Assassin's Creed IV: Black Flag. Good or Bad?

[Beliyal]

Ugh. Since all AC games were immensely fun to me, I know that this one will be as well, but I really hoped they will take a break and introduce a new compelling story, new protagonists (unrelated to the existing ones), new time periods and all. To me, it looks like a complete waste of a potential new trilogy to put the game in a virtually the same period, with a character related to three characters we played (how's that going to work anyway? We solved Desmond's story, why do we need to go back to Connor's grandpa, what could he possibly tell us that would be relevant to any of the stories?)

I was thinking that if they were continuing the main story of Desmond that perhaps Grandpappy may have found some way of defeating Juno/The Gods, as Juno has basically taken over the world as of the end of III.

If so, probably a message left in advance for him. If they saw so far ahead into the future, who is to say Minerva did not in some way manage to leave a message for Grandpappy to help Desmond stop Juno?

Hm, good idea actually. However, I think it would've been better to just leave the existing characters alone (especially Desmond and his family) and introduce someone else. And this, although a good idea, would be quite confusing. But I don't know anymore, it's not like Assassin's Creed was never confusing before!

 

[Smeggs]

Ugh. Since all AC games were immensely fun to me, I know that this one will be as well, but I really hoped they will take a break and introduce a new compelling story, new protagonists (unrelated to the existing ones), new time periods and all. To me, it looks like a complete waste of a potential new trilogy to put the game in a virtually the same period, with a character related to three characters we played (how's that going to work anyway? We solved Desmond's story, why do we need to go back to Connor's grandpa, what could he possibly tell us that would be relevant to any of the stories?)

I was thinking that if they were continuing the main story of Desmond that perhaps Grandpappy may have found some way of defeating Juno/The Gods, as Juno has basically taken over the world as of the end of III.

If so, probably a message left in advance for him. If they saw so far ahead into the future, who is to say Minerva did not in some way manage to leave a message for Grandpappy to help Desmond stop Juno?

Hm, good idea actually. However, I think it would've been better to just leave the existing characters alone (especially Desmond and his family) and introduce someone else. And this, although a good idea, would be quite confusing. But I don't know anymore, it's not like Assassin's Creed was never confusing before!

They couldn't possibly leave Desmond's family alone if this person's ancestor is Desmond's ancestor.

Edward Kenway.
Haytham's father is rumored to be the lead this time around, which could be really cool letting us see Haytham's past and how he became the man he was in Ac3.
Also Haytham mentioned once that he could sail better then Connor, whether this is true or just another of his taunts remains to be seen but this could mean more time with Haytham.

I found Haytham to be a bland, boring character, whose only motivation was a brainwashed, idiotic idea of controlling the masses through enslaving their minds.

 

[bastardofmelbourne]

off-topic: I still can't get over the fact that over five games, they utterly failed to make Desmond at all interesting.

People were calling him bland as soon as the first game. He's the protagonist - he's literally a stand-in for the player in the game's framing device. But he stayed boring old Desmond right up until his plotline ended, and now we don't care, and they're making new games with (presumably) a new Animus user.

Why didn't they just drop him after the first game if he was so irrelevant to the game's success? Why keep exploring the life of Blandy McBlando for five games? Five games with a crappy, vestigial protagonist!

 

[Pulse]

Fundamental gameplay is so boring and simple they keep tacking on half formed other types of gameplay.

I wish they would invest in one or two aspects and make them excelent, rather than having lots of mediocrity.

Stop calling it AC and just make a full out pirate game if you want, but it'll still dabble in each mechanic (assasinations, hand to hand, parkour, naval combat, resource management) without going deep/challenging in any area.

 

[unindexedsearchengine]

As much as I love the series (yes, even you, III), this seems a tad early. Still hyped though. I'll be happy as long as there is free-running and a minimum of one hidden blade. I'm likely to buy this.

 

[Kyber]

Very bad in my opinion. I didn't like naval battles in AC3, it might have been fine in a different game, maybe even fun, but it doesn't fit in AC series. What i want is parkour on rooftops, climbing around and assassinating, NOT being in a boat, firing cannons at other boats.

 

[MeChaNiZ3D]

Damn, and just when I had mentally renounced the series.

I really did like the naval combat of 3, and it could be interesting to be an assassin with pirate paraphernalia. The architecture and atmosphere might be a bit better than 3 as well. I don't know, I might not buy it on principle (online passes and launch editions etc.) as well as the series getting a bit tired and not knowing what to do with itself, but a pirate setting might be just what it needs. I will say though, although the naval battles in 3 were really good, it's diluting Assassin's Creed's core gameplay. In conclusion: I KNOW NOTHING ABOUT THE GAME EXCEPT THE SETTING, SO I'LL SEE.

 

[Nouw]

Has potential, but will they use it? Assassinating a target in the middle of a ship-to-ship battle with enemies boarding sounds very fun.

 

[TheAIOverlord]

No. Remember the good old days of sneaking through crowds as you slowly approach your target? Remember that part of the creed "you are a blade in the crowd"?
Last I checked, Assassin's Creed was about assassinating templars as stealthily as possible. This is just...HOW IS THIS ASSASSIN'S CREED?!

 

[Robot Number V]

It'll probably be bad, if the current trend is anything to go by. I didn't really care about the first game, but I thought the second one was brilliant. Brotherhood was OK, but not quite as good as II. Revelations was kind of a mess, lots of really out-of-character moments for the series. And 3 is just...boring. The setting just isn't doing it for me. There's no especially tall or impressive buildings to climb, but there's lots of features that add pretty much nothing for me. (Hunting, tree-running, The Homestead, etc.)

Yeah. Well. We'll see.

EDIT: Also, and this is completely irrelevant, but I think it's weird that they gave it a subtitle despite it being a full sequel.

 

[TheCommanders]

The concept is intriguing and could certainly make for a fun game. HOWEVER, Ubisoft has clearly forgotten what made their series fun originally. They are now making yearly installments of whatever they want with the Assassin's Creed name, and a few of its mechanics tacked on to make sure it sells. That annoys me.

 

[The Unworthy Gentleman]

It's a new game with a new character and new setting to a series that I already love with a focus on the best part of the most recent entry to the series. What on Earth is not to love about this game?

The gameplay. I hope they go back to the old gameplay style, where it wasn't just press RMB+W to go everywhere. Also move the buildings closer, I could barely cross the roofs of 3 with the distance between the two.

 

[FantasticMrLP]

The AC series... When it first came out it was a new IP and had an interesting idea. Thesecond game was promised to be an awesome futuristic AC game, that didn't happen. Each game afterwards seems to be stalling this to the point where i stopped bying them after brotherhood and would simply like to see this series peacefully die. As it is now just becoming a meaning series with too many sequals until it becomes like final fantasy in which fans of the origonal will be doomed to keep buying the games no matter how far removed from the originol idea they stray.

 

[Shoggoth2588]

DAMN YOU!! I Hope you're proud of yourself for giving me something new to listen to you magnificent bastard!!

---

I'll say here what I'm surprised I haven't said here yet:

I'm pleasantly surprised that the naval combat aspect of AC3 caught on as well as it did! It looked like a ton of fun but that's probably the only draw AC3 has on me. Here's the thing though...why not just make a completely new IP based around that naval combat? You can still have Pirates and, swashbuckling but center it around a completely original character. Kind of like how Assassin's Creed was a sort of take-off from Prince of Persia, they could have made King of the Tides or something.

As an Assassins Creed though, I'm glad Connor isn't getting his own spin-off games like Ezio did. Pirates are awesome but a pirate who is also an assassin just sounds like one of those peanut-butter/chocolate combinations what will probably make for an awesome type of character. OP, I share your concern about a lack of high buildings to climb and, jump off of. If this was a fresh IP there would be no need for such things but Assassins Creed IV will sell more on day one (and more importantly, sell a shitload more pre-orders) than Tidal Warfare or whatever this could have been.