8 Things Ubisoft Could Do to Improve Assassin's Creed

8 Things Ubisoft Could Do to Improve Assassin's Creed

Assassin's Creed: Syndicate is a pretty solid game, but the series is in dire need of an overhaul.

Read Full Article

Coop sucked
Ac is not a game designed to any way to accommodate coop
In short, I couldn't disagree more with your coop entry.

Also, take out the filler missions and you have 3 hour game in syndicate, give or take an hour for personal skill/experience.
That didn't work out for 1886, it wouldn't work for ac.

Regarding Point 2: Personally I think this should broaden out to the "Stop Putting Out A New Game Every Year." Wanna know why Unity was a horrific nightmare of faceless bugs? Look no further than the rushed release schedule. We all know they're not going to stop this, though...(expanded on in Point 8).

Regarding Point 7: To be fair, no more Uplay would improve all Ubisoft games...not just AC. :P

Regarding Point 8: As mentioned in Point 2, this would indeed improve things. However they're not going to...hell, they expressly said a few years back "We're going to ride this pony as hard as we can until we grind it into the ground! What this means is that we're going to milk it for every scent we can by putting out yearly releases and, in terms of the story, we're just going to keep spinning our wheels in the mud so we have further excuse to drag it on until the series is no longer popular enough to warrant making. That is to say: even we don't know where we're going with this crap."

So yeah...they sound pretty firmly committed to annual releases, and the day Uplay is no longer parasitically woven into Ubisoft games is the day when massive fires simultaneously break out in all Ubisoft headquarters and the buildings burn to the ground. :P

I just want them to go to Asia already. :|

I would like them to move forward with the story. I gave up after the ending of AC III, because it became clear that they had no idea where they were going, but every now and then I check up on a wiki or something. And the stuff going on in modern times just isn't going anywhere. If that is going to be the case, then they should just drop the whole idea of the current timeline and playing inside memories, and just set the game in those time periods. But they still want to cling to the modern day stuff, even though it's moving at a snail's pace. That's something I would like them to work on.

Sniper Team 4:
I would like them to move forward with the story. I gave up after the ending of AC III, because it became clear that they had no idea where they were going, but every now and then I check up on a wiki or something. And the stuff going on in modern times just isn't going anywhere. If that is going to be the case, then they should just drop the whole idea of the current timeline and playing inside memories, and just set the game in those time periods. But they still want to cling to the modern day stuff, even though it's moving at a snail's pace. That's something I would like them to work on.

Well what COULD they do with a modern assassin? Doesn't Hitman already cover that? And Splinter Cell, too. Sort of.

American Tanker:

Sniper Team 4:
I would like them to move forward with the story. I gave up after the ending of AC III, because it became clear that they had no idea where they were going, but every now and then I check up on a wiki or something. And the stuff going on in modern times just isn't going anywhere. If that is going to be the case, then they should just drop the whole idea of the current timeline and playing inside memories, and just set the game in those time periods. But they still want to cling to the modern day stuff, even though it's moving at a snail's pace. That's something I would like them to work on.

Well what COULD they do with a modern assassin? Doesn't Hitman already cover that? And Splinter Cell, too. Sort of.

A good question, and one I think AC III kind of gave us a glimpse of. There were a few parts where you played as Desmond--and honestly, those few parts moved the story forward more than the entirety of some of the other games. I would like to see something like that return. Yes, we can still have our memory missions, but I wouldn't mind playing in the present timeline again. I want to see the Assassins start bringing Abstergo down, striking at the Templars directly or indirectly. So far, save for those few times in III, all the Assassins have done is react, or sit and watch and breathe sighs of relief. It gets kind of depressing when the "good" guys keep losing over and over, or don't make any strides toward victory.
Okay, that cross over with Watch Dogs was great, but we need more of that stuff in the games themselves I think. It might be tricky, since there would be some serious gameplay balance issues with firearms, but I think Ubisoft could do it if they really wanted to.

If they don't want to, then they need to just drop the whole thing.

I swear these kind of threads show up every year. Says a lot about the franchise.

I never finished Unity and I don't have Syndicate. Last Assassin's Creed game that I played was Rogue, and that is because that game is essentially Black Flag 2, and I am very happy with that. Poor Assassin's Creed; doomed to forever be Ubisoft's cash grab.

I would like to see something happen in the present day storyline for once or just kill it off entirely. I kind of enjoyed the segments in 2/Brotherhood/3, with 3 actually giving you access to the grand temple that had been teased for like 2 games at that point. More importantly, the 2012 story-line was actually tied up(even the if the threat of the Templar Satellite launch fizzled out). Black Flag looked like they were trying to start something with Juno being the new big threat to the world, and that's gone nowhere in the last 3 games(or so I've heard, I haven't played any of the games since BF).

Is it terrible that I'm actually starting to miss Desmond?

I do enjoy playing with friends, if they make a few co-op missions and improve upon it, I would be all for co-op.

Ditto on a year off, the series really nailed it with Black Flag, but I also think they should take time off for the next entry and deliver a stronger game, its been a while since I have been excited for an AC game.

As for the Abstergo present day story stuff, I have no idea what its trying to do now, Black Flag made somewhat of an interesting premise, but since then, I dunno, unless they set one in modern day, its probably just going to be more distracting than anything.

Combat Overhaul, yes, counter is so broken I am surprised it wasn't a patchable exploit in the first game.

Alright, this is going to sound dumb(especially because it's going to err dangerously close to Metal Gear Solid 3: Snake Eater and/or Call of Duty: Black Ops; yes, the first Black Ops, not its sequels), but what about something to do with the Cold War? Hell, maybe we could do something REALLY unique and show things from the perspective of an American operative in Afghanistan during the Soviet invasion of the 1980s and show us the rise of what would become Al-Qaeda.

And about the "modern" part of the storyline, well. I'm wondering, because it does seem like it might be tough, especially considering all the other stuff that's been done. But maybe there could be something that ties in more directly with the most recent main series Far Cry games, specifically FC3 and FC4, involving a search for a hidden Templar facility hidden deep in the wilderness. Maybe it's strategically located near some (in)famous location or relic, or the site houses a buried artifact of some sort concealed in the deep underground layers of the structure.

And this comes more from personal preference, but I'd really like to see a story set in the 1920s in a major American city. Because Tommy Gun.

(All this from a user who openly confesses he's never touched a single Assassin's Creed game.)

They could lay to rest the whole genetic memory thing and go full cyberpunk.

Movement and Combat need to improve. Other games have vastly improved on it. And A thought occurs... Why not take the Nemesis system from Mordor and put it in an AC game? It fits so well. Maybe dual campaigns, one being a Templar, the other an Assassin.

I massively agree with the 'too much same stuff to do' sentiment.

A game I massively enjoyed, that was similar to AC, was the Saboteur. It had the open world, much like AC, and it was also split into areas. In these areas there were fortifications to take back, weapon systems, listening towers and the like to destroy and mini missions to complete. Completing them will 'inspire' the area. Full colour is restored (the game had a cool comic book effect in the Nazi controlled areas where only certain things had colour, like red swastikas and yellow street, car and house lights) and the population are seen out and about more. Nazi patrols are reduced, and if you end up in a fight with them then often civvies and the French Resistance will help you.

Nazi controlled areas were still black and white, had fortifications and barbed wire everywhere and you were likely to be attacked on sight. It made you feel like you were making a difference when you scouted into these areas to cause trouble and eventually clear them... You would often scout into them, detroy a few things, then hightail back to safety. Much more realistic that way. You could get too deep behind enemy lines and it would be nigh impossible to get back, or survive an attack.

AC is just daft at times in comparison. The ammount of times I was playing Black Flag and wearing the Skull and Crossbones pirate outfit, completing a mission that ends with me running away from a load of guards, only to then turn straight around and wonder back through the area with no repercussions... Kinda spoils the vibe!

I agree they should fix the combat. I may be in the minority, but I felt the combat and ACII and Brotherhood was perfect. It was visceral and had a flow like in the Arkham games.

And I completely agree that they should take a year (or more) off. Sure, after ACII we looked forward to the games. But making this an "annual franchise" (I think was how some Ubisoft Exec put it) has completely dulled its luster. So let's give the dev teams a chance to really create something interesting, fun and unique again.

I still replay the first two ACII games. I like Ezio (arrogant prick that he is), I enjoy scampering around Renaissance Italy and found the game play utterly enjoyable. I suspect Black Flag will be up there on the replay list as well.

The newer games just seem like reskinned variations on the same themes.

Oh and finally...how about getting back to the core concept? Wasn't the whole point of the game about planning and executing an assassination and getting out in one piece? Now with all the side missions around eavesdropping, tailing guards, fighting mobs, raiding warehouses, etc...the truly fun and interesting stuff seems to have taken a back seat.

I'm playing through Rogue for the first time and played/replay all the games up to that point(including some of the story DLC) over the past year. So at this point, I'm pretty much missing Unity and Syndicate(and I'm told that I'm not missing much of I skip Unity).

So a couple things that stick out for me:

1.) Cut the bloat. Remember in AC I when there wasn't any money? I didn't either. AC II decided to do the villa renovation mini-game, both as a distraction, a way to feel like you were building a new home/HQ and to provide cash flow for better weapons. Except then it became part of the series for pretty much every game , because Ubisoft hasn't seen a good idea that they didn't want to drive completely into the ground till everyone is tired of it. Same with the Crafting from III.

The forts were a nice change of pace in IV but now Rogue has forts and strongholds in the cities that need to be conquered.

At least we can be thankful they haven't tried to revive the tower defense mini-game or the Tetris quest from Revelations.

2.) Have some kind of goal you're working towards. I may be one of the few people who misses the 2012 storyline from the first 5 games, because at least it was going somewhere. Oh, it was going very slowly but at least each game was making some kind of progress and there was a purpose to delving into the memories of each ancestor other then because history was cool. While I'm not hugely fond of brotherhood(mostly for turning you into a landlord, introducing the "Capture the towers" thing to the series and generally feeling like AC 2.5), at least it tied Desmonds storyline and Ezos storyline together by having Desmond literally follow in Ezios footsteps to discover the old Assassin vault under the villa and later find the Apple in the vault under the Colosseum.

Since they saved the world in III, the whole thing in the present has just kind of stagnated. They keep hinting that Juno is up to something and, aside from the whole thing with the Sage in IV, not much has happened with that in 3 games(that I can tell). It's just more "Assasins and Templars want precursor artifact. Intrigue and Stabbing ensue. Any progress you made in this game will be undone in the next one".

Have the assassins make some actual fucking progress for once in the present, or do something with Juno, or hell, tell us what the point is of all this new Precusor stuff they keep throwing at us in the last few games(Earthquake machines in Rogue, the Observatory and Sage in IV). Otherwise it just feels like we're eternally treading water so Ubisoft can keep selling us a new game each and every year.

Yeah, the Parkour is the thing for me. When they said Unity was going to add Parkour up and down buttons I thought that would be great. Then I played Syndicate and it's...yeah. Same old.

Combat does need a complete overhauul. One of the weird things is that most of it's superfluous. Got half or two thirds of the way through brotherhood without hitting counter. Did the same for Revelations. I don't seem to do quite so well in Syndicate, but that only brings things back to "wait to spam counter."

Aerosteam:
I just want them to go to Asia already. :|

Or diversify at all, in my case. I mean, we had three games in Ezio's lifetime, then we had three games (if you include Liberation, and I think there was another portable) set in roughly the same time period, albeit on different sides of the pond at least. Syndicate is at least 100 years-ish later (And Black Flag significantly earlier, IIRC), but still treading on similar territory.

Hey, remember when there was going to be a Mayan installment? Ancient New World shit? That would be cool. So would Asia, a proper title. But right now, anything different would be nice. There's so much fertile ground for exploration, and we're not seeing it.

Dalisclock:

1.) Cut the bloat. Remember in AC I when there wasn't any money? I didn't either. AC II decided to do the villa renovation mini-game, both as a distraction, a way to feel like you were building a new home/HQ and to provide cash flow for better weapons. Except then it became part of the series for pretty much every game , because Ubisoft hasn't seen a good idea that they didn't want to drive completely into the ground till everyone is tired of it. Same with the Crafting from III.

Sadly, it seems this won't happen. In Syndicate, the money flows much slower, and I think it's solely so they can sell you Helix credits. Now that they've monetised money (and crafting items, and so on), I think we're stuck.

But yeah, the systems here are annoying. Scrap them.

The forts were a nice change of pace in IV but now Rogue has forts and strongholds in the cities that need to be conquered.

Keep in mind that you had to deal with this in Brotherhood and Revelation as well, more or less. And in Revelation, you needed the towers for the maps and shops in centralised parts of the game. So not so novel. I prefer Syndicate, because at least going loud was a real option (even if it's kind of antithetical to what we're told about Assassins, but then...so is Jacob)

2.) Have some kind of goal you're working towards. I may be one of the few people who misses the 2012 storyline from the first 5 games, because at least it was going somewhere. Oh, it was going very slowly but at least each game was making some kind of progress and there was a purpose to delving into the memories of each ancestor other then because history was cool. While I'm not hugely fond of brotherhood(mostly for turning you into a landlord, introducing the "Capture the towers" thing to the series and generally feeling like AC 2.5), at least it tied Desmonds storyline and Ezos storyline together by having Desmond literally follow in Ezios footsteps to discover the old Assassin vault under the villa and later find the Apple in the vault under the Colosseum.

I would rather they scrap it entirely, but I'm flexible. Shit or get off the pot, as they used to say. They used to be chasing Maguffins, but for a reason. Why are they chasing them now?

So Abstergo doesn't get them. Yawn.

However....

Since they saved the world in III, the whole thing in the present has just kind of stagnated. They keep hinting that Juno is up to something and, aside from the whole thing with the Sage in IV, not much has happened with that in 3 games(that I can tell). It's just more "Assasins and Templars want precursor artifact. Intrigue and Stabbing ensue. Any progress you made in this game will be undone in the next one".

I've not played 3 or 4, so maybe this is the status quo, but the WW1 missions made it seem like Juno was going to feature prominently in the next one.

Have the assassins make some actual fucking progress for once in the present,

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

...sorry, that was mean. >.>

But seriously, yeah. Using the framing device to advance a plot seems like a no-brainer. Unfortunately, Ubisoft seems to be even less of a brainer.

I know it's close to necroing the thread but I'm gonna throw one more idea out.

Let us play as the Templars for an entire game.

I was watching a LP of Unity, just so I could see if I missed anything by not playing it(and now I'm convinced I didn't) and I came out of it thinking "Did Arno even do anything that anyone cares about?" It seems like the Templars pretty much got exactly what they wanted in Revolutionary Era France and frankly, the game would have been much more interesting if you'd spent the entire game playing as Elise and not Arno, and maybe it would have been an interesting twist if the Assassins had been the one pushing the revolution to begin with and it just got out of their control. I know, what could have been....

Seriously, We've gotten hints of playing the Templars in III(which was quite fun) and the modern day plot has already established the idea of Abstrego making Propaganda games. Rogue tried....just not nearly hard enough. Mostly because Shay's transition feels a bit rushed(and pretty much based on both Shay and Achilles not taking a few minutes to actually talk things out) but also because, well, playing as a Templar in Rogue feels almost exactly like playing as an Assassin(other then occasionally having assassins jump out of haycarts to try to murder you).

Do something different for once, Ubisoft. Every so often you point out that the assassins are kind of assholes and hypocrites themselves at time(you know, like in every game since Revelations) and hinting that the Templars may not be all bad. Put your money where your mouth is and commit. Show us an Era from the Templar POV and more importantly, make the gameplay different enough to be memorable. The Templars are always implied to have vast resources and it would be nice if we had gameplay that somehow reflected that.

 

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