StarDestroyer.Net BBS

http://www.gametrailers.com/gamepage.php?id=2581

Okay I was impressed by the last hands on they did but this is just extra cool looking.. especially the bit where the assassin staggers a guard right off a rooftop.

Any chance it'll come out on PC? The swordplay looks awesome.

(my brother has a PS3 but he'll be taking it with him when he moves out after his wedding in September ...)

Vympel wrote:Any chance it'll come out on PC? The swordplay looks awesome.

(my brother has a PS3 but he'll be taking it with him when he moves out after his wedding in September ...)

It's been confirmed for the PC.

Orgasmic.

Let me just say everything shown for Assassin's Creed so far has been very, VERY impressive. The only way the game can go downhill with the thus shown fighting is if it's a Spider man I for the PC style random button masher. But I don't think that's likley with the team behind the game.

Mewantsitbadly!

Seriously, this trailer was the shit. The market lacks games like these.

The combat looks incredible, especially the way you seem to be able to use your whole body as a weapon. Did anyone else notice the way the character bitchslapped that one guard? My only fear is that I will not be good enough to keep up with the awesomeness of this game in actual play.

Interesting choice of music for the new trailer there, gives it a bit of a Sopranos feel to it, and I'm interested in how exactly they'll do the music for the actual game. The ridiculously well timed and editted fan-trailer Das Creed has probably spoiled me though, considering just how well the music fit with the action.

I've maintained that Assassin's Creed will be the game that makes me buy a 360 and HDTV/projector.

That's been true since the first E3 trailer and finally seeing some SEXY ARSE swordplay has just convinced me further.

PeZook wrote:Seriously, this trailer was the shit. The market lacks games like these.

The use of DJ Shadow was remarkably perfect. This trailer was made fantastically well.

And yes - Altair's awesome parkour has now been matched by his awesome swordplay.

Nobody better spoil the plot for this one: it looks like it'll work on a few levels, and someone saying 'zomg u wurk for teh ur quanz' would kill that.

It's times like these I regret not having an Xbox 360 or a not-lame computer. This is one of those games which I can get really excited about. Apart from the totally slick gameplay, as Stark says the story looks to be almost 'wheels-within-wheels' in style - does anyone recall the mysterious death screen after Altair got punked by a bunch of Christians?

Having looked it up, I realise I heard about Assassin's creed about a year ago, and nothing until recently. It's certainly going to make my 360 be more than a media streamer for me.

I read somewhere that not only is the environment very interactive, but they haven't gone and covered the world in 'less than 2"' detail. Their level design software autmatically tags areas as climbable etc, which introduces the exciting idea of dead-ends etc. I'm tired of games where the only place you can 'climb' is the best place to climb (or a terrible place to force you into a trap etc). If I can get halfway up a tower and realise I've stuffed myself because I didn't plan my course, that will be kickin-rad.

Stark wrote:I read somewhere that not only is the environment very interactive, but they haven't gone and covered the world in 'less than 2"' detail. Their level design software autmatically tags areas as climbable etc, which introduces the exciting idea of dead-ends etc. I'm tired of games where the only place you can 'climb' is the best place to climb (or a terrible place to force you into a trap etc). If I can get halfway up a tower and realise I've stuffed myself because I didn't plan my course, that will be kickin-rad.

I heard something along the lines of 'if it protrudes about an inch, you can grasp on to it'. Just going off the videos it really does look as though you can climb just about anything - I know I'd spend a fair amount of time just climbing shit. And making use of Altair's parkour to fuck around.

PS. Jade Raymond, intrepid producer and narrator, is hot.

Yeah that's what I mean: plenty of games say stuff like that, but the reality is that they still limit the flexibility anyway. If they don't deliberately design 'flat' levels with deliberately featureless walls etc to stop the player climbing where they don't want you too, that'll be good.

The levels look surprisingly big, too - bigger than your average Hitman level.

Stark wrote:If they don't deliberately design 'flat' levels with deliberately featureless walls etc to stop the player climbing where they don't want you too, that'll be good.

Hopefully not. However, the fact he was climbing about on a church steeple (I can't see what possible purpose that would serve) makes me optimistic.

The levels look surprisingly big, too - bigger than your average Hitman level.

It really does look like a full city in some of those shots, and the NPCs are characterful, so it seems particularly vibrant. Man, I haven't gushed this much over a game in ages.

The crowds I've seen in some earlier trailers have more people in one road or square than the average Oblivion town has in it's entirety. It's like... someone made a GTA game with more than one care per 30m of road! The idea that this limits your ground-level mobility and attempts to charge headlong through crowds makes you obvious is a great bit of 'organic design'.

Call me crazy, but if they design the levels with no eye to limiting the player for plot reasons, just cruising around checking shit out will be fun. I bet there will be 360 achievements for things like 'get to x inaccessible spot' or 'hang around zone y without attracting attention for five minutes' etc.

Stark wrote:The crowds I've seen in some earlier trailers have more people in one road or square than the average Oblivion town has in it's entirety. It's like... someone made a GTA game with more than one care per 30m of road! The idea that this limits your ground-level mobility and attempts to charge headlong through crowds makes you obvious is a great bit of 'organic design'.

Call me crazy, but if they design the levels with no eye to limiting the player for plot reasons, just cruising around checking shit out will be fun. I bet there will be 360 achievements for things like 'get to x inaccessible spot' or 'hang around zone y without attracting attention for five minutes' etc.

I'd love it if acting suspiciously got you unwanted attention ; No Hitman-style "Giant bald guy in gloves gives donuts to FBI, FBI greedily takes donuts. Donuts are spiked with poison. big surprise!"

Though if the PC version doesn't have "save anywhere", I'll be pissed.

Pfft, save anywhere in mission based games is for babies. That feeling that makes you want to save is called 'tension'. It's a GOOD thing.

I expect they'll do the Hitman thing and have increasing difficulties having decreasing amounts of saves. Why wouldn't the console versions have an identical save system, anyway?

Sadly, it sorta looks like the 360 version might look a bit worse than the PS3 version.

Stark wrote:Pfft, save anywhere in mission based games is for babies. That feeling that makes you want to save is called 'tension'. It's a GOOD thing.

Uh, no. Because then you get a hard mission, and there's this moment where you always get killed, and then you spend six months trying to beat this part, having to go through half the mission every time.

Maybe you have that kind of free time, but I don't

Stark wrote:I expect they'll do the Hitman thing and have increasing difficulties having decreasing amounts of saves.

That would satisfy me, at least. It's a good solution that pleases pretty much everybody.

Stark wrote:Why wouldn't the console versions have an identical save system, anyway?

I don't know, it's a developer decision. But plenty of PC ports use a typically console save system.

PeZook wrote:Uh, no. Because then you get a hard mission, and there's this moment where you always get killed, and then you spend six months trying to beat this part, having to go through half the mission every time.

Maybe you have that kind of free time, but I don't

No, in that case I'd just abandon the game for having shit level design. Having no saves means you have to keep your eyes open for problems like that as a level designer. Having unlimited saves makes most PC games *LAUGHABLY* easy. Oh no, I can just save and try to steal this thing! Dammit, try again, and again, and again... this is fun somehow.

PeZook wrote:I don't know, it's a developer decision. But plenty of PC ports use a typically console save system.

Really? I can't think of any console ports right now, do you mean 'profile' style saving (ie, Halo)? All the cross-platform games I can think of (like Oblivion) use a regular save system.

Stark wrote: No, in that case I'd just abandon the game for having shit level design. Having no saves means you have to keep your eyes open for problems like that as a level designer. Having unlimited saves makes most PC games *LAUGHABLY* easy. Oh no, I can just save and try to steal this thing! Dammit, try again, and again, and again... this is fun somehow.

It depends on your playstyle. Sometimes sequences that are laughably easy to some people are difficult for others, and an otherwise awesome game can get ruined because of one or two such things. It gets worse when a game is freeform and you can't foresee what the player will have to go through when designing a level.

Remember San Andreas? There was a mission there, "Wrong side of the tracks", that I passed on the first try. But most people found it hard for some reason, and because you had to go through the same motions every single time when you attempted it (drive to the mission marker, drive to the train station, watch a short unskippable cutscene, get on the bike, chase the train) before you got to the hard part, there were people who gave up on a ridiculously awesome game because of that single mission.

I'm talking about stuff like that. I do think the Hitman approach is optimal - you have limited saves depending on difficulty, but you can set them to unlimited if you want to.

On the save/load grind...well, I do find it fun, sometimes. But, you know...if you don't want to do it this way, just don't

Stark wrote: Really? I can't think of any console ports right now, do you mean 'profile' style saving (ie, Halo)? All the cross-platform games I can think of (like Oblivion) use a regular save system.

It may just be the older (or shittier) games. I'm mostly thinking Tomb Raider here, which stubbornly insisted on only using "save points". And profile-style saving is cool and all games should have it.

PeZook wrote:It depends on your playstyle. Sometimes sequences that are laughably easy to some people are difficult for others, and an otherwise awesome game can get ruined because of one or two such things. It gets worse when a game is freeform and you can't foresee what the player will have to go through when designing a level.

Remember San Andreas? There was a mission there, "Wrong side of the tracks", that I passed on the first try. But most people found it hard for some reason, and because you had to go through the same motions every single time when you attempted it (drive to the mission marker, drive to the train station, watch a short unskippable cutscene, get on the bike, chase the train) before you got to the hard part, there were people who gave up on a ridiculously awesome game because of that single mission.

I'm talking about stuff like that. I do think the Hitman approach is optimal - you have limited saves depending on difficulty, but you can set them to unlimited if you want to.

On the save/load grind...well, I do find it fun, sometimes. But, you know...if you don't want to do it this way, just don't

Um, I just said right then that missions that revolve around failing at the end when you have no saves is *poor game design*. You just said exactly the same thing. Save/load spoilt is *bad*, and it makes games like Oblivion and Fallout retarded (gee let's steal everything everyone in town is carrying! Why? Because I can save/load until everyone is unarmed lol!). And if you *don't* spoilt, Fallout is much, much harder - being *forced* to save/load sploit is a symptom of bad game design. Stealing is broken in almost every game ever.

It's possible to have no saves during missions and simply not have these critical-fail situations, or be freeform enough that a player can change approach. I seldom save in Hitman games, even the later ones where you can save all you like. It's called 'good level design'.

Stark wrote:It may just be the older (or shittier) games. I'm mostly thinking Tomb Raider here, which stubbornly insisted on only using "save points". And profile-style saving is cool and all games should have it.

Oh yeah, like PS2 games and stuff. Frankly, I think save points have their place (they're essentially the same as the transparent 'checkpoint' system used in FPS's, for instance).

ANYWAY, this game appears to have relatively simple goals, so I'll be playing on 'super-hard no saving because I rule'.

It may just be the older (or shittier) games. I'm mostly thinking Tomb Raider here, which stubbornly insisted on only using "save points". And profile-style saving is cool and all games should have it.

I recall Tombraider 1 - 3 at least had infinite saves at any location on PC.

I didn't play any other of those games until Tombraider Legend so i can't speak for the others.

Stark wrote:ANYWAY, this game appears to have relatively simple goals, so I'll be playing on 'super-hard no saving because I rule'.

The goal couldn't be simpler. "Get to important Christian. Stab him the fuck in the throat with your cool ass missing finger punch-dagger." HOWEVER, considering that the various enemies can kill your smooth moving assassin ass with a single good sword swing, playing it on super-hard mode might not be advisable.

At first.

Bah, I bet that IS super-hard mode. If you die in one hit on normal, I'll be utterly shocked: most people don't like that sort of thing.

Some articles I've read suggest there might be several steps per kill (setting up your sneaky-ass approach etc), but since combat is to be avoided I imagine it'll be like the better Hitman levels: cruising around planning, a kill, and then running like a crazy man. Shame no uzis or disguises, though.