Assassin's Creed 2 Talk

Joystiq confirms plans for an Assassin's Creed sequel, relating comments about the project during Ubisoft's first-half fiscal 2008-09 conference call. A sequel to the successful stealth/action game was probably a given, but the confirmation indicates they are shooting for a release during Ubisoft's fiscal 2010, which would make for a holiday 2009 release using those old-fashioned non-fiscal calendars the rest of us are saddled with. GiantBomb has their own light to shed on this news (thanks Destructoid), as during the taping of an episode of Gametrailers' Bonus Round they picked up word from tapped-in industry analyst Michael Pachter that the middle ages setting of the first Assassin's Creed will shift several hundred years forward into the 18th century, perhaps to be set during the French Revolution. This news of a time shift is not confirmed, and other details like target platforms are not available at this time.
View : : :
49 Replies. 3 pages. Viewing page 1.
Newer [  1  2  3  ] Older
49.
 
Re: Assassin's Creed 2 Talk
Dec 4, 2008, 16:49
49.
Re: Assassin's Creed 2 Talk Dec 4, 2008, 16:49
Dec 4, 2008, 16:49
 
I agree with the both of you (Dades, Jerykk).
AssCreed was simpler, but this is because it was more refined. What I find is that Ubisoft ninjaneers their gameplay so it's deep but narrow, or broad but shallow.
In AssCreed's case, it was broad, but shallow. You could do lots, but there wasn't much necessary action to accomplish it.

Anyhow, Dade's right, all games have their own way of doing things and AssCreed didn't float your boat. It's still a brilliant platformer, one of the best in my mind, and my only complaint is that Flag Collection, Replay Value Does Not Make.
I'm sure I'm not alone in this.

If I were to see AssCreed v1.5, I would buy it if it featured RANDOM MISSIONS. Why not?
Altair, go kill him.
Altair, we need to know a secret. Go interrogate him.
Etc.

Edit: Aiming yourself while running full tilt proved to be a serious issue sometimes. Mind you, Mirror's Edge is a problem this way as well.

This comment was edited on Dec 4, 2008, 16:50.
Avatar 13202
48.
 
Re: Assassin's Creed 2 Talk
Dec 3, 2008, 13:06
48.
Re: Assassin's Creed 2 Talk Dec 3, 2008, 13:06
Dec 3, 2008, 13:06
 
it's about having to time your jumps and rolls and chain together different moves to maintain momentum and traverse the environment in the most efficient way possible. It's about actually playing the game.

You have to do all of those things in Assassin's Creed so I have no idea what the hell game you played. You don't run around randomly jumping off things without mapping out a path in your head before hand and some of it can require intense timing, especially if you are being pursued. As he previously mentioned, you just don't need to press 10 buttons to accomplish the same task. I find it funny you mention PoP and Tomb Raiders as examples given that they don't exactly require much of that either, there is simply more problem solving in traversing the game as opposed to combat transport which is part of the mechanics in Assassin's Creed. Later on in the game you even get an extra grapple button for making more difficult jumps and grapples by the way, something you ignored previously.

In the end you're bitching about a game for not being exactly what you want and being both vague and incoherent about what that might be. Finally, I found it amusing you had no other comparisons on the PC and instead pointed to console games. Complexity compared to what exactly again? That's what I thought Jerykk, chuckle. You're the joker always going on and on about console games ruining complexity in the PC gaming industry, irony at it's finest.

This comment was edited on Dec 3, 2008, 13:12.
Avatar 54452
47.
 
Re: Assassin's Creed 2 Talk
Dec 3, 2008, 12:38
47.
Re: Assassin's Creed 2 Talk Dec 3, 2008, 12:38
Dec 3, 2008, 12:38
 
It's not that difficult a concept to grasp. Some people like playing games, not watching them. Interactivity is a key part of gameplay. In AC, platforming requires the absolute minimum of interactivity. When compared to the likes of Prince of Persia or Tomb Raider, AC's platforming is simply boring because it doesn't require any skill or thought. It isn't just about pressing more buttons, it's about having to time your jumps and rolls and chain together different moves to maintain momentum and traverse the environment in the most efficient way possible. It's about actually playing the game.

If you don't like platformers, you'll probably be more forgiving of AC. For people who do like platformers, AC was just weak.
Avatar 20715
46.
 
Re: Assassin's Creed 2 Talk
Dec 2, 2008, 18:02
46.
Re: Assassin's Creed 2 Talk Dec 2, 2008, 18:02
Dec 2, 2008, 18:02
 
I guess my confusion stems more from the fact that these are also criticisms leveled at cinematic-style games in general. Obviously, a pretention to a highly cinematic experience means less depth and, indeed, less direct content. The combat is certainly an example of this, as it prioritizes the look and flow over what it gives you to actually do, I just don't understand why that has any effect on fun. Plenty of games are fun for being far more complex than this, but on the other hand, plenty of games with more complexity also fall flat on their asses.

I can perfectly understand that someone may not be able to have fun with this kind of execution, but even if it's just boiled down to that, the idea that there's something inherently wrong with the game just because it lacks input complexity or challenge is silly. I'm probably in the minority thinking like this, though, I suspect I was the only person in the universe who liked Devil May Cry 2 a few years back...
NOT THE BEES! NOT THE BEES THEY'RE IN MY EYES AARRGRHGHGGAFHGHFGHFG!
Avatar 51686
45.
 
Re: Assassin's Creed 2 Talk
Dec 2, 2008, 10:35
45.
Re: Assassin's Creed 2 Talk Dec 2, 2008, 10:35
Dec 2, 2008, 10:35
 
It's not more deep. People are kidding themselves if they think that adding an extra button push to grapple would've made a difference. The game was lacking content in many areas which was the real problem. The combat was also very easy to master and not inherently difficult to begin with which didn't help either. There were many problems with Assassin's Creed, adding an extra button or two to push wouldn't have magically made this game Mirror's Edge. People just like to bitch about supposed lack of complexity in PC games. I'd pose to those people, what complexity was there to begin with? I can't even think of a PC game like Assassin's Creed to make comparisons with.
Avatar 54452
44.
 
Re: Assassin's Creed 2 Talk
Dec 2, 2008, 00:04
44.
Re: Assassin's Creed 2 Talk Dec 2, 2008, 00:04
Dec 2, 2008, 00:04
 
I really don't understand this whole "holding down the button = it sucks" mentality over this game. Okay, so it's less effort than tapping the button multiple times. How is tapping the button multiple times more "deep?"

Then again, the Wii is just waving a TV remote back and forth in place of tapping a button, but an inordinate amount of people seem to equate this with virtual reality and deepness, so who am I to talk...
NOT THE BEES! NOT THE BEES THEY'RE IN MY EYES AARRGRHGHGGAFHGHFGHFG!
Avatar 51686
43.
 
Re: Assassin's Creed 2 Talk
Nov 30, 2008, 22:04
43.
Re: Assassin's Creed 2 Talk Nov 30, 2008, 22:04
Nov 30, 2008, 22:04
 
Not what I meant. Your negative opinion on the game is what prevents objectivity. I was a fan of the game overall but can acknowledge it's faults, that's the difference between you and I. It was fun but flawed but the freerunning wasn't one of those flaws.
I see. You can be objective because you liked the game, but because I didn't like it, I'm obviously unable to be objective. A logical leap worthy of Altair himself.

You don't sound like you spent a lot of time with Assassin's Creed. Interaction was frequently required in much of the freerunning, just obviously not to the degree of something like Mirror's Edge. As for the goal of the game, the videos and ads I saw showcased the game world, combat and many other things. They didn't focus solely on the freerunning. If you feel they did then please point to a specific advertisement to give us an example.
After playing through most of the second city area, I realized that I was doing the same things over and over, that the combat was not remotely challenging, and that the platforming aspects were virtually automatic. While they were neat to watch for a little while, they certainly can't carry the game. The story seemed like it had the potential to be interesting, but I just couldn't force myself to keep doing the same things over and over to get through the game while not being challenged in any way.

As for the goal of the game, the videos and ads I saw showcased the game world, combat and many other things. They didn't focus solely on the freerunning. If you feel they did then please point to a specific advertisement to give us an example.
Not solely, no, but it is featured at least as prominently as the combat system and the story aspects. Seeing as the combat provides no challenge, the platforming provides no challenge, and the missions are ridiculously repetitive, I wonder what people actually see in this game aside from the graphics and cool-looking moves. Like I said before, it seems like their main goal with the game was for it to look cool. They obviously didn't consider deep gameplay or challenge to be on their list of goals. I guess some people just like to watch the game look cool.

"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts." -- Bertrand Russell (I think...)
Avatar 9540
42.
 
Re: Assassin's Creed 2 Talk
Nov 30, 2008, 19:52
42.
Re: Assassin's Creed 2 Talk Nov 30, 2008, 19:52
Nov 30, 2008, 19:52
 
Again, the goal of the game was not to make a freerunning simulator. And all of those things in the game you brought up did require interaction. You couldn't just run and jump off random things without ever pushing buttons, you were required to give user input. It automated some of the functions for you but yet again, it was not a freerunning simulator. The mode of transport was not the entire game unlike something like Mirror's Edge.

Platforming was at least 70% of Assassin's Creed. It was very obviously the focal point of the game. And holding down a button is probably the least amount of user input you can have while still qualifying as user input. If we were talking about a Zelda game, your argument would have some merit. While those games do have platforming elements, they are relatively minor and thus, the automated jumping is acceptable. However, platforming is a huge part of AC. Almost all of the missions require extensive platforming. Want to collect all the flags? Platforming. Want to discover all the towers? Platforming. Want to assassinate all the targets? Platforming. Platforming is what you spend the most time doing in AC.

I was a fan of the game overall but can acknowledge it's faults, that's the difference between you and I.

Yet you can't seem to acknowledge that the platforming was dumbed down. Completely mindless, in fact. Here, let's try an analogy. Shooter 1 requires that you aim and fire manually. Shooter 2 requires that you just hold down one button while the game automatically aims and fires for you. Which shooter is dumbed down?

As everyone has been saying, it's perfectly okay for you to enjoy the platforming in Assassin's Creed. We won't judge you for that. However, there is really no way you can argue that the platforming wasn't dumbed down.
Avatar 20715
41.
 
Re: Assassin's Creed 2 Talk
Nov 30, 2008, 17:55
41.
Re: Assassin's Creed 2 Talk Nov 30, 2008, 17:55
Nov 30, 2008, 17:55
 
We're not talking about a 2-d game-world where things are on a timer. We're talking about NPCs acting dynamically based on their own AI, the player having to change courses and react to them on the fly, as well as executing moves to jump, grab, swing, climb, etc, that are based on the environment that they are encountering at that moment, rather than some memorized series of events such as you'd find in a typical side-scroller where everything is on a fixed and timed path. AC managed to turn all of that into holding down a single button and running at things so that you can watch your character do all the climbing, grabbing, swinging and such on its own. You just choose where to run.

Again, the goal of the game was not to make a freerunning simulator. And all of those things in the game you brought up did require interaction. You couldn't just run and jump off random things without ever pushing buttons, you were required to give user input. It automated some of the functions for you but yet again, it was not a freerunning simulator. The mode of transport was not the entire game unlike something like Mirror's Edge.

If I'm not a fan I can't be objective? Do you understand the meaning of the words "fan" or "objective"?

Not what I meant. Your negative opinion on the game is what prevents objectivity. I was a fan of the game overall but can acknowledge it's faults, that's the difference between you and I. It was fun but flawed but the freerunning wasn't one of those flaws.

The platformer-esque rooftop running was the primary showpiece in all of the videos and ads. It was hard to believe that there was almost no interaction involved aside from guiding the direction of the character.

You don't sound like you spent a lot of time with Assassin's Creed. Interaction was frequently required in much of the freerunning, just obviously not to the degree of something like Mirror's Edge. As for the goal of the game, the videos and ads I saw showcased the game world, combat and many other things. They didn't focus solely on the freerunning. If you feel they did then please point to a specific advertisement to give us an example.
Avatar 54452
40.
 
Re: Assassin's Creed 2 Talk
Nov 30, 2008, 16:36
40.
Re: Assassin's Creed 2 Talk Nov 30, 2008, 16:36
Nov 30, 2008, 16:36
 
And all of what you just said is memory repetition despite you saying it isn't for some reason. There's nothing "wrong" with it but don't confuse it for some deep gameplay complexity or something. You're free to disagree but if you think that spotting mushrooms moving back and forth and timing a jump based on that isn't a memory repetition exercise then I don't know what more to say, its practically a textbook scenario of one in a videogame.

We're not talking about a 2-d game-world where things are on a timer. We're talking about NPCs acting dynamically based on their own AI, the player having to change courses and react to them on the fly, as well as executing moves to jump, grab, swing, climb, etc, that are based on the environment that they are encountering at that moment, rather than some memorized series of events such as you'd find in a typical side-scroller where everything is on a fixed and timed path. AC managed to turn all of that into holding down a single button and running at things so that you can watch your character do all the climbing, grabbing, swinging and such on its own. You just choose where to run.

You obviously weren't a fan so I doubt you will have any objectivity when speaking about the gameplay elements, it's not really a discussion worth having.
If I'm not a fan I can't be objective? Do you understand the meaning of the words "fan" or "objective"?

If you didn't enjoy it then fair enough. The goal of the game was not to create a platformer, it was to combine several different gameplay elements together and base a story around that. Could they have done a better job? Absolutely. Did they fail because they didn't make you press a button every time you needed a handhold? No.
I wonder now what the goal of the game actually was. The platformer-esque rooftop running was the primary showpiece in all of the videos and ads. It was hard to believe that there was almost no interaction involved aside from guiding the direction of the character. The goal didn't seem to be in any of the other aspects of the game either. The combat was ridiculously easy, the missions were extremely repetitive, and the stealth aspects didn't even matter since you could easily kill any number of opponents. So what, exactly, was the goal of the game? It seems that they settled on a goal of "make it look cool".

This comment was edited on Nov 30, 2008, 16:40.
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts." -- Bertrand Russell (I think...)
Avatar 9540
39.
 
Re: Assassin's Creed 2 Talk
Nov 30, 2008, 16:06
39.
Re: Assassin's Creed 2 Talk Nov 30, 2008, 16:06
Nov 30, 2008, 16:06
 
Not when the game-world is dynamic. It's timing and reflexes, along with the ability to spot objects and patterns. Memory has little to do with it as the timings will be different all the time.

And all of what you just said is memory repetition despite you saying it isn't for some reason. There's nothing "wrong" with it but don't confuse it for some deep gameplay complexity or something. You're free to disagree but if you think that spotting mushrooms moving back and forth and timing a jump based on that isn't a memory repetition exercise then I don't know what more to say, its practically a textbook scenario of one in a videogame.

Supplement what gameplay? The repetitious pre-assassination missions? The cheese-fest combat where you can defeat virtually any number of enemies? The platform elements were the central feature of the game and were hyped more than anything else by the developers and advertising.

You obviously weren't a fan so I doubt you will have any objectivity when speaking about the gameplay elements, it's not really a discussion worth having. If you didn't enjoy it then fair enough. The goal of the game was not to create a platformer, it was to combine several different gameplay elements together and base a story around that. Could they have done a better job? Absolutely. Did they fail because they didn't make you press a button every time you needed a handhold? No.

Avatar 54452
38.
 
Re: Assassin's Creed 2 Talk
Nov 30, 2008, 14:12
38.
Re: Assassin's Creed 2 Talk Nov 30, 2008, 14:12
Nov 30, 2008, 14:12
 
There's nothing complicated about timing gimmicks in platformers. It's memory repetition exercises.
Not when the game-world is dynamic. It's timing and reflexes, along with the ability to spot objects and patterns. Memory has little to do with it as the timings will be different all the time.

The goal of AC was not to be a platformer, it was to have that supplement the gameplay.
Supplement what gameplay? The repetitious pre-assassination missions? The cheese-fest combat where you can defeat virtually any number of enemies? The platform elements were the central feature of the game and were hyped more than anything else by the developers and advertising.

This comment was edited on Nov 30, 2008, 14:17.
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts." -- Bertrand Russell (I think...)
Avatar 9540
37.
 
Re: Assassin's Creed 2 Talk
Nov 30, 2008, 13:51
37.
Re: Assassin's Creed 2 Talk Nov 30, 2008, 13:51
Nov 30, 2008, 13:51
 
There's nothing complicated about timing gimmicks in platformers. It's memory repetition exercises. One man's complexity is another man's simplicity was my point. The goal of AC was not to be a platformer, it was to have that supplement the gameplay. That was my original point which he deflected with this useless argument. Perhaps it failed in it's goals to many people and I have certainly read that opinion more than once. I still found it an enjoyable game because I didn't approach it expecting Mirror's Edge.
Avatar 54452
36.
 
Re: Assassin's Creed 2 Talk
Nov 30, 2008, 12:42
36.
Re: Assassin's Creed 2 Talk Nov 30, 2008, 12:42
Nov 30, 2008, 12:42
 
Yes it is subjective. First off you're using the term in a way one might phrase a backhanded compliment and it's not fooling anyone. Complexity does no one any good if they can't understand it or find the game fun. Dumbing down to you is streamlining to a different person.
How can you say that AC is not dumbed down from platforming games that require timing and some degree of precision to perform various acts? It requires you to hold down a button. That seems to be the very definition of dumbed down. Hell, SMB requires more timing and precision than AC.

I think you're just feeling insulted that the kind of game you like is being referred to as dumbed down. I can understand not liking the term, because it is derogatory, but I think you could accept that it refers to something real. Everyone plays games for enjoyment, so if you enjoy that sort of game, then there's nothing wrong with that. This is why I wish they'd make it an optional thing. Let you choose to have one button handle all the moves, but let those of us that would like to have a more complex system have that too.
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts." -- Bertrand Russell (I think...)
Avatar 9540
35.
 
Re: Assassin's Creed 2 Talk
Nov 30, 2008, 12:11
35.
Re: Assassin's Creed 2 Talk Nov 30, 2008, 12:11
Nov 30, 2008, 12:11
 
However, dumbing down is not subjective. Holding one button to make a character automatically run, jump, climb, roll, hop and swing is dumbed down regardless of whether or not you find it enjoyable.

Yes it is subjective. First off you're using the term in a way one might phrase a backhanded compliment and it's not fooling anyone. Complexity does no one any good if they can't understand it or find the game fun. Dumbing down to you is streamlining to a different person.

just as nobody can argue (except you) that AC's platforming wasn't dumbed down when compared to every platformer in existence.

Also ridiculous statements like that make your credibility nil. Every platformer in existence, really? Could you be a bit more broad and vague? So we're talking Super Mario Brothers here too? I guess any platformer that allows you to land without mashing an intense button combination is just "dumbed down!".

I know your penchant for arguing anything and everything on these boards but even I was surprised when you posted that little "gem".
Avatar 54452
34.
 
Re: Assassin's Creed 2 Talk
Nov 30, 2008, 04:46
34.
Re: Assassin's Creed 2 Talk Nov 30, 2008, 04:46
Nov 30, 2008, 04:46
 
Reducing complexity doesn't always make things "dumbed down", sometimes too much complexity just isn't fun.

In this case, reducing the complexity (actually, removing it entirely) made the platforming boring... to me. If you found it fun, that's fine. You should understand that notions of fun are completely subjective. However, dumbing down is not subjective. Holding one button to make a character automatically run, jump, climb, roll, hop and swing is dumbed down regardless of whether or not you find it enjoyable.

Remember, dumbed down != bad. In my experience, I've found dumbed down games to be less fun than their more complex predecessors. However, to each their own. There are actually some people out there who thought Deus Ex 2 was great. However, nobody within their right mind can argue that it wasn't dumbed down from DX1, just as nobody can argue (except you) that AC's platforming wasn't dumbed down when compared to every platformer in existence.

This comment was edited on Nov 30, 2008, 04:51.
Avatar 20715
33.
 
Re: Assassin's Creed 2 Talk
Nov 29, 2008, 19:38
33.
Re: Assassin's Creed 2 Talk Nov 29, 2008, 19:38
Nov 29, 2008, 19:38
 
Uh, by that logic, every game should just have one button that does everything for you, since you're usually playing a character that's very proficient at what he/she does.

No, that's your logic. It's a gameplay decision made by the developers who thought that managing his every move while freerunning would've reduced the enjoyment value of the game. If you disagree with that you're free to not purchase it or it's followups. I found the game interactive enough to be quite enjoyable and my only hopes are for improved combat and more content in the game world itself.

Developers frequently have to make choices during product development to go a certain path with game features. Reducing complexity doesn't always make things "dumbed down", sometimes too much complexity just isn't fun. They didn't make Mirror's Edge, they made Assassin's Creed. If you can't see the difference then I don't know what more to say.
Avatar 54452
32.
 
Re: Assassin's Creed 2 Talk
Nov 29, 2008, 01:24
32.
Re: Assassin's Creed 2 Talk Nov 29, 2008, 01:24
Nov 29, 2008, 01:24
 
Why don't they create real platform gameplay for those of us that want to play the game, and then add an easy mode (or cinematic mode if you prefer to call it that) that people can use if they just want to watch the action?
Sounds like a great idea to me.
"The price of freedom is eternal vigilance."
Avatar 22891
31.
 
Re: Assassin's Creed 2 Talk
Nov 28, 2008, 19:41
31.
Re: Assassin's Creed 2 Talk Nov 28, 2008, 19:41
Nov 28, 2008, 19:41
 
Well I guess I also enjoyed the platforming. I mean this guy is a master assassin, so why babysit him for everything he does?

Uh, by that logic, every game should just have one button that does everything for you, since you're usually playing a character that's very proficient at what he/she does.

Interaction is a pivotal element of gameplay and if that interaction is limited to holding down one button, that doesn't make for very compelling gameplay.

The biggest problem with hybrid-genre games is that there are people who don't like every genre. Developers try to avoid frustrating such players by toning down the difficulty and complexity of each genre's implementation in the game. Unfortunately, this results in a game that doesn't excel in any way and fails to satisfy those players who have experience with many genres of games. I love platforming, stealth and action games so I expected a lot more out of Assassin's Creed and it failed to deliver in every respect.
Avatar 20715
30.
 
Re: Assassin's Creed 2 Talk
Nov 28, 2008, 17:53
30.
Re: Assassin's Creed 2 Talk Nov 28, 2008, 17:53
Nov 28, 2008, 17:53
 
Why don't they create real platform gameplay for those of us that want to play the game, and then add an easy mode (or cinematic mode if you prefer to call it that) that people can use if they just want to watch the action?
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts." -- Bertrand Russell (I think...)
Avatar 9540
49 Replies. 3 pages. Viewing page 1.
Newer [  1  2  3  ] Older