Yah, sorry Yäk. I got to call "bittervet" on this one. It seems like you want to hate it, so you shouldn't need to try so hard to hate it. The simple answer for you is because that would suck in an Assassin's Creed game. There are people who would love the game you describe (not me, but that's ok), but Assassin's Creed fans looking for an Assassin's Creed game would not. You have to sacrifice realism for gameplay. Almost always. In almost every game.
People asked questions like this when Pirates of the Burning Sea was coming out, and the developers normally responded "because we want to make a fun pirate game, not a sailing simulator".
Wohoooo! Fanboy hate engage!!!!
Of COURSE you can call bittervet on this one or in fact most on anything I say, that would be a fully truthful statement! And with that comes a tendency to talk down on nearly everything because the world is gray and unfeeling and so bland.
No worries, I am not hating on anybody liking this game, people gonna find enjoyment where they can, just rambling on with my usual shitposting while bored at work. At least I gives you something to read.
Another good point. Did you see the nacelles on some of the ships? I mean, just look at the Condor/Crow. How the hell is that thing supposed to put out a linear thrust without tumbling the ship around? Talking about thrust and reaction and velocity, one of the hardest games I ever played was I-War way back in 1998. And why do I remember that game 15 years after release and not having played it for at least 12 when I can barely remember Star Conflict (which had easy physics for "fun") from earlier this year? Because its flight behavior conformed to Newtonian physics that made steering the ship an absolute nightmare but oh so interesting.
That's a really good point, you should make sure to stick to games where CONSTANT THRUST = CONSTANT VELOCITY, IN SPACE.