Was AC:Brotherhood "worth it"? *Spoilers for AC:B*

[GrizzlerBorno]

So I finished Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood the other day and, as a devout AC fanboy, I LOVED it........... But yeah, was the game really worth it? I mean, I love the overall story of the franchise but (spoilers from here on out) they basically added so little to the franchise's story with AC:B.

I mean, Ezio's part in AC:B can be summed up with: Goes home. Home gets set on fire. Bowser kills Mario. Ezio waits for Cesare to walk into a figurative mousetrap.
He loses the Apple, only to have it back in his hands after 10 (albeit fun) hours of roof stalking. So back to square fucking one, then?

As for the 2012 story, they add a bit more to the plot (and a LOT more to the characters....only to kill one of them off in... ANOTHER CLIFFHANGER UBISOFT? SERIOUSLY? Are. You. Joking?) but I don't see why AC2 could not have ended with: Ezio deposits Apple at Colosseum. Gang finds it. Lucy gets stabbed.......for....some reason. DLC maybe?

So fellow Assassins/Templars? What say you? Was Brotherhood worth all the hate the franchise is receiving for it's yearly schedule? Do YOU hate the yearly schedule? Are you, like me, worried that the franchise (and gameplay) will wear thin for you before AC3 hits?

 

[Goofguy]

But Rome was so cool! And calling in your assassins to do your dirty work was pretty sweet.

In all seriousness though, when you put it that way, you do make valid points. However, one thing you maybe failed to take in to consideration was the introduction of multiplayer to the franchise in AC:B. When you add that to the list of things that the single player improved from its predecessors, the whole package is well worth any fan's time.

 

[AMMO Kid]

I liked the cliffhanger. I liked the game. I liked the first two. And no, the franchise doesn't deserve hate. It's an awesome franchise.

 

[Zhukov]

No. No it was not.

My tolerance for the series was slightly strained by Assassin's Creed II, especially that batshit-bananas ending.

By the end of Brotherhood I was begging for it to be over. It felt like two hours of content stretched out to make a 20 hour game. If it wasn't for the multiplayer, I would have felt ripped off.

Also, I got the distinct impression that the developers actually expected me to care about Lucy.

As it is, I most definitely won't be buying the next one. At least not until it ends up on sale for $15 on Steam.

 

[HooterNanny]

What is the problem with a cliffhanger ending (for all the AC games for that matter)? The player knows (or most would do), that this is not the last game in the series, so obviously it would end on a cliffhanger. You can't wrap things up, then have a sequel without introducing a completely new antagonist

 

[hitman_7]

I have been I good fanboy of the AC games
I have never insulted it
Never betrayed it
And never thought of any of these things
When Brotherhood was annocced I basicly jump in the air of excitment. And of course I bought the game but first let me tell you something:
In the first one I loved and played it over and over and over and over again until AC2 came out
In AC2 I was overjoyed with happiness And played it over and over and over and over and over and over and over again until I got my hands on Brotherhood
In ACB I played the story ONCE and the rest of my time was spent pwning n00bs (sorry 4 the language)in the multiplayer wich I proudly manage to get withing the top 100 of Assassins in the world..
But there was something off.. I had no desire of playing the story again or by the matter the multiplayer ;( And this was mainly ´cause bettwen AC and AC2 there was a 2 years period wich the players could see perfectly all the new features the second one had to offer but in ACB there was almost nothing new..
You still played Ezio. Had the same weopons. And he could now perform killstreaks.
So to sume up Brotherhood was weakest of the three and Revelations is looking very weak too

 

[Simeon Ivanov]

I think Brotherhood has improved gameplay (The Crossbow, the Thief/Courtesan/Mercenary side missions) and the graphics looks better than ever I might add. However, something felt ... not right with the story ... maybe after Ass Creed 2 It was hard to achieve that level of epic again. HOWEVER that doesn't mean I didn't enjoy the story nor the game, it's AssAssins Fucking Creed! How can I hate it?

Oh I do like the modern day characters and their dialogues (Mainly Shaun and Rebecca) and I wanna see more of them, Ubisoft

 

[Shameless]

Well, by releasing a new game every-year it feels like Ubisoft are milking the franchise in what I like to call Call of Duty Syndrome.

However AC: B was far from a cash-in, it felt like a significant chapter in the series and the quality did not drop, however it did feel like they stretched a short story into a long one.

Nevertheless I am excited About Assassin's Creed: Revelations, from the trailers (and the title) it seems like we are finally getting some answers.

 

[DustyDrB]

I'll admit the story wasn't nearly as good as the second because they decided to absolutely cram everything into the last few hours of the game. However, the gameplay was improved and Rome was a wonderful location.

The game felt rushed at the end, but it was a step back in the story department and a slight step forward in gameplay. Overall, I prefer Assassin's Creed II. They're both fantastic, though.

 

[ReservoirAngel]

I aint finished it yet (only got it a couple ago) but to be honest, clicking that left bumper and watching a member of your own private death squadron appear and strike down those you deem worthy of such a death is worth the price of admission by itself.

But for me so far the story seems good and I'm very much enjoying it.

 

[Etteparg]

With the added features fellow assassins, multiplayer, Borgia towers, guild side quests, horse mechanics, very large and detailed Rome, better imo enemy AI, the Leonardo quests , and probably my favorite heavy weapons, plus story (even if it was a small addition I thought it was good.) all of these to me made the game almost stand alone. Though I do understand that these to some people seem like dlc at best.

 

[Nieroshai]

I loved every minute of it. My only problem was that if you didn't do any side quests (of which there were hundreds and they were plot-relevant) the main game was short.

 

[Chechosaurus]

Also... What about the excellent ending where he Desmond kills his fish girlfriend and then it's all like... Animus-ception? The game was worth it for that moment alone.

 

[Mr. Omega]

Ezio's story? Totally worth it.
Desmond's story? Uh... o...k...?

That's how the entire series has been. Plus, the multiplater was a shit-ton of fun. That with the great campaign (at least Ezio's part) was worth it, and as for the 2012 part, I like the conspiracy you learn in the puzzles and extras... but not the parts with Desmond are lacking. 2/3 [arts of the plot are good, the gameplay is great, the multiplayer is tons-o-fun... so yeah, it's worth it.

 

[DustyDrB]

Ezio's story? Totally worth it.
Desmond's story? Uh... o...k...?

That's how the entire series has been. Plus, the multiplater was a shit-ton of fun. That with the great campaign (at least Ezio's part) was worth it, and as for the 2012 part, I like the conspiracy you learn in the puzzles and extras... but not the parts with Desmond are lacking. 2/3 [arts of the plot are good, the gameplay is great, the multiplayer is tons-o-fun... so yeah, it's worth it.

Same as far as the Desmond story goes, but I did enjoy his platforming section in the Colosseum. And the futuristic platforming was cool too.

 

[ZeroMachine]

I think it's the best in the series by far.

Look, story, writing, acting, it all tops ACII.

 

[MrRetroSpectacles]

Assassins Creed Brotherhood is different to AC and AC2 purely because it was what I like to call a 'tester' game. It tested out new ideas, such as bringing in the crossbow that AC fans were a little pissed at not getting. (I.E, don't put weapons on characters in trailers if they aren't in the game, or gloves for that matter, ahem, GTA4). Also, the idea of business affecting the protagonist was increased from AC2, to see if it could be taken further as a gameplay feature (It apparently can). And most importantly, multiplayer, they wanted to see if it would work at all, it did, now they know what to improve in that respect.

So, although story extension was used as added incentive to try out the multiplayer and other gameplay features, it was mostly a tester game. Now "Revelations" will be used as an improved tester game, where they test if the improvements to the original designs as suggested by fans (Ubisoft are great for taking fans critical opinions on board for AC games) actually add anything to the game. So the multiplayer will be new and improved with more modes etc.., the gameplay features increased (Assassins dens that affect law enforcement for example). It's all a clever tactic to make sure the now long awaited Assassins Creed Three is full of enough refined game features to make it a definite fan favourite.

I like this approach personally, hopefully we won't end up with a Call of Duty weekly newspaper style game before the real one is released, so long as this is the final tester, it should work out quite well.

 

[GrizzlerBorno]

What is the problem with a cliffhanger ending (for all the AC games for that matter)? The player knows (or most would do), that this is not the last game in the series, so obviously it would end on a cliffhanger. You can't wrap things up, then have a sequel without introducing a completely new antagonist

Have you ever played Mass effect?