'Assassin's Creed Identity' Released on iOS Worldwide

[Armen]

I played a good portion of the game when it was in beta on the soft launch. I deleted it when it was free; defiantly not paying 4.99 for it lol

since you've played the game would you answer some questions for me?

- Does the game require an Internet connection to play or can it be played offline as well?
- What type of game play do each of the character classes bring to the table?
- What didn't you like about the game? (clunky controls, boring after a while, etc)

 

[69Mustang]

Apple should also develop their own first party controller and offer it as a bundle option with the Apple TV. Apple has been all about accessories lately, and this is very much needed. To take things even further, they could have a gaming edition of the Apple TV. For $249 you get 64GB storage, first party controller, and faster A9X chip with 4GB of RAM. That machine could even support 4K video for all the people who think they can see a difference sitting 10 feet away from their 60" display because they clearly have much better than 20/20 superhuman vision. Anyway, I'd definitely pick that beast up, but they would need their premium game store to make it successful.

So basically you want an Apple branded console, because that's what you just described. Although, if I'm honest, that hypothetical console would not be worth $249 based on the specs above... imo of course. Objectively, for $50 more a PS/XB makes a helluva lot more sense. That ATV really wouldn't bring anything to the table to make one say, "Aw man, I'm gonna get this over a X console." Admittedly, I could be missing something but the machine described above falls short.

 

[sinsin07]

I do dream a lot

Again, please note I did not say consoles were going away completely. I just said they will less mainstream than they are now - eventually becoming niche products for the hardcore. The mainstream is moving to iOS on the iPad and Apple TV (I also begrudgingly also see it moving to Android's solution ).
[doublepost=1456417480][/doublepost]
I know we have not agreed on this point many times, but I see in your response a window of opportunity (oh, I hate that pun). I tend to lump ATV and iOS in the same space. however, I will go with your comments that suggest you do not. ATV is getting there -- that is my point. It will never be as good as a dedicated console, but for everyone but the hardcore gamer, it just needs to get close enough, and that is not far away. with mFi controllers improving and even the iphone as a controller improving, i think we are not far away at all.

You and I may also agree in part, because I do see the mainstream moving to what you are calling the brief interaction and the world of long play games is shrinking in terms of users. This is what I am calling the hardcore that need a console -- those that need total immersion and real long play with amazing graphics.

As the ATV and the iPad improve, the number of people that require a dedicated console versus being just fine with the iPad/ATV is going to shrink. It already is...

The specs of the current cpu/gpu on the A8 in the ATV4 vs PS4 are not even close.

People are already struggling with Disney Infinity on ATV 4.

What type of games do you think there will be for ATV and mobile if gaming houses put those platforms first and relegate the PS4 and XBONEs to niche?

How would a gaming houses that makes games like GTV, Assassin Creed, Halo, Metal Gear V, Just Cause, Star Wars Battlefront afford to make those games for the iOS environment where the cost of the game would be considerably less, not to mention the 30% of the top Apple takes?

(I know GTV and others have reached iOS. What I am asking is if they are not done on the consoles first, how can they afford to do the iOS environment first?)

 

[2457282]

The specs of the current cpu/gpu on the A8 in the ATV4 vs PS4 are not even close.

People are already struggling with Disney Infinity on ATV 4.

What type of games do you think there will be for ATV and mobile if gaming houses put those platforms first and relegate the PS4 and XBONEs to niche?

How would a gaming houses that makes games like GTV, Assassin Creed, Halo, Metal Gear V, Just Cause, Star Wars Battlefront afford to make those games for the iOS environment where the cost of the game would be considerably less, not to mention the 30% of the top Apple takes?

(I know GTV and others have reached iOS. What I am asking is if they are not done on the consoles first, how can they afford to do the iOS environment first?)

I don't have a specific answer to your specific question because I do not run those companies nor do I run Apple. What I can say is that there are already more phones and ipads on the market, in homes and in pockets than there are consoles - not sure about ATVs. The sheer volume seems to indicate a direction for your answer. look at how many games are downloaded into each device on average and compare that to how many game a typical console owner has. Look at how many game houses are developing and making money in the Apple ecosystem and how many on the console ecosystem. also, As I stated the business models are still in flux as the freemium model only works in certain games (the model that seems to be the main approach on the iOS platform).

 

[MartinAppleGuy]

since you've played the game would you answer some questions for me?

- Does the game require an Internet connection to play or can it be played offline as well?
- What type of game play do each of the character classes bring to the table?
- What didn't you like about the game? (clunky controls, boring after a while, etc)

Yes, not a massive change apart from appearance from what I remember (was a good few months I played it haha).

I just never liked the the PS2 like movement, there wasn't a great float to the game. It was just very old in terms of motion and fluidity.

 

[Armen]

Yes, not a massive change apart from appearance from what I remember (was a good few months I played it haha).

I just never liked the the PS2 like movement, there wasn't a great float to the game. It was just very old in terms of motion and fluidity.

The description of the different classes implies each one has advantage/disadvantages. Like for example I gathered the beserker fights in the open very well whereas the thief may have more stealth options etc. It can't be just the clothes?

 

[sinsin07]

I don't have a specific answer to your specific question because I do not run those companies nor do I run Apple.

Yet you are clairvoyant enough to claim "The mainstream is moving to iOS on the iPad and Apple TV".

What I can say is that there are already more phones and ipads on the market, in homes and in pockets than there are consoles - not sure about ATVs. The sheer volume seems to indicate a direction for your answer.

Yeah and so what? If you are referring to those mind numbing short duration games then you may have a point. If you are talking about premium titles like the one this thread is about, then no, there is no indication that the current model will favor mobile and ATV over consoles.

look at how many games are downloaded into each device on average and compare that to how many game a typical console owner has.

We are talking about premium titles here, not those short duration games on mobile. And where are your numbers on how many are free, how many are making money, etc?

Look at how many game houses are developing and making money in the Apple ecosystem and how many on the console ecosystem. also ...

Yeah, but what kind of games are you referring to by these gaming houses?

When GTA, Assassin Creed, Metal Gear, Halo, Tomb Raider, The Order, The Witcher, COD, Far Cry, Borderlands, Destiny, Infamous, Quantum Break, Tom Clancy's The Division, Uncharted and other such type titles are released first on ATV before PS or Xbox then it will be time to take notice.

Till such time the mind numbing, short time, "I'm on the crapper'" games can win the day on mobile and ATV.

 

[macduke]

So basically you want an Apple branded console, because that's what you just described. Although, if I'm honest, that hypothetical console would not be worth $249 based on the specs above... imo of course. Objectively, for $50 more a PS/XB makes a helluva lot more sense. That ATV really wouldn't bring anything to the table to make one say, "Aw man, I'm gonna get this over a X console." Admittedly, I could be missing something but the machine described above falls short.

I'd get a console like that for my kids when they're older. $100 cheaper and the games would probably cost in the $20-30 range at most. The App Store is generally more kid-friendly as well. Great for families and casual living room use. I'm enjoying my 4th gen so far and would love to see it take the next step. First party controller bundles would mean that anything in the "premium" store would need to support controllers. Right now support is really iffy. As for me, I'll stick to my Fallout and Halo on the Xbox One when I really want to game. I just think the ATV needs a little more horsepower to do lower-end ports of current console games. Right now it's kinda stuck in simple clicky games hell. Although big part of that problem is the whole controller situation.

 

[69Mustang]

I'd get a console like that for my kids when they're older. $100 cheaper and the games would probably cost in the $20-30 range at most. The App Store is generally more kid-friendly as well. Great for families and casual living room use. I'm enjoying my 4th gen so far and would love to see it take the next step. First party controller bundles would mean that anything in the "premium" store would need to support controllers. Right now support is really iffy. As for me, I'll stick to my Fallout and Halo on the Xbox One when I really want to game. I just think the ATV needs a little more horsepower to do lower-end ports of current console games. Right now it's kinda stuck in simple clicky games hell. Although big part of that problem is the whole controller situation.

Don't get me wrong, I completely get what you're saying. It's probably a viable choice for someone all-in Apple's ecosystem. The only other thing we'd disagree on is the App Store being a more kid-friendly/family-casual environment. Maybe because we're discussing AAA titles that's the mindset used to gauge the kid/family aspect? Dunno. Rest assured both app stores are equally family/casual accessible. The only downside is the $60 year for multiplayer. I don't know anyone who's ever paid full price for a sub, but the sub price is $60.

You're 100% right about ATV needing more hp for even low end ports. More than the hp, it will need a more substantial HD. I'm sure there will be some cloud dependency, but the size of titles worthy of $20-30 is going to be pretty massive relative to the 64GB you mentioned earlier. Apple tends to (at least they used to) prioritize UX. Cloud dependency on big titles? You'll have to pardon my skepticism.

If they want kickstart more robust gaming on the ATV, the first priority will be getting rid of the requirement for the game to work with the remote. As long as that's a requirement, Apple is effectively hamstringing the development of more appealing titles. The Siri remote as a least common denominator sets the bar pretty darn low for a dev.

 

[CylonGlitch]

Has anyone played Identity yet? If so, how important are the coins? I hate in-app purchases and if the game is ruined because it needs coins every 30 minutes to continue to play, I'll pass.

 

[marty1980]

Is it on appletv? I have no interest in a handheld version.

Definitely a prime candidate for Apple TV 4. I hope they have support. I'll see if it's on the store when I get home.

I don't mind paying $5 for a game on a mobile device. I'd prefer paying $5-20 for a PAY-ONCE mobile game over downloading a free game and living with all the microtransactions needed to enjoy it; bringing the cost of that "free" game into the $100s for dedicated (crazy) players. I don't even mind some microtransactions in games as long as they are reasonable (most are not reasonable in today's industry).
[doublepost=1456503471][/doublepost]

If they want kickstart more robust gaming on the ATV, the first priority will be getting rid of the requirement for the game to work with the remote. As long as that's a requirement, Apple is effectively hamstringing the development of more appealing titles. The Siri remote as a least common denominator sets the bar pretty darn low for a dev.

I believe developers could get around this by providing a micro-experience (think: game-within-a-game) for those that do not own a MFi controller and only have the remote. This micro-experience would give a taste of the full game, but wouldn't be as complex due to the limitations of the remote. Then, if the user has an MFi controller, the full console-like experience is unlocked and there's an entire game to explore.

Though... I don't know if that would break app store guidelines, but Disney Infinity 3.0 requires the Base accessory to access a portion of it's game. So it seems possible as a workaround to get more apps on the ATV.

 

[69Mustang]

I believe developers could get around this by providing a micro-experience (think: game-within-a-game) for those that do not own a MFi controller and only have the remote. This micro-experience would give a taste of the full game, but wouldn't be as complex due to the limitations of the remote. Then, if the user has an MFi controller, the full console-like experience is unlocked and there's an entire game to explore.

Though... I don't know if that would break app store guidelines, but Disney Infinity 3.0 requires the Base accessory to access a portion of it's game. So it seems possible as a workaround to get more apps on the ATV.

That would be a crappy user experience in the type of titles we're discussing. A title like AC with a micro-experience would end up like playing horribly imo, with no real way to get the true experience of the full game. Even with free trial versions, you'd need the full interaction experience to gauge whether or not to drop $20-30 bucks on an AAA mobile title. There is hope though. Guitar Hero specifically said you need the guitar controller to play the game and they got no real push back from Apple. Hopefully, games with a complex nature will be able to follow suit.

 

[marty1980]

That would be a crappy user experience in the type of titles we're discussing. A title like AC with a micro-experience would end up like playing horribly imo, with no real way to get the true experience of the full game. Even with free trial versions, you'd need the full interaction experience to gauge whether or not to drop $20-30 bucks on an AAA mobile title. There is hope though. Guitar Hero specifically said you need the guitar controller to play the game and they got no real push back from Apple. Hopefully, games with a complex nature will be able to follow suit.

The restrictions on the remote create a crappy experience due to lack of supported apps.

Apple can add a parameter for apps that are limited without a controller or some other peripheral. Then show the warning clearly to the user before purchase. Don't expect me to come up with every solution for this concept.

The point is that there are things that can be done to provide ample info the user before a purchase is made and without screwing up ease of use or causing confusion.

For now, developers can take the risk by putting a warning in the app description like so many apps do that don't run well on "supported" devices or, like Gutar Hero, require a peripheral. Some devs could even take in some advertising money for when a user buys the app and starts to play without a controller: "Hey, we recommend the [insert brand] controller! Here's where you can buy one!"

 

[69Mustang]

The restrictions on the remote create a crappy experience due to lack of supported apps.

Apple can add a parameter for apps that are limited without a controller or some other peripheral. Then show the warning clearly to the user before purchase. Don't expect me to come up with every solution for this concept.

The point is that there are things that can be done to provide ample info the user before a purchase is made and without screwing up ease of use or causing confusion.

For now, developers can take the risk by putting a warning in the app description like so many apps do that don't run well on "supported" devices or, like Gutar Hero, require a peripheral. Some devs could even take in some advertising money for when a user buys the app and starts to play without a controller: "Hey, we recommend the [insert brand] controller! Here's where you can buy one!"

That's exactly what I said in my original post.

 

[marty1980]

That's exactly what I said in my original post.

Not exactly. I still believe there should be something in every Apple TV supported app that gives the user something to do with the remote. Your post seems to say apps shouldn't be required to support the remote at all if they don't want (exception of global system features like Siri, Sleep, and Muti-tasking).

 

[69Mustang]

Not exactly. I still believe there should be something in every Apple TV supported app that gives the user something to do with the remote. Your post seems to say apps shouldn't be required to support the remote at all if they don't want (exception of global system features like Siri, Sleep, and Muti-tasking).

You're right. We do differ there. I view the remote requirement for gaming in a similar vein with Microsoft's insistence on the Kinect being a part of the XB1. It was an idea they still regret. The remote does fine as a remote. I'm of the belief that you should always use the right tool for the right job. Phone type games that don't require complex controls? Fine for the remote. Dumbing down the controls of a AAA title to accommodate the remote? Outside of navigating the menu's, I just don't see the advantage for the gamer or the game maker.

Differing opinions. It's all good.

 

[lmjabreu]

You're dreaming.
Without the console/PC game sales games like Assassin, GTA etc. would never be able to see the light of day on mobile or Apple TV.
And then even after the port, the experience may not be the same.
Take a look a the thread here in the Apple TV forum on Disney Infinity for example.

Haven't read the Disney Infinity thread, but having played the game: it's a horrible attempt at an aTV game.

Apple TV user base is tiny compared to consoles, but iPhone/Android? Massively larger than all consoles combined: all consoles account for less than 45 million in 2014 (from 50 in 2013), Android alone sold 1 billion in 2014, iPhones 194 million, both numbers increased in the following years. Unlike consoles, this is a diverse audience, no idea of how many would actually pay for games, but this is a much larger market than consoles, with many companies already producing not only Candy Crush, but high-quality profitable games like Modern Combat 4*, which fill in the gap left by Activision on mobile, and other big players on PC/Console. The sad thing is, people and thus companies will dismiss mobile until it's too late for them, letting history, like that of Nokia, Microsoft, who missed out on mobile, will slowly repeat itself. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

*Gameloft's a mobile-only company, MC4 is the fourth in the series, they've got more titles that are essentially clones of GTA, and other popular console games. The fact they're still around and releasing new versions seems to suggest mobile is profitable enough for them to do that, which also seems to suggest the audience is there.

 

[sinsin07]

Haven't read the Disney Infinity thread, but having played the game: it's a horrible attempt at an aTV game.

Apple TV user base is tiny compared to consoles, but iPhone/Android? Massively larger than all consoles combined: all consoles account for less than 45 million in 2014 (from 50 in 2013), Android alone sold 1 billion in 2014, iPhones 194 million, both numbers increased in the following years. Unlike consoles, this is a diverse audience, no idea of how many would actually pay for games, but this is a much larger market than consoles, with many companies already producing not only Candy Crush, but high-quality profitable games like Modern Combat 4*, which fill in the gap left by Activision on mobile, and other big players on PC/Console. The sad thing is, people and thus companies will dismiss mobile until it's too late for them, letting history, like that of Nokia, Microsoft, who missed out on mobile, will slowly repeat itself. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

*Gameloft's a mobile-only company, MC4 is the fourth in the series, they've got more titles that are essentially clones of GTA, and other popular console games. The fact they're still around and releasing new versions seems to suggest mobile is profitable enough for them to do that, which also seems to suggest the audience is there.

We are talking AAA titles, not clones, like the one this thread is about, AC.

When you see AAA type titles coming to ATV first, then its time to take notice.

 

[Speedy Dingo]

I don't have a specific answer to your specific question because I do not run those companies nor do I run Apple. What I can say is that there are already more phones and ipads on the market, in homes and in pockets than there are consoles - not sure about ATVs. The sheer volume seems to indicate a direction for your answer. look at how many games are downloaded into each device on average and compare that to how many game a typical console owner has. Look at how many game houses are developing and making money in the Apple ecosystem and how many on the console ecosystem. also, As I stated the business models are still in flux as the freemium model only works in certain games (the model that seems to be the main approach on the iOS platform).

So what you're saying is that because Joe average, along with his wife and kids have an iPhone, iPad and iPod touch and download more games on those devices that this is reason the general public is moving to iOS and ATV? Sorry but that's a really narrow view of scope of things. Yes most people will download more games on iOS devices than owning physical console games, but look at the type of games they download, how much they are and how long they spend playing these mobile games. I play on both consoles and iOS devices and I have way more games on iOS, but I probably spend about 10mins on these "free" games and I get bored quickly. They all seem to offer the same type of gameplay and are riddled with ads at every possible point in the game. So Joe average and his family may have 100+ games on their iOS devices, but you know that Joe average will always return to his console or PC where he can get a true gaming experience with proper controls and proper content. It won't be riddled with microtransactions or ads whenever you turn on a game on consoles - and that's because you've paid for the product.
So what I'm basically trying to say is that more devices and digital free games on iOS doesn't actually equal a sign of where the masses are going. The numbers are there because it's the device most of us use on the go and it's the 5 minute games that will tie us over until we boot up Grand Theft Auto 5 when we get home. ATV is also there for Netflix. As Nintendo has always said, "Quality over Quantity."

 

[marty1980]

FYI - I checked my ATV last night and the game was not in the store. Assuming no support.