Could Assassin’s Creed have benefited from a cover system

Bracken Lee-Rudolph from ITF Gaming writes: Most modern gamers have had experiences with the Ubisoft Montreal developed Assassin’s Creed franchise, and most gamers have their opinion on what made it as successful as it is, as well as what features could have been added to either improve it, or just give it that extra boost in variety. I am no exception to that, and I believe that the stealth elements of the title seemed to lack that bit of work that could have put the player right into the boots of a historical Assassin.

[Jdoki]

No, a cover system would not have benefited the game... what would have benefited the game was developers who didn't make the game progressively worse with each launch.

[ziggurcat]

you can't be serious in thinking that AC III was worse than the first one...

[morganfell]

The ability to take cover, the ability to get behind cover is more important than a cover mode.

"...or just give it that extra boost in variety"

Where is there variety in one of the most overemployed game mechanics in the history of design?

[-Gespenst-]

I think the first game was a more cohesive experience than the third. Although I suppose it had less meat on it's bones.

[Jdoki]

I preferred the setting and story from the 1st. It felt more immersive, and the story was intriguing. Obviously from a technical point of view it was much rougher than ACIII, but I could live with that (even on PS3!).

I really disliked ACIII. It no longer felt like an Assassins Creed game. I found it boring. I didn't feel like an assassin. I didn't care about the characters. I would take ACI and II over III any day.

[Eamon]

Agreed, the problem with AC3 was that it was no longer an AC game. It became about doing errands for historical figures. Some of the missions were really good but most of them were plain boring.

Not to mention, Connor's story fell flat and Connor himself was an uninteresting character.

I liked his dad much more.

[ShinMaster]

Maybe so.
But I also think it could have benefited from a 'not sticking to walls when running system' aka ANOTHER F*****G BUTTON!

[AdmiralSnake]

Most def....you're an assassin....a cover system would be great, implements new ways on killing and assassination...

[The_Klank]

They kinda half hearted a cover system in Ac3, if you stand next to an edge of a building he'll automatically stick to the wall. I could see a full blown system working quite well.

[bauer007]

short answer: yes, long answer: yes! TERRIBLE GAME

[StraightPath]

You have not even played the AC3 to call it a terrible game. The amount of content in that game is overwhelming. The beautiful and huge vistas found in the frontier is jaw dropping the gameplay mechanics are better then ever the story is excellent the characters are excellent and the new edition like navals battles could have thier own game as its so good and amazing visuals in the pacific ocean. Water effects are supreb. The soundtrack is grest. This is one of the greaest AC to date. Ac2 and Ac3 are the best. Connor is a absolute beast.

[Cyrax4]

I have beat it and it is a terrible game. The developers hold your hand during the entire game. IGN's Colin Moriarty said it best: you watch a cut scene, run to a location, watch another cutscene, and then press a couple buttons.

AC2 was amazing back in 2009. Brotherhood was OK. Revelations was meh. 1 & 3 are terrible games.

[DasTier]

Connor is definitely not "beast" he is one of the worst main characters is recent video game history (Just like Jason Brody, funny that their both Ubisoft games, maybe Lara Croft in the new Tomb Raider is going to be extremely hatable too).

*POSSIBLE SPOILERS*

His views on life a freedom are so retarded, he doesn't even listen to the assassin who trains him, Achillies! Yet he just fucks everything up causing war. The game and game world would have been much better if you played the whole game as Hatham and the Templars were successful.

[DasTier]

@Cyrax4

Weird I loved the original AC, but got bored to death of AC2. Picked up Brotherhood and hated it, but bought Revalations and loved the return to the middle eastern (well Constantinople) setting. I was also very disappointed in AC3 though The DLC had looked cool, but after seeing it is being release in episodes, no thank you.

[-Gespenst-]

Not a terrible game, but so much of the game happens in short, easy bursts. The gameplay doesn't really have a lot of depth. It's impressive to look at, but not difficult to execute.

I thought Connor was a good character though, I don't understand the hate. Most of the evaluations of him I see are just ill-informed. He's voiced really well too.

[bauer007]

Lmao Ive played it and its not even a 5/10

[WolfLeBlack]

There is actually a cover system, sort of: you can wander up to a wall and Connor will push up against. I found it quite useful, but limited.

I think a full system could work, providing it doesn't break the pacing

[SlyFamous02]

All games can benefit from a full cover system.

[shivvy24]

uncharted cover system isnt great either , its good but not great

[fredrikpedersen]

It certainly might have made the stealth a little less buggy and useless!

[Sketchy_Galore]

Given that the series has always flirted with the stealth genre if not starting out as a pure stealth game it would be nice if they put in some kind of stealth system. An actual playable combat system wouldn't be bad either.

[Cyrax4]

The AC series has one of the worst control schemes in all of gaming.

[-Gespenst-]

Cover system and crouching. Definitely. The cover system in III was alright, but it's needs so much more.

To be honest, while the AC control scheme is pretty novel, it often feels pretty awkward. It could definitely use some improvements.