Not here for that mess. I want Connor off AC series for good and I want them to stay away from America as setting. Give me China, give me Japan, give me Egypt, give me France, give me Russia.
Playing this on PC, and...omfg...Fuck this sequence 3 mission where I'm trying to sneak into a camp without being scene -_- This is splinter cell 1 frustrating trial and error shit. Probably would be done if i didn't try sabotaging the cannons also, but too many damn soldiers around.
Playing this on PC, and...omfg...Fuck this sequence 3 mission where I'm trying to sneak into a camp without being scene -_- This is splinter cell 1 frustrating trial and error shit. Probably would be done if i didn't try sabotaging the cannons also, but too many damn soldiers around.
I think Connor should be a one and done deal. He was far too nieve to be believable to the detriment of the revenge storyline. Haytham was much more interesting.
French Revolution would be cool because it was pretty nasty and it's France, a beautiful city.
You get the revolution back drop like in ACIII, but a much better/sexy setting for an AC game.
The only way I'd like to see them continue the Connor storyline is if they use a decendant during the U.S. vs. Indian wars of the 1800s. Custer is a perfect AC villian. It wouldn't work though because it would be set outside a major city.
Could the relative coherence of AC and ACII have been due largely to the presence of Patrice Désilets? This game certainly felt like it lacked any kind of director with a solid creative vision.
The last game in the series he was involved with was Brotherhood, right?
The game seems like a textbook example of what can happen when you have like half a dozen studios across the world working on one game. It's like a giant puzzle, but none of the pieces seem to fit together or feel cohesive. The naval stuff and Peg Leg side missions were great but they felt like they were just slapped on. None of it felt like it gelled together.
French Revolution would be cool because it was pretty nasty and it's France, a beautiful city.
You get the revolution back drop like in ACIII, but a much better/sexy setting for an AC game.
Up to Sequence 7, I think the game is alright but nowhere near as interesting as AC Brotherhood or AC2. The game 'feels' really iffy as well. Not being able to hide when you get seen is atrocious, I don't know who thought that was a good idea. Once someone turns red arrow even if he doesn't see you and is just going to investigate you can't hide you have to fight or run it's stupid as hell.
It feels like even though running across buildings and in the street is a bit smoother it's less predictable. In AC2 and Brotherhood I knew exactly what would make me fall down, what I would and wouldn't be able to do. In this game you sort of have to take your chances and hope your character's animation doesn't fuck up, it wasn't like that in previous entries.
I wish I could explain better what I mean about it feeling iffy. It probably doesn't help that my framerate is shit in foggy areas and there are hardly any visual options to tone down compared to previous entries.
I really wish the next game would be set during the Russian Revolution, either that or in the Soviet Union and you play as a member of the secret police or something. I'd like to play as a flat out evil character one day with a personality rather than a blank slate.
The game seems like a textbook example of what can happen when you have like half a dozen studios across the world working on one game. It's like a giant puzzle, but none of the pieces seem to fit together or feel cohesive. The naval stuff and Peg Leg side missions were great but they felt like they were just slapped on. None of it felt like it gelled together.
Yeah as flawed as AC1 was, he seemed to have a very peculiar vision about the setting and the general gamedesign, down to the controls.
I remember one interview in which Jade Raymond said the idea of "high" and "low" profile were his, of controlling the character sort of like a car, with "gas and break pedals".
I don't understand the complaint people are having that you cannot successfully hide if your pursuer has you in their line of sight and saw you dive headfirst into a haystack... I mean, in real life, you saw that guy dive into a haystack... it's not like you'll go... oh well fuck that, they became a ghost and dissapeared and walk away... you saw him dive in there and he hasn't gone anywhere else... go into that haystack and give that stack a real assforking!
It feels like even though running across buildings and in the street is a bit smoother it's less predictable. In AC2 and Brotherhood I knew exactly what would make me fall down, what I would and wouldn't be able to do. In this game you sort of have to take your chances and hope your character's animation doesn't fuck up, it wasn't like that in previous entries.
Yeah... I really don't like the new control scheme at all. The only good thing is that you can enter and leave combat more easily, but that comes at the cost of being able to lock on to a specific target. Also, I may be wrong, but you can't attack random people in this game, right?
The movement controls suffered with their "streamlining" attempts in my opinion. I felt like I had much more control over precisely what my character would do in AC and the ACII series. Sure there were a lot of mistaken jumps taken in the beginning, but I felt the controls of those games were very tight once you got used to it.
With Assassin's Creed III, I never felt like I quite got a handle on the controls even after 30 hours with it. So much of it seemed like I just had to hope the game would know what I was intending to do and that the animation wouldn't fuck up. Chances are, it would, though.
I don't understand the complaint people are having that you cannot successfully hide if your pursuer has you in their line of sight and saw you dive headfirst into a haystack... I mean, in real life, you saw that guy dive into a haystack... it's not like you'll go... oh well fuck that, they became a ghost and dissapeared and walk away... you saw him dive in there and he hasn't gone anywhere else... go into that haystack and give that stack a real assforking!
Yeah. I don't really understand this complaint either. It makes sense to me, and that part of the system is pretty easy to understand. Try to get to a spot where the line of sight is broken and then hide. I actually thought it has always been like this, but I guess I don't remember the details of the previous games.
I don't understand the complaint people are having that you cannot successfully hide if your pursuer has you in their line of sight and saw you dive headfirst into a haystack... I mean, in real life, you saw that guy dive into a haystack... it's not like you'll go... oh well fuck that, they became a ghost and dissapeared and walk away... you saw him dive in there and he hasn't gone anywhere else... go into that haystack and give that stack a real assforking!
I'm not complaining about it if the guard has already seen me and I'm running away. I'm complaining about it when the guard is simply investigating and doesn't know I'm there yet. If he hasn't acknowledged that I'm there, why can't I hide in the haystack?
I'm not complaining about it if the guard has already seen me and I'm running away. I'm complaining about it when the guard is simply investigating and doesn't know I'm there yet. If he hasn't acknowledged that I'm there, why can't I hide in the haystack?
That's also a thing, yeah. It happens more often than not in boats, where the guards see me for a millisecond while hanging off the edge, and they'll just keep looking in my direction indefinitely instead of going back after a time. :/
That's also a thing, yeah. It happens more often than not in boats, where the guards see me for a millisecond while hanging off the edge, and they'll just keep looking in my direction indefinitely instead of going back after a time. :/
This caused my full synch on one of the missions to take hours and hours.
It relied on a very specific path of killing and climbing and sometimes a guard that saw me out of the corner of his eye will just not go back to his patrol ever.
You have to focus damage on a particular part of this ship. It is mostly luck sadly and easily the worst optional objective in the game. Hope you haven't upgraded your ship's damage!
That's also a thing, yeah. It happens more often than not in boats, where the guards see me for a millisecond while hanging off the edge, and they'll just keep looking in my direction indefinitely instead of going back after a time. :/
Oh wow. This has happened to me so often. It's even happened to me in forced stealth areas. At that point, sometimes the only way is to just break out into a fight again.
That also reminds me when you're trying to infiltrate a fort and someone sees you. You can hide and it all goes back to normal except some of the soldiers start saying stuff like
"Keep your eyes open. The bastard's around here somewhere."
"Keep your eyes open. The bastard's around here somewhere."
"Keep your eyes open. The bastard's around here somewhere."
"Keep your eyes open. The bastard's around here somewhere."
"Keep your eyes open. The bastard's around here somewhere."
"Keep your eyes open. The bastard's around here somewhere."
for a good solid minute. That is pretty annoying.
"Decided to hate it?" I think most of the complaints have been documented thoroughly so far. Why do you think it's "great"?
I agree that the PC version looks and plays beautifully. It's an amazing looking game. It has great sound, cool animations, and a very well-done atmosphere that sucks you in to the world.
That's about the extend of what I feel is "great" about the game. In terms of what you actually do and see in it, it's a fucking mess.
I love Assassin's Creed games, even when I hate them.
Unlike almost all of my friends, I am mostly positive about this one.
But fuck if there aren't a lot of things about it to hate. I don't think accusing people of disliking it by implying there's a hive mind consensus and not totally legitimate complaints about things people may prioritize and have different standards for than you does anything but make you look like a dumb child.
I also have to say that some of the glitches are just adorable. Having Connor turn bald all of a sudden or fly up into the sky when you fail a mission is pretty hilarious.
I loved all the other AC games, including the first, and this was my most hyped game of the year. Too bad I have to hate it because the Gaf Hive-mind has spoken. First you ass holes make me dislike Dark Knight Rises, now this. Damn it!
I also have to say that some of the glitches are just adorable. Having Connor turn bald all of a sudden or fly up into the sky when you fail a mission is pretty hilarious.
Wow at the hate in here , I am really loving the game and setting as I am from MA so that's why I like the setting so much. Also connor is fine at least he isn't a total dick like Ezio, and I still did love Ezio btw but he was kind of an asshole.
I am thankful that these characters I play as have unlimited stamina, they can run fast forever without having to catch their breath... unlike those lazy horses when ya try to spur em
Despite all the negativity I've been hearing about it, I absolutely loved the game ... for the most part. The frame rate does suck at parts and it does have the same glitches AC typically has, but even so I'd be lying if I said I wasn't having fun playing it.
In terms of story ...:
I like Connor as a character. He's really different from Altair and Ezio, but Ezio's character still reigns supreme. Connor is super emotional, though within the context of the game, a lot of that makes sense. For the most part, I liked it.
The whole sci-fi stuff with the older Civilization is really convoluted and weird. The conclusion of Desmond's story is pretty meh. I was hoping for something better than touching a stupid orb to decide Earth's fate ... oh well.
I'm really loving the Homestead missions in this game. The characters and stories are far more enjoyable than anything in the real story, and the frontier is by far the prettiest part of the game. I'm playing the PC version, getting 60 FPS with no drops out there, and I'm just eyegasming all over the place. I'm just sprinting around whirling my tomahawk, going at my own pace so I never get frustrated when Connor decides he isn't perfectly lined up with the next tree branch and stops dead in his tracks. I've even been doing a whole lot of trading and crafting, even though I know it's almost worthless.
I'm dreading having to go back and play story missions, though. I think I'm in Sequence 8, and so far the story missions have been bearable at best. At worst they've been controller-throwingly frustrating. After a totally unacceptable number of instant-fail stealth missions, the game's new favourite trick is to make me tail NPCs with terrible pathfinding code, who'll jitter around obstacles and spin 180 degrees totally at random.
A character told me we'd be going to New York, and I thought it'd be a chance to explore a sweet new city. Not so. The game locks you into a series of missions the moment you reach the city, the first one being a slow horseride where your NPC guide completely ruins the serious tone of his monologue by mowing down about a hundred pedestrians. Then you're immediately dropped into a terrible tailing mission, then
sent to jail and forced through that whole ordeal
, and by the time you're done it's onto a new Sequence and you're back on the Homestead. And then I think there was a Desmond section right after that. What an incredibly hamfisted way of introducing a new city.
I am thankful that these characters I play as have unlimited stamina, they can run fast forever without having to catch their breath... unlike those lazy horses when ya try to spur em
Wow at the hate in here , I am really loving the game and setting as I am from MA so that's why I like the setting so much. Also connor is fine at least he isn't a total dick like Ezio, and I still did love Ezio btw but he was kind of an asshole.
I don't really get the hate for Connor, but I'm only a little more than halfway through. I mean, he's not that interesting or good, but the previous protagonists (and especially the main character of the series, Desmond) were fairly bland as well.
I don't really get the hate for Connor, but I'm only a little more than halfway through. I mean, he's not that interesting or good, but the previous protagonists (and especially the main character of the series, Desmond) were fairly bland as well.
I don't really get the hate for Connor, but I'm only a little more than halfway through. I mean, he's not that interesting or good, but the previous protagonists (and especially the main character of the series, Desmond) were fairly bland as well.
Same I am at 50% , hopefully Connor does not do something insanely dumb to make me hate him lol. Also if you reply to this and say he does please use spoiler tags!
It didn't make sense for him to really be dedicated to the Assassin ideology. It didn't really make sense for him to support the revolution or the British. It didn't make sense for him to choose to support those he did in many cases. It's like he'd just do whatever anyone asked him. I think the assassination missions, where you straight up murder some random Joe on the street, were some kind of meta commentary about Connor and his character, or lack thereof.
A character told me we'd be going to New York, and I thought it'd be a chance to explore a sweet new city. Not so. The game locks you into a series of missions the moment you reach the city, the first one being a slow horseride where your NPC guide completely ruins the serious tone of his monologue by mowing down about a hundred pedestrians. Then you're immediately dropped into a terrible tailing mission, then
sent to jail and forced through that whole ordeal
, and by the time you're done it's onto a new Sequence and you're back on the Homestead. And then I think there was a Desmond section right after that. What an incredibly hamfisted way of introducing a new city.
