Assassin's Creed: Origins

[mohit9206]

It doesn't bother me obviously. Why are you getting angry?
 
Have i shamed anyone or abused anyone? No.
 
Its just an opinion bro. Take it,leave it or Shove it.
 
No need to get your panties wet. Chill.

Did you mention panties? [emoji160]

[Heaven Angel]

Not satin panties @mohit9206 

 

_

 

 

[mohit9206]

Dunno about camel but the horse moves and looks like shite. RDR did it better years ago

Sent from my ONE E1003 using Tapatalk

Its a low effort game made by low effort developers . Its the same thing being painted as something different. Don't see what's worth excited over.

[Heaven Angel]

You just described 90% of the games these days. 

 

Excited for a new setting, new story, better gameplay, etc. What else you want from an Assassin's Creed game? Cars and flights? yo-yo-hombre stuff? 

 

Thank you for your valuable insights though.

[HEMAN]

Bashing a game before its released without even playing it. People really need to stop giving opinions about games unless they played it themselves and completed it 100%. 

[Sach4life]

8 hours ago, mohit9206 said:

Its a low effort game made by low effort developers . Its the same thing being painted as something different. Don't see what's worth excited over.

 

Feels nice to hear things like these from people ,who know absolutely nothing about game development, about games hundreds of people work on, before the game has released.

Edited September 5, 2017 by Sach4life

[Sach4life]

8 hours ago, mohit9206 said:

 

 

Double post

Edited September 5, 2017 by Sach4life

[WhiteWolf]

They have made lot of changes to tm gameplay . Nothing about this game says low effort.  

Edited September 5, 2017 by WhiteWolf

[Sach4life]

5 minutes ago, adity said:

They take effort but I wouldn't go so far as to say that Ubisoft is doing some high quality sh*t with Assassin's Creed.
Salman Khan movies take a lot of money and a lot of people work on them. But, they're still sh*t.
I dunno about this game but most Ubisoft games have been low effort titles.

Sent from my ONE E1003 using Tapatalk
 

 

Couldn't disagree more. Regardless of how samey or boring Ubisoft games feel, to call them low effort is extremely wrong. Unity was boring and i couldn't play it for long, but i would never call it a low effort game. Having same gameplay mechanics doesnt make it a low effort game. There are lots of other things in games than just gameplay. There is a huge difference between filmmaking and game development. 

Edited September 5, 2017 by Sach4life

[Star Lord]

Hating on a game even before its release is so cool man!

[DinJo]

Somehow this game is creating hype of AC3 but the dull voice acting is reminding of disastrous boring gameplay of AC3 as well

[mohit9206]

 

I've always enjoyed Assassin’s Creed games mostly for story and characters and this game clearly lacks that so fun gameplay isn't going to suffice.

The developers have sacrificed story for apparently better gameplay while developers like Rockstar and Naughty Dog don't have to sacrifice one to make the other part better.

 

 

[Heaven Angel]

Ubi is no ND or Rockstar and not a pinch of CDPR in them. These guys cannot be compared with them, lol. 

 

But if there will be no downgrade in final release then they have done a fine job here. Still not a day 1 material tho. 

[Heaven Angel]

Ubisoft has made some of the most amazing games of all time. Just because some things have changed, doesn't mean they are not good or low effort developer. 

 

They are the only developer that is taking a risk in this market and always coming up with new ideas, even if they fail, they keep trying. 

 

From E3 alone:

• Mario + Rabbids: Mushroom Kingdom turn based strategy game
• The Crew 2: Racing game with cars, boats, planes
• Transference: Interesting and different looking VR game
• Skull and Bones: Naval combat
• Starlink: Space shooter
• Far Cry 5: FPS
• South Park TFBW: Cartoony RPG
• Just Dance 2018: Party game
• BG&E2: Third person action game

Yeah, wake me up when someone else is making a variety of good games. Low effort is the last thing you can call them. 

 

As for Assassin's Creed: Origins, so far it is shaping up great. They have corrected and changed so much for better. But hey, continue bashing without playing. 

[ALPHA17]

3 hours ago, Joe Cool said:

Yeah, wake me up when someone else is making a variety of good games. Low effort is the last thing you can call them. 

 

 

Variety is not quality and does not equate to quality. 

 

Also, most of Ubisoft titles have the same basic open world with game mechanics altered to fit the theme. 

 

The Ubi ART stuff is the only stuff you can call "different", rest is just industry standards in different skins. 

[WhiteWolf]

7 hours ago, Joe Cool said:

Ubisoft has made some of the most amazing games of all time. Just because some things have changed, doesn't mean they are not good or low effort developer. 

 

They are the only developer that is taking a risk in this market and always coming up with new ideas, even if they fail, they keep trying. 

 

From E3 alone:

• Mario + Rabbids: Mushroom Kingdom turn based strategy game
• The Crew 2: Racing game with cars, boats, planes
• Transference: Interesting and different looking VR game
• Skull and Bones: Naval combat
• Starlink: Space shooter
• Far Cry 5: FPS
• South Park TFBW: Cartoony RPG
• Just Dance 2018: Party game
• BG&E2: Third person action game

Yeah, wake me up when someone else is making a variety of good games. Low effort is the last thing you can call them. 

 

As for Assassin's Creed: Origins, so far it is shaping up great. They have corrected and changed so much for better. But hey, continue bashing without playing. 

They take lot of risks. No publishers will fund game like For Honor and BG & E2...

 

[Ethan_Hunt]

3 hours ago, ALPHA17 said:

Variety is not quality and does not equate to quality. 

 

It does mean a developer is open to accepting new franchises, taking risk and not being afraid to experiment with their capabilities. 

 

Quote

Also, most of Ubisoft titles have the same basic open world with game mechanics altered to fit the theme. 

 

Which game doesn't? The whole market is flooded with games which more or less have the common open world mechanics/elements. It's a genre that's been saturated to a great extent. Take Grand Theft Auto for example, since Rockstar was being put on a pedestal. They have pretty much stuck to the same gameplay formula for their flagship franchise with some minor changes in their subsequent iterations.  

 

Ubisoft is probably one of the most versatile developers present right now. We can't deny the vast array of popularity that most of their IPs have garnered. 

[ALPHA17]

39 minutes ago, Ethan_Hunt said:

It does mean a developer is open to accepting new franchises, taking risk and not being afraid to experiment with their capabilities. 

 

Which game doesn't? The whole market is flooded with games which more or less have the common open world mechanics/elements. It's a genre that's been saturated to a great extent. Take Grand Theft Auto for example, since Rockstar was being put on a pedestal. They have pretty much stuck to the same gameplay formula for their flagship franchise with some minor changes in their subsequent iterations.  

 

Ubisoft is probably one of the most versatile developers present right now. We can't deny the vast array of popularity that most of their IPs have garnered. 

1

 

Ubisoft is the publisher as well, not just the developer. 

 

The company does not make take a whole lot of risks, that is like saying Activision takes a whole lot of risk by releasing a new CoD every year from a different developer. Or that EA takes a whole lot of risk when releasing big budget titles like Battlefront, BattleField or The Sims. 

 

Every game has to adhere to some basic tenants of their genre, shooters gotta shoot etc. Problem is that if you look at half of Ubisoft's current portfolio it is about a third-person perspective open-world-sand-box game. With thematic appropriate game mechanics /systems. 

 

Assassin's Creed -- Third person open-world stab-a-thon with the same mechanics that the first game showed us in 2007 

Watch_Dogs -- Third person open-world GTA clone with the same basic mechanics as Assassin's Creed now in modern day so you have guns and h4xx but why bother with hacking because guns are easier (Watch_Dogs 2 fixed this but then sold like piss too) 

The Division -- Third person open-world looter-shooter which I still dunno what they were trying to do after that amazing E3 reveal 

The Crew -- Third person racing-thing with towers to unlock local area missions? Buy the DLC-expansion to fix all these issues. Got to see how Crew 2 turns out 

South Park -- Obsidian did the last game with ThQ being the initial backer. Now Ubisoft is making the follow on internally without input from the show creators or Obsidian. I wish that this one does not turn to some generic franchise that gets regurgitated every couple years 

Far Cry 5 -- Sixth instalment in the franchise with what looks like another set piece change, just like Far Cry 4 and Primal before it

 

I think my point is made. Go back 10 years, Ubisoft had a far more diverse library, they did RTS, RPG, first person combat titles and a lot of campy B-grade stuff but it was well worth it

 

There are various studios /publishers /studio-publishers that have run the gauntlet of diversifying their portfolio and if you think Ubisoft is one of them cool, I do not think so. They have a couple of interesting ideas like Skull and Bones coming up but looking at how things went with For Honor, do not hold your breath. 

Edited September 6, 2017 by ALPHA17

[Heaven Angel]

So? How does it change the fact that Ubisoft takes more risk compared to other publishers/developers?

 

Assassin's Creed -- Third person open-world stab-a-thon with the same mechanics that the first game showed us in 2007

 

Yeah. No. The core part is always going to be around assassin but they have changed and added over the years. It's nothing like 2007.

 

Watch_Dogs -- Third person open-world GTA clone with the same basic mechanics as Assassin's Creed now in modern day so you have guns and h4xx but why bother with hacking because guns are easier (Watch_Dogs 2 fixed this but then sold like piss too)

 

That can be applied to 90% of the open world games. Why bother hacking because guns are easier is like saying - Hitman game - why to bother going stealth when you can just shoot your way out.  

 

The Division -- Third person open-world looter-shooter which I still dunno what they were trying to do after that amazing E3 reveal

 

The game is still supported and been receiving updates & content. 

 

The Crew -- Third person racing-thing with towers to unlock local area missions? Buy the DLC-expansion to fix all these issues. Got to see how Crew 2 turns out

 

Except it's nothing like that. What are you even talking? 

 

South Park -- Obsidian did the last game with ThQ being the initial backer. Now Ubisoft is making the follow on internally without input from the show creators or Obsidian. I wish that this one does not turn to some generic franchise that gets regurgitated every couple years

 

So far every preview has been positive. Time will tell how it is. 

 

Far Cry 5 -- Sixth instalment in the franchise with what looks like another set piece change, just like Far Cry 4 and Primal before it

 

Far Cry 4 was very much same like Far Cry 3. But Primal was a completely different game. Just because they are open world and have few same elements doesn't make it bad. They have also fixed the issues and added multiple content to make the experience a lot better. 

 

Plus, not sure how they are supposed to change Far Cry or Assasisn's Creed series. The core is always going to remain the same. They can only change the setting.

 

GTA games have always been open world and it's always the same thing. Hitman games are always same go here, kill X as you like, complete the mission. All FPS games are same. 

Pretty much every franchise has been following the same, but since this is Ubisoft, we gotta bash them.

 

Funny you forgot Rainbow Six Siege, Steep, Far Honor, Mario + Rabbids, Grow Up, TrackMania 2, ANNO, etc. All these were also released in last 2 years. 

 

So much for no diversity. 

[WhiteWolf]

Quote

I think my point is made. Go back 10 years, Ubisoft had a far more diverse library, they did RTS, RPG, first person combat titles and a lot of campy B-grade stuff but it was well worth it

Things are different now.. Game development is way more expensive now. Ubisoft open world formula works and they will keep making these type of games as long as people keep buying them. Ghost Recon and AC games are million sellers. People like you and Mohit are in extreme minority..If they started making games which you and Mohit likes they will go bankrupt..Your type games don't make money anymore..It's a fact that you can't deny.

 

Same goes for games like Destiny and COD..Activision will keep milking these games as long as people like Heaven  keep buying them dayone

 

 

 

And how can u ignore games like R6 and For Honor. Not many devs will make R6 or For Honor style game..

 

 

 

Ubisoft is very special publisher...Industry needs Ubisoft more than Acivision and all.. SC,AC, GR nd all are my all time favourite games

 

 

 

 

 

Edited September 6, 2017 by WhiteWolf