Seems to be set in the days of Caribbean piracy- though its heyday would be before the American Revolutionary War setting of III but piracy did exist in those waters until the early 19th century. I've never played AC but I'm surprised by the rate they are coming out with them.
A big money machine Ubisoft has there. Some of those games aren't bad, even though they are basically mass produced.
Anyway, pirates are usually fun. The naval parts of ACIII were awful though. They looked decent, but it is hard to express just how much they screwed up history in order to make the battles more interesting for the kind of customer they seem to have in mind (which seem to children with an incredibly short attention spans).
To hell with Feudal Japan, ancient Greece, Egypt, the rest of Africa, Scandinavia, everything else - let's go with pirates!
Assassin's Creed 1 is still my favourite of the series, it was a bit repetitive but the environments were varied and the character didn't seem overly/unnecessarily violent like in 2 and 3.
In reality, the ONLY reason they're going with pirates is because of the introduction of naval gameplay in AC3, and they want to keep doing that, and pirates are the logical choice. While the naval gameplay in AC3 wasn't bad, it didn't feel necessary at all - multiplayer naval gameplay would have been awesome but still, Ubisoft continues to push the repetitive multiplayer they currently have.
Without spoilers, the ending to AC3 was less than satisfactory, it felt as if Ubisoft, over the course of the series, killed any logical conclusion to the "end of the world scenario" to give the player a sense of no hope - but the ending was just bad.
As much as I don't want to get this game, without knowing anything about it, I probably will.
Edit: Also, MercZ, every time you make a thread in the general gaming section I feel as if I hate the world even more...
Without spoilers, the ending to AC3 was less than satisfactory, it felt as if Ubisoft, over the course of the series, killed any logical conclusion to the "end of the world scenario" to give the player a sense of no hope - but the ending was just bad...
It's been the case for a lot of games lately. I'm starting to think that they all hire one dumbass who writes the stories of the latest installments. Or atleast they've all been to the same failed drama school.
I laugh at anonymous neg-reppers who misread my posts.
It's been the case for a lot of games lately. I'm starting to think that they all hire one dumbass who writes the stories of the latest installments. Or atleast they've all been to the same failed drama school.
Inb4 "Mass Effect 3."
I'm on the fence about this new installment, though. I was hoping for at least a two year gap between III and IV, but I guess we'll find out more about it soon. Monday, apparently.
"I have this condition where I'm really lazy." ~Toby Turner
"I mean, ugh, I don't care what people do with their bodies. It's what I want to do to their bodies that I care about." ~Schofield "Kill the weak so they can't drag the strong down to their level. This is true compassion." ~Benzir
If they can keep the story and gameplay interesting, then I have no issues with the rate the games are coming out at. I liked the naval warfare aspect of Assassin's Creed III, so I hope that made it to this game too.
I love the AC series, but I still think it might be a bit too early to release a new AC. It looks fucking badass though and I love pirates too, but it seems to be going off from what the Assassin's really are/were. The silent, invisible, invincible and discrete killer.
Can't say anything about ACIII, still don't have the hardware to make it run... Much less IV, but what the fuck, I'll get it anyway.
Still, for the first time, I agree with Schofield.
There are a lot of variables to factor in. They already have the engine made, and we don't know how easy it is for them to implement new features in it. For all we know, it could be extremely easy for them to make alterations to it, so they won't have to spend as much time on that. They may also have produced it parallel with Assassin's Creed III. It wouldn't be the first time they've done something like that.
Last edited by Serio; March 3rd, 2013 at 10:48 AM.
Reason: VARIABLES! THE VARIABLES! HOW DO THEY WORK?!
They've been developing IV for years, apparently. A different group at Ubisoft has been working on it. Can't get a source on that at the moment but it was definitely official.
"I have this condition where I'm really lazy." ~Toby Turner
"I mean, ugh, I don't care what people do with their bodies. It's what I want to do to their bodies that I care about." ~Schofield "Kill the weak so they can't drag the strong down to their level. This is true compassion." ~Benzir
That trailer is pretty good, actually. Too bad that those guys only use render material for advertisement and not as part of the game, though (that was the case for the third part anyway).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Serio
There are a lot of variables to factor in. They already have the engine made, and we don't know how easy it is for them to implement new features in it. For all we know, it could be extremely easy for them to make alterations to it, so they won't have to spend as much time on that. They may also have produced it parallel with Assassin's Creed III. It wouldn't be the first time they've done something like that.
They probably designed the ACIII engine with ACIV in mind, the idea being to get two games out of one engine upgrade. Maybe they'll add some new features though, depending on whether ACIV is coming to the new consoles or the old ones.
The best serving of video game culture, since 2001. Whether you're looking for news, reviews, walkthroughs, or the biggest collection of PC gaming files on the planet, Game Front has you covered. We also make no illusions about gaming: it's supposed to be fun. Browse gaming galleries, humor lists, and honest, short-form reporting. Game on!
4Likes
Assassin Creed IV officially announced 
I laugh at anonymous neg-reppers who misread my posts.
Linear Mode
