Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Games

Ubisoft Plans Assassin's Creed Live Online Game Service (bloomberg.com) 31

Assassin's Creed, a video game franchise set in huge worlds where each one can take hundreds of hours to complete, is getting even bigger. From a report: A new project, which is known inside Ubisoft Entertainment by the code name Assassin's Creed Infinity, sets out to create a massive online platform that evolves over time, according to people familiar with its development. Whereas previous Assassin's Creed games each unfolded in specific historical settings such as ancient Greece or Ptolemaic Egypt, Infinity will contain multiple settings with room to expand to others in the months and years following its debut, said the people, who asked not to be identified discussing a project under development. Individual games on the platform might look and feel different, but they will all be connected. Details surrounding the project, which hasn't been previously reported, are in flux, and it's still years away from release. The teams have also been affected by the #MeToo allegations that have swept through the company over the last year.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Ubisoft Plans Assassin's Creed Live Online Game Service

Comments Filter:
  • Assassin's Creed is best when it's about telling rich stories. We've got enough big empty games already.

    • I'm of two minds on this:
      1) An Assassin's Creed MMO actually makes a lot of sense, narratively, mechanically, and otherwise. There are well-established, competing factions. Going back in time in the Animus is already "instanced" narratively, so there's nothing to explain there, and different characters already play differently, so there's room for experimentation and trying different gameplay.

      2) There's no way I'd ever play it. Ain't nobody got time for an Assassin's Creed MMO, especially given Ubisoft's tr

    • by quall ( 1441799 )

      I'm torn on this. On one hand, their games do have some good stories. On the other hand they're really repetitive to play. After about 30 hours and only 50% into each game, I don't even care about the story anymore and usually stop playing. Not because the story is bad, but because the game is boring to play. I think it's because it's a single player game without puzzles. I cannot even imagine playing an MMO assassin's creed because without the story they don't have anything except a good game engine.

      Yet I

  • As annoying as GaaS can be, for something like AC with releases every 18-24 months it seems and with similar game loops this kind of makes sense. The developers have tons of built assets and world elements already and the "time travel" conceit tying these games together can slot right in to connect these in some coherent manner. I can absolutely see this being something that's almost a full MMO and would let dev's build in more content rather than devising an entirely new release every time.

    The real questi

  • This is Ubisoft, so "infinity" here means a couple of years then your access and all that cash you spent on microtransactions will be lost forever when the servers shut down. Just ask the Might & Magic fans.
    • It's a game. If my "micro transactions" were lost, so what? With all of the demands of having a family, a full-time job, and (gasp) occasionally going outside, that falls way down the "give 2 shits" list.

      • Anyone able to comprehend what type of argument this user is trying to make?
      • Funny that even with all those demands, you're still able to make time to comment on an article about hypothetical transactions in a hypothetical video game to tell everyone how few shits you give.

        Some people like video games. People who like a game get annoyed when the publisher prevents them from playing that game anymore. None of this is very confusing.

      • "It's a game. If my "micro transactions" were lost, so what? With all of the demands of having a family, a full-time job, and (gasp) occasionally going outside, that falls way down the "give 2 shits" list."

        Wot? You have a life? Awesome!

      • I realize with a family, and a job, and mowing the lawn or whatever, its hard to keep up with all the videogame news, so maybe you haven't heard. In the case of Might & Magic: Legacy, Ubisoft shut down the DRM server so you can't even play the game. Its a single player game.

  • Back in my day they were use to be called MUD (Multi-User-Dungeon (or Multi-User-Door (Door use to be a secondary piece of software added to a modem based BBS System))). However I never got into them, nor the new MMO Games, I have tried them, and played them to see if I would enjoy them. However it never got interesting.

    My biggest issue is mostly it is a world where nothing you do matters. When you start the game, you find that someone is needs help, so you clear out all the level 1 monsters in the area

    • That's why MMOs started instancing where when you cleaned out a dungeon, it stays cleaned out when you enter it again, but if someone else goes in there it's still packed with monsters. But since you can "help" someone else who hasn't done it yet, you can go in there with the new guy to clean out the dungeon again. Which in turn meant that people who wanted to farm something down there started to beg and whine to be taken down there by the new guys, which in turn meant that they never got to experience that

      • > In other words, no, there's no fix for that problem.

        Yes there is. Just give the player a "Reset dungeon" option, put dungeons on a timer, etc. For example:

        * World of Warcraft has dungeon cooldown timers. If you can clear a dungeon in 30 minutes and it has an hour cooldown you switch to an alt. character or alt. account and clear a different dungeon. (Unfortunately Blizzard has nerfed gold farming old dungeons because of bullshit "Fun detected. Nerf incoming" micro-management but until Shadowlands dr

    • > so you clear out all the level 1 monsters in the area, the the NPC thanks you, as you wonder on and say you reach level 30 you come back to that area, that NPC is still being attacked by those monsters, in which you at Level 30 can take out all of them in one shot.

      Guild Wars 2 dynamically de-levels you to the zone max level cap you to address this very problem.

      It has pros and cons:

      * Pros -- if you are high level you can join your buddy and still have challenging content.
      * Cons -- it feels like you are

    • > In order for the game to be consistent for all the players, you need to re-spawn and reset the scenario so the other players can have a turn as well,

      That is what The Division 2 does. It lets you replay missions and gives you an option to chose the difficulty: Story, Normal, Hard, etc. If you have completed the story version of a quest you can hop in and help you buddies with theirs. Or if they are further along they can hop into your game.

      The game has automatic level down-scaling and up-scaling.

      * If

  • This seems like something that will cost me too much. I'll stick with standalone games.
  • I ended up spending a lot of time playing video games. Thought I'd finally give an Assassin's Creed game (Valhalla) a proper try, after barely scratching the surface of previous entries before getting bored. I ended up putting in around 120 hours, before reeling from it in disgust. They're horrific time sinks with despicable monetisation. I tried picking up every bit of loot, working my way around the map. It took me 40 hours to get my first full armour set, aside from the one you get near the start. It wa
    • Moderation is key. I'm still on the Ezio collection after years and years. I've always enjoyed it. I just hope I will always have a machine that can play the next game, but normally there are options to get old games.
    • by ffkom ( 3519199 )
      I do totally not understand your disappointment. I played AC Valhalla for ~150 hours, always offline, through the entire story line, and I never bothered to buy anything from that stinking micro-transaction gnome (would have not been possible while playing offline, anyway).

      AC Valhalla is enjoyable completely without any micro transactions, and I had more than enough "legendary" equipment of all sorts at the end of the story.
  • They ruined Thief as well by turning it into a non-interactive movie.
  • In a supplementary announcement, Ubisoft announced the recent assassination of Haiti's Prime Minister was the first demonstration of the 'live concept' aspect of the game. According to a company spokesman, "we thought people were getting the wrong impression, that is that it would be a MMORPG; this is not the case."
  • ... because I do not like playing online at all. But I enjoyed AC Odyssey and AC Valhalla, and a next single-player, offline playable AC is certainly something I will consider buying (on physical media, of course).
  • by antdude ( 79039 )

    What about Prince of Persia live online game service? :P

  • Now the real question is whether these metric fucktards can manage to let people play their games without some phenomenally stupid fuck up of some emaail address on uPlay. You tie access to a *paid for game* to some irrelevant shit. Go fuck yourselves. I'd like to play Anno but I guess I can't (and you games SUCK so I now pirate all of them.) uPlay sucks subarctic penguis.

He has not acquired a fortune; the fortune has acquired him. -- Bion

Working...