Now that we have stealth mode, why do we still need the complicated running control scheme?
The simplest way to control running would be to have the player character reach max speed when they press all the way forward on the analog stick. Due to the idea of high/low profile, this couldn't happen. But now that we have a toggle that explicitly brings us into a stealthier mode or stance, doesn't that mean that default movement is free to be considered high profile without using any modifiers?
Sure, currently stealth mode isn't actually stealthy in some situations, like blending, but that could be fixed. stealth mode could automatically transfer between stealthy stances that are appropriate for the situation, and it could be up to the player's discretion if they want to toggle into high profile as soon as they exit a blend group, since if you're not going to try to crouch and hide behind something when out in the open, why not just run?
This could make it so much less taxing on fingers to navigate the world, and free up the right hand for right stick navigation and face button inputs, making it easier to engage the "climb this" modifier while running. I can't really see a reason not to do it this way, the switch between modes probably should have been a toggle from the start.
EDIT: regarding exiting blend groups in stealth mode, it would be cool if one of the face buttons were used to do a stealth-mode-only "slide" or "dive" move, for getting a burst of speed that would hopefully put you behind something before you get spotted. also would just be a cool way to improve the feeling of steath mode being distinct from regular movement, where the same input would probably be related to climbing/parkour.
EDIT2: to walk while in normal mode u could just not push the stick all the way forward, like pretty much every other game does. Also the reason this makes sense is because AC is not a small, tightly constructed stealth game, it's a big sprawling open world with stealth challenges that take place in massive locations. 95% of your time in every AC game is spent traveling, so the default mode should be optimized for traversal.
First, it's not a "complicated running control scheme." You pull a trigger; the more you pull it the faster you go. You push a control stick; the more you push it, the faster you go.
Honestly, getting rid of the "high profile" trigger is a terrible idea, to me.
What you are suggesting is that when you walk outside you are either high profile or stealthy. With no option to walk, or walk faster, in a normal way. When I go to a public place to people watch, and I do it often, I see people walking normally. I don't see some people sneaking and the rest jogging.
Additionally, putting all the control of movement on the one left control stick complicates it more than it is now. With this configuration, the control stick would necessarily have to be more sensitive to run the gauntlet of walking to sprinting.
And finally, gameplay wise. Like I mentioned above, in the real world you can walk (slow to fast walking, low profile movements), jog and sprint (high profile movements). Cops/guards/etc are probably more likely to notice you if you're jogging vs walking. It makes sense.
So, to sum up my points and not become a broken record:
1 - it's not a complicated movement system
2 - the system actually mirrors reality
3 - dictating all your movements with one control stick would unnecessarily complicate things to accurately run the gauntlet of movement possible for a human
The current system more accurately reflects life, imo, than a constant high profile.
For a final example: If you have to go to the bathroom real bad in public, you walk as fast as you can trying to keep a low profile so people don't notice you. If you fear you can't make it, you jog or run instead because making it in time is more important than saving face.
“Force has no place where there is need of skill." Herodotus
The latest entries don't let you run faster the deeper you pull in the trigger. Though that would be cool and I'd have liked to see that. I'd still prefer that over stick tilting, because how deep in you pull a trigger is easier to manage than having to tilt a stick. This is because when you tilt a stick, that single finger controls both directional accuracy and magnitude of direction (or, the speed at which you're moving). Whereas when you're pulling a trigger deep or shallow, that finger is only responsible for the magnitude. It's easier.
For me the main problem with AC's control scheme is that it fractures the Combat and Stealth/Nav into two separate game modes due to lack of Standardization. Having Context-Sensitive controls is okay (sort of) and it's kind of AC's thing. However, Standardization and Consistency of controls does two nice things for us;
1) Makes us feel like we're playing the same game no matter what we're doing (Stealth/Nav/Fight)
2) Allows for deeper and quicker mastery without much second-guessing
Stealth as the only toggle would work. It might also further remove standardization/consistency and make even more of the game's responses to a single input contextual.
That aside, it's nice to consider how only tilting a stick half-way actually Feels. Like I said, it's difficult to be more precise directionally while the stick is only tilted half-way. This is why games like Entwined or other Tunnel-Runners always tell the player "To be more precise, always have your stick be touching the outer edge completely." If that wouldn't be a problem during AC's gameplay, I'd be down for it.
But if it were, such as for precise movements during Pickpocketing, Tailing, Moving that you have to do while in motion, it'd just add to the irritating things that happen over a 40-hour time with the game; irritations such as climbing something you didn't want to, or not climbing something you did. Irritations that happen because of the controls' lack of standardization - irritations that games with more standardized/consistent controls never face. Jermaine might be onto something though, because Assassin's Creed has never felt like it needed accuracy that tight. It's very much a looser, sloppier experience than most similar games in the genre.
Patrice Desilets' design philosophy has always been, and still is, "the difficulty should be in the brain, not on the controller."
Whatever we demand the AC control scheme to be - this is what we should be keeping in mind. I mean, if we care about his original vision. I do. AC is very much about Flow and reading the environment. What happens on the joystick shouldn't even be in the player's mind. They shouldn't have to stumble over the controls. In this regard, AC is the polar opposite of a fighting game. Still! That doesn't mean taking control away from the player. It's a fine line between removing the wall between Player and Game, and widening that wall because you tried to take away TOO MUCH control.
@doublestab
-it is not up for debate that the control scheme is more complex than the suggested alternative
-assassin's creed is not reality, and perhaps lofty hopes of it being that are to blame for the control's failings.
-the crouch could be redesigned to only engage in stealth mode in appropriate places, like restricted areas or alleys off the main street. Or they could remove the crouch and go with corner cover again, which would only engage in stealth mode.
-it wouldn't be complicated. it would be simple. The games are already designed based on the assumption you'll be spending a lot of time moving at top speed. this gets at that more efficiently.
@DAZ
As I said above, I've reconsidered normal walking being controlled by stick movement, at the sacrifice of stealth mode's crouch only engaging when in appropriate situations, or at the sacrifice of crouch as a concept entirely. Instead, stick movement could dictate varying degrees of walking or running, almost the same as the old high profile split, except on a toggle and requiring no inputs other than the stick.
I think this kind of seperation has its uses, such as simulating things specific to types of movement very specifically. The feeling of running or the tactile sensation of pickpocketing, one thing I agree AC1 did best. Patrice's view makes sense: AC is a very experiential game, and simplifying it with the concept of discrete modes helps to tailor those experiences for maximum impact.
I'm not against a harsh split between modes of control and function, I'm just against further splits within the same category. Combat shouldn't feel so separate from stealth takedowns. (and perhaps pickpocketing shouldn't feel so separate from looting a body? seeing as they are in essence the same action, though in the latter the target isn't the one who can catch you doing it.)
Putting magnitude and direction into one input is necessarily harder to control than separating them. As an analogy, it's why your car has a gas pedal and a steering wheel. Your speed in a car is not dictated by if you also push the steering wheel in.
If you want a control scheme that's more video gamey and doesn't run the gauntlet of possible movements, then sure, make it just like every other video game. While we're at it, lets add vehicles and gun fights (oh, wait...)
Agree to disagree.
“Force has no place where there is need of skill." Herodotus
I'd be open to trying your control scheme. If it works, great! If it doesn't, we take what was good from it and move on.
Just like how Unity's attempt at providing greater control in terms of parkour (Up - Down - Forward) was juddery and annoying most times, but Controlled Descent was fantastic.
You've pretty much got me hooked in terms of "Combat and Stealth Takedowns shouldn't feel different" and "Looting and Pickpocketing shouldn't feel different." I mean, Looting and Pickpocketing already do feel pretty similar - same action, as you say. One is tense in that you have to stand still while you do it, the other is tense in that you have to always be moving while you do it.
As an experimental control, it might be neat to see pickpocketing have more to do with a tightly timed button press while you're running into a dude in the crowd, putting him off balance and swiping the item while being like, "Oh, sorry sir, you alright?" then being on your way. This is pretty much how actual pickpockets do stuff, and it's a lot quicker and scarier than the current model. It also draws slightly more attention so you can't just pickpocket a hundred dudes in the exact same area.
I like the current model, though - so this isn't a huge thing for me; just something to toss in the air 
@doublestab
unlike a car in real life, video games can be designed around two discrete modes of speed rather than an unending gradation between. and limited gradation could still exist through the explicit function of an analog stick, as I've mentioned before. You can say all you like that it's too hard to feather the stick, but there's a reason it caught on as opposed to an omnidirectional d-pad, and that reason is that you have control over the intensity of your input. games do some things the way they do for a reason. not everything is a slippery slope, and that's a bad argument anyways. Clearly guns and vehicles entered this series while the method of movement control stayed the same, so changing it would not necessarily have hastened the arrival of said guns and vehicles.
EDIT: I don't know where you got the idea that I want it to be instantly 0-60 in terms of acceleration. I've always wanted acceleration to be more gradual and reaching the top speed to be an accomplishment of sorts. I don't think I said anything about that in my posts, but saying now: I don't want you to instantly be running at max speed, just to always be in some degree of run in that mode. it really isn't so controversial as you're making it out to be.
@DAZ
yeah the only real problem with Unity's approach was that it didn't feel snappy in practice. Watch Dogs had a wonderful feel to its vaulting, though it was a much simpler action. If movement in general felt more like that game, it would be a good thing.
I think a lot of good things in the AC series have been abandoned due to them not being executed properly and the concept itself being blamed rather than said execution. Obviously the biggest example is a lot of the stuff in AC1, but it's persisted throughout the series. While some things that are executed fine but are actually maybe not good concepts have been kept as if they're the sole reason for the series' success.