Assassins Creed Unity [PS4, XO]

As the combat hasn't really been altered since the first game (counter, kill, counter, kill while they all wait patiently for their allot time of death) I don't really expect any major game mechanics will be changed this time either.

Why would they really bother, the formula as it is sells millions so don't rock the boat.
 
the combat focus is altered. the 1st game is stealth while to the latest one, it beocme more and more action.

ubi promised this AC will not just brawl but also stealth and teamwork but i just dont believe their marketing. I already burned by watch dogs.
 
^artistic pride maybe? They quite literally have thousands of people slaving away on the series 24/7. Bound to be an enthusiastic combat designer somewhere amongst them.
 
the combat focus is altered. the 1st game is stealth while to the latest one, it beocme more and more action.

ubi promised this AC will not just brawl but also stealth and teamwork but i just dont believe their marketing. I already burned by watch dogs.

The focus may be different, but the quality was always shitty. Both in terms of stealth gameplay and combat.
 
the combat focus is altered. the 1st game is stealth while to the latest one, it beocme more and more action.

ubi promised this AC will not just brawl but also stealth and teamwork but i just dont believe their marketing. I already burned by watch dogs.

but it's still, counter-kill, counter-kill while the enemies wait for their turn to die.
 
but it's still, counter-kill, counter-kill while the enemies wait for their turn to die.

This is the only gameplay info I could find and it says enemies don't wait for their turn anymore, fighting is tougher so you focus more on stealth and more:

 
This is the only gameplay info I could find and it says enemies don't wait for their turn anymore

Shadow or Mordor does this well. If you are surrounded by a lot of orcs (20+) you are probably going to get ganked unless your counter timing is good and timing needs to be good when your having to counter simultaneously attacks and still getting hits in yourself.

I like to think of it as thinking mans CQC. Positioning is important because orcs don't form a queue. If you're the jam in an Orc doughnut you need to move unless you're really good and even then certain Orc units can ruin your day. In AC you just churn through enemies, it's just a war of attrition that takes time and presents no challenge. SoM has shown the way to mix ranged attacks in with CQC and donut well. Oh and to keep developing the CQC through new abilities.

AC will really have to up its game. A shiny version of Paris isn't going to do it for me.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
As the combat hasn't really been altered since the first game (counter, kill, counter, kill while they all wait patiently for their allot time of death) I don't really expect any major game mechanics will be changed this time either.

Why would they really bother, the formula as it is sells millions so don't rock the boat.

I'm bit worried that they change the formula too much. I really liked original Assassin's Creed battle system and I was worried that they mess it up in sequel. Thankfully it still worked great and I hope it's the case in this time too. Assassin's Creed series in one of those rare combat systems where you feel like a superhero and not some goon who has to chip away massive health bar. To this day I'm still impressed by how smooth the melee fight feels against large groups of mobs.

For example in AC:B Matrix like training. Pure bliss.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qR089iYnheY
 
I just think it completely undermines the whole Assassins thing. If maybe not a last resort, at least combat should be similarly challenging to going about your shady work all stealthy-like. In the last few games I stopped bothering about stealth entirely because taking the route of direct assault was so much easier and quicker. Unless of course one of the many poorly designed missions burdened me with arbitrary fail states in case I was ever discovered.
The assassins are just really skilled regular dudes after all, and yet they make a wraith-possessed ranger tasked with guarding the Black Gate of Mordor look like a bloody amateur. Just feels so ridiculous and wrong.
But then this is coming from a developer who thought having the step niece of your co-brother-in-law's sister accidentally killed be a good enough reason for a douchy protagonist to empty the bank accounts of homeless war veterans and abused spouses with his cell phone. So yeah, near immortal assassins probably check out just fine for the scriptwriter monkeys at Ubisoft.

By the way, Eurogamer put another preview article up today, and it sounds sobering to say the least.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Assassin's Creed: Unity takes a daring leap back to the series' origins

Eurogamer have an article up on the game.

Eurogamer said:
Missions themselves are more tactical, and the new combat and exploration controls are an important part of this. You can finally crouch manually (hold the L trigger) and lock into cover with a tap of the A button. If you're spotted by a guard you'll see an outline of your last known position on screen, better informing you of where you might be slipping up but also giving you the opportunity to deliberately gain their attention before sneaking away and flanking your attackers. The R trigger is still your command for parkouring up and over objects and buildings, but the addition of the A (for up) and B (for down) buttons mean you can better inform the game exactly where you want to go. There are fewer slip ups, and less accidental jumps off 200ft towers into a sprawling, desynchronised heap on the ground.

Combat has been made a little harder - at any rate, enemies feel like they have more health, but the parry button is still there and the reintroduction of health packs allows you to still stand and batter someone for quite some time until they finally, finally submit and die. The best that can probably be said about Unity's combat is that it has finally become more attractive to avoid it - due to how unfun and slow actual combat can be compared to stealthy, quick kills that let you move on undetected, but also due to the new enhancements in stealth bonuses that you can now acquire.

Nope. No thanks. Not after WB got it all so right in Shadows of Mordor. :nope:
 
ACU_109_SP_PanoramaKingsBeheading_1412088355.jpg

ACU_110_SP_PanoramaCountryside_1412088356.jpg
ACU_119_SP_TreasureHunt_1412088358.jpg
ACU_111_COOP_Heist_1412088357.jpg

The game is too gorgeous to resist !
but as expected its 900p :cry: !
 
I'm absolutely fine with 900p if they can iron out the performance issues. I play on a pretty big tv from not too far away, and I would never have noticed W_D's 900p resolution myself.
 
I'm absolutely fine with 900p if they can iron out the performance issues. I play on a pretty big tv from not too far away, and I would never have noticed W_D's 900p resolution myself.

even if you can live with 900p, what will you do about this:

Clumsy, awkward, lumpen… these are the not the words we expected to hear on exiting a lengthy hands-on demo with Assassin’s Creed Unity. But trying to find exactly the right words to describe the game’s new parkour system is all we and other journos could talk about at first. Which is a shame, because other much heralded elements, like the amazing new next gen graphics, were impressive. But overall we came away from the preview with some serious concerns about the final game.
 
If it really is a problem with the parcour system and not just something you simply have to get used to and master (I'm all for distinct controls and not a fan of being at the mercy of context sensitive button presses), then I'm probably gonna skip it or at least wait until it's cheap. It's not like I'm short on options in November and I'm way more interested in Dragon Age anyway.

I just don't take issue with the resolution. In fact I think this pixel hunting craze is annoying at best and damaging at worst. I don't like the idea of developers who are more concerned about pumping out all the pixels than making compelling games.
 
yeah, its to be played on TV. People sit far from them. 900p is fine (for me).

but if PS4 need to run 900p for ACU... man... i wonder how heavy the PC version will be. Because playing in non native resolution is a big "no" for me on PC. The distance between me and screen is very small and making non-native stuff very blurry.

to make thing worse, i only have Radeon HD 7770 :/
 
"At Ubisoft for a long time we wanted to push 60 fps. I don't think it was a good idea because you don't gain that much from 60 fps and it doesn't look like the real thing. It's a bit like The Hobbit movie, it looked really weird.

"And in other games it's the same - like the Rachet and Clank series [where it was dropped]. So I think collectively in the video game industry we're dropping that standard because it's hard to achieve, it's twice as hard as 30fps, and its not really that great in terms of rendering quality of the picture and the image."

Alex Amancio, the game's Creative Director, reiterated this point: "30 was our goal, it feels more cinematic. 60 is really good for a shooter, action adventure not so much. It actually feels better for people when it's at that 30fps. It also lets us push the limits of everything to the maximum.
"It's like when people start asking about resolution. Is it the number of the quality of the pixels that you want? If the game looks gorgeous, who cares about the number?"

http://www.techradar.com/news/gamin...-industry-is-dropping-60-fps-standard-1268241

What do you think?

I say he's right.
 
Back
Top