Yeah mgs 5 is an odd case, mgs was always about crazy story and very good gameplay mixed by author lead insanity who like to play with his audience (the ladder in mgs3).
AC4 is another odd case, it’s been praise for the pirate mechanics much more than the typical AC mechanics (with disappointing stealth follow missions), in fact the true game that was praised for doing more with the formula was the vita game, originally off brand spin off send to death on a dead platform, but ended up being retcon as part of the main series, due to incredible sales relative to the platform, and great reception among fan with a character that had more charisma (in a time where game concepts with woman were turned down, let alone a black woman). AC4 is basically using the strength of having a very generous formula that allow entire new setting and idea to be compatible.
Also they have an incredible universe incredibly boringly presented and exploited (especially the present day and overarching plot). AC unity didn’t fall because of technical issue only too, people had issue with the pacing, lack of draw in the story and lack of charisma. AC syndicate came back to a more gameplay lead structure very close to AC1 with charismatic characters (people really like the woman lead too, surprisingly) but also have turn the setting more “cartoony” overall (don’t know yet if it’s a good thing for long term reception). They rest on the episodic nature of their formula too much (new era, new character, new setting, popular historical events, super convenient framing device!).
Also now witcher 3 has happened, while it’s not the same genre it has set expectation very high for everyone (so much it retroactively made bioware look bad for rpg lover).
And yeah The Witcher 3 definitely raised the bar. I hear that the next one coming out this year is taking a lot of cues from it, and becoming more like an action RPG (which they’ve already been doing since Unity).
AC1 was a story about freedom vs control, it was philosophical at time, each side had great thing to say and thesis to advance that wasn’t clear cut manichean, this has degrade other time but ac3 and even ac4 was about this ideal (the founding father fighting for their own freedom at the expense of other (native, black in the last scene, discussion between the heroes and his templar father), pirates trying to create a democracy and their failing in the face of tyranny, etc … in syndicate you have down to earth heroes sweeping through rooftop and a villain full of tics and no motive except he punch desk, marx is mocked as hipster fodder devoid of thesis and other character are just there with traits and tics but no real thesis. in fact the assassin’s ideal start to blur with templar in a both side are bad (instead of pondering the responsability of acts like in ac1) which is blatant in ac unity as they sided with power on the french revolution (the hero is an aristocrat who is legitimized in his status, the revolution side is unilaterally evil, the mass is shown as that scary mob, they show the assassin’s as corrupts and weak, put napoleon on assassin’s side (which is debatable), there is no real thesis of the gray morality like in ac 1, it’s rather manichean). And part of this is that the original team have completely quit the game after ac3, after a slow bleed of talents. In fact you can see they made that inside joke in the present day part with a mock ubi soft (abstergo) being the templar den in which they corrupt the meaning of the assassin’s with their game (it’s even a plot point in ac liberation).
For whatever its worth, I thought the Ezio series was pretty idealistic as well. Assassins are shown pretty much always as the good guys and Templars are just evil (I mean, Brotherhood was about the Borgia after all).
I honestly feel like AC 3 changed that up somewhat. I think it did a decent job of showing not the Assassins but the founding fathers as deeply flawed people. It points out George Washington as the guy who ordered Indian villages razed. And that ending (the parting shot from the British) was very, very cynical. And in some cases, the Templars were fighting for the same thing as the Assassins, just with different people.
Definitely agree about AC 4. It was a very romantic view of pirates.
Very interesting point about Unity. I had thought of it as simply returning to “Assassins and Templars are the same,” but you’re right, it’s not just them as being the same, but both are corrupt. It’s like neither is truly aspiring to a higher ideal.
And definitely agree about Syndicate. The main villain was just poorly done. I found it very interesting, though, how the Assassins, who are typically a “rebellious” or “anti-order” force, were working with the Queen. Seemed like a huge change of pace for the series.
Worth pointing out that in the AC universe, Ubisoft works with Abstergo (presumably unaware of their Templar affiliations) to produce the AC games (AC-ception…).
This one is funny, I’m Caribbean, and when people say pirate of the Caribbean they never show actual Caribbean, it’s just a romantic version of western escapism. When I got indie I tried to make a game that reinvent pirate from a caraibean culture feel (which has evolve to center around maroon instead), because we barely have anything that reference them in our basic imagination (it’s something imported from europe generally, we don’t cultivate it).
When I learn about pirates, they were fairly idealist and rather quite democratic (they elect the captain and they share the spoil equally, everyone as a say in decisions), they cultivate a harsh reputation (using spectacle like lighting fuse to impress on the beard, it’s true story) only to actually avoid fight (which is super costly and destructive) and have people turning themselves over directly. In fact most people becoming pirate is actually revolting, it’s because the way official boat enroll grunt people, by scrapping homeless, drunk, debt prisoner to toss them under the tyranny of a commander (hence the democratic turn when they go pirate).
Basically pirate are often everyday man who were forced into servitude and rebelled against authority (there is a fair number of opportunist too), which cast them as outlaw because society was ruled by aristocracy that didn’t granted them those rights, hence they could not return home, they had to go rogue. They were incredibly sympathetic to slave which they often liberate from slaver boat. They also had a lot of good relation with native with which they had a custom of exchanging name (and from which they learn and imported a number of culinary practice, like buccaneer chicken).
So pirate depiction of ac4 is actually quite accurate (in spirit) except for the main character who is right out of a pulp trope. As a Caribbean the one who goes around robs and plunder are not pirates, they were these greedy old kingdom, they stole whole country and the fate of the actual Caribbean is truly sad. All those tales of cannibalism is greatly exaggerated, especially in face of the atrocity that was use on them, but people with power write history.
Another Halo fan! Glad to see I’m not alone Also played AOE, and AOM. I’ve never been a fan of RTS games but they were fun to fool around with as a kid.
I would be a Halo player if any of the last three were on PC. As it stands, I’m a huge fan of the universe (read a number of the novels). I think Microsoft crafted something really special there.
There is only one Halo novel I actually appreciate for a unique take on the Halo universe and clever writing. I don’t recall the name but it begins on a human Insurrectionist asteroid colony, with a civ named Delgado. That was truly an innovative work. I suppose others may disagree with this opinion but tbh I don’t appreciate dumb plots or writing poorly, especially for a novel. YouTube comments are quite disgusting lol
Interesting statements about poor writing. Halo novels (especially those by Eric Nylund) are some of the highest quality “extended universe” novels out there. The plots aren’t always some twisting scheme, but they’re typically very well-written.
Also played AOE, and AOM. I’ve never been a fan of RTS games but they were fun to fool around with as a kid.