Like Clockwork, There's More Assassin’s Creed Next Year

  • 170 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
#151 Posted by President_Barackbar (3415 posts) -

@TPoppaPuff: Woah woah woah, no need to fly of the handle here. I'm not saying COD would be better if it was longer. I think that the recent AC games have a really good campaign length which is boosted by a lot of fun things to do on the side. If you don't agree, that's fine, but don't put words in my mouth.

#152 Edited by P_Albatross (4 posts) -

@TPoppaPuff: 'At least in Call of Duty the characters and storyline changes from year to year.' Except MW3 is somehow managing to drag out the same tedious 'Cold War' storyline that COD4 started years and years ago, along with all the same characters. I assume you're referring to the fact that they decided to squeeze two more games in between the Modern Warfare trilogy that were entirely unrelated story wise yet pretty much the same thing in every other sense.

'The campaign is brisk and doesn't overstay it's welcome.' Yes, in the sense that no-one really buys any Modern Warfare/Call of Duty games solely for the single player anymore. It might as well not be there.

'The coop modes offered change from year to year.' Fair enough, this much is true and the co-op modes have been consistently good.

'The multiplayer is addicting, long lasting and among the best in it's genre.' And Assassin's Creed has 'interesting-but-flawed multiplayer that doesn't have the legs to last longer than a month at most.' Opinion is a wonderful thing isn't it? I logged a lot of time into Brotherhood's multiplayer and though it was a little buggy at times it was still enormous fun (in my opinion).

'Assassin's Creed 2-3 is the same as last year and the year before that.' Sooo, like Call of Duty then, really? As you put it so well: 'Same character's, same setting, same gameplay...' I forget which series you were talking about but it fits them both so well it doesn't really matter.

Never mind, your recent post is even more illogical than the one I've just dissected. The main campaign in Brotherhood was a perfectly good length and there was plenty of other stuff to do as well. You're comparing the single player modes of Brotherhood and any Call of Duty/Modern Warfare game (already pointless) and then complaining that AC:B was too short?! As said below, you're welcome to have your opinions but at least back them up with genuine issues.

#153 Posted by Kyle (2323 posts) -

I DID NOT EXPECT THIS AT ALL!

#154 Posted by ImperiousRix (2963 posts) -

I assumed as much. I figured Ezio's story would be wrapped up with Revelations, but that the series would live on to an ultimate conclusion through a few more games.

I just hope it does "end" and end satisfyingly at some point. I'd hate to have one of my favorite series of this generation devolve to a point where it lacks enjoyment.

#155 Posted by kingzetta (4307 posts) -

#3

#156 Edited by TPoppaPuff (237 posts) -

@P_Albatross: Some of your statements make little sense. Except the very fact that it hasn't been the exact same characters three consecutive years in back to back to back games like AC2. Yeah they started out "years and years ago" but this is third game released for these characters in just over four years rather than the third game released in just over two years. And given I haven't played MW3 yet, but most people wouldn't consider their half-terrorism-oriented-turned-conspiracy-oriented-but-having-little-to-do-with-the 'Cold War' storyline dragged out at all. I have to think that the majority of people find the storyline more convoluted and entangled than anything; and you can't do that if your dragging the story out. The only way the story can get overly complicated is if you keep progressing the storyline at such a fast pace or over a much longer extended period of storytelling and they managed to make it convoluted before the second game even finished. Hardly seems dragged out to me.

And don't get me wrong, I like AC MP. Well, more accurately; I like the concept of AC's multiplayer. It's refreshing and unique. The problem with it is that are design flaws that have yet to have been fixed as far as I can tell from the beta, some mechanics are still wonky and janky, and there's just no incentive to keep playing. Now sure, you don't need a whole bunch of unlocks to keep everyone playing if your gameplay is polished and addicting enough, but ACR's doesn't seem to be at all, much like ACB's. Maybe its the console's not being strong enough to truly create the atmosphere necessary to make it work. Maybe the ideas themselves need a slower paced game to truly be realized but in doin so will simply alienate too many players. Maybe it's just Ubisoft themselves not being great at competitive multiplayer design and game development to really pull the concept off. Maybe it's all of the above. Who knows? But I do know the mp, while fun for a short time or as a novel distraction, it is flawed in it's execution and is not nearly as polished as it needs to be to have a substantial following. Sure it has a niche audience that will stick with it, but I ask you this: if there was another game from another developer that offered the same hunter-prey/crowd dynamic that AC MP offers, would people still be playing AC MP over the other? Maybe, but probably not.

"You're comparing the single player modes of Brotherhood and any Call of Duty/Modern Warfare game (already pointless) and then complaining that AC:B was too short?! As said below, you're welcome to have your opinions but at least back them up with genuine issues." Now you're putting words in my mouth and acting asinine. I never compared the single playeer campaigns themselves; that would be silly. I compared the value of the products and their content as a whole. I consider value in full price purchases a legitimate issue; clearly you do not. A single player game only has the value of the length of that campaign unless there are several different variations and changes that can offer a new experience to the user on following playthroughs. Neither title offers that. Now the value of a multiplayer game depends on a number of factors like playerbase but mostly centers around amount of content and quality of gameplay. As much as haters love to hate, CoD's gunplay is very good and the game is always incentivizing you to keep playing. AC MP? Again, would the multiplayer even have a playerbase if it had competition? And nowhere in any of my posts did I claim ACB was too short. You're just making shit up. But as a content comparison, ACB is much lighter than MW, WAW, MW2, BO, and MW3 and likely not worth the $60 price tag it was released with unless your obsessed with the AC storyline or the uniqueness to the multiplayer.

#157 Posted by Tylea002 (2295 posts) -

Well, yes, I'd expect the -final- AC next year. It's 2012. Matches up with all the crazy stuff in the game. Personally, even if revelations is good, I think all it'll do is make people less excited for AC 3 (which I hope they call it). But I do want to see it in 2012 - but end the series there, for a while, ubisoft.

#158 Posted by probablytuna (3524 posts) -

Yeah I kinda expected there to be another Assassin's Creed game next year, quite possibly Assassin's Creed III judging by how the present setting is in 2012.

#159 Posted by danKRANE (11 posts) -

I expected AC3 to come next year anyway but man do I hope they give the series a breather after that for a bit. Just to give the game time for people to miss it so there will be some anticipation with the following one as well as giving them time to really get out of the box with the following game.

#160 Posted by P_Albatross (4 posts) -

@TPoppaPuff: Well fair enough, I see your points. In which case it just comes down to the fact that you like COD more than Assassin's Creed... which is fine. But I don't think that any Assassin's Creed game (excluding maybe the original AC) has been light on content. And like I said, I played lots of the multiplayer and finding games was an issue at awkward times but apart from that it was fine and if you could look past a few lag issues and bugs it was really fun.

I wasn't trying to put words in your mouth, that's simply what I thought you were saying. I'm not sure you're giving the AC single player stories credit, they aren't short in any way. You could play through the main story in a couple of rentals but that's like saying that Elder Scrolls is low on content because I could rent that twice and finish the main story. There's lots of other stuff to do which should appeal to anyone who buys the game.

'But as a content comparison, ACB is much lighter than MW, WAW, MW2, BO, and MW3 and likely not worth the $60 price tag it was released with unless your obsessed with the AC storyline or the uniqueness to the multiplayer.' But you could say that for all the MW and COD games! If you're not obsessed with the multiplayer then they're woefully short on any content! That's true for pretty much any game nowadays. Your argument (if I'm correct, not putting words in your mouth) is that because AC:B's multiplayer wasn't polished and bug-free like COD/MW it doesn't count. Well, ok, there's a fair point in there. I still enjoyed it, and I enjoyed the single player so I definitely got my £40 out of the game.

#161 Posted by NTM (7234 posts) -

Wait, what's with all this AC: Brotherhood hate and Revelations doubt? Every time an Assassin's Creed game comes out, it gets better and better. I don't find them perfect because of a few ways they present progression, especially near the end of Brotherhood where it just skips ahead in memory, but nonetheless I found it to be fantastic experience.

#162 Posted by deskp (444 posts) -

Ooh and it should feature a new assassin aswell Big Smile

#163 Posted by MYCAELIS93 (27 posts) -

great game to kick back and chill with, so i have no problem with this franchise going a few more games

#164 Posted by Soap (3560 posts) -

It better be Assassins Creed 3 and set in modern times with Desmond or so help them!

#165 Posted by slyely (154 posts) -

I am ok with this as long as they keep a good storyline going and AC3 brings some innovation to the series. But, I am starting to get a little burnt on the story of Ezio. If they want to tell the story of one assassin then they should keep the max of two games, then switch.

#166 Edited by Peanut (953 posts) -

Burned out on AC before I even finished 2, but I pushed through. Brotherhood was impossible for me to play much of. I think I'm done until the AC game where Desmond is running around in modern times stabbing people in the face.

#167 Posted by Death_Unicorn (2838 posts) -

I'm already burnt out. Not getting Revelations, probably not getting this next one unless they do something shockingly new, which is unlikely.

#168 Posted by LiquidPrince (15833 posts) -

Obviously... Assassin's Creed 3, 2012... Works together in perfect harmony.

#169 Posted by Man_Of_Asher (8 posts) -

Before this one even comes out........

#170 Posted by Dixavd (1291 posts) -

This is hardly news, we have known that AC3 would come out as the finale of Desmond's story in 2012 in relation to the alternate reality in the games. Ezio and Altiar's lives end in Revelations, and then Desmond's comes to a close in 3 for the predated December 2012 end of the world talked about in the games. They said they would do this since the announcement of Brotherhood - and it is hardly that of the Call of Duty franchise yet, as they are definitely improving on each game so far - although it could become that depending on what they do after AC3 with different characters.

They have had the story written since 1999 (which you can check by seeing the copyright in the credits of every game) so up-to the end of AC3 they have mapped out.

#171 Posted by m0nty (164 posts) -

@Dixavd said:

This is hardly news, we have known that AC3 would come out as the finale of Desmond's story in 2012 in relation to the alternate reality in the games. Ezio and Altiar's lives end in Revelations, and then Desmond's comes to a close in 3 for the predated December 2012 end of the world talked about in the games. They said they would do this since the announcement of Brotherhood - and it is hardly that of the Call of Duty franchise yet, as they are definitely improving on each game so far - although it could become that depending on what they do after AC3 with different characters.

They have had the story written since 1999 (which you can check by seeing the copyright in the credits of every game) so up-to the end of AC3 they have mapped out.

I hope you mean their stories end otherwise that's a big Homer Simpson Star Wars moment I really don't appreciate pal. It's a 50/50 bet that they actually die in this game but you shouldn't have to read about it two days after it comes out.

#172 Posted by sreya92 (193 posts) -

Finally, I haven't played Brotherhood or Revel. because I didn't feel they contributed enough to the story to be worth $60, which, combined with the combat makes for a very fun game so I'm glad they're finally coming out with the real ACIII.

Hopefully they'll have the integrity to finish the story and leave a good series be remembered for a good series and not turn it into a spin-off fest like Kingdom Hearts has become or turn it into an annual CoD/EASports thing. I'm convinced we'll never get to see what happens in the 3rd true installment.

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.