PDA

View Full Version : I'd be much more likely to buy this game...



VitaminArrr
11-22-2014, 08:25 AM
I'd be much more likely to buy this game...

... if it wasn't an "Assasin's Creed" game. Don't get me wrong, I loved the previous Assassin's Creed games. But therein lies the problem: after four epic sagas, I have spent so many hours playing Assassin's Creed games that I literally never, ever want to spend one more minute of my life doing it. It's played out. It has lost all interest value.

"Assassin's Creed" has become Ubisoft's vehicle for these really cool historical reenactment games, but guys, come on. Enough is enough.

I would be much more likely to buy this game if it stood on its own as a really awesome French Revolution game that did *not* try to mold itself into some "previously-proven" series like "Assassin's Creed" or whatever.

You guys should really think a little harder about innovating and doing something outside of the box. There comes a time when the same-old same-old slapped onto a game is just not cool anymore. It's the same reason I'll never play another minute of Halo or Call of Duty or Madden, despite the fact that I have spent literally thousands of hours playing those games. I just can't do it anymore; the games haven't changed and I got bored of them a million years ago.

Assassin's Creed IV for that matter didn't need to be an Assassin's Creed game, either. It would have been a fine and great story without need for shoe-horning the trippy, weird Assassin's Creed storyline into it. It would have been perfect without all those "warp to the present-day" moments where you have to hack into computers inside some weird office that is obviously a meta-Ubisoft-office. Very clever... not.

Just make a historical reenactment, open-world game where you get to somewhat role-play as a character and forge your own adventure. Why does it have to be all about killing people? I don't get it.

And I also don't buy that that's the only kind of game that sells, because guess what, nobody's tried to make a major release game that wasn't like that. So how do you know it wouldn't sell?

Then there's the fact that all games these days are getting infested with buy-ware. These days, half the time, as soon as you start up the game it wants to sell you something that costs just as much as the freaking game you just bought. Nothing offends or turns me off more to a company than when I just bought their product and the first thing it does is try to sell me more stuff.

Look, it's not that I don't have money. But I just don't want to get sold things inside my freaking games.

Just set the price of the game at what you want to charge for it. $99? $129? Whatever... just set it to whatever it is actually going to cost me for the full freaking game. Put that on the price tag. That way at least once I've bought the game, it's over with, and I can enjoy the gaming experience without being confronted to buy one more thing, ever. For Christ's sake.

And then there is the releasing of beta software to the general public, a terrible practice. I think at some point programmers stopped being engineers and started just being code-monkeys. Nice of you to have the public finance your beta test for a product that no matter how defective it is, they can't return it to the store because "it's software" (as if there was some way to pirate these new-fangled discs, like there used to be in the 3.5" floppy disk days).

ace3001
11-22-2014, 08:30 AM
After their last new IP wasn't very well received plus the hot mess they're in right now, I don't think they will try experimenting anytime soon.

As for
Just make a historical reenactment, open-world game where you get to somewhat role-play as a character and forge your own adventure. Why does it have to be all about killing people? I don't get it. What you're looking for is an adventure game. Those don't have a lot of mass appeal these days.