{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
2/2/2016 5:57:20 AM
6
So basically take everything that makes assassin's creed what it is, and throw it out the window?
A lot of the things you mention are things that fans of the series really love, things that define the game. All they really need to do story-wise is reintroduce the present day timeline and expand upon the aftermath of desmonds sacrifice.
Keep the past characters interesting, show us their motivations, keep the Templars as the enemy, even if they aren't as black and while as before (in fact, the best Templars were those such as haytham, who gave you enough reason to question everything youvr known about them). Make the world much more interesting, with more side mission variety more characters, larger locations, better ways to control and interact with the environment.
The formula does not need to be changed, only improved. Making it an rpg with choices like you mention would completely throw the game out of character. You instantly remove any historical accuracy (a huge part of the game) and just leave the continuity of such a series in a mess. Adding bars for food and water would turn the action-adventure game into a survival game, which attracts a different audience entirely. Removing the slower parts in the beginning gets rid of all of the characterization that the new characters desperately need, and offers contrast to the monotonous parts of the rest of the game. Ezio and Edward would have been nowhere near as good characters without the early portions of the game.
All of your points would make a great game of its osn, but not a great assassin's creed game. The franchise is already established and the formula is not to be changed too much. Such changes would turn away the current fanbase, which is never a good move. The core parts of the game must be kept.
English
-
The "formula" is old and it's time for a complete overhaul changing a game that makes you climb towers to sync the map, too a map all ready sync from the beginning. RockStar or Bethesda would make a better Assassins Creed game, Ubisoft formula is to make the game full of tedious content, over-hyped marketing, Season passes and milk the franchise only to throw it away just like they did to Prince of Persia. It's been 8 years it's absolutely the perfect time for change.
-
Change is good, but change too much and you will ruin the experience. If you want proof of that, look at halo 4, advanced warfare, arguably DAI, doom 3, metroid: other M, etc. When you change a pre-established franchise too much, it becomes unrecognizable as a part of that franchise, and ends up doing nothing to expand upon the games before it. Rather it just alienates the fans of the old series from what the game has become. No, we don't need to keep syncronizing towers and picking up feathers in the streets. But we need to still have good characters with deep backstory and motivations. We still need fluid parlour that can go uninterrupted and a central focus around the struggle between templar and assassin ideals. We still need a solid linear story woven into real life events, and the presence of The real world struggle between the 2 opposing forces The core parts that have made the franchise what it is should not be changed lest they want it to be remembered as game that failed to be assassin's creed.
-
- Phantom Pain - Fallout 4 - Halo 5 - Gta V These, Great games have proven that a completely change overhaul is a positive thing... Their development cycle is longer then Assassins Creed and I doubt a 2 year development time for Assassins Creed wouldn't make a difference to the next game.
-
Phantom pain and GTAV still have the core gameplay of their predecessors nailed down. There are a few key changes but they still play a lot like the games before them. Halo 5 returned to the core gameplay of halo 1-3. Though it still gets a bit of flak for the things that still feel a bit too alien. Fallout 4 is still fallout at its core. A huge, open world with a ton of things to do, great quests Vaults, the works. And the changes it has received, especially to its combat system, have been very controversial. As I said, change is good, but changing too much is never good. The extended development time should be used to overhaul the more tedious and monotonous parts of the game. Add much more to do and create a story as compelling as that of Ezio or Edward, if not more. Focus on making each and every objective unique, with more ways to tackle the missions. Perfect the combat system and provide us with more guild interactions than just paying off some thugs. So long as the core of what defines assassin's creed stays virtually untouched, they can change anything else. A game can be altered and improved without making it an entirely different game.
-
Fallout 4 and Halo 5 were letdowns. MGSV TPP's story was a letdown.
-
Phantom Pain was... Unfinished for a story, but you have to admit that intro mission was a roller coaster and the stealth system is the best out of any game to date. Fallout 4: I would have to say the game was primarily based on just shooting and looting. But it seem more focused on their new features instead of more immersive content. Halo 5: I already knew it was a disappointment, I had a hunch that it wasn't going to be good and now waiting until a 60% off sale (which is probably very soon)
