No other company does animations better than Ubisoft, IMO. It was always one of my favorite things about AC's MP. Being able to customize the animations and all. *fingers crossed*Originally Posted by Havemercy87 Go to original post
I dunno, I'm not saying this because I'm a playstation fan but Naughty Dog has done some amazing animations in the past. Ubisoft is great though.Originally Posted by Fatal-Feit Go to original post
I was thinking of Naughty Dog as well, but their titles are mostly a linear and scripted experience. When you consider the open world aspect of something like AC, it's more remarkable, IMO.Originally Posted by Dead1y-Derri Go to original post
I do agree they are linear but they still offer amazing animations and then obviously you've got the unscripted moments of fights and the animation is spot on and quite realistic. I think both companies bring a lot to the table.Originally Posted by Fatal-Feit Go to original post
If you take a look at some of the animations in The Last of Us and on the MP modes, pretty brutal and amazing.
Yeah, the animations in Naughty Dog games are still pretty awesome. Especially in TLOU. I can't think of a better rival for Ubisoft.Originally Posted by Dead1y-Derri Go to original post
There are only 3 zones in a game with 4 players per team. This means the possible combinations are as follows:
2 - 2
3 - 1
2 - 1 - 1
2 - 2 seems to be the strongest one, because if one group meets a lone enemy they can try to overwhelm him and capture the point, then send one guy to capture another, while the other group will most likely have equal numbers to contest the last zone. In such composition I imagine making good use of teamwork and not getting into each other's way will be a priority to get the most out of it.
Unless enemy team goes 3 - 1 on your 2 - 2 setup and the lone guy goes for the uncontested zone. He will claim it and do the work that the other two of your team members are doing (effectively cutting your gain and forcing you to split, to contest the zone), while your second group will be forced to fight against three people. Of course, it can only work if the lone guy won't end up running into two enemy people and there is no guarantee that the 3-man team will win, because their sheer number can make killing two enemies problematic...
The most risky strategy seems to be 2 - 1 -1. You will surely claim at least one zone, but one man will be at a disadvantage (if enemy goes with 2 - 2 setup) and the rest of your group won't have the advantage of numerical superiority. It means it's down to how your group will fight as victory there will grant superiority on the field. In case of meeting 3 - 1 setup you will have equal chances of contesting at least one zone, claim one zone for certain and be at a disadvantage at the last objective. So it's down to your best dueler basically to win you superiority.
Of course, I imagine that in game there will be much more factors involved, such as players' skill. Numbers are not everything, as we saw in the E3 trailer, where the last surviving Samurai managed to kill all knights, including the last 2 vs 1 combat.