Ubisoft: Modern Day Assassin's Creed Mechanically Unfeasible

Karloff

New member
Oct 19, 2009
6,474
0
0
Ubisoft: Modern Day Assassin's Creed Mechanically Unfeasible



Besides, there's far too much to do as it is, which is one of the reasons why Connor won't be seeing a resolution any time soon.

If you're an Assassin's Creed fan you may be waiting impatiently for the day when those darn Assassins stop faffing about in the past and move on to the present day. If so you're out of luck, as Ubisoft developers, in an AMA, admit that a modern Assassin's Creed is technically unfeasible. "There are just too many mechanics we would have to develop to make it believable," says lead writer Darby McDevitt, "vehicles, plausible modern cities, a huge array of ranged weapons, etc." Besides, the team's already got too much on its hands with the current setup to want to do anything premature like, for instance, resolve the present day Assassins versus Templar story. "There will certainly be a resolution to the most recent plot developments," says McDevitt, "but the overall conflict will probably rage forever, just like most deeply divided philosophical conflicts."

Connor's story is still in the weeds, and likely to remain there. "It's a huge universe," says community developer Gabe Graziani, adding "we could work forever and not illuminate it all." Ubisoft doesn't have the resources to do everything it wants to do, and Connor's is one of the story elements it's unlikely to get to revisit any time soon, if ever. Though McDevitt did hint that Embers [http://assassinscreed.wikia.com/wiki/Assassin%27s_Creed:_Embers], which took six months to make, was a side project that everyone on the team loved, "so maybe we'll go that route again one day." Holding your breath while you wait for that to happen is probably a bad idea. As for Desmond, "he's dead dead," game director Ashraf Ismail confirms, so any thoughts to the contrary can now be abandoned.

It's been more than two years in the making, and the team found it smooth - if technically difficult - sailing, particularly on next generation consoles. "Both XboxOne and PS4 were easy to deal with," says Ismail, though there were some grey areas initially. When the team started work, the next generation was new even to the companies manufacturing it; neither Microsoft nor Sony were entirely clear on console requirements. "And this is normal," Ismail reminded his AMA audience; at the start of any cycle, when the manufacturers are just finding their feet, grey areas are to be expected.

Source: Ubisoft AMA [http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/1pz0j2/iama_developer_on_assassins_creed_iv_black_flag/]


Permalink
 

josemlopes

New member
Jun 9, 2008
3,950
0
0
It makes sense although for Ubisoft they could probably just use Watch Dogs as a template since from what they showed us its basicly what Assassins Creed would be like in a modern day setting
 

synobal

New member
Jun 8, 2011
2,189
0
0
Also because they want to see how many more games they can make before the series becomes unprofitable then they can do the "Final" assassin's creed with much ho hum for one final money cash in and retire the series for 5 years and then do a remake/reimagining/reboot of the series for more cash.
 

GoaThief

Reinventing the Spiel
Feb 2, 2012
1,229
0
0
Thanks for the spoiler warning.

Such a nice thing to shove in to an article allegedly about the technical reasons why a modern setting Assassin's Creed isn't feasible.

Very unhappy and unimpressed.
 

RA92

New member
Jan 1, 2011
3,079
0
0
Basically, AssCreed can't afford to have the development time frame of Watch Dogs with the vital annual release.

synobal said:
Also because they want to see how many more games they can make before the series becomes unprofitable then they can do the "Final" assassin's creed with much ho hum for one final money cash in and retire the series for 5 years and then do a remake/reimagining/reboot of the series for more cash.
I dunno, Prince of Persia hasn't stirred from its grave in quite a while. I can see Watch Dogs being the next franchise-fatigued cash cow.
 

Jandau

Smug Platypus
Dec 19, 2008
5,034
0
0
Yes, Ubisoft, it is possible. And it's being made. By YOU! You're just calling it Watch Dogs.

Seriously, this is hilarious. They are pretty much making the game already, or something so close to it that it invalidates the argument. Grated, you might say "Then just play Watch Dogs.", but that's besides the point. People would like a modern AssCreed game for the setting and to perhaps resolve the plot (at least somewhat). But it's not being made, even though Ubisoft is pretty much making it already. And what does this tell us? That Ubisoft would like to milk the AssCreed franchise for at least several more sequels, but can't really come out and say it, so they pussyfoot about with lame excuses...
 

Gizmo1990

Insert funny title here
Oct 19, 2010
1,900
0
0
Is anyone really asking for more Connor? A house plant has more life and charisma than he did. He is Blandy Blanderson, captain of the H.M.S Bland.
 

thiosk

New member
Sep 18, 2008
5,410
0
0
More to the point, unfeasible vs infeasible. I really prefer infeasible. I don't know why. I know its the minor usage of the two. This is linguistic tyranny foisted upon us by those salty limeys. Lady liberty weeps as my spell check even hates infeasible.
 

rcs619

New member
Mar 26, 2011
627
0
0
BigTuk said:
They're probably gonna pulla doc brown and go back to the past I mean they didn't even touch the roman empire, ore the greeks/persians. and there was a whole mongol dynasty.
That's what I was thinking. Work their way up to around, say, the American Civil War or so, before properly modern guns started to appear, then go "Oh hey, we just found out about another of those magical maguffin things one of your ancestors found back in Rome. Or in the 100 years war. Or something. Then they can bounce back to that, while keeping the thin, modern day framing device moving 'forward'.
 

Something Amyss

Aswyng and Amyss
Dec 3, 2008
24,759
0
0
Karloff said:
<As for Desmond, "he's dead dead," game director Ashraf Ismail confirms, so any thoughts to the contrary can now be abandoned.
Until they change their minds or it's demonstrated that one hand didn't know what the other was talking about.

Though I won't be sad if there's no more Desmond.
 

blackrave

New member
Mar 7, 2012
2,020
0
0
Translation:
"There are just too many mechanics we would have to develop to make it believable," says lead writer Darby McDevitt, "vehicles, plausible modern cities, a huge array of ranged weapons, etc."

We are lazy as fuck..


"Besides, the team's already got too much on its hands with the current setup to want to do anything premature like, for instance, resolve the present day Assassins versus Templar story."

..and couldn't be bothered by deviating from usual formula for more than 0.5%..

"There will certainly be a resolution to the most recent plot developments," says McDevitt, "but the overall conflict will probably rage forever, just like most deeply divided philosophical conflicts."

..because we are going to milk this franchise until management pulls the plug and whole story stays unresolved.


P.S. Did I missed something here?
 

DTWolfwood

Better than Vash!
Oct 20, 2009
3,716
0
0
I'm hoping they Spin off Black Flag into its own franchise.

Look i just want a sailing game where i can sail all kinds of awesome ships of the line.

Ubisoft make a sequel to Pirates of the Burning Sea! XD

Also, they had a "modern" Asscreed every time you played as Desmond no?
 

giort08

New member
Oct 4, 2010
11
0
0
LordLundar said:
Eh, all it is is an excuse to keep chugging out more annual AC pieces of drek.
Exactly. Thank You for saving me the time to write it :D
 

Sanunes

Senior Member
Mar 18, 2011
626
0
21
They don't want to make an Assassin's Creed game set into the present doesn't bother me, I just wish then they would drop the ties to the present then all together. Assassin's Creed games are something I buy if I find them at a low enough price for there just isn't enough change to them to make them full price.
 

TiberiusEsuriens

New member
Jun 24, 2010
834
0
0
josemlopes said:
It makes sense although for Ubisoft they could probably just use Watch Dogs as a template since from what they showed us its basicly what Assassins Creed would be like in a modern day setting
I thought the same thing. Pretty much all of Ubi's 3rd person games share the same free running mechanic... they look so similar I wouldn't be surprised if it was directly shared code. Watching Aiden run, jump, climb, and vault around the city gave me very vivid recollections of the past two or three AC games. The only difference is that WD has "vehicles, plausible modern cities, [and] a huge array of ranged weapons, etc."

I'm trying to figure out what key element of the AC games that WD is missing and I'm drawing a blank. Anyone else think of something?
 

DaViller

New member
Sep 3, 2013
172
0
0
Well it does make sense to me. It´s kinda hard to escape from guards by climbing on the rooftop, to then laugh down at them, if they all have guns. If you think about it, assisins creed only makes sense in very dry urban settings (like a dersert town where the first one took place, or a version of italy where rain doesn´t exist) without any guns. I mean being able to run around on rooftops and stuff is very cool, but once you start adding snow or rain into the equation everything falls apart(or down). It was one of the major things that bugged my in AC3. I could never shake of the feeling that Connor should wait until at least spring or stay on the ground, rather then to try balancing over rozen tree branches and rooftiles.

Edit: this reminds me of that extremely stupid ending to assasins creed 2 in wich abstergo finds your hideout and attacks you. I was thinking "oh nice I get to fight people with guns now with modern day desmond being all badass", then the van opened and a bunch of dudes with fucking stunprods jumped out. Theyr the fucking templars, who basically controll the world, and they try to attack a gang of highly skilled and close combat specialized professional killers with a bunch of dudes with stunprods.
 

synobal

New member
Jun 8, 2011
2,189
0
0
blackrave said:
Translation:
"There are just too many mechanics we would have to develop to make it believable," says lead writer Darby McDevitt, "vehicles, plausible modern cities, a huge array of ranged weapons, etc."

We are lazy as fuck..


"Besides, the team's already got too much on its hands with the current setup to want to do anything premature like, for instance, resolve the present day Assassins versus Templar story."

..and couldn't be bothered by deviating from usual formula for more than 0.5%..

"There will certainly be a resolution to the most recent plot developments," says McDevitt, "but the overall conflict will probably rage forever, just like most deeply divided philosophical conflicts."

..because we are going to milk this franchise until management pulls the plug and whole story stays unresolved.


P.S. Did I missed something here?
Nope looks like you got it all. I stopped caring about Ass creed after 2, when it was obvious they intended to milk the series until they died. As someone who loves and demands a good story element to games i play I'm not interested in playing a series that ultimately is perfectly happy to never resolve the story so long as they keep getting money.