for infinite life cycle. Nothing is infinite but human stupidity and the universe, and I'm not so sure about the universe. ;)

However, every multiplayer match is different than the last. Maybe you don't see it initially, but every person has their own flavor in this game. Some people like to be Santa clause, click-click-click on the rooftops, while others like to blend in, or even ride a civi group around, just enjoying the view. And of course there are those who do some combination, and those that do neither. There are those that are set in their ways, and those that can adapt over the course of a game. Every match plays differently than the last, and as a result it can be replayed thousands of times without getting old (assuming you are having fun)

Meanwhile, the Campaign just doesn't change playthrough to playthrough. It's not like the flags move around to new hiding spots, it's not like the AI radically improves in any way. The story is the same, without alternative endings, but I honestly don't want that in this sort of game. The next 50 guards will go down just as easily as this 50 you are currently slaughtering. The flags become something of a course you can run to quickly nab 'em all each time you get to the area, or all at once at the very end.

Don't get me wrong, I enjoy the stories of this franchise. I really do. But not at $60 a ride. I can wait, like I can wait for a DVD/Bluray of a movie. Unless of course, it's date night. Unfortunately, unless the co-op is couch co-op, I don't see myself picking this up immediately.

Typical PvP player response.

The play through is not exactly the same. That's stupid, guards wont react the exact same way or be in the exact same place and things won't play out the exact same way. Don't be ridiculous.

I'm tired of hearing this argument in games. PvP is not inherently more variable, AI no matter how stupid it is will not react the same. Perhaps the difficulty won't change but to say it's exactly the same is among the most ridiculous things I've ever heard on this forum.

Landruner
08-12-2014, 08:00 PM
Because frankly, without MP, I don't see a reason to get it immediately. It's not like the single player will get worse if I wait, and without a competitive MP, I don't see a reason to get it early. I can easily wait till Steam sells it and all DLC for it combined under a price tag of $20 bucks, so honestly I don't know why I would get it until then.

If it is a single only story experience, it has to have Elder Scrolls levels of replay-ability in order to be worth the big price tag. While the AC series has nice single player, I simply don't see my self repeatedly playing it in order to feel worth the $60. I mean, ACB still has a community, and you don't see them playing the single player. Who here still plays AC 1 or 2?

AC fans are "Replay habilis" :p! - I half way see your point there, I mean I personally do not play the AC/MP, but for UNITY they compensated it with the Co-op, which if made intuitive and clever enough will certainly be 100 of times more fun that a casual MP mod, so, I do not really the point of waiting because a MP option is missing. I mean AC1 and AC2Vwere without MP and for $59.99 at release, and back in time, I do not think people found robbed or in the need to wait for player the SP only. I mean I believe that AC games are mostly for the SP and MP is secondary. Am I wrong?1

Assassin_M
08-12-2014, 08:03 PM
Meanwhile, the Campaign just doesn't change playthrough to playthrough.
Actually, yes it does.

Pryotra
08-12-2014, 08:06 PM
Typical PvP player response.

The play through is not exactly the same. That's stupid, guards wont react the exact same way or be in the exact same place and things won't play out the exact same way. Don't be ridiculous.

I'm tired of hearing this argument in games. PvP is not inherently more variable, AI no matter how stupid it is will not react the same. Perhaps the difficulty won't change but to say it's exactly the same is among the most ridiculous things I've ever heard on this forum.

Ok, fair enough.

But at the same time, the flags are in the same location every game. The shanty's do follow the same paths every time. Honestly, it's as set in stone as the Story. As for guards, they run the same paths every game, and they have a set amount of answers they use to any given scenario. The ones that don't move are essentially just an interactive part of the landscape. While the game may not be 100% the same, it's pretty darn close. In fact, I have yet to be surprised by an npc in a play-through, as of Black flag. When you can solo half a city right away in the first playthrough without gearing up, you know you understand the AI on a level that simply shouldn't be. And I am talking about while the templars still believed you to be a rouge assassin, before they discovered you were a pirate.

Meanwhile, MP is different, as even the most stupid of humans adapt over time. How do you feel that MP isn't more variable? I'm interested in the "classic" PvE player response.

Pryotra
08-12-2014, 08:12 PM
AC fans are "Replay habilis" :p! - I half way see your point there, I mean I personally do not play the AC/MP, but for UNITY they compensated it with the Co-op, which if made intuitive and clever enough will certainly be 100 of times more fun that a casual MP mod, so, I do not really the point of waiting because a MP option is missing. I mean AC1 and AC2Vwere without MP and for $59.99 at release, and back in time, I do not think people found robbed or in the need to wait for player the SP only. I mean I believe that AC games are mostly for the SP and MP is secondary. Am I wrong?1

Wasn't talking down to anyone, at least wasn't trying. But I did wait for the price drop on 1, and 2 I actually got free due to waiting. So... yeah. While I enjoy playing the Single player, If it can't adapt or meaningfully change in any way I simply can't bring myself to a second playthrough.

While I agree that AC should be Single player first, I simply require more to invest $60 into it if that is the end all be all. And as I said before, couch co-op would make this difference for me.

Unfortunately, I'm off to work. Pleasant chatting with you all on this. I will be back later to catch up, so don't think I won't come back.

Assassin_M
08-12-2014, 08:13 PM
Meanwhile, MP is different, as even the most stupid of humans adapt over time. How do you feel that MP isn't more variable? I'm interested in the "classic" PvE player response.
No, it's not. it's the same basic strategies, hiding places, chase breakers..etc. You only play it a couple of times until you realize it's basically the same thing always..

see? I can do that too.

Sesheenku
08-12-2014, 08:25 PM
Ok, fair enough.

But at the same time, the flags are in the same location every game. The shanty's do follow the same paths every time. Honestly, it's as set in stone as the Story. As for guards, they run the same paths every game, and they have a set amount of answers they use to any given scenario. The ones that don't move are essentially just an interactive part of the landscape. While the game may not be 100% the same, it's pretty darn close. In fact, I have yet to be surprised by an npc in a play-through, as of Black flag. When you can solo half a city right away in the first playthrough without gearing up, you know you understand the AI on a level that simply shouldn't be. And I am talking about while the templars still believed you to be a rouge assassin, before they discovered you were a pirate.

Meanwhile, MP is different, as even the most stupid of humans adapt over time. How do you feel that MP isn't more variable? I'm interested in the "classic" PvE player response.

I don't bother with collectables, they're pointless in nearly every game for one thing.

Secondly guards run a set path but they'll never react exactly the same and when you get there they'll most likely be in a different spot than your last play through.

Finally let me correct you I'm not PvE only, for this series yes but I play PvP in others.

MP isn't more variable, we can argue the supposed depth but at the end of the day you're going to go and attack your opponent with similar strategies, the one and only thing that makes PvP fun is the interaction with other players and tense situations that can happen because you know that the opponent could be anywhere.

Quite frankly it's like chess and sports. In chess you see where all the pieces are, you plan from there and hopefully things go precisely the way you want (SP) and then there's sports where you have to be vigilant and your decisions are all timed, the opponent could be anywhere and they could get to you at anytime, you need to think quickly and efficiently. (MP)

Neither however is necessarily more in depth or enjoyable.

HiddenKiller612
08-13-2014, 12:09 AM
Ah the age old I love mah multiplayersss... y u no keep iat? If you don't want to buy this simply because it is singleplayer only... you're missing the point of the games. It never needed mp, and it always felt tacked on and useless.... imo. I only bothered with it because I collect trophies in series I love, and this happens to be one of them..... all in all, I felt more repetitiveness in mp than in all of the single player games. People do the same tactics, the same kills, hide in the same places... and run around getting 100 point kills... the only thing remotely interesting was wolfpack... and that can be played solo. All in all, this series isn't for you if what you're looking for is mp... I'm personally glad it's gone, and won't feel a bit bad if it remains gone forever. Now we'll get games fully focused on what matters, the singleplayer.

GreySkellig
08-13-2014, 01:24 AM
It's great that some people love the AC MP, but most folks play for the single player, which is, for the record, widely acclaimed. It sounds like you have more of a problem with single player games in general.

Besides, if the MP really is so endlessly, diversely entertaining, then why do you need a new AC MP? Why play any AC game after Brotherhood? (This is a silly question, of course, but I hope you see my point.)

I'm personally excited because this may be the first time I really dig into AC's multiplayer components. I've always preferred co-op over competitive.

Jexx21
08-13-2014, 02:07 AM
MP was probably dropped because there weren't enough players. I think that the amount of MP players have dwindled down to the point where they don't see a point in developing it anymore because it'd be more cost-effective to drop it.

LatinaC09
08-13-2014, 02:32 AM
I'm glad they dropped the multiplayer. I always thought of AC as a single player game. The co-op however does intrigue me.

ShoryukenMan
08-13-2014, 03:42 AM
You don't have to. I'm not paying full price for the game either. But, I have very different reasons for doing so. Usually I buy each AC on day one. This time they're releasing two games this year and, unfortunately, Rogue is coming out after Unity. I wanted to play Rogue first so that I wouldn't get used to Unity's new mechanics and then go back to Rogue's older mechanics. Also, I don't want to get used to Unity's gorgeous next gen graphics and then go back to Rogue's (while still good looking) last gen graphics. And I'm not a graphics *****. lol.

What I plan to do is wait for black friday and get both. I'm sure Amazon will have some kind of bundle deal for both games during that time. Besides, I can wait. I plan on playing Liberation HD (which I still haven't played yet) replaying AC4 (which I finally got on PS4), the Aveline dlc, and then Freedom Cry. All in preparation for Rogue and Unity.

So, with that said... Yes, a lot of us still play the older games. For me, the only true thing that matters in AC is it's single player content. It's story, it's beautiful cities, it's amazing characters, and the awesome game play, they are what makes AC, AC for me. And I've replayed all of them multiple times. Especially AC2 and Brotherhood. I'm not a multiplayer kind of guy. And yes, while I do enjoy some Cod and Halo MP matches when they first come out, I'm still primarily a single player person. Hell, I buy Halo for it's campaign before I buy it for it's multiplayer.

So, if you feel that you don't want to pay full price on Unity, then that's your prerogative.

Pryotra
08-13-2014, 04:47 AM
Ok, I'm back from work. Time to respond!

No, it's not. it's the same basic strategies, hiding places, chase breakers..etc. You only play it a couple of times until you realize it's basically the same thing always..

see? I can do that too.

I'm really not certain that this is real. I mean, this sounds like 4 year old logic. "NU-UH! IT TOTALLY ISN'T!" is a terrible argument, but still the one you put forth.

I guess you were looking for an "ARE TOO!!!!"


Ah the age old I love mah multiplayersss... y u no keep iat? If you don't want to buy this simply because it is singleplayer only... you're missing the point of the games. It never needed mp, and it always felt tacked on and useless.... imo. I only bothered with it because I collect trophies in series I love, and this happens to be one of them..... all in all, I felt more repetitiveness in mp than in all of the single player games. People do the same tactics, the same kills, hide in the same places... and run around getting 100 point kills... the only thing remotely interesting was wolfpack... and that can be played solo. All in all, this series isn't for you if what you're looking for is mp... I'm personally glad it's gone, and won't feel a bit bad if it remains gone forever. Now we'll get games fully focused on what matters, the singleplayer.

This is an actual response, if a bit defensive. I am glad you love the series. I don't want you to stop on my behalf.

However, this game is going to have to live up to the "greats" of single player gaming like AC2 did if it wants to earn my $60. If you actually remember AC1, it was pretty.... everywhere. Yahtzee said it best. It was a good game, but it's like the developers didn't know what part of it was fun. Skyrim was one such example, but there are others such as psychonauts, zone of the enders, Mass Effect 1 & 2, etc.

I fully expect to buy this game. I don't expect to spend anywhere close to $60 on it. Frankly, the single player isn't going to be made worse by waiting. If there isn't a deteriorating pool of players on the multiplayer, why rush the purchase? I know that AC1 and 2 started at $60. 2 months later that went down significantly. If the co-op is dead in 2 months, the game probably was a flop, and at least I'm not out money that I can't really use to the fullest down the road. If it is still there, I lost nothing, and gained $20. $20 buys alot of tacos man.

I don't bother with collectables, they're pointless in nearly every game for one thing.

Secondly guards run a set path but they'll never react exactly the same and when you get there they'll most likely be in a different spot than your last play through.

Finally let me correct you I'm not PvE only, for this series yes but I play PvP in others.

MP isn't more variable, we can argue the supposed depth but at the end of the day you're going to go and attack your opponent with similar strategies, the one and only thing that makes PvP fun is the interaction with other players and tense situations that can happen because you know that the opponent could be anywhere.

Quite frankly it's like chess and sports. In chess you see where all the pieces are, you plan from there and hopefully things go precisely the way you want (SP) and then there's sports where you have to be vigilant and your decisions are all timed, the opponent could be anywhere and they could get to you at anytime, you need to think quickly and efficiently. (MP)

Neither however is necessarily more in depth or enjoyable.

I actually like this argument. It makes sense, is well thought out, and doesn't get defensive or belittle the speaker. Thank you for that.

While we can disagree about the guards (at this point when I play I only use fists and start a fight with every guard I run into. I don't run, and I don't die. Only way to milk the challenge at this point.), I like the summary of what you find fun in the multiplayer. It's pretty parallel to what I feel when I play it, and to me makes this game all that much more exciting and addicting to a degree.

I also like the comparison to chess and sports. I like both, but no one ever plays chess with me any more. =(

That said, it's pretty spot on, and I think it boils down to which challenge you find more enjoyable. For me, that was the multiplayer, catching others and getting caught where both experiences I enjoyed, alongside the stalking and the predicting the other side. I liked the rush, and I will miss it. That said, I will still enjoy the Single player... just a couple months after the initial price drops. The better the reviews, the less I will wait. That said, if I don't hear good things, I can easily wait longer.

I honestly think that every game sense the first has been pretty easy in terms of difficulty, but I think that is specific to my experience. You see, I played 1 on a PC that had an incompatible graphics card. While it ran the game, there was one, GLARING draw back. The Kingdom. You see, the Kingdom I played had an issue with meshes. By that, I mean that they didn't stick to the landscape, meaning that they were strewn randomly throughout the air, making it impossible to see anything. I 100% that game like this, and fighting waves of guards + templars while attempting to find flags was probably my most trying experience in a large majority of my gaming career.

So I probably enjoyed AC1 for the wrong reasons, but in the end I have never found an AC single player lacking. I just have a hard time having it contain my attention, as I can easily knock out a play-through in a few evenings. I then spend a couple more evenings with the collectables and whatnot, and then before the week is over I have the game done in minimal time. To me, this has found me wanting in a way that so far only the pvp has fulfilled. I enjoy the single player, but not $60 enjoy it. More like $20 enjoy it.

Sesheenku
08-13-2014, 05:23 AM
I actually like this argument. It makes sense, is well thought out, and doesn't get defensive or belittle the speaker. Thank you for that.

While we can disagree about the guards (at this point when I play I only use fists and start a fight with every guard I run into. I don't run, and I don't die. Only way to milk the challenge at this point.), I like the summary of what you find fun in the multiplayer. It's pretty parallel to what I feel when I play it, and to me makes this game all that much more exciting and addicting to a degree.

I also like the comparison to chess and sports. I like both, but no one ever plays chess with me any more. =(

That said, it's pretty spot on, and I think it boils down to which challenge you find more enjoyable. For me, that was the multiplayer, catching others and getting caught where both experiences I enjoyed, alongside the stalking and the predicting the other side. I liked the rush, and I will miss it. That said, I will still enjoy the Single player... just a couple months after the initial price drops. The better the reviews, the less I will wait. That said, if I don't hear good things, I can easily wait longer.

I honestly think that every game sense the first has been pretty easy in terms of difficulty, but I think that is specific to my experience. You see, I played 1 on a PC that had an incompatible graphics card. While it ran the game, there was one, GLARING draw back. The Kingdom. You see, the Kingdom I played had an issue with meshes. By that, I mean that they didn't stick to the landscape, meaning that they were strewn randomly throughout the air, making it impossible to see anything. I 100% that game like this, and fighting waves of guards + templars while attempting to find flags was probably my most trying experience in a large majority of my gaming career.

So I probably enjoyed AC1 for the wrong reasons, but in the end I have never found an AC single player lacking. I just have a hard time having it contain my attention, as I can easily knock out a play-through in a few evenings. I then spend a couple more evenings with the collectables and whatnot, and then before the week is over I have the game done in minimal time. To me, this has found me wanting in a way that so far only the pvp has fulfilled. I enjoy the single player, but not $60 enjoy it. More like $20 enjoy it.

Ah well I never said they were hard, they certainly aren't difficult games but even though I CAN just go and beat the crap out of a guard before he can even draw his weapons, I prefer to as I said, consider it like a game of chess, you see the pieces clearly but will what you expect happen after your move is made? It's always 50/50 especially with how nonsensical guard behavior can be in the games. Essentially I always try for stealth and adapt as necessary, well... until they put instant fail missions everywhere.

In any case I fully respect waiting for reviews, especially with this company who has delivered lower quality experiences lately in AC.

Pryotra
08-13-2014, 08:59 AM
Ah well I never said they were hard, they certainly aren't difficult games but even though I CAN just go and beat the crap out of a guard before he can even draw his weapons, I prefer to as I said, consider it like a game of chess, you see the pieces clearly but will what you expect happen after your move is made? It's always 50/50 especially with how nonsensical guard behavior can be in the games. Essentially I always try for stealth and adapt as necessary, well... until they put instant fail missions everywhere.

In any case I fully respect waiting for reviews, especially with this company who has delivered lower quality experiences lately in AC.
I think you misunderstand, but at the same time you are very close to the mark. I do like a challenge, and frankly the AI has hardly improved since AC1. I mean, outside of getting guns and/or running faster, they really haven't changed all that much. It's either try to use guns, try to melee with whatever weapon until you disarm/kill them, if disarmed and able they will pick up any nearby weapons, and if an Important/coward NPC, they run. Oh, and if it's none of the above, it's either failing at parkour or just generally tarding/glitching it up, which admittedly is the most entertaining occurrence. At this point, I don't really find that there are that many "instant fail" missions; I mean, even the mission in AC2 with Ezio right after his dad dies EVENTUALLY runs out of guards to throw at you (you still have to complete the mission by walking away, but at least after the brutal massacre where you kill every single guard in all of Italy you can have some time to mourn. It's how I choose to end it, and it kinda explains the poor training all later guards seem to have.).

As for the declining quality, again we agree completely. Not even just in the multiplayer (Seriously? Forgetting why you initially put in chases?Just wow.), but the single player as well. They keep adding mechanics that are 100% unessary and broken (hookblade? On top of the leap climb? I mean, they could have just made the hookblade into the old man ezio jump climb, but they decided it was better to slingshot you up skyscrapers 1.5+ stories at a time.) or simply dumbing down the mechanics (Connor, your entire combat was prompt based and you know it. Might as well have been a push button action sequence ala resident evil). Not to mention the story has felt a little less.... cohesive, if you ask me. Like they were grasping for straws after a forced decision to change the plot entirely.

I sure hope the next couple games deliver, as the series does seem to be on a downwards trend ever since revalations.

Sesheenku
08-13-2014, 10:10 AM
I think you misunderstand, but at the same time you are very close to the mark. I do like a challenge, and frankly the AI has hardly improved since AC1. I mean, outside of getting guns and/or running faster, they really haven't changed all that much. It's either try to use guns, try to melee with whatever weapon until you disarm/kill them, if disarmed and able they will pick up any nearby weapons, and if an Important/coward NPC, they run. Oh, and if it's none of the above, it's either failing at parkour or just generally tarding/glitching it up, which admittedly is the most entertaining occurrence. At this point, I don't really find that there are that many "instant fail" missions; I mean, even the mission in AC2 with Ezio right after his dad dies EVENTUALLY runs out of guards to throw at you (you still have to complete the mission by walking away, but at least after the brutal massacre where you kill every single guard in all of Italy you can have some time to mourn. It's how I choose to end it, and it kinda explains the poor training all later guards seem to have.).

As for the declining quality, again we agree completely. Not even just in the multiplayer (Seriously? Forgetting why you initially put in chases?Just wow.), but the single player as well. They keep adding mechanics that are 100% unessary and broken (hookblade? On top of the leap climb? I mean, they could have just made the hookblade into the old man ezio jump climb, but they decided it was better to slingshot you up skyscrapers 1.5+ stories at a time.) or simply dumbing down the mechanics (Connor, your entire combat was prompt based and you know it. Might as well have been a push button action sequence ala resident evil). Not to mention the story has felt a little less.... cohesive, if you ask me. Like they were grasping for straws after a forced decision to change the plot entirely.

I sure hope the next couple games deliver, as the series does seem to be on a downwards trend ever since revalations.

I don't particularly care for any instant fail stuff in my AC at least. Especially because of things like easily being able to mess up parkour, I mean jeez, I've played the crap out of every game, probably putting in no less than 50-70 hours in 1-ACB and a little over half for ACR, probably 30 in AC3 and just 25 or so in AC4 at a pure guess of course and still it's easy to slip up on parkour, fall, and cause instant failure by death. detection, or because you fall into an area that isn't allowed and can't get out in time.

Oh man, finally someone that agrees with me about AC3 here, when I first played it I thought OMG WTF they stuffed EVERY function they could possibly stuff into the high profile button, as if it wasn't stuffed enough as it is, then they changed the counter controls, made combat EVEN EASIER and made climbing require even less thought than before. I mean ffs you can press the parry button in AC3, go make yourself dinner, come back and the game will still be awaiting your next button input. Do you REALLY need 2 full seconds to decide what to do? Jeez.

I was utterly disgusted with AC3's changes to the mechanics in SP.

If Unity doesn't deliver I'm done with this series but fortunately it looks good so far.

randomking007
08-13-2014, 11:14 AM
Games I will be picking up in about a year when they are cheaper:
AC Rogue
AC Unity
Batman Arkham Knight
Lord of the RIngs Shadow of Mordor

In one years time I am going to be pretty busy!

Namikaze_17
08-13-2014, 03:14 PM
Achilles's Voice: "Then don't. But return the games, stats, and the-the gameplay they have bestowed upon you. Do that, and you words have some merit."