Assassin's Creed Revelations

I'm excited for the multiplayer. They fixed the multiplayer for Brotherhood with the extra content, especially the new game modes, and if they can have all that in there from the get go it could be great.

Wembley wrote:
imbiginjapan wrote:

I just started Super AssCreed Bros. this past weekend and I'm having a nice time with it. The plot is cuckoo though, especially having never played, or really paid attention to, the prior games. Suddenly taking control of a dude in hoodie and jeans in order to jury rig fuse boxes was... unexpected. I am intrigued by where the plan to take all the craziness.

Skipping the first one is totally fine, but if you aren't going to play AssCreed 2, you might want to at least brush up on the story of it. Brotherhood continues the story of 2 directly, so some things might get confusing otherwise.

I'm more or less just playing for the roof-walky jumpy-stabby part and letting the story slide by.

All the AC games have a fairly long period at the start before you can get to the free roaming jumpy-stabby bit. Probably the best bet would be to jump into multiplayer and mess with other people. I haven't been into multi in a while because the PC matchmaking is shaky.

Higgledy wrote:

I'm excited for the multiplayer. They fixed the multiplayer for Brotherhood with the extra content, especially the new game modes, and if they can have all that in there from the get go it could be great.

Matchmaking is still crap though. Logged on for the first time in a while this week and didn't even play because we were waiting about 10 minutes before we decided to give up.

The one saving grace for the PC version multiplayer is that you can use the steam overlay web browser to pass the matchmaking time.

Scratched wrote:

GI scans over here if you're interested in such things

I'm not entirely comfortable with that link.

wordsmythe wrote:
Scratched wrote:

GI scans over here if you're interested in such things

I'm not entirely comfortable with that link.

I took a scan of the CoC and there's nothing against such things, and I don't remember a dominant forum opinion on such things. If a boss truly feels that the link isn't appropriate, then I'll bin it.

nel e nel wrote:
Higgledy wrote:

I'm excited for the multiplayer. They fixed the multiplayer for Brotherhood with the extra content, especially the new game modes, and if they can have all that in there from the get go it could be great.

Matchmaking is still crap though. Logged on for the first time in a while this week and didn't even play because we were waiting about 10 minutes before we decided to give up.

True. The match making is incredibly odd. Sometimes, when you hit PLAY NOW, it seems determined to set you up with an unpopular game type rather than prioritising finding you a game to play. Also, letting the players pick their own teams is just asking for trouble.... and I think it's crazy to not only give experienced players more powers (which is par for the course these days) but to also give them more points for doing the same things as lower ranked players.

Perhaps I over stated it when I said it was fixed. It's better than it was :).

Scratched wrote:
wordsmythe wrote:
Scratched wrote:

GI scans over here if you're interested in such things

I'm not entirely comfortable with that link.

I took a scan of the CoC and there's nothing against such things, and I don't remember a dominant forum opinion on such things. If a boss truly feels that the link isn't appropriate, then I'll bin it.

Please do, writers gotta make a living.

-snip-

Higgledy wrote:
nel e nel wrote:
Higgledy wrote:

I'm excited for the multiplayer. They fixed the multiplayer for Brotherhood with the extra content, especially the new game modes, and if they can have all that in there from the get go it could be great.

Matchmaking is still crap though. Logged on for the first time in a while this week and didn't even play because we were waiting about 10 minutes before we decided to give up.

True. The match making is incredibly odd. Sometimes, when you hit PLAY NOW, it seems determined to set you up with an unpopular game type rather than prioritising finding you a game to play. Also, letting the players pick their own teams is just asking for trouble.... and I think it's crazy to not only give experienced players more powers (which is par for the course these days) but to also give them more points for doing the same things as lower ranked players.

Perhaps I over stated it when I said it was fixed. It's better than it was :).

I agree with everything except getting more points for more experience. Unless you are referring to the poison, which gives you more points when you kill someone with it, but it also isn't an instantaneous kill, so someone else can poach your kill while the poison takes effect, and it also takes away a slot that could be used for something with more utility (i.e. mute or smoke bomb).

Scratched wrote:
wordsmythe wrote:
Scratched wrote:

GI scans over here if you're interested in such things

I'm not entirely comfortable with that link.

I took a scan of the CoC and there's nothing against such things, and I don't remember a dominant forum opinion on such things. If a boss truly feels that the link isn't appropriate, then I'll bin it.

I thought he was making a GI=gastrointestinal joke.

GI issues aside, I recently finished the Assbro Facebook game (No, I'm not quite sure why myself). For those of you who didn't bother, the fb game tied in pretty closely with the Assbro storyline, expanding backgrounds on assassination targets, filling in the stories of various bit characters and providing a little more depth to the world. The final sequence ends rather abruptly with a member of the Assassin's receiving visions of an ominous man from China. I'm curious if that works in to Revelations at all, or if it's just some random ephemera the Assbro facebook team came up with.

Sinkwater wrote:

I agree with everything except getting more points for more experience. Unless you are referring to the poison, which gives you more points when you kill someone with it, but it also isn't an instantaneous kill, so someone else can poach your kill while the poison takes effect, and it also takes away a slot that could be used for something with more utility (i.e. mute or smoke bomb).

I was thinking of the streak bonuses i.e. x2 score for a loss streak and +750 points for a silent kill streak. It means a high level player is getting those streaks on top of his or her score while a lower level player maybe getting the same streaks but not getting the extra points. Also, the players with x2 loss streak are getting boosted up past other players who don't have access to that streak yet.

I'm having the exact same reaction to ACR as I did to ACB: a mixture of ambivalence and skepticism at a suspiciously quick turnaround for a sequel that looks like a retread for any remaining dollars—isn't Assassin's Creed supposed to be a trilogy, not stuffed with filler games?

Now a trilogy within a trilogy? Yo dawg...

On the other hand, since I did play ACB, I'm expecting the arc of this reaction to follow last year's (curiousity at over-the-top reception -> investment -> concurrence that it was worth it and even better than the preceeding game).

If nothing else, I've got full confidence that once again Ubisoft Montreal will shine a gorgeous light on another unique and unvisited setting in 1511 Constantinople.

I try to think of these as fully priced, fully featured expansion packs. That way it doesn't seem so crazy.

Since I had such a good time with Brotherhood, I have no problem with them sticking to the same formula.

Brotherhood started to wear on me towards the end, but that was caused primarily by my desire/compulsion to find and do everything. It was a great game.

I would call them filler, but I'm too busy having fun. Moaning about too many good games seems like you're looking for something to moan about. It's hardly as though Ubisoft is giving these projects to a B team of interns in the back room, they're pouring resources onto them thick.

Gravey wrote:

Now a trilogy within a trilogy? Yo dawg...

Yeah, that was my kneejerk reaction as well. I mean, 3 full games in 3 years? My suspicion is that they brainstormed all of these ideas when making AC2, but there was no way in hell they could fit them all in 1 game, so they planned this 3-within-3 from the get go.

kazooka wrote:

For those of you who didn't bother, the fb game tied in pretty closely with the Assbro storyline, expanding backgrounds on assassination targets, filling in the stories of various bit characters and providing a little more depth to the world.

I also partooketh of the FB game. Not only does it expand the universe and fill in background on some sideplayers, it also unlocks goodies in AssCreedBro and vice-versa. The other cool thing is that you actually get to play out the assassinations that you send your guild on in the main game, so you get a bit of storyline when you send off someone to kill a dignitary in Constantinople, for example. You also get to level up your assassins as well. Nothing like actually playing AssCreedBro at work when you're away from your console/PC.

I'm looking forward to it. I still haven't finished brotherhood... I'm pretty much in chapter 8 so I'm close to the end. I wouldn't say this is a day 1 purchase for me, but I've really enjoyed all of the Assassin's Creed games. Even the first one which a lot of people hated for it's repetitiveness.

Besides, if anyone needs something to blame for 3 games in 3 years... blame the consoles. They are still here and not going any time soon so they can still get away with using the same engine and just adding content. Content doesn't take nearly as long to build once you've got the engine. Not exactly a bad thing, but it doesn't really do much for pushing the envelope either.

nel e nel wrote:
Gravey wrote:

Now a trilogy within a trilogy? Yo dawg...

Yeah, that was my kneejerk reaction as well. I mean, 3 full games in 3 years? My suspicion is that they brainstormed all of these ideas when making AC2, but there was no way in hell they could fit them all in 1 game, so they planned this 3-within-3 from the get go.

The other big advantage I can see for them, and also probably why they were able to do 3 releases in 3 years, is that they didn't have to reinvent the wheel for each game. They evolved the engine as needed for each, kept the gameplay fresh enough for each, and reused assets as appropriate so they didn't need to create an entirely new game in 12 months. It just seems to make sense from many perspectives, gamers get a lot of something they like, and development costs are lower than 3 entirely new games.

Just to clarify my earlier post, I'm not actually whinging about another (most probably) great AC game. Sure after hearing about AssRev I did have the same initial reaction to hearing about AssBro, but what I mainly meant to convey was why should I be skeptical this year when Ubisoft Montreal did so well last year ("I'm expecting the arc of this reaction to follow last year's")? After all, a seemingly ad hoc trilogy within the promised trilogy is silly, but by this point the team has far and away earned our confidence.

And how often do I make "Yo dawg" jokes? Never. Give me this.

Ubisoft did it to themselves really by going AC then AC2, which naturally sets people up to expect the third release to be equivalent to AC3, and that the series was a trilogy. From searching around, they address this a bit by saying "each numbered release is a new character", but I could see that as a bit of an excuse.

Just finished AC:B this past week. Story really feels like a giant pile of WTF, but the gameplay is fun.

I'll definitely be picking up AC:R when it hits in late fall.

Trailers for trailers is a very stupid development across the medium. But I'm not sure what's to be done about it.

I will say, though, Ubisoft does good trailer. Just really exciting stuff that does the Get Me Pumped job. They have someone there who knows how to pace things in a way a lot of other companies don't. To wit:

Yeah, whoever does the Assassin's Creed trailers does a great job. I've never played one of them (just got 2), but I get excited watching the ads and have since I saw one for the first game. They just look awesome.

SpacePPoliceman wrote:

Trailers for trailers is a very stupid development across the medium. But I'm not sure what's to be done about it.

I will say, though, Ubisoft does good trailer. Just really exciting stuff that does the Get Me Pumped job. They have someone there who knows how to pace things in a way a lot of other companies don't. To wit:

I'm playing Brotherhood and that trailer comes on at the start screen if you leave it too long. I'll sometimes watch it through again even though I've seen it many times. It's so well done.