this
everyone points to 3 as the downfall but the signs were there in Brotherhood and Revelations
3 was just the diarrhea on top of the coffin after the nails were already hammered
Unity sank the franchise, Syndicate, while good, performed poorly commercially so afterwards they rebooted Assassin's Creed into this low-effort, RPG slop that's as formulaic as Far Cry and Ghost Recon.
Ubisoft are lazy and morons still buy their games.
If you think about it, the series only died because Unity was a flop. If they released Rogue then waited another year working on Unity, the series wouldn't have become a RPG slop.
Commercials for Assassin's Creed: Revelations while Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood was still considered new in GameStop. It was extremely confusing, since both games were spinoffs of Assassin's Creed II.
The creator wanted the series to be a trilogy. Ubisoft said no so he decided to leave after Brotherhood, afterwards Ubisoft milked the series and the rest is history.
>first game
nice proof of concept, very rough around the edges. it was good that you had to travel between big cities and back to the assassin hideout/monastery to get guidance and tutelage from your master. the combat sucked, reconnaissance missions were highly repetitive, the actual assassinations were more about spectacle and cinematics than planning/gameplay, but the story was intriguing. it had potential. >second game
general improvements to virtually every aspect of the game, but the core was still flawed. freerunning was improved; larger array of weapons to use, but combat was still just "wait for parry and instantly kill everything"; the addition of subject 16 puzzles and assassin tombs was great, reminiscent of prince of persia; an overall better setting, but the story sort of fell off at some point. fantastic soundtrack and atmosphere despite the flaws. mission structure changed from "scope out a target and gather info, then choose a method of approach and assassination based on your observations"
this is the biggest problem. game should've developed into a hitman style game, where you can creep around, gather information, and infiltrate a restricted area so you could take a target out and escape like a ghost. you know, an actual stealth action game. instead, they never innovated in this fashion, stealth has always been virtually non existent, and combat is braindead, so I don't even get the appeal of these games, even if the story might've been interesting at some point, and the presentation is there in terms of music and atmosphere and intrigue.
>Create innovative but repetitive game >Then, make the sequel three times >WHERE'S CHARLES LEE! >Make unrelated games and repeat ad nauseum
The series died with Brotherhood, Black flag is a fun game, but shouldn't be part of the series and proved that you could make a open world game, slap the word assassin to it and it would print money
>but shouldn't be part of the series
It's more AC than many games in the series. How many assassins actually joins the brotherhood willingly besides Edward? Even Ezio himself says I didn't chose this life it's chosen for me to Sofia.
for starters, crappy trailing missions and other boring sections that bog down the gameplay. i put up with it for 1 and 2 because it was new to me and the gameplay was fun. they should have kept focus on the core gameplay and assassination missions
3 should've been the last one, maybe blackflag, and instead of killing off Desmond, they should've made it that he picked up all the skills of his ancestors from the animus with Watchdogs 1 being his game where it's mainly the same game, but with AC parkour and a storyline around Desmond going against modern day templars that run everything in the city. Everything else from the series would just be scrapped entirely, and Watchdogs 2 would've been Desmond again but with an assassin team he put together behind him.
>desmond in the modern day
the reason I I think they didn't do that is because the historical setting has always been a selling point for these games, and this is evidenced by the percentage of people who would be totally fine with them ripping out the modern day story entirely and just having these games being isolated affairs in periods throughout history, without a framing device holding them and the plot together.
Yeah I can understand that, I really liked when they were aiming for historical accuracy too. I just think it would've been a cool way to have the modern sections actually build up to something and then letting the franchise end but carry on in a new franchise linked directly to it. It would've been a cool way to do the whole shared universe thing.
Nothing went right. Assassin's Creed 1 is merely an earlier version of everything wrong with Ubisoft's design philosophy. You do bland, copy-pasted side missions in an underbaked open world, do combat that isn't scaled for difficulty at all so it's mostly way too easy and occasionally obnoxious and frustrating, and climb le towers. The story deliberately contradicts itself in terms of character motivation and morality, the bad guys are secretly the good guys except when they're not, and it's done cynically to create a paper thin illusion of narrative depth. Everything else is a cheap gimmick for marketing purposes. The entire franchise never should have happened.
AC1 is fundamentally very different from the other AC games, since the open world is designed more like a big level where you do recon and scout out areas to plan your assassinations. Climbing towers was also never required at any point in the game (its only benefit is highlighting nearby points of interest on the map, which you can find through casual exploration anyway).
It was AC2 that threw this out and made what we now know today as the Ubisoft formula.
Ubisoft was ironically short-sighted when it came to the scouting towers. Could've done something like placing all of the side missions for that area within view of the perch and they'd be highlighted with Eagle Vision so you wouldn't need a map or the silly "GPS" as they call it. They already had a system where eagles will fly around unsynced viewpoints, could've just changed it so the eagle would disappear when all the side missions in the surrounding vicinity were complete. They did a half-assed version of such a system in Unity by having spacial UI that pops up when you're low profile on roofs, but that's because there's so much junk on the map that you'd never get it all.
AC1’s map was at least well designed enough that it could be played with the minimal off. In fact, it becomes a much better game when you do that. You actually end up learning the city, following directions and actually start thinking about where intel opportunities would logically be.
Games who are generalists are condemned to be shallow
these motherfrickers should make specialized games about several aspects them combine them
one game only about combat
one game only about chasing and fleeing
one game ponly about stealth
always keep the same universe to build up characters, the story, recycle asset and music
one good game can be sold over and over each generation with countless "remasters" and rereleases, even if they re shit like skyrim os imagine an actual good game, would get a oot classic status and sell tens and tens of millions for decades + build a strong brand
but tyhey d need to hire talented people, not overwork them and pay them well which the sociopathic dunning kruger western mutts cannot do to save their lives
public companies suck anyway. whatever, they ll keep making slop forever
>Games who are generalists are condemned to be shallow
It also bloats the budget enormously. Everyone wants GTA without fully appreciating why GTA was so successful not just commercially, but production-wise.
AC1’s map was at least well designed enough that it could be played with the minimal off. In fact, it becomes a much better game when you do that. You actually end up learning the city, following directions and actually start thinking about where intel opportunities would logically be.
I love how clean the game looks with all the UI disabled except the weapons icon.
it was supposed to end at ac3, everyone hoped for a proper endgame where you conclude the big conspiracy by fighting in modern times while using your skills from animus, now we're at ac12(?) and there's no end in sight
though i can't tell if they didn't properly conclude the game at some point, i think the last time i was even remotely aware of what's going on, it was black flag
brotherhood. It started the trend of pointless oversaturation.
this
everyone points to 3 as the downfall but the signs were there in Brotherhood and Revelations
3 was just the diarrhea on top of the coffin after the nails were already hammered
fippy bippy
Unity sank the franchise, Syndicate, while good, performed poorly commercially so afterwards they rebooted Assassin's Creed into this low-effort, RPG slop that's as formulaic as Far Cry and Ghost Recon.
Ubisoft are lazy and morons still buy their games.
Which is sad because Unity is the best true AC game, it only lacked Jesper Kyd music to make it GOAT.
Yearly releases
This. Ubisoft REALLY wanted AC to be their CoD.
Probably is that they fumble the ball with every game from 3 onwards.
If you think about it, the series only died because Unity was a flop. If they released Rogue then waited another year working on Unity, the series wouldn't have become a RPG slop.
The thing is that Unity was positively received in retrospect. It’s retrospectively considered one of the best games in the franchise now.
The absolute trainwreck of a release is what killed it.
How about wait a year and release Unity
Commercials for Assassin's Creed: Revelations while Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood was still considered new in GameStop. It was extremely confusing, since both games were spinoffs of Assassin's Creed II.
The creator wanted the series to be a trilogy. Ubisoft said no so he decided to leave after Brotherhood, afterwards Ubisoft milked the series and the rest is history.
>first game
nice proof of concept, very rough around the edges. it was good that you had to travel between big cities and back to the assassin hideout/monastery to get guidance and tutelage from your master. the combat sucked, reconnaissance missions were highly repetitive, the actual assassinations were more about spectacle and cinematics than planning/gameplay, but the story was intriguing. it had potential.
>second game
general improvements to virtually every aspect of the game, but the core was still flawed. freerunning was improved; larger array of weapons to use, but combat was still just "wait for parry and instantly kill everything"; the addition of subject 16 puzzles and assassin tombs was great, reminiscent of prince of persia; an overall better setting, but the story sort of fell off at some point. fantastic soundtrack and atmosphere despite the flaws. mission structure changed from "scope out a target and gather info, then choose a method of approach and assassination based on your observations"
this is the biggest problem. game should've developed into a hitman style game, where you can creep around, gather information, and infiltrate a restricted area so you could take a target out and escape like a ghost. you know, an actual stealth action game. instead, they never innovated in this fashion, stealth has always been virtually non existent, and combat is braindead, so I don't even get the appeal of these games, even if the story might've been interesting at some point, and the presentation is there in terms of music and atmosphere and intrigue.
AC1 is arguably the best game because there are actually multiple ways to approach the assassinations (even in the more spectacle orientated ones).
The blue print for an open world Hitman was there, but they decided to pursue the GTA crowd for whatever reason with the sequels.
>an overall better setting
thats very subjective
They made Assassin's Creed 2 and they didn't stop making Assassin's Creed 2 until people got bored.
Now we are on the 3rd version of Witcher 3.
This game and parappa are the only reason I care about vydia at all...
which shows my weird taste for vydia.
So basically Ubisoft greed killed the franchise.
Many such cases.
I hope they will make a reboot some day.
Too bad it will never happen...
>Create innovative but repetitive game
>Then, make the sequel three times
>WHERE'S CHARLES LEE!
>Make unrelated games and repeat ad nauseum
The series died with Brotherhood, Black flag is a fun game, but shouldn't be part of the series and proved that you could make a open world game, slap the word assassin to it and it would print money
>but shouldn't be part of the series
It's more AC than many games in the series. How many assassins actually joins the brotherhood willingly besides Edward? Even Ezio himself says I didn't chose this life it's chosen for me to Sofia.
There’s too much focus on piracy and not enough focus on assassination. It’s a good pirate game, but a bad AC game.
they kept going after 2. first game was a tech demo at best, 2 was pretty good.
for starters, crappy trailing missions and other boring sections that bog down the gameplay. i put up with it for 1 and 2 because it was new to me and the gameplay was fun. they should have kept focus on the core gameplay and assassination missions
3 should've been the last one, maybe blackflag, and instead of killing off Desmond, they should've made it that he picked up all the skills of his ancestors from the animus with Watchdogs 1 being his game where it's mainly the same game, but with AC parkour and a storyline around Desmond going against modern day templars that run everything in the city. Everything else from the series would just be scrapped entirely, and Watchdogs 2 would've been Desmond again but with an assassin team he put together behind him.
>desmond in the modern day
the reason I I think they didn't do that is because the historical setting has always been a selling point for these games, and this is evidenced by the percentage of people who would be totally fine with them ripping out the modern day story entirely and just having these games being isolated affairs in periods throughout history, without a framing device holding them and the plot together.
Yeah I can understand that, I really liked when they were aiming for historical accuracy too. I just think it would've been a cool way to have the modern sections actually build up to something and then letting the franchise end but carry on in a new franchise linked directly to it. It would've been a cool way to do the whole shared universe thing.
Patrice left
Nothing went right. Assassin's Creed 1 is merely an earlier version of everything wrong with Ubisoft's design philosophy. You do bland, copy-pasted side missions in an underbaked open world, do combat that isn't scaled for difficulty at all so it's mostly way too easy and occasionally obnoxious and frustrating, and climb le towers. The story deliberately contradicts itself in terms of character motivation and morality, the bad guys are secretly the good guys except when they're not, and it's done cynically to create a paper thin illusion of narrative depth. Everything else is a cheap gimmick for marketing purposes. The entire franchise never should have happened.
AC1 is fundamentally very different from the other AC games, since the open world is designed more like a big level where you do recon and scout out areas to plan your assassinations. Climbing towers was also never required at any point in the game (its only benefit is highlighting nearby points of interest on the map, which you can find through casual exploration anyway).
It was AC2 that threw this out and made what we now know today as the Ubisoft formula.
Ubisoft was ironically short-sighted when it came to the scouting towers. Could've done something like placing all of the side missions for that area within view of the perch and they'd be highlighted with Eagle Vision so you wouldn't need a map or the silly "GPS" as they call it. They already had a system where eagles will fly around unsynced viewpoints, could've just changed it so the eagle would disappear when all the side missions in the surrounding vicinity were complete. They did a half-assed version of such a system in Unity by having spacial UI that pops up when you're low profile on roofs, but that's because there's so much junk on the map that you'd never get it all.
AC1’s map was at least well designed enough that it could be played with the minimal off. In fact, it becomes a much better game when you do that. You actually end up learning the city, following directions and actually start thinking about where intel opportunities would logically be.
>What went wrong?
It is no longer Jade's game
>1) average game
>2) shit game
>3) shit game
>4) shit game
nothing . franchise just went from average to shit
Once it went to RPG gameplay with origins it kind of lost what gave the game series a little bit of a theme
Games who are generalists are condemned to be shallow
these motherfrickers should make specialized games about several aspects them combine them
one game only about combat
one game only about chasing and fleeing
one game ponly about stealth
always keep the same universe to build up characters, the story, recycle asset and music
one good game can be sold over and over each generation with countless "remasters" and rereleases, even if they re shit like skyrim os imagine an actual good game, would get a oot classic status and sell tens and tens of millions for decades + build a strong brand
but tyhey d need to hire talented people, not overwork them and pay them well which the sociopathic dunning kruger western mutts cannot do to save their lives
public companies suck anyway. whatever, they ll keep making slop forever
>Games who are generalists are condemned to be shallow
It also bloats the budget enormously. Everyone wants GTA without fully appreciating why GTA was so successful not just commercially, but production-wise.
I love how clean the game looks with all the UI disabled except the weapons icon.
Even then, GTA had a focus. It’s a cops and robbers game about sandbox chaos. It has a “core identity”.
Really Bethesda is the only company that actually managed to make “jack of all trades” games and have them be financially successful.
It went through an incredible amount of ups and downs but currently I'm actually pretty happy with where it's at. Excited to see AC Red, personally.
Origins
it was supposed to end at ac3, everyone hoped for a proper endgame where you conclude the big conspiracy by fighting in modern times while using your skills from animus, now we're at ac12(?) and there's no end in sight
though i can't tell if they didn't properly conclude the game at some point, i think the last time i was even remotely aware of what's going on, it was black flag