![]() ![]() They create blockbusters designed to sell millions, and that’s their primary goal. Ubisoft makes Assassin’s Creed games like Michael Bay makes movies. They do, naturally, and that’s fine-but do they have to be so damn shameless about it? Whether it’s overpriced ‘special editions’ or the microtransactions in Unity, the company makes it clear, constantly, that they want your money. They treat their games like products, which cheapens them. The databases are filled with humorous notes about dumbing things down to broaden the appeal.Īssassin’s Creed is mainstream entertainment, but I wish Ubisoft had loftier goals for it. There’s a running meta-commentary in recent Assassin’s Creed games about sinister Templar corporation Abstergo using DNA memories to create mainstream entertainment products. It's heartening to hear that they've already been working on it, in Ubi's words, "for the past few years." Hopefully Ubisoft Québec are using this framework to do something different. We see the new hero atop a sync point and the rope-swinging is straight out of Black Flag. Worryingly, the Assassin's Creed Victory shots (well, I say shots, but they're obviously just concept mock-ups) already suggest the new game is recycling some old ideas. Sticking to this formula makes churning out yearly sequels easier for the developers, but as I said, that needs to stop too. ![]() I think it’s time to create a new standard. New features may be added, like AC3 and Black Flag’s brilliant ship combat, but the games still largely stick to the set menu: arbitrary collectables, hay carts, sync points, hiring 'dancers', sneaking through bushes, disabling alarm bells. Those ones have even started showing up in Far Cry, which is just baffling to me. It’s utterly formulaic, recycling the same missions over and over-even the ones no one likes, like tailing and eavesdropping. It’s fine for sequels to share the DNA of other games in a series, but Assassin’s Creed has taken this to an extreme. ![]() But historical epics like Assassin’s Creed deserve more time to be crafted and polished. They’re dumb, flashy, six-hour action movies. I can understand Call of Duty sequels being released every year. Now imagine what they could have done if they had another two. Look at what Ubisoft achieved with Unity in a couple of years. In comparison, Assassin’s Creed games feel increasingly mass produced, like they’re rolling off a conveyor belt. They release a new Grand Theft Auto every 3-5 years, taking as long as they think they need. And assets are frequently recycled between games. The mission design gets noticeably sloppy towards the end of almost every entry in the series, presumably as deadlines begin to loom. Unity was a mess of bugs and frantic patching. But this is having a negative impact on their quality. They have shareholders to appease, and making games on this scale costs a fortune. Ubisoft is a business, and businesses exist to make money. The reason so many studios work on these sequels is because they’re massive, and they have to do a new one every year. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |