Quantcast

Jump to content

» «
Photo

Assassin's Creed: Comet

39 replies to this topic
Niobium
  • Niobium

    Johnny the Commie

  • Members
  • Joined: 13 Oct 2013
  • Canada
  • April Fools Winner 2015

#31

Posted 29 March 2014 - 03:20 AM Edited by nobum62, 29 March 2014 - 03:22 AM.

This is a must read article (and dont forget to read the comments guys): http://m.ie.ign.com/...ssassins-creeds


and here is the quote (for those who wouldnt bother clicking on the link)

" In a recent interview
 with Edge, Ubisoft's vice president of creative Lionel Raynaud discussed the future of Assassin's Creed and the company's decision to continue supporting last-gen consoles.

"We will have games for PS3 and 360 for this year and probably the years after," Raynaud said. "We want to be able to provide games to people who are playing on these consoles."


This makes plenty of sense, of course, as there are around 160 million combined PS3s and Xbox 360s already in consumers' hands. That install base dwarfs the Xbox One's and PlayStation 4's numbers, though they've only been out since late 2013.
Raynaud also spoke to Assassin's Creed's popularity, and the large number of new games in the series appearing on store shelves every year.
"We are able to offer people a new Assassin's Creed every year because they want Assassin's Creed's every year. As long as this is true we would be very stupid not to satisfy this need, but it puts a lot of pressure on us to create something that will never disappoint.
Ubisoft recently revealed Assassin's Creed Unity, which is coming to PS4, Xbox One, and PC later this year."-IGN.

Lol Ubisofts are f*cked Up lol.

What the f*ck Ubisoft? "They want Assassin's Creed's every year"? I don't remember ANYONE asking for AC to be released every year Ubish*t. We are not a bunch of impatient morons. We would prefer that you actually spend more time working on these AC games, rather than milking the sh*t out of the AC franchise like COD and all of the EA Sports games, just to maximize profit. You can still make a sh*t-ton of money without milking AC.
  • Detective Phelps likes this

iNero
  • iNero

    Black Tiger Sex Machine

  • Members
  • Joined: 05 Jul 2012
  • Germany

#32

Posted 29 March 2014 - 07:32 AM

Releasing every year is perfect when you look at it from the business perspective.
A lot of money, thats what such a company is looking for. Like every other company too.

The problem are the customers who buy it yearly. They wouldnt release it every year if people wouldnt buy it.

HaythamKenway
  • HaythamKenway

    All hope lies in Doom.

  • Members
  • Joined: 30 Jan 2012
  • Czech-Republic

#33

Posted 29 March 2014 - 08:54 AM

Well, at least every AC still feels fresh compared to previous one. CoD doesn't even try to differentiate by setting in different time periods anymore. Every game since MW3 is "near future-slightly advanced tech" bullsh*t. The only games that could be classified as "rehash-y" were Brotherhood and Revelations, but both of them offered so much new that they were as much of a rehash as Vice City was back in the day.

 

Maybe it's my fault as a fan, but I think Ubisoft managed to change things up with each installment just enough to justify a new release. Would I rather have one AC every three years, but one that's more complex and fine-tuned? Of course. I think the developers themselves would much rather do that too, but suits force them to push out an AC title every year (IV's present day sections even touched on the subject of current video game development in a way that makes me surprised that the big heads at Ubisoft approved of the commentary). But we are stuck with this annual release cr*p and I think the developers did a stellar job at making each release relevant and making the series move forward, gameplay-wise.

 

I just have to hope they'll be able to keep this up. It would be a huge waste if franchise this great fell victim to this stupid business model.


BLOOD-MOND
  • BLOOD-MOND

    aka: Blood-Is-in-Diamond or BiiD

  • Members
  • Joined: 21 Dec 2013
  • None

#34

Posted 29 March 2014 - 09:04 AM Edited by Blood-Is-in-Diamond, 29 March 2014 - 09:10 AM.

Lol true bro,Ubisoft (B**BI) are just CRAZY and RETARDED,the shocking part is that it took GTA (1997-2014) 17 years to have 15 games while AC (2007-2014) it took only 7 years to have 16 games lol UBi are stupidly greedy (f*cking C*nts) this is why Take2 and Rockstar said GTA will never become an annualised franchise...V was 5 years after IV and you can see the changes in everything,from Gameplay Mechanics,to scope,to Graphics/Visuals and both main games were released on PS3/Xbox 360 Era (not to mention V's Phenomenal Success).

Detective Phelps
  • Detective Phelps

    F*ck the 4th amendment!

  • Members
  • Joined: 27 Jul 2013
  • United-States
  • Helpfulness Award [GTA V section - Reporting]

#35

Posted 29 March 2014 - 10:30 AM

Lol true bro,Ubisoft (B**BI) are just CRAZY and RETARDED,the shocking part is that it took GTA (1997-2014) 17 years to have 15 games while AC (2007-2014) it took only 7 years to have 16 games lol UBi are stupidly greedy (f*cking C*nts) this is why Take2 and Rockstar said GTA will never become an annualised franchise...V was 5 years after IV and you can see the changes in everything,from Gameplay Mechanics,to scope,to Graphics/Visuals and both main games were released on PS3/Xbox 360 Era (not to mention V's Phenomenal Success).

What about R* and their cash cards? ;)

 

 

The problem are the customers who buy it yearly. They wouldnt release it every year if people wouldnt buy it.

Exactly. I won't be getting an AC game this year. Two games in one year? They're milking the franchise even more. 

  • Niobium likes this

Cylan
  • Cylan

    High-Functioning Sociopath

  • Members
  • Joined: 17 Jan 2013

#36

Posted 31 March 2014 - 10:30 AM

Considering they're both probably made by different studios within Ubisoft, they'll be full, good games and I'm going to buy both of them.

 

People always make this comparison with Call of Duty, saying that they're milking the franchise like Activision does. The difference between CoD and AC is that CoD is a first person multiplayer-centric shooter, of which there are literally dozens. There aren't that many games like Assassin's Creed and the history buff in me gets giddy over every release.

 

Well, every release until they go to Egypt or India.

  • HaythamKenway likes this

FranklinDeRoosevelt
  • FranklinDeRoosevelt

    32nd President of Los Santos

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 02 Aug 2013

#37

Posted 31 March 2014 - 02:26 PM

Ubisoft should be going backwards for the story in Assassins Creed stories because the past is way more interesting and historical than the modern one's. There are a LOT of stories they can focus on. This is one reason why I loved the Assassins Creed so much.


InfernoV
  • InfernoV

    Dont you just hate keyboard warriors!

  • Members
  • Joined: 29 May 2012

#38

Posted 02 April 2014 - 03:18 PM

-----AC AND GTA V SPOILERS BELOW-----

Ubish*t destroyed a franchise.

Why would they make an AC game EVERY YEAR? Oh wait, money of course.

The stupid thing is they haven't ended the story when it just goes on forever. For f*ck's sake end the story already! Stop making it a drag. The AC 3 ending was terribad. Lucy's betrayal was forced. Desmond's death was forced about as much as Johnny K's. The gameplay is basically the same each game. Ugh, there's so many problems with this franchise. AC is f*cking ruined.

Frankly, I even pirated AC 4 because of how ruined the franchise is. But I didn't even finish it because the gameplay was the same, I did not give a sh*t about naval warefare and the franchise's story is such a drag and won't end already.

I hope Ezio assasinates the CEO of Ubish*t.


THISSS!!!!

Firefly8000
  • Firefly8000

    The Harwood Butcher

  • Members
  • Joined: 17 Mar 2009

#39

Posted 02 April 2014 - 04:03 PM

-----AC AND GTA V SPOILERS BELOW-----

Ubish*t destroyed a franchise.

Why would they make an AC game EVERY YEAR? Oh wait, money of course.

The stupid thing is they haven't ended the story when it just goes on forever. For f*ck's sake end the story already! Stop making it a drag. The AC 3 ending was terribad. Lucy's betrayal was forced. Desmond's death was forced about as much as Johnny K's. The gameplay is basically the same each game. Ugh, there's so many problems with this franchise. AC is f*cking ruined.

Frankly, I even pirated AC 4 because of how ruined the franchise is. But I didn't even finish it because the gameplay was the same, I did not give a sh*t about naval warefare and the franchise's story is such a drag and won't end already.

I hope Ezio assasinates the CEO of Ubish*t.

1. I don't see how this franchise is 'destroyed' just yet. I'm still seeing quality in the AC games despite their yearly cycle, and so are the majority of gamers.

 

2. Yes, money is the reason why anything and everything exists. You think a company gives a sh*t about how much work they put into something? As long as it sells it will get made. That's Capitalism for you.

 

3. If they ended the story at this point you can guarantee there'd be a sh*t ton of people who'd complain, so in this regard you can't win. As far as I care, they can carry on forever with no end result as long as the storylines remain interesting. I'll admit, AC3's ending was seemingly rushed and there was very little development in AC4, but I won't throw it out completely just yet. They're building up to something great hopefully.

 

4. 'Gameplay' being basically the same? Doesn't that apply to all games? You have a foundation and so it's going to follow that. There are changes if you'd care to look. The big recent innovation was the whole naval combat aspect, and don't try to deny it. Just because you "did not give a sh*t about naval warfare" doesn't mean it's an invalid part of the game. I don't give a sh*t about GTA Online, but I'm hardly going to bash Rockstar when the majority of fans want that.

 

5. You automatically make everything you say stand zero ground when you admit to pirating the damn game. That means the game still has appeal to you, and you still desire to play it. You choosing not to pay simply makes you the asshole in this case. Whether something is of poor quality or not, someone put their time and dedication into it and so the least you can do is spend money to indulge in their work.

 

6. 'Ubish*t', now that's a good one. Funnily enough Ubisoft is probably one of the top developers/publishers out there at the moment, so if you're calling them bad at their jobs then I got bad news for you in terms of your expectations from the video game industry.

 

TL;DR, Your complaints aren't exactly driving home in the grand scheme of things. Did you ever put your feelings down to the idea of OPINION? I don't usually rant, but it seems that the idea of 'killing something in its prime' is becoming a tad too mainstream nowadays.


Niobium
  • Niobium

    Johnny the Commie

  • Members
  • Joined: 13 Oct 2013
  • Canada
  • April Fools Winner 2015

#40

Posted 02 April 2014 - 09:49 PM Edited by nobum62, 02 April 2014 - 09:52 PM.


-----AC AND GTA V SPOILERS BELOW-----

Ubish*t destroyed a franchise.

Why would they make an AC game EVERY YEAR? Oh wait, money of course.

The stupid thing is they haven't ended the story when it just goes on forever. For f*ck's sake end the story already! Stop making it a drag. The AC 3 ending was terribad. Lucy's betrayal was forced. Desmond's death was forced about as much as Johnny K's. The gameplay is basically the same each game. Ugh, there's so many problems with this franchise. AC is f*cking ruined.

Frankly, I even pirated AC 4 because of how ruined the franchise is. But I didn't even finish it because the gameplay was the same, I did not give a sh*t about naval warefare and the franchise's story is such a drag and won't end already.

I hope Ezio assasinates the CEO of Ubish*t.

1. I don't see how this franchise is 'destroyed' just yet. I'm still seeing quality in the AC games despite their yearly cycle, and so are the majority of gamers.
 
2. Yes, money is the reason why anything and everything exists. You think a company gives a sh*t about how much work they put into something? As long as it sells it will get made. That's Capitalism for you.
 
3. If they ended the story at this point you can guarantee there'd be a sh*t ton of people who'd complain, so in this regard you can't win. As far as I care, they can carry on forever with no end result as long as the storylines remain interesting. I'll admit, AC3's ending was seemingly rushed and there was very little development in AC4, but I won't throw it out completely just yet. They're building up to something great hopefully.
 
4. 'Gameplay' being basically the same? Doesn't that apply to all games? You have a foundation and so it's going to follow that. There are changes if you'd care to look. The big recent innovation was the whole naval combat aspect, and don't try to deny it. Just because you "did not give a sh*t about naval warfare" doesn't mean it's an invalid part of the game. I don't give a sh*t about GTA Online, but I'm hardly going to bash Rockstar when the majority of fans want that.
 
5. You automatically make everything you say stand zero ground when you admit to pirating the damn game. That means the game still has appeal to you, and you still desire to play it. You choosing not to pay simply makes you the asshole in this case. Whether something is of poor quality or not, someone put their time and dedication into it and so the least you can do is spend money to indulge in their work.
 
6. 'Ubish*t', now that's a good one. Funnily enough Ubisoft is probably one of the top developers/publishers out there at the moment, so if you're calling them bad at their jobs then I got bad news for you in terms of your expectations from the video game industry.
 
TL;DR, Your complaints aren't exactly driving home in the grand scheme of things. Did you ever put your feelings down to the idea of OPINION? I don't usually rant, but it seems that the idea of 'killing something in its prime' is becoming a tad too mainstream nowadays.
I'm the asshole for not paying? The people at Ubisoft are the assholes for milking a franchise I liked, and turning it into COD. They are the assholes for ripping us off with the slightly changed games. The only game that actually changed a lot since AC2 was AC3. Time and dedication? Black Flag was announced too quickly after AC3. There was no time, and I highly doubt dedication too.

Yes the game still had appeal to me, and I still had a desire to play it, but you know why? Because I was a fan. Not anymore though. Black Flag has made me loose interest, because it had the same gameplay and its story was a drag. I'm talking about the modern story.

Not all games have the same gameplay. WTF? GTA V's gameplay was completely different from GTA IV's, for example. The missions may have the same objectives (ie kill this guy, steal that car, etc.), but things like the driving and shooting are completely different. So IV and V don't have the same gameplay. Not all franchises do either. AC and COD though...




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users