Judging by my previous bodies of work, you may assume that I play
only RPGs and very little else. This is a perfectly logical
assumption and one that you would be forgiven for making, yet it is
not exactly true. I play a variety of games of diverse genres and
with different expectations for each one. Recently, I purchased and
beat the third main installment of the Assassin's Creed franchise. In
the early writings for my blog, I had a few
things
to say about the franchise, and it is about time I returned to it.
While I am a huge fan of the series and enjoyed my time with the new
protagonist Connor Kenway from the time of the American
Revolution, I noticed that the game was not without flaws which
may pose a danger to the series going forward. This is not intended
to be a review of the game, rather a collection of thoughts about it
that have a general theme. Also, I will not be discussing multiplayer
in any shape or form: Assassin's Creed will always be a primarily
single player game to me, with an added (but welcome and enjoyable)
multiplayer component. Lastly, I intend this to be spoiler free, yet
I acknowledge that what I say may come with implicit spoilers, you
have been warned. With that in mind, here is my critique of
Assassin's Creed 3.
The first thing I really began to notice towards the middle of
Assassin's Creed 3 was the vast quantities of side stuff to do.
Normally, I would be all for the inclusion of more content in a video
game to help justify the $60 purchase price. However, in this game
many of the optional missions feel decidedly arbitrary and pointless.
Many of them are, and I mean this quite literally, a series of
checklists of tasks to perform in order to build rapport for various
factions in the game that the player will rarely see or interact
with. Things like “Kill X amount of enemies with Y weapon,”
“Perform a Leap of Faith X times,” or “Use Z gadget to perform
X perfect hunts.” The game asks the player if they want to perform
these tasks, yet offers no incentive to do so. While I have not
actually completed the tasks myself, as far as I am aware there is no
reward besides a useless achievement/trophy for completing them.
Players are also invited to explore the underground network of
tunnels built by the Free Masons in Boston and New York to unlock
fast travel locations. However, the game already offers a sizable
number of fast travel locations by default, so this again seems like
an empty, pointless gesture, even if the tunnels themselves are very
interesting in their own right. There is also an optional moneymaking
mechanic in the Davenport Homestead. Connor has to renovate the
Homestead and bring enough people to come to live there in order to
build a thriving community. The characters and subplots introduced
through this quest-line are very well done and help to flesh out
Connor as a character (and I have to stress that this does wonders
for making Connor a much more relatable protagonist). The problem
with this is that the ultimate use for the Homestead is to craft
goods and make money by shipping them to various vendors. While
players can use this money to purchase new weapons and equipment for
use on missions, it is ultimately superfluous because Connor's
initial inventory is more than enough to take the player from the
start of the game to the end of the game. Lastly, the player can take
part in a series of collection quests. They can gather up feathers
from the Colonial Frontier, open treasure chests scattered throughout
the game world, and reclaim the pages to Benjamin
Franklin's legendary
almanacs. Yet again, these do not seem to manifest into any
tangible gameplay benefits: Collecting feathers nets the player a
Native American tribal outfit, opening chests grants the player money
and recipes for the Homestead they do not need since the economy
confers no real benefit, and the Almanac's again give more recipes.
All of these extras are included in the game and provide extra
length, yet they all (with the exception of the Homestead) feel
tacked on and serve no purpose in the context of the game besides
lengthening a playthrough's running time. An average player will
have no need to do most of this.
Another observation I made when playing Assassin's Creed 3 is that
the game has many different gameplay types, to the point where it may
seem somewhat scattered and disjointed. Throughout the game, the
player is introduced to a number of different mechanics that are only
used once or twice and then never used again. Players will be asked
to direct Patriot troops in battle in the middle of a Loyalist siege.
In another mission later on, they are tasked with firing a cannon
into Loyalist troops in order to stop them cold. At another point in
the game, players are forced to cross through no man's land in the
middle of a shootout, learning the timing and ducking from cover to
cover avoiding the shots. All of these gameplay styles are only used
in their respective sequences and never make repeat appearances.
While they serve their purpose in breaking up other sections and
providing a bit of a breather, the side quests and other missions
should be doing that while the main quest sticks to reiterating on
their core mechanics in interesting ways. There is one last mechanic
that deviates from the standard Assassin's Creed gameplay style, but
it is more ingrained into the game: The naval missions. As a part of
the story, Connor gains his own ship with which he can sail the sees
in pursuit of the Templars and other things. Ship combat sections
appear a few separate times in the story and there is an optional
quest-chain surrounding naval combat, and they are all very well done
and deserve praise. However, it again seems like a distraction from
what should be the main mechanics of the franchise. All of these side
mechanics seem to get in the way of what should be a game about
stabbing dudes in the throat.
Speaking of killing dudes, the arsenal Connor has with which to do
so is a fairly decent one. He has access to Hidden Blades,
Swords/Axes/War Clubs, Tomahawks/Daggers, Pistols, Bows, Rope Darts,
Poison Darts, Trip Mines, Muskets, Snares, and Smoke Bombs. This is
quite the inventory. But the problem is that most the this equipment
feels completely useless. In my playthrough of the game, I basically
only used the Hidden Blade and Tomahawk in combination with Smoke
Bombs and Bows. I rarely used the Pistol and NEVER used any of the
other pieces of equipment. The game bills Connor's inventory as a
toolbox the player can use to solve any problem in any manner they
please. However, this is not the case. Due to the optional objectives
and constricted, occasionally linear level design, any decision the
player might have made with tactics is immediately thrown out the
window. Due to the nature of the story, with the player playing as
Desmond Miles, who is reliving Connor's memory through the Animus
device, the player is given optional objectives in order to
improve synchronization with Connor's memory by doing things how he
did it. It will give players objectives like “Kill X amount of
enemies from a hiding spot” or other such tasks to complete
mid-mission. So while the player in theory has a multitude of way to
go through many missions, they will in actuality only have one or two
“best” ways of successfully pulling it off. Also, many of the
missions have the player moving from waypoint to waypoint to waypoint
in a decidedly linear fashion. Even without these constraints, just
going in and having an all out brawl to kill everyone is generally a
tactic that works. The way levels and set-pieces are arranged, there
is either very little challenge or a great deal of challenge
(depending on whether or not the player chooses to go after optional
objective and what those objectives are at times) without much of a
middle ground or room for experimentation.
When all of these points are combined, it results in a game that,
while well-intentioned, feels like it does not truly know what it
wants to be. The game is lacking in an underlying core than binds
everything together. It feels like it is juggling too many balls at
once and is destined to drop a few of them as a result, even if the
vast majority remain in the air. These mechanics dilute the game and
keeps it from shining in the way it really should. For future
Assassin's Creed games, I recommend making a return to the simplicity
and purity of the first game where the goal is to kill targets in
creative and sneaky ways, but with the advancements made in the
systems by subsequent games. The first game allowed players to
research their targets and learn all about their habits and routines,
giving them the information to plan their assassinations. I would
love to see them weave this investigation into the story-driven plots
the series has come to be known for. The story would take players
through the investigation, but loosen the leash during the actual
assassinations, giving players much more freedom in that respect. It
may be wise to kill the concept of optional, mid-mission objectives
as they tend to hinder the game more than they help. Go back to the
core of the franchise. For all the talk of Assassins vs. Templars,
there is very little in the way of assassination that goes on in more
recent games in the franchise. Assassins apparently tend to do more
faffing about then actual killing.
That is not to say that Assassin's Creed 3 is a bad game by any
means. In fact, after the Ezio trilogy, it is a step in the right
direction. The game has returned the series to the interesting gray
on gray dynamic between the Templars and Assassins over the Chaotic
Good vs. Stupid Evil conflict of Assassin's Creed 2. In fact, the
plot in general is very well written, even if the rewrites to history
done in order to shoehorn Connor into the American Revolution feel a
little like Forrest Gump. The improvements they made to the parkour
systems really help to improve the overall game. This is a very good
game. I am just somewhat disappointed as a long time fan of the
franchise that it may be falling victim to the sin of trying of
please everyone. This franchise can work, but it needs to be planned
more carefully. I do not want to see it fall to the wayside.
4 comments:
Hmm. I know we discussed this one quite a bit, but you have a different focus than I do. There isn't anything I particularly disagree with, but there's things I'd like to discuss more in depth. I guess that's good, leaves me something to write my own post about (I still need to do that some time...)
Oh, another note. You mention one-off mechanics - the cannon, commanding the soldiers, etc. etc. Those are what I'd call 'set-piece' mechanics, and are specifically meant to be done once as a 'memorable' part of the game. Except these don't hold a candle to AC2's hang-gliding or the several chase-scene setpieces in other AC games. So they're just not executed properly, in my opinion.
That's a fair point. Still, I don't know if the series as it stands needs them. Aside from the flying machine in Ac2, none of the set-pieces come to mind as "memorable". It just seems like "We want to do everything" and you know what comes of that. "When you try and appeal to everyone, you will appeal to no one."
Fortunately, I would not go that far. And, no lie, our discussion did help to inform this article. Thank you for being a good person to bounce ideas off of.
People cry foul of reptitiveness every AC game though and so they try to fill it with all this extra stuff every game.
I guess that there's some deeper seated problem that gets translated by the brain as repetitive (because the games do feel repetitive). Maybe something about the combat system or interactivity? And until it can be pinned down and fixed they're going to try and fill the void with Tower Defence minigames
(Plus they've probably got lots of guilty bored mechanics designers sitting round with nothing else to do because you can pretty much just build a new setting and it will make an AC game worth playing =D)
The repetitiveness of the first game had more to do with the investigations than the assassinations, though I do see your point.
Nonetheless, I would like that AC remain true to its core, which is shaking dudes in various ways. Like Half-Life, you can use the same mechanics, yet reiterate on them in different ways.
Post a Comment