@queuing_for_PS4 @MAS_100 No it sold 12 million copies because other people like myself actually realised it's not a rehash of the other games. I understand quality, it is you who doesn't understand that a formula that has designed quality can rely on quantity to produce the goods. Ubisoft have many studios, many studios willing to work on the franchise, you don't see the changes made.
@queuing_for_PS4 @MAS_100 At what point did I say Assassin's Creed 3 was the best? I didn't. I don't disagree that it was disappointing with some elements of the game, however I still thought it was a very good game, the problem for me personally was the story and Connor wasn't the best protagonist. Now you are changing your point, you were saying it's a rehash, but now saying the new gameplay elements didn't make up for the flaws. You are accepting their is new gameplay elements. I'm defending the point that Assassin's Creed 3 was different in many ways, something you have difficulty coming to terms with.
I don't know why you keep comparing Far Cry 3 and Assassin;s Creed 3, yes they're both developed by Ubisoft, but by completely different studios with Ubisoft. They are a completely different genre of game.
If Aassassin;s Creed is dead then why did Assassin's Creed 3 sell 12 million copies? If anything Ubisoft proved the franchise still has a lot to prove going forward and as a fan of all the games I anticipate what they will come up with next.
@queuing_for_PS4 I don't know why you can't understand Assassin's Creed 3 changed this, Assassin's Creed 3 was not a complete rehash. It was built from the ground up, combat redesigned from the ground up, the game used a different engine. Yes elements of the game were the same, but the frontier area was different, hunting was different, being able to climb and jump through tress was different. If you can't see the clear differences between Assassin's Creed 3 and the previous games then I feel sorry for you. I know I have reiterated the point of Assassin's Creed 3 a lot, but you don't seem to understand it. That game was developed for a period of 3 years, and changed a lot of things as well as making other things better.
@queuing_for_PS4 I agree with you that the games could definitely be made better if they were released 2 years between each other. But as I said before, with multiple Ubisoft studios helping develop each game it can be done with a year, and more than a year as I said before. Assassin's Creed 3 was worked on for longer, so that is a step forward. Let's just hope the next game is released late next year for Next Generation consoles, then that would be the massive step forward.
@queuing_for_PS4 You must be unbelievably frustrated with Call of Duty then. But anyway, with Assassin's Creed they let different studios handle different games, as was the case with Assassin's Creed 3 being in production for 3 years I think it was. They worked on some of the games at the same time, and it made sense that Ezio's trilogy didn't require incredible steps forward, just the nice tweaks it had to the overall experience each new game.
MAS_100's comments