Home Original Content Funny Pictures Funny GIFs YouTube Funny Text Funny Movies Channels Search

hide menu
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
User avatar #1 - oodlesandoodles ONLINE (03/03/2013) [-]
I used to love the AC series. I was madly in love with the first one because of it;s gameplay, and even more so, the story. The second one was even better, but after that, I felt that story was losing its quality with each subsequent game. Brotherhood was decent, Revelations, unnecessary, and AC3 was a letdown. I'm conflicted about this next one. I want to get it, because I know the gameplay will be excellent, but, damn it, I want a good story.
#9 to #1 - tyraxio (03/03/2013) [-]
I'm excited about this one though, however, I really think they should just make one set today, and then they can always go back to the past again later. Put you in the shoes of a modern-day Assassin with years of training, that is actually badass (*ahem* that means not a dude like Desmond) and give him some agenda. Seriously, that would be a wicked oppertunity to make some modern-day/futuristic Assassin weapons, which I think would be nice for all of the fans out here, since that is what a lot of fan art is; imagining exactly what weapons the modern Assassins use.
User avatar #10 to #9 - oodlesandoodles ONLINE (03/03/2013) [-]
I think they tried to do that at one point, but fans started complaining about how that would ruin the series. Honestly, at some point, there was a rumor that AC3 was going to be set during WWII and with a female protagonist. I was actually looking forward to seeing that
#11 to #10 - tyraxio (03/03/2013) [-]
That would actually have been really interesting! But I could imagine people raging over that. People seem to be tied a lot more emotionally to WWII than to just about any other piece of human history, no matter how violent.
User avatar #14 to #11 - oodlesandoodles ONLINE (03/03/2013) [-]
True, also people have gotten so used to Assassin's Creed being set during times where guns either didn't exist or couldn't fire more than a single bullet at a time and they feel like anything would be a betrayal to the series.
#15 to #14 - tyraxio (03/03/2013) [-]
Yeah. Well, it would be a bit weird, I must admit. They would have to turn the gameplay completely around to half semi- and full automatic guns all of a sudden.
User avatar #16 to #15 - oodlesandoodles ONLINE (03/03/2013) [-]
Not necessarily. In order to keep a series fresh and entertaining, you either change the gameplay or the goals of the gameplay each time a new game is released. A WWII setting, in my opinion would've put more of an emphasis on stealth, because at any moment, your opponent could blow you away with a Tommy gun. They wouldn't have had to give the player full access to guns, either, because, let's face it, if you were an assassin, you don't want a bunch of guns weighing you down. Maybe you'd get a single pistol but other than that, you've got your hidden blade, some darts, a short knife, and smoke bombs.

**** , that sounds awesome.
+1
#8 to #1 - deadlivingviking **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #12 to #8 - oodlesandoodles ONLINE (03/03/2013) [-]
Yeah, when they added multiplayer, it officially became a "Bro Game" like CoD
User avatar #2 to #1 - okamiden (03/03/2013) [-]
I don't think it's going to be good because there is no Assassin aspect to it whatsoever/ The just added the hidden blade part at the end because at the last minute some guy burst in the office saying "HOLY CRAP WE FORGOT TO MAKE IT LOOK ASSASSIN-Y".
Seriously, they should've made a whole new series for this one. Similar to the plot of the AC one where they use ancestors to find where the Apple was but instead be like Blackbeards hidden dildo stash or something.
User avatar #3 to #2 - oodlesandoodles ONLINE (03/03/2013) [-]
When you think about it, there was no Assassin aspect to any of the games. Ubisoft likes to push the stealth aspects of the series when they talk about the series, but the real fun of the game is taking on large groups of enemies and occasionally killing civilians. At least in my opinion, the stealth system always felt like a chore because it was so forced.
User avatar #4 to #3 - okamiden (03/03/2013) [-]
Yea, I suppose I see where you're coming from. I personally like to be as stealthy as possible through out the game, but do like to cause chaos every now and then. Like in 3, I'd place a land mind down and throw money and gather every civilian I can on top of it (since civilians can't set it off), then piss off a guard and make him chase me, make him run over it and create a mini genocide. But then again, they all had the "Assassin" thing in common. Now they just took a sharp left and labeling a pirate as an assassin.
User avatar #5 to #4 - oodlesandoodles ONLINE (03/03/2013) [-]
I'm pretty sure Assassin's Creed was only meant to be a trilogy, but after the overwhelming success, they decided to milk it for all its worth. In fact, sometime after the release of AC2, one of the Ubisoft spokespeople said something along the lines of "We didn't think it would be this big." and "We could make hundreds of these games." It was at that point that I knew the series was doomed.

I also think that they chose a pirate theme this time around because of the success of the Ship battles in AC3.
User avatar #6 to #5 - okamiden (03/03/2013) [-]
It really was. They had one team of developers make 1 2 and 3 and another make rev and bortherhood to milk the series. They really ran the series into the ground. "Whelp, we're out of recognizable time periods, lets do pirates n **** ". That's what I hate about companies. Bungie intended for Halo to be a trilogy, and it was beautiful, I would've been a okay with 3 being the last one. Then boom, Reach and a new trilogy come out. Same with Gears of War. 3 Games and now they're making a prequel because of it's success. Plus, since [SPOILER] Dezmond is kill[/ENDSPOILER] I don't know what they're going to do with the plot.

I liked the concept of the naval battles and all, they're really cool but I never really sat down and played AC3 and did side naval missions, I only did the ones needed for the stories because it's just not my thing.
User avatar #7 to #6 - oodlesandoodles ONLINE (03/03/2013) [-]
From a business standpoint, I can understand it. Take something people like and keep watering it down until they stop paying for it. It really hurts to see so much potential ritualistically burned at the stake in the name of corporate greed. The plot is most likely going to be something utterly asinine. I won't even waste my time thinking about it.

Additionally, notice that it took them several years to make AC1, then two years to make AC2, and another two to make AC3. It only took one year each to make Brotherhood and Revelations, and those were just cut and pastes of AC2. Seeing as AC3 was just released last year and AC4 is set for this year, it's probably going to end up being a cut and paste as well.
#13 to #7 - anonymous (03/03/2013) [-]
that's pretty much the reason CoD is so big, everyone liked 4, so acti aren't letting anyone make a decent IP until people stop buying CoD
 Friends (0)