Assassin's Creed thread

  • 🐕 I am attempting to get the site runnning as fast as possible. If you are experiencing slow page load times, please report it.
I've had the misfortune to have to deal with IT Pajeets before. Maybe I'm unlucky, but the ones I encountered were notoriously lazy fucks that would only do the bare minimum - if at that. You will have to locate the problems with their work and then you have to tell them HOW TO FIX IT, because they will drag things out as long as possible just to avoid doing further work.

Ten white or Chinese/Korean/Japanese IT guys would do more in one week than ten billion pajeets would in ten years.
 
Am I misremembering or in Assassin's Creed 1-3 could enemies follow you up onto buildings?

It seems like in Shadows enemies have zero answers for you climbing a building, if you do so they just stand around looking confused and shouting their combat lines.
They could yes, everyone except for brutes IIRC.

The pathfinding wasn’t great though i remember them often just jumping from roof to roof.
 
A friend of mine sent me this clip and as a samurai sperg I noticed something... for some reason all the guards use a Chinese-style sickle spear/halberd, or ji, rather than a Japanese jumonji yari (cross-shaped tip) or su yari (regular long tip) which were the most common spear types used by the vast majority of soldiers and warriors of the time. There was one famous example of a samurai who used a sickle spear like in the clip, his name was Kato Kiyomasa and according to history he mostly used it during tiger hunts.

It's like if they made a WWII game and all of the German enemies you fought used an FG42.
 
It's like if they made a WWII game and all of the German enemies you fought used an FG42.
You take history consultant in games for granted until they actually skip out on having one.

I enjoy the modern slop AC games but this just isn't one. They tried making the combat too For Honor-esque and it just ended up being bland. Like, more bland than the ability-slop that the previous games were. I've watched a few streams and while the movement seems fun and more AC-like than previously, it's also just.. soulless. And I wanted to like the game too.
 
Nothing against you, but why should there be an option for "one-hit assassinations" in ASSASSIN'S CREED? Let's force enemy leveling into a game where you're trained to swiftly and stealthy kill targets.
The way health's done is in "blocks". Regular enemies will have a single block, brutes might have two or three, etc. While the amount of health within those blocks varies (there's a specialist swordsman who can be easily assassinated but turns it into an absolute tank when fought directly), an assassination will take entire blocks away at time.

Enemies explicitly have animations demonstrating that they're seeing you at the last second, or they're so heavily armoured that a poke with the blade isn't killing them outright. Brutes will sometimes let Naoe stab them, only to laugh and throw her back.

It's making a distinction between different enemy archetypes. Regular grunts will always die in one assassination - and can't stop you performing them if you jump them as soon as you're spotted - but elite guys require passive skills that increase the health "blocks" you remove. Some enemies can only be assassinated from the back when they're unaware, but will drop in a single one, etc.

It was a bit odd getting used to it but if you keep up to date with your gear, and play with passive skills, you can easily out pace enemies even on higher difficulties. They seem to increase enemy detection and damage rather than bloat hit points.
 
I played Odyssey years ago, I enjoyed the game as an armchair historian. I cheated in their "pay-to-enjoy" money to skip the artificial grind. I appreciated the effort that went into the world's creation and its environments. I honestly don't remember if the game was marketed as a 1:1 historically accurate game like AC: Shadows was.

My tolerance for bullshit was too low to get through most of AC: Valhalla, and Shadows wont even get the time of day from me.
 
The way health's done is in "blocks". Regular enemies will have a single block, brutes might have two or three, etc. While the amount of health within those blocks varies (there's a specialist swordsman who can be easily assassinated but turns it into an absolute tank when fought directly), an assassination will take entire blocks away at time.

Enemies explicitly have animations demonstrating that they're seeing you at the last second, or they're so heavily armoured that a poke with the blade isn't killing them outright. Brutes will sometimes let Naoe stab them, only to laugh and throw her back.

It's making a distinction between different enemy archetypes. Regular grunts will always die in one assassination - and can't stop you performing them if you jump them as soon as you're spotted - but elite guys require passive skills that increase the health "blocks" you remove. Some enemies can only be assassinated from the back when they're unaware, but will drop in a single one, etc.

It was a bit odd getting used to it but if you keep up to date with your gear, and play with passive skills, you can easily out pace enemies even on higher difficulties. They seem to increase enemy detection and damage rather than bloat hit points.
thats actually an ingenuous system, too bad they didn't come up with it 15 years ago, it was always sort of silly how some dagger on a guys arm somehow went through literally everything. although its not like enemies were meant to be tough to kill considering chain kills and guns and then having other assassins kill them.

playing unity or the vicorian london games were fucking stupid with how you could just kill people with guns everywhere.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mary the Goldsmith
I played Odyssey years ago, I enjoyed the game as an armchair historian. I cheated in their "pay-to-enjoy" money to skip the artificial grind. I appreciated the effort that went into the world's creation and its environments. I honestly don't remember if the game was marketed as a 1:1 historically accurate game like AC: Shadows was.

My tolerance for bullshit was too low to get through most of AC: Valhalla, and Shadows wont even get the time of day from me.
I hope it was not marketed as historically accurate, because you have the opportunity to push a female protagonist into the Olympics and later go consort with Greek gods in Atlantis or something. The whole game was fully of cringe dialogues and the DLCs got more ridiculous with each release!
 
? Ubisoft has been treating their players like retarded children that need to be told literally everything for so long that it's been a meme for over a decade.
To be fair if you still buy their games after all of it. You may be actually a retarded child.

This should be interesting.
This is another last minute hail Mary attempt to appeal to Tencent.
They're not biting. Ubisoft pissed them off enough.
 
I hope it was not marketed as historically accurate, because you have the opportunity to push a female protagonist into the Olympics and later go consort with Greek gods in Atlantis or something. The whole game was fully of cringe dialogues and the DLCs got more ridiculous with each release!
That's too bad, I had completely forgotten they had a female protagonist in that game. I ran around the map just looking at things and killing random bounty dudes, so the story dialogue didn't even register to me. I never got far enough into the game to realize they had DLC, consorting with the established universe Gods has been a thing in AC games in the past so that part isn't all that surprising. I'm going to safely assume the Greek Gods were modernized and bastardized to some degree. Can you imagine if they had done the same to Muhammed?
 
Last edited:
That's pretty much why they aren't being honest about their "historical research" either. They haven't outright said they used Thomas Lockley's material, so they don't have to go "Sorry my dudes, we got bamboozled by this Lockley guy."
I'd think "We took an academic seriously" is much less embarrassing than "We're fucking stupid."
 
I'm actually kind of low key surprised Thomas Lockley pulled off his grift successfully for a decade.

You'd think some some non Asian Jewish guy showing up and going "hello my fellow Japanese I've discovered a secret black samurai that no one else knew about! By the way don't you just hate white people and love immigrants?" Would be deeply suspect.

I know in the U.S there are actual laws forbidding you from asking obvious questions when these people show up and start pulling cons but you'd think the Japanese would have been suspicious.
 
Back