As a massive fan of AC2 and Brotherhood I'm finding myself somewhat let down with this game.
I think you can really smell the whiff of a rushed, cynical development time and Ubi seem to have added in a bunch of features that do more to frustrate, bore and distract from the great parts of the last two games than create fun.
Of course, the core game is still great. Assassinating and stealthing is fun and the story mode has some awesome setpieces.
The main problems I have with the game are as follows:
1. Too much un-needed clutter.
Did we really need a bomb crafting mechanic? Ezio already has plenty of options and it feels like the bombs are a wasted opportunity as
a) you never really need them
b) they're a boring pain in the ass to craft.
c) loud-ass explosions aren't very assassin-ish
d) you can't move while aiming. which is annoying.
The map is so cluttered with shops, bomb crafting sites, Assassin coops, respawning treasure chests and god knows what else that it's a nightmare trying to even find your mission markers sometimes. Not to mention the un-needed map effects that make opening and closing it a slow affair.
2. Tower Defence
This minigame sucks. It is badly explained, has an awkward as hell camera mechanic, is frustratingly chaotic and somehow boring at the same time. Not to mention it is unrewarding, simply there to punish you for renovating the dens, something that seems like a dick move to me.
3. Renovation
Renovating the city adds to your Templar awareness. Which means much time utterly wasted running around after stewards and Templars to lower it again in order to avoid having to do another shitty tower defense game. Why the hell does the game punish you for doing the optional stuff? This is pure ass-backwards game design - you should be rewarded for this kind of stuff. Sure it makes sense from a story point of view but it's the complete opposite of fun IMO.
4. Built by committee
The game feels cynically built, rushed and fractured. For example... you can really tell the linear POP style 'dungeon' areas were built by a different studio, as they are visually very different to the rest of the game with more dynamic lighting, different textures and more structured visual design. It feels disjointed and separate, unlike the ones in Brotherhood which to me felt seemless and part of the overall world.
And the minigames just feel pointless, like they just brainstormed in a boardroom and threw every half-assed idea they came up with into the game. It's like they tried to add in as much shit as they could and just completely jumped the shark.
5. Location
Now perhaps this is just personal preference but Ubisoft's Constantinople to me doesn't have half the charm, character and identity that Rome, Florence and Venice had. At times it's even downright ugly.
It seems like they scrimped on assets, re-using the same 3 or 4 buildings over and over, not to mention the dull, dusty colour scheme that just doesn't appeal to me the way the beautiful vistas of the last two games did. Even the sky doesn't look as nice.
It just all looks the bloody same, meaning you have to make frequent use of that slow, clunky map screen.
6. Instant fail mission parameters
I think I just have to accept that Ubi are never going to realise that instant fail missions are infuriating in open world games full of random events and possibilities.
7. Altair
'Huh? What? Hey this is awesome! I'm Altair! This is great, fan service woo! He even has a bit of a personality this time! Let's do this - what... oh. That ended pretty quickly.'
8. Random dudes who stab you in the back and camping snipers
I don't think I even need to elaborate on why these ideas suck. It's like they designed them solely to piss you off.
9. Desmond's first person platforming bits
These would be kind of interesting if the controls weren't so awful and didn't feel like ice skating.
What do you guys think? Did Ubisoft shit the bed with this game? Or do you like all the new additions and the kitchen sink feel of it?
I think you can really smell the whiff of a rushed, cynical development time and Ubi seem to have added in a bunch of features that do more to frustrate, bore and distract from the great parts of the last two games than create fun.
Of course, the core game is still great. Assassinating and stealthing is fun and the story mode has some awesome setpieces.
The main problems I have with the game are as follows:
1. Too much un-needed clutter.
Did we really need a bomb crafting mechanic? Ezio already has plenty of options and it feels like the bombs are a wasted opportunity as
a) you never really need them
b) they're a boring pain in the ass to craft.
c) loud-ass explosions aren't very assassin-ish
d) you can't move while aiming. which is annoying.
The map is so cluttered with shops, bomb crafting sites, Assassin coops, respawning treasure chests and god knows what else that it's a nightmare trying to even find your mission markers sometimes. Not to mention the un-needed map effects that make opening and closing it a slow affair.
2. Tower Defence
This minigame sucks. It is badly explained, has an awkward as hell camera mechanic, is frustratingly chaotic and somehow boring at the same time. Not to mention it is unrewarding, simply there to punish you for renovating the dens, something that seems like a dick move to me.
3. Renovation
Renovating the city adds to your Templar awareness. Which means much time utterly wasted running around after stewards and Templars to lower it again in order to avoid having to do another shitty tower defense game. Why the hell does the game punish you for doing the optional stuff? This is pure ass-backwards game design - you should be rewarded for this kind of stuff. Sure it makes sense from a story point of view but it's the complete opposite of fun IMO.
4. Built by committee
The game feels cynically built, rushed and fractured. For example... you can really tell the linear POP style 'dungeon' areas were built by a different studio, as they are visually very different to the rest of the game with more dynamic lighting, different textures and more structured visual design. It feels disjointed and separate, unlike the ones in Brotherhood which to me felt seemless and part of the overall world.
And the minigames just feel pointless, like they just brainstormed in a boardroom and threw every half-assed idea they came up with into the game. It's like they tried to add in as much shit as they could and just completely jumped the shark.
5. Location
Now perhaps this is just personal preference but Ubisoft's Constantinople to me doesn't have half the charm, character and identity that Rome, Florence and Venice had. At times it's even downright ugly.
It seems like they scrimped on assets, re-using the same 3 or 4 buildings over and over, not to mention the dull, dusty colour scheme that just doesn't appeal to me the way the beautiful vistas of the last two games did. Even the sky doesn't look as nice.
It just all looks the bloody same, meaning you have to make frequent use of that slow, clunky map screen.
6. Instant fail mission parameters
I think I just have to accept that Ubi are never going to realise that instant fail missions are infuriating in open world games full of random events and possibilities.
7. Altair
'Huh? What? Hey this is awesome! I'm Altair! This is great, fan service woo! He even has a bit of a personality this time! Let's do this - what... oh. That ended pretty quickly.'
8. Random dudes who stab you in the back and camping snipers
I don't think I even need to elaborate on why these ideas suck. It's like they designed them solely to piss you off.
9. Desmond's first person platforming bits
These would be kind of interesting if the controls weren't so awful and didn't feel like ice skating.
What do you guys think? Did Ubisoft shit the bed with this game? Or do you like all the new additions and the kitchen sink feel of it?
