The game was rushed. (some proof inside)

#21_Dura_Posted 11/7/2012 1:30:22 AM
ajmrowland posted...
_Dura_ posted...
ajmrowland posted...
Lowering expectations will always make for a more enjoyable experience.


Jesus Christ, what horrifying times we live in.

And you can't blame others for being hyped when Ubisoft directly promised things that plain aren't in the game.


But am I wrong? I'm not a cynical person. I dont go doom and gloom with every thought I have, but I simply dont let every imperfection or perceived imperfection hinder my enjoyment. That's all I'm saying. No game is the most awesome game ever-not to everyone anyway-and that will always be the case.

I really liked the game. About up their with AC2. anyway, gotta gofinish the epilogue.


You are wrong. Expectations do not affect overall enjoyment. I like the game too, but saying it's not massively flawed is just fooling yourself. Criticizing it is a good thing. Nothing ever gets better without coming to terms with it's faults, and Ubisoft have determinedly had their head in the sand for a while now (see: 100% Synch). The more people talking about the crap parts of the game, the better. Maybe someone on the dev team will take hint.
---
PSN: Duragon_Mikado
kabuki....isnt that were you ...you know...on the girl? - CrusaderZeRo
#22MinamoPosted 11/7/2012 1:38:04 AM
helvinek83 posted...
Okay but ACIII has arguably the largest open world setting on XBOX & PS3 to date. The ACIII game world is definitely bigger than Dragon's Dogma which is a massive game world. I have covered 75% of the map in DD but only around 40% in ACIII in nearly the same amount of time.


Let's consider that ACIII has like the biggest game world ever and also if you could name one triple AAA game that's better than ACIII that has a bigger game world AND runs better with fewer or no glitches then I will listen otherwise ACIII stands as the masterpiece that it is.


Every single thing about this post is wrong.
#23_decitronPosted 11/7/2012 1:47:54 AM
Jarret_Kennedy posted...


We cannot keep supporting sub par games JUST because they are big names. We're making it ok to quickly produce games for easy profit. This game is horribly unpolished, and the story feels extremely rushed and somewhat oddly paced.


shall i assume you didn't buy one?
---
http://img9.imageshack.us/img9/439/mw3kids.jpg
#24_decitronPosted 11/7/2012 1:49:37 AM
z3r0d0wn posted...
la noire was rushed


la noire was just bad design from the start, polished with some pretty cool tech and an unnecessarily large city
---
http://img9.imageshack.us/img9/439/mw3kids.jpg
#25ajmrowlandPosted 11/7/2012 2:29:02 AM
^it never flied by me. Ubisoft among others has infamously treated handheld titles as second rate.

At the very least, a company like Square Enix gives them dignity.
#26GuardianShadow0Posted 11/7/2012 2:43:05 AM
[This message was deleted at the request of a moderator or administrator]
#27ajmrowlandPosted 11/7/2012 2:58:37 AM
_Dura_ posted...
ajmrowland posted...
_Dura_ posted...
ajmrowland posted...
Lowering expectations will always make for a more enjoyable experience.


Jesus Christ, what horrifying times we live in.

And you can't blame others for being hyped when Ubisoft directly promised things that plain aren't in the game.


But am I wrong? I'm not a cynical person. I dont go doom and gloom with every thought I have, but I simply dont let every imperfection or perceived imperfection hinder my enjoyment. That's all I'm saying. No game is the most awesome game ever-not to everyone anyway-and that will always be the case.

I really liked the game. About up their with AC2. anyway, gotta gofinish the epilogue.


You are wrong. Expectations do not affect overall enjoyment. I like the game too, but saying it's not massively flawed is just fooling yourself. Criticizing it is a good thing. Nothing ever gets better without coming to terms with it's faults, and Ubisoft have determinedly had their head in the sand for a while now (see: 100% Synch). The more people talking about the crap parts of the game, the better. Maybe someone on the dev team will take hint.


I know. I'm talking about expectations from hype. Like excitement. "THIS IS GONNA BE THE MOST AWESOMEST THING IN EXISTENCE!!!!!!!" People still act like that.

I criticize openly. What is it about the %100 synch thing? Those obtional objectives were not so much for synch this time around, though some missions were frustrating enough without them.

The game has bugs, some involving the menus. A little more insight into Connor's character development would've been nice. Characters should've looked and sounded their ages rather than simply using one model(not to mention 5yo connor was more like 9yo). More Achilles would've made his death in the epilogue tough base with us the players and that last mission I was to go to was some sort of online thing with Connor speaking directly to us. The epilogue was a nice wrap up to what is sure to be Connor's only game, but it would've needed maybe one of those cliche scenes where we see him "one last time" and the camera pans over the scenery to settle on a sunset and *then* have that brief tutorial.
#28ajmrowlandPosted 11/7/2012 3:05:03 AM(edited)
GuardianShadow0 posted...
ajmrowland posted...
The only problem i've actually experienced with this game is te glitches. Everything else is up to the standard set by AC2.

I'm a realistic guy. I know when people-even I-get overhyped about something. Unfortunately, i seem to be one of the few who actually catches themselves. Lowering expectations will always make for a more enjoyable experience.

I personally would've preferred a better economic system myself. I do like the hunting, but it just doesnt net enough money for me. Also, some of the graphics could probably have been worked better.

*Spopiler*for Desmond Sequence 3: And Daniel Cross had too much setup just to be killed off like that, but I guess that's always been what made this series unique: just killing off characters without a farewell.


USE SPOILER TAGS RIGHT, YOU MORON! SPACE THEM OUT IF YOU DON'T KNOW HOW TO USE THE CODES! That's common frickin' sense.


Alright geez. But guess what, if I spaced it out, I would've gotten the same reaction from somebody. It's happened before.

And in the long run, I probably have ahigher IQ than yours. Asperger's.

And the coding is not the most obvious thing. Just another flaw with gamefaqs.

Oh, and I think calling anyone a moron, even if you're in the understandably blind rage that comes with a spoiler-which is eventualyl inevitable on the internet regardless of what site you use-is considered by mods to be a personal attack.
#29KillerSlawPosted 11/7/2012 6:09:46 AM
DaRk MaGe2004 posted...
KillerSlaw posted...
While I enjoy the game, I do agree that everything seems unpolished and the story just seems to be missing points (especially near the end).

I didn't even realize Achilles had died until after I beat the game. I thought he was GOING to die, but the scene where he dies it just seemed like he went to sleep. I also feel that Connor comes to a realization at the end that he has to kill Charles Lee because of his role as an Assassin and not out of simple revenge. Instead it comes off that he kills Charles Lee because he attacked his village, even though we actually learn that was Washington. It makes it seem like there was no character growth when there easily could have been.


You apparently skipped that homestead mission. Because I think its incredibly obvious....and it was one of the saddest scenes in the game.


Even though I thought I did most of them it's very possible that I did miss that one. If so, then I take back what I said about Achilles.
---
http://i48.tinypic.com/359bpg1.png http://i.imgur.com/VXqqs.gif
#30Jarret_Kennedy(Topic Creator)Posted 11/7/2012 6:26:26 AM
Nope, didn't buy it. I often rent for a night first. You just can't be sure of quality lately. Did beat it though. Quite a few issues with the final bits of the story as well. Talk about going out with a whimper.