Free roam | Forums

[Be1dou]

Yeah, I don't mean to say it's a bad thing. I love their open-world games and I've literally invested thousands of hours into the AC franchise. It's really about whether or not it's something For Honor needs. I think it would hurt the overall experience. However, a hub-like area would be pretty neat. I've always wanted to see Ubisoft recreate a town in feudal Japan. If AC won't do it, this is the next best thing.

[WYRDB0Y]

The thing about free-roam in Ubisoft's open-world games are that they adhere to the open-world aspects in a very bland and formulaic way. They focus more on creating a huge open-world area and populating it with stuff instead of the other way around. So the activities we get tends to be trivial and uninspiring.

When Ubisoft does it, yes.

To learn how to populate open world with meaningful activities :
Step 1: Play Rockstar Games pre-GTA V (GTA V is weak in that regard).
Step 2: Play Witcher 3 (and vote it GOTY of 2015, they deserve it).
Step 3: Turn your awe you just acquired by playing these masterpieces into work; on your open-world game.
Step 4: Profit!

[Be1dou]

When Ubisoft does it, yes.

To learn how to populate open world with meaningful activities :
Step 1: Play Rockstar Games pre-GTA V (GTA V is weak in that regard).
Step 2: Play Witcher 3 (and vote it GOTY of 2015, they deserve it).
Step 3: Turn your awe you just acquired by playing these masterpieces into work; on your open-world game.
Step 4: Profit!

xD lol

I get what you mean, but W3 was made the opposite way. In an article, the devs expained that they crafted their world around the side activities. Your point still stands, though.

[MisterWillow]

I get what you mean, but W3 was made the opposite way. In an article, the devs expained that they crafted their world around the side activities. Your point still stands, though.

That just sounds like it would work a lot better than how I imagine Ubisoft makes most of its open world games---which is basically, decide on the setting, shape the main story around that setting, and after that's done, go around the map and strategically place side activities, collectibles, towers to climb, etc. etc. rinse, repeat---as opposed to shaping both the world and the characters/side quests concurrently.

Of course, to be fair to Ubi, in the case of the Far Cry games, anyway, they're building the world from nothing (most of their other franchises inhabit preexisting cities and places in time), whereas CDProjekt has a huge wealth of information concerning storytelling, world, and (major) characters for the Witcher games. It's going to be interesting to see what their Cyberpunk game turns out to be, since they have no real preexisting assets to pull from, aside from the basic setting, aesthetic, and/or mood.

[WYRDB0Y]

@MisterWillow

If you're interested here's the interview Fatal is talking about:
https://www.mapcore.org/articles/int...interview-r69/

[guest-r22Cs27m]

I get this is Ubisoft, and most of the community compares it to assassins creed, but I really feel this is a built for multiplayer game. The vision was for a new genre and to really get sword combat down for a change rather than button mashing.

To me this is the sword fighting call of duty or battlefield. Intentionally for multiplayer matches, possibly with a single player story that, is mostly secondary to the multiplayer. The size and scale of this is yet to be determined, so right now it's small skirmish matches like call of duty, but it could be larger multi-stage sieges like battlefield does for FPS games.

[VernalBreak]

I can understand that but obviously they are going to use a 3d world for story so that could be adapted to free roam.