-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Assassin's Creed III [November 2012 - End of Desmond arc]
- Thread starter rockman zx
- Start date
Actually the core AC2 team was (from what I heard) more or less split in half, with the first part going on AC3 preproduction, and the rest working on the yearly sequels along with about every other Ubisoft studios. And now they can ramp up the production of AC3 with everyone from the previous games on it, and tools and everything else for the new engine being ready.duckroll said:
Dizzle24 said:
That's a pity. I really like the AC universe, but I haven't played Brotherhood and I'm not getting Revelations anytime soon. Instead I'm going to remain excited for the unannounced AC3, and I plan to play Brotherhood and Revelations whenever I can get them for super cheap on Steam in the future. That seems to have protected me from AC burnout!
Blimblim said:
Yes, but if Ubisoft didn't want yearly AC titles, Brotherhood and Revelations would likely not exist.
The Dutch Slayer
Member
THANK you for being the man of reason blimblim! this is exactly how I feel about this.Blimblim said:
Boombloxer
Member
Nowhere close to that. They push 7m average over 3 gamescjelly said:
I hope this means they have had a separate team working on AC 3 for the last few years or something. Would seem silly to make the jump in # and have it be no different than these yearly iterations.
Although i will say how Ubisoft has structured their several satellite studios over the world to handle pieces of these games has been keeping the quality up. No easy task.
Although i will say how Ubisoft has structured their several satellite studios over the world to handle pieces of these games has been keeping the quality up. No easy task.
ClosingADoor
Member
I think there is a seperate team working on AC3. I remember Ubisoft saying something like that back when Brotherhood was announced.~Kinggi~ said:
I was actually thinking they would save AC3 for next gen, but with 2012, that doesn't seem possible anymore. Well, as long as it's as great as the others, I'm happy.
Of course Ubisoft see the AC games as the cash cow it is (no thanks to their excellent marketing for AC1 though, it certainly wouldn't have sold that much with just the review scores). It doesn't mean they are going to release a half-assed AC3 though. I mean, just check that insane list of people who worked on ACB:duckroll said:
http://www.mobygames.com/game/windows/assassins-creed-brotherhood/credits
There were *even more* people working on ACR than that (game is gold, or close enough to it that it doesn't matter anymore for the production part of the game), and you can be certain they have already all moved to AC3. And since they had quite a bit of people working on the pre-production part of the game for 2 years now, we can hopefully think that all these people all know exactly what they are supposed to do and just produce content and code for the game.
If their project managers did and still do their job correctly, they can produce an insane amount of content (to go with the stuff already done by the preproduction team) in the upcoming year, and we might get the AC3 game we were supposed to get if the yearly AC games had never existed.
Now it remains to be seen what will happen with the new direction AC3 will take without Desilet, but from what I heard he already had a less important role in AC2 than he had in AC1, so we'll see.
I for one can't wait to see what AC3 will be, that's for sure.
Yeah I always thought AC3 would be a next-gen game when they started talking about the 2012 release date. But that won't be the case, so I guess the new engine will be a highly scalable engine that will be ready to do some actual next-gen stuff as soon as the consoles are out. Maybe they'll use the PC version as their test beds, that would be quite a nice idea in fact.ClosingADoor said:
Deadly Cyclone
Pride of Iowa State
Revelations is the end of Ezio's arc, not Desmond's.JDSN said:
Also, no "milking" talk until one of the games sucks. Each subsequent AC game has been better than the previous, so I'll keep taking them.
FHIZ said:
Well, AC 2, Brotherhood, and Revelations are all Ezio games, so they didn't really abandon the numbering system. Although they could have done AC2, AC2: Brotherhood, and AC2:Revelations.
3 will be a new character most likely, or just a full Desmond game.
Angry Fork
Member
Except AC2/Brotherhood/Revelations all deal with Ezio's storyline and character. AC3 will not feature Ezio presumably (at least as a main character) and will focus on Desmond + a new character maybe.FHIZ said:
Magic Mushroom
Member
d0c_zaius said:
Not even close. Brotherhood has better combat, the cool Borgia towers, the crossbow, the 100 percent sync system which adds challenge and replay value, recruiting and calling assassins and an excellent multiplayer. It's the better game.
Incendiary
Banned
FHIZ said:
Yeah, I agree with other posters, I always figured that III would indicate the next person in the storyline. Brotherhood and Revelations still deal with Ezio from II, so if they hit III next it means he's not the main protagonist anymore.
I always figured the last game in Desmond's storyline would be a modern Assassin's Creed with Desmond running around on rooftops and shit. Basically Prototype except without the monster powers.
iNvid02
Member
d0c_zaius said:
general consensus is that each games has improved upon its predecessor,
so even if you didn't like it as much as ac2 most people did, nothing has been
milked yet.
sure they could have spent an extra year on acb and polished it even more, but
that can be said with any game
IrrelevantNotch
Banned
d0c_zaius said:
Preach it brotha
MidnightCowboy
Member
Brotherhood is better than 2 by virtue of having far more stealth opportunities.
ShockingAlberto
Member
I am pretty sure that's not actually true.cabot said:
ShockingAlberto
Member
The "It's cool because the games aren't getting worse" argument doesn't really hold water if you didn't feel Brotherhood was a better game.
Rush2thestart
Member
cabot said:
Not really.
What you should've said is that milking isnt necessarily bad unless the quality starts to decline.
ShockingAlberto said:
I wasn't a huge fan of Brotherhood but I still can't fault Ubisoft for their decision to keep making these games. People will get tired of the IP whether they make them once every other year as well.
If you don't want as much AC as they're making you can just not play all of them.
Ether_Snake
å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®
Bob Tampinha said:
The thing is this is exactly the same damn thing to so many other series out there. Look at God of War, Gears of War, COD, Uncharted, etc. What is SO different from one game to the other really?
People seem to expect more differences between each AC games because of how things changed between AC1 and AC2, and because of the whole "change era/ancestor" thing. But practically all other popular game series out there do no different.
Ether_Snake said:
Why are you comparing AC with other series? I don't get this obsession you have with comparing one series with another. You yourself have pointed out why people have specific expectations when it comes to AC. That makes it different from the other series you are listing. If people are unhappy about AC becoming like "any other popular series", then that is a legit complaint.
I rank the games like this:
1. AC
2. AC:B
3. ACII, which I wasn't a big fan of in the least. (compared to the other two)
I think Revelations will be much better than Brohood and possibly even better than AC for me. Definitely will have the best gameplay from what I've seen.
Also, Revelations looks like freaking concept art. Truly amazing. I still prefer the more 'realistic' look that AC had though.
1. AC
2. AC:B
3. ACII, which I wasn't a big fan of in the least. (compared to the other two)
I think Revelations will be much better than Brohood and possibly even better than AC for me. Definitely will have the best gameplay from what I've seen.
Also, Revelations looks like freaking concept art. Truly amazing. I still prefer the more 'realistic' look that AC had though.
Ether_Snake
å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®
duckroll said:
Err no because the same people don't complain about the other series not changing at all after two-years or more between each game.
So it's really nitpicking. People don't like it because they don't like the idea that a company is releasing a sequel every year. Same goes with Gaffers bashing COD for being a milked series and never having even played it to begin with, nor even caring about it or FPS games.
Glad to know such opinions mean jack shit as either series just keep selling more anyway.
Ether_Snake said:
No, it's not nitpicking. I don't see why this is hard to understand. Let's look at this comparison:
The expectation of what a Gears of War game is based on GoW and GoW2: You play as Marcus, the shitty AI or your friend plays as Dom. There are aliens. You shoot them. They die. Sometimes you die. Sometimes your partner dies. In the end there's a ton of juice all over the place, and you look at all the juice.
The expectation of what an Assassin's Creed game is based on AC and AC2: You play as Desmond, who through the miracle of science gets to relive the memories of his ancestors. Each game covers a different ancestor and is set in a distinctively different historical period. You are an assassin and you assassinate people. Jumping from tall heights is cool.
Gears of War 3 fulfills all the expectations of what a Gears of War game is. Assassin's Creed Brotherhood and Revelations does not. I don't see why this is hard to understand for you. It is not nitpicking, it is called having different expectations for different series based on a pattern.
Ether_Snake
å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®
duckroll said:
Ok so a game that takes two or three years to make and makes no changes to the formula is fine, but a series where it upgrades every two or three years is bad and the releases in between offer as much in terms of what you'd expect from sequels than you would expect from other series is wrong? Who says each game has to cover a different era and ancestor anyway?
And that's only by pretending that AC actually under-delivers with its yearly releases, when in fact it offered even more than the other series often did with two+ years of development.
So AC is guilty of being a better brand that is more inspiring, gotcha.
NotTheGuyYouKill
Member
I don't care if they do yearly releases. I liked AC1, loved AC2, loved ACB, and I think ACR will also be fantastic. As long as they continue fine tuning and improving, and as long as the story remains interesting to me, I'm game for more Assassin's Creed every year. It's a nice tradition at this point, closing out the year with an AC game.
Ether_Snake said:
I really don't think you understand what anyone is trying to say here. You keep trying to compare the development of the games in some objective manner which really doesn't matter. Games are not the same, and most people do not treat every series with the same expectations or standards. This is not about fair critique based on some formula of returns or content value.
Nothing matters to a consumer except what he/she wants out of the product, and what is appealing about that product to the individual. If I enjoyed Assassin's Creed and Assassin's Creed 2 because I enjoy the formula the game had where each game was set in a totally different time period and had a different main lead character, are you saying that my connection to the series because of this particularly aspect is irrelevant just because Ubisoft wants to make it a yearly series?
Whether it is yearly, or quarterly, or every 3 years doesn't matter to me. It's not the only series I'm interested in, and it's not the only game I play. What matters to me is that I am interested in the specific formula the series originally had. Now it has a different formula. I don't have to like that. Not accepting it doesn't make a damn difference to me, and I have every right to objectively criticize it from my point of view. That doesn't mean that others can't or shouldn't enjoy it. It just means my preference is to wait for AC3.
Boombloxer
Member
Radec said:Let me try..
1. AC:B
2. ACII
..
..
..
104,301. AC
IMO.
Pretty much. AC is nowhere close as good to the other games, which has superior features in every way.
And this is someone who collected those damn flags.
IrrelevantNotch
Banned
Is this a Brotherhood vs. II thread now?
Ether_Snake
å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®
duckroll said:
That's fine, but I was not responding to you, I was responding to someone who seemed to expect much more improvements in an AC sequel, which had nothing to do with changing eras or ancestors or whatever, and I replied that it wasn't any different than other series. There was nothing in there about ancestors or different eras. I said the fact that the series has the possibility to change things drastically from one game to the next leads people to expect even MORE than they normally would from a sequel, and that's BEYOND the idea of changing era or ancestor, not that people shouldn't expect a different era or ancestor in every game.
Similar threads
- Locked