• Visstix@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    79
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 day ago

    “The Assassin’s Creed franchise evolved into the household name it is thanks to rare, or at least rare-among-AAA, support for risk-taking at Ubisoft”

    Fucking lol.

    • BreadstickNinja@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      36
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      “No, no, hear me out. It’s exactly the same game. The same thing we make every single time. But this time, it’s in… Egypt.”

      “Holy shit! What a maverick! Who is that guy? I like the way he thinks. Give him a corner office and the same budget we gave the Greece one!”

      • med@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        23 hours ago

        You know what I would buy? Hitman set in ancient Egypt.

        Infiltrating a workgang forced to build a pyramid, putting a spitting cobra into a nasty enforcer’s chamber pot because he owes the Potiphar some serious myrrh?

        Sign me up.

        • BreadstickNinja@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          19 hours ago

          Honestly, not a bad idea. Synthesizing and iterating, taking things out of context, combining elements you haven’t before - that’s how you get something interesting.

          Ubi’s problem is that their gameplay loops are completely stale. There just isn’t enough new and different, the stories are trite, the dialogue is shit, and everything is boring and predictable.

          I somewhat enjoyed the first Assassin’s Creed, but was a little bitter it wasn’t the Prince of Persia game they’d intended the engine for. I didn’t find “walking slowly to blend in with a crowd” to be as fun as the intense combat and tight platforming of Sands of Time. But I cannot for the life of me understand how the series blew up into a juggernaut of a dozen releases over two decades.

          I’m actually playing The Lost Crown now and - not that I’m the first to observe this - but I feel like it’s the best thing Ubi has done since The Two Thrones twenty years ago. This is the kind of risk that Ubi should be taking. Modest games, smaller budgets, new genres. Diversify and let the creatives create. Let small projects succeed and give them a sequel. If small projects fail, it doesn’t break the bank. But for christ’s sake stop releasing the same three giant boring games over and over.

          • Uruanna@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            15 hours ago

            I’m still sad they killed the 2008 Prince of Persia after the DLC, top of my list from them. (Lost Crown isn’t far)

            Also TBF, Origins isn’t the best example to blame them for making a stale loop, since that’s precisely the game where they updated the AC formula to make it a lot more RPG.

            But I cannot for the life of me understand how the series blew up into a juggernaut of a dozen releases over two decades.

            Heavily historical setting fairly accurate about settings that a lot of people are interested about. Nothing easier. You can literally throw a dart at a map and a timeline and make something interesting with a shit story. People will buy a million of them, doesn’t matter if they’re all the same game. It’s a goddamn mystery that no one is doing anything like that with their own engine, absolute lack of imagination.

      • ampersandrew@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        23 hours ago

        The Egypt one was definitely one where they changed it a lot. So much so that I no longer enjoyed playing them.