@El_Galant said:

@CaptainCody said:

@Video_Game_King: Video games aren't movies, books, or television. They are video games. The interactivity of them is what makes them stale and unoriginal over time, this will be a constant from now until the end of time. It is a quantitative factor based on how many games of a kind you play.

I don't know about this. Things that are great stand the test of time regardless of what they are. I just played Shadow of the Colossus for the first time and I was very impressed on how enjoyable the game is with just a sword, a bow, a horse and just being able to grab onto a certain texture. Great execution on a simple premise with over the top bosses. The Matrix is still great to watch 13 years later...and many people keep their favorite books around so they can read them again at some point in the future. Just because the interactivity isn't updating the impact of the experience will always stay enjoyable....even if you are looking at the Sistine Chapel or the statue of David, both created by Michelangelo, they remain great works and enjoyed by millions 400+ years later....

Seems like you missed the meaning of "interactivity."

I don't think Ubisoft should be compelled to create and release games around your schedule. I have played every Assassin's Creed at release while attending college for Art and Design, working roughly twenty-five hours a week, going to the gym at least four times a week, tweeting and dating. If you don't want to play a new Assassin's Creed game every year, the solution is simple. Don't do it, or maybe wait a while before you play the newest one. If nobody wanted a new game, they wouldn't be releasing them. I totally appreciate your situation though. I don't think I'll ever play Modern Warfare 3 at this point. The problem isn't too many games. It's too many priorities. Face it dude, you're a grown-up now.

@El_Galant said:

I don't understand the need to put a game out every year for this series. I haven't even been able to play Revelations yet, I don't think we have enough time to play all these games much less get excited over another AC game within a year of each other. We have lives, work, go out, girlfriends, wives, maybe kids in some people case, family, etc...watch TV, movies, write blogs, play sports, exercise, Twitter, Facebook and play videogames. Ubisoft better rethink their strategy now before we get sick of a diluted product...and that is all I have to say.

You don't have time to play 1 game a year??

maybe all game companies should cancel all games then. ''Alright everyone we had a good run but it's time to pack up your things, there is already Assassin's Creed series, the market is saturated for the next decade.''

My issue isn't that I don't have time for a 25 hour game each year, it's that I have so many other 25 hour games each year. AC2 was the first game I platinumed on PS3, I've since switched my main focus to 360, and even though I've owned AC:B for more than 6 months I have only a few hours played. Gears 3, Skyrim, Saints Row, BF3, ME3, Journey, Borderlands, Madden, Forza 4, GTA4 have all stood in the way of me advancing AC:B, as well as DA:O, DA2, and Darksiders, which all sit on the shelf virtually untouched.

While I'm excited for AC3, I'd like to finish the other AC's first, and I'm not sure that'll happen before October of this year. Does it diminish things for me to not play a game the day it launches? I guess not, at least not single player centric games.

I'm actually kind of stoked there is only a few games I'm really looking forward to in 2012; it'll give me a chance to whittle my backlog down. Apparently I have some form/mash up of gaming OCD/ADD.

Is Fat Ezio in Splinter Cell X Metal Gear Solid?

@Dany said:

I wouldn't call the gameplay boring, it is just stacked with so many weapons and mechanics, that it becomes tedious to run around the city with 30 icons on the map. Killing people is too easy and the fail states are constrained.

Totally agree. Killing people is WAY too easy and you are constrained by the fail states.

@El_Galant said:

@JeanLuc said:

I've never heard the phrase "officially Megamans" before.

It means making more installments of the same franchise that players can either count or remember playing.

I can count and remember all the Megaman games.

How does this thread keep coming back?

@El_Galant said:

@JeanLuc said:

I've never heard the phrase "officially Megamans" before.

It means making more installments of the same franchise that players can either count or remember playing. How many AC games are there now and the franchise was started when, 5 years ago?

I thought it meant treating gamers like abused housewives by constantly backhanding them but then running back and saying "we love you, don't go away" when we threaten to tell them to fuck off.

Every time I see this thread I start reading it as "Ubisoft cancels..." It seems my brain has already decided on a meaning for the verb "Megaman", and it doesn't match up with the thread title's intended meaning.

Well i do think it hurting the franchise but there still good games. They surprised me with brotherhood since i was pegging it being just a yearly cash in but turned out really good and fix one big complaint i had with AC2 (not feeling like an assassin) and i was disappointed in revelations being it was more of the same no new story elements that was worth wild and lacking revelations considering its called revelations.My biggest problem with this is I feel the story is taking a hit by them trying to stretch it out longer and not really moving the overall story ahead. I would like to get some answers and a push to move the story ahead.

I thought "Megamanning" referred to hilariously inaccurate box art.

I'm still ok with this .

It was official back in 2010.

So does this mean we're switching the 'hate target' from Bioware to Ubisoft? Oh good!

There is nothing wrong with a yearly release as long as they are quality titles. Many people are burned from the Call of Duty franchise and that's fine. Assassins Creed has been a great series that has nearly improved on every consecutive release.

i have yet to complete ac1 or reelations but i have completed ac2 and brotherhood well i got to the very end of brotherhood but stoped playing just before demond stabs the lass...still counts.

@Mikemcn: i pre order the join or die edition of ac3 from amazon will i get still get the captain of the aquila bounes with the JOD edition?

I think it's a horribly depressing thing that this thread has gotten so many replies.

I've enjoyed all of the AC game so far (except i dont think i could go back to 1 now, lol), so I dont really mind the yearly releases. That said, Revelations felt like it was stretching that time period a little thin and some of the stuff in the game felt like a step backwards from Brotherhood. Oh, and please keep ur tower defense out of my AC games, lol.

Also:

@TooWalrus said:

@El_Galant said:

@JeanLuc said:

I've never heard the phrase "officially Megamans" before.

It means making more installments of the same franchise that players can either count or remember playing. How many AC games are there now and the franchise was started when, 5 years ago?

Or, at least that's what @El_Galant: thinks "officially Megamans" means. I'd interpret the topic title to mean that in ACIII, you fight eight elemental bosses, and steal their weapons, then use them against the other bosses which are each weak to one of those elemental weapons. Then, at the end, you have to fight them all at once- it's called a "boss rush".

HAHAHA!