• 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 Mirage has been officially announced!

Pagusas

Elden Member
the controls are among the worst in the series, the amount of icons on the map are parody-esque and the fighting system is hilariously bad and worse than in prior entries
Thats the feedback I remember the game getting after the launch window, thats why I'm surprised with the feedback here. Plus I remember people saying the story was the weakest and most unimportant off all the AC games to date. Also its the worst ranked AC game on Metacritic.
 
Last edited:

CamHostage

Member
WFT? Sorry kiddies, no AC for you this time.


fprkrk9.jpg
orry

https://www.xbox.com/en-us/games/store/assassins-creed-mirage/9n4096hx1wwq
 
Last edited:

Arachnid

Member
you don't have to play them all or any of them, I haven't touched an AC game since Unity, now I'm ready to go back.
I've played and beat every single one, hated or not lol (except Valhalla which I'm having trouble mustering the strength to continue; I have learned to wait for the 10-15 dollar version with all DLC though). I'm in too deep to stop now. I hope they learned from the last two.
 
Last edited:

Gun Animal

Member
Seems like the series will be going back to a yearly release schedule? Surely They wouldn't have announced "Red" and "Hexe" if they were coming out in 2025 and 2027 or even later... I'm glad, I love AC for the most part. Valhalla and Odyssey were TOO BIG, but as long as they make it so you can see credits roll in under 30 hours I'll probably be happy with any future titles.
 
I don't even understand what it means. What do you have to buy it with? The new AC set in Japan or the original Valhalla?
Assuming this isn't an error on MS store, it's real gambling that turning a usually M game series to an AO. This is likely due to loot boxes because games of chance that don't involve money are labelled by the ESRB as simulated gambling. And if this is true, that would mean a lot of games are going to be rerated to AO.
 

sainraja

Member
not really, AC (Odyssey and Origins in particular) has a better fighting system at the very last, and if they reduce the map clutter they could make a way better game than Ghost of Tsushima.
but being Ubisoft I bet they can't keep themselves from cluttering the map once again
I don't know why people feel the need to downplay the combat system in Ghost. It is actually pretty good and its FUN.

The original AC games also had a good combat system and they don't need to be replicas of each other to be considered 'good' or 'better' than the other. I really enjoyed playing Ghost and I really really miss the combat systems of the earlier AC games. As for the AC games you named, either I am forgetting Odyssey and Origins combat or its very similar to that of Valhalla which is very simplistic so I can't understand how it can be considered better than the earlier AC games or Ghost's combat.
 
Last edited:

Three

Member
Assuming this isn't an error on MS store, it's real gambling that turning a usually M game series to an AO. This is likely due to loot boxes because games of chance that don't involve money are labelled by the ESRB as simulated gambling. And if this is true, that would mean a lot of games are going to be rerated to AO.
Oh that makes sense but in that case why is it saying not sold separately? That's really confusing. I thought because this was initially an expansion it was no longer being sold standalone.
 
Last edited:
Oh that makes sense but in that case why is it saying not sold separately? That's really confusing. I thought because this was initially an expansion it was no longer being sold standalone.
Looks like that's just how MS store has it for games with no price yet? No idea.
These are upcoming games on the store with the same "not sold separately"
 
Last edited:

CamHostage

Member
Assuming this isn't an error on MS store, it's real gambling that turning a usually M game series to an AO. This is likely due to loot boxes because games of chance that don't involve money are labelled by the ESRB as simulated gambling. And if this is true, that would mean a lot of games are going to be rerated to AO.

As you said, it's most likely an error, but if not, it'll be appealed to be re-rated. They'll tweak something about it or they'll make a case for the justification and security of their gambling system, and the end product will ship with an M. (It does happen that products get rated and have to carry that in promos but eventually are re-rated either up or down... but I have never seen a game go out as "AO" in its marketing; the Ubisoft website still calls it RP with a likely M, which makes more sense. So either this is very funny, or a real moment of reckoning for game makers using lootboxes or stuff like that...)
 

01011001

Banned
I don't know why people feel the need to downplay the combat system in Ghost. It is actually pretty good and its FUN.

The original AC games also had a good combat system and they don't need to be replicas of each other to be considered 'good' or 'better' than the other. I really enjoyed playing Ghost and I really really miss the combat systems of the earlier AC games. As for the AC games you named, either I am forgetting Odyssey and Origins combat or its very similar to that of Valhalla which is very simplistic so I can't understand how it can be considered better than the earlier AC games or Ghost's combat.

early AC games have no real combat system. it's basically a QTE and simplistic to the max.
and it's not even as good as something like Batman Arkham, which at least has the rythm-game-like structure to it. but it was one of the early ones in that style and it was far away from being the focus of the game, so it's excusable.

Ghost of Tsushima's fighting system isn't bad, but it's literally nothing to ride home about either.
it serves its purpose but it has many flaws and no depth. and it's way too big of a focus of the game to just be excusable as easily as early AC games' systems.

AC Origins or AC Odyssey at least have weapon classes and do not rely on randomised animations and too much context sensitivity. they also don't arbitrarily restrict your moves.

context sensitive fighting systems that change animations in a way that's not in control of the player will always be highly restrictive and can not even remotely compare to fighting systems that give the players actual control over their actions.

the biggest issue I personally have with Ghost of Tsushima's fighting system are the different stances tho.
not only do they barely add any depth, they also are way too much of a rock/paper/scissors system, but not even really that, it's way more like a color matching system.
you could replace Stone, Water, Wind and Moon with Red, Blue, Green and Yellow, and then color code Swordfighters, Shield users etc. accordingly, which would expose this issue in a more transparent way.
this wouldn't even be that much of an issue if the game didn't literally automatically pause to tell you you are fighting your enemy incorrectly... GIGANTIC red flag right there.
and it also doesn't do that only once either. I found a way to highly efficiently fight against almost all enemy types by doing certain moves, the game didn't like that and reminded me at least 3 times from what I can remember to NOT USE THIS STANCE... it stopped me mid combat to tell me I'm playing wrong
 
Last edited:

sainraja

Member
early AC games have no real combat system. it's basically a QTE and simplistic to the max.
and it's not even as good as something like Batman Arkham, which at least has the rythm-game-like structure to it. but it was one of the early ones in that style and it was far away from being the focus of the game, so it's excusable.
If you believe that then it is going to be really hard having a meaningful conversation about each game's combat systems. So I will just say....to each his own but you just seem unnecessarily dismissive of the combat in those games.

Ghost of Tsushima's fighting system isn't bad, but it's literally nothing to ride home about either.
it serves its purpose but it has many flaws and no depth. and it's way too big of a focus of the game to just be excusable as easily as early AC games' systems.

AC Origins or AC Odyssey at least have weapon classes and do not rely on randomised animations and too much context sensitivity. they also don't arbitrarily restrict your moves.
Having different weapon classes does not make the combat deep, it just means you have more than a sword to use to fight and I honestly don't see how the other systems are restrictive.

context sensitive fighting systems that change animations in a way that's not in control of the player will always be highly restrictive and can not even remotely compare to fighting systems that give the players actual control over their actions.
I don't see how any game 'gives' us actual control over the characters action. Being able to switch weapons is an action that is still made via an input method such as a controller. Same with any other action that a player does. Developers can put in a punch action between two enemies that is not connected in a context sensitive way but that is just going to look off. Why does it matter if that same punch action between two enemies is a little smart and context sensitive? Unless I am misunderstanding your point here.

the biggest issue I personally have with Ghost of Tsushima's fighting system are the different stances tho.
not only do they barely add any depth, they also are way too much of a rock/paper/scissors system, but not even really that, it's way more like a color matching system.
you could replace Stone, Water, Wind and Moon with Red, Blue, Green and Yellow, and then color code Swordfighters, Shield users etc. accordingly, which would expose this issue in a more transparent way.
Here I just disagree with your take on it so to each his own. I enjoyed it...it was fresh and different.

this wouldn't even be that much of an issue if the game didn't literally automatically pause to tell you you are fighting your enemy incorrectly... GIGANTIC red flag right there.
and it also doesn't do that only once either. I found a way to highly efficiently fight against almost all enemy types by doing certain moves, the game didn't like that and reminded me at least 3 times from what I can remember to NOT USE THIS STANCE... it stopped me mid combat to tell me I'm playing wrong
Hmm, weird. I am not sure what I did or didn't do but I don't remember being interrupted multiple times like that (after initially following the tip).
Perhaps I learned the different stances and which enemies to use them against quickly or maybe if you do follow the tip the first time it won't show again, but I dunno, it wasn't that much of an issue for me I guess and I know it would be something that would have annoyed me. I remember how that kind of thing happened in a Need for Speed game at the start with a tutorial where they stopped gameplay without the option to skip.
 

01011001

Banned
If you believe that then it is going to be really hard having a meaningful conversation about each game's combat systems. So I will just say....to each his own but you just seem unnecessarily dismissive of the combat in those games.

they literally are not real fighting systems.. there's no real decision making involved, or depending on game very little.


Having different weapon classes does not make the combat deep, it just means you have more than a sword to use to fight and I honestly don't see how the other systems are restrictive.

different weapons bring at the very least gameplay diversity.

I don't see how any game 'gives' us actual control over the characters action. Being able to switch weapons is an action that is still made via an input method such as a controller. Same with any other action that a player does. Developers can put in a punch action between two enemies that is not connected in a context sensitive way but that is just going to look off. Why does it matter if that same punch action between two enemies is a little smart and context sensitive? Unless I am misunderstanding your point here.

the issue is that you take agency away from the player. if you take away agency you also take away the feel the player can get for the character's actions.

if you press X and 1/3 the time your character does a horizontal slash, 1/3 of the time he does a vertical slash and another 1/3 of the time a diagonal one, you feel less in control of your character and getting a worse feeling for inputting combos that need timing.

now add context sensitive animations and you will not be able to accurately judge what you input will result in.
in Ghost of Tsushima pressing Square can result in your character standing still and doing a horizontal slash, a vertical slash, a diagonal slash, him automatically locking on to a nearby enemy and doing a slash that look different still from the ones before etc.
you lose control of your character. your input is merely an attack command, not a command for specific movements.

if a combo looks the same every time you input it you will get a feeling for said combo, which in return gives the developers the possibility to implement more complex combos that require timing and precision.
if the developers make the fighting system too context sensitive you can't do do that. context sensitive movement means the player will never see the same string of animations and therefore can't accurately judge when to follow up with the next button press. this results in the developers needing to loosen the precision required to input combos, limiting the possible complexity of the combos and precision needed to perform them



Here I just disagree with your take on it so to each his own. I enjoyed it...it was fresh and different.

theres nothing fresh and/or different about it. games did it before and did it better. see Nioh


hmm, weird. I am not sure what I did or didn't do but I don't remember being interrupted multiple times like that (after initially following the tip).
Perhaps I learned the different stances and which enemies to use them against quickly or maybe if you do follow the tip the first time it won't show again, but I dunno, it wasn't that much of an issue for me I guess and I know it would be something that would have annoyed me. I remember how that kind of thing happened in a Need for Speed game at the start with a tutorial where they stopped gameplay without the option to skip.

it happens every time the game thinks you used the wrong stance too often agains the wrong enemy type.
it's a color code, like I said. Use Red Stance vs Red Enemy, use Blue Stance vs Blue Enemy... only that they don't call it or Red, Blue etc. and don't color in the enemies :)

stances are mostly irrelevant once you learn how to use certain moves against all enemy types equally as efficiently.
I haven't played in a while so I don't precisely remember my typical combo I did but I know I basically used the same 2 or 3 moves against all enemies and killed everything fast and easily. (I played on hard btw.)

so basically I found a way to fight enemies my way, and the game didn't want me to do that, never saw that in any other game and it annoyed me.

I guess Sony knows their clientele is usually of the highly casual type, so they saw the necessity to implement this so even the last soccer mom knows she's playing wrong.
 
Last edited:

sainraja

Member
they literally are not real fighting systems.. there's no real decision making involved, or depending on game very little.

----

I guess Sony knows their clientele is usually of the highly casual type, so they saw the necessity to implement this so even the last soccer mom knows she's playing wrong.
The main reason I am getting very confused by your statements/justifications is because we are discussing Assassins Creed game combat, combat of the more recent ones with that of the previous and Ghost. I haven't invested a lot of time into Nioh yet so I can't comment on if that's better than Ghost or not but for me Ghost was a fresh take and I enjoyed it. The key complaint you have, seems to be the pause to instruct you which can easily be remedied if they allow you to turn that off and there is a mode where you can turn it off which you might also find more immersive. There does not seem to be a middle option where you can just turn off combat tips unless they have patched it and we don't know of it. I personally don't recall that ever being a problem for me. Call me casual if you want lol.

Anyway, getting to the point of my confusion with your statements. We're discussing the later AC games with previous and Ghost and I don't see how their (the later AC games) combat systems is better or requires more decision making (not saying it doesn't require it). The first AC game's combat required you to be on your toes and manage how many foes you were in combat with at all times. But I also don't see us seeing eye to eye on this so perhaps it is best to just agree to disagree.
 
Last edited:

Kenpachii

Member
6dd5882f4b784fe892a070f7177f385d.png


Gambling isn't that bad it seems like or else it would have been banned over here. also 59 is kinda cheap against the 120 of valhalla etc with everything in there.

Wonder how the dlc's are going to work.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom