@zombiebigfoot said:

Is it kind of stupid and pointless? Sure. But I hardly see how it's something worth getting this pissed off over. It'll probably be a short sequence in the game, not something that's forced upon you throughout the entire thing.

This. I mean past AC games had you using a winged flying machine that would get massive increases in altitude by small fires. They are simply taking a fairly slow paced and probably fairly mundane concept and making it more video gamey. I mean if you want realistic naval battle, might as well play a strategy game and not an action-adventure game centred on platforming and close quarter combat.

@Hailinel said:

@Example1013

@The_Nubster said:

@Example1013 said:

@The_Nubster: You're right, clearly the idea of a master assassin being able to kill someone with one shot or land safely in a large bale of hay is just as unrealistic as a giant ship being able to turn with the speed of a car, or the idea of 5 giant ships in a row blowing up after getting hit with rocks.

Yes. Using knives and 15th century guns as one-hit kills isn't realistic. Breaking a fall with a bale of hay is unrealistic. All of these things are unrealistic, from the jumping/climbing/science-magic to the 'arcade' naval combat. You're not picking the right aspect of that game to get anal about.

So what you're saying is, there is no spectrum of realism, and a one-hit kill with a knife is equally as unrealistic as Ezio fighting Cthulhu with a hedge trimmer made of rainbows.

What he's saying is that to hold the game's naval combat to an expectation of realism that is not matched by other design elements that are fantastic in their own way is absurd.

Your logic is flawed in that you assume my expectations aren't matched by other elements. That is a false statement because the only expectation I stated was a non-zero level of realism, which I think is the same level of realism that the rest of the mechanics hold to.

@Example1013 said:

@Hailinel said:

@Example1013

@The_Nubster said:

@Example1013 said:

@The_Nubster: You're right, clearly the idea of a master assassin being able to kill someone with one shot or land safely in a large bale of hay is just as unrealistic as a giant ship being able to turn with the speed of a car, or the idea of 5 giant ships in a row blowing up after getting hit with rocks.

Yes. Using knives and 15th century guns as one-hit kills isn't realistic. Breaking a fall with a bale of hay is unrealistic. All of these things are unrealistic, from the jumping/climbing/science-magic to the 'arcade' naval combat. You're not picking the right aspect of that game to get anal about.

So what you're saying is, there is no spectrum of realism, and a one-hit kill with a knife is equally as unrealistic as Ezio fighting Cthulhu with a hedge trimmer made of rainbows.

What he's saying is that to hold the game's naval combat to an expectation of realism that is not matched by other design elements that are fantastic in their own way is absurd.

Your logic is flawed in that you assume my expectations aren't matched by other elements. That is a false statement because the only expectation I stated was a non-zero level of realism, which I think is the same level of realism that the rest of the mechanics hold to.

Assassin's Creed III is an action game, not a naval simulation. If it really bothers you this much, maybe you should play P.T.O. or something.

So falling hundreds of feet into a bale of hay and walking it off without a scratch is not a problem, but cannonballs causing explosions is? Get over it dude, it looked fucking awesome.

@Jazzycola said:

@Example1013 said:

Yeah ezio and altair did some pretty crazy, impossible stunts, but they never completely ignored every aspect of things like 'inertia' or 'gravity'.

So falling from a 30 story building into a haystack isn't completely ignoring 'inertia' or 'gravity'? It's dramatized for your entertainment. Who really wants to maneuver a ship around for hours to get 1 shot off? And if you really want to jump down the rabbit hole of logically nitpicking, why are you playing a video game? Logically speaking it's a complete waste of time.

Flash fact: If you actually jump off 30-story buildings into haystacks in real life, you'll emerge completely unharmed. Everybody just thinks it's completely implausible because nobody does it anymore. Who has haystacks lying around next to tall buildings anymore?

@Hailinel said:

@Example1013 said:

@Hailinel said:

@Example1013

@The_Nubster said:

@Example1013 said:

@The_Nubster: You're right, clearly the idea of a master assassin being able to kill someone with one shot or land safely in a large bale of hay is just as unrealistic as a giant ship being able to turn with the speed of a car, or the idea of 5 giant ships in a row blowing up after getting hit with rocks.

Yes. Using knives and 15th century guns as one-hit kills isn't realistic. Breaking a fall with a bale of hay is unrealistic. All of these things are unrealistic, from the jumping/climbing/science-magic to the 'arcade' naval combat. You're not picking the right aspect of that game to get anal about.

So what you're saying is, there is no spectrum of realism, and a one-hit kill with a knife is equally as unrealistic as Ezio fighting Cthulhu with a hedge trimmer made of rainbows.

What he's saying is that to hold the game's naval combat to an expectation of realism that is not matched by other design elements that are fantastic in their own way is absurd.

Your logic is flawed in that you assume my expectations aren't matched by other elements. That is a false statement because the only expectation I stated was a non-zero level of realism, which I think is the same level of realism that the rest of the mechanics hold to.

Assassin's Creed III is an action game, not a naval simulation. If it really bothers you this much, maybe you should play P.T.O. or something.

Please, build more straw men.

@Example1013: It's not a straw man to say that if you want a better simulation of naval combat that you should play a naval combat simulation.

@ahgunsillyo said:

Flash fact: If you actually jump off 30-story buildings into haystacks in real life, you'll emerge completely unharmed. Everybody just thinks it's completely implausible because nobody does it anymore. Who has haystacks lying around next to tall buildings anymore?

I totally don't believe this, but I'm bidding on 2 tons of straw and a dump truck just to be sure. Will report back with my findings in the morning.

@Hailinel: Asking for bullet drop physics in an FPS is not asking for a bullet simulator. Or I guess according to you, I should just go play a bullet simulator.

@Example1013 said:

@Hailinel: Asking for bullet drop physics in an FPS is not asking for a bullet simulator. Or I guess according to you, I should just go play a bullet simulator.

Well, you weren't asking for bullet drop physics, were you?

@Hailinel said:

@Example1013 said:

@Hailinel: Asking for bullet drop physics in an FPS is not asking for a bullet simulator. Or I guess according to you, I should just go play a bullet simulator.

Well, you weren't asking for bullet drop physics, were you?

Do you have some sort of condition or something? Serious question.

@Example1013 said:

@Hailinel said:

@Example1013 said:

@Hailinel: Asking for bullet drop physics in an FPS is not asking for a bullet simulator. Or I guess according to you, I should just go play a bullet simulator.

Well, you weren't asking for bullet drop physics, were you?

Do you have some sort of condition or something? Serious question.

This coming from the guy OCD about naval battle accuracy and the physics of ships at sea in an action game. Is this thread one elaborate troll?

So falling hundreds of feet into a bale of hay and walking it off without a scratch is not a problem, but cannonballs causing explosions is? Get over it dude, it looked fucking awesome.

Well good thing most games aren't realistic ... first time you die that's it black screen you're done because reviving corpes is just unrealistic , so is a character that's hit with a pipe in the head and torso he'll need to revice medical attention and probably have to rest for a week before getting out to explore the wasteland using crutches too ... I think you reached the point where playing videogames is not for you anymore just nitpicking stuff for the sake of nitpicking.

@Example1013: Where's your thread about the leonardo machine plowing through the Italian wilderness blowing up everything in sight?

@Hailinel said:

@Example1013 said:

@Hailinel said:

@Example1013 said:

@Hailinel: Asking for bullet drop physics in an FPS is not asking for a bullet simulator. Or I guess according to you, I should just go play a bullet simulator.

Well, you weren't asking for bullet drop physics, were you?

Do you have some sort of condition or something? Serious question.

This coming from the guy OCD about naval battle accuracy and the physics of ships at sea in an action game. Is this thread one elaborate troll?

I don't know, I'd figure there has to be something wrong if you can't figure out what an analogy is.

@Vinny_Says: If it was in Brotherhood or Revelations then I wouldn't have seen it. I didn't play either of them.

@Example1013 said:

Please, build more straw men.

From Wikipedia: "To "attack a straw man" is to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by replacing it with a superficially similar yet unequivalent proposition (the "straw man"), and refuting it, without ever having actually refuted the original position."

So I said. . .

"Yes. Using knives and 15th century guns as one-hit kills isn't realistic. Breaking a fall with a bale of hay is unrealistic. All of these things are unrealistic, from the jumping/climbing/science-magic to the 'arcade' naval combat. You're not picking the right aspect of that game to get anal about."

To which you responded,

So what you're saying is, there is no spectrum of realism, and a one-hit kill with a knife is equally as unrealistic as Ezio fighting Cthulhu with a hedge trimmer made of rainbows.

Now correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that you "replac[ed] [my statement] with a superficially similar yet unequivalent proposition, and refut[ed] it." And Hailinel is building straw men?

I don't know what the OP is on about. The animatic the OP is referring to (open cow pastures) is going to be far from how the game actually plays (past AC cutscenes and current AC III gameplay footage). It is well known that 'open fields' we're the products of Native American and probably colonial hunting tactics and it was not uncommon to find open territory in PA and MA near major cities for example. I will say one thing though being from CT myself...I don't really get the whole 'cliffs on the water' thing as shown in the 7 min footage. There aren't really any cliffs like that until you wind up further North like in the Maine area. CT shoreline is pretty flat and up to Boston I believe its pretty much the same...but Ubisoft is a French company so I don't expect them to have made a plot for plot recall of the entire North East territory.

Second, this is a video game. Since when did video games or movies become near-reality simulations? This isn't Microsoft Naval Simulator 2000, and even if it was you can bet it will still be unrealistic because it's a video game.

Sorry I don't mean to come out guns blazing but as a writer and editor, I constantly deal with people who are against a fictional story because they claim it was unbelievable. If it weren't fictional then they might be right, but this is fiction and this is a video game. Naturally it won't adhere to the rules of realism.

So annoyed at Ubisoft right now. Where are the smoke signals and nascent casinos?

Whatever. It looked gorgeous. Seemed fun. Why not? I mean, you were best buds with Da Vinci... who also made all of your fucking weapons and stuff.

@Jace: I like you.

@Example1013: Exploding cannon shells are not completely out of the realm of possibility. Ever heard of something called the carcass?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carcass_(projectile)

@RollingZeppelin: Oh, you mean like a grenade?

@nixatron said:

So ships exploding because they got hit by cannon balls killed it for you because that is were you stop believing in it? not the whole dude hops in machine to view his ancestors memories thing? or the balls of magic that have unlimited power? or the weird god alien things? You might as well complain about how he cant possibly climb those buildings because there is no way a human being can hold on to ledges that small while you're at it.

hahah, nice, I approve of this comment

@Commisar123 said:

I thought the bigger issue was the fact that it was a pretty turret sequence.

A turret sequence where you have control over movement is not a turret sequence.

Realism.

Gratuitous explosions? In a video game?

HAS THE WORLD GONE MAD?

@Chavtheworld said:

@Commisar123 said:

I thought the bigger issue was the fact that it was a pretty turret sequence.

A turret sequence where you have control over movement is not a turret sequence.

Okay, but how much control do you really have? At best it's heavily guided

This is madness!

@FunExplosions said:

I just graduated from History school, and can confirm that the Native Indians did have tomahawks.

Oh, the indigenous people of India? Pretty sure they did not.