All I ever hear is people bitching. How about someone actually states what makes the old formula better? Exclude the story because the story just requires a better writer according to your complaints so here's something to think about when it comes to the old formula.

Odyssey and origins are so unrealistic wah wah (Oh because causing a million crimes and then just walking in a group of three people hides you despite the fact that you stick out like a sore thumb)

Odyssey and origins is too rpg (Oh like RPG elements didn't exist before? Leveling up, leveling up gear, upgrading skills and abilities, all of it existed before they just made them better)

What was better? The frustrating climbing, the fact that you have to hold R2 just to start running? the fact that when you jump the direction you input you still end up jumping a whole other direction the game decides for you and dying.

What was better? de-synchronizing just because of the games own fault? I mean heck who doesn't love a challenge but I mean an actual challenge not a challenge that is made a challenge because the controls are so damn rigid. AC3 having to run back and forth into a bush until the fucker finally decides to AUTO crouch.

​

What was better? Collecting the mind numbing items that are all over the map instead of them being actual interactive missions, forts, and action/stealth like it is now?

​

Literally about the only thing that old formula had was the parkour riddles and mazes from the tombs which I could see them bringing back. Having a home base and creating a brother hood. The rest of you bitching about the old formula clearly know nothing about creating video games because no one, no one but you bitches agree that the old formula was better. Critics constantly criticized how rigid the game felt, gamers constantly complained how boring a lot of the aspects of the games got. Stop asking for something that is broken in comparison to what it is now SMOOTH LIKE BUTTER.