The Hidden Blade Assassin's Creed in Depth

That probably means they're going to fix a lot of bugs with that. I'm not sure if they watch the site, though.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nm9oy_P3kIw- info from pod cast

There are plenty of people in the community who find exploits, and plenty of them post on the official forums about them or bring them to Ubi's attention, so I'm sure they'll find out about most of them. In the end, though, most of the bugs in the game are found before release.

It's just a question of what they actually have time to fix. So it's likely that a lot of the exploits we find were documented by some random bug tester, but they just didn't have time to get around to fixing it, or it was deemed non-essential, or fixing it would break another system in the game and thus it was more trouble than it was worth.

I haven't seen a lot of exploits on here that were also posted on the forums...

Some more screenshots (I hope you haven't seen them already)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WOD6K4wdPlU

There were a few I've seen before, but new ones as well. Thanks!

It's going to be fun trying things with multiple missions in AC3. The two main uses of missions with scenes are teleporting and staying anonymous. Somehow I don't think Ubi will make everything unexploitable.

Testers probably find bugs more than exploits. Some of the exploits here took a while to figure out, and I don't think they spent that much time on one thing. Plus they may underestimate some things.

Usually exploits are only possible with bugs or faults in the system/design.
I know that the majority of them are found by the millions who play the game for 200 hours after release, but testers definitely always find more bugs than the team has time to fix.

Most of the exploits here don't seem to be based on bugs or faults in the system/design. Sometimes they are based on things overlooked, and sometimes they are based on something the devs never thought to do. For example, turkey shoot using the obstruction charm. In AC1 an opponent will give up trying to climb somewhere if his way keeps getting blocked. They tried to prevent that by having the character take different climbing routes. By it was still possible in certain places. It's just that the game is so big and there are so many possibilities.

I don't even know what you guys are debating about anymore.

It seems Ubi might patch every possibility of exploits. We are just discussing whether anything will be possible for the multiple missions and I guess whether Ubi knew about the exploits of the previous games beforehand but couldn't patch them before the game release. You know a site has gone in depth when they're arguing about exploits.

Umm...okay. It's kind of impossible for any game company to find each and every exploit in their games. In fact, knowing the bugginess of virtual media, some "fixes" end up creating more exploitable options for players. Not always, but sometimes.

I have input!!!!

I know what you're talking about, but testers are supposed to bring it to a game designer's attention if they figure out a way to do something using the logical systems of the game, which work well elsewhere. Not just actual bugs and stuff, but also systems that could be reworked to prevent an exploit. As you said, though, in a game so big, they can't keep reinventing their systems. Theoretically it's possible to have a non-exploitable, yet complex game, but it would require a whooooole bunch of planning and reinvention.

It's possible, but when testers are running the same level over and over again for months at a time with the crappy pay they get, they won't be as motivated to find as many things.

Ummm, but you guys have to PAY to even play the game, you don't get a paycheck at all, and you still find stuff. Testers are testers because they like and are good at testing games. I'm sure they have plenty of motivation.

In all my years as a software developer, I've only met two Quality Assurance (QA) engineers who had an Aurel-level knack for finding exploits. One of them was a college intern with no formal training. I always requested them to test my most important programs. Your typical QA engineer is thorough but not creative.

By the way, one place where I'm working now they call themselves "Product Verification" (PV) instead of QA or the quainter QC (Quality Control). They say it conveys a more positive message: "We already know the product has high quality. Our job is to verify!"

Sounds reasonable. The point I was trying to make that accidentally started this whole argument is that most games ship with lots of bugs and exploits (that they knew about from the testing process) left in, simply because they didn't have time or resources to fix them.

If they intentionally left them in, then they're a bad company. They're being lazy. I think they're just not seeing them. Testers are only human. They just want their paycheck after too much of the same.

Obviously they're not seeing all of them, but really, I don't think you really understand how impossible it is to ship a bug and exploit free game of this magnitude on a reasonable dev schedule.

If they see a bug or exploit that they don't approve of, then it's their responsibility to fix them. Games have been able to push back their schedules by a couple months to fix a few errors like this. And with a game like Assassin's Creed, they can do whatever they want, since Ubisoft is guaranteed money whenever they decide to ship it.

But at some point companies have to prioritize. Their job it to make sure all the worst bugs are gone, yes, but not every bug is a game-breaking, experience ruining thing. Most bugs will never be encountered by players. They do as good of a job as they can, but even on a project with 3 years development time, in the end developers simply have to prioritize instead of perfect. That's the way it works for every studio ever. There are deadlines, and if you're going to delay the game to meet them, it better be for a better reason than "there's this bug that makes this exploit that is really hard to do and players might find fun possible." Or, "This nonessential, barely noticable system isn't working quite as well as it should.". Just as a director cannot afford to reshoot scenes line for line, devs cannot afford to spend limitless development time on nonessential parts of a project. All studios try to put as much attention to detail as possible, and since AC3 reached feature complete a year before release, and they're just polishing now, it's probably going to be as un-buggy as possible. I know that you feel entitled to a perfect game, but people are simply not perfect. The vast majority of bugs squeak through unnoticed. It's just that the devs are aware of more of them than you'd think, and simply can't perfect everything.

I think you're not seeing that we all agree on the circumstances. If the developer really doesn't want the game to ship without a certain bug, they'll fix it. Otherwise it's not worth it and they won't fix it.

That's what you people have been saying ALL THE DAMN TIME.

To be fair, Joey was saying that EVERY bug they know about should be fixed before ship. Which is not what we were saying.

Youre right. This is a stupid argument.

Well...no, but okay. :3

A stupid but entertaining argument. And the moral of the story is: No matter how hard Ubi tries to make AC3 unexploitable, THB will still come through.

I suppose they don't play video games. Just as well, they aren't loser enough to waste their time on that, um, I mean they prefer to fight Abstergo in real life instead of in the games. And I wasn't aware there were levels. There must be a Stabguy-level (stunt assassinate targets), an IanXO4-level (turkey shoot targets), and even a Subject 18-level (die before getting out of Solomon's Temple).

-.-

Well then we all just have horrible communication skills I guess. : P

Wait. What? How is that even possible... jump off at Robert instead of the ladders?

There was a classic post by ViralJudicator on AC-maps where he described the first time he played AC:

I asked how he managed to die while riding a horse: Dismounted into water.

Amazing.

I also loved getting punched into the water by crazy people. [/sarcasm]

It was a joke. Subject 18 is a member who was banned for improper behavior. Here's how it happened.

Subject 18 going to his doom.
http://thehiddenblade.com/last-person-reply-wins?page=14#comment-14297
Stabguy unleashing the wrath of thehiddenblade on him.
http://thehiddenblade.com/last-person-reply-wins?page=14#comment-14312

Jumping directly to Robert isn't high enough to cause death. The only ways I died in that place were glitching through the ground by attempting a wall breach and at the end. Dropping from a high wall will take some health away, and if you keep doing it over and over you will lose all your health. Don't ask why I did that.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6pDugHeoXg4

I remember that he wasn't that bad before he took issue with EA... shame. You aint so bad, EA!

ACIII's special edition

Thanks EA.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z3x19dtR3eI

Alex tells us about the different types of weapons we can assassinate with (not just a hidden blade), how the enemy reacts to us charging towards them, and more.

Here's a load of links AC just posted on Facebook:

Most of them are already on this site but there may be something extra...? (I'm busy revising so am trying to avoid watching/checking too many links about non-chemistry related stuff! )

I'm not going to include a bunch of articles that don't say anything more about the game anyway. Also, this thread is about AC3, not Liberation, so I decided not to include that.

We need to get a forum for that! Man, Liberation is near to convincing me to get a vita. I dunno.

Fair enough, Phi. As I said, I didn't closely check the articles.

You and me both, Calvar. I've started making offers on some on eBay, despite the fact that realistically I probably couldn't afford any games to go with it!

http://www.pu.nl/power/aciii-ubisoft-doodt-bewust-geen-amerikanen-demo-s
the article is dutch but there is an English quote it says that ubisoft didn´t kill any american soldiers during the demo to make sure that people will buy the game to see how they are handling it with the american history.

(I don't know where to put this; I just thought it was interesting)

"Aquila" is the name of Connor’s ship (Latin). "Aquila" means "eagle." So there's that eagle theme.

and "Abstergo" is the Latin verb for "to cleanse, wipe away, clean off"

"Abstergo" is latin for "I abduct".

Also, davinci, next make sure you click through: http://kotaku.com/5918810/can-americans-not-handle-the-sight-of-their-an...

Ah, Kotaku. Somehow they manage to stoke the flame of controversy even when theyve already covered the whole "o no pro american" angle extensively.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hCoMTh-sFg New 4th of July trailer.

I'd like to see a bit more credible source on that.

I'm pretty sure that Ubisoft will deal this controversial issue with sensitivity and care. Anybody with a functioning cerebal would have noticed that up to this point, Connor is fighting only Loyalists. Ubisoft is saving the dramatic and emotional stuff for the actual game.

And no, I'm not dead.