People might complain about how the games lost something after Origins and that Unity was the last good AC game but after Ubisoft changes up the formula again people will bunch the newest mythology trilogy in with the "good ones" and complain about whatever comes next.
It was ALWAYS nu creed vs old creed.
When ACIII came out people complained and said that AC was dead and that the original game and Ezio trilogy gave you more freedom and was better.
To a lesser extent when IV, Freedom Cry and Rogue came out people complained about the sailing and grouped III in with the older ones and said Assassin's Creed was AC anymore and was dead and that the old ones were better.
When Unity and Syndicate came out people then moved III, IV, and Rogue into the same category as I, II, Brotherhood, and Revelations and talked about how much better they were than the Unity and Syndicate.
And ever since Origins, Odyssey and Valhalla have been out Unity and Syndicate have suddenly become "good" AC games and are considered old AssCreed now despite their flaws at the time.
The same thing is 100% going to happen with whatever comes next. This is the real Assassin's Creed cycle.
The fanbase is a bunch of hypocrites that act like the fight between nu and old asscreed is a new concept when it's literally always been a thing.
This community has always been split
And no, I'm not dispelling any legitimate grievances people have with these games individually, im just saying that this is an awful mindset because the idealogy of old vs new creed inevitably covers up any ideas or discussion that any individual game in the series had at release when the newer one comes out and so the older entry is just forgiven and thrown into the "good ol ones" list with no nuance whatsoever. It's why these games never improve.
Shittycate will never be a good game, it's set on a karl marx fever dream
The only AC games that can truly be classified as the “classic” AC games are the ones that Patrice Desilts was involved in (so AC1, 2 and Brotherhood).
IDK what the fuck you are talking about, my guy.
1 was a neat concept that stumbled in places, and the Ezio trilogy refined it to peak AC.
3 has always been considered a low point of the series, and that has never changed.
4 was fun as fuck. The assassin shit was very simplified but the sailing, story and gameplay was solid and still considered one of the best overall games.
I'm actually playing through Unity again and honestly, although the story is weak and I would consider it the peak of Ubishit open-world map icon bloat, they did a really good job at polishing the free running and assassin aspects of the game.
Syndicate was meh overall, and where the old formula truly started to show it's age.
All of the "nu" AC is garbage and where Ubisoft lost my respect. They threw in the towel and just mimicked other popular franchises instead of innovating the AC formula. Anyone who disagrees has shit taste.
My main problem with Unity, honestly, is the slowish run speed compared to the relative size of the world compared to the ones right before it.
It's cause the framework for the parkour is animation based, they had to make it slow or it would look really jarring when transitioning to the next animation. You can kinda see it when the PC makes that big jump, it looks floaty almost.
if they just ripped unity's engine out and remade 2 through revelations in it they would be regarded as the best remakes of all time.
It's annoying when going for the bloated collectables though. Especially since you had horses on the countryside in ACII and in the cities in AC Brotherhood and III but don't have them here. I honestly understand why Syndicate compromised with the grappling hook at that point, it's not something a lot of people talk about when it comes to Unity.
lmao who the fuck cares about ass creed
A shit ton of people, people want the series to go back and do the Ezio storyline right.
3 is good. Ezio is boring. And Black Flag is only for people who don't like AC anyway who only want crappy sailing with shanties
I miss arkham style combat. Tried origins and odyssey, didn't like the witcher style combat and level being more important than anything else. I played ezio's trilogy, 3 and 4, didn't enjoy sailing but 4 was alright
I found the sailing and looting to be okay but honestly the game gating it's unnecessary collectibles behind upgrading your ship unless you say fuck it buy the resource pack a bunch of times is dumb and where the grindy elements that people complain about in this series started in the first place. Something tells me that the majority of people singing black flag's praises didn't go for 100% or even all upgrades and it shows
Lol, players just want parkour through nice history setting without trannies and strong womyn
No one cares about trash sci fi
>And ever since Origins, Odyssey and Valhalla have been out Unity and Syndicate have suddenly become "good" AC
Since when? Who says? The YouTuber in your recommended page?
I was disappointed that AC2 lost the surreal, mysterious tone and stricter combat that AC1 had. I enjoyed it despite that, but this "cycle" exists even with each individual game. I stopped during Revelations because it was boring and full of filler, despite wanting to wrap up the section of AssCreed that I was invested in.
The worst part of Unity for me is the "single player MMO" shit they had going on since they were shilling co-op at the time. While the map was huge and looked nice, it was extremely repetitive arbitrary level scaling. At least in the older games, you had big dick knights with better equipment/training to justify in-game that they're tougher. In Unity it's the same 5 enemies who die in a single hit in 1 area, but can tank a dozen bullets and sword blows despite having no armor on if you go 50m to an adjacent area.
>People might complain about how the games lost something after Origins and that Unity was the last good AC game but they're retarded because the series already went to shit with 3
Fixed.
Absolutely
Unity felt like a damn tech demo. It's obvious they blew their load on the map and phoned in the actual content. For fucks sake, half the game is co-op shit that was BROKEN and no one played and guess what no one will ever play again. So great, instead of adding perhaps 15 more hours to the single player story (which is all anyone remebers AC games for) they 100% wasted it.
The story is so weak. Arno's entire impetus for becoming an assassin is the death of a literal who you spend 5 minutes with, and his killer is another litteral who you spend maybe 30 minutes with. Even the charismatic Bellic falls off the face of the planet for 2/3 of the game until showing up again randomly as a turncoat. Elise x Arno was honestly the only interesting thing the game they had going
Every other set piece is just a museum tour during critical moments of the early Revolution. And personally, I think they focused on the boring parts. The Jacobin Terror, the actual entree of the entire affair, is like 2 hours of gameplay at the very end. Which is funny because the moment Arno is freed from the Bastille in 1789 you have guillotines set up in the streets and sans culotte street battles even though that stuff was only really happening after the September Massacres. Just have him become an assassin in 1792 and perhaps wrap the story up in 1799 when Napoleon siezes power.
Such a shame too. The game is BEAUTIFUL and looks fantastic even to this day. It's in my option the greatest ever waste of a video game setting ever done not exaggerating. The 10/10 rendition of Paris deserves a 10/10 story, not the 5/10 fifteen hour wet fart we got.
I like that game forces you to use stealth, in perfectly done level you will one hut everyone