William Pansky argues the Assassin's Creed series is becoming oversaturated, do we really need another in 2011?
nope....also do we need another COD in 2011?? hmmmm....nope =)
Meh...let it come out, Ubisoft isn't forcing anyone to buy this day one. Just pretend its coming out Fall 2012 and buy it at a discounted price.
We dont need another Assassin Creed but i do love the series and games and story i dont mind another assassin creed this year
AC is one of the few Ubisoft titles that actually sale well so it's getting the COD treatment. and when times really get tough for Ubisoft expect to see Tom Clancy's Assassin Creed or Might and Magic Anno 3040!
that's not the point. the game should get 2 years of development atleast. ubi has done nothing but milk this franchise and if it keeps selling don't worry than we will get one every year till the IP is dead COD every year and AC every year for next 3-4 years or till both IP's become guitar hero last year ubi had 12 studios work on AC:BH that's being on strict time limit. take your time come out with new ideas better understand how to use the engine or make a new one see all the gaming sites praise AC games but when a COD is announced its just another fps double standards if you ask me
Milk the franchise? There has been 3 games since 2007, and each one of them were very good, and different in their own way.
really different how? the first was just a ok game so AC2 became really good and made changes that needed to be made but since than its almost the same game with new story and this would be the 4th game in 4 years do we see other big AAA titles make the same games every year? its just like COD fans to them its new every year and same goes for uall who love AC game more power to you but than don't complain about cod or any other franchise that comes out every year combat is the weakest part of this game and from the looks of it not big changes even this year i read the preview gameinformer
The first game had its problems, everyone knows that. Overall, the game was still very good. The story was good, the fighting I think is done well. The main problems in the first game were the lack of things to do, which lead to repeating all of the same types of missions, as well as leaving the animus way too often. Assassins Creed 2 fixed everything from the first game, and made everything better. There was a decent amount of customization in the game, loads of mission types, a great, and long story. Much more weapons in the game, and different ways to fight etc.. Brotherhood should not have been sold for full price, but was still a great game. It was more like an expansion from 2, which is no problem. Then of course that game added the fantastic multiplayer experience, which is like nothing else I've ever seen before. If you don't like the games, don't buy them, and don't read articles about them, simple as that. They are not milking this franchise, and i'm sure the new game will be just as good.
No, but I'd be lying if I said that I didn't want it
Same here. If Revelations improves on Brotherhood the way Brotherhood improved on Ac2.... it'll be worth buying.
nope but if they finish the plot line I'll let it slide brotherhood made me mad cause they could have not cut Assassin's creed 2 short and made it into a full game......but it also lead the plot up to it's finally so I let it slide im just getting sick of ezio
Do I need it? No but I know others who do. What I need is FF type zero. I need that game.
Soon as they Announced brotherhood I didn't want to play another AC game.
i didn't care for the first one..so no
I honestly think we do. Assassins's Creed's ezio trilogy has such great cliff hangers and such great story telling behind them that this is one franchise that pretty much NEEDS to have a new game every year to keep a bit of hype from the ending of the last one going. the year to year thing works great for assassins creed as opposed to other titles because of their structure (bear in mind im keeping Assassins creed 1 out of the picture here) lets say that ubisoft waited another year for revelations. the cliffhanger of the last game would have had double the time to die out and though the production would last twice as long the incurring loss of possible sales would not make up for it. YES we need AC each year for the fans. other games like many of the sports games and Call of Duty we DO NOT need every year though because they don't have the same KIND of fanbase that AC has been able to hold onto. now alternatively if AC revelations comes out and that is the end of EZIO then the wait can be longer because the Cliffhanger is not as much of an instant jump and more suited to a long term wait.
I agree to an extent. You're right about wanting to keep the story going while the last cliffhanger was fresh in the fan's minds, however I think waiting two years for a release wouldn't hurt the fan base any because of the powerful grasp the story has over them. They would announce it and people would automatically remember and get excited. Releasing a segment of Ezio's story each year isn't that big of a crime considering the size of Ubisoft's staff and the careful attention to detail they have projected in the past. I expect them to give this great Assassin a proper burial. Now, if AC3 came out in 2012 I would start calling foul for sure. That would be a little ridiculous.
As long as the series continues to provide FRESH gameplay, and progress a compelling story, while still delivering a quality product, they can release as many as they want, as often as they want. The bigger problem with yearly releases is games like CoD or Halo. It's a shooter. CoD doesn't have a compelling story. It's a very cookie-cutter war story, with few "oh my god" moments. All they are really doing is re-skinning it and adding a few new maps and guns. Completely unnecessary.
Needing is a very strong word. 'wanting' is more appropriate.
i love AC, Cant wait for revelations
Do we need another? No. Do we want another? Hell yes. You can complain about how they're "milking it" all you want, but the point is, they're excellent games, and they improve with each installment. So why should we be opposed to a new one?
That's right, as long as they sell, why not? Each one has been better than the last.
exactly they are excellent games which means they should stick to the plot and take there time to develop them and have a couple years in between them.....look at call of duty its year to year and it sucks
Exactly, Brotherhood was the best in the series. As long as it keeps getting better then what's the problem? People keep comparing it to CoD but after Modern Warfare the series has taken a number of sideways steps. Still great games but not particularly improving or innovating.
I never understood why people complain about a game getting released every year. If you don't want it, don't buy it. If your a fan of the series then you will probably be happy that you don't have to wait long to play another.
Need? No. Want? Yes.
I Still haven't finished the first one & haven't opened the second. I can't keep up, my backlog of games borders on outrageous (over 30 games).
In a word, yes. As one of the best storytelling franchises out there, yearly releases are totally up to par. Now if the gameplay is unchanged, Ubisoft might be shooting themselves in the foot, especially when AC3 finally hits.
I can relate to the need vs. want consensus as I really want Ubisoft to wrap this story up! If AC3 came out next year I'd call foul on Ubisoft because (and I think I have a lot of shared sentiment about this) I would want them to take as much time as they needed creating a new character and world for us to traverse through. We don't want this IP to become like Dragon Age. So go ahead Ubisoft; show us the end of Ezio's story. But I hope I don't see the big A for at least the two years.
You do realise Ubisoft is making AC3 simultaneously with ACR, thats why they have about 6 developers working on it
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.