Sections

Is it too early for Assassin’s Creed 4?

Monday, 4th March 2013 13:02 GMT By Dave Cook

Assassin’s Creed 4: Black Flag has now been officially announced, but is the yearly cycle model a good fit for the brand? VG247′s Dave Cook argues for and against the move.

Assassin’s Creed 4: Black Flag

You can see Sam’s video interview with Ubisoft here, in which they talk about Black Flag’s open world, upgrading Kenway’s ship and much, much more.

Stace saw Black Flags running last week and has written a huge and rather brilliant preview based on everything from combat to exploration. The game sounds massive.

We’ve got a big gallery of Black Flag screens right here, showing off dual-sword combat, free-running and whales.

There have been two Black Flag trailers released so far. You can watch the reveal trailer here, and a second clip that sets up Kenway’s character.

I really disliked Assassin’s Creed 3.

When I wrote my appraisal of Ubisoft Montreal’s open world romp, I struggled to find positive things to say about it. To me it embodied everything wrong with modern gaming today. The developer had somehow managed to take the dense geography of colonial America and make it feel like a dull corridor devoid of choice and features.

Personally, I think they dropped the ball. Combat was whittled down to contextual, singular button presses, the plot was a confused mess and the free-running mechanic had become too clever for its own good, frequently battling against the increasingly intricate terrain. Running in a straight line became a chore, the code was rife with glitches, and the sign-posting was overbearing to the point of annoyance.

You simply cannot take a huge open world, litter it with a stack of uninspired, rudimentary side-quests and call it worthwhile content. I completed the whole game without spending a single penny of in-game currency on new gear, or through hunting. Don’t get me started on the insulting micro-payment model either.

Ubisoft knows it fucked up hard, that’s why special attention is being drawn to Assassin’s Creed 4: Black Flag’s naval exploration, seeing as it is the one positive element of Assassin’s Creed 3 that most critics agreed on.

Can it atone for the sins of Assassin’s Creed 3? Well, if our first impressions are anything to go by, then yes it might. But I’m cautiously optimistic about the publisher’s ability to steer the ship around, despite claims that the team is fighting hard to combat previous short-comings.

The game follows Edward Kenway, a pirate rogue who sails the Caribbean in search of loot and adventure, as well as the odd drink or three. Ubisoft’s big pitch is the idea that Kenway will be able to sail a seamless open world full of islands, undersea treasure and port towns waiting to be explored. It sounds a lot like The Legend of Zelda: Wind Waker, but with interracial pirate three-ways.

There’s definitely a darker edge on show in the official reveal trailer, but a few things still aren’t sitting right. We see Kenway’s quad-revolver and dual-blade combat at work (expect ‘quad-revolver’ to become a mainstay of the game’s marketing-speak), but I’m still concerned that his combos will be executed simply by tapping one button. Assassin’s Creed 3′s combat didn’t feel like you were really in control of what was happening. It felt boring and uninvolved.

There’s also a feeling that Black Flag is simply a response to the positive reaction to naval sections scattered throughout Assassin’s Creed 3. Granted, development will have started over a year ago, but it’s as if Ubisoft knew that its ship gameplay would shine brightest. My worry here is that the whole game will place great emphasis on sea-faring and not enough on the elements that made the early games – Assassin’s Creed 2 in particular – so enjoyable.

Assassin’s Creed 2 delivered a dense world teeming with character, tangible side distractions, and an intriguing modern day story. With Desmond out of the frame and replaced by a faceless Abstergo employee trying to uncover Kenway’s mysteries, Ubisoft is missing out on giving us strong modern day lead. At least they won’t be another also-ran that receives immense scorn from gamers and critics alike.

Here’s a wild stretch: make the hero female Sure, a woman controlling a male ancestor like Kenway might be a stretch, but he seems like a total philandering bastard. The character clashes would make for intriguing plot points. You’d grow to hate and love Kenway in equal measure.

After all of this my key concern is that the open world will still feel sparse. Assassin’s Creed 3′s colonial hubs were often pretty to look at but offered little in the way of interaction or added value. Seeing as Ubisoft failed to create an involving play-space first time around, you can understand why I’m wary when approaching Black Flag’s increased scope.

Seamless open worlds aren’t easy to craft and to keep interesting. Far Cry 3 succeeded with gusto, as you actually felt compelled to wander off the beaten patch and explore every shack and cave you came across. Assassin’s Creed 3 didn’t have an inch of Far Cry 3′s intrigue. Ubisoft needs to capture that essence in Black Flag or it will stumble.

On paper the concept of an open world connected by Kenway’s ship is ambitious but rather incredible. I genuinely hope Ubisoft pulls it off as it could be epic in scope, and because I sunk many, many hours into the Ezio trilogy, I’d like a reason to come back after feeling burned by Assassin’s Creed 3.

This isn’t an impossible feat. It can be done, but I’m worried that this yearly cycle will stunt development. Call of Duty gets away with it, but that’s because it’s a linear corridor shooter. Open worlds take time, consideration and a strong attention to detail. That’s why Red Dead Redemption’s old west took some five years to develop.

Rushing Black Flag out the gate could be costly for Ubisoft, but I hope for their sake they know what they’re doing. I’ll follow this one with keen, but cautious interest from now on. How about you?

Latest

50 Comments

  1. bitsnark

    “Ubisoft knows it fucked up hard, that’s why Assassin’s Creed 4: Black Flag exists.”

    Didn’t development on Black Flag begin in Summer 2011? Do you contend then Dave, that because of the perception that AC3 wasn’t up to scratch, that Ubisoft hurried development on Black Flag and that we otherwise wouldn’t have gotten an AC game this year at all?

    Bearing in mind that when it releases in October, it would have nearly two and half years of development time attributed to it.

    #1 2 years ago
  2. Dave Cook

    @1 Yeah we’ve heard that they realised it wasn’t up to scratch mid-development and set out to improve on certain areas in AC4. That said, I’ve edited that bit to make it clearer. Cheers for the heads up :)

    #2 2 years ago
  3. bitsnark

    @2 No worries bud! Great article though; I’m sure there are many that share your trepidation.

    #3 2 years ago
  4. DSB

    I just can’t do it. I feel like I really should play Assassins Creed 3 because I paid for it and all, but goddamn… That game is boring!

    If there was such a thing as digital reselling, that game would be long gone.

    #4 2 years ago
  5. freedoms_stain

    I reckon they already botched the series.

    Brotherhood and Revalation should never have happened, or they should have taken the modern day out of the equation for those games, because they’ve killed off any interest people had in the over-arching plot by stretching it out.

    At this point they’re never going to change the combat. If you complain the combat is ridiculously easy (on reddit for example) you’ll get a ton of upvotes, but you’ll also get a ton of replies from people along the lines of “oh, but I like feeling like a badass!”. Which makes me feel kind of depressed about the direction the industry is headed. I see a future where I’m not going to be able to play the majority of big budget games any more because they’re all mind-numbingly simple.

    #5 2 years ago
  6. wlodi

    Dave, you didn’t read the info about modern day gameplay, which seems to indicate there’s no modern-day hero – instead, “the player is a hero” hired by Abstergo to research Edward’s life – which might have a lot in common with Ubisoft’s Initiates project (which is now under NDA), possibly bringing social gameplay features to AC4 – think similar to Watch Dogs is hinting at. A very interesting concept for me, but I think I’m going to miss having a modern day character.

    #6 2 years ago
  7. Sylrissa

    I do feel as if Assassin’s creed has become Ubisofts Call of Duty, but I can’t help but feel that black flag does look really interesting and might turn out to be really good.

    By taking what was many peoples favorite part of AC3 and building the next game around it (hopefully)

    #7 2 years ago
  8. alimokrane

    I have given up on the franchise since Brotherhood. Didnt buy Revelations or AC3..They have messed up the whole premise of the game since its conception, no wonder Desilets (the creator of the franchise, let’s face it, it was his idea) left the company.

    Yearly cycles have ended up producing empty and shallow open world games.

    They need to give the granchise a long break and try and do something exceptional on the new hardware and release something in late 2014 at the earliest but here we AC4 is being released this year.

    Dont also get me started on Watch Dogs. the game uses the exact same formula and it will do Ubisoft no favours.

    #8 2 years ago
  9. Dave Cook

    @6 I did read it, I just didn’t like the concept. I think having a strong modern day character would be much better than someone faceless, or really weak. It’s a strange direction.

    What sort of character would you like to see?

    Thanks for reading :)

    Dave

    #9 2 years ago
  10. manamana

    Another great read, Dave. I admit that I only played AC1. And I always wanted to get the next iterations but somehow I lost interest. What I also admit, is that I love to be in anticipation of something. And the AC series has this yearly CoD/NBA/Madden vibe to it, which I simply find hard to get exited about. Stopped playing Cod with MW2 btw.

    #10 2 years ago
  11. wlodi

    @9 Haha, fair enough. It’s a great read, Dave. I like the concept, but it’s all in the execution, and yes, it sounds very risky.

    #11 2 years ago
  12. xXNapsterManXx

    I liked AC3 but my favorite is still AC2 can’t wait for AC4

    #12 2 years ago
  13. Dave Cook

    @11 Thanks again :) Yeah it could work out really well depending on how they play it, but based on Desmond and the other modern day characters – don’t get me started on Danny Wallace’s character – I’m not sure at the moment.

    Past games seriously made me feel like I was tagging along with the cast of some modern Scooby Doo reboot.

    #13 2 years ago
  14. YoungZer0

    Yeah, I think I’m done with the series. Russian Revolution is not going to happen any time soon. Nor are we going to get any Ninjas or Industrial London. Imagine a plot about Jack the Ripper being not one but many killers and the prostitutes he killed were assassins.

    Or something like that. The potential for the stories are unlimited.

    AC3 was a disaster, the game was simply not fun to play, I forced myself through it. From story, to character (Ugh, Connor), to gameplay, to missions, to sidemissions, to full synch. All, except one thing didn’t work.

    I expected to hate the Naval missions, mostly because I thought they didn’t fit into the whole scenario, but I loved them. They were the best part about it. I literally cheered “FUCK YEAH!” after my I destroyed my first Man-o-War. There was a Rush while playing it, ruined by full synch, but anyway, it was good while it lasted.

    The new AC is a mixed bag. I’m glad I’m going to have more Naval missions in a fitting scenario, yet still, how far is that away from Assassin’s Creed original premise? I generally think that the series has lost its soul, what it was all about. They keep stuffing useless shit into it that barely fits and it’s barely about assassinating people anymore. Remember when the main missions were actually fun? Were you’d prepare yourself before killing the target? Where you WANTED to kill the target in a specific way?

    I don’t know about you, but that stopped in AC3. I stopped caring about the perfect hit, mostly because the game would continue to interfere. The missions were linear, broken up by many cutscenes, most of the time THE GAME would force you to kill the target in one way and one way only.

    Oh, I see you prepared for the mission very well, so here’s a cutscene in which Connor gets spotted and has to fight his way out, later you ride on a horse back only to conclude the whole thing in a fight.

    And if that wasn’t enough the full synch would make it worse. It would force ONLY ONE way to complete the mission and it would fuck up the narrative COMPLETELY!

    I shot most of my targets in the back, because I was so fucking annoyed by the broken gameplay mechanics, the forced, linear gameplay or the bugs. I had to literally (!) restart the last mission over 40 times, because A.) Full Synch wouldn’t allow me to be touched by people or by fire and I could only be max. 25 m away from the target. B.) The way wasn’t clear enough, so I would run into fire and die. C.) A bug would throw Charles through the floor and the mission would abort, because he would be too far away.

    At the end, I had the way memorized so well, that I was actually AHEAD of Charles, but don’t you dare to think that the game would allow me to kill him, no-no sir. I had to wait for him to catch up, so the scripted events would open up the paths.

    We had to fight on a burning ship, only for him to escape.

    As I said, a total disaster.

    #14 2 years ago
  15. OlderGamer

    For the most part, imo, the franchise formula is used way too much and way too often. Over saturation and over exposure leaves a lot of gamers looking else where for something to play. It doesn’t matter who you are or what you play, at some point you are going to have had enough.

    ACIII, for me, was the first game in the franchise I played. I liked the setting and it drew me in. For the most part, I enjoyed it. It didn’t grab me to the point of wanting to play another one.

    Besides where is the gaurentee that AC4 will be any better then ACIII? Like most companies, when a game in a franchise dips, instead of putting it on the shelf for a bit, they quickly produce another one. Seems backwards to me.

    #15 2 years ago
  16. DSB

    I should’ve been smart enough to leave it be. I got Brotherhood with a graphics card (never really played it) and I got Assassins Creed II on a fire sale.

    I just think the American revolution is really interesting, so I figured that whatever they did, it would somehow interest me. Clearly not so…

    @13 Haha, spot on man. That’s exactly how it feels.

    … And what the hell for? Personally I think a lot of those settings are genuinely interesting (ancient middle east, how often have we been there?) but the games insist on never letting you actually be there, and regularly pulling you out.

    It’s just ass backwards, somehow.

    #16 2 years ago
  17. TheWulf

    I haven’t bought an Assassin’s Creed game in forever, not since the first. I was thinking about giving III a go, it was somewhat tempting due to the setting, but the reviews convinced me otherwise. It was just more of the same, really. But more of the same of the parts I liked least.

    I honestly wish they’d just drop Assassin’s Creed at this point and either create a new IP or revisit some long-neglected older ones. Doing a good job of a proper Beyond Good & Evil sequel would be brilliant, but I can’t see them doing that. They have plenty of other IPs though, regardless, and they could pen a new one too. It just seems like a waste. They’ve become pretty much ‘The Assassin’s Creed Developer’ and nothing more. The most intriguing thing they’ve done recently is a 2D Rayman game, and that’s… kind of sad.

    There have been a few points in history where the Ubisoft logo meant new, exciting, and interesting things. But this particular point isn’t one of them. Damn shame. Damn shame.

    #17 2 years ago
  18. Erthazus

    “Is it too early for Assassin’s Creed 4?”

    Nope. It’s not. Assassins Creed 3 sold for 12 million units and it was a horrible game but still it sold gajillion of copies.

    If I was Ubisoft I would release the damn thing every 6 month with DLC for every week. Milk it boys. It’s easy to make money out of console consumers.

    #18 2 years ago
  19. ps3fanboy

    i played the first game on the pc. played half way though it then gave up the whole game series. never touched a ac game since…. this game have the most boring story ever.

    #19 2 years ago
  20. polygem

    well, it´s not my franchise. i played the first one half way through and got bored, tried the second one but was instantly bored again, never touched the third and probably wont touch the fourth or any other. the franchise is just shit imho. it´s a lazy excuse for a blockbuster videogame. no passion. no fun. just soso games with full blown marketing. there are so many great alternatives out there… i don´t understand what people see in these games. i wish they would just let it die so we can get more games that are actually good and not just mediocore.

    #20 2 years ago
  21. Edo

    I’am excited for this game,but unfortunately for all the wrong reasons as I wanted an open world Pirate game with naval battles since forever.When back in 2010 Disney canceled Pirates of the Carribean:Armada of The Damned,the game that looked really promising I gave up all hope that something like that might actually happen.
    Then AC III showed up with it’s exciting naval battles that were the only pleasant surprise in this game and as YoungZero said they were thrilling from the very first battle at sea.Sure,some of the later ones were a bit frustrating and a tad repetitive,but there is just something incredibly satisfying about defeating not only enemies ship(s) but also the treacherous sea that constantly preys on your fragile vessel.
    Now,don’t get me wrong like most of the other people I started to play this series because of the potential it was showing both in gameplay and story department but I am afraid that ship has sailed and it’s long gone now…so as I said I’m in it for the adventures at sea and why not,if the pirate life brings is it…even the inevitable debauchery :P .

    #21 2 years ago
  22. M. K.

    Definitely not to early. Like Erth said, it’s too easy to make money with AC.

    For me the series died after the second game, which was great imho, but now? They can release as many games as they want, I don’t care.

    #22 2 years ago
  23. Dave Cook

    @22 In a business light it makes sense, but should consumers settle for pumped-out sub-par experiences? I think this all goes back to a debate we had on here recently where I said I happily buy CoD games each year as I enjoy them, despite people saying they’re poor quality.

    Apples and oranges I guess.

    I’d like to see AC4 do well as I’ve put serious time into the franchise. AC3 was the only one I really disliked.

    #23 2 years ago
  24. sonny

    @10 +1
    It just went too fast and some people never had the chance to catch up.
    I simply don’t feel that it’s something special anymore when they release it every year.
    That’s why I stopped playing AC, COD, NFS…

    #24 2 years ago
  25. SameeR_Fisher

    well Dave I agree with you on the modern character thing, a really bad choice.

    But for ACIII I will respectfully disagree, Connor was simply the best character, I loved him and related to him more than Ezio, heck I am having headaches cause the new guy seems like another Ezio-Clone, meeeeeh.

    As for the combat, well this is kinda strange, I fail to remember any time where AC offered challenge through combat, ACIII may have mainstreamed it even more, but the game was as easy as any other AC game, except for ACI cause it had more balance, AC combat was never complex, hard, or challenging, at least ACIII offers some variety. -but I agree lacking the challenge is really bad-

    Climbing and Running, I never had a problem with them in ACIII, and again neither were any AC complicated with the mechanics, the modern times weren’t as cool as I hoped for, but Connor made up for it, there were ALOT of technical stuff, but that is a thing I am welling to forgive due to how big and awesome ACIII.

    Regarding AC4:BF, it is way too early, this should have been something like Brotherhood/Revelation, not a sequel, I mean there is no continuation to the modern setting, and we are kinda in a prequel, how can this be a sequel !!!!

    Also AC focusing on Naval Battles ?!, WTF is that, they are cool and amazing, as Side Quests, not the focus of the game, Naval Battles are not the reason why I would play an AC game.

    I wanted more Connor to be honest, nothing big like Brotherhood or Revelation, just like 12hrs or something after the events of ACIII to see how he was like after all of that.

    I have put 36hrs & 25min in ACIII, and I can say it is my most enjoyable AC title.

    #25 2 years ago
  26. M. K.

    @23: Only because me, you and some other guys on the internet think, the expirience is “pumped-out” it doesn’t mean that the “not-so-hardcore” crowd doesn’t enjoy them.

    I mean, I know a lot of people who only play shooters and buy only one action adventure annualy, I think you know which game they buy every year ;)

    #26 2 years ago
  27. Sadismek

    Assassin’s Creed is my only guilty pleasure in gaming, but this is going too far. It’s sad to see something I like butchered in this way, when it still holds so much potential.

    This will be the last AC I’ll buy at launch, and if it fails, then you can kiss goodbye from a fan, Ubi.

    #27 2 years ago
  28. Zarckan

    No it’s not too early.

    Connor was shit! end of.

    #28 2 years ago
  29. Mus42

    I’ve never played an AC game – I always thought they looked cool but I never took the plunge. However if they make a decent game out of this new one then I will be making a purchase. As others have said, the world definitely needs a quality Pirate game. So fingers crossed this is the one!

    #29 2 years ago
  30. heroes159

    Thanks Dave. Great article :)

    #30 2 years ago
  31. Dave Cook

    @30 Many thanks :)

    #31 2 years ago
  32. mehdidante

    never is soon for another AC’s game . i just cant get board of this game .

    #32 2 years ago
  33. Moonwalker1982

    To be really honest…i disliked the first AC, except for its mechanics. ACII was awesome, with Brotherhood things started to drag, to become boring and feel unnessecary and Revelations was just a big let down for me. When they announced ACIII and said it had been in development for many years i got excited again and expected a true difference but that’s not what we got.

    Problem with annual releases is, there’s no time to truly innovate it, bring real new stuff that feels different and truly improve on things. With improve i don’t mean making things more casual. At this moment not looking forward to this one at all.

    #33 2 years ago
  34. Lengendaryboss

    Great article Dave. in all honesty there is a point when this will get boring (Assassin’s Creed 3) and Sales and Quality will decrease. Of course from the business perspective i can see why Ubisoft are bleeding this cow dry and with sales showing no sign of decreasing yet it is not early for another Assassin’s Creed game .

    #34 2 years ago
  35. Eddie Rodrigues

    People now compare AC games to CoD due to yearly releases, that simply doesn’t justify the comparison: CoD has two main studios, one works at a game for a certain year (Infinity Ward), the other for the next year release (Treyarch), although they feel like a 6 month development game. AC games have multiple studios and begin years before for that the next sequel may launch year after year, but the game feels like a 2-3 year project (as @1 said, Summer 2011).

    Call of Duty’s campaign is dull and quick, the multi is fun most times, AC makes the great equilibrium of those two aspects and AC3 being my top favourite.

    FOR THOSE SAYING AC:III IS BORING: After you beat an Assassin’s Creed main campaign most elements on it gets boring. AC:II left me with a ‘meh’ while I continuously and aimless explored Venice after clearing the missions. AC:III, or should I say, every AC game since Brotherhood, made me feel free and happy to play them as they had tons of diverse side quests and a multiplayer mode, which is fun if you know how to play. Even though Brotherhood and Revelations were expansion packs IMHO, AC:III felt new and different, and finally had DLC content that actually made me feel proud to buy a Season Pass (which I personally hate these).

    #35 2 years ago
  36. nollie4545

    If you find it boring, don’t buy it! For every numbskull that does not buy into the AC franchise, I hope they get given a free Cock of Duty and Butthurtfilled game instead to play until their moronic minds are satisfied.

    Nothing wrong with the AC story or single player, far more ‘story’ in them than all the COD/BLOPS/BF lot combined.

    #36 2 years ago
  37. Eddie Rodrigues

    @36 This is the comment that made my day :D

    #37 2 years ago
  38. nollie4545

    Seriously, I can actually predict the story line and overall play for the first 5 missions of the next big box shooter from either camp right now, watch this, here we go.

    Mission 1: enter game, attend training camp. Move and practice shoot stuff. Cutscene: exit level.

    Mission 2: Cutscene: Arrive in level via vehicle. Move and shoot stuff.

    Mission 3: Cutscene: some boss guy telling the player what to do. Move in and shoot stuff. To make it even harder to move and shoot stuff, they throw in some moving stuff you aren’t allowed to shoot. Cut scene: boss guy saying good job but the real bad guy is in location X.

    Mission 4: Cutscene: repel down rope or swim into level. Move and shoot shut. Deactivate bomb after stuff is shot. Cut scene: boss telling player what to do next.

    Mission 5: Cutscene vehicle entering level. For the reasons of variety the player is now sat in a vehicle so only has to shoot stuff, without moving.

    Can we see a pattern here?

    #38 2 years ago
  39. vicrysty

    Personally I think is the best franchise. From my point of view is never too early for a new game Assassin’s Creed. Come on Assassin’s Creed 3 was not that bad. I continue to occur each year about a new game Assassin’s Creed. No female character. I would like to see Assassin’s Creed in ,,ww2″ or in the ,,future”. Bad idea
    I liked all Assassin’s Creed, including Assassin’s Creed 3.

    #39 2 years ago
  40. nollie4545

    Assassins Creed set in WW2 or even WW1 would be truly epic. It is just dying to be done. All the ingredients are already there. It could be epic.

    The thing I like about AC is that it has picked up where Hitman left off.

    #40 2 years ago
  41. Diingo

    YES.

    #41 2 years ago
  42. Lewis247

    “Assassins creeds 3 has been in development for years so it’s ok…. Oh yeah and assassins creeds 4 has been as well. ACCEPT IT EVERYONE. ITS TOTALLY JUSTIFIED”

    #42 2 years ago
  43. Moonwalker1982

    @36

    So you are not afraid that Ubi is slowly destroying their franchise? Cause i sure am. You are right about CoD, i feel the exact same way. Used to love the games, now i’m just beyond tired of it. I can see that happening with AC as well if they keep this on. You simply can’t inovate enough in only a year or so, you need time to make it special and not just milk that goddamn cow. Sadly the latter seems to be happening. I said it before, Ubi should take a lesson from Take Two. What Take Two’s Strauss Zelnick said about annual releases like CoD. The man is spot on there.

    #43 2 years ago
  44. DSB

    It doesn’t really matter if you use 50 different studios and put them to work for 10 years.

    If all they can do is these halfbaked reruns, then I honestly couldn’t give less of a fuck about the working conditions they were made under.

    #44 2 years ago
  45. gkenobi

    i may be in the minority, but i enjoyed ACIII and can not wait for this.

    #45 2 years ago
  46. nollie4545

    I’ll be getting AC4 as soon as I can justify it. It won’t be at launch because I haven’t even got AC3 yet but I have played it and I did enjoy it.

    Seriously, if you are a true fan of any gaming franchise, you would never complain of a sequel being released ‘too soon’. So long as it isn’t cronked or half baked, does it matter if it comes out 6 months later?

    Rather be blown away by too much content than screwed by devs resting on their laurels and doing nothing like HL3. And in the end, the developers will make more money and have a bigger fan base if they are seen to release more titles rather than less.

    #46 2 years ago
  47. Kuwabara

    Dave your a damm noob. Ac 3 is the best in the series.The sheer joy of the stealth kills possible only in this game due to the frontier/outdoor terrain is enough to make it the best. I really liked the Ai and ability to certain terrain and leap through trees, which again was useful in combat or stealth situations. Add to that the naval missions which was enjoyable for the most part and was amazing at times and the discovery of 2 or 3 islands. I enjoyed the story but there could have been more better missions. Still very good game, and improved on the last few games in almost every regard.

    #47 2 years ago
  48. Digital Bamboo

    Interesting article. It’s a tough question. I was definitely surprised when ACIV was announced, and thought it was, perhaps, premature; then I watched the trailer and thought ‘well, that looks pretty cool’.
    For me, personally, it’s not too soon, as I generally don’t play games until years after they’ve released anyhow, so it makes little difference to me when they come out. For Assassin’s Creed super-fans I imagine it’s not too soon. For Ubisoft’s short-term profits, I don’t think it’s too soon. They’re making boatloads of money now, so why change course?
    But is it too soon for the long-term health of the series? Tough call. Would the series be better off (in terms of quality & innovation) if the teams behind ACIII & IV had worked together to make one game, instead of two? We’ll never know. Does Ubisoft even care, as long as they’re making a shit-ton now? I doubt it.
    I haven’t yet played III, so I can’t speak to it’s quality (or lack thereof). I was planning on buying it some day, but this article/thread has given me pause. Really like the look of IV so far, so I do hope it turns out great.

    Nitpick: I don’t think the firearms Kenway is wielding are revolvers, but rather pistols (hence the necessity to carry 4, as they only offer a single shot).

    #48 2 years ago
  49. Ali

    The idea of this series turning into a yearly release pattern isn’t just made purely for the money but rather to avoid situations that Ubisoft would face without their millions seller.

    The thing is, there are more than 300 guys working on this franchise, the building of the studio is the biggest yet in gaming industry. Ubisoft keeps spending millions on it and on the other hand gives the green light from time to time to unusual and special projects with which they can afford the risk.

    This series isn’t just there for the sake of it being there, Ubisoft is reaching a point where it just can’t operate without it, but they ain’t gonna admit it nor imply it.

    To their own merits, they succeeded into planting what makes the series justifiable for the yearly release. They sat up a story that’s milkable and not confined to a certain timeline. It is interesting enough to get a huge number of fans that would be following the series yearly yet on the same time.

    Now for a gamer who hasn’t been following the series, it is not likely he bough every yearly installment. I believe many skipped AC3 (Conner was shitty enough to throw me away( Native Americans are much more interesting than that) and are looking at AC4 as just their way of getting in again.

    Eventually, they will find themselves looking for alternatives… finding another series to fill in with AC turning it into a two year series (U think they haven’t tried that with PoP ?) No luck so far…. eyes are rolling over Watch Dogs though..

    #49 2 years ago
  50. photomaven

    good article over all though a couple of facts are wrong:

    1. the game has been in development for over 2 1/2 years.
    2. the far cry 3 team is working on the open world aspect of this game.
    3. you dont play as a faceless abstergo employee, the employee is you!

    great article, cant wait for this game!

    #50 2 years ago

Comments are now closed on this article.