Assassin's Creed IV Multiplayer Won't Include Naval Combat

 Pages 1 2 NEXT
 

Assassin's Creed IV Multiplayer Won't Include Naval Combat

Kingdom Hearts III Screenshot

Assassin's Creed IV lets you do plenty of online assassinating, but don't hold your breath for multiplayer ship battles.

The naval combat in Assassin's Creed III was the most surprisingly entertaining addition the series has seen in a while - entertaining enough that ship-to-ship battles will be a large part of Assassin's Creed IV's gameplay. That portion of the game won't extend to multiplayer, however - Black Flag will feature several co-op and competitive multiplayer modes, but none of them will brave the open seas.

"You have to take into consideration that it took a very big dedicated team in Singapore about two and a half years to do it for the solo [play]," says lead multiplayer designer Tim Browne. "In Black Flag it's even better, but for solo. We've looked at it and we've considered it. We seriously considered it. We think it would be cool, but at the same time we tried it, and for technical reasons it's impossible."

The developers behind Black Flag are proud of the complex ocean and weather simulation that goes into naval combat, but it's that same complexity that makes it difficult to implement multiplayer naval combat that stacks up against the single player experience. That, and the fact that the game is headed to as many platforms as possible, which makes any task that much more complicated.

Assassin's Creed IV: Black Flag unfurls its single-player sails on PS3, Xbox 360, PS4, Xbox One, Wii U, and PC this fall.

Source: VG247

Permalink

Aw... Kind of sad, but honestly as long as the multiplayer stays fun, I have no problem. Can't wait to play it.

They should just scrap the multiplayer all together because if you're going to build the entire game around Pirates! yarr and then take away the core component of being a pirate for the multiplayer. Might as well release COD with no guns, or Farcry 3 multiplayer with no trees.

Well it would be like making a whole other game, unless they only made the ship battles one on one.

synobal:
They should just scrap the multiplayer all together because if you're going to build the entire game around Pirates! yarr and then take away the core component of being a pirate for the multiplayer. Might as well release COD with no multiplayer, or Farcry 3 multiplayer with no trees.

Fixed that for you.

synobal:
They should just scrap the multiplayer all together because if you're going to build the entire game around Pirates! yarr and then take away the core component of being a pirate for the multiplayer. Might as well release COD with no guns, or Farcry 3 multiplayer with no trees.

Except the game is nothing like those.

Least not when I tried things out back in Brotherhood. The whole deal of one person is marked for death and they have to blend in and pretend to be an NPC was incredibly fun and tense. Some of the most fun online multiplayer I've taken part in aside from Red Dead Redemption.

Well now I'm kinda disappointed. It could've been all Guns Of Icarus style as well, with each team having a crew with specialities (captain, cannons, lookout etc) and...now I'm going to stop before I make myself sad.

Luckily, the Assassin's Creed multi-player is one of the more unique and fun multi-player games out there, but it's still a bit disappointing after thinking how great it could have been.

DVS BSTrD:
Well it would be like making a whole other game, unless they only made the ship battles one on one.

World of Pirate Ships.

I just find it funny that they've taken a series that started out as being half-way a puzzle platformer in climbing massive buildings, navigating through crowds to avoid guards, and finding the perfect route to assassinate your target to "no more tall buildings" in ACIII and "Yeah, we're just about done with buildings all together" in Black Flag.

I'm sure there'll be some token platforming to do in Black Flag, but you're a frickin' pirate.

entertaining enough that ship-to-ship battles will be a large part of Assassin's Creed IV's gameplay.

It's likely the tallest thing you'll be climbing is a frickin' mast. I don't like saying "I wish this series would just die already" but...well...I wish this series would just die already. A lot of people say that ACII was the last good one they made, I give it the benefit of the doubt and say that ACBrotherhood was the last good one. Revelations was absolute crap and III was just insulting. Really? We're leaving the fate of the world in the hands of Adam Sandler? And he has to choose between resetting human history so it can essentially repeat itself over the next course of thousands of years, or saving humanity by enslaving it to a power-mad ancient goddess who constantly talks about how much she absolutely despises humanity and in fact wants revenge against them...........and he chooses the latter.

Yep, time to pack it in AC, you've officially "Jumped the SharkHaystack"

that is a shame. I'm not usually one for multiplayer but I'd play the hell outa that.

I'm getting the feeling they can totally do it, they're only holding that back because of the current gen consoles. In fact, I'm almost willing to bet that it will be in the next AC game since that one will probably be for just the next gen consoles.

It's weird isn't it?

That we're looking forward to naval combat in a game that was originally just about stabbing people.

Mostly due to its superb execution.

If, in the future, they decide to reverse this decision on a future title, it's something I'll highly look forward to.

DLC. That's all that needs to be said.

It will be DLC, or at the very least, a hook used to sell AC5 on Next-Gen.

I'll stick with Sid Meier's Pirates then.

Good, screw the multiplayer. It's its own thing and I don't mind one bit. It's just saddening that it falls to the naval combat to convince me to buy a game that I was supposed to be looking forward to for the assassinations.

Of course not. That would be too much fun.

Aw, PvP with the AC naval combat system would've been neat to see. Maybe a DLC.

Aww, that's disappointing.
But oh well, chances are I wasn't gonna play the multiplayer at all anyway.

How is it that Assassin's Creed get this kind of ship combat better than basically every other game that attempted this?

It's so odd.

it doesn't have naval combat yet however I've heard these plans involving the next one

synobal:
They should just scrap the multiplayer all together

You could have just finished that post there.

At first I loved AC multiplayer, being a game about stealth and paranoia, but then people started unlocking stupid undetectable weapons like poison or playing the game by abandoning everything that made it fun. It was ridiculously frustrating to be wandering around, trying to stay unnoticed and locate your target, only to see that everyone else in your match was a dipshit who just non-stop sprinted everywhere on the rooftops and shot people.

I didn't even bother with the multi in AC3 after the earlier installments just turned into a run-and-gun experience.

piinyouri:

synobal:
They should just scrap the multiplayer all together because if you're going to build the entire game around Pirates! yarr and then take away the core component of being a pirate for the multiplayer. Might as well release COD with no guns, or Farcry 3 multiplayer with no trees.

Except the game is nothing like those.

Least not when I tried things out back in Brotherhood. The whole deal of one person is marked for death and they have to blend in and pretend to be an NPC was incredibly fun and tense. Some of the most fun online multiplayer I've taken part in aside from Red Dead Redemption.

It was supposed to play that way. It very rarely actually did.

When played properly, it was a tense and fun experience. When reduced to a bunch of people not bothering to stay anonymous who just sprint everywhere, it was samey and boring.

SonicWaffle:

piinyouri:

synobal:
They should just scrap the multiplayer all together because if you're going to build the entire game around Pirates! yarr and then take away the core component of being a pirate for the multiplayer. Might as well release COD with no guns, or Farcry 3 multiplayer with no trees.

Except the game is nothing like those.

Least not when I tried things out back in Brotherhood. The whole deal of one person is marked for death and they have to blend in and pretend to be an NPC was incredibly fun and tense. Some of the most fun online multiplayer I've taken part in aside from Red Dead Redemption.

It was supposed to play that way. It very rarely actually did.

When played properly, it was a tense and fun experience. When reduced to a bunch of people not bothering to stay anonymous who just sprint everywhere, it was samey and boring.

Yikes, sounds like I just got lucky then.

piinyouri:

SonicWaffle:

piinyouri:

Except the game is nothing like those.

Least not when I tried things out back in Brotherhood. The whole deal of one person is marked for death and they have to blend in and pretend to be an NPC was incredibly fun and tense. Some of the most fun online multiplayer I've taken part in aside from Red Dead Redemption.

It was supposed to play that way. It very rarely actually did.

When played properly, it was a tense and fun experience. When reduced to a bunch of people not bothering to stay anonymous who just sprint everywhere, it was samey and boring.

Yikes, sounds like I just got lucky then.

Yeah, prolly. Which game did you give up on? I made it through to Revelations, but that was the last straw. I never even bothered with the AC3 multi.

SonicWaffle:

piinyouri:

SonicWaffle:

It was supposed to play that way. It very rarely actually did.

When played properly, it was a tense and fun experience. When reduced to a bunch of people not bothering to stay anonymous who just sprint everywhere, it was samey and boring.

Yikes, sounds like I just got lucky then.

Yeah, prolly. Which game did you give up on? I made it through to Revelations, but that was the last straw. I never even bothered with the AC3 multi.

Brotherhood was the only multiplayer I tried. Borrowed it from a friend and after taking a break from burning through the main game I thought "Why not? It's not my thing usually but I'll give'er a try."

I borrowed ACIII from him later on and got to about the very end of it and just quit playing. I didn't think it was honestly BAD, but I got to the mission where your chasing the guy through the firey wood scaffolding bits and he has like superhuman speed and after 7 retries I just quit and never got back to it.

piinyouri:

SonicWaffle:

piinyouri:

Yikes, sounds like I just got lucky then.

Yeah, prolly. Which game did you give up on? I made it through to Revelations, but that was the last straw. I never even bothered with the AC3 multi.

Brotherhood was the only multiplayer I tried. Borrowed it from a friend and after taking a break from burning through the main game I thought "Why not? It's not my thing usually but I'll give'er a try."

I borrowed ACIII from him later on and got to about the very end of it and just quit playing. I didn't think it was honestly BAD, but I got to the mission where your chasing the guy through the firey wood scaffolding bits and he has like superhuman speed and after 7 retries I just quit and never got back to it.

AC3 does get a lot of bad press, but I agree that it isn't actually a bad game. It's just very boring; dull and unlikable characters, too much emphasis on firearms which break combat too much, way too much time spent climbing trees instead of running around in cities. It was a disappointment compared to what had come before and, like Mass Effect 3, it received a ton of unjustified hate simply for not living up to expectations.

It says a lot that I can't even pinpoint the mission you're talking about, because I seem to remember doing something very similar quite a few times and not one of them was interesting enough to stand out in my memory.

I've always hated the Assassin's Creed multiplayer. Not because it's bad or anything, but because it makes the story shorter. Compare ACII with Brotherhood or Revelations. ACII took me a week or two to complete, and I had so much fun with it whereas Brotherhood took me three days. I enjoyed it, but wanted more.

An AC multiplayer should be on it's own disk IMO.

SonicWaffle:

piinyouri:

SonicWaffle:

Yeah, prolly. Which game did you give up on? I made it through to Revelations, but that was the last straw. I never even bothered with the AC3 multi.

Brotherhood was the only multiplayer I tried. Borrowed it from a friend and after taking a break from burning through the main game I thought "Why not? It's not my thing usually but I'll give'er a try."

I borrowed ACIII from him later on and got to about the very end of it and just quit playing. I didn't think it was honestly BAD, but I got to the mission where your chasing the guy through the firey wood scaffolding bits and he has like superhuman speed and after 7 retries I just quit and never got back to it.

AC3 does get a lot of bad press, but I agree that it isn't actually a bad game. It's just very boring; dull and unlikable characters, too much emphasis on firearms which break combat too much, way too much time spent climbing trees instead of running around in cities. It was a disappointment compared to what had come before and, like Mass Effect 3, it received a ton of unjustified hate simply for not living up to expectations.

It says a lot that I can't even pinpoint the mission you're talking about, because I seem to remember doing something very similar quite a few times and not one of them was interesting enough to stand out in my memory.

It really stuck out for me cuz the guy just has inhuman running speed, whereas every other time I was chasing someone, it was a mild pursuit at best, and I was never in danger of actually losing them. With this guy, 2-3 of the retries were from the mission failing about 3 seconds after it starts. He just jets off down the pier and you pretty much start with the "He's getting too far away" warning.

piinyouri:

SonicWaffle:

piinyouri:

Brotherhood was the only multiplayer I tried. Borrowed it from a friend and after taking a break from burning through the main game I thought "Why not? It's not my thing usually but I'll give'er a try."

I borrowed ACIII from him later on and got to about the very end of it and just quit playing. I didn't think it was honestly BAD, but I got to the mission where your chasing the guy through the firey wood scaffolding bits and he has like superhuman speed and after 7 retries I just quit and never got back to it.

AC3 does get a lot of bad press, but I agree that it isn't actually a bad game. It's just very boring; dull and unlikable characters, too much emphasis on firearms which break combat too much, way too much time spent climbing trees instead of running around in cities. It was a disappointment compared to what had come before and, like Mass Effect 3, it received a ton of unjustified hate simply for not living up to expectations.

It says a lot that I can't even pinpoint the mission you're talking about, because I seem to remember doing something very similar quite a few times and not one of them was interesting enough to stand out in my memory.

It really stuck out for me cuz the guy just has inhuman running speed, whereas every other time I was chasing someone, it was a mild pursuit at best, and I was never in danger of actually losing them. With this guy, 2-3 of the retries were from the mission failing about 3 seconds after it starts. He just jets off down the pier and you pretty much start with the "He's getting too far away" warning.

The problem with AC chase sequences is that there is generally a path the game wants you to follow, and if you don't do exactly what it wants then you're likely to fail. However fast the guy is there will be a way to keep up, you just have to hit the right obstacles or climb spots. This is made even harder by the dodgy controls which will sometimes force the character to stop instead of climbing or move the wrong way around an obstacle.

A lot of my retries on those missions involved finding out exactly where the game wanted me to climb, jump etc and where it just wanted me to sprint. Pain in the arse.

Becasue noone wants to use ships in a game about pirates that gets Assasins Creed sticker on it. Because, once again, Ubisoft will prove that this shiny sticker alone is selling games and not quality.

SonicWaffle:

piinyouri:

SonicWaffle:

AC3 does get a lot of bad press, but I agree that it isn't actually a bad game. It's just very boring; dull and unlikable characters, too much emphasis on firearms which break combat too much, way too much time spent climbing trees instead of running around in cities. It was a disappointment compared to what had come before and, like Mass Effect 3, it received a ton of unjustified hate simply for not living up to expectations.

It says a lot that I can't even pinpoint the mission you're talking about, because I seem to remember doing something very similar quite a few times and not one of them was interesting enough to stand out in my memory.

It really stuck out for me cuz the guy just has inhuman running speed, whereas every other time I was chasing someone, it was a mild pursuit at best, and I was never in danger of actually losing them. With this guy, 2-3 of the retries were from the mission failing about 3 seconds after it starts. He just jets off down the pier and you pretty much start with the "He's getting too far away" warning.

The problem with AC chase sequences is that there is generally a path the game wants you to follow, and if you don't do exactly what it wants then you're likely to fail. However fast the guy is there will be a way to keep up, you just have to hit the right obstacles or climb spots. This is made even harder by the dodgy controls which will sometimes force the character to stop instead of climbing or move the wrong way around an obstacle.

A lot of my retries on those missions involved finding out exactly where the game wanted me to climb, jump etc and where it just wanted me to sprint. Pain in the arse.

Huh, as fun as it was (when it worked, as you said) to run and climb over stuff, the guy was so fast my first impression was to straight gun it on foot, since I figured climbing would only slow me down.

piinyouri:

SonicWaffle:

piinyouri:

It really stuck out for me cuz the guy just has inhuman running speed, whereas every other time I was chasing someone, it was a mild pursuit at best, and I was never in danger of actually losing them. With this guy, 2-3 of the retries were from the mission failing about 3 seconds after it starts. He just jets off down the pier and you pretty much start with the "He's getting too far away" warning.

The problem with AC chase sequences is that there is generally a path the game wants you to follow, and if you don't do exactly what it wants then you're likely to fail. However fast the guy is there will be a way to keep up, you just have to hit the right obstacles or climb spots. This is made even harder by the dodgy controls which will sometimes force the character to stop instead of climbing or move the wrong way around an obstacle.

A lot of my retries on those missions involved finding out exactly where the game wanted me to climb, jump etc and where it just wanted me to sprint. Pain in the arse.

Huh, as fun as it was (when it worked, as you said) to run and climb over stuff, the guy was so fast my first impression was to straight gun it on foot, since I figured climbing would only slow me down.

The way they tend to work, it's entirely possible that running on foot was the best plan at first, but then the game would present you with an option to swing on something and cut a few seconds off or dive through a house to gain speed. Generally these interactions aren't labelled or anything, so many of the chase missions end up being trial-and-error until you hit the right sequence. Oftentimes it seems like the most logical course, especially in a city, would simply to get high as soon as possible to give a better view of the streets and not lose the target, but the game will punish you for it. Because apparently in the several seconds it takes to get to the top of a building your character will completely forget what the target looks like, what direction they were heading in, and the ability to use a raised position to pick out a sprinting person from an otherwise ordinary street scene.

They aren't particularly well designed :-P

This is very surprising considering that when AC3 dropped I heard nothing but good things about naval combat. Not to mention that AC4 is being built from the ground up to be a Pirate game wearing the AC-Hoodie (the design document for this thing had to have come from a scrapped pirate game).

Maybe it'll be added in as DLC down the line. Either way I'm unaffected since I don't really play online multiplayer...and haven't played an AC since 2...and probably won't be getting this one until it's down to $20 (which I still haven't done for the now $20 AC3...)

As much as I like the navel battles, its not what I play Assassins Creed for. I play it for the assassinating, something that Assassins Creed, Assassins Creed 2 and Brotherhood got right along with the multiplayer got right and the rest of the series got wrong. In the last game, the mutiplayer was the only place were I could have some fun assassinating people so keeping it focused to just that is fine with me

Wasn't this announced a few months ago?

it would have been an interesting experience but i woulndt have touched the MP anyway. played a bit in revelations and thats it. i stick the SP, so no loss for me.

AgentLampshade:
An AC multiplayer should be on it's own disk IMO.

You mean, kinda like how it already was?

I would have liked naval multiplayer, but I see that they tried and it didn't work. While it saddens me, they did their best.
Yet people will bitch and say Ubisoft is stupid, but honestly, if it didn't work it didn't work.

Think about it; how would boarding work? On-ship open combat? Map variety? Weather systems? Ship rendering in real-time for several multiplayer inputs would be a nightmare. Without top-notch host connections, DC'ed games would be rampant.
It's better to abandon a project that's simply not working than to waste resources on it.

 Pages 1 2 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