" Assassin's Creed 3 huge in terms of physical size, playing time and the number of new gameplay, we have it included. We've removed a lot of systems and mechanics from previous games, but I think we still have achieved the maximum possible extent , "
See, he never said that the game will be short, if it was, they wouldn't dub it 'the biggest AC game ever'. He's just stating his opinion about long games and how he's worried that players won't be able to finish AC3. If Alex regrets and changes his mind about the length of the game, then he's a bit late. AC3 is almost done, 3 months away, and I doubt Ubisoft would take the risk and delay the game, which I doubt. I mean, just half a month ago, at E3, Alex was constantly saying how big AC3 is, bla, bla. So don't panic, AC3 will be very huge without the DLC that's supposed to be released later.
He's absolutely right.
It's been the big surprise of the current gen, with achievements and online statistics, to find that so few players play their games to the end. It boggles my mind that people pay £30 for something they won't play in full, but there it is.
I'd rather have a satisfying 10 hour game that I want to play three or more times than a 30 hour game that trades too much on repetition.
Except alot of the time those 10 hour games generally lack any redeeming quality in terms of story. Sometimes long games do aswell, Skyrim.Originally Posted by DoubleclickTF Go to original post
just wondering, in the interview page it said
Hutchison also explained that the game world of Assassin’s Creed 3 is "1.5 times the size of Rome" in Assassin’s Creed Brotherhood.
But I thought from the previous info, we have the Frontier as 1.5x the Rome,
Both NY and Boston is 80 (75?)% of the Rome,
that doesn't add up quite right,
it they shrink down the size of the map, that will be quite disappointing, not to mention we have Caribbean sea
I'm pretty sure it's a mistake.Originally Posted by Johsi32 Go to original post![]()