I can't help but feel that Assassin's Creed is slowly dying on the inside.

[Jonatron]

Possible spoilers.

AC1, I kind of enjoyed, kind of grued at. AC2 was just fantastic. Magnificently structured in pacing, character development, story and the gameplay tweaks over AC1 were amazing. Brotherhood felt like a 2.5 to me. Really rather pointless for the most part, though it had a few high points. Revelations, though very similar to Brotherhood had much more a punch. Revelations showed the Altair from the Codex and Bloodlines how I'd hoped he might be. The "weird pointless stuff about future people" in Revelations was in AC2, you just had to collect all the video parts to see it. Of the three stories, I care Ezio > Altair > Desmond. That games of such high polish (though very cluttered feature creep) can be produced annually is a damned achievement of the industry. The artwork, aesthetic and atmosphere of Ezio's environment is my favorite aspect.

I can't stand the multiplayer, my only quarrel with it though is that it makes my gamerscore look bad. It's not for me, so I don't touch it.

 

[SwiggleDyl]

The yearly release is probably its biggest hurt, I adore the series so much (still haven't played revelations though)but the reason people loved the second one so much is because they took a good game and redid the formula to create a great game. While Brotherhood and Revelations attempt to improve on this its still just a few different changes rather than some great improvement. Ubisoft's best chance at getting the same love for AC3 that the second one had is to change it up again (but in a good way, hence a massive risk).

 

[newdarkcloud]

I'm very much with you. I love the first two Assassin's Creed games, thought for different reasons: I liked the assassinations and story of one, but appreciated the changes they made in 2. I honestly though 2's story was slightly weaker because the bad guys were just bad guys and impossible to relate to.

I liked Brotherhood, but I felt it could have had a better story. I liked the Recruit mechanic but wished training them was less of a pain in the ass. The chain kills made combat less of a grind. Ezio's story was alright, but hardly important. Desmond's story went as far as it ever goes.

Revelation has begun to shake my confidence in the series. There were only 2 or 3 actual assassinations in Revelations and the gameplay "additions" were uninterested and irrelevant to me. I'm indifferent towards the hookblade and bombs (never used them) and hate Den Defense and Desmond's levels. Also, the story didn't go anywhere at. At the very least, Altair's segments were cool.

 

[The_Blue_Rider]

I think that yes they are too easy, but on the whole Assassins Creed is still easily one of my favourite series out there, if not my most favourite.

Sure its made a few strange decisions (Tower Defence etc.) But I like the fact that theyre trying new things at least, since they cant do much with the core gameplay, which is already done quite well in my opinion. Also the execution streaks, while they did make the game too easy at times, it made up for it with the fact that they were incredibly fun to do when you had a horde of enemies come at you, and it was incredibly satisfying seeing 20+ plus guards just laying there dead and defeated on the ground around you.

 

[JoesshittyOs]

Felt this way since Brotherhood.

It's kinda disheartening to see a series that would thrive with a multiple year production method, completely abandon that because the second one sold big bucks.

We would have been getting Assassin's Creed 3 by this time, and it would have actually been a new game by now, if you think of it.

 

[Daystar Clarion]

Brotherhood was pushing it, but in the end, I still enjoyed it.

Revelations, on the other hand, was just unnecessary and I feel that the series really should have had a change of scenery after Brohood. Revelations felt really short and the plot was just lazy.


In Brohood, we had the Borgias. They were the bad guys, they were the people that needed to be stopped.

I can't even remember the name of the bad guy in Revelations. The Sultan's son? Someone's uncle? None of the characters left the slightest impact on me.

The one good thing about Revelations, I will say, the Altair segments were the best parts of the game for me. I never really liked him in the original, but he was really fleshed out in Revelations.

The series needs a change of scenery and new ancestor to stay fresh, because as it is, Desmond is still a boring arsehole whom I have no interest in.

 

[Vault101]

its pretty obvious I think..1 year cyle

hardly changing anything yet shoveling piles of crap on top of the core gameplay

I think the best thing would be too change things up (female protagonist..it could totally work)..but go back to core gameplay...if that makes sense

 

[gigastar]

Well, after playing and spotting the difference between AC2 and AC:B i decided to use this series as my default christmas present from my parents.

I certainly wouldnt call Revelations a terrible gift, but i wasnt as dissapointed knowing that i didnt drop my own money on it.

But next year? I might have to revise my options unless theres going to be an AC3. Sadly while 2011 was a year of sheer awesome for gaming, i cant think of anything of note due for release in late 2012.

 

[omega 616]

Brotherhood was pushing it, but in the end, I still enjoyed it.

Revelations, on the other hand, was just unnecessary and I feel that the series really should have had a change of scenery after Brohood. Revelations felt really short and the plot was just lazy.


In Brohood, we had the Borgias. They were the bad guys, they were the people that needed to be stopped.

I can't even remember the name of the bad guy in Revelations. The Sultan's son? Someone's uncle? None of the characters left the slightest impact on me.

The one good thing about Revelations, I will say, the Altair segments were the best parts of the game for me. I never really liked him in the original, but he was really fleshed out in Revelations.

The series needs a change of scenery and new ancestor to stay fresh, because as it is, Desmond is still a boring arsehole whom I have no interest in.

Yeah, Altair was Ezio before Ezio was born. They where the same person!

To be honest beyond assassins and Templar's being in a war and you are on the side of the assassins I have no idea what the story is!

 

[predatorpulse7]

The problems with this series is two fold: increasingly easy difficulty and way too frequent releases(this couples with unnecessary multiplayer).

They need to try and recreate the MOOD of AC2. In AC2, you had a new character(with his own arc, we see him from birth till he's like 40), actual involvment of the assassin order with the local population(you used crowds more), a cool sidekick in davinci, cool new weapons, 2 big cities and various smaller but still interesting locals and a story that actually went somewhere until the lulzy ending(a punchup with the pope). AC2 did most things right because it chose to implement all these elements.

With Brotherhood and Revelations, Ubisoft kept these elements apart and gave us halves of what could have been a very good games. Both Brotherhood and Revelations are passable but could have been so much more. Imagine a game with Rome and Constantinopole in it, with Borgias and Sultan's brother, the addition of training your assassins, withouth the gimmick of bombs(but keep the hookblade that was ok), an epic arc regarding Ezio's last years, solidifying the order in Italy and Turkey and at the same time searching for the secrets of Altair. That would have been the real AC3. Instead they split it up to get more money and gave us a disjointed story. A good story imo still but the only thing Revelations does right is the implementation of the hookblade and the wrapping up of the story but there is not reason why these couldn't have been put in the previous game as well.

To quote Yahtzee, they are spreading a good thing too wide so the good becomes really thin.

As I said, this series has great potential but only if they stop with the yearly releases, ditch the multiplayer(seriously, what kind of human being plays AssCreed for the multiplayer?) and start focusing on the singplayer story and gameplay. They did it beautifully in AC2, a game I gladly go back to, and I think they can do it again. I pray this series doesn't become as milked as star wars.

 

[captaincabbage]

I'm playing through AC:R at the moment (I hired it) and I've gotta say, where the fuck did they go wrong with this series?

It's got way too much gimmicky bullshit and frankly, they should have stopped Ezio's story at AC2. I'm so fucking sick of that time period it's not funny.

Y'know what I want? I want a new character, a new setting (fuedel Japan please) and a fucking crouch button.
Seriously, does nobody in this universe know how to crouch? What. The. Dickens.

 

[AstylahAthrys]

Revelations was a huge disappointment to me. I loved 1, and 2, and I liked Brotherhood as well, but Revelations was just not nearly as solid. My opinions on the game are identical to Yahtzee's, actually, which is honestly the first time that has ever happened. I will play the next game, because I kind of care about the story, but it will be after the price drops to $20.

 

[Et3rnalLegend64]

The problems with this series is two fold: increasingly easy difficulty and way too frequent releases(this couples with unnecessary multiplayer).

They need to try and recreate the MOOD of AC2. In AC2, you had a new character(with his own arc, we see him from birth till he's like 40), actual involvment of the assassin order with the local population(you used crowds more), a cool sidekick in davinci, cool new weapons, 2 big cities and various smaller but still interesting locals and a story that actually went somewhere until the lulzy ending(a punchup with the pope). AC2 did most things right because it chose to implement all these elements.

With Brotherhood and Revelations, Ubisoft kept these elements apart and gave us halves of what could have been a very good games. Both Brotherhood and Revelations are passable but could have been so much more. Imagine a game with Rome and Constantinopole in it, with Borgias and Sultan's brother, the addition of training your assassins, withouth the gimmick of bombs(but keep the hookblade that was ok), an epic arc regarding Ezio's last years, solidifying the order in Italy and Turkey and at the same time searching for the secrets of Altair. That would have been the real AC3. Instead they split it up to get more money and gave us a disjointed story. A good story imo still but the only thing Revelations does right is the implementation of the hookblade and the wrapping up of the story but there is not reason why these couldn't have been put in the previous game as well.

To quote Yahtzee, they are spreading a good thing too wide so the good becomes really thin.

As I said, this series has great potential but only if they stop with the yearly releases, ditch the multiplayer(seriously, what kind of human being plays AssCreed for the multiplayer?) and start focusing on the singplayer story and gameplay. They did it beautifully in AC2, a game I gladly go back to, and I think they can do it again. I pray this series doesn't become as milked as star wars.

Don't hate on the multiplayer lovers. I like it. You don't have to.

It seems that the bombs are a really big grievance to a lot of people. I don't really see why. "Too much focus on bombs." I'm pretty sure that one can go through a hell of a lot of the game only using smoke bombs like in the older games. I mostly use them for trolling the guards. The only ones you really need are Shrapnel/Thunder (group kills), Smoke, and maybe Cherry/Smoke Decoy bombs (luring in for group kills/assassinations). The other ones have their uses but are usually situational.

I agree that Ezio's place in ACR was somewhat pointless. The whole point of the game was to explain the stuff going on in the older games and close Altair's and Ezio's stories before we move on. Ezio was mostly a device so we could see Altair's story (which was really well written in my opinion). Collect the keys, find love interest, finish up Altair's story. I don't think he made a significant impression on Constantinople like he did with bringing Italy into the Rennaisance and overthrowing the Borgias. I agree on your "recreating AC2's mood" argument.

I liked the Desmond sequences and how they were presented. You were essentially retracing his steps in a weird Animus way. I liked the change of pace, the narration, and the explanation of his character. I seem to be a minority though. I just like becoming involved with my fiction and its characters. Everyone else wants to see Desmond shiv someone instead.

I still like how the devs added little things like the Janissary camp where you can find two of them cooking in a corner and how NPCs will comment on current events if you stay and listen. Nobody gives a crap about those though of course. I just want to point them out for anyone who might.

 

[Ulquiorra4sama]

Is it weird i read parts of this with Yahtzee's voice in my head?

OT: I hesitate to call Assassin's Creed a dying thing because despite all its clear flaws i still find it to be a game i'll play for hours when i sit down with it. I'll admit there's really not much challenge in it and i think most the reasons i died when playing through Revelations was only due to the poorly judged jumps across rooftops, but i can't really blame the designers for that.

Personally i'm kinda glad they seem to be moving on with Desmond's story because i'm interested in seeing just how they'll handle that. Because if they're supposed to be placing him in a "not too distant future" setting then i hope we'll leave some(if not all) notions of tower defense and city renovation. I'm really just curious how they'll make it happen, though if it resembles the Desmond Sequences from Revelations in any way i think i'll have to stab someone

On a completely unrelated note: That Sage trophy that got locked due to an update thaty made, has that been fixed or does my boycott of their multiplayer need to keep going? >_>

 

[tigercrews]

I'll admit that I played AC2 before AC1 due to jumping into the series late and I'm glad I did. People keep saying that the games have gotten easier over time because killing is so easy. News flash: You're playing a game where the main job is killing people, especially killing them quickly and with a multitude of methods. If you end up in a sword fight in an AC game more than likely you did something wrong. Also, if you want to make things more difficult or fun you don't have to use the items you complain about. I went through AC:R without even buying the crossbow and only using shrapnel bombs and smoke bombs. I enjoyed using the other bombs when I tried them out but I preferred playing the game my way so pigs blood and fake gold were out. More importantly the game has kept several missions where stealth is key. There were fewer in Revelations and that was for a reason that had a polar opposite in Brohood, you were in a city where almost no noe had ever heard of you except the big bad guys, but if the minions don't know who to look for you can continue in your anonymity. I only had to do the tower defenses one time because keeping myself incognito is how I play so I never had to do another one. I've never felt like the game's have slipped, the last two have been shorter due to their material they are covering but I feel AC3 will be as long as AC2 was before.

-Hoping for either Russian Revolution or WWI Europe
tigercrews

 

[predatorpulse7]

The problems with this series is two fold: increasingly easy difficulty and way too frequent releases(this couples with unnecessary multiplayer).

They need to try and recreate the MOOD of AC2. In AC2, you had a new character(with his own arc, we see him from birth till he's like 40), actual involvment of the assassin order with the local population(you used crowds more), a cool sidekick in davinci, cool new weapons, 2 big cities and various smaller but still interesting locals and a story that actually went somewhere until the lulzy ending(a punchup with the pope). AC2 did most things right because it chose to implement all these elements.

With Brotherhood and Revelations, Ubisoft kept these elements apart and gave us halves of what could have been a very good games. Both Brotherhood and Revelations are passable but could have been so much more. Imagine a game with Rome and Constantinopole in it, with Borgias and Sultan's brother, the addition of training your assassins, withouth the gimmick of bombs(but keep the hookblade that was ok), an epic arc regarding Ezio's last years, solidifying the order in Italy and Turkey and at the same time searching for the secrets of Altair. That would have been the real AC3. Instead they split it up to get more money and gave us a disjointed story. A good story imo still but the only thing Revelations does right is the implementation of the hookblade and the wrapping up of the story but there is not reason why these couldn't have been put in the previous game as well.

To quote Yahtzee, they are spreading a good thing too wide so the good becomes really thin.

As I said, this series has great potential but only if they stop with the yearly releases, ditch the multiplayer(seriously, what kind of human being plays AssCreed for the multiplayer?) and start focusing on the singplayer story and gameplay. They did it beautifully in AC2, a game I gladly go back to, and I think they can do it again. I pray this series doesn't become as milked as star wars.

Don't hate on the multiplayer lovers. I like it. You don't have to.

It seems that the bombs are a really big grievance to a lot of people. I don't really see why. "Too much focus on bombs." I'm pretty sure that one can go through a hell of a lot of the game only using smoke bombs like in the older games. I mostly use them for trolling the guards. The only ones you really need are Shrapnel/Thunder (group kills), Smoke, and maybe Cherry/Smoke Decoy bombs (luring in for group kills/assassinations). The other ones have their uses but are usually situational.

I agree that Ezio's place in ACR was somewhat pointless. The whole point of the game was to explain the stuff going on in the older games and close Altair's and Ezio's stories before we move on. Ezio was mostly a device so we could see Altair's story (which was really well written in my opinion). Collect the keys, find love interest, finish up Altair's story. I don't think he made a significant impression on Constantinople like he did with bringing Italy into the Rennaisance and overthrowing the Borgias. I agree on your "recreating AC2's mood" argument.

I liked the Desmond sequences and how they were presented. You were essentially retracing his steps in a weird Animus way. I liked the change of pace, the narration, and the explanation of his character. I seem to be a minority though. I just like becoming involved with my fiction and its characters. Everyone else wants to see Desmond shiv someone instead.

I still like how the devs added little things like the Janissary camp where you can find two of them cooking in a corner and how NPCs will comment on current events if you stay and listen. Nobody gives a crap about those though of course. I just want to point them out for anyone who might.

I stand by my original assertion. Multiplayer seems very tacky in a story driven game like AssCreed, not to mention that the whole experience is one giant clusterf**k or to quote Yahtzee "it depends mostly on who you spawn closest to". I hate that time and resources is being spent on such a pointless feature instead of the singleplayer.

Bombs are "hated" because they make a already too easy game even easier. They are fun no doubt about it but it makes you feel even moreoverpowered, as if that wasn't already the case.

I agree on the significance of the impact in Constantinopole. It could have been far greater if they had time to expand the sultan/bizantines bit but again, this game was rushed and it showed. Tbh, I thought the same about Brotherhood but at least there they had time to draw up a villain, Caesare Borgia. Here, they basically guide you along not telling you a thing then at the end it's ta-da, here he is and oh btw, Ezio's journey has ended, bye, and make sure you watch Embers. Seriously, if you don't watch Embers, Revelations end seems pretty weird, as far as Ezio's fate is concerned.

 

[silasbufu]

I couldn't get myself to finish Brotherhood, after playing the second part like a madman.

Not even going to bother with Revelations.

Enough is enough

 

[Baradiel]

I loved them more and more, and thought Brotherhood was almost flawless. However, my brother got Revelations for Christmas, and I tried Revelations. I spent a few hours on it, but I just couldn't get into it like I had the previous three. Also, I couldn't try the multiplayer because theres a fucking online pass system! Ubisoft? Don't do this to me, especially when your servers are appalling and take an age to connect.

I'm glad after Revelations Ubisoft is changing the setting. It really does need a new mixup.