Assassin's Creed Revelations - Disappointing.

[wayfaringpanda]

The problem I had with ACR is, among the stupid additions like the tower defense game, is that the world seems to have shrunk. In AC, we had the entire Middle East. In AC2, a large portion of Italy. In ACB, the entire, enormous city of Rome, including the vast countryside plus three side locations tracking down the Da Vinci machines. ACR gave us one city, with no countryside to explore, that was smaller than the city of Rome. Plus, there was no sense of accomplishment when you finished a memory sequence, and were able to go into a new area - making the entire city open at once meant that sense of reward was gone. That last one may seem silly, but it felt like an important distinction to me.

Plus, I felt the story was weaker, both in Desmond's and Ezio's case. The bad guys weren't as bad, they were predictable, and just lacked the oomph that you felt from Rodrigo and Cesare Borgia.

And what happened to the faction missions? You have the Romanis, the Thieves and the Mercenaries, but almost no missions for them? I know we got the recruit missions, but I didn't feel it was an even exchange.

I hope AC3 feels as large and as awesome as AC2, and doesn't follow the trend.

 

[saucecode]

I actually liked the bombs. I didn't spend much time in it, but they worked!
The location was fine, but it did feel a bit weird because of Ezio's history.
And the Tower Defense, that was just not very fun. I'd much rather fight them myself, that option should go in.

 

[Flailing Escapist]

I only have one thing to say to Ubisoft (Assassin's Creedwise)
'ahem'
TAKE US SOMEWHERE ELSE YOU A-HOLES! The only re-occuring character should be Desmond and his little group of buddies and baddies. You could take us ANYWHERE in the world and ANY TIME PERIOD so why don't you?!

AC2 was a giant step in the right direction and after that you guys were considering taking us to feudal japan or the round table so what the hell happened? Ezio had a complete character ark in 2 so why for fuck's sake did you need to make 2 more games about him? YOU COULD TAKE US ANYWHERE!

I haven't played Revelations yet but from what I've heard from here and other people Assassin's Creed (to me) is dead. There was SO much potential here but you lost yourselves in what I can only assume is money. A new game every year, seriously? Damn you, Ubisoft!

 

[Kermi]

While I agree that Revelations is a bit dosappointing, I think it's pushed the story along nicely and when it comes to Assassin's Creed I only ask that it be playable so I can enjoy the story. AC2 and Brotherhood did this, and Revelations kind of did... except they ended it on ANOTHER FREAKING CLIFFHANGER.

I can only hope the glut of features they tacked onto Revelations means they were throwing everything at the wall to clean off their desks, and that this means they'll take us to a new time period, a new city, with a new character, and the game will have a raft of new and different features while still maintaining the same basic core gameplay.

That's my hope, anyway.

 

[damselgaming]

I just read the story on Wikipedia and await the next true sequel. Let's be honest though. they are kind of digging themselves into a Metal Gear sized hole of ridiculous plot.

 

[Shoggoth2588]

I'll take instant-fail mission parameters over timed missions or, escort missions any day (now that I think about it, those are both IF-Missions...and I can't think of any others at the moment either save for the ones involving bottomless pits)

I haven't played either of the AC2 Spin-offs and can't say I plan to. I'm waiting patiently for AC3, which will star Desmond and likely disappoint me for focusing even more heavily on online-only multiplayer. I'm still waiting for my Ancient-Egyptian AC title and will hold out hope for that one until games go 100% digital, when I'll likely disappear (not in a suicide way, in an "I'm Done Progressing" way)

 

[zspartancats]

I liked it. It felt just Brotherhood and that was fine with me. Though, I would like to see it be in the oven for a year or two. For Ubisoft to come up with new concepts/ideas.

Also, Ubisoft should have left the multiplayer zone alone. I still think its over all a disappointing experience.

 

[putowtin]

As a massive fan of AC2 and Brotherhood I'm finding myself somewhat let down with this game.

I can agree with you on the bombs, the defense, the repeatative nature of the city, and the shortness of Altair's sections (though being a massive AC fan I have the "Secret Crusade" book that delves further into the life of Altair)

But (and maybe it's the fan girl in me) I can over look these flaws as the completion of Ezio's story was brilliant and with more answers that the end of AC: Brotherhood, I am looking forward to the climax next December!

 

[electric method]

I'd assumed all of this would be the case in terms of AC:Revelations, which is why I've held off buying it. I remember playing AC: Brotherhood, and while liking it, thought it added nothing to the game series other than completely unnecessary elements. For e.g. expanding on the rebuilding of the stronghold from AC2 to include all of Rome.

I guess the issue could be summed up as this: In each progressive game in the series Ubisoft has given the player more options and choices. But not the choices and options that actually benefit the game world, lore or plot. What, imo, would have worked better is the illusion of choice. That is, and was, already present in the games due to the open world sandbox nature of the AC franchise. All the additionals just bog down the gameplay and detract from one of the most important characters in the games; the cities and environments.

All of this is rather unsuprising coming from Ubisoft though. They have a long history of doing stuff like this tbh. Look at the POP trilogy. The first game, Sands of Time, was an incredible game. It needed no sequel, but Ubisoft made 4 more POP games. I guess the best way to say it is, Ubisoft regularly kills off it's great franchises by trying to make lightening strike twice. The net effect of which is games that have the look and feel of the originals they are based on but lack the soul.

 

[Illithidae]

When I think about it, I guess I kinda agree with you - but I'm really liking the look of Revelations from my point here.

Sure, it's not a big story, but neither was Brotherhood. It might not be the best story compared to the other games, but that's mostly because you already KNOW the character and his motives. As he says in Brotherhood, Ezio intends the Assassins to live on where he cannot, and Revelations is both the drawing together of plot threads and the conclusion of Ezio's story as he finally reaches his goals. Some stories are better than others.

Assassin's Creed II, Brotherhood and Revelations have been Ubisoft's attempt to create a giant plot which follows Ezio's growth from someone seeking revenge to a true master - from a state of no family to one once again. His tiredness shows and, happily for you, this is where his story ends.

Speaking of his story, he's been around for about 60 years. When you think about it, how much change can be put into a game, or rather trilogy, when all the time that passes is 60 years? It's not the same great leap of a time period that it was between Assassin's Creed I and II, so there's not really the sudden invention of crossbows and guns to draw a contrast between the games within Ezio's trilogy. While some of the objectives you do, like the tower defense, might not be too pleasant - isn't it all just a way of trying out new things within a limited schedule? I have no doubt that Ubisoft will avoid using 1-year development schedules past this, since they no longer have the pressure to finish Ezio's story.

Edit: I forgot a point there, about the Templar attention point. To me, it kinda makes sense - sure it's a troublesome mechanic within the game to say the least, but we all know that by 2012 the Assassin order is on its last legs with only a few more pockets of resistance. As far as we can tell, the Assassins failed to embrace the new age like the Templars did, and they've paid for it. Frankly, it makes sense for Ezio's presence in the city of Constantinople to recieve more publicity within the Templar circle - they've heard all about his exploits within Italy.

Ezio is a master assassin now, so it makes sense for them to be trying to find them so Templar growth can begin anew. It's just as easy for them to plant agents within the city, if not easier, as you do. If they see you getting a foothold, then why would they just sit back and allow that to happen? Assassin's Creed is coming to look at the big picture, and that shouldn't just apply to the Assassins but to the Templars too.

And to revise my point about the gameplay changes; Some are going to be hit-and-miss, others won't be. Ubisoft has to balance between locational and timeline gadgets, and I feel they've done that well.

 

[MiracleOfSound]

Ezio is a master assassin now, so it makes sense for them to be trying to find them so Templar growth can begin anew. It's just as easy for them to plant agents within the city, if not easier, as you do. If they see you getting a foothold, then why would they just sit back and allow that to happen? Assassin's Creed is coming to look at the big picture, and that shouldn't just apply to the Assassins but to the Templars too.

I did say that in the OP - yes it made sense from a story perspective. But when the gameplay suffers because of it something ain't right.

 

[JohnDoey]

I can understand where you are coming form but to me it's probably about on par or a better better than brohood, but fuck whoever made the ending it's even worse than brohood's

 

[Fiz_The_Toaster]

I just finished the game Thursday night and I'm just now finishing a few things, and I've thought about the game during that time, honestly I had nothing else better to think about since buying shops is kinda boring.

I don't think the bomb building was that bad, I thought it was a little interesting, but then again I only did it twice, one to make a smoke screen bomb and the other to make a big bomb.

The tower defense was utter bullshit. If I knew I wasn't going to win, I'd just fail on purpose and then kill the Templar den leader there to get my den back. And they have you do that in the Mediterranean defense too, which is bullshit too. My captured city is under attack because the game gave me way too many missions for that one city and now I'm punished for it because I didn't get to it fast enough, never mind that I was doing missions in another city that had more missions than I have assassin's. Sorry, but that's my biggest gripe with the game, and the one that pisses me off the most.

I used the zoom function on the map more than I'd liked, I wish they stretched the map out more so I can see everything better. I like the place but I've been running around like crazy and I don't really have that many land markers to know where I am, unlike in Brotherhood and ACII, but that's just my complaint.

I agree that it's rather annoying that I have to find a herald every time I bought a land mark or a shop just so I can get my awareness down, so I don't get stabbed, which I'm actually fine with, or one of my dens don't get attacked, and do the bullshit defense mini game. I don't mind the renovations though.

I wish the Altair sections were longer and more fleshed out, but I can kinda see that we are just supposed to see flashes in his life that were important to the Creed.

The failed synchronization alerts are annoying. For an 'open world' game, Ubisoft really put limits on how I can complete a mission, and sometimes it's really not how I would finish one. Again, I can see where they're coming from since we are doing things how Ezio did them, but I wish they weren't so limiting.

I really love Assassin's Creed, but I think this one wasn't as great as the others, but I still love it. I'm just hoping that Ubisoft listens to these kinda of complaints/criticisms and fixes them in the next game.

 

[Ulquiorra4sama]

I have yet to play through this game yet since i've been too deep into Saints Row: The Third to do anything else between school work. One of my friends has said this game was totally awesome though so i'll just have to wait and see for myself i guess.

It's really a shame if the bombs turn out to be pretty much useless, but i agree they're a bit of an odd choice for the silent killer of the night

 

[rekabdarb]

I actually liked the tower defense game. What i didn't like was the awareness with purchasing shops... which in the long run did nothing i don't think guards even gave a shit about me until i ran up to them and did the hook and throw.

The ending. This is what realllllly disappointed me. Do you see how disappointed i was. I put that many l's.

it's all like *censored* and then a door opens and *censored* and ezio is lame... and his story doesn't even finish.

had fun with the game, also didn't like cappadocia or whereever. If i have to do a new game to get those animus fragments i'm gonna be pissed. Oh and the 'hidden tomb' went missing after beating the game... so do that before you beat it. Ayep.

Oh and the desmond sequences. Christ these are infuriating. I did the first two and then just got tired of them. Like why are they needed. Don't forget to snag the TWO emblems for online in EACH sequence. TWO PER SEQUENCE.

I didn't realize that until i got to the fourth one...

 

[Darks63]

Wow they managed to make Constantinople a ugly samey city pretty bad considering the effect put in to Florence in AC2.

 

[MiracleOfSound]

Oh and the desmond sequences. Christ these are infuriating. I did the first two and then just got tired of them. Like why are they needed. Don't forget to snag the TWO emblems for online in EACH sequence. TWO PER SEQUENCE.

I didn't realize that until i got to the fourth one...

Speaking of those, I'm struggling trying to think of anything more immersion breaking than online unlocks in a single player game. Fuck that.

 

[VoidWanderer]

While I did enjoy the game, I was not impressed with the 'Tower' defence aspect, so I kept my Templar attention thing down.

It definitely wasn't the best they've done, but I think this is the 'too many cooks in the kitchen' problem. Also known as Portal 2 syndrome.

While they wanted to maintain the integrity/core of the game, with the other studios pitching in we had too many committees (who apparently haven't played the game and therefore should never get a say in the game) throwing arbitrary gameplay mechanics in.

If it is going to stay multiple studios for the development, make it TWO. One for single-player and the other for multiplayer.

I loved the singleplayer experience and barely ever touch multiplayer (unless it is co-op) but with the number of studios involved, I am concerned about the next game.

 

[MiracleOfSound]

It's really a shame if the bombs turn out to be pretty much useless, but i agree they're a bit of an odd choice for the silent killer of the night

They are definitely not useless, just un-nessecary I guess.

They are probably a bit of fun if you're willing to invest the time into the crafting... which I'm not. Lol