Ladies and gentlemen, we are currently on the eve of E3 (Shut up it's close enough to the eve). We are but a few months from the next numbered sequel in the critically and fan-acclaimed series Assassin's Creed. So my question to you is, which one of the iterations that have come out have been your favourite?
Personally, mine has been Assassin's Creed 2. Although lacking in gameplay and Online (which I absolutely loved in Brotherhood and Revelations), The art design, the story , and the general feel of the game makes it stand out to me the most.
In hindsight, I did prefer the original.
It was just far more precise, clean, and knew what it wanted to be.
It was great for stealth, and more about actual, well-done assassinations rather than set pieces.
I remember when it was unlikely to become such a huge triple-A title, and in my opinion it made for a simpler, more challenging experience.
That game was a lot of fun and Ezio had more development and, well, character than Altair did. Altair is still a good character but he did nothing for me in the first game and that game was a little boring and it was tedious as hell going from one place and different cities.
The story was great in the second one and had more interest with the Templars and the Assassins than the others, and Revelations' story was a little weird and I think that was the weaker one of the series.
2 had the best story and all that jazz, but I'm gonna go out on a limb and say Brotherhood was the best. Better controls than 2 while keeping most of the good stuff, and a way better supporting cast.
2 had the best story and all that jazz, but I'm gonna go out on a limb and say Brotherhood was the best. Better controls than 2 while keeping most of the good stuff, and a way better supporting cast.
I felt like Brotherhood added a bunch of pointless stuff to the game just for the sake of pointless stuff to justify it's existence.
The whole deal with managing assassin recruits? Pointless time sink.
The whole deal with the Borgia towers? Pointless obstacle to a somewhat pointless challenge to buy everything ever built in Rome.
Romulus's armor? Doesn't really make much sense to the story and is basically just there for the developers to go "hey remember how fun the assassin tombs were in the previous game? Well we brought them back but with absolutely no context! Why? For the funzies!"
Everything in the game felt like there wasn't much soul to it, like the developers only made it for a paycheck. Revelations feels even more like that.
Definitely AC2 for me. It has by far the best story of them all. It was great seeing Ezio develop from mouthy womaniser to master assassin. I found AC1 quite boring and AC Brotherhood to be an incredibly lazy cash in.
Ladies and gentlemen, we are currently on the eve of E3 (Shut up it's close enough to the eve). We are but a few months from the next numbered sequel in the critically and fan-acclaimed series Assassin's Creed. So my question to you is, which one of the iterations that have come out have been your favourite?
Personally, mine has been Assassin's Creed 2. Although lacking in gameplay and Online (which I absolutely loved in Brotherhood and Revelations), The art design, the story , and the general feel of the game makes it stand out to me the most.
I do love Assassin's Creed II because it was the first of the series I played, and I'm a sucker for the revenge story. However, when I backtracked and played AC I, I really thought AC II was WAY too easy. Plus, when you reveal more of Altair's life in Altair's Chronicles, Revelations, etc., he's actually really--and I mean, REALLY--badass.
Not true - there was exactly one innovation after the original and that was AC2. AC1 was straightforward and clean and simple and the story hadn't gotten all crazy yet, but in terms of game mechanics, it had some major problems. The combat was both frustrating and difficult and too much of the game was spent doing meaningless busy work. And the ending left something to be desired - felt almost like they ran out of ideas and just decided "Let's have him fight EVERYBODY at the SAME TIME!!!!!111"
AC2 picked up where that left off. It changed the combat engine so that you had a whole bunch of new weapons, moves, and tactics. It cut down a lot on the busy work and filled in the gaps with meaningful side missions. It cut out the empty land between cities and then made up for it by expanding the cities into huge playgrounds to run around in. The story was made more complex - it was interesting to meet historical figures and find hints of the hidden "conspiracy". Basically, it took the AC1 formula, cut out the time-wasting parts, and enriched the actually interesting parts. Worked well.
But then it all went awry with Brotherhood and Revelations. Brotherhood at least tried to innovate a little, but that innovation was more or less unnecessary. Yay, we can now get kill-streaks, but nobody was screaming for it and it made the combat far too easy. Revelations didn't even try - basically it was just, "Yo, here's grenades."
However, my biggest grievance with Bro'hood and Revelations? The story. It went from "entertaining conspiracy/historical fiction" to "is there anything close to a goddamned point to all this."
Firstly, Ezio Auditore is not a compelling character. He's perfectly fine as a videogame avatar and the protagonist in an action story, but Ezio's personal character development is not something that anyone is interested in. The culmination of this ridiculous focus on Ezio's personal life was Revelations' subplot of Ezio looking for true love. I absolutely do not care whether or not Ezio gets it off with a (admittedly very hot) redhead who could hypotheticall be his granddaughter.
Secondly, there is no meta-plot arc. From AC1 to AC2, there still was a sense of continuity, building a plot between them. Bro'hood had a little bit of a sense of that, if only because it expanded on current-day Desmond's story. But nothing seems to be happening around Ezio, the guy we spend all our time with. He moves to Rome, than Turkey, kills some guys, but it all seems a lot like the only plot points that matter could've been covered very quickly in the prelude of a true sequel, not two drawn-out full-length expansion packs.
Thirdly, the historical parts just got ridiculous. It was interesting to see historical figures become part of the story, but the main story didn't hinge around their involvement. By the time we reach Revelations, they are the only story, and EVERY THING THAT EVER HAPPENED IN THE HISTORY BOOKS IS RELATED TO THE ASSASSINS. Lowest point: Marco Polo's dad is sort of like Assassin librarian who is the source of all extant copies of ancient literature, by bringing them back to Italy from his secret trip to Altair's compound and then hiding them in Italy's architecture for some reason
Fourthly, the conspiracy aspect is now suffering from what I like to call "Lost syndrome" - basically, you just throw in a whole bunch of mystery tidbits together without explaining them, to the point that it no longer seems like there's any sort of cohesive pattern. Off the top of my head, we've got
the Mayan calendar predicting that the sun will destroy the earth or the earth's magnetic field will shift and that's because the Greek gods predicted that it would and it happened before and it destroyed all of human civilization, which was actually very advanced many millenia ago, but the gods were actually aliens who looked like humans or maybe not and maybe the humans are descended from them or maybe just the Assassins were descended from them or maybe the Assassins were descended from Adam and Eve, who were hybrids (maybe) and they escaped the aliens, who were apparently keeping them as slaves, but that doesn't match up with some other stuff, and Adam and Eve stole the Apple from the aliens or maybe they didn't steal it, and this Apple is some sort of magic McGuffin that drives the story and gives people omnipotent power, only the first game implied it doesn't give any real power, just illusions, and this Apple has allowed Templars to control people throughout history, but it's also been lost to them since Altair, but it's also a beacon of sorts that identifies all the other alien sites where maybe there are also artifacts, but these artifacts are different, maybe, and for some reason the aliens wanted Desmond to kill Kristen Bell (maybe because her contract was too expensive), so they've clearly got some mysterious agenda at work too, so can they really be trusted. Oh, and we still don't know what the Templars are after - they want to control the world with the Apple, in a satellite or something, but then, wouldn't they also want to stop the solar flare or magnetic field or alien invasion or whatever from destroying the Earth too?
And also the puzzles and emails also have other conspiracy tidbits.
I can't remember where I read it, but one review I read of Revelations said it pretty well - the Assassin's Creed story is entertaining, with all these twists, and you want to figure out what's going to happen, but also, it's pretty dumb. It's really complicated, but ultimately, it's very nonsensical.
Presumably, with AC3, we're going to discover that Benjamin Franklin was also an Assassin leader. And Benedict Arnold was secretly a Templar who wanted Fort Ticonderoga because there's a secret Egyptian tomb underneath it that holds the key to unlock the final door, which can only be found by using secret instructions encoded on Paul Revere's silverware and William Dawes' stirrups. And the only way to power it is by using Franklin's kite, which you tie to the original copy of the Declaration of Independence, which has a secret inscription that's only visible to other Assassins.
One thing that's been bothering me since AC2 - It made sense for Altair to wear his nondescript white robe around Christian and Moslem pilgrims, but Ezio walks around in Renaissance Italy in brilliant red and white hood and cape to go with his shiny armor and like twenty different, clearly visible weapons (Not to mention, he went around telling everyone his name, that he was an Assassin, and lived in a giant castle that had "Secret Assassin Base" inscribed in giant letters). How does this make him less conspicuous? And in colonial North America, when people are walking around in tricorner hats and powder wigs, and the only people wearing anything close to a shiny white hood are women in their frilly bonnets, how does an Assassin's uniform help you "blend in"?
I liked the original the best. I didn't care for Ezio at all. The only ones with Ezio I've played are 2 and a small amount of Brotherhood, but I thought he seemed really stuck up, he didn't have a motive other than "revenge," which he seems to forget about halfway through the first game, and his outfit stood out from absolutely everything, making zero sense for an assassin. He just seems to be along for the ride, not really thinking about what he's doing. Altair, on the other hand, devotes his life to making sure people aren't oppressed by their leaders, he has the clear and commendable motive of preserving/creating freedom, and his outfit makes sense: the monks wear a similar garment, and it doesn't look like an expensive coat, it looks like a minimalist robe; it works for an assassin. The first one also introduced the gameplay, which is awesome for a while but can get stale, making it seem cooler to me in AC then AC2. When I played two, I didn't notice the differences everyone was talking about, the weapons seemed to perform exactly the same as Altair's, regardless as to whether or not it was a sword or a warhammer. Yeah, two hidden blades was nice, but save for double assassinations and making the shortsword obsolete, they worked the same way. Poison was useless, and the gun was just the knives from the first game but less useful.
Ladies and gentlemen, we are currently on the eve of E3 (Shut up it's close enough to the eve). We are but a few months from the next numbered sequel in the critically and fan-acclaimed series Assassin's Creed. So my question to you is, which one of the iterations that have come out have been your favourite?
Personally, mine has been Assassin's Creed 2. Although lacking in gameplay and Online (which I absolutely loved in Brotherhood and Revelations), The art design, the story , and the general feel of the game makes it stand out to me the most.
I prefer AC2.
It fixed the issues with the first game and gave us big zones to explore, with lots of additional stuff, so it lasted a while. The follow ups where just more of the same, but in smaller and smaller areas...
AC1: I loved every minute of... Sure, the "pre-mission" missions were dull repetitive and boring, but the atmosphere was built up around it so well that I just didn't care... Managing to walk through the streets of (Insert any city name here) and be swept up in the chaos of what was a busy marketplace...
Sure, it had it's downfalls, but it was good for what it was... An EXPERIMENT!
And the story wasn't half bad either... I mean, Altair's story, not Desmonds... Not until I see the end of Desmonds either.. which probably won't be until AC5 at least...
AC2: This was also quite fun... Although Ezio in general just pissed me off... A suave italian rich-boy who had his family wrongly accused because the pope and something or other blah de blah... I lost track of the AC2 story about mid-way through... Although fistycuffs with the pope was a great ending... or was that brotherhood's ending?
Who knows...
Although the "home town" thing was nice, having to build everything yourself was stupid... most annoying part of the game was that... Mind you, the only thing Ezio could do better than Altair was climb faster... but that's because it went from "experiment" to "AAA title"
ACB: building up a team of assassins to call in on the fly was some of the best fun I had around Rome... the map was big enough for you to get lost in, but familiar enough to never forget which way you had to go... which was a downside of AC2 because you'd always end up in a new city once you learnt the old one...
ACR: Yeah, I'm not sure about this one... Ezio STILL managing to fly around like a madman on ziplines and make 2 storey drops onto guards as an old man?
I'm not buying it...
Sure, the gameplay was a smooth as ever, but, it just lost the feel... That's all I'm going to say about this one...
Overall, AC1 to me was the best....
Because it set the scene as to what to expect of the other games, it let us know about the creed and it's rules... While Altair (practially; once you got control) lived by these rules and respected those above him... Ezio just didn't seem to care about the creed... Once he learnt about it he kinda just shrugged and continued on however he wanted... It was always about his family and his quest for vengeance on those who wronged him... Not about following what is right and true...
Mind you, the original "idea" behind the creed died out after AC1... hope 3 can bring it back...
TL;DR
AC1 was best in my eyes... It built up the story and showed the players how things should be done throughout the entire series... "For the creed" not, "For my vengeance"
Wow, I am the only person to vote for Revelations. While 2 made the biggest impression when I first started it, so far ACR is just better. I love all the refinements and new toys to play with. And I especially love the change in aesthetic and the ways it calls back to the first game, it feels much more like a genuine sequel to 2 rather then Brotherhood's full-length expansion pack. Desmond's platforming-flashback bits were awesome too, I would have bought something like that as it's own $5/$10 indie game.
Yes the design might be getting a bit tired, but I've been playing it first and foremost for the the story so I could put up with it even if it wasn't still a blast anyways. And 3 looks like it'll be even better.
It was more of the 2nd game, with some nice additions too (the War Machines were super fun). They added crossbows and a much faster gun aim time, and it did have the best chase music in my opinion, even if the second one had better music overall. I'll admit the story wasn't as good as in the second one, but there was a much clearer objective in Brotherhood that was obvious throughout.
Both are very similar, but Brotherhood is just more of it.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
