Assassin's Creed III's "Big Jump" Only Possible Due to Annual Releases

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 NEXT
 

And they couldn't have done it without stunting the story and making the lore a complete mess? Yes, the concept is inherently a bit silly, but it was interesting and provided an enjoyable (if not extensive) reflection on religion - get to AssRevvers and the whole thing goes fucking crazy, apparently they just threw in every bloody idea they came up with.

Brotherhood was an affordable diversion, it filled the gameplay 'bucket' to the brim without spilling over. Revs then overflowed onto the floor whilst someone else laid a big ol' brick in the bucket.

Dr.Panties:

Vault101:

Dr.Panties:
snip.

uhhhh?

you hate the games

so you keep buying them...

and I think your kind of missing the "point" of the assasin order (or their original doctrin)

Yep, I keep hoping for one to turn out well. I buy pretty much any new high-profile game, regardless of genre.

And I'm not missing the point of anything here, but I'm sure that you'll attempt to enlighten me in this regard. My biggest problem is with the mechanics. They just aren't good enough, and indicative of an overall awful trend towards automation, streamlining, minimising player input. Dreadful.

image

you buy games you hate..just because they are high profile as in they will somehow change to your liking..and then complain about it when they don't

thats like me buying COD every year in the hopes that this year they will have a decent length single player (as in..it aint gonna happen)

again..what?... that's...not how you do things

as for the mehcanics..sure..but did you honestly expect that to change? (anyway I dont feel assasins creed is too automated, the free running flows beautifully)

as for the Assasins themselfs (the thing I figure you were missing the point of), the original order (before they went through drastic changes) was about the spectacle, they were a known entity an assassination was about making a public statement

perfectly shown in the opening cinematic of Assasins creed 1

"hide in plain sight" in a crowd of people Altiairs outfit isn't as conspicuous as you might think (not to mention looking like a scholar)

he remains unseen then swoops in like a bird of prey..and then vanishes, a spectacle that adds to the mystique and reputation of the assassins, that's the Idea

even after that, by Ezios time, Ezio could still look like some kind of nobleman/mercinary...and of coarse its easy to get lost in a crowd

yeah, in Brotherhood his outfit its just too much, but then in Revelations its not as bad

Dr.Panties:

Kaulen Fuhs:

Dr.Panties:

And how about the distinct lack of any mechanics that can even be equated with stealth? You know, like crouching, sneaking, illumination and darkness? You think a haystack suffices? Not one of the protagonists in any of these games has been an actual assassin. They've all been "brigands", or "thugs". "Assassins's" Creed is a misnomer, and your games suck.

I don't think you know what an assassin is. Stealth is not a requisite to being an assassin.

Oh, ok. You keep telling yourself that, as you wade (ie: single button tap) through 15 armed and armoured soldiers like a "realistic" assassin. Or "blend" in with your inconspicuous assassin's outfit and arsenal.

Seriously? You're actually going to maintain that stealth and artifice were not essential components of an assassin's modus operandi during any of the historical periods presented in these games?

You tell me.

I was under the impression that all one needed to do to be an assassin was assassinate people.

Do the stealth elements of the games blow pretty hard? Yeah, they do. But I contend that the title "Assassin's Creed" is spot-on.

"Also, the beauty of Assassin's is that if you do it right it's kind of a new IP," he said. "It's still about navigation and combat, but it's a brand new hero, brand new setting, brand new fantasy. It really is as close as you could get to a big budget new IP late in the hardware cycle."

It's official, "IP" has lost any vestigial meaning.

Though this could mean Nintendo has the most new IPs of any gaming company.

"It's funny, people say it's about how often you release new entries, but I really think it's about how good they are," he added.

Except when you reach a point where people either get tired of the formula or tired of the games. At that point, it doesn't matter how awesome they are.

That's cool, I don't think that excuses you selling Brotherhood and Revelations for $60 on release when they are essentially heavily padded DLC.

Woodsey:
And they couldn't have done it without stunting the story and making the lore a complete mess? Yes, the concept is inherently a bit silly, but it was interesting and provided an enjoyable (if not extensive) reflection on religion - get to AssRevvers and the whole thing goes fucking crazy, apparently they just threw in every bloody idea they came up with.

Brotherhood was an affordable diversion, it filled the gameplay 'bucket' to the brim without spilling over. Revs then overflowed onto the floor whilst someone else laid a big ol' brick in the bucket.

where did they trip up on the lore? (as if I've been keeping track) it does kind of annoy me how the assasins are now the scooby gang (well to be fair its been like that since AC2) makes you wonder how incompetent the assasins are

but I mostly agree....a grass roots approach I think is the best thing

Dr.Panties:

Yep, I keep hoping for one to turn out well. I buy pretty much any new high-profile game, regardless of genre.

So you're rewarding them for the bad games. That makes perfect sense.

Simonoly:

I think it's just a preference thing. I just found the swordplay frustrating and it really didn't match the flow of the game. You spend most of your time running along rooftops and sprinting through streets and I've always wanted that sense of freedom to be translated to the combat. But as soon as you attack an enemy you lock onto them, there's a fixed camera angle and everything becomes static and slow. I just want more freedom during combat. Although in the E3 demo there is a part where the new Assassin guy grabs a spear and stabs someone whilst running along so hopefully combat scenarios are opening up a bit.

ah, fair enough

I think the Idea was for the swordplay to be "realistic" hence why its slow and methodical

and I guess it kind of shows that doing your best to avoid it is a preferable option (not that you can in the first game trudging around rescuing citizens)

Honestly, I think the franchise has got to the point where releasing a new title isn't risky. It's a very well established franchise.

Plus, you don't see other companies doing this shit, so it isn't "necessary". Stop trying to justify your money grubbing ways.

Vault101:

Woodsey:
And they couldn't have done it without stunting the story and making the lore a complete mess? Yes, the concept is inherently a bit silly, but it was interesting and provided an enjoyable (if not extensive) reflection on religion - get to AssRevvers and the whole thing goes fucking crazy, apparently they just threw in every bloody idea they came up with.

Brotherhood was an affordable diversion, it filled the gameplay 'bucket' to the brim without spilling over. Revs then overflowed onto the floor whilst someone else laid a big ol' brick in the bucket.

where did they trip up on the lore? (as if I've been keeping track) it does kind of annoy me how the assasins are now the scooby gang (well to be fair its been like that since AC2) makes you wonder how incompetent the assasins are

but I mostly agree....a grass roots approach I think is the best thing

The biggest problem I have is the Animus. It began as a pseudo-science story tool to get things going, in-universe it had a fairly logical (for something that's complete bullshit) side-effect. That was it, it was neat, it let them tell the story, it had an interesting problem. Now it has a virtual basement of code in which a man's entire conciousness now lives. The initial set up was neat and simple, now it seems to be becoming a magical focal-point of the series, which it shouldn't be. It's like how ridiculous it became in Crysis 2 where there's a fucking alien invasion and yet everyone's hunting you for the bloody Nanosuit. It's a plot-device to get things going, and shouldn't be uncomfortably moved to the centre of attention.

The whole bloodline thing seemed to get mixed up too, as Altair and Ezio are apparently not related (even though they implied they were). How they explained this in an interview made it clear that they'd thought of it whilst writing AssRavers, and their justification was based more on a technicality. "Well, we never EXPLICITLY SAID they were related guys!" And this doesn't even seem to serve any purpose anyway. All they've said now is that Ezio and Altair are both descended from *spoiler*, and that after a long time the two bloodlines reconnected. It doesn't mean anything, it serves no purpose, they've just put it there.

It's all beginning to feel like it's unravelling too fast with too much going on - and whether or not they had everything planned from the beginning soon becomes irrelevant when it's told so messily.

Flailing Escapist:
That's cool, I don't think that excuses you selling Brotherhood and Revelations for $60 on release when they are essentially heavily padded DLC.

60 dollars worth of dlc.

Zachary Amaranth:

"Also, the beauty of Assassin's is that if you do it right it's kind of a new IP," he said. "It's still about navigation and combat, but it's a brand new hero, brand new setting, brand new fantasy. It really is as close as you could get to a big budget new IP late in the hardware cycle."

It's official, "IP" has lost any vestigial meaning.

Though this could mean Nintendo has the most new IPs of any gaming company.

"It's funny, people say it's about how often you release new entries, but I really think it's about how good they are," he added.

Except when you reach a point where people either get tired of the formula or tired of the games. At that point, it doesn't matter how awesome they are.

Compare it to a custom built pc.
You change the cooling one day,Then you change the mobo next year,And Then you change the processor the year after that,Etc etc.
After a few years it will still use the same case (assasins creed canon) But everything is different.

Dryk:
"We put a different guy in the same outfit and moved it to America. Totally different game guys."

... who are they expecting to fall for this?!

From a developers point of view I suppose it would be seeing as the engine would have needed at least a few changes, character models would have been changed, as well as adding things like proper guns. The environment would need re modelling and a drastic re skin, also trees apparently will now accommodate free running as well as lots of other objects (I would guess).

It's easy to sit back and say it's the same game, but it's really not.

It's still no way in hell "a new IP" though. He's just trying to desperately grab some good PR out of thin air.

Woodsey:

It's all beginning to feel like it's unravelling too fast with too much going on - and whether or not they had everything planned from the beginning soon becomes irrelevant when it's told so messily.

so they arn't related now :/

maybe they could use that pseudo excuse to have a female assasin (in the main game) without Desmond having to play as his grand mother if people find that too weird...

....what I can dream can't I?

Yes, it's the closet we'll get to new IP right now.

Pay no attention to The Last of Us and Beyond behind the curtain.

Hyping your game is fine, sirs, but kindly try not to make such ridiculous statements.

rolfwesselius:

Compare it to a custom built pc.
You change the cooling one day,Then you change the mobo next year,And Then you change the processor the year after that,Etc etc.
After a few years it will still use the same case (assasins creed canon) But everything is different.

By that logic, almost every franchise is a "new IP" in this scenario, and this is nothing special.

Vault101:

Woodsey:

It's all beginning to feel like it's unravelling too fast with too much going on - and whether or not they had everything planned from the beginning soon becomes irrelevant when it's told so messily.

so they arn't related now :/

maybe they could use that pseudo excuse to have a female assasin (in the main game) without Desmond having to play as his grand mother if people find that too weird...

....what I can dream can't I?

Desmond is related to both, they aren't related to one another. So - for instance - Ezio is related to Desmond's dad and his Mother is related to Altair.

I think everyone just assumed that it was a fairly direct bloodline and we were following a clear group of individuals of a family tree, who have each been fucked over by the same issue as Desmond's the Boss Man who's got to solve it.

But now it means the genetic code is all over the place (I mean really, they could have just said it passes through every male in the family, sometimes it's dormant) and that Desmond is actually one of several thousand with super powers.

rolfwesselius:

Compare it to a custom built pc.
You change the cooling one day,Then you change the mobo next year,And Then you change the processor the year after that,Etc etc.
After a few years it will still use the same case (assasins creed canon) But everything is different.

Yes but in this case he said it's like a new IP (case). So in your analogy it's like changing every component except the case and proclaiming that it's almost like you've got a new case.

Dryk:

rolfwesselius:

Compare it to a custom built pc.
You change the cooling one day,Then you change the mobo next year,And Then you change the processor the year after that,Etc etc.
After a few years it will still use the same case (assasins creed canon) But everything is different.

Yes but in this case he said it's like a new IP (case). So in your analogy it's like changing every component except the case and proclaiming that it's almost like you've got a new case.

The Tribes series was also not a new ip you know.
It's based in an established universe the Earthsiege universe (Case) but it is still considered a different ip.

I thought brotherhood was a fine extension of the original. But revelations was a bit too short and bit too sequelly.

Personally, AC is a such a fantastic game not because of the combat or the stealth sections, but because of how you get to explore a rich world and the strange sense of historical context it gives you.

Grey Carter:
Hutchinson went on to argue that since Assassin's Creed sequels feature different characters in different settings, they're a lot like new IPs.

"Also, the beauty of Assassin's is that if you do it right it's kind of a new IP," he said. "It's still about navigation and combat, but it's a brand new hero, brand new setting, brand new fantasy. It really is as close as you could get to a big budget new IP late in the hardware cycle."

He doesn't seem to know what intellectual property means. Let's test him; someone make a game with all the tropes and art of an Assassin's Creed game (shouldn't be hard, they have made several versions of the same game for us to sample), but use a different setting and name the characters differently. When legal rings up with their cease and desist, tell them "It's as close as you can get to a new IP this late in the hardware cycle."

Also, PC says hello. You know, the platform that never needs a new generation and is constantly being updated? But there's no new IP on the PC, right? OH WAIT.

The only problem I've recently realized about this game is that it seems that stealthily sneaking around to get to your target is now completely gone. The thing that made the original game so appealing to most people.

I honestly don't care what they do with the series so long as they give it a proper ending. It is a story, after all, and every story must have an end. Of course, the direction the plot is going (I'm only on AC2 at the moment), I imagine the end to be extremely silly, like "Desmond: Space Assassin."

Dr.Panties:

I buy pretty much any new high-profile game, regardless of genre.

You, sir, are a marketing team's best friend.

Zachary Amaranth:

Dr.Panties:

Yep, I keep hoping for one to turn out well. I buy pretty much any new high-profile game, regardless of genre.

So you're rewarding them for the bad games. That makes perfect sense.

Hey, now. There's nothing wrong with blind fanaticism. ;P

JoesshittyOs:
The only problem I've recently realized about this game is that it seems that stealthily sneaking around to get to your target is now completely gone. The thing that made the original game so appealing to most people.

Yet even in the original both "final battles" were just straight-up brawls.

Clearing the Eye:
Hey, now. There's nothing wrong with blind fanaticism. ;P

There is something wrong with absurd hyperbole. Maybe he just has a lot of money and free time.

Amnestic:

Wait, I thought Desmond was the hero? And the setting is still the Animus using future tech to look back into his genetic memories? Lead writer Matt Turner says Assassin's Creed 3 will feature more Desmond than ever before, and more present-day events than in any past installment. (Apr 3, 2012).

Is that wrong? Do we have a new hero now? Did they suddenly decided to rewrite the entire direction of the game over the past two months?

Oh, that sounds awful. I was looking forward to this game until you just linked that. I hate the Desmond parts of the games.

Scrustle:
What? That's complete rubbish! Ubisoft themselves showed off a really original big budget new IP at E3 in Watch Dogs. And we have games like Dishonored, Beyond and The Last Of Us on the way too. And there are big risky sequels that have come out without the need of yearly instalments, like GTA 4. They may not be common but they do happen. You have to prove that you can be successful and consistently make quality games. High frequency is not necessary.

Umm I am not sure why you used Grand Theft auto as a yearly installment, Call of Duty would be more suitable.

Clearing the Eye:

Zachary Amaranth:

Dr.Panties:

Yep, I keep hoping for one to turn out well. I buy pretty much any new high-profile game, regardless of genre.

So you're rewarding them for the bad games. That makes perfect sense.

Hey, now. There's nothing wrong with blind fanaticism. ;P

Actually, I purchase, play, review and then retain or recycle (give away), depending on quality.

Zachary Amaranth:

Dr.Panties:

Yep, I keep hoping for one to turn out well. I buy pretty much any new high-profile game, regardless of genre.

So you're rewarding them for the bad games. That makes perfect sense.

How would I know whether they are bad games unless I play them for myself? There is absolutely no rental option in this country.

Lvl 64 Klutz:
I honestly don't care what they do with the series so long as they give it a proper ending. It is a story, after all, and every story must have an end. Of course, the direction the plot is going (I'm only on AC2 at the moment), I imagine the end to be extremely silly, like "Desmond: Space Assassin."

Dr.Panties:

I buy pretty much any new high-profile game, regardless of genre.

You, sir, are a marketing team's best friend.

See above. No rental option, prefer to play for myself and form my own judgement.

tipp6353:

Scrustle:
What? That's complete rubbish! Ubisoft themselves showed off a really original big budget new IP at E3 in Watch Dogs. And we have games like Dishonored, Beyond and The Last Of Us on the way too. And there are big risky sequels that have come out without the need of yearly instalments, like GTA 4. They may not be common but they do happen. You have to prove that you can be successful and consistently make quality games. High frequency is not necessary.

Umm I am not sure why you used Grand Theft auto as a yearly installment, Call of Duty would be more suitable.

I didn't. I said the exact opposite.

Lvl 64 Klutz:

JoesshittyOs:
The only problem I've recently realized about this game is that it seems that stealthily sneaking around to get to your target is now completely gone. The thing that made the original game so appealing to most people.

Yet even in the original both "final battles" were just straight-up brawls.

I think in the original, it made a little bit more sense. I'd imagine if you were able to sneak up on the master Assassin, he'd hardly be worth calling a master Assassin. But going fistacuffs with the pope?

I agree.

ccdohl:

Clearing the Eye:
Hey, now. There's nothing wrong with blind fanaticism. ;P

There is something wrong with absurd hyperbole. Maybe he just has a lot of money and free time.

Absurd hyperbole? Really?

Do you even take notice of the inputs required of you when playing these games? This series is one of a notable few that set an ugly precedent with regards to automation.

*Cue telegraphed enemy attack, tap a single button to counter. Win. Repeat. For an entire legion, should one so desire.*

*Hold forward and a single button, traverse entire architectural wonders.*

I really, really dislike these mechanics, and the proliferation of such automated mechanics throughout a variety of modern games (especially third-person action games). That's what I'm complaining about, along with an incredible logical disconnect with regards to character, premise and setting.

As far as your second statement goes, my financial situation, spending habits, and leisure activities have no relevance to my criticisms of this franchise.

Dr.Panties:

ccdohl:

Clearing the Eye:
Hey, now. There's nothing wrong with blind fanaticism. ;P

There is something wrong with absurd hyperbole. Maybe he just has a lot of money and free time.

Absurd hyperbole? Really?

Do you even take notice of the inputs required of you when playing these games? This series is one of a notable few that set an ugly precedent with regards to automation.

*Cue telegraphed enemy attack, tap a single button to counter. Win. Repeat. For an entire legion, should one so desire.*

*Hold forward and a single button, traverse entire architectural wonders.*

I really, really dislike these mechanics, and the proliferation of such automated mechanics throughout a variety of modern games (especially third-person action games). That's what I'm complaining about, along with an incredible logical disconnect with regards to character, premise and setting.

As far as your second statement goes, my financial situation, spending habits, and leisure activities have no relevance to my criticisms of this franchise.

Well, the absurd hyperbole that I was actually referring to was the guy calling your purchase choices blind fanaticism.

Though now that you mention it, you're a little over the top too.

I agree, the games aren't very good. I didn't like the first one because I didn't like the story. While the second one was fun, the combat was sort of dumb.

As for the mechanics, you have a point, but I don't think that AC is about the combat so much as it is about the world and interacting with it in extraordinary ways. Sure, the combat is simple, and assassination doesn't require stealth, but they did make one heck of a cool city, and it is a joy to run around it and throw archers off of roofs.

To me, it's like Skyrim. I hate the battle system in Skyrim, and I would prefer to play Dark Souls, which has a battle system that I enjoy. However, Skyrim isn't really about the combat so much as the world. I've recently gotten in to Skyrim because I can explore, rob people, own homes, choose alliances, and do a lot of stuff outside of the battle system. The combat isn't as tight or tense as Dark Souls, but that's okay because combat isn't necessarily the focus.

A person who is more in to driving games might scoff at the vehicle handing in GTA, and my bet is that you don't care for the combat system in the Batman games. That's fine, play what you like, but realize that GTA isn't about vehicle mechanics and Batman isn't a martial arts simulator. These are just parts of a bigger experience.

Dr.Panties:

Kaulen Fuhs:

Dr.Panties:

And how about the distinct lack of any mechanics that can even be equated with stealth? You know, like crouching, sneaking, illumination and darkness? You think a haystack suffices? Not one of the protagonists in any of these games has been an actual assassin. They've all been "brigands", or "thugs". "Assassins's" Creed is a misnomer, and your games suck.

I don't think you know what an assassin is. Stealth is not a requisite to being an assassin.

Oh, ok. You keep telling yourself that, as you wade (ie: single button tap) through 15 armed and armoured soldiers like a "realistic" assassin. Or "blend" in with your inconspicuous assassin's outfit and arsenal.

Seriously? You're actually going to maintain that stealth and artifice were not essential components of an assassin's modus operandi during any of the historical periods presented in these games?

I'm going to maintain that. Historically, most assassins were motivated by an ideological agenda or trying to make a statement, were usually extremely showy and unsubtle in their attempts, and were apprehended or killed in the aftermath. This is especially true of the historical Ḥashshashin.

It's only the 20th century that's invented this notion that "assassins" are cold, calculating, subtle professionals while "thugs" and "hitmen" are brash dumb killers, when historically the opposite is true.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here