This series had such potential

I'm perfectly fine with the series just being a AAA game template with decentish combat and parkour mechanics to act as a vehicle for different time periods and settings that would otherwise never get into a game.

aztec asscreed when

Ubisoft went wrong.

I had an ex from highschool that started playing Ass Creed shortly after we broke up. And even though we stayed friends, I can't help but feel that her obsession with the series is ultimately one of the deciding factors for me distancing myself from her more and more at that point.

WHERE'S MY PRINCE OF PERSIA SEQUEL UBISOFT REEEEEEE.

writing
wanting to have interesting characters that aid Ezio and such made it unnecessary for the play to discover an approach to the target them self. I distinctly remember a part in Brotherhood where I sneak into the huge castle only to follow a predetermined root for a good portion of it. If the missions weren't story driven then the gameplay could be quiet enjoyable with figuring out what & how to do things.

But the writing is the second half of the game, and boy was the ball dropped on that. This series could've had a rather excellent story if it:
A) Showed a lot more of the Templar's side of it. I really enjoyed how they were reasonable in AC3
B) Made it a trilogy. One game where the you suck the Assassin's cocks, one where the Templar's cocks are sucked, and a third where the character realizes that they don't want to suck cocks and instead wants theirs sucked by forming a neutral/against-both-sides party.
C) Just like above but the Templars and Assassin's team up to fight some common enemy or something.

I feel the perfect Assassin's Creed game would allow player choice in approach and which side they fight on. It would be a major challenge to do this with the restrictions the Animus provides: the character is reliving history, not making it. Choice could be implemented alongside the animus, it would simply require good writing or good modern day segments.

The 'first ones' and their artifacts shouldn't have taken center stage in the story in my opinion. I was enjoying the implications in AC2 that the apple of eden was a pivotal tool in human history but I lost interest with the revealing of Minerva. The story completely left the realm of cool conspiracies through out history at that point.

Vanilla WoW.jpg

The moment there is a non-basic grunt, mashing is going to make you lose instantly.

No, the shit like the Apple of Eden is what set the series apart. It got worse the more it backed up from it and Eve.
Templar and Assassins should have worked together to get rid of Juno by using the Apple and Eve's memories to stop a second enslaving of humanity. That's howhy it should have kept the modern time important. That's how it should have ended.

To bad the game was glitchy on the PC version and dodge only worked half the time, it's like the game can't register when you hit the space bar.

Instead of ending the series on 3 as supposed to, they decided to sequel bait and make more and more of the games.
As a result the games are no longer just a neat trilogy with an alright story and conspiracy theorist lore, it is akin to a fucking tv show that got too popular to end and keeps going to shit more and more with each season because fans gobble it up.

This tbh.
The series is shit, the only good thing is that you get to explore cities in different time periods.

Egyptian/Sumerian ac never ever.

I bet you that you forgot about this game

I bet you that you forgot about this game

If they leave AC for a couple of years longer (they won't), people might have moved on a bit, so Ubi can come in with a big return/reboot.

It needs to be a stealth game first, action game second if at all. An open world stealth game, that requires you to scope out your target's location, daily life, guards, escape routes etc. would be great fun. Let the play have all the freedom in their assassination mission other than the target. How you kill, when, where is all up to you.

As for combat, make it far harder. Fight more than one or two enemies and you might as well run as they will swarm you and ruin your day.

Did anyone here find the multiplayer enjoyable?

This was assasins done right,it wasnt a good action platafarmer or a stealth game either

Jade left.

I did. Shame we never got a standalone or something. Although The Ship kinda of scratches that itch.

I didn't. I always wanted to finish this piece of shit but it always crashes at some random point of the game. For some reason I love the aesthetics of 90's 3D in general, mainly red orb stuff like Riven or Journeyman

That's a very apt comparison. Like TV show writers, cash cow vidya series writers don't know when it's gonna end so it's hard to tell a cohesive story. You just keep writing until it gets shitty and gets cancelled.

1 was good, 2 fixed a lot of its problems, but it was downhill from there. Black Flag was a great pirate game though.

The first game was interesting and didn't insult my intelligence.

Then we got ancient aliens and worse, American revolution history. Nobody cares about George Washington except for Yankees.

The Crusades were cool and not often depicted in popular fiction.

For starters, they could've at least added a difficulty slider instead of just one universal easy-ass difficulty. Harder difficulties would involve things like counterattacking not being counterinstakilling and enemies not just attacking you one at a time.

I've played every game up til Black Flag and never once touched the multiplayer

Patrice Désilets got sacked. Fuck jewbi.

...

It was always shit fam.

That's why it's wasted potential. If there had been even one game to do the idea justice then it wouldn't have been such a waste.

In order for that to happen Ass Creed would have had to do two things:

1, Make it so fighting too many guards at once would lead to inevitable failure, making running from them your only option.

2, Make it so you cannot easily outrun the guards, preferably by giving you sprint bar which limits your sprint so that it can only ever be used as an initial means to give yourself some distance from enemies, thus forcing you to make use of the environment (including ways other than climbing) to stop the enemies from catching back up.

There are other changes to be made of course, but those are the two key changes.

Doing this however, would require the devs to make a game where the player cannot just easily kill everything to succeed. In other words Ass Creed's target audience is too casual for the game that the series should have been in the first place.

yearly installments, burnt out any possibility of improvement and new shit appearing.

As much as I enjoyed the feeling of fighting 30 guards using kung-fu ninja rules, it would have been a better assassin game and more fun if the guards were actually a threat, if there was ever an actual reason to run from a fight besides being on a timed mission.

As it is, fighting is more fun than running because you can escape piss easy. Run up a nearby wall and take off, that's it. Your idea of a stamina bar is a good one for evening the odds a bit.

It had such potential, such promise

They really fucked up. Now any instance of sailing in games is tainted by people saying it's like Assassin's Creed. It's a shame too, I really want to play a good sailing game so I can justify drinking rum all day long.

Why aren't they creating a pirate game considering Black Flag was great (minus the assassin part shit)?

That's a start, but the gameplay would have to be shored up, as well. Mashing counterattack should not be an effective strategy. Also, AC should have lost all the scifi bullshit from the start. It's literally retarded.

I had a pretty good time drinking rum with pic related.

A lot of those are actually armor, but obviously not as you'd be familiar with since the aztecs didn't do much metalwoking.

You would have underpadding/ a vest made of thick cotton (pic related), which would be soaked in mineral rich water and left to dry, at which point the minerals inside would crystallize, strengthening it and actually making it resistant to arrowheads and lacerations. You'd also have stuff like wooden or leather helmets, shields, and potentially armguards/shinguards, and then the "pajamas" you seen on the outside in that image made of animal skins/thin cotton and decorated with feathers.

It was obviously not comparable to the steel armor the spainish had, but it worked better then you'd expect, same goes for their weapons, but I don't wanna go too far into that unless people wanna know.

t. an autist who knows way more then he should about the aztecs

Rumor is egypt is next.

I'd really like a mughal india one, but I'd also dread the POO IN LOO shitposting tsunami it'd cause

I don't see why people get soo buttmad over ancient aliens. That said, not even us americans give a shit about american history. It's boring as fuck

Assassin's Creed is an interesting concept that is stricken by poor execution. There are some decent elements about some of the games; Assassin's Creed II had the best Codex puzzles and the Assassin Tombs were alone some of the best segments of these games because they invoked the obstacle course level design of Prince of Persia. The music is fucking fantastic and the style and aesthetics aren't too bad either. The story was mishandled and the gameplay could use a massive reworking. I would personally like to see something closer to a Hitman or MGS style game but with the parkour and climbing intact. The first game asked the player to gain information about their target through various means - pickpocketing couriers or guards for special information, beating members of the target's faction and interrogating them, or bribing certain figures like heralds - but that information was never made useful, and the final moments just before and just after the assassination takes place will always be the same. Three things:
- Rework combat
- incorporate actual stealth
- put forth effort into creating open ended levels that allow the player to reach and assassinate their target in a variety of ways

To clarify on that last bit, there still needs to be restrictions put in place so that the player will be challenged and engaged. If you're going stealth, you shouldn't be able to carry around a huge fucking arsenal, and if you're going guns blazing then stealth should be punished somehow, or at least made more difficult. Maybe force the player to build a loadout for each playstyle and prevent them from switching equipment once they're out in the field. This will force players to think about their approach and actually commit to it. I was going to suggest making combat closer to Ninja Gaiden, but I'm not sure that would be an improvement. I honestly don't know how combat could be made better, but I sure as hell know that the current system is garbage. I guess make it closer to Arkham Asylum combat. It's not perfect but at the very least there is some challenge in maintaining a flow.

The writers probably intended to do something like that but were forced to keep pumping out the games.

Go ahead

...

Frogs are even worse writers than Japs. At least the series gave us this assassinscreed.wikia.com/wiki/Al_Gore

Excellent taste.
Good luck trying to find a Ship of the Line.

hitler lost ww2

Unleash the autism, let it shine like it never has before.

Alright faggots, you asked for it

You'll note before I said "didn't do much metalworking". The aztecs obviously knew how to make jewelry and other decorative out of soft metals like gold and silver, and they were capable of bronze working, and they did produce some bronze or copper axes and maces in combat, but the majority of their weapons were made of stone or wood, or some combination of the two.

They primarily used atlatl's (basically a sling that throws darts, it's the thing the guy is using in pic 1) as their ranged weapons, but e they had traditional bow and arrows as well. Beyond mostly boring standard stone axes and maces and flint or obsidian daggers called tecpatl (I don't remember the names of the axes and maces, sue me), their more interesting and notable melee weaponry were weapons that used a wooded base, but studded the striking edges of the weapon with obsidian, which as you know is a type of volcanic glass.Examples of stuff like that are the Machuauitl, which was basically a cricket bat with the obsidian razors on the sides, and the Tepoztopilli, which was a wooden spear used in melee combat that had the razors lining the tip.

What you might not know about obsidian is how ridiculously sharp the shit is. like, approaching "steel folded 1000 times" level sharp, except actually. The edges on a well rafted obsidian blade could be as fine as about 3 nanometers, which means it's thin enough to actually cut between your skin cells. It sounds bullshit, but it's true. That said, being a glass, it was also brittle as fuck. Not as brittle as you might think, you could still cut stuff with it and use it in combat a few times, but it was still way more fragile compared to metal or other stone.

In any case, the Spanish were scared shitless of the machuauitll. Pretty much every first hand account we have from a conquistador has at least one mention of a horse being beheaded in a single stroke or something like that by one. Probably an exeggration, but it still indicates that the spainish were scared of the damn thing, and there are similar reports in regards to the atlatl as well,

1/3(?)

Bad ass.

Cool, thanks for going into it.

I'm going to blindly believe you, and repeat the story about mineral water armor to all my friends without doing any actual checkups on it.

Does anybody care about the incas, or are they just another flavour of grabbag mayincatek el dorado type setting people keep on using.

Cause i really like the incas. I like the whole idea of mountain-goat people who invented complex architecture and bartering systems before the wheel.

And this is where I loop back to where I left off in comment one of "but it worked better then you'd think". The aztecs didn't actually primarily lose to the spainish due to the technological gap. It was obviously a factor, but the main reasons they lost were due to politics and diseases. Montezuma II (the emperor of the aztecs at the time as well as the then king of Tenochtitlan, the more or less captial, which was a really fucking cool city and is probably the single coolest thing about the aztecs, but more about that in post 2), actually invited Cortes and his men into the city due to a series of events that happened prior to his arrival there which i'm not going to get into but you should totally read up about because it's interesting (just read the wikipedia article for conquest). So when shit started to go down after cortes chilled there as a guest for a while, Cortes had strategic control of the palace and had montezuma captive. over a couple of months, where he was using Montezuma as a puppet. Eventually, he had to go and leave because a larger Spanish fleet arrived off the coast, who were under orders to capture cortes, so he went to deal with that. By the time cortes got back, he found out his men he left there had decided to just massacre a bunch of nobles, and all hell broke loose.

The aztecs actually managed to send Cortes and his men running pretty effectively without much of an issue here, though Montezuma died in the process, which shows that the aztecs and their weapons and armor preformed pretty well despite the obvious technology gap. The spainish returned to Tlaxcalan territory (A neighboring alliance of city states which the aztecs demanded tribute from and as such hated the empire, again, read the wiki article) to rest and regroup over about 10 months, during which time, the aztecs were getting ravaged by smallpox and famine. Cortes eventually re-stormed Tenochtitlan, this time not only with his Conquistadors, but also a Tlaxcalan army of about 200,000 soliders.

By this point, pretty much the whole city was in disarray due to the plague and famine anyways, so the Aztecs suffered horrible loses here and that's the battle that decided the war (The aztec empire itself was techniocally an alliance of city states itself, though unlike the Tlaxcalans, the aztecs had a functional single ruler and seat of power, being the Tenochtitlan and it's king. once it fell, the other city states pretty much gave up or died supporting Tenochtitlan), and Tenochititlan was totally destroyed in the process, with some first hand accounts reporting Cortes wept as he blew it apart with cannon fire due to how magficnant the city was and how he was destroying it (again, the city was rad as fuck)

So yeah, Aztecs primarily lost due to Montezuna II's incompetence, the strained politcal relationship between the Aztec empire and the Tlaxcalans, and smallpox. Not saying that if the Spainish and the aztecs had equal numbers and access to logsitics the aztecs would stand a chance, they wouldn't, but as things were, with the Spainish in the aztec's home turf, even with their steel equipement, they would have lost of it for the above.

2/3(?), gonna talk about how cool aztec cities and agriculture are next.

I mean, pretty much everything i'm saying can be easily read online just by googling, it's pretty well documented. There is a lot of interesting stuff not as well sourced/prevalent online, though, such as how their caste system worked and how the nobles in Aztec society were basically just giant jews the same way Italian nobles were in thr ressiance or how their legal system worked. Anyways, if you want more info beyond what i'm saying, Mesolore, FAMSI, and the AskHistorians subreddit. Plebbit, I know, but the mods there ban you from posting if you post without sources or aren't a verified expert with a degree, so it's suprkisingly decent are all good resources

I would have wept too.

Isn't there like a forest of limestone obelisks that is impenetrable to traverse? That shit will cut you up fierce.

you mean that french guy that got sued and his new company got bought by ubi and shit

Gotta wonder, do you actually have/are working on a degree in aztecology, or is this just a hobby.

It must have been a beautiful sight as the burritos and guacamole was cooked by hellfire.

They weren't taco yet, that came later.

Pretty sure the Aztecs had tortillas by then, though

and other assorted corn based products.

It's funny to imagine the spanish shooting cannons at some guys wearing furry pajamas as corn pops into the sky though.

They had popcorn, too. There's something nice to accommodate the destruction of one of the world's largest cities.

After living in California for a decade, I just can't see that like a bad thing.

Alright, so, my last post so that way people don't bitch at me for spamming

The coolest thing about the aztecs by far was their urban planning, Arctecture, and agricultural techniques, and the sort-of captial(more on that in a bit) of Tenochtitlan is a great example of where all 3 of those areas intersect.

For some context, when we talk about the Aztecs, we normally mean a specific ethnic group in Tenochitlan called the Mexica, which settled there and formed a city in the 1300's after being granted land there by the Tepanec's, which were the kingdom that dominated the region prior to the aztecs rising to power. Tenochtitlan was pretty much built on top of Texcoco Lakes (which no longer exist, more on that later), as were many city states in the areas. In fact, Tenochtitlan and a neighboring city called Tlatelolco were so close to each other that they eventually just became one city (which still used the name Tenochtitlan)

Anyways, in the 1400's a war of successon broke out with the Tepanecs, and Tenochtitlan/Tlatelolco (the Mexica), and two other city states, Texoco (the Acolhua) and Tlacopan (Tepanecs) all joined forces, and emerged victorious. They, and the land they now gained as a result of their victory, was the birth of the Aztec Triple Alliance, Aka the Aztec empire. Over the next hundred years they continued to expand and grow till they reached their peak in 1519, when the spainish came.

Anyways, onto Tenochtitlan specifically. The best way to think about it was a mesoamerican venice. It was situated on an island in the Texcoco lakes (which were drained in the 1700's, which is why axlotl salamanders are extinct in the wild), and it had tons of aquaducts, and causeways. There were also a bunch of what are called chinampas, which were mats of floating soil the aztecs used as garderns, which would eventually settle into the lakebad and form actually grounded soil. There were huge markets, a large temple complex called Templo Mayor, and Montezuma's palace is described as having zoos and aquariums.

Also, it was larger then pretty much anything in europe at the time, and population wise, it was only rivaled worldwide by Cairo and Bejing. Every conquistador who left a first hand account marveled at how large and magfnciant it was and how they couldn't beliveve what they were seeing was real. I don't have room to post the excrepts in a post, so here''s a pastebin: pastebin.com/YcdzJUUQ

Anyways, the kicker is that Tenochtitlan is LITTERALLY buried under modern day mexico city. Like, the center of Mexico city just has tapped off areas where ruins stick out of the ground. The Spainish destroyed one of the largest cities in the world that they themselves said was beyond anything they could dream of, and the result is the shithole of modern day mexico city. Thanks spain.

Anyways, that's the long, long version of why an aztec assassins creed game would be sick as fuck

Incas's are cool, but i'm way more interested in Central america compared to south america.

Nah, I''m just really interested in them, but when I can actually afford college it's something i'd like to pursue having a degree in, though since i'm not actually a spic and don't live anywhere close to mexico i'm not sure if that's possible.

This.

You could always move and pursue your passion, it's hardly a good job and the pay would be awful even if you do get a job at all, but people have chased worse dreams.

Also on the bright side, education and life in mexico must be quite cheap if you do bring some bank with you.

Speaking as an argentina spic, there's literally no better time to move then now, since the currency is collapsing faster then a femenist's legs. And if you're poor over there, you still get to live off pretty well in here without much changing.

They started trying to incorporate cliche game mechanics like tagging enemies to see them through wall and they dumbed down the combat to be like the Batman games.

First AC is best AC solely for getting into fistfights with the unarmed guards whcih makes a huge crowd gather around you and doesn't make you wanted.

Repetitive, no combat variety
even though i do have some affection for 2 and Rogue theyre still mediocre at best

Egyptians and Sumerians? Unless you're talking about modern egypt where Anwar Sadat is a Templar: it's not going to happen.

I think the new Assassin's Creed should take place at the turn of the century and prominently feature John Browning as a villainous Templar.

Man you really like this stuff, if I lived in a southern part of mexico I would love to invite you over. Tabasco and Yucatan are great places to do some exploring on the jungle. 12 years ago my dad and I went to Tabasco and in some marsh behind our hotel we found some cool stone figures, unfortunately my dad sold them to his brother but I think that it was for the best, if the police foud out about it you could go to jail for a long time

Does he have any pictures of them?