[Multi-Console] Reasons why assassin's creed syndicate will be a success

[tyltyl]

Every year ubisoft comes out with a new assassin's creed. Having our hopes up at times and letting us down. Well I have several reasons why this particular one shouldn't disappoint.

1. HISTORY: Every Assassin's creed game that debuts with new dynamics, new controls, or a different engine always flops. AC1, AC3, and Unity anyone? but the games that came after ended up being the best out of the franchise. AC2 and AC Black flag. This is due to learning experience and customer feedback.

2. PERFECTION: This game will have no multiplayer or co-op. This for me is a good thing. They've spent all their time and resources perfecting single player. The most refined games in the franchise have been the success. I've always thought of that as being better. As for multi-players... it should be bitter sweet. The staff has learned from it's mistakes and has made sure these mistakes have been corrected.

3. FUN: The use of the rope launcher and other tools that will be used quite a bit should be quite entertaining. Gamers have forgotten what makes a great game. It isn't innovation, not so much the story. it's about having fun and enjoying it. Faster game play, gaining territory, with a new time period it should be good.

4. SETTING: Trains, electricity, and other inventions changes everything. Interaction with these will be new and fresh to the player. It isn't just different. The other time periods were considered medieval. Now we're playing in a modern setting. It should be more relatable to most people.

5. PROTAGONISTS: The worst games or the biggest disappointments featured assassin's with dull-like personalities. Altair, Connor, and Arno weren't all that relatable and made players lose interest. Where as the most successful titles featured assassin's that were less dull, Ezio (charismatic), Edward (ambitious), and Shay (conflicted). Jacob Frye was described as being brash and reckless. Evie was described as being very strategical and decisive.

6. MISSIONS/MEMORIES: Being able to switch throughout the story from Jacob to Evie should make for more unique and different objectives. Unity gained a little praise from that mission where you chase Elise in a hot air balloon and AC2 really mixed things up. There also should be missions that include trains, carriages, and electricity that will be different from the common assassinating a target or following a target without getting noticed.

7. INTEREST: Not only is it a new setting, protagonist, and the newest assassin's creed. but that fact that this takes place in England. which is the homeland and founded location of the Templars. Consider that this will be a very tough fight for the assassin's. Though the game does take place in 1868. Every assassin's creed ever has the game skipped some odd years throughout the story. So I'm still betting on Jack the Ripper being involved. Jack the Ripper has sparked interest in thousands of people. Having the setting in Victorian London and not involving him will be a mistake.

 

[Arian]

Lol it will fail horrobly. Last good assassins creed was revelations, everything after that sucked balls tbh.... also ac1 wasnt a flop lol it just paled compared to the sequels. I think instead of coming closer and closer to our current time they should rather take a spep back. How about an assassin in ancient persia(the one whose statue you saw in ac2) how about an assassin in egypt oder china/japan? Now that would be fresh and great....

 

[Amaterasu]

Are you seriously criticizing AC1 and Altair ?

Lmaoooo

 

[Arian]

Are you seriously criticizing AC1 and Altair ?

Lmaoooo

Ikr? Ac1 was awesome! Something completely new back then(i mean it was like 2007 if im not wrong...) and altair is still my favourite assassin. Though ezio comes in a close second, altair was just plain badass and epic. Bit kids nowadays start with the later ac games and then bash the first one -.-

 

[Kaneki Kun]

The last time I purchased an Assassin's Creed game was Brotherhood, which was the best the series had to offer. Everything up to Black Flag is garbage, Black Flag was good. I will pass up on this game and play it at a friends house to test it out and if I like it I'll try to buy somewhere for $30-40

 

[Desiigner]

Didn't read but Black Flag sucked.

 

[Altair ibn la ahad]

You dare to insult me, you mere human? I was the one who saved our Credo during it's most critical time! I was the one to wield the holy Apple of Eden for decades! I am Altair ibn la ahad, and there is no Assassin finer than me!

 

[ALCH3MY]

To be honest, the series started out pretty well.
The first few games were actually really impressive and were a delight to play, as they were unique and offered a decent amount of content in terms of graphics, gameplay & story.
Then the series peaked pretty quickly, and the past few installments have slowly been getting worse and worse.

- 3 wasnt amazing. It was a nice change after playing as Ezio for the past 3 titles, but didn't feel overly Assassins Creedy in terms of gameplay.
- 4 was an ok game, but again, this is more because it offered us gameplay content we hadn't seen before (ie. Naval combat and a much more impressive map than the previous games). It got boring pretty fast.
- Unity & Rogue were basically the developers laying the AC logo down on a bathroom floor and taking it in turns to take a piss on it.

+ They keep bringing out as many smaller games as they can just to milk the series (Chronicles, Liberation, etc..)

What started out as an amazing and promising series has slowly died little by little, so im not holding out any hope for the next game.

TLR: "Was good. Now bad. Next one's probably gonna suck"

 

[Arian]

To be honest, the series started out pretty well.
The first few games were actually really impressive and were a delight to play, as they were unique and offered a decent amount of content in terms of graphics, gameplay & story.
Then the series peaked pretty quickly, and the past few installments have slowly been getting worse and worse.

- 3 wasnt amazing. It was a nice change after playing as Ezio for the past 3 titles, but didn't feel overly Assassins Creedy in terms of gameplay.
- 4 was an ok game, but again, this is more because it offered us gameplay content we hadn't seen before (ie. Naval combat and a much more impressive map than the previous games). It got boring pretty fast.
- Unity & Rogue were basically the developers laying the AC logo down on a bathroom floor and taking it in turns to take a piss on it.

+ They keep bringing out as many smaller games as they can just to milk the series (Chronicles, Liberation, etc..)

What started out as an amazing and promising series has slowly died little by little, so im not holding out any hope for the next game.

TLR: "Was good. Now bad. Next one's probably gonna suck"

pretty sure AC3 was only successfull cause it was american history....else i sucked.

 

[GhostProject]

Almost all of the reasons given are vague descriptions of the plot and mechanics and gives no definite reason for why it'll be successful.

But it'll be successful because of successful marketing. I'll guarantee that the game will lack depth and be riddled with bugs though, so whatever your definition of success is. Don't give them too much credit before they do anything.

 

[Goetia]

Syndicate looks like shit.

AC1 - Still better than Revelations and all games that came after in the franchise, despite it's considerable age. Says a lot about Ubisoft's shitty standards for Assassin's Creed now.

AC II - Hands down, the best game in the series. It had the best story, the most well-developed character. It brought so much to the table and everything had purpose, unlike in the new games.

AC Brotherhood - It is what Assassin's Creed II could have been graphically if Ubisoft kept it in development a little longer. But, Brotherhood tried too hard and gave the player way too many things, which is where the trend of useless weapons and items began. MP was ridiculously fun. And funnily enough, Brotherhood had the best multiplayer in the series.

AC Revelations - Here is where the failure began. The story is a little weak, Altair practically carried it. A man in his 50's would, no way in hell, be able to move as fast as he could a decade or two ago. He has aged, it should be seen in the gameplay. Multiplayer was broken.

AC III - The character of Ratonhake:ton was a mess. You could only tell that he had emotion when he was pissed off. He was way too stoic. It was another attempt at an Altair-esque character. The setting had so much potential, but they just ****ed up. Multiplayer was broken beyond belief here.

AC IV - This was a good game. But as an Assassin's Creed game, it was horrible. The character, again, wasn't original. It was an Ezio copy. Multiplayer was patched slightly, so meh.

AC Rogue - An Assassin's Creed game where you play as a Templar ._.)

AC Unity - This game is actually okay, since the character was somewhat original. He had Ezio's looks, sure, but he wasn't similar in terms of personality. Story was decent. Game was buggy as **** though.

Despite all the failure that taints the successful image AC created, of course Syndicate will succeed. It's because people are invested. But AC has degraded in a COD style cash cow. That is reality.

 

[RasenUchihaChaos]

5 is full of bs we can't relate to Altair or Connor you must have been living the good life If you can relate to Ezio and a guy who becomes a pirate assassin and wants to be filthy rich

 

[AllSixes]

I actually liked ac3 and connor is a TANK whether you like it or not.

 

[P3ĮÑ 🥈]

From what i'm seeing, the mechanics/physics are the same as unity, seriously unity's parkour was a total flop, challenging yes, but incredibly annoying.

FUN: The use of the rope launcher and other tools that will be used quite a bit should be quite entertaining. Gamers have forgotten what makes a great game. It isn't innovation, not so much the story. it's about having fun and enjoying it. Faster game play, gaining territory, with a new time period it should be good.

Yeah and they've been doing that since how long? 2009, seriously, the new gadgets and taking things up a notch with "oh so awesome widgets" doesn't make the game compelling. AC3 had a totally new physics engine, as did unity, yet it they are and remain terrible games.

4. SETTING: Trains, electricity, and other inventions changes everything. Interaction with these will be new and fresh to the player. It isn't just different. The other time periods were considered medieval. Now we're playing in a modern setting. It should be more relatable to most people.

Almost all the AC games have had different settings, from the crusaders and renaissance, to the american and french revolution, gives the game a whole new feel, but not a factor that involves how the entire outcome of game is presented, it could be shit, just like ac3 which was highly anticipated, I'm interested in the american revolution, it's an interesting event in history, alongside with the brits colonizing shit around, but if the story and pacing is horrible alongside with dull characters and off putting events, how am I supposed to find the appeal in that game?