Assassin's Creed

Not at all. The guy's never dressed as a guard or implied to be so. He's at most treated as someone who could've given them away.

Edited by Ghilz on Jul 18th 2018 at 10:45:27 AM

They were not, they've been in every game since Revelations.

Really? I remember Black Flag had like, essentially random ones; and I don't remember them in Unity at all. Granted, it's been a while.

x3

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=egZq6MDYRUc

Here's the scene in question around 9:50

It is an old man, but to be fair, this never gets explained and knowing the rest of the series it is easy to write it off as 'guard'. You probably wouldn't realize its an old man unless you were looking for it. I sure didn't when replaying the franchise.

Even then, the claim of 'Don't muder the innocent, but any city guard period is corrupt and should be put down at the slighest inconvenience' has some... problems.

I agree as said above that punishing the player in most ways might be too strict, but I feel like not addressing it at all just feels like the elephant in the room. I also tend to think that most 'problems' in games are really just narrative opportunities in disguise.

"Innocent" means they won't get between you and your prey. "Any guard" upon realizing what you are, will draw weapons and attempt to enact violence on you. Stealth killing them makes killing the actual target more easy. Besides. If we What Measure Is a Mook? then the next step up is What Measure Is A Dragon and What Measure Is A Big Bad.

Though other stealth games like Dishonored specifically encourage ghost playing levels. I believe Theif did similar. Surely there's some way we could encourage players away from it? Maybe, if by encouraging total stealth (and making the mechanics more around stealth rather than 'stealth until you're caught') then the death of a guard might actually gain some weight?

I'm really more musing about things than saying 'I want x'.

I mean. It's already "when guards discover you they will draw swords and attempt violence on you". That theoretically should be enough to deter charge and swing type playstyles. But it's easy to change difficulty settings, and some people like the challenge. I think we'll just have to chalk it up to "combat gameplay is fun, but the character probably didn't actually murder this many people or this much wildlife".

The Assassins being hypocrites has always been true.

It's more or less, "Stay your hand from people who don't get in the way of the job."

We know canonically that many Assassins killed hundreds of people other than their targets. A lot of the time the "Memory Synchronization" mentions "Kill X number of guards without being detected."

• Altair gutted a random guy, not a guard.
• Ezio burned down a city of Byzantine Christians.
• Connor murdered a shit ton of British soldiers who had nothing to do with the Templars
• Edward...well, Edward is a straight up mass murderer.
• Jacob killed a random bus driver businessman

Edited by CharlesPhipps on Jul 20th 2018 at 5:01:42 AM

I'm really digging Origins museum tour feature.

That last one, Jacob... ooo what an arsehole :D

Kenway yeah... but if we stick to actual piratical history - they didn't actually do that much actual buckling or even swashing - mainly threats and boarding.

As for the museum feature - I REALLY enjoyed it. Wasn't in the mood for TV, or for actually playing, so having some form on interactive History Channel was... really zen. Here's hoping we get something similar in Odyssey. Though considering the amount of sea that may be trickier.

I wish I hadn't looked at the pictures for the Trial of Sobek. That probably would have been a fun surprise.

It's kind of apropos that Edward befriended the two of the most violent pirates. Charles Vane and Black Bart.

On the thought behind the RPG mechanics.

Interesting - multiple endings!

I think we need to see what these "choices" really do as well - is it just a few random icon changes on the map or will characters live / die?

Also that choice between Sparta and Athens - wonder how deep that'll go or if you will have to choose a side according to the plot.

Part 2: On Combat

Flavius better not be the final boss because that was super anticlimactic. I killed him while trying to find a treasure chest for crying out loud.

His boss fight is pretty good... except for the part where you can wander into it completely by accident while trying to do sidequests. That moment right there is a strong argument for at least some railroading in open world games.

I can see why some people are having a poor reaction to this - the combat isn't parry parry flow as mentioned. And it does look more... flashy. More gamey?

Still keen on it. But to continue in this vein I think would move away from AC as a stealth, open world game. Origins has a lovely balance which I hope this keeps. Because we're stumbling into Witcher 3 magic almost. Combat with special moves feels a bit weird. But maybe less button mashy or predictable.

I don't like killing the war elephants.

[delete]

Edited by CharlesPhipps on Aug 24th 2018 at 12:55:37 PM

Yeah that felt weird. And a bit cruel. I preferred the legendary warships of AC IV - they felt menacing AND challenging. The Elephants were a challenge but almost as a grind plus it was strange killing an animal as a boss.

Yeah par for the course in an ubisoft game where you slaughter your way through an endangered species list. But the elephants were a bit off.

For combat I was hoping they'd do something interesting with the AI to show proper phalanx fighting or how grouped enemies would perhaps bunch better. So far I'm still seeing the Mook Chivalry thing with the twist that they will sometimes gang up on you. But then again most games can't convey actually group combat very well. It does tend to turn into just a brawl.

It's mostly desert raiders and sailors you fight though.

[delete]

Edited by CharlesPhipps on Aug 24th 2018 at 12:55:46 PM

Cinematic trailers plus some gameplay.

Oh snits you have to fight a godsdamned gorgon?

no thank you

nope the fuck out.