26 replies to this topic

[LumiTurtle]

So yeah, last AC game I've played was For Answer, I have skipped both V and VD. Is it worth getting VD now? I mean, the majority of the game is online, there's no reason buying it if there's no people to play with =p

 

Is there an active playerbase?

 

Also, is it worth getting AC V for the singleplayer?

[Black Crow]

So yeah, last AC game I've played was For Answer, I have skipped both V and VD. Is it worth getting VD now? I mean, the majority of the game is online, there's no reason buying it if there's no people to play with =p

 

Is there an active playerbase?

 

Also, is it worth getting AC V for the singleplayer?

I'm sure somebody else can give you a better answer, but mine would be that it depends on how big a fan you are and how big your interest to the game is.

I ended up buying V just for the campaign and atmosphere, since I had this kind of  itch. VD's campaign was pretty awful, imo, in the sense that nearly  all missions were 2 minutes long. V offered longer levels and maybe a little exploration on the maps with the number of collectables, but if you're looking for an amazing story, then no. It's not worth getting it. You might want to watch some videos to get an idea, anyway.

 

As for VD, you'd really want somebody else's opinion. INT server's 'active' hours can be pretty dead, so you'll need everybody on your friendlist there to find games, but they're there. JP still has plenty of activity, imo, but from what I understand it is far less competetive than it used to be last year. There's still some  tough teams, I hear.

 

Also, timezones mess up the dwindling activity here more than it does on 'popular' games. Take me for example, I'd have to play on the INT server around midnight to get activity, but since I gotta work during the weekdays, that's not very suitable for me. The JP server, however, can be a bit puzzling in return for US players in terms of peak activity hours, as I understand, but for me, they play during the daytime.

 

I would say JP is worth getting, but not INT, but I already have both, so.... But like I said, you should wait for others to write what they think as well.

[Soren]

International is only worth getting if,

 

A. You're actually interested in playing online.

 

B. You have some amount of dedication and patience (the learning curve is steep, especially if you wanna be winning fights against people.) If you're the type to rage at video games when you lose, then this definitely isn't for you.

 

C. You're social.

 

D. You're in the same time zone with Americans.

 

 

Also in general, V's single player is better. But VD's is arguably more challenging. But I could be talking out my ass here. I merced so much in ACV, helping people with story missions that at this point it's totally mindless. Heck, I don't even need guns to do 95% (if not 100%,) of them. It's a real shame they got rid of the giant bosses, because they were totally solo-able and would have provided a pretty neat offline challenge, after the servers shut down. VD has giant bosses too, but they're generally much much more difficult to solo. Except for Motherwill, I guess. You're kind of expected to have a team backing you when fighting those. And UNACs are usually very little help.

[Black Crow]

See, I told you. I tried to so hard to give a good answer and then Soren just does it, making it look so effortless.

I think I can agree with him completely here. International's activity times don't go well with me, since I live all the way in Finland.

Though, I know a certain person who lives in Finland as well, but he doesn't seem to have any problems with playing on INT, as he plays very, very late...

 

However, personally, while it's true there's a lot of learning in this game, I don't think it was that hard to get to where I am right now. But I'm not that good anyway, so whatever. >_>

It's just that some other people seem to have made the learning curve look like SUCH a big deal. It's there, but, well, I guess I just might be used to games like that.

[dikhed7]

My 2 cents, if you are only going to play single player on V or VD then no. Single player for both is awful. Once you figure out how to play the game it's not challenging at all and the story is garbage. And i kind of felt like i was just doing the same thing on the same maps over and over. If you plan on playing VD online then yes. I'm sure you could find it in a barging bin somewhere for a deal.

Basically if you are offline only then 4, 4A, LR, SL, etc all would be a better investment.

[DominantLegend]

I'm echoing Soren's advice here, but also want to explain that VD's single player is, in my opinion, better than V's. But both aren't really worth buying for the single player alone unless you're a die hard fan.

 

V's story is stilted and weird, very hard to get into and very poorly explained. The voice acting on the INT copy is very bad too. VD's story had significantly better characters and is composed much more cleanly as a story. The big difference is content. Verdict Day offers far more single player and multiplayer content, in my opinion, because most of the missions in V last only 30 seconds or so, except for the story missions which are longer. 

 

VD has more subquests and normal missions, more maps, and hardcore mode as well, so even as a purely single player experience there's a lot more content and replay ability. Combine that with the fact that V's online servers are no longer being ran, and VD does have a sort of active group on the PS3, it seems a no-brainer to me.

 

So in my opinion, if you have to  choose between V and VD, it's worth getting VD. But if you have to choose whether to get an 5th Gen AC game at all... then that's a more difficult question. 

 

For single player, $30 on VD is going to get you a few week's worth of content with a steep learning curve, if you include hardcore mode. If you're cool with that, then by all means, buy it.

 

But if you're looking for multiplayer you have to make friends, you have to spend time learning, and you have to be actively talking with others to get much use out of it at all. There's activity, but most of it is done via friend requests and invites. So if you're looking for an online game, you need to commit to it.

 

 

tl;dr: Get VD, not V. Single player is a few week's of content for $30. Multiplayer requires hours and hours of strong commitment, but is very rewarding. 

[Soren]

It's just that some other people seem to have made the learning curve look like SUCH a big deal. It's there, but, well, I guess I just might be used to games like that.

 

It's amazing to me how many people have been playing for over a year and still don't seem to understand the game mechanics and what all the numbers actually mean. And then there's aaaallll those people on INT that think AP is more important than defense and don't understand why bullets cut through them like a hot knife through butter.

 

But beyond that, since the game is so old (and also so very similar to ACV, which a lot of us also had experience with,) it is definitely hard to get into the pvp when you're fresh and everyone else has several years of practice. But that being said I've met some players who got good fast. Heliosophist, when he actually played, was very impressive to me. He got the game, then about a month or so later he ended up being one of my favorite people to play with.

 

Just depends on the person, I reckon. It's the stubborn ones that refuse to take advice/critisicm, and don't want to pay attention to anything that never seem to improve. Which, unfortunately, seems to be most people. I just don't understand why they keep playing if it isn't to try their best to win.

[DominantLegend]

I find that a lot of players either stick to "advice" that their teammates give them (which parts are "good"), or what they think looks the best. There are so many players out there who refuse to use certain parts because they just look ugly, or they feel they are cheap. You can't do that in this game and also expect to play at a competitive level. 

 

If anything, ACV was a brilliant experiment of what happens when you take an ego-centric game built around glorifying the main player, then turn it into an online-only competitive co-op game. 

[Soren]

If anything, ACV was a brilliant experiment of what happens when you take an ego-centric game built around glorifying the main player, then turn it into an online-only competitive co-op game. 

 

I would say VD glorifies the main player more than V. At least ACV was much better balanced than VD, and had more competitive value. The skill gap between the actually good players and the weaker ones was much wider. If someone was good, you knew it. And you had to work to beat them. Whereas in VD, anyone can cheese out anyone for the most part, and pretend to be awesome. VD is braindead in comparison.

 

ACV forced people to learn how to manage their energy and learn how and when they needed to move instead of just permagliding everywhere. You had to play more cautious. And melee was actually risky. If you flew in and missed your pile, you were going to get lit up because you didn't have the energy to gtfo like you can in this one. You used it up getting into your opponent's face to begin with. Yet even still, competent melee players existed (mostly in JP). And it was much more impressive because of this. Along with everything else.

 

Also shields didn't exist. No get out of jail free cards. It was a much better world. Even the maps were much more friendly towards competition.

[Maze]

I would say VD glorifies the main player more than V. At least ACV was much better balanced than VD, and had more competitive value. The skill gap between the actually good players and the weaker ones was much wider. If someone was good, you knew it. And you had to work to beat them. Whereas in VD, anyone can cheese out anyone for the most part, and pretend to be awesome. VD is braindead in comparison.

 

ACV forced people to learn how to manage their energy and learn how and when they needed to move instead of just permagliding everywhere. You had to play more cautious. And melee was actually risky. If you flew in and missed your pile, you were going to get lit up because you didn't have the energy to gtfo like you can in this one. You used it up getting into your opponent's face to begin with. Yet even still, competent melee players existed (mostly in JP). And it was much more impressive because of this. Along with everything else.

 

Also shields didn't exist. No get out of jail free cards. It was a much better world. Even the maps were much more friendly towards competition.

I'm going to agree with this acv was a much better game, and also of course you didn't needs shields cause the maps and game balance weren't complete shit.

 

even though I was late to the party in five and I wasn't half as skilled as I was at the peak of my acvd play which was well over a year ago at this point.I got enough online play in to say taking out one good player in five was infinitely more satisfying then taking out a whole team in vd simply because the balance was good enough to lead to some really great duels, that could both rely on split second reactions or clever positioning.

 

also I don't want to say the story was really better in V vs VD because they both are pretty poorly written but the story telling in V and the story missions had much better construction.

 

generally I'd say if V's servers where still active to get that because it's actually a pretty good experience to play it but no its servers got dropped. and I personally wouldn't recommend acvd looking back on my overall experience, there arent many good ways to play this game that are fun the maps are bland both strategically and visually and the game is so meta heavy most the skill you may acquire may mean very little the second the wrong ac pops onto the field.

[dikhed7]

Soren and Maze get it^

[Black Crow]

Just listening to you guys telling how good V was makes me look at VD from another angle. Not that I found VD to be perfect in the first place, but I really, really wish I had gotten to try V's multiplayer.

 

I've seen a little gameplay and played it's story mode, so I know some of the maps, from which I really like how the city maps appeared to be like.

I know that VD is set after generations of war or somethin', but did they REALLY have to fill all the maps from V with water? Vindy City? More like, Drowny City. (I had to give puns a try, ok?) Or what's it called, Mining Sector, with the tall tower and a bunch of explosives everywhere, with some windmills? They just had to leak it all over the map and trash half the items there to make sure it as little cover as possible, and so that the wind could breeze freely through the empty space.

 

... Still my favorite game, tho. VD, that is. Maybe if I had a decent computer and some drawing programs, I might play VD less.

 

Oh right, shields. I know some people who're more than happy to use them, but I try to keep away from them, personally. It's probably just me, but I see using shields as a lack of courage. But to be honest, I have a very few builds that use them, so I guess I can't really judge.

[dikhed7]

Crow, some will disagree with me but V was completely diffrent than VD on many levels. The maps had way more depth to them. Duels wernt always 2 guys humping a building in the middle of a ocean. Sawa and VTFS weren't on every AC. Although the early HRJ shenanigans just about killed the game and the late DSR middle weights were lame as hell. Most people played Rogue ACS and did well with them. Alot of the stats on parts that don't mean shit in Vd had a much larger effect in V. Even the ACs handled diffrently. I would take V over VD any day of the week. I even miss all of the old V pilots. You really missed alot if you weren't in on the early months on V.

[DominantLegend]

I meant 5th gen overall having that glorification factor, and didn't mean to turn this into a V vs VD debate in terms of quality, but it does go to show people's differing experiences with the game.

[SwiiTcHBacK]

 

 

If anything, ACV was a brilliant experiment of what happens when you take an ego-centric game built around glorifying the main player, then turn it into an online-only competitive co-op game. 

 

This is quite an interesting point.

 

V vs VD debate has been done to death. I think a lot of people don't look for what's right in VD despite it's flaws though. That or they don't even know what was done right there.

[Reyleones]

I never played acv but vd isnt as flawed as people make it out to be....its still my favorite online game to play for reasons(not listing a book on why)so while we spend hours typing and discusding why v is better than vd we should be CQin lol but seriously this game can be more acyive with a lil effort from the community, like CQ will be dead but 2 fb rooms are going full of people....that complain the game is dead lol i think the communities organization is dead lol not the game, anyways if people spent as much time dissecting this game that they do actuslly playing it wed have ourselves a good ol time gents, now cut the crap an CQ! Tankas yuus

[Black Crow]

I think I spend more time on ACVD than any other game, so I guess it tells how much I like the game despite it's flaws. (Or how bad other games are these days *Joke*).

 

Speaking of activity, I've been trying to get a person I know face-to-face to get ACVD on the PS3, though, I've also been honest with him when I've told him that for us Finnish people, INT gets active at funny hours, referring that he might want to get a JP copy if he's not ready to buy both. But then again, I also mentioned that learning through JP might not be too ideal, but I'm not too sure here to be honest... I also mentioned that it might take some dedication to learn the game.

 

If you guys have any suggestions on what I should tell him about, I think I might appreciate it. I already told him of a certain Network on Youtube, as well as of this forum, in case he feels like doing some reading or wants to find more stuff related to the game.

 

That being said, he's only obscurely heard of the AC franchise before I started talking about it, much like how I knew it before I decided to find out more about it.

[Maze]

Sawa and VTFS weren't on every AC.

this reminds me remember those dual 4-shot sawa quads?

[dikhed7]

^ you mean every AC you see in Conquest...?

[Sash]

this reminds me remember those dual 4-shot sawa quads?

 

Ahhh the nostalgia of fighting those things in V on Alpine... Or fighting the Tank version on Abandoned Facility.