Along with the Sony announcement this week, Ubisoft has some news of their very own. It seems the recent rumors involving their newest title are also true.
Interesting. Hoping they develop it for PS4, the series needs a break this gen
Ps4? I bet it is. I'm really getting bored of the series now and still need to finish ac3.
I need to but I just can't bring myself to do it Connor is so....boring and unlikable and the story is bland unlike past AC games
You're in the same boat as me. I platinumed every AC game on my PS3 including the insanely hard AC:B multiplayer trophies; however, AC3 is the exception. Connor replies with bland, boring lines and his voice is so wooden. I don't want to get AC3's Platinum trophy, not because it's hard, but because the game is so damn boring. I think the next AC is the first in the series I will miss out on. In addition, Connor looks silly. He must've been in his mid 30's at the point I'm at in the game yet he looks about 50 and if he IS 50 years old and I'm disgustingly mistaken then that is ridiculous. A 50 year old climbing buildings and free running? Sigh... Another area in AC3 I hate (probably the source of my Harris toward this game) is how the game plays itself. That's right, it's basically "PRESS R1 & GO!" Why they simplified the control scheme is beyond me. Not only did they cut out features in doing so, but they also made a boring tech demo. Moreover, Can you tell I don't like it? I'm sorry if I went on a bit but it's all true. Oh, also, don't get me started on AC3:L on the Vita, that marked the last time I support Ubisoft for selling me a broken game in nothing more than beta form. What a joke it is to see they getaway with this. I contacted Ubisoft support but they replied once with a laughable response TWICE and now they're ignoring me. I demanded a refund so now I've resorted to Amazon, the shop where I bought the game from.
No way! Connor is awesome. So is the game.
Says the guy who's name is star child... The only being that single handedly destroyed mass effect
Almost all AC's were boring, 2 is the exception. It seems alot of people can take repetition more than me
WW2 London? Could be cool, but the setting doesn't seem to have any definite enemies. London never got invaded or anything like that Personally, I would prefer 1800s London.
how long can you milk a cow for
Look to Mario for that answer.
"how long can you milk a cow for" Well, they only produce milk after giving birth. They usually 'dry up' at around 300 days afterwards. They are then usually 'bred' again, which takes about another 6 months until they give birth again, and so the cycle repeats. Dairy cows usually live approximately 7-9 years in a human controlled environment. Without human interference, maybe 15 years. ;)
I agree it has been milked, the brotherhood and revelations games have made the series feel dragged out. However I am invested in the story and it is one of few AAA sequels I will be picking up for the story. I want another game but not another clone.
I can't see combat working at all in WWII London....
This seems like way too big an event for it to just be another Connor game. It couldn't actually be ACIV could it? ACIII's only been out for like 4 months. I remember thinking how original, reserved and cool the first AC game felt, and while it wasn't perfect and warranted multiple games to be perfected and explored, I never thought it would become what it is today. Generally the games are good so I can't complain too much about milking if the quality is good. But at the same time, you need a bigger break between games. That anticipation is part of what made II so good and exciting. It's way too early to announce another Connor game, and it's WAY way too early to announce IV. Haha, unless they've had a third team working on IV for like a decade I just don't see how it couldn't be a churned out piece of crap made for a quick buck disguised as a good game. But who knows I guess...? They've gone franchise crazy on this series...
Take a year off..
But AC3 took 3 years to create. They had one team doing the sequels while another developed 3. So would that year matter???
theWB27 Yes it would matter. The problem isn't the time in which a game is developed, just how often they are released without much innovation or anything new brought to the table. For instance, CoD games take 2 years to make roughly, but there are two teams going at it, hence the yearly release cycle. Not much new is brought to the table, so people lose interest from something they were once passionate about because it originally brought something new and exciting. I do see your point though. I would want the next one to come out at the end of 2014 on next-gen consoles at the earliest, but Ubisoft have already made clear their plans on a yearly cycle. @8GB_DDR5RAM I 'agreed' with your comment before I even read it. Your name is hilarious. On a side-note though, it is 'GDDR5' RAM. DDR5 is different (and non-existent I believe).
It might end up being PS4 exclusive. Since Sony decided to put so much RAM inside of it they might not want to be held back by slow DDR3 PC RAM and whatever sad RAM M$ is going to use. Smartest bet would be to just take complete advantage of Sony's unified 8GB DDR5 memory and create the ultimate Creed.
They need to have a better character this time round to make people actually care enough to continue playing the game
I really think most current Gen franchises should end with this gen, especially this one. I want fresh new experiences, not the same boring old thing with a new coat of paint.
MAKE IT STOP FOCUS ON YOUR OSIRIS GAME, DAMMIT
Ugh, more AC?? Give us some more Watch Dogs instead...
Assasins Creed of Duty!
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.