Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
Thanks, Crist. That is actually a perfect way to describe how I felt about this game: beautiful disaster. It's like meeting a really attractive person, but then on the first date you find out they have multiple personality disorder and are generally really boring on the inside, haha.
I know! Everyone was unrelatable! I don't care about what Connor is doing, or the Templars, or the old man. The voice acting wasn't the worse I ever heard (Skyrim wins), but it definitely was not good either. This makes it much harder to care about the characters when they have bad lines to read from and don't emote them convincingly enough. To be fair, maybe I should take into account that Ubisoft is "annualizing" AC so they have to pump a game out every year, so maybe that's why this game had potential but is ultimately left unpolished and felt "not done" yet. But then again, maybe you should stop annualizing a game series if you can't deliver a quality product on time.
1).....
The only things that disappointed me were mostly the result of glitches and bad counter detection.
1) If you were to die amid a big fight, you'd think that it'd just plop you back at the start, instead it generally plopped you in a place where most of the fight was done, as if by dying it's placed you to the next checkpoint.
2) I was looking forward to the Haytham fight, when it finally came time to throw down with him, it was going to be one of the climatic fights. You learn quickly on in the fight how to defeat, him just counter near an object, simples! Maybe not the greatest use of my combat prowess but hey, he's spouting some dialogue whilst we fight so why not. Just counter by a- oh, that counter didn't register, okay, just counte- what? Erm, coun- are you serious? To the point I died, maybe three times. It would just not allow me to counter him. Then, thanks to glitch 1, after one reattempt, I kicked him through one barrel and I was done.
I was gutted, ruining one of the climatic fights basically meant my playthrough was destined to leave me wanting. Figured I at least had Charles Lee to face. Oh. A chase. Then I just. Oh. Okay.
I look forward to Black Flag. Maybe they've ironed out some of the quirks of the new movement/combat systems. Naval combat was at least not as dull as defending a base in Revelations, so doing that in a pirate capacity might be swish.
AC1 had the most repetetive gameplay. From AC2 on, they got it more or less right. They throw in new ideas with every part, some work, some don't. So, some stay (naval battle), some go away (tower defense).
Likewise with the difficulty: many complain that these games are too easy, but I still have to find a critic that tried and accomplished a 100% run (preferably with the complete HUD turned off). The synchronization and HUD mods ARE the difficulty settings, but everyone seems so obsessed with a "primitive" menu entry for the difficulty and seems to fail to notice that a variable setting as this has certain advantages over a static setting.
And I still think that "Don't you remember your uncle? It's-a me, Mario!" is a huge tip of the hat to the very simple, but great controls of Super Mario, and a quite straightforward "hint" as to what kind of a game AC wants to be. Has anyone ever complained about Marios battle techniques? ;)
AC1 to AC2.3 to me were lacking in storytelling. One of the few franchises where I longed for more cutscenes. Leo was cool, but I still remember the cutscenes for new inventions being the same every time. AC2.1 to 2.3 had good charactarization, owing hugely to Ezios charme.
I love AC for its recreation of the "historical" cities alone. I like to explore these excellently designed sandboxes so much that the rest of the game becomes almost secondary. When I started playing AC2.3 and came to Constantinopel, having unveiled nothing of the map yet, I at once wanted to find and climb the Hagia Sofia.
I was sceptic of AC3 at first ("shabby" Boston seemed such a letdown at first after roaming the italian Rennaisance), but got sucked in rather quickly (the wilderness did it for me).
As to your (negative) points, Axsun:
> 1) God-awful Story and Dialogue
Quite contrary I find the dialogue one of the best of the series, owing to the maaany cutscenes.
The story was always bonkers, but I never felt that the series took itself seriously (I will so miss Shauns entries ;)). I at least give it credit for trying to "explain" the game controls with the Animus setting (yes, that stuff that almost nobody likes. ;))
Btw "showing" a dialogue is not "telling"...
> 2) 34 Hour Prologue and Tutorials
I sincerely hope that there's a comma missing between numbers. ;)
The pacing is indeed very slow; one can like it or despise it. Since the main game has at least as much content as any of its predecessors, I took that as a bonus. More lore. ;)
So the pace of the story doesn't bother me at all. I like it that they took this risk of alienating fans, a slow game with an introvertive character (after Ezio).
The pacing of the gameplay seems much more of a problem, but I will judge when I have finished sequence 8 to 12.
As for still getting tutorials well into the game... I like games that continually introduce new aspects over those were you get everything at the beginning and that's it for the rest of the game (no surprises, please?).
3) Sum of the Parts Suck to Make a Terrible Whole ... The game feels so schizophrenic.
Can't argue with that. There's a strange mixture. For me it works. For you, it unfortunately doesn't.
But how does Connor expose himself in the naval missions? I don't think anyone on the enemy ships will be able to tell anyone or even recognize facial features at this distance. And if there's a crowd at sea watching you (like in the cities), it must be a bug. Apart from on the ships I didn't see a soul on this ocean...
4) interface & menu
Interface, maps and all seem fairly simple.
The menus are indeed needlessly confusing, sometimes feeling like matryoshka cyberdolls. I still haven't figured out how to level my assassins.
> "but the producers really lack the focus they need to make this a tightly packed game."
A game where you can lose yourself in cities and wilderness, wander and explore for hours on end... needs to be tightly packed. Hm. Maybe AC doesn't wnat to be so tight? ;)
> This game series can truly be great if they say "NO" to some features and just hone in on a few things that makes the game fun to play.
Isn't that what they've been trying so far from AC2.1 on? A work in progress...
God, don't get me started about the getting randomly spotted. Sometimes I'm 5 feet in front of a guard and they don't care. But sometimes I'm 3 roofs away and he starts shooting at me. WTF.
Yeah, I was lucky enough to not have any technical glitches, but I have heard that a lot of people had issues and can't play.
Speaking of this, anyone else find it ridiculous and non-sensical that if you buy AC3 on Steam you still have to start and log into Uplay to (not) enjoy the game? Two layers of DRM protection, Ubisoft? Really?
1) Yeah, it's little things like that that makes me peeved. These are little details that should have been ironed out before release.
2) You brought up a good point. I like the combat system to fight minions, but the boss fights aren't that much more different. They need to tweak the combat system to have a special quirk when fighting bosses to make it different than fighting minions.
I am still kind of surprised they made a full pirate game out of AC. The game just didn't feel like it would go in that direction. How did we go from secret societies of the Templars to Pirates of the Carribean? I guess I will just treat AC as the "mindless popcorn flick" equivalent to movies now. Don't worry about the plot or purpose and just enjoy watching things explode.
Really? You liked the dialogue? Well, I mean, to each his own. But you can just sense the inexperience writer that's not confident in his words. And when I said "showing" I meant this: showing two person talking about something is not showing. That's telling.
If Connor is suspicious about something, have a scene where there is NO talking but Connor stalking someone and seeing them hand notes or looking around sneakily. That will SHOW us that Connor is suspicious and why he is like that. The game usually just has characters talking and talking about confusing things. It's confusing because we never see any of that stuff they're talking about. AC3 had too much "telling" about events and not enough "showing." I do agree that more cut scenes and flashbacks might have helped. That's how movies do it, and AC3 is trying to be a movie. So it should try to be a good movie at least.
I wasn't a fan of the game, but it's perfectly fine that you disagree with me on my points. I appreciate the civil discourse we're having. But reading your critique of my critiques made me understand why you disagree with me so much. It sounds like you're playing and evaluating AC3 like a video game for fun and pleasure.
Now before everyone yells at me and say "uh it IS a game, you idiot", let me me clarify. You play it as a game much like maybe Super Mario Bros. or Frogger, where the point is to just have fun with the gameplay mechanics. I played it like an interactive movie that contains gameplay elements. Judging by the production values and the ambitious storytelling goals in AC3, I think Ubisoft was going for that interactive cinematic adventure. If it's going for that, then I have valid comments about cohesion and narrative and points of views. If this was purely just a video game where I run around and kill people, then this game has surpassed all my expectations. But that's the problem because it was trying to be a this huge cinematic story with emotions and continuity. That's when my points above are valid and the game has failed to bring together all those elements like story and pacing that a typical film has to adhere to.