
You may recall that Assassin's Creed Shadows was going to launch on the 14th February before its second and most recent delay, which pushed it back to the 20th March.
But why was the open world title hit with such a sudden delay in the first place? Well, according to director Charles Benoit, it boiled down to the game's parkour system.
Benoit told IGN: "The Japanese architecture, the roofs [are] super complex — probably the most complex thing that I ever worked with if we compared to Odyssey and Syndicate. We needed specific codes and specific animations to support something super fluid, changing the transition of the parkour to make it even more fluid."
The director's explanation continues: "So that's one of the specific feedback that we heard that we wanted to address, and it really improved since the last few months." Hey, sounds good to us!
Indeed, the most recent RPG-leaning Assassin's Creed games — Origins, Odyssey, and especially Valhalla — have really strayed from the series' once trademark parkour systems, much to the despair of some fans who have been playing since the days of Ezio.
It's promising, then, to hear that Shadows is revisiting the franchise's roots — at least when it comes to dashing across architecture. Clearly, parkour is one aspect that the development team wanted to get right, so here's hoping that the delay helped them achieve their goals.
Having recently played a few hours of Assassin's Creed Shadows at a preview event, we're certainly looking forward to seeing how the finished product fares. Naoe — the game's shinobi protagonist — is kitted out with all kinds of new climbing, running, and leaping animations, backing up Benoit's comments.
Are you happy to hear of parkour's (hopefully triumphant) return in Assassin's Creed Shadows? Watch your footing in the comments section below.
How important is parkour to an Assassin's Creed game? (638 votes)
- Parkour should always be the focus of Assassin's Creed
- It should be an important part of the overall game
- Eh, it's a part of AC, but I've never cared about it that much
- Honestly, I prefer less focus on parkour in Assassin's Creed
[source ign.com]
Comments 41
Exactly what I wanted to hear!
Unity was the 🐐 for parkour, so hopefully they can improve with Shadows.
Hopefully they can get the parkour right. And reach the heights of Union, which is the series best for parkour. Definitely felt more basic in the recent ones.
@Jacko11 I see no lies here
Reminds me I should go back and plat Unity at some point...
@Jacko11 I really liked the control change in unity to upward and downward movement with (I think it was) Triangle (up) and Cross (down). Made your character actually go where you wanted more often and gave more freedom. It's a shame the Unity engine had some other major issues and they moved away from that system as it was great in a lot of ways.
I'm hoping this is the game that gets me back into the series, lost all interest after Syndicate and playing Valhalla just put me off even more as it didn't feel like Assassins Creed anymore.
They haven't seemed to care about parkour since Unity (still the best one), so this is great news.
They had to get it fluid enough to run tf away from the release of Monster Hunter.
If they are able to improve the game noticeably by giving it more time in the oven, then it makes you wonder what would happen if they really did give the developers time to try and create a masterpiece rather than forcing them to churn out games on a schedule.
Kudos to Ubisoft for not rushing an unfinished/broken game to market. Is refreshing in this day and age…
Assassin's Creed games where you spend more time on your horse than climbing don't feel like Assassin's Creed to me.
I'm not particularly hopeful about this one, but I'm ready to be surprised
Has anyone seen the footage? I recommend watching Ropotopolous' video about his 5 hours with the game. From people expecting for parkour to be better than Mirage, it apparently is worse. It is more in line with Odyssey's parkour - bar the backflips and flashy animation. I am so disappointed in this regard but thankfully the game is looking polished and fun at the very least.
Did they show you more of the RPG aspects during the demo? skill points? gears stats? all that good stuff?
I skipped Mirage because they went away with the RPG stuff that I enjoyed from Odyssey and Valhalla.
@ProfessorNiggle
You mean to tell me that the parkour designed to get around in the vast open world and period correct architecture of feudal Japan feels different than the parkour designed for the cramped city streets in Mirage? I can’t believe it! Who would’ve thought!
@NorrinRadd are you okay? It being different is no issue. It being worse is the issue.
Looks better than the last showing and I’m definitely interested. But at launch? I don’t think so. You actually think I’m going to be done with monster hunter in a couple of weeks?
@ProfessorNiggle the biggest issue most are taking is the forced transitioning between characters due to Yasuke literally not being able to climb some things. I just don’t get it, and this kind of “we’re giving players choices but only when we want them to choose to accomplish something or accomplish nothing” makes it a wait for a clearance deal for me. That being said, all Ubisoft games tend to go for cheap very soon after launch due to the public distrust in the brand.
@Coffeeglitch yeah I saw that in the SkillUp video. I thought they’d do something like Jacob and Evie Fry where Jacob is just slower, but to make Yasuke not even able to climb everything climbable just makes me think why make him a main character? Like he could’ve just been used in certain missions and just make the gameplay revolve around Naoe.
Now after giving players the illusion of choice once again, after players have chosen their preferred character to go around with, and presuming it’s Yasuke, they now have to switch characters every time they want to explore?? What terrible game design.
@ProfessorNiggle it’s very confusing, there’s literally no reason for it outside of making the player do things they may not want to. Even games like Elden ring, with some builds being just broken, are doable with others even if the difficulty is much higher.
To prevent people from playing the game in a way they enjoy for no apparent reason is just a very bad move.
@NorrinRadd a good example of it being worse is Yasuke can legitimately just bash through some walls. But doing it seems clunky, like there’s a 50/50 chance he’ll hop onto it or bash through. I don’t expect feudal Japan to function like manhattan, that’d be stupid. But placing limits on your own design is very strange.
I stopped playing the AC games after AC3. The next AC game I played was odyssey and I loved it so much I saw it through to the platinum trophy. Then I played origins and valhalla and they reinvigorated my interest with the franchise. I'm really looking forwards to shadows and have zero interest in the other titles.
I mean, not only the parkour, but the immersion of the narrative was a trademark of AC, which is missing since Origins.
NPC animations are horrendous, especially in dialogue, and everything feels meaningless. AC feels like an amalgamation of systems with no real structure or soul behind them.
@ProfessorNiggle
If I had to guess Yasuke is the culmination of dumbing down the gameplay mechanics until it's basically just a button mash action game. To this day I still don't understand why some people buy assassin's creed games if they hate stealth.
I wish they’d evolved the parkour & let us have more control, like Rooftops & Alleys or the swinging & air moves in Spider-Man. Mirage felt like they just reused the same old code from the early 2000’s & those teleport assassination animations were just lazy & half assed.
Hopefully the combat isn’t the crappy hack n slash clipping animations it’s been since origins too but I don’t expect Ubisoft to innovate & excel at anything these days.
In other news, I’ve been replaying Splinter cell Blacklist on the Steam deck & it still feels like it was made with some passion, unlike any Ubisoft game I’ve played in the last 10 years.
@ATaco And I don't understand why anyone gets an AC game if they like stealth. Well, that's a bit hyperbolic. AC's stealth has never risen above mediocre, imo. The idea at the core of the AC series used to be "social stealth," getting to a target when in a crowd or in broad daylight. Like an assassin would. It was pretty novel in 2007. I don't think they ever really nailed that, but parkour and blending and listening etc were all meant to serve a different sort of stealth system then what we have now. I mean, most of it functions just fine, but I've never missed the "social stealth" of the AC games when playing another stealth game.
@LikelySatan
Yes because they stopped iterating on it to focus on making it more of an action game. Funnily enough, the Hitman games have done a much better job at the social stealth than Ass Creed ever did and it's what I've always preferred.
@ATaco I dropped out of Hitman because of the always online thing, but I know that they are incredible.
I don't think AC has ever felt great to play. Especially combat. Syndicate is my favorite in the series, and the combat in that one is a chore. It's gotten better now, but it doesn't feel unique. I don't know, they're all too damned big now so they pass through too many hands. Everyone paring it down so it's easier for the next.
They should delay it again for multiplayer 🥲
AC Unity is still the Parkour goat
Its one thing I must have missed as so played each game from AC 1 through the Ezio astrology to Black Flag they said they changed Parklour every time and I yet I felt it as always slow to climb up a building it was never fluid. I can't bring myself to play these games and more they all seem dull and too grinding now
From what I've seen it looks like the combat could have done with a bit more work as well.
I think AC games can still be very good, if they focus on right things. Also not all newer games are worse than the old ones, I personally think that Origins is among the best games in the series and it has newer mechanics and a really huge open world.
@Coffeeglitch honestly very baffling decision. Like it just shows that Ubisoft are so against having a female protagonist and they really just shoe horned Yasuke in there so they could have dual protagonists, seeing as he can’t even participate in some of the most basic mechanics any AC games have
My most anticipated game of the year and I am avoiding all spoilers but I do hope they try to devolve the parkour a bit. What I loved about older AC games (the first one especially) was that you had to plan your path up buildings. Looking for cracks and hand holds. It was slower sure but more realistic and imo more fun. That has long since been traded for leap and sprint jumps that are faster but look more unrealistic. And while the recent game engine doesn’t turn you into a spider totem, it is more forgiving about your path. I hope Ubisoft toned that down a bit. I will love the game either way but I still hope.
Edit: I have heard that Yasuke and Naoe climb differently (as they should) and i am looking forward to playing through twice as either character. I am hoping that has an impact on the ending but don’t expect it.
@ProfessorNiggle there was an article on pcgamer recently that quoted the developers as saying the equivalent of “we need a ninja if it’s Japan so what if we had a samurai too!” Just a bunch of out of touch folks, I’m sure the game won’t be terrible but the issue is that Ubisoft needs a sure fire hit given the scenario they’ve gotten themselves into. I don’t think this will be it. The guillemot family needs to go.
@Coffeeglitch that is some weird reasoning but perfectly encapsulates the culture of Ubisoft. They add not because of what it can bring to the game but simply because why not. That's why after having fun for the first 20 hours of their games, you realise you haven't even touched the title screen yet and have another 60 to go, and it's full of the same things over and over again. I really wish that was an over exaggeration.
Yasuke gameplay could've been something to look forward to but realistically, it's going to make the game an annoyance of navigating menus to switch characters over and over again. It's like they chose the most surface level and basic way of putting him in the game.
That being said, it'll be their golden ticket. Of course it'll be a hit. It's Assassin's Creed and it's in Japan and I have to give it to them it looks better than I was expecting, not great, but decent. If Valhalla managed to get them a couple billion, I feel like this will do more as it simply looks like a better game. But then again I remember Xbox's conference in 2020 when they showed off Valhalla and they fooled me then.
@ProfessorNiggle I don’t disagree, it does look good. But I don’t think it’ll be their golden ticket for a couple of reasons. One, price point. Ubisoft games not only have a habit of going on sale quickly but they also are overpriced for what they are. Likely one of the reason they scrubbed the gold, ultimate etc editions as it makes the game a harder sell. Two, and honestly a bigger issue, is their public image. They committed to a second year of Skull and Bones despite no one bothering really, and they also claimed they would keep X Defiant alive and then killed it shortly after.
With the Animus launcher coming out alongside Shadows (or before if they decide to bump it up), there’s also the potential for a similar issue to CoD where all the games are installed even if you don’t own them. The different is that despite my own dislike of CoD, it sells very very well. Ubisoft has been making many choices to put off people from buying their games.
Time will tell, but I do not see it as a golden ticket for them. They need to release the game completely flawless with no design flaws at all for that, and already it’s apparent there’s some major issues with the presentation. All it will take is another developer saying some very stupid things on social media to sink the boat. I don’t like Tencent getting involved, but I also won’t act like current leadership is sensible.
@Coffeeglitch will be interesting to see what happens. And tbf you have a point regarding it maybe not doing as well as they'd want. Valhalla was also released in the height of COVID and alongside the PS5/XSX so inevitably more sales. Let's see what happens in March
@ProfessorNiggle I’m hopeful it will do well but also reluctant to be hopeful. Current leadership sees a big hit and then squanders the surge in stock value by getting too greedy, but at the same time I really would prefer less of a joint venture. They never go well, look no further than bungie. Though to be fair I celebrated bungie getting absorbed by Sony, they’d been the industry’s problem spouse for a long time. Ubisoft is just a weird company that has strange leadership.
@Coffeeglitch agreed! I think a sale of some of their IP would benefit the community massively as Guillemot bros have fumbled decision making time and time again.
This proposed move to see Tencent take over is such a bad move for me as it will see them still acting as CEO, and we can expect more grind sesh games that are designed to sell you the idea of brilliance before beating it over your head repeatedly with poor game design, a feeling of incompleteness and no real substance.
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...