Developer of completely and utterly mediocre franchise upset he's not get inflated scores anymore

  • 60 results
  • 1
  • 2
Avatar image for uninspiredcup
uninspiredcup

36446

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 85

User Lists: 2

#1 uninspiredcup
Member since 2013 • 36446 Posts

Remember that good on paper bad in practice monkey game that popped up for 2 seconds and disappeared?

It's everyone's fault it done badly. Indie developers do not have AAA resources and therefor, can never ever achieve high scores.

We have families and stuff, help.

Patrice Désilets insists Ancestors: The Humankind Odyssey didn't review well because critics "didn't play the game"

"So please don't take notes today as we talk, mainly because I don't know how to make a video game."

News by Vikki Blake, Contributor Updated on 1 December 2019

Former Assassin's Creed developer Patrice Désilets has hit out at reviewers of his new game Ancestors: The Humankind Odyssey, insisting some critics "didn't play the game" because of the game's mediocre aggregate score on Metacritic.

"I'm used to having bigger numbers than that, so it's the elephant in the room," Désilets told attendees of Reboot Develop Red (thanks, GI.biz), referring to the typical higher scores achieved by Assassin's Creed games. "But people expected my studio of 35 people to ship a game that is really close to Assassin's Creed, and it's just not possible. We made some harsh decisions in order to ship the game, and we wanted it to be different.

"We know for a fact that some reviewers actually didn't play the game," he added. "It is part of our industry - they have to review games, and they have 15 of them to review in one week, and sometimes they don't have time. And since Ancestors is so different, some of them went 'urgh, I don't have time for this'."

Désilets went further, suggesting some reviewers "just invented some elements" of their reviews, too, and insisted that the game's concept alone "needs an hour [...] maybe two" to be understood.

"And we know for a fact that some just invented some elements in the game - like there is no fire and you cannot ride any horses, even though one reviewer said 'oh, it wasn't that great when you ride a horse'. Yes. My people are pissed, by the way," he added. "So please don't take notes today as we talk, mainly because I don't know how to make a video game."

That said, Désilets did acknowledge that sometimes "the realities of running a games studio" triggered a disconnect between his role as a CEO of Panache and that of being a game designer.

"President, CEO, responsible for 35 families," Désilets said. "The game designer in me wants to make a decision about the quality and whatnot, and then the other guy says, 'no, no, I'm responsible for those people, and I need to make a decision that makes sure the studio doesn't shut down, and that it's good for at least two other years afterwards'... Without them, I'm not here."

Ancestors: The Humankind Odyssey is out now on PC and is slated to release on PlayStation 4 and Xbox One on 6th December, 2019.

In the Eurogamer review, Christian Donlan - who didn't mention horses, incidentally - said "Ancestors is ambitious and clunky and not much fun - and it's often quietly thought-provoking too".

Avatar image for davillain-
DaVillain-

39388

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#2  Edited By DaVillain-  Moderator
Member since 2014 • 39388 Posts

The true reason why no one didn't play it is because Ancestors: The Humankind Odyssey was an Epic exclusive to begin with you greedy fool! He shouldn't be getting all upset if Epic paid him well enough right? Well in any case, it doesn't help this game went to Epic exclusive and trust me, I would've bought the game if they didn't go EGS and so with that, I'm waiting till it hits on Steam next year. Next time, don't make a deal with the Devil and maybe everyone will play your game.

I will rarely at times buy a game day one on EGS if it's a game I want to play asap but Ancestors wasn't one of them. Ancestors does look interesting, the real Planet of the Apes.

Avatar image for Jag85
Jag85

13932

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 213

User Lists: 0

#3  Edited By Jag85
Member since 2005 • 13932 Posts

When did his games get inflated scores? The Sands of Time is one of the greatest 3D platformers. The first AC didn't get great scores to begin with. And AC2 and Brotherhood were very well-made games for their time. He had nothing to do with the later AC games, so it's not his fault that Ubisoft became so unoriginal and kept abusing the template he set with the first two AC games.

Avatar image for mrbojangles25
mrbojangles25

45029

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 0

#4 mrbojangles25
Member since 2005 • 45029 Posts

First off, no disrespect to Patrice Desilets in what I am about to say, but...

...Some people believe they deserve to be rewarded solely for creating something different.

That is not how it works. You still need to make a fun, functional, and quality product. If you can make that fun, functional, and quality product unique? Well, good for you, that's pretty awesome.

But if all you can do is make a game unique, you don't deserve praise. Also, if he is "used to seeing bigger [metacritic score] numbers" than what he got, he probably doesn't belong in independent game development.

Also it was a god damn Epic-store exclusive which just cuts your potential sales in half, right there. If you sign an exclusivity deal with the devil, you void your right to complain about sales because a.) you got paid a lump sum, and b.) you clearly only care about money, and c.) that's probably why your game didn't get well-received, because you care about the paycheck and not the craft.

Avatar image for uninspiredcup
uninspiredcup

36446

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 85

User Lists: 2

#5  Edited By uninspiredcup
Member since 2013 • 36446 Posts

@mrbojangles25 said:

First off, no disrespect to Patrice Desilets in what I am about to say, but...

...Some people believe they deserve to be rewarded solely for creating something different.

That is not how it works. You still need to make a fun, functional, and quality product. If you can make that fun, functional, and quality product unique? Well, good for you, that's pretty awesome.

But if all you can do is make a game unique, you don't deserve praise. Also, if he is "used to seeing bigger [metacritic score] numbers" than what he got, he probably doesn't belong in independent game development.

Also it was a god damn Epic-store exclusive which just cuts your potential sales in half, right there. If you sign an exclusivity deal with the devil, you void your right to complain about sales because a.) you got paid a lump sum, and b.) you clearly only care about money, and c.) that's probably why your game didn't get well-received, because you care about the paycheck and not the craft.

Truth.

Assassins Creed 2 wasn't good either, the only good part of Assassins Creed in when you are on the boat not playing Assassins Creed.

90% it too high, 80% is too high, 70% is too high.

Remove the flashy production values and Ubibucks marketing, exceedingly hot garbage.

Avatar image for mrbojangles25
mrbojangles25

45029

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 0

#6 mrbojangles25
Member since 2005 • 45029 Posts

@uninspiredcup said:
@mrbojangles25 said:

First off, no disrespect to Patrice Desilets in what I am about to say, but...

...Some people believe they deserve to be rewarded solely for creating something different.

That is not how it works. You still need to make a fun, functional, and quality product. If you can make that fun, functional, and quality product unique? Well, good for you, that's pretty awesome.

But if all you can do is make a game unique, you don't deserve praise. Also, if he is "used to seeing bigger [metacritic score] numbers" than what he got, he probably doesn't belong in independent game development.

Also it was a god damn Epic-store exclusive which just cuts your potential sales in half, right there. If you sign an exclusivity deal with the devil, you void your right to complain about sales because a.) you got paid a lump sum, and b.) you clearly only care about money, and c.) that's probably why your game didn't get well-received, because you care about the paycheck and not the craft.

Truth.

Assassins Creed 2 wasn't good either, the only good part of Assassins Creed in when you are on the boat not playing Assassins Creed.

90% it too high, 80% is too high, 70% is too high.

Remove the flashy production values and Ubibucks marketing, exceedingly hot garbage.

Indeed.

I personally enjoyed AC 1 and 2 (Ezio is a great protagonist), but the games were buggy and had terrible controls even at the time of their release. They are almost unbearable to play with today's standards (I've tried and gave up after a few hours).

Avatar image for BassMan
BassMan

11015

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 127

User Lists: 0

#7 BassMan
Member since 2002 • 11015 Posts

Ancestors doesn't look like a good game. That is why people didn't play it. Simple as that. I don't care who makes it. If it does not look good, I am not going to play it. Same shit as Kojima and Death Stranding. The only thing is Kojima has a crazy fanboy following that prevents legit reviews. So, he should be crying that he is not as popular as Kojima and that is why his game's scores are not inflated.

Avatar image for sakaixx
sakaiXx

6510

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 5

#8 sakaiXx
Member since 2013 • 6510 Posts

Even the great Kojima on gets low 80 on metacritics.

Avatar image for Juub1990
Juub1990

8880

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#9 Juub1990
Member since 2013 • 8880 Posts

@Jag85: 90% is way too high for ACII which is kind of a shitty game.

Avatar image for lamprey263
lamprey263

36290

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 0

#10 lamprey263
Member since 2006 • 36290 Posts

Well, I am sure it's a universal frustration for developers to see reviewers didn't put much time into their games, but whether that's warranted or not, some thoughtful approach of addressing this that doesn't come off as petty is probably the way to go about it.

Avatar image for i_p_daily
I_P_Daily

13551

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#11 I_P_Daily
Member since 2015 • 13551 Posts

@BassMan said:

Ancestors doesn't look like a good game. That is why people didn't play it. Simple as that. I don't care who makes it. If it does not look good, I am not going to play it. Same shit as Kojima and Death Stranding. The only thing is Kojima has a crazy fanboy following that prevents legit reviews. So, he should be crying that he is not as popular as Kojima and that is why his game's scores are not inflated.

Avatar image for vfighter
VFighter

5629

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#12 VFighter
Member since 2016 • 5629 Posts

@uninspiredcup: AC2 was actually a very good game, and it scored accordingly. Not sure why popular games get shit on by a vocal minority, guess cause it's the net and that's all the rage, but the fact that it sold extremely well and was well received by customers and reviewers is more telling then the toxicity of gamings underbelly.

Avatar image for hrt_rulz01
hrt_rulz01

19542

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#13 hrt_rulz01
Member since 2006 • 19542 Posts

@i_p_daily said:
@BassMan said:

Ancestors doesn't look like a good game. That is why people didn't play it. Simple as that. I don't care who makes it. If it does not look good, I am not going to play it. Same shit as Kojima and Death Stranding. The only thing is Kojima has a crazy fanboy following that prevents legit reviews. So, he should be crying that he is not as popular as Kojima and that is why his game's scores are not inflated.

Lol, nailed it.

Avatar image for uninspiredcup
uninspiredcup

36446

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 85

User Lists: 2

#14  Edited By uninspiredcup
Member since 2013 • 36446 Posts

@vfighter: Or, it actually is a shite game.

Avatar image for R10nu
R10nu

1547

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#15 R10nu
Member since 2006 • 1547 Posts

Nobody cares for a game based solely around monkeys that is an EGS exclusive. Who fucking knew.

Avatar image for Jag85
Jag85

13932

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 213

User Lists: 0

#16 Jag85
Member since 2005 • 13932 Posts

@Juub1990: AC2 hasn't aged very well, but it was a very well-made game for its time. It was fresh at the time, and set the template for most Ubisoft games that came after. And that's the problem. When the formula gets used and abused so much, it eventually gets boring. So if you were to go back and play AC2 today, it will just look like the same old derivative Ubisoft stuff they've been doing this past decade. But back in 2009, AC2 was fresh and fairly unique. It's not Patrice's fault that Ubisoft kept recycling his formula to the point that people got fed up of it. That says more about the creative bankruptcy of modern Ubisoft than it does about Patrice Desilets.

Avatar image for Juub1990
Juub1990

8880

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#17  Edited By Juub1990
Member since 2013 • 8880 Posts

@Jag85: It had great voice acting, graphics, soundtrack and production value. The game was bad in 2010 and is bad now. The fact it was made almost 10 years ago doesn’t excuse the utterly trashy combat, poor stealth mechanics and lack of mission variety. It might have been unique but it was a bad game then and it’s a bad game now.

Avatar image for R4gn4r0k
R4gn4r0k

32076

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#18 R4gn4r0k
Member since 2004 • 32076 Posts

I think the game looks cool bit its survival mechanics are way too harsh. For example when you get hurt or when you get hungry/thirsty.

And yes, I want to play as a monkey swinging in trees. I love Donkey Kong Country!

Avatar image for xantufrog
xantufrog

11921

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 5

#19  Edited By xantufrog  Moderator
Member since 2013 • 11921 Posts

@mrbojangles25: well said.

I like the idea of this game but 1) it just doesn't look well done and 2) it's on the worst storefront/pseudoplatform on PC so I don't actively look for games there - thus, an indie game without advertisement goes there to die, because I quickly forgot it even existed. It's not like I'll impulse buy it on sale on my "daily perusal of the EGS", lol

Avatar image for pyro1245
pyro1245

5569

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 9

User Lists: 0

#20 pyro1245
Member since 2003 • 5569 Posts

Oh yeah I remember hearing about this game.

Never saw anything else about it for whatever reason.

Avatar image for Maroxad
Maroxad

15321

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#21 Maroxad
Member since 2007 • 15321 Posts

A novel concept, but some questionable choices stopped me from getting it.

EGS exclusivity being one of them.

Avatar image for nepu7supastar7
nepu7supastar7

5348

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 51

User Lists: 0

#22  Edited By nepu7supastar7
Member since 2007 • 5348 Posts

@mrbojangles25:

"...Some people believe they deserve to be rewarded solely for creating something different. "

- Beautiful statement, right there. It also describes Kojima to a T and his hardcore following constantly praising Death Stranding. Unique or not, the game should be fun and entertain above all else.

Avatar image for Pedro
Pedro

36072

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 64

User Lists: 0

#23 Pedro
Member since 2002 • 36072 Posts

The sad reality of video games as a whole is that marketing typically holds more value than the actual game itself. If this was made by a certain company or person, the response would have been different. I have seen people spin out of control as they "objectively" try to sell a game in their review and overlook the many issues with the game purely because of the money or the personal bias behind it. If he wanted this game to succeed, he needed a almost cult like following.

Avatar image for uninspiredcup
uninspiredcup

36446

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 85

User Lists: 2

#24  Edited By uninspiredcup
Member since 2013 • 36446 Posts

@Juub1990 said:

@Jag85: It had great voice acting, graphics, soundtrack and production value. The game was bad in 2010 and is bad now. The fact it was made almost 10 years ago doesn’t excuse the utterly trashy combat, poor stealth mechanics and lack of mission variety. It might have been unique but it was a bad game then and it’s a bad game now.

Agreed. Can go back and play other Ubisoft games like Rayman 1/2/3, or Splinter Cell 3. Brilliant games.

Assassins Creed is like a tumour that spread to other parts of it's body duplicating shitty, shallow open-world games ensuring a gravy-train of green-bank notes built on a foundation of mediocrity.

Ubisoft use to be a fantastic company, now its largely shit, most of it's IP's barring Rayman have been defecated on. That's probably because they couldn't think up a way to turn Rayman into a shitty open-world game with huge grind-walls solely existing to try frustrate the player.

Splinter Cell will be getting that treatment, no doubt. They actually done good with Blacklist and backtracked on their mouth-dribbling action-man direction, but it sold like shit, and we know how Ubisoft operates.

Avatar image for vfighter
VFighter

5629

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#25 VFighter
Member since 2016 • 5629 Posts

@Juub1990: Bad to you, sure we all dislike good things. But no matter your view on it AC2 was a great game when it came out, the combat was probably its weakest area, but it was still fun just not very deep. It got all kinds of praise from both critics and gamers for the simple fact that it was a good game, period.

Avatar image for Juub1990
Juub1990

8880

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#26  Edited By Juub1990
Member since 2013 • 8880 Posts

@vfighter: It was always terrible. The fact you gotta use time as an excuse to explain its mediocrity is telling. ALTTP was released in 1992 and is still good to this day. Chrono Trigger is from 1995 and is still good. Ninja Gaiden Black is from 2004 and still terrific. Why should AC2 get a pass?

It getting all kinds of praise is something I don't give a **** about. Pretty much everyone agrees it's a mediocre to bad game these days and why is that? Quality isn't supposed to age when technology is a non-factor. Movies from the 1920's are still good in 2019.

"Gameplay aging poorly" Yeah I don't buy that for one second.

Avatar image for jg4xchamp
jg4xchamp

61860

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 14

User Lists: 0

#27 jg4xchamp
Member since 2006 • 61860 Posts

Assassins Creed was never good at any point. Typical triple A game with bad gameplay getting by in atmosphere n production value n shit

Avatar image for Pedro
Pedro

36072

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 64

User Lists: 0

#28 Pedro
Member since 2002 • 36072 Posts

@Juub1990: I live in a world where I have to wait years or even decades for people to realize some of the highly praised games in the past were actually mediocre or shitty. Then these folks try to convince me that it was different back then. No! It wasn't. It was shit back then, just that people were wowed by other factors that glossed over the shitiness.

Avatar image for Macutchi
Macutchi

6969

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#29 Macutchi
Member since 2007 • 6969 Posts
@uninspiredcup said:

They actually done good with Blacklist

Avatar image for uninspiredcup
uninspiredcup

36446

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 85

User Lists: 2

#30  Edited By uninspiredcup
Member since 2013 • 36446 Posts

@Macutchi said:
@uninspiredcup said:

They actually done good with Blacklist

The caveat being, i'm mostly talking about the side-objects and COOP on harder difficulty. Some really solidly paced map design with multiple ways to approach objectives rewarding pure stealth and experimentation with gadgets, coupled with enemy/objective placement changing to add replay value and stop you simply memorising routes to cheese it. Can easily spent upwards of 20-30 hours in that shit.

I'd put it above (next-gen) Double Agent and Convinction by a wide margin. Still has problems..

The controls compared to the frankly, perfect originals are still garbage ice-skating, and it still uses that garbage on/off lighting system the incremental combination of light/speed/sound.

It also has dumb-ass unlocks because this is a modern game and plebs needs rewarded for the simple act of playing.

The main campaign has a better story than mah-daughter, but it uses checkpoints and has too many linear action sequences.

Sam Fisher himself in this is also ass, he was introvert, but had a coy sense of humour, in some cases straight up breaking the fourth wall. Here he is generic military jargon mumbo jumbo, not as bad as Convictions generic revenge man, just bland.

I do like the stuff they lifted from Mass Effect where you have a base and get to select missions, it's a nice idea mostly implemented well.

Step in the right direction, which wasn't really something i'd expect at all given how Ubisoft work. And given it's poor sales (most likely due to people expecting it to be like Conviction), we can kiss bye-bye to that.

Avatar image for vfighter
VFighter

5629

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#31 VFighter
Member since 2016 • 5629 Posts

@Juub1990: Except I didn't say it aged poorly or that it was good for its time, its just a good game period. Learn to read before replying please.

Avatar image for Juub1990
Juub1990

8880

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#32 Juub1990
Member since 2013 • 8880 Posts

@vfighter:

>It was a great game when it came out.

In the damn past tense. Maybe you should learn to write before typing?

Avatar image for vfighter
VFighter

5629

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#33  Edited By VFighter
Member since 2016 • 5629 Posts

@Juub1990: In context to people saying it sucked when "it first came out", dear Lord do I really need to explain this?!?

Avatar image for Juub1990
Juub1990

8880

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#34 Juub1990
Member since 2013 • 8880 Posts
@vfighter said:

@Juub1990: In context to people saying it sucked when "it first came out", dear Lord do I really need to explain this?!?

You replied to my post stating it sucked then and still sucks now. The only argument you've made is that "it was good when it came out". You never spoke of it in the present tense. Besides that, you can't fucking tell me this game holds up well to this day because it absolutely does not. While idiots may have had nothing to compare it to at the time and were deluded it was a great game, nowadays it is hopelessly outclassed even in the things it did well for its time.

Avatar image for Macutchi
Macutchi

6969

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#35 Macutchi
Member since 2007 • 6969 Posts

@uninspiredcup said:
@Macutchi said:
@uninspiredcup said:

They actually done good with Blacklist

The caveat being, i'm mostly talking about the side-objects and COOP on harder difficulty. Some really solidly paced map design with multiple ways to approach objectives rewarding pure stealth and experimentation with gadgets, coupled with enemy/objective placement changing to add replay value and stop you simply memorising routes to cheese it. Can easily spent upwards of 20-30 hours in that shit.

I'd put it above (next-gen) Double Agent and Convinction by a wide margin. Still has problems..

The controls compared to the frankly, perfect originals are still garbage ice-skating, and it still uses that garbage on/off lighting system the incremental combination of light/speed/sound.

It also has dumb-ass unlocks because this is a modern game and plebs needs rewarded for the simple act of playing.

The main campaign has a better story than mah-daughter, but it uses checkpoints and has too many linear action sequences.

Sam Fisher himself in this is also ass, he was introvert, but had a coy sense of humour, in some cases straight up breaking the fourth wall. Here he is generic military jargon mumbo jumbo, not as bad as Convictions generic revenge man, just bland.

I do like the stuff they lifted from Mass Effect where you have a base and get to select missions, it's a nice idea mostly implemented well.

Step in the right direction, which wasn't really something i'd expect at all given how Ubisoft work. And given it's poor sales (most likely due to people expecting it to be like Conviction), we can kiss bye-bye to that.

i did try blacklist again on higher difficulty after the last time you said this and still didn't get it lol.

yes the gameplay may have been a bit more nuanced than conviction's ultra simple kill all the things can't even hide bodies with the enemies all sounding straight out of the cobra kai from karate kid formula. but it shouldn't get praise just because of that. it's still a staggering regression from chaos theory.

blacklist just swapped out one set of problems for another, with its invisible walls, no interrogations, ironsideless personality-lite sam fisher and his merry band of cheesy stereotypes, painful forced actions sequences, blatant mass effect rip off inbetween mission bit lifted, shifted and shoehorned in so you're forced to buy your own essential gear (because top secret agents working for us government have to buy their own shit), can't recollect sticky cams, no map, hold x to hack, dogs and drones and all the other crap i can't remember.

we'll have to agree to disagree :)

Avatar image for Jag85
Jag85

13932

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 213

User Lists: 0

#36 Jag85
Member since 2005 • 13932 Posts

@Juub1990: I didn't say the gameplay was great, but that it was well-made and quite unique for its time. The open-world stealth/assassination gameplay wasn't something we had seen in games before. AC also had "Batman Arkham" style combat years before Batman Arkham. And the Animus story concept wasn't something we had seen in video games before either, or even in movies for that matter.

But ultimately, the gameplay was like a jack-of-all-trades, master-of-none. The combat and platforming were dumbed-down compared to Prince of Persia, and the stealth elements were dumbed-down compared to MGS and Splinter Cell. But it's not like the gameplay in other open-world games were any better at the time. Open-world games had pretty low gameplay standards at the time, like the trash gameplay of GTA4. For all its faults, I'd much rather prefer AC2 over GTA4.

Avatar image for vfighter
VFighter

5629

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#37 VFighter
Member since 2016 • 5629 Posts

@Juub1990: The game holds up well to this day because it was a good game to start with, you can have your opinion and that's fine, but dont let that get in the way of reality and facts.

Avatar image for Juub1990
Juub1990

8880

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#38 Juub1990
Member since 2013 • 8880 Posts

@Jag85 said:

@Juub1990: I didn't say the gameplay was great, but that it was well-made and quite unique for its time. The open-world stealth/assassination gameplay wasn't something we had seen in games before. AC also had "Batman Arkham" style combat years before Batman Arkham. And the Animus story concept wasn't something we had seen in video games before either, or even in movies for that matter.

But ultimately, the gameplay was like a jack-of-all-trades, master-of-none. The combat and platforming were dumbed-down compared to Prince of Persia, and the stealth elements were dumbed-down compared to MGS and Splinter Cell. But it's not like the gameplay in other open-world games were any better at the time. Open-world games had pretty low gameplay standards at the time, like the trash gameplay of GTA4. For all its faults, I'd much rather prefer AC2 over GTA4.

GTA IV is also gutter trash. Arkham Asylum was released in 2009 so not sure what you mean by "Arkham style combat years before Arkham".

@vfighter said:

@Juub1990: The game holds up well to this day because it was a good game to start with, you can have your opinion and that's fine, but dont let that get in the way of reality and facts.

Bullshit it does. There's absolutely nothing redeeming about it in this day and age because everything it had going for it was bested a million times over and it sure as hell isn't the combat, stealth or parkour that would make it a good game today. It's a bad game and doesn't hold up well AT ALL these days. Lol at facts. Learn to write kid.

Avatar image for Jag85
Jag85

13932

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 213

User Lists: 0

#39 Jag85
Member since 2005 • 13932 Posts
@Juub1990 said:

GTA IV is also gutter trash. Arkham Asylum was released in 2009 so not sure what you mean by "Arkham style combat years before Arkham".

The first AC released in 2007, two years before Arkham.

Avatar image for Juub1990
Juub1990

8880

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#40 Juub1990
Member since 2013 • 8880 Posts

@Jag85: And the combat is markedly different from Arkham so again not sure what you mean by "Arkham style combat".

Avatar image for uninspiredcup
uninspiredcup

36446

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 85

User Lists: 2

#41  Edited By uninspiredcup
Member since 2013 • 36446 Posts

@Macutchi said:
@uninspiredcup said:
@Macutchi said:
@uninspiredcup said:

They actually done good with Blacklist

The caveat being, i'm mostly talking about the side-objects and COOP on harder difficulty. Some really solidly paced map design with multiple ways to approach objectives rewarding pure stealth and experimentation with gadgets, coupled with enemy/objective placement changing to add replay value and stop you simply memorising routes to cheese it. Can easily spent upwards of 20-30 hours in that shit.

I'd put it above (next-gen) Double Agent and Convinction by a wide margin. Still has problems..

The controls compared to the frankly, perfect originals are still garbage ice-skating, and it still uses that garbage on/off lighting system the incremental combination of light/speed/sound.

It also has dumb-ass unlocks because this is a modern game and plebs needs rewarded for the simple act of playing.

The main campaign has a better story than mah-daughter, but it uses checkpoints and has too many linear action sequences.

Sam Fisher himself in this is also ass, he was introvert, but had a coy sense of humour, in some cases straight up breaking the fourth wall. Here he is generic military jargon mumbo jumbo, not as bad as Convictions generic revenge man, just bland.

I do like the stuff they lifted from Mass Effect where you have a base and get to select missions, it's a nice idea mostly implemented well.

Step in the right direction, which wasn't really something i'd expect at all given how Ubisoft work. And given it's poor sales (most likely due to people expecting it to be like Conviction), we can kiss bye-bye to that.

i did try blacklist again on higher difficulty after the last time you said this and still didn't get it lol.

yes the gameplay may have been a bit more nuanced than conviction's ultra simple kill all the things can't even hide bodies with the enemies all sounding straight out of the cobra kai from karate kid formula. but it shouldn't get praise just because of that. it's still a staggering regression from chaos theory.

blacklist just swapped out one set of problems for another, with its invisible walls, no interrogations, ironsideless personality-lite sam fisher and his merry band of cheesy stereotypes, painful forced actions sequences, blatant mass effect rip off inbetween mission bit lifted, shifted and shoehorned in so you're forced to buy your own essential gear (because top secret agents working for us government have to buy their own shit), can't recollect sticky cams, no map, hold x to hack, dogs and drones and all the other crap i can't remember.

we'll have to agree to disagree :)

Blacklist if I recall correctly actually has more gadget options than Splinter Cell 3, most of them useful unlike Double Agents.

Loading Video...

The drone itself acts as outside stick-cam and the player has a gas gun, which acts as a pacifist option, mines as well if I recall correctly.

One of the things I liked as well is how that is used heavies and snipers to cancel out a lot of the usual tactics forcing you to think about the approach more than the bog standard enemies. In some regards it made the maps more engaging even the original Splinter Cell games as those hardly ever had a spanner thrown in the works barring a few missions where a timer would suddenly pop up or a fire-fight would break out.

That created it's own problem of Sam on a world trip, where the exact same enemies where in different countries, which makes no sense.

I do agree as mentioned about the pointless grind crap, the player should be given all equipment from the start in Splinter Cell, Ghost Recon, Rainbow 6 etc... but Ubisoft are a bunch of cocks who chase whatever trend gets them green, they have absolutely no respect for the brands they present.

I would have preferred proper hacking as well, it acted as both a story-telling mechanic as well as a gameplay one where it immersed you in the world that little bit more.

The problem with that though, the side-missions change placement, they are designed for repeated playthroughs with very easy fail states, I don't think the typical hacking style would mesh well with Blacklist, only really the main campaign, which isn't great.

Can pick up bodies and hide them in Blacklist btw.

Loading Video...

Forgot to mention that dumb-ass lens flair as well, with no option to turn it off. Donno what the **** they were thinking.

Avatar image for Jag85
Jag85

13932

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 213

User Lists: 0

#42 Jag85
Member since 2005 • 13932 Posts

@Juub1990: The combat systems of both AC and Arkham are dumbed-down versions of the Prince of Persia combat system.

Avatar image for watercrack445
watercrack445

2103

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

#43 watercrack445
Member since 2017 • 2103 Posts

Should've done something else while he had a chance.

Avatar image for Macutchi
Macutchi

6969

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#44 Macutchi
Member since 2007 • 6969 Posts

@uninspiredcup said:
@Macutchi said:

i did try blacklist again on higher difficulty after the last time you said this and still didn't get it lol.

yes the gameplay may have been a bit more nuanced than conviction's ultra simple kill all the things can't even hide bodies with the enemies all sounding straight out of the cobra kai from karate kid formula. but it shouldn't get praise just because of that. it's still a staggering regression from chaos theory.

blacklist just swapped out one set of problems for another, with its invisible walls, no interrogations, ironsideless personality-lite sam fisher and his merry band of cheesy stereotypes, painful forced actions sequences, blatant mass effect rip off inbetween mission bit lifted, shifted and shoehorned in so you're forced to buy your own essential gear (because top secret agents working for us government have to buy their own shit), can't recollect sticky cams, no map, hold x to hack, dogs and drones and all the other crap i can't remember.

we'll have to agree to disagree :)

Blacklist if I recall correctly actually has more gadget options than Splinter Cell 3, most of them useful unlike Double Agents.

Loading Video...

The drone itself acts as outside stick-cam and the player has a gas gun, which acts as a pacifist option, mines as well if I recall correctly.

One of the things I liked as well is how that is used heavies and snipers to cancel out a lot of the usual tactics forcing you to think about the approach more than the bog standard enemies. In some regards it made the maps more engaging even the original Splinter Cell games as those hardly ever had a spanner thrown in the works barring a few missions where a timer would suddenly pop up or a fire-fight would break out.

That created it's own problem of Sam on a world trip, where the exact same enemies where in different countries, which makes no sense.

I do agree as mentioned about the pointless grind crap, the player should be given all equipment from the start in Splinter Cell, Ghost Recon, Rainbow 6 etc... but Ubisoft are a bunch of cocks who chase whatever trend gets them green, they have absolutely no respect for the brands they present.

I would have preferred proper hacking as well, it acted as both a story-telling mechanic as well as a gameplay one where it immersed you in the world that little bit more.

The problem with that though, the side-missions change placement, they are designed for repeated playthroughs with very easy fail states, I don't think the typical hacking style would mesh well with Blacklist, only really the main campaign, which isn't great.

Can pick up bodies and hide them in Blacklist btw.

Loading Video...

Forgot to mention that dumb-ass lens flair as well, with no option to turn it off. Donno what the **** they were thinking.

yeah this is what you did last time. silkily written, compelling arguments. makes me doubt myself and give it another go. i'm not falling for it again though ;)

btw i was talking about conviction when i said you couldn't move bodies.

and yeah the gadgets were pretty useful. it's not totally devoid of quality, i just remember it for the iffy bits, not the good bits. the drone was quite fun, and the switch to first person view at the end was pretty well done iirc. but i wasn't a fan of the big tank enemies; snipers i can live with, but heavies, dogs and (enemy) drones are some of my most loathed types to battle.

i am basing my view entirely on the sp campaign so if there was some quality outside of that then i would have missed it tbf

Avatar image for uninspiredcup
uninspiredcup

36446

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 85

User Lists: 2

#45  Edited By uninspiredcup
Member since 2013 • 36446 Posts

@Macutchi said:
@uninspiredcup said:
@Macutchi said:

i did try blacklist again on higher difficulty after the last time you said this and still didn't get it lol.

yes the gameplay may have been a bit more nuanced than conviction's ultra simple kill all the things can't even hide bodies with the enemies all sounding straight out of the cobra kai from karate kid formula. but it shouldn't get praise just because of that. it's still a staggering regression from chaos theory.

blacklist just swapped out one set of problems for another, with its invisible walls, no interrogations, ironsideless personality-lite sam fisher and his merry band of cheesy stereotypes, painful forced actions sequences, blatant mass effect rip off inbetween mission bit lifted, shifted and shoehorned in so you're forced to buy your own essential gear (because top secret agents working for us government have to buy their own shit), can't recollect sticky cams, no map, hold x to hack, dogs and drones and all the other crap i can't remember.

we'll have to agree to disagree :)

Blacklist if I recall correctly actually has more gadget options than Splinter Cell 3, most of them useful unlike Double Agents.

Loading Video...

The drone itself acts as outside stick-cam and the player has a gas gun, which acts as a pacifist option, mines as well if I recall correctly.

One of the things I liked as well is how that is used heavies and snipers to cancel out a lot of the usual tactics forcing you to think about the approach more than the bog standard enemies. In some regards it made the maps more engaging even the original Splinter Cell games as those hardly ever had a spanner thrown in the works barring a few missions where a timer would suddenly pop up or a fire-fight would break out.

That created it's own problem of Sam on a world trip, where the exact same enemies where in different countries, which makes no sense.

I do agree as mentioned about the pointless grind crap, the player should be given all equipment from the start in Splinter Cell, Ghost Recon, Rainbow 6 etc... but Ubisoft are a bunch of cocks who chase whatever trend gets them green, they have absolutely no respect for the brands they present.

I would have preferred proper hacking as well, it acted as both a story-telling mechanic as well as a gameplay one where it immersed you in the world that little bit more.

The problem with that though, the side-missions change placement, they are designed for repeated playthroughs with very easy fail states, I don't think the typical hacking style would mesh well with Blacklist, only really the main campaign, which isn't great.

Can pick up bodies and hide them in Blacklist btw.

Loading Video...

Forgot to mention that dumb-ass lens flair as well, with no option to turn it off. Donno what the **** they were thinking.

yeah this is what you did last time. silkily written, compelling arguments. makes me doubt myself and give it another go. i'm not falling for it again though ;)

btw i was talking about conviction when i said you couldn't move bodies.

and yeah the gadgets were pretty useful. it's not totally devoid of quality, i just remember it for the iffy bits, not the good bits. the drone was quite fun, and the switch to first person view at the end was pretty well done iirc. but i wasn't a fan of the big tank enemies; snipers i can live with, but heavies, dogs and (enemy) drones are some of my most loathed types to battle.

i am basing my view entirely on the sp campaign so if there was some quality outside of that then i would have missed it tbf

Main campaign mostly agree, it's shite.

Double Agent Xbox/GC was the last "good" campaign. And most assholes haven't played it, let alone be aware of it's existence. Ubisoft will remaster a billion garbage Assassin Creed titles but happily leave that to be forgotten.

Such a frustrating company, they can objectively make great games, but largely opt towards trash.

Avatar image for Litchie
Litchie

24827

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 12

User Lists: 0

#46 Litchie
Member since 2003 • 24827 Posts

@uninspiredcup said:

Such a frustrating company, they can objectively make great games, but largely opt towards trash.

Agreed 100%. Would be nice if they gave us something else than copy/paste open world trash games once in a while. I'm just worried that a company who don't care about anything else will loose the good employees who created their good games, and be left with a company who simply don't know how to do anything else than open world trash games. I've seen it happen to other studios, and it's possible it's currently happening to Ubi, considering they're slowly turning all their games into the same game.

They are more than welcome to prove me wrong by making another great Rayman game, or release Beyond Good & Evil 2 and not have it be a sci fi version of Assassin's Creed, or make another Prince of Persia or something. Or, god forbid, something new and original.

Ubisoft was once one of my favourite developers. Their current state is just sad as hell.

Avatar image for Jag85
Jag85

13932

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 213

User Lists: 0

#47 Jag85
Member since 2005 • 13932 Posts

@uninspiredcup said:

Such a frustrating company, they can objectively make great games, but largely opt towards trash.

When was the last time that Ubisoft made a great game?

Avatar image for jg4xchamp
jg4xchamp

61860

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 14

User Lists: 0

#48  Edited By jg4xchamp
Member since 2006 • 61860 Posts

@Jag85: rainbow six siege.

Avatar image for uninspiredcup
uninspiredcup

36446

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 85

User Lists: 2

#49  Edited By uninspiredcup
Member since 2013 • 36446 Posts

@Jag85 said:
@uninspiredcup said:

Such a frustrating company, they can objectively make great games, but largely opt towards trash.

When was the last time that Ubisoft made a great game?

The last unequivocally great game I played was Rayman Legends.

I can't really comment on Rainbow Six Siege, the monetization put me off it.

Blacklist is partially great for reasons discussed above.

Avatar image for vfighter
VFighter

5629

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#50  Edited By VFighter
Member since 2016 • 5629 Posts

@Juub1990: So that's your argument, because other games have "bested" it then it can no longer be a good game, bwahahahaha, what an incredibly stupid notion.

Hey did you hear Sonic the Hedgehog sucks because they've made better platformers since then, oh and SMB on the nes, pure ass now that we have better games. That line of reasoning is beyond weak, here though I'll be fair, give this another shot, if you throw enough shit at the wall something is bound to stick.