Is Assassin's Creed adopting the CoD model? AC3 to be released October 30

http://www.gamespot.com/news/assassins-creed-3-launching-october-30-6350454

Too soon, a sequel should never be released a year from the previous installment.

Waaay to soon.

This is how good franchises die, when company's get greedy and over saturate the market.

Not surprised, at all.

How many Assassin's Creeds have there been now? I thought they had already made five.

Desert Sleepy wrote:How many Assassin's Creeds have there been now? I thought they had already made five.

If you count the crappy mobile phone games and the Nintento DS game/s There's about 6/7....


RIP Assassins Creed

DeadApe wrote:This is how good franchises die, when company's get greedy and over saturate the market.

I've been saying this since AC: Brotherhood.

Brotherhood was a mediocre title because it did little to improve upon AC2, most of the mechanics were the exact same and the tacked on multiplayer was stupid.

After Revelations, I realized that Ubisoft was trying to milk the series for all it's worth.

It's going to go the way of Guitar Hero if the market is drowned in a sea of AC games all the damn time.

DeadApe wrote:This is how good franchises die, when company's get greedy and over saturate the market.

Very much agreed.

There is a difference, because multiple studios are working on these games. Revelations(IMO the best in the series) literally had over an hour of credits because of all the different Ubisoft studios that worked on it.

And if you want to be technical the last two (Revelations and Brotherhoods) were expansions of the story from AC2. They have had the story for AC3 Done for a long time, and have most likely been working on it long before Revelations hit the shelves.

Sir Manguydude wrote:There is a difference, because multiple studios are working on these games. Revelations(IMO the best in the series) literally had over an hour of credits because of all the different Ubisoft studios that worked on it.

And if you want to be technical the last two (Revelations and Brotherhoods) were expansions of the story from AC2. They have had the story for AC3 Done for a long time, and have most likely been working on it long before Revelations hit the shelves.

Not an accuse for milking a series dry.

If they had the story for AC3 done early like you said, Ubisoft should have just had AC3 placed into full production.

The fact of the mater is that, Ubisoft took a chance with Brotherhood and decided to make a game that's almost quite literally the same game with only a few more features. It worked out well for them so they made Revelations.

No doubt in my mind that the series will continue after AC3. Ubisoft is going to try to get as much money from AC as humanly possible.

Don't call Brotherhood and Revelations "expansions" just because they are sequels to AC2. They sold full price at $60.

A new Assassin's Creed game has come out every year starting with AC2.

I read somewhere, I think on IGN, that AC3's been in development for just over three years.

Wasn't the first AC released, like, a year ago or something?
Google'd it, and it was on 2007? What the shit? I haven't even gotten the chance to try out the first of them yet...

Made in Finland wrote:Wasn't the first AC released, like, a year ago or something?
Google'd it, and it was on 2007? What the shit? I haven't even gotten the chance to try out the first of them yet...

AC1 blows. Really, really repetitive and a chore to finish. AC2 is so, so much better.

Since everybody is talking about AC. There's a 50% price cut on AC Revelations at my local Gamestop, is it worth it?