Best posts made by DoctorDoom11235
I just want to second most of the OP's concerns. Specifically, the 'omniscient enemy' problem; when the OP calls detection "broken quick," it is not an exaggeration. I'll try to get some video but I have certainly been detected through walls and at ranges that make little sense. Similarly, the communication between enemies is improbably good. I actually don't mind if a significant number of enemies know my general direction (pointing and shouting works after all), but to know my exact position after moving extensively and taking cover is a little much.
The lack of double assassinations really hurts this game. As I am sure you are aware, the 'axe throw' option almost always leads to detection. Even if this is functioning 'as intended' the inability to even guess whether the target can be seen by another enemy makes it suboptimal. Without double assassinations, many arrangements of enemies go from "tricky" to "impossible."
There are hundreds of posts about this on reddit and other forums; these issues cannot or should not be a surprise. When they were not even mentioned, much less corrected, I simply assumed Assassin's Creed had given up on stealth - it's Vikings after all. I, like many other players, have just accepted open combat as unavoidable in most situations. I don't begrudge anyone their design choices, but, much like Prince of Persia spawned Assassin's Creed when design choices took it too far from the core of the franchise, perhaps we have moved beyond the core of what makes an Assassin's Creed game.
So, it's very difficult to take complaints about creative freedom or the fact the "while GTA does it, it doesn't focus on melee," when the crux of your argument is "I want to slaughter defenseless, fleeing civilians." Just what, precisely, is "melee focused" when the civilians don't fight back? What artistic value are you creating?
I get it, you want to murder civilians. Why? Couldn't tell you, but AC may not be the series for you. Eivor's journey is set, you're playing a life that's already happened. Ultimately, there are heroes and villains in the story; the story doesn't work if the "good guy" goes around committing mass atrocities. There is no "morality stat." Vikings did slaughter people (as did, for the record, just about everyone else in the 9th century), but I doubt Ubisoft set out to make a game where the hero is a war criminal.
Anyone with a background in linguistics or etymology can tell you that names migrate across sexes all the time. "Ashley" or "Ashleigh" was an exclusively male name until the 1900s. "McKenzie" and it's variations was predominantly male until the 1990s. "Sasha" is still a predominantly male name in many eastern European countries while almost exclusively female in the US and elsewhere. Now, to quote a great film... "I'm an American, baby, our names done mean ****," so I am sympathetic to anyone who feels culturally affronted. I do, however, question the level of umbrage taken here.
However, I would remind you that you're playing a game about ancient aliens. It's a game, and in an age where we demand an orgasmic framerate with minimal load time and minimal memory cost, it's possible building in a feature where you chose a name (or a different name was assigned to male or female) might slow our precious, precious response time.
So how about this.
As a white heterosexual male, I am going to accept that while I am accustomed to a world oriented around my preferences, perhaps other people would like their preferences considered as well. I'm going to chill out and not demand my preferences be satisfied to the exclusion of others. I am going to play the game, enjoy my time doing it, and not make a game about ancient aliens into a battleground for a culture war. I encourage everyone else do the same...
The whole point is they don't have a morality stat because your character has a morality built in. You may not like that. You may derive hours of joy decapitating shrieking women and groveling farmers. I don't think that makes you a bad person or anything - but that is not the story Ubisoft is trying to tell.
"if ACV really want us to be heroic, at least make it into a morality stat, (like "respect" in gta sa), where certain missions require high morality, to discourage slaughtering."
How is that different? De-syncing doesn't actually cost you anything but the reload time. If anything, denying a player content because they chose to play a certain way is, in my opinion, actually a bigger infringement on my freedom. Ubisoft isn't trying to be GTA, and they aren't trying to be morally neutral. They are telling you "our hero doesn't murder civilian children because he is bored," even if that's what you do in your free time.