I may be at loss to what happened here. What the fuck happened to the combat in AC4? I know a lot of you didn't like AC3, but I did and one reason is the combat. Connor's fighting moves, counters, double counters and kills were so flashy, brutal and crisp. The camera would zoom in at the perfect time, showing Connor's screaming face as he's hacking a poor lad's neck as if it was wood. Come to think of it, his double kills were the best counters I've ever seen in an action game. Remember how Connor would jump and roll towards his next foe during the free-flow combat?

Now, in AC4, Edward's moves are choppy, way too long, unvaried and badly animated. Especially since he borrows some of Connor's moves, which are oddly translated with a pair of swords compared to a tomahawk. Actually, I had this funny feeling that the dual swords fighting style was going to be very unimpressive. And I was right. You always get the same lame counters, which are never in sync with their audio effects.

And what about those double counters? Well, they, for one, never happen at sea, which is where you'll fight 70% of the time. And, on land, they happened so rarely because of the ultra-passive AI. Remember in AC3 when you were constantly swarmed and attacked at all times? You could actually chain double-counters and counters, where in AC4, the soldiers you fight just circle around you, just like in AC1. And one time out of 10, they'll launch a double attack on you.

Want a reminder of what the counters looked like in AC3? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dnLOdWPKSQE ( fast forward around 1:25 mark to get the some examples. That counter at 2:45 mark is one of the best I've seen. )

Now THIS is combat. So, what the hell, Ubi Montreal? It seems to me like they based their combat engine on an older game, like AC1 or 2. Even AC2 had a better counter kills.

I completely agree, I think AC4 as a whole is a better game but the combat is one of the things that in my opinion took a step back from AC3.......

The combat is pretty sloppy, I'll agree. AC3 had one thing going for it, and it was the combat.

Yeah the raw quality of the combat AC is so good at needed some more work. Still they vastly improved most other aspects of the game. Gotta give them credit for that.

The combat is my least favorite thing across the board in the AC games. I think Black Flag does a much better job at explaining how to break the guards of those big brutes who will damage you if you counter. I had no clue how to kill those dudes in AC3 aside from shooting them. It may have been my fault for rushing through AC3 and not taking time to upgrade my stuff and learn the combat system better. But at it's core it's no fun, so what's the point?

I see your point. It's definitely not as fleshed out in Black Flag, as it has been in the past. I've been lucky enough to hop in Ac 4 with that old burning excitement I used to have for Ac 2 and Brotherhood, so despite the combat being much more simplified, it's serviceable enough for me and I'm still having a great time with the game as a whole.

I'll probably find next year's Ac a little more mundane if they simply copy/paste the formula again and don't try some new things mechanically. Not to say they didn't try new stuff this year generally speaking. They really pulled off the whole Pirate's aesthetic and setting nicely.

Combat works fine, AC combat has never been great so whatever. The guns are what makes it fun.

It had some flair in AC3, at least. And guns too.

I wouldn't call it good in AC3 either, but yeah, Black Flag was definitely a step back for combat.

Black flag is the only assassins creed game I ever played but I noticed straight away that some of the animation work was really off compared to what I had seen in previous games and their trailers. There's some flimsy stuff where my sword is meant to go through the guys head but it completely misses but you still see blood splatter.

the combat might be a little sloppier but could you do that in AC3:

I agree the combat in AC4 was aggravating and I felt I enjoyed it more even in Brotherhood, I guess my main issue is the camera just doesn't zoom out enough so too many times an enemy off screen would come in and disrupt the fighting and I kinda just wish the counters would just kill the weaker soldiers there and then just so the combat isn't dragging out.

I think it's on par with AC3, as in pretty shitty. In my opinion, AC1 and AC2 had the best variations on the combat. AC1 had the most mechanics if you actually payed any attention, and AC2 wasn't just a hammer fest. Now, enemies are just cookie cutter designs that all require EXACTLY the same combination of button presses. How AC3 and AC4 don't get the same criticism as Ryse got when it was shown off early on is beyond me, because AC3 and 4 both basically have quicktime events for combat, only difference is they don't show button symbols, just a particular model for the enemy.

I agree about the animations. They are really long, inconsistently so, and there is no clarity about when one attack ends and the next begins. They are TOO flashy most of the time, instead of just quick and brutal, and that gets really annoying. I miss when you had to time button presses.

AC4 is just too easy and slow in combat. I wouldn't mind the ease of combat nearly as much if you wiped guys out in a couple of seconds, but it takes so long to get to the point where you are actually moving on to the next guy.

What I want to know is what the hell happened to combat air assassinations. A guy will be in the middle of parrying one of your crew's attacks as you descend upon them, but because you didn't "exit combat" the guy cancels out of his parry animation and into a "hey get off me!" animation. I feel like there are a lot of times where you should be able to just kill a dude nearly instantly, either by jumping two swords first onto him, or stabbing him in the back, or stabbing him AND his buddy in the back. But the way it triggers combat and the way that combat completely changes the rules of engagement. A lot of times I just run by guards hammering the assassinate button and just shoulder past them because of how that whole system works.

That and how lazy the stealth sequences have gotten is really souring me on AC4. I love the sea stuff and the characters are definitely closer to Ezio's flair. But I still think they need to go back to AC1 to make a great game at this point. AC2 and beyond have gotten so far from that first attempt that it mind as well be it's own property. I would love to see AC1's mechanics given attention and some serious polishing. People seem to think that it had the worst everything but I actually enjoyed that game. 3 and 4 have done nothing but piss me off, disappoint me, and bore me for the most part. And I don't think AC2's strength was ever the combat (although I did generally enjoy it and thought the stealth was usually better than AC3/4's super linear closed in sequences).

I bet an AC4 that still had the awesome ship combat, interesting setting, but also had engaging, enjoyable combat that had more mechanics than "read the enemy's uniform to know the one button that will let you hammer on X," and more open ended environments and experiences would have been really truly great. But so far I'm not seeing that from AC4. The ship stuff is great and I'm enjoying the story and characters a lot but the rest of the gameplay has been dampening all of that.

AC3 is the only AC I like

Yo you can just dump tho

I like running around stabbin dudes though.

Sure the combat does not look as good in 3 (and by the way OP, you sound super creepy describing how you enjoy the death animations so much) but the main problem I have is the fact that the combat is just worse then the previous games. Like someone else said, the camera is too zoomed in so when your on the ship you can't see the person behind you attacking you. The ever so increasing lack of difficulty in killing dudes also suck. The guns are not that fun when you have like 4. Remember the good old times when the bad guys actually had health bars?

I don't really remember the combat very well in 3. Thought it was gernerally the same. Except the sound always cuts out during the final execution of an enemy (when it zooms in) and I find that extremely annoying.

Besides that I'm surprised no one has mentioned the downgrade of the facial animations. I thought they looked quite amazing in 3, especially the main baddy. They almost looked as good as something like LA Noire I thought... not quite of course. In 4 they all look stiff and awkward like they did in the previous games.

This made me laugh in front of my screen, almost spitting my yogurt. I can indeed take a dump in life.

@ilikepopcans I didn't mean to sound creepy, I just have an eye for detail, especially since beat 'em ups are my favorite genre of games. God of War, Ninja Gaiden, DmC and whatnot. I tend to have an eye for combat.

What I miss is the difficult traversal in the landmarks in 2. The game has gotten so good at guessing what I'm doing instead of what I'm actually doing that they would rather have Kenway stick to the nearest tree than sprint in a straight line.

My biggest problem with the combat is that enemies don't have hitpoints, the only way to kill them is to finish your animation string and get the final hit off. It's annoying getting stuck in an animation loop and hitting the same guy 10 times with no effect. It also sucks losing progress on an enemy because you had to counter someone else. Sure, it's more cinematic, but the immersion is broken when you've slashed the same guy 10 times because you keep needing to one-hit-kill counter people.

It's not "what the hell happened to the combat" it's "the animation isn't as good". This combat is hugely dependent in that since 3 for sure and yeah this one isn't as good as that game. 3's combat animation was really fantastic.

I think they need to do some work on the combat going forward, but to me it's pretty much the same as the last few. It really makes like no difference there aren't health bars guys.

Like Uh,uh,uh,uh

I played 3 hrs of AC and 2 hrs of AC2, so from that perspective AC IV is a lot more fun to play since I put 39 hrs into it. To be honest, I hear people talking about Conner's moves being 'flashier' and I think "Well, this guy Kenway who is a different person, right?" Kenway is a pirate, he's not a trained Assassin or Templar...that's the F-ing point, isn't it? Kenway is supposed to be rough around the edges, he kicks people in their shins, he stuffs a pistol up their nose, and he chops them with a cutlass. He is not supposed to pirouette and curtsy his way through a fight with tiny knives or rapier.

For me 60% of this game is sailing, fighting ships & forts, and traversing silently through jungle landscapes. Another 30% is hunting and skinning...so I can dress in what appears to be a 1970s pimp outfit made from a Jaguar. And, 10% the man-to-man, man-to-group fighting

Hey, more power to people who want style over swagger, that's cool that you have a different point of view. But I have to say there are 200 other thing about the game I woudl fix (likely all that would make it LESS like the old games) that I would change before I worked on fluid combat.

- Dialogue trees, what you say to people should matter....that should open up which way a mission goes.
- Crew who are individuals & characters, whom if you lose, matter to how you ship runs.
- There should be special crew who if you recruits give perks and bonuses. (Gunner improves gun fire & traversal speeds, Carpenters fix damage over time, Bosuns make the ship handle better & move faster, Quartermasters increase cargo capacity, and Boarding Leader more skilled boarding parties AND ability to 'stealth board' ships that are not moving.
- Three types crew Special (see above), Wasters are cheap/less skilled crew, Seamen are skilled/costly crew. A Bosun and a Boarding leader make 'Wasters' learn faster. Crews with more than 20 Seamen work better, fight harder, and make useful items for free.
- A way to repair forts you take over, the return to life of these oasis of protection. Just I should be able to set a new 'executive' to run that fort for me.
- More realistic ships, more rooms inside ships to explore.
- The ability to capture a NEW boat to become the Jackdaw.
- The ability to have AI ships 'in company' with Jackdaw...protection & more crews to board.
- Missions that are about bringing cargo from one city to another in real time, no fast travel.
- The 'captains cabin' in the Jackdaw being more than a 3D menu, the ability to enter other spaces on the Jackdaw (or various Jackdaws of each size.)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=64k5THdC64s

Nothing wrong with you explaining how you like the fighting system in a game called ASSASSINS creed, uh Uh UH UH!

yeah, melee combat is worse for sure. And not many options for the types of weapons (just swords or assassin blades). The gun combat is much better though.

The only thing I feel is missing from the combat is the double counters. Double counters were really awesome in AC3, was bummed when they weren't in AC4.

It is my opinion that AC combat, and also 3D Prince or Persia combat while we're talking Ubi games, is all terrible. In every game. Ubisoft hasn't a clue how to make good third person action combat.

@deadmanforking: They're in there, it's just seems extremely rare. I'm about to finish the game a second time alongside Freedom Cry and I've seen it three times . The AI is just too passive.