Assassin’s Creed 3: learning from Diablo 3 mistakes
With a month and half to go until the release of Assassin’s Creed III Ubisoft has now made a decision that could help make the game an even more popular choice on the PC, as it will be playable offline. While Ubisoft would have you believe that they made this decision a few months back and took feedback from some of their other previous titles into consideration, one has to assume how much Diablo 3 had to do with this?
It’s no secret that that digital rights management (DRM) has had a huge effect on certain games, with Diablo 3 being the most recent so it’s finally nice to see that some developers have started to listen to their customers with news that Assassin’s Creed 3 can now be enjoyed without the need to connect to the Internet.
We’re told that DRM has not totally been removed as you will need to activate your copy of the game during the installation process, but you will not need an always-on connection after that. Let’s not forget though that the whole issue with DRM has been ongoing for years with Ubisoft, gamers hated the thought of this hindrance, which was only made worse if they had issues with their Internet dropping.
While this issue has never been forgotten it was the release and early problems with Diablo 3 that has highlighted the hatred that gamers have for DRM once again. Okay, so we know that there’s always the fear that dishonest gamers will spoil games for others, but at least honest gamers will not be penalized with always-on DRM.
As you already know you will now be able to take command of your own ship in AC3 thanks to the new Naval level, and this helps to make the whole experience more convincing because in order to have a strong military presence in another country you need to be able to control the seas, which we explained in a recent post. There’s been another new trailer (see below), which offers a walkthrough of this new dimension to the franchise.
There are high hopes for AC3, not only with this new feature, but also the new engine and the changeable weather and huge battle scenes. Let’s just hope that Ubisoft have done enough to make this one of the best from the franchise yet?
- Juventus vs. Galatasaray: Live resheduled match: Update
- X-Men: Apocalypse set to follow in 2016
- PlayStation 4 also supports multi-controller options
- Bayern Munich host Manchester City in tonight’s big live game
- Manchester Utd vs Shakhtar Donetsk on ITV tonight
- GTA V Heists release date update a smack in the face
- Santa Tracker games for kids in 2013
This game will be epic, everything about it screams GOTY, Just hope it is not a bloody American crap where they screw around with history to make them selves look like the valiant heroes! If it is I for one will never buy it or any other Ubisoft game released for the rest of my life!
It's the Canadian branch of the French Ubisoft that develops all the good UBI games like AC and PoP. So if anything they'll probably poke fun at 'Murcia as we don't like them very much.
Well in this time period and when it comes to the actual conflict Americans were valiant ones if you want to get technical. I'm not speaking for America today. The English were savage monsters of death back then, just ask there good friends in India and China and let's see the rest of the world Lol. The British and the spanish easily have killed way more people than Americans ever have And it won't just glorify americans, because I know for a fact that theres going to be colonists villans. And you do know the devopers are Canadian right? Relax man the game is gonna kick ass.
"Well in this time period and when it comes to the actual conflict Americans were valiant ones if you want to get technical." If we are going to get technical, then we need to speak of what actually happened, rather than adhere to a romantically embroidered version of events which is great for patriotic purposes, but anathema to historians. There was no clear good side and bad side during the American Revolution. "The British and the Spanish easily have killed way more people than Americans ever have." That is a bit like saying Saddam Hussein is a nice guy compared to Pol Pot. In other words, the US has killed enough as to not have any grounds to get on their moral high horse about the historical skeletons in other nations closets. Until this game is released, then nobody is going to know what it is truly like. The trouble is, they are marketing this game in the UK by wrapping it in the US flag. I doubt that fact of killing Redcoats bothers many that much, at least not in comparison to the thought of a game series of this reputation going down a Team America route, just in the hope of selling more copies. Flag waving patriotic fervour is never a good export, unless you wrap it in the flag of the nation you are selling it to.
Firstly let me get this straight I am English so do not really care either way since in my opinion we are the main power in Great Britain and all ways will be. But when you accuse the English of being "savage monsters" I assume you mean the British Empire which itself includes the English, Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish. We greatly improved the living standards of all country's we took over. All of which were in mostly peaceful circumstances with a few exceptions I am sure. As for India, we helped them greatly and we very rarely took over if at all with pure military force! Instead we took over gradually with commercial power other wise known as TRADE! We only ever resorted to military action to protect are TRADE I say again TRADE not to conquer but to protect our businesses. We also built the huge Indian railway routes to help with transporting our goods that were gained though our TRADE. These railway routes are still in use to this day and greatly help India's people. More importantly Great Britain created and supported the people by strengthening the government in India. Crime rates in all areas controlled by the British Empire were very low, thanks mainly to the discipline and order of our Military forces that were stationed in areas where our Trade was important and at risk of possible attacks. When we left India after we disbanded our Mighty Empire (Largest the World has ever or will ever see!) India quickly fell into chaos and crime and corruption returned to there pre British Empire levels. Many Indian's believe that the British Empire was a positive force for their country, some even wish we still controlled India because of the vast economic wealth that such a partnership gave them. I am not going to even bother mentioning the Chinese because I don't want this to turn into a essay which I could easily write if I had the time. Also I know they are Canadians and to be more precise French Canadians who are well documented to dislike the British people more than even the French do! Another major fact that you should if you are not already aware of know is that the British Empire were one of the first you hear me first country's to abolish Slavery. Where as your so called "Valiant" Americans were one of and if not the last Country's on Earth to abolish Slavery. Does that sound like the working of a heroic and just Country and people?
LMAO!!!!! You were really aching for such an argument weren't you? You reallly live a thrilling English life XD. Peaceful? XD being such a history major that you try to come off as, please tell us which countries has had the most revolutions? lol the British empire is one of the top ( if not the top). Wieerddddd for being so peaceful huh? In my general opinion if there are reasons for a revolution....its not very peaceful. Improved living standard. Yes we they built a railroad for India. but if you were a colonist forced to pay heavy taxes on any/everything you bought while being forced to house and feed soldiers for as long as they wanted with no say about it...that’s an improvement? Lol its easy to cherry pick the good and bad ehh? LOL thats funny, when America fights battles to "protect its interests" we are murderous genocidal baby-eaters ( lol tastes good with BBQ sauce), when really all we had to say is " protect our TRADE or businesses" to be noble in the world. Irony XD val·iant (vlynt) adj. 1. Possessing valor; brave. 2. Marked by or done with valor. I went through the trouble of defining this word for you, because I know your major is in history....not English XD. not saying im a English nazi....but this is lack of trying really. Now pay attention lose here because I am going to hit two points at the same time. American revolutionist were out gunned, out numbered, ill fitted and lacked both discipline and training compared to the superpower redcoats. Yet they still did not yield and won the war...imagine that 13 colonies or states defeating a superpower. By all means that is bravery on all accounts. So yes untrained armed militia do have a tendency to shoot fellow soldiers, nature of the beast but in the end who came out on top? Fun fact time !!!!!! #1 which country is generally always the first to responded and provide aide to foreign countries? #2 which country spends the moneys money aiding foreign countries? We have the USNS Mercy and USNS Comfort. What’s the name of your humanitarian designed ships again??? "Further more it not only insults my Country's History but the Spanish people's as well!" ROFL !!!!!!! U mad bro? As if your sole purpose wasn’t to insult America ( XD ) I aint even mad XD You made my Saturday work shift entertaining XD. Get off your bandwagon high horse and realize that not all Americans voted for hairy bush, some times one vote isn’t enough. Possibility of you not liking the game because of “American influence”, then don’t get it…..one person does not carry enough weight to affect them, just like my vote.