PDA

View Full Version : Brotherhood vs Revelations



dimbismp
10-11-2016, 07:50 PM
The forums are,understandably,kinda dead. So, as there is almost nothing to talk about at the moment, let's have a little debate, shall we? I know that this type of threads are done to death,but the truth is that the specific games were released years ago. This means that now we are able to point out their strengths and weakness more easily, without being affected by post-release hype, potential buggy launches etc.

If this thread/poll gets enough attention, i am thinking of creating similar ones.

So, ACB vs ACR...

https://s.blogcdn.com/www.joystiq.com/media/2011/02/acbpcsp01freeclimbenvironment.jpg

VS

https://ubistatic9-a.akamaihd.net/resource/en-US/game/assassins-creed/ac/ACR-gamepage-SS_139158.jpg

Obviously, these games are really similar, as they are both sequels to AC2. They both star Ezio etc.

Story and Characters : ACR > ACB
Gameplay : ACB >= ACR
Open World : ACB > ACR
Setting : ACB ~= ACR
Winner : ACB

SixKeys
10-11-2016, 09:58 PM
Brotherhood, no contest. I can't think of a single aspect in which ACR would be better.

Fatal-Feit
10-11-2016, 10:24 PM
I don't know if MP counts in gameplay, but Brotherhood def wins by a mile in that regard.


Brotherhood, no contest. I can't think of a single aspect in which ACR would be better.

There have been the argument, which I also used to make, in that ACR has the better story, but I disagree with it nowadays. Brotherhood was a much smoother and direct sequel with better pacing and cast. Revelations feel completely out of place in both its historical and MD story. And maybe it's just me, but I can't get over seeing Desmond looking like Adam Sandler and Altair's new voice and demeanor doesn't feel like Altair. I also don't like its Ezio even though they ''humanized'' him.

Namikaze_17
10-11-2016, 10:52 PM
Story - Tie

The best part about ACR is the ending; Ezio's section is kinda boring without Alta´r ( I don't know if its my lack of knowledge for Constantinoplian politics, or my lack of care for Ezio putting the moves on a woman much younger than him :p) while Brotherhood is just... Brotherhood.

Setting - ACR

Only by a meter because nothing in Rome really caught my interest. Constantinople is alright, but I quickly got bored of it for some reason.

Gameplay - ACB

Ezio is just a flippin' badass in the game. That, and controlling your own brotherhood crew was all shades of cool. :cool:

Rev is sorta just a re-thread except on a lesser scale. Grappling hook was alright, but I never really found much use for it. Bombs, while awesome if experimented, are just useless.


Open world - ACB

There was just a much better flow between the side content and the story; everything was connected. There was also a rural area so that's a plus. ;)

LoyalACFan
10-12-2016, 12:20 AM
Story/Characters- ACR

ACB's story was okay, but it very trite and straightforward with a lot of really cringey dialogue ("Vittoria agli Assassini" is nothing compared to everything that transpired between Lucrezia and Caterina). Plus I think the characterization was totally off throughout the game; Claudia is all over the place, Bartolomeo is dumb as hell and makes no sense as a viable ally, La Volpe completely lost his mojo from AC2, and Machiavelli creates unnecessary problems throughout by lying and deceiving his compatriots. And then there's Cesare... Ugh, what a missed opportunity for a compelling counterweight to Ezio.

On the other hand I thought ACR's story was really good; showing us a fallible, aging Ezio who doesn't quite know his place in the world anymore. They did a nice job of telling Altair's story in meaningful conjunction with Ezio's as both of them downshifted into retirement. Yusuf was immediately likable, and his presence made me begrudge the unnecessarily tutorialized opening sequences a lot less. If it wasn't for the cheesy damsel-in-distress abduction of Sofia and that godawful carriage chase that followed, it might be my favorite AC story after AC4. Yeah, the modern day was totally pointless, but can give that a complete free pass since it was never actually planned and Darby was saddled with the impossible task of making a story for Desmond that both progressed the MD lore and kept Desmond in a coma. And in the end, it was really well-written. Subject 16's monologues gave me goosebumps a few times, and you've gotta love Ezio interacting with Desmond directly in the end.

Setting- ACR

Are you people crazy? :p I hated Rome. The Centro district was great, and a few parts of the Antico had their charms, but fully 2/3 of the map is just countryside with occasional ruins and villages. Sooooo boring. There's nothing to climb! There's nothing to do! Not to mention those obnoxious impassible cliffs, and the awkward clumps of trees in the south that do nothing but take up space.

Meanwhile, Constantinople is perfect. It's just so unbelievably fun for parkour. The buildings are the perfect height, with enough staggered layers to make roof-running feel dynamic and fast-paced, and very few obstacles to break the experience. On the other hand, free-running in Rome's irregular and half-crumbled ruins is like the parkour equivalent of driving through mile after mile of speed bumps.

Gameplay- Tie

The core mechanics are virtually unchanged between the two, and where there are differences, some are good and some are bad in both. Revelations has a positive in the more-challenging Janissary archetype, but a negative in the useless bombcrafting mechanic. Brotherhood has a positive in the tombs and exotic missions, but a negative in the lack of depth in recruitment missions. And so on.

Open World- ACB

Everything seems to have a point in Brotherhood. While I wasn't a huge fan of the fact that literally everything is about weakening Cesare, because that got boring pretty fast considering how weak of a villain he was, at least everything had some context and purpose behind it. Renovating Rome, building a Brotherhood, even the freaking Borgia flag collectibles, they were all thematically relevant in some way. Whereas ACR just kind of keeps all that for no reason, adds a pointless book-collecting side mission sequence, and Den Defense. And the "random events" were so pathetic I'm not even going to recognize them as a plus. I did like that you could go on missions with your handpicked Assassin captains, though.

Overall- ACR, by a healthy margin.

dimbismp
10-12-2016, 12:50 AM
Story/Characters- ACR

ACB's story was okay, but it very trite and straightforward with a lot of really cringey dialogue ("Vittoria agli Assassini" is nothing compared to everything that transpired between Lucrezia and Caterina). Plus I think the characterization was totally off throughout the game; Claudia is all over the place, Bartolomeo is dumb as hell and makes no sense as a viable ally, La Volpe completely lost his mojo from AC2, and Machiavelli creates unnecessary problems throughout by lying and deceiving his compatriots. And then there's Cesare... Ugh, what a missed opportunity for a compelling counterweight to Ezio.

On the other hand I thought ACR's story was really good; showing us a fallible, aging Ezio who doesn't quite know his place in the world anymore. They did a nice job of telling Altair's story in meaningful conjunction with Ezio's as both of them downshifted into retirement. Yusuf was immediately likable, and his presence made me begrudge the unnecessarily tutorialized opening sequences a lot less. If it wasn't for the cheesy damsel-in-distress abduction of Sofia and that godawful carriage chase that followed, it might be my favorite AC story after AC4. Yeah, the modern day was totally pointless, but can give that a complete free pass since it was never actually planned and Darby was saddled with the impossible task of making a story for Desmond that both progressed the MD lore and kept Desmond in a coma. And in the end, it was really well-written. Subject 16's monologues gave me goosebumps a few times, and you've gotta love Ezio interacting with Desmond directly in the end.


I agree. I tend to fondly remember ACB's story,as it was my first AC game. But the truth is that it is pretty mediocre. If only ACB had a more complex story, then it would easily be considered the best AC ever.

It is no wonder that the two worst AC stories (Syndicate and Brotherhood) were written by Yohalem. No disrespect to the man, i just think that he doesn't fit with the type of storylines the series should have...
On the other hand, it is far from a coincidence that the two best AC stories (Revelations and Black Flag) were written by Darby...

SixKeys
10-12-2016, 07:38 AM
Setting- ACR

Are you people crazy? :p I hated Rome. The Centro district was great, and a few parts of the Antico had their charms, but fully 2/3 of the map is just countryside with occasional ruins and villages. Sooooo boring. There's nothing to climb! There's nothing to do! Not to mention those obnoxious impassible cliffs, and the awkward clumps of trees in the south that do nothing but take up space.

Meanwhile, Constantinople is perfect. It's just so unbelievably fun for parkour. The buildings are the perfect height, with enough staggered layers to make roof-running feel dynamic and fast-paced, and very few obstacles to break the experience. On the other hand, free-running in Rome's irregular and half-crumbled ruins is like the parkour equivalent of driving through mile after mile of speed bumps.

Nah.

There are one or two districts that are interesting in Constantinople. The rest is boring and annoying to climb. Ziplines never seem to be going in the direction I want to go, so they're pretty much useless. The ziplines in Rogue were better even, since they were perfectly straight lines, so it didn't matter which direction you were coming from. The rooftops are uneven in height so Ezio keeps getting stuck underneath them, or your smooth freerunning gets interrupted by Ezio clumsily stumbling on a rooftile that's too low to climb yet too tall to simply jump over.

I will admit that having to circle around the cliffs in Rome is annoying.

crash_1232015
10-12-2016, 10:24 AM
Very close call between the two games, however what made me choose brotherhood was that although the game play in revelations is more improved, the story line in brotherhood is just that bit more fleshed out, even though both games felt very short after the epic experience of AC2!

As far a location goes I'd say both games were even

LoyalACFan
10-12-2016, 10:56 AM
Nah.

There are one or two districts that are interesting in Constantinople. The rest is boring and annoying to climb. Ziplines never seem to be going in the direction I want to go, so they're pretty much useless. The ziplines in Rogue were better even, since they were perfectly straight lines, so it didn't matter which direction you were coming from. The rooftops are uneven in height so Ezio keeps getting stuck underneath them, or your smooth freerunning gets interrupted by Ezio clumsily stumbling on a rooftile that's too low to climb yet too tall to simply jump over.

I will admit that having to circle around the cliffs in Rome is annoying.

We'll agree to disagree then :p I thought the ziplines were great; if you're headed downhill, you can pretty much always find one that takes you where you want to be. The uneven rooftops were all part of the fun for me, sure they weren't always perfectly matched up, but if you looked ahead, you could basically always find a path without breaking your momentum. And constantly changing altitude makes it feel more like parkour instead of just having the rooftops be Assassin Highways. Never had issues stumbling over rooftiles, personally. Really, the only place I find annoying is where the river runs through the city and you have to descend to ground level to get across.

Megas_Doux
10-12-2016, 12:36 PM
Brotherhood, no contest. I can't think of a single aspect in which ACR would be better.



I've always thought thar for the "greater good" of the franchise neither Brotherhood nor Revelations should exist, but if I have to pick one Revelations is my choice.

Brotherhood beats Revelations in terms of gameplay and side quests without a doubt.
However the story/characters -ACB feels like a bad scooby doo episode- setting and even the soundtrack make me favor Revelations.

Ezio finding Altair is a top moment in the franchise. Ahmet is a good villian contrary to Cesare that wins the "most disappointing ever" character award . Constantinople is my favorite city from the previous generation whereas Rome dwells in the pit in that regard.

About Rome here is why I despise it that much:

1) The Campagne district and Antico are that empty and lifeless it makes The Frontier look like the Thames from Syndicate in comparson. Oh and they are a boring chore to navigate thanks to the cliffs.

2) The centro one has its non landmarks -and even landmarks- buildings on an scale THAT small doors reach Ezio's shoulders

3) Then there's the generic churches with the same design instead of the real life ones.

4) Its ugly as f**_%%7 yellow based palette in the centro district.

D.I.D.
10-12-2016, 01:06 PM
Brotherhood by a country mile.

BH managed to be expansive, with lots of side content, and yet tight. I would often check out what else I could do next and have a hard time choosing which thing to do because there were many equally inviting tasks calling to me. Stylistically, it was a bit of a pantomime but it embraced that intentionally. BH was better than ACII, unless you're really into "greenhorn becomes hero" stories. Revelations is significantly worse than both of them.

In Revelations' favour, I can think of a few things I liked. There were some graphical improvements, especially in cutscenes. The library scene was a good idea. There was at least one good moment where the mission design and the full sync requirement matched up to create a problem to solve (ensuring the herald survives the gang hit unharmed). The mission to sneak into the palace and report to Suleiman was nice, and you could find some interesting ways to do it unseen.

I could be here a long time going into the things I disliked about ACR. As a fan of My Name Is Red, I wanted much more from a game that deals with early 16th century Istanbul. The setting was poorly utilised, and I hope they can return in a future game and do it justice next time.

cawatrooper9
10-12-2016, 04:51 PM
Revelations for me.

BH, for me, just seemed generic- Rev had a ton of character.

I get that Rev is far from perfect- bomb crafting seemed like an interesting idea, but it was a lot of trouble for not a ton of payoff, and the replayable towers seemed like a good idea, but ended up being kind of annoying. Still, the game seems like a love letter to fans. Brotherhood seemed to instead go for the mass appeal.


One thing about maps- to me, Brotherhood is a prime example of how NOT to do a rural AC map. The rural areas were mostly pretty flat, and what little variation in elevation there was (typically cliffs) were often not even climbable. Also, the seemingly arbitrary Animus walls were just a pain. Like, lock off a section of the game if it's special (like if Syndicate had locked off Parlaiment earlier on) but entire portions of the map is just obnoxious.

Farlander1991
10-12-2016, 08:04 PM
As much as it pains me, I'll have to go with Brotherhood and not Revelations.

I think Revelations has better characters, better story, better connection between Modern and Past day (it's pretty much the only game where the modern day and past day arcs are tightly interconnected and one influences another), better city, better visuals (except Desmond's face) and better music. So I have a very sweet spot for Revelations. And some of my most favorite moments from the series and/or Ezio's Trilogy are there.

All that said... Brotherhood is a more cohesive package. Despite its flaws, everything makes sense there. It's one whole. When I was replaying AC games one after another, I could feel how Brotherhood provides a very whole experience in comparison to Revelations, and it was very enjoyable, while in Revelations couldn't help but feel frustrated a lot of times between the moments that worked good.

If ACR had one more year of development, if they didn't have to make the game in 11 months, if it was the same amount of dev time like AC4, I'm sure ACR would blow ACB out of the water. I'm sure they'd polish better the new features (like Den Defense), removing some of the old ones like city liberation (which in Istanbul doesn't make sense) wouldn't be as risky, there could be some actual meaningful side-content, and so many things. But it is what it is now. So if I have to recommend someone which one game to take out of these two, I would say Brotherhood despite all the things I like about Revelations and think are much superior to ACB.

marvelfannumber
10-12-2016, 08:20 PM
2) The centro one has its non landmarks -and even landmarks- buildings on an scale THAT small doors reach Ezio's shoulders

3) Then there's the generic churches with the same design instead of the real life ones.

4) Its ugly as f**_%%7 yellow based palette in the centro district.

Well, to be fair Constantinople has these problems too. The scale is ridiculously off (tiny doors are still prevalent) and there's copy paste EVERYWHERE, even worse than Brotherhood. Infact even landmark buildings with database entries are copy paste and look nothing like how they do in real life. Then there's even landmarks which are placed in the wrong spot. Constantinople I think had more potential than Rome but it just has alot of rough edges and feels kind of rushed. Revelations does have a better color palette but it gets pretty tiering after a while.

Another problem I have is that I think they wasted two potentially amazing settings for Brotherhood and Revelations. We could have had Ancient Rome and Medieval Constantinople but instead we get Florence 2.0 and Ottoman Istanbul....great.

ajl992015
10-12-2016, 10:00 PM
Brotherhood, no contest. I can't think of a single aspect in which ACR would be better.

Your'e honestly trying to say the story of brotherhood is better than revelations? forget that brotherhood had some horrible dialogue and characters and the story progression was not even that good with not many memorable moments in the main campaign ( side content had a lot of cool moments though I must say) and gameplay is the same in revelations with added changes, how people can say the gameplay is better in brotherhood is beyond me. The word people are looking for is they think the game design is better not the barebones gameplay because that just makes no sense whatsoever. I can understand if you like brotherhood I was just surprised it was 'no contest'.

For myself I say revelations because of its story, characters and the world (Constantinople is just so beautiful love roaming around it) and the music (this is my favourite score in an AC game). though i admit the open world design is a lot better in brotherhood by miles in terms of side content but everything else i think revelations does better, ESPECIALLY the story.

BananaBlighter
10-12-2016, 10:02 PM
As much as it pains me, I'll have to go with Brotherhood and not Revelations.

I think Revelations has better characters, better story, better connection between Modern and Past day (it's pretty much the only game where the modern day and past day arcs are tightly interconnected and one influences another), better city, better visuals (except Desmond's face) and better music. So I have a very sweet spot for Revelations. And some of my most favorite moments from the series and/or Ezio's Trilogy are there.

All that said... Brotherhood is a more cohesive package. Despite its flaws, everything makes sense there. It's one whole. When I was replaying AC games one after another, I could feel how Brotherhood provides a very whole experience in comparison to Revelations, and it was very enjoyable, while in Revelations couldn't help but feel frustrated a lot of times between the moments that worked good.

If ACR had one more year of development, if they didn't have to make the game in 11 months, if it was the same amount of dev time like AC4, I'm sure ACR would blow ACB out of the water. I'm sure they'd polish better the new features (like Den Defense), removing some of the old ones like city liberation (which in Istanbul doesn't make sense) wouldn't be as risky, there could be some actual meaningful side-content, and so many things. But it is what it is now. So if I have to recommend someone which one game to take out of these two, I would say Brotherhood despite all the things I like about Revelations and think are much superior to ACB.

This. Revelations for me had tonnes more character, in the city, the story, the music, and ACB didn't really feel very unique, but it was a better game and more coherent experience.

But you see, Assassin's Creed's uniqueness is part of why I love it so much. AC doesn't get very good reviews because most of the games just aren't that good when compared to games like Witcher 3 which get universal praise. But I will always prefer any AC over Witcher 3 because of WHAT it is, not HOW it is executed.

The concept of Witcher 3 is nothing special, just another medieval fantasy game, and that kind of stuff has been done to death. But I can't think of anything like AC, the combination of parkour, stealth, and combat in a historical open world with a story about exploring genetic memories. When I discovered AC it was like a dream come true, all these elements were exactly what I was looking for in a game. It is the reason I bought a console, because until then I had never seen any games that really interested me - the only things my friends were playing were FIFA, COD and GTA.

I almost see Brotherhood as one of these more generic open world titles. I see Syndicate in that way too. And those two games are pretty high up on my list (but I don't see BF like that, and it's at the top). I mean, it's still got AC elements, and it's still more unique than Witcher 3, but in a sense, while I may have less fun playing Revelations, I have more respect for it.

ajl992015
10-12-2016, 10:08 PM
Story/Characters- ACR

ACB's story was okay, but it very trite and straightforward with a lot of really cringey dialogue ("Vittoria agli Assassini" is nothing compared to everything that transpired between Lucrezia and Caterina). Plus I think the characterization was totally off throughout the game; Claudia is all over the place, Bartolomeo is dumb as hell and makes no sense as a viable ally, La Volpe completely lost his mojo from AC2, and Machiavelli creates unnecessary problems throughout by lying and deceiving his compatriots. And then there's Cesare... Ugh, what a missed opportunity for a compelling counterweight to Ezio.

On the other hand I thought ACR's story was really good; showing us a fallible, aging Ezio who doesn't quite know his place in the world anymore. They did a nice job of telling Altair's story in meaningful conjunction with Ezio's as both of them downshifted into retirement. Yusuf was immediately likable, and his presence made me begrudge the unnecessarily tutorialized opening sequences a lot less. If it wasn't for the cheesy damsel-in-distress abduction of Sofia and that godawful carriage chase that followed, it might be my favorite AC story after AC4. Yeah, the modern day was totally pointless, but can give that a complete free pass since it was never actually planned and Darby was saddled with the impossible task of making a story for Desmond that both progressed the MD lore and kept Desmond in a coma. And in the end, it was really well-written. Subject 16's monologues gave me goosebumps a few times, and you've gotta love Ezio interacting with Desmond directly in the end.

Setting- ACR

Are you people crazy? :p I hated Rome. The Centro district was great, and a few parts of the Antico had their charms, but fully 2/3 of the map is just countryside with occasional ruins and villages. Sooooo boring. There's nothing to climb! There's nothing to do! Not to mention those obnoxious impassible cliffs, and the awkward clumps of trees in the south that do nothing but take up space.

Meanwhile, Constantinople is perfect. It's just so unbelievably fun for parkour. The buildings are the perfect height, with enough staggered layers to make roof-running feel dynamic and fast-paced, and very few obstacles to break the experience. On the other hand, free-running in Rome's irregular and half-crumbled ruins is like the parkour equivalent of driving through mile after mile of speed bumps.

Gameplay- Tie

The core mechanics are virtually unchanged between the two, and where there are differences, some are good and some are bad in both. Revelations has a positive in the more-challenging Janissary archetype, but a negative in the useless bombcrafting mechanic. Brotherhood has a positive in the tombs and exotic missions, but a negative in the lack of depth in recruitment missions. And so on.

Open World- ACB

Everything seems to have a point in Brotherhood. While I wasn't a huge fan of the fact that literally everything is about weakening Cesare, because that got boring pretty fast considering how weak of a villain he was, at least everything had some context and purpose behind it. Renovating Rome, building a Brotherhood, even the freaking Borgia flag collectibles, they were all thematically relevant in some way. Whereas ACR just kind of keeps all that for no reason, adds a pointless book-collecting side mission sequence, and Den Defense. And the "random events" were so pathetic I'm not even going to recognize them as a plus. I did like that you could go on missions with your handpicked Assassin captains, though.

Overall- ACR, by a healthy margin.


THIS. You have explained it PERFECTLY. Every time people say they like ACB more for some really uneducated reasons it annoys me and I find myself facepalming. I can understand liking it more for the open world design or the love for italy as a setting or from a nostalgia perspective but beyond these points there is nothing that can be said other than to unfairly target ACR to make brotherhood 'look' better. When people say they can't follow the story that annoys me the most, its because of people like that that we cant have complex stories anymore in AC because of their continuos complaining we lost a good modern day, we lost complex stories in the past for which they have dumbed it down all to make these people be able to follow whats going on. It is ok to like brotherhood more but not for the wrong reasons or reasons that make NO sense. Farlander above for example gave some awesome points on why he liked brotherhood more, these MAKE SENSE.

Lastly, someone explain how they can like brotherhood and not syndicate when if you think about it they are the same game in both past and modern story (liberating a city from templar control - cesare and starrick, all side content revolving around them, light tone. Modern day about searching for a POE using these genetic memories).

Syndicate was brotherhood but with a much better setting and a way better story but people complain about it.

Farlander1991
10-12-2016, 11:20 PM
This. Revelations for me had tonnes more character, in the city, the story, the music, and ACB didn't really feel very unique, but it was a better game and more coherent experience.

But you see, Assassin's Creed's uniqueness is part of why I love it so much. AC doesn't get very good reviews because most of the games just aren't that good when compared to games like Witcher 3 which get universal praise. But I will always prefer any AC over Witcher 3 because of WHAT it is, not HOW it is executed.

The concept of Witcher 3 is nothing special, just another medieval fantasy game, and that kind of stuff has been done to death. But I can't think of anything like AC, the combination of parkour, stealth, and combat in a historical open world with a story about exploring genetic memories. When I discovered AC it was like a dream come true, all these elements were exactly what I was looking for in a game. It is the reason I bought a console, because until then I had never seen any games that really interested me - the only things my friends were playing were FIFA, COD and GTA.

I almost see Brotherhood as one of these more generic open world titles. I see Syndicate in that way too. And those two games are pretty high up on my list (but I don't see BF like that, and it's at the top). I mean, it's still got AC elements, and it's still more unique than Witcher 3, but in a sense, while I may have less fun playing Revelations, I have more respect for it.

Which was your first AC game, btw? Was it Revelations? Or one other? Just curious. It's just what you say regarding 'what it is, not how it is executed', that's what AC1 is for me. I see why it can be criticized by a lot of people, but to me it's an amazing experience and one of the most favorite games ever, and in terms of AC series holds the top alongside (slightly below I'd say) AC4.

And for me, Assassin's Creed 2 is far more gamey and less unique than AC1, and both Brotherhood and Revelations are essentially a continuation of this 'gamey-ness', with Brotherhood having a higher overall quality than Revelations.

And I think why I like AC4 so much is because it managed to combine the uniqueness of AC1 with more standard gaming aspects and create a very well-crafted experience, took the best it could from both worlds so to speak. I mean, Caribbean Sea alone is like Kingdom, in a sense that you can just enjoy the journey from one place to another like you could in AC1 when it comes to Kingdom, but unlike Kingdom there's some sensible things to do.

One could say that I consider ACR a failed AC4. Maybe because it too has some of those aspects of AC1 in terms of tone and some principles they tried to use. But as an overall package it's not as unique as AC1 (and also, while AC1 is not to everybody's tastes, it does provide a cohesive experience based on what it wanted to provide), and not as good a game as ACB, which is why, while I do respect ACR still, it's not as magical to me as a game like AC1 is.

D.I.D.
10-13-2016, 03:18 PM
Your'e honestly trying to say the story of brotherhood is better than revelations? forget that brotherhood had some horrible dialogue and characters and the story progression was not even that good with not many memorable moments in the main campaign ( side content had a lot of cool moments though I must say) and gameplay is the same in revelations with added changes, how people can say the gameplay is better in brotherhood is beyond me. The word people are looking for is they think the game design is better not the barebones gameplay because that just makes no sense whatsoever. I can understand if you like brotherhood I was just surprised it was 'no contest'.

For myself I say revelations because of its story, characters and the world (Constantinople is just so beautiful love roaming around it) and the music (this is my favourite score in an AC game). though i admit the open world design is a lot better in brotherhood by miles in terms of side content but everything else i think revelations does better, ESPECIALLY the story.

ACB was the first AC game that really encouraged the player to think how best to complete a mission area from the outside. I was finally able to do what I'd always wished I'd be able to do: formulate a plan and execute it. AC1 was too opaque (you could hunt for other ways in, but you weren't really able to exploit anything) and AC2 had only one mission that you could enter by intelligent means (and I'm pretty sure that was a glitch of sorts - I dived from the rooftops into the side of Emilio Barbarigo's house, managed grab the wall to get around the back and in through the back windows). ACB had plenty of missions that rewarded planning.

ACR was this huge step backwards. It had tomb missions that were nothing but graphical tech demos, the worst of them being the boat in the caves: totally on rails, and all you had to do was push forwards and hit jump occasionally. It wasn't even fussy about the timing of those jumps. The searching for the books was one of the worst things this series has ever produced, literally just "climb thing, look at 4 things until you are told [thing x] is the right thing, go to thing". Den Defence was absolutely terrible. I happen to have a soft spot for a well designed tower defence game, and this mode had absolutely none of the tactical considerations that a game like this needs to be fun. It was impossible to lose as long as you just spammed the same moves, but like so many things in ACR it didn't care that it wasn't good. AC games are no strangers to activities that pad out the game, but there's a difference between padding and wasting the player's time. These activities were the latter.

Games are not simply their story and their gameplay. They also stand on their structure, and ACB is highly structured. Quest lines build off each other. Areas become reachable because you built the aqueducts, and the money required to build them tugs on other threads by which you'll earn that money. There is busywork, and there are missions that are just there to give you a bit of raucous fun (the return of the flying machine, the war machines, and others).

ACB's story is silly but it knows it is. It's swivel-eyed, camp melodrama, and that's a valid choice. ACR does some things well, such as wrapping up Altair's story in connection to Ezio and Desmond, but others are weak, and it's not because the story is "too complex" as you allege in that other post! Lots of major characters, especially on the Templar side, are not given enough development, to the point that the whole thing is nebulous. Then you have Clay, who was a fascinatingly damaged character in the past, who is suddenly this awful surly bro who's completely in command of himself. All the potential of him was lost, as a man who has been through the trauma of living thousands, maybe millions of lives. It's just not the case that because ACB's story was goofy and ACR's was serious that ACR's must be better. It's about engagement, solidity, satisfaction. If you don't like ACB's approach, fine, but we're not dumb for disagreeing with you. To be frank, if you honestly think ACR is highbrow, you probably need to read more books.

I'm not going to blame the writer for this, although I think I was at the time. Darby's proved himself to be an enormously thoughtful writer who puts a great deal of effort into his research. It's interesting to hear all the references he makes to the work of other people he admires. S16, for example, probably wasn't his fault. The things Clay says aren't necessarily the issue, but the casting and direction were. I've been saying this for a long time, but I think it would be a good thing to have the head writer also be the creative director (or at least co-creative director).

BananaBlighter
10-13-2016, 04:45 PM
Which was your first AC game, btw? Was it Revelations? Or one other? Just curious. It's just what you say regarding 'what it is, not how it is executed', that's what AC1 is for me. I see why it can be criticized by a lot of people, but to me it's an amazing experience and one of the most favorite games ever, and in terms of AC series holds the top alongside (slightly below I'd say) AC4.

And for me, Assassin's Creed 2 is far more gamey and less unique than AC1, and both Brotherhood and Revelations are essentially a continuation of this 'gamey-ness', with Brotherhood having a higher overall quality than Revelations.

And I think why I like AC4 so much is because it managed to combine the uniqueness of AC1 with more standard gaming aspects and create a very well-crafted experience, took the best it could from both worlds so to speak. I mean, Caribbean Sea alone is like Kingdom, in a sense that you can just enjoy the journey from one place to another like you could in AC1 when it comes to Kingdom, but unlike Kingdom there's some sensible things to do.

One could say that I consider ACR a failed AC4. Maybe because it too has some of those aspects of AC1 in terms of tone and some principles they tried to use. But as an overall package it's not as unique as AC1 (and also, while AC1 is not to everybody's tastes, it does provide a cohesive experience based on what it wanted to provide), and not as good a game as ACB, which is why, while I do respect ACR still, it's not as magical to me as a game like AC1 is.

My first was AC4, and I absolutely agree when you say that it managed to combine the uniqueness of AC with standard gaming aspects like good open world activities. Which is why it's at the top for me. I also rank AC1 very highly, and and unlike ACR where it's kind of a failed open world experience, you can clearly see that AC1 isn't trying to be a generic open world title, so it didn't fail in that regard (especially when you consider that it's designed for HUDless gameplay). Then there are games like AC3 which I really want to love, but it just was a mess where the whole experience and going for 100% sync felt like a chore.

SixKeys
10-14-2016, 07:19 AM
Your'e honestly trying to say the story of brotherhood is better than revelations?

Here's my breakdown (personal opinion, of course):

Which one had the more memorable cast? Brotherhood. (Though in fairness it must be said that the cast worked so well because we had already been introduced to most of them in AC2. They were just given the extra development they lacked in that game.)
Which one had the more interesting modern day? Brotherhood.
Which game made me feel more? Brotherhood.
Which one had the better humor? Brotherhood.
Which one had the better buildup up to and including its final moments? Brotherhood.

So yeah, Brotherhood wins in the story department.


forget that brotherhood had some horrible dialogue and characters

Still better than Revelations. Sofia Sartor is the most boring female character in the series and the best thing that can be said about Yusuf is that he had a lot of potential that was never realized. Can't say much about Alta´r since he wasn't actually the Alta´r I knew and loved from AC1, but just a reskinned Ezio with all of Ezio's moves and the wrong voice actor.



and the story progression was not even that good with not many memorable moments in the main campaign ( side content had a lot of cool moments though I must say)

I'll agree that ACR has more standout moments in its story campaign. The best two scenes are Ezio the Bard and entering Alta´r's library. That's where it ends, though. The other memorable stuff is scenes I would rather soon forget, like the skyfight with what's-his-face (I honestly forgot his name), the ridiculous parachute carriage chase, all the short, linear Alta´r segments, Subject 16 the surfer dude, and Ezio going against the Creed in the most egregious ways (setting the harbor on fire, blowing up an entire city full of civilians)....



and gameplay is the same in revelations with added changes, how people can say the gameplay is better in brotherhood is beyond me.

The combat in ACB is the best in the series. Fast, fluid and elegant. ACR's combat was a p!ssing contest between animators to see who could come up with the longest, most unnecessarily gruesome execution moves. It turns combat into a chore, where your kill streak gets constantly interrupted because Ezio starts doing an execution move that's about 10 seconds long, giving enemies plenty of time to attack you. It doesn't even make sense from a character point of view. I can see the hot-headed, braggart teenage Ezio showing off with these unnecessarily drawn-out kill moves, designed to maximize suffering, before he officially joins the assassins and starts following their code. But in ACR he's supposed to be older and wiser and dedicated to the Creed. Why would he go out of his way to prolong someone's suffering by sloooowly pushing a spear through someone's stomach and watching the guy flail around in agony for several seconds? It gets even more absurd when you have these in-between missions where Ezio preaches about the sanctity of life to his recruits. This isn't Mortal Kombat. I'm not impressed by these long-*** animations. I just want a combat system that reacts to my commands and doesn't pause every five seconds to show off.

The bomb-crafting and hookblade were fine additions, but really not enough to compensate for odd, out-of-place ones like Den Defense and Desmond's Journey. Stalkers got annoying fast. Searching for books was a joke. Renovating shops made no sense plot-wise when Constantinople had a booming economy. Bomb tutorials counted as side missions, that's how little content this game had. Everything else that did work (like Templar dens, tombs and factions) was copy-pasted from the previous games.

The soundtrack got on my nerves with the constant "aaahhh-AAAAHHH-aaaahhhh" theme being played in every. Single. Cut scene. It has its highlights, but out of Jesper's work on the series it's easily the weakest.

And finally, ACR's multiplayer was the worst. They somehow managed to mess up the almost-perfect MP from Brotherhood. It was simply half-finished, no two ways about it.

Sorrosyss
10-14-2016, 08:52 PM
Considering Brotherhood is my favourite of the franchise, this is an easy poll for me. :)

Brotherhood gave us multiplayer. The actual option to recruit Assassins. And love or hate him, easily the most memorable villain in Cesare Borgia (guards!). It also introduced us to the Beloved, dear Juno. The modern day was better than in the previous titles, and the glyphs and warnings from Subject 16 all added up to some intriguing plotlines.

Whilst Revelations was also good, for me it fell flat in some areas. I only played for the second time just last year, and even now I couldn't tell you the names of most of the characters. They just were not interesting enough for me. I'll admit old man Ezio is my favourite of his incarnations, but I still feel his adventures in Revelations were just not as interesting as his first two games. Add to that the god awful platforming puzzle sections of the pared down Modern Day, and the fiddling with the perfect combat system of Brotherhood (Slow mo kills - why?), just left a game that felt in the shadow of its predecessor. Revelations had a pretty short development cycle by all accounts, and in many areas it did kind of show. But I don't want to sound too negative. It was still great fun, and certainly better than anything after AC3... :p

cawatrooper9
10-14-2016, 10:08 PM
I will say, even though Rev is an easy choice for me, I much prefer the recruit system in Brotherhood. They just felt more like my own recruits, other than borrowed (which, I guess makes sense, given Constantinopel wasn't really Ezio's home).

Even though the recruit system was arguably more robust in Rev, I didn't like how my Assassins could start at higher levels, didn't like how they seemed to just appear out of nowhere. I also didn't like their robes as much- as much as I like period themed robes for protagonists, I feel like recruits should be more immersed in traditional garb.

Though, they're both leaps and bounds better than the contrived AC3 recruit system.

SixKeys
10-14-2016, 10:41 PM
I will say, even though Rev is an easy choice for me, I much prefer the recruit system in Brotherhood. They just felt more like my own recruits, other than borrowed (which, I guess makes sense, given Constantinopel wasn't really Ezio's home).

Even though the recruit system was arguably more robust in Rev, I didn't like how my Assassins could start at higher levels, didn't like how they seemed to just appear out of nowhere. I also didn't like their robes as much- as much as I like period themed robes for protagonists, I feel like recruits should be more immersed in traditional garb.

Though, they're both leaps and bounds better than the contrived AC3 recruit system.

I much prefer making up my own personalities and backgrounds for my recruits. Like if one of them looks a bit cocky, I send that person on the more difficult missions because I like to imagine they're a bit of a daredevil. The Rev system of giving recruits stories was touted as being better, but I just didn't care about them the same way I did with my ACB recruits.

phoenix-force411
10-18-2016, 12:49 AM
I prefer Revelations over Brotherhood. I really dig the Masyaf keys missions in Revelations over the Lair missions, because they were just so well designed especially that tower mission where Ezio controls traverses through a platform puzzle that involves rising the water and draining it to get to new areas.

SpiritOfNevaeh
10-18-2016, 01:24 AM
Brotherhood for me!

AnimusLover
10-18-2016, 02:19 AM
Brotherhood.

Revelations is a cut and paste job of Brotherhood and a bad one at that. They turned one of Brotherhood's best features (i.e. assassinating the district captains) into a fail state if you fail the Den Defense lol what a tack on. Revelations was the beginning of the end for the series and started to feel more like a checklist sandbox game with its endless tasks it gives you right off the bat, rather than a living breathing world to navigate. Brotherhood had good modern day puzzles and story, Revelations was a disappointing follow up to that, not dealing with the fallout of Lucy's murder.

Brotherhood is the franchise's best game - it has everything that has made the series as good as it is today.

MP
Sending assassins on missions to get loot.
District liberation.
Optional objectives.

There's no comparison.

Namikaze_17
10-18-2016, 02:54 AM
Revelations Desmond looked better than Brotherhood Desmond. That coma did wonders for his appearance.

Farlander1991
10-18-2016, 06:02 AM
I much prefer making up my own personalities and backgrounds for my recruits. Like if one of them looks a bit cocky, I send that person on the more difficult missions because I like to imagine they're a bit of a daredevil. The Rev system of giving recruits stories was touted as being better, but I just didn't care about them the same way I did with my ACB recruits.

That's not an issue of giving stories (I do think that giving stories has better potential), but rather an issue of the recruit system not mattering in the overall scheme of things in Revelations. Brotherhood was, well, all about the recruits. It's even in the name. Revelations was Ezio's personal story, with a bunch of Brotherhood legacy mechanics that were left and felt tacked on - liberations, recruits, etc.

cawatrooper9
10-18-2016, 02:49 PM
That's not an issue of giving stories (I do think that giving stories has better potential), but rather an issue of the recruit system not mattering in the overall scheme of things in Revelations. Brotherhood was, well, all about the recruits. It's even in the name. Revelations was Ezio's personal story, with a bunch of Brotherhood legacy mechanics that were left and felt tacked on - liberations, recruits, etc.

The game was otherwise similar enough to ACB that, without it, people would have still complained. They couldn't win.

As I've said before, the recruits simply don't feel like "mine" in the game, they feel borrowed- which, I suppose from a storytelling aspect, really does fit well. Unfortunately, I just found it less engaging as a mechanic.

Megas_Doux
10-19-2016, 12:48 AM
The combat in ACB is the best in the series. Fast, fluid and elegant.

.

Just no....

Brotherhood's "combat" in THAT easy I find it offensive, period. One of the things that I hate THE most about the fan base: their enjoyment of being freaking demigods without ANY effort whatsoever. Not even ONCE I've been close to dying in that game. I've literally played with my eyes closed against the Papal Guards -only four during free roam- and the many guards of populating the bridge leading to The Vatican and won. And that's even with the glitch removing armor on....

Yeah it's fluid, if by fluid it means you can ONE shoot 4 millions guys without ANY skill given the opportunity. Fluid....... More fun that clunky AC II / AC IV/ ACR and cartoonish ACS. But far from AC III in the "fun department" and my personal favorites AC I and Unity's in terms of thrill.



. And love or hate him, easily the most memorable villain in Cesare Borgia (guards!).



http://www.relatably.com/m/img/dear-god-memes/170286a345d7fd1bae37da75152b85b61ce0a66f3795ed5401 99349503eebb2e.jpg


One of the worst VA's in the series BY far. Any "italian" stereotype thrown into mix with him and even poorly acted one at that. The biggest wasted opportunity alongside Robespierre in terms of historic antagonists/villains and by a HUGE margin.


It also introduced us to the Beloved, dear Juno



Juno! the embodiment of the modern's day lack of what you would call a plot.....

AnimusLover
10-19-2016, 01:53 AM
Just no....

Brotherhood's "combat" in THAT easy I find it offensive, period. One of the things that I hate THE most about the fan base: their enjoyment of being freaking demigods without ANY effort whatsoever. Not even ONCE I've been close to dying in that game. I've literally played with my eyes closed against the Papal Guards -only four during free roam- and the many guards of populating the bridge leading to The Vatican and won. And that's even with the glitch removing armor on....

Yeah it's fluid, if by fluid it means you can ONE shoot 4 millions guys without ANY skill given the opportunity. Fluid....... More fun that clunky AC II / AC IV/ ACR and cartoonish ACS. But far from AC III in the "fun department" and my personal favorites AC I and Unity's in terms of thrill.

I remember watching a video online of Ubisoft getting feedback (https://youtu.be/BB0QPx7nSLc?t=3m14s) from fans about what they'd like to see in Syndicate and one of the fans said he wanted the combat to be more like Black Flag. I face plamed. Black Flag has the easiest and most tedious combat by far of any of the games. I feel Ubisoft pander too much to fans and as a result the latter titles feel soulless. Assassin's Creed 2 and 3 were good in the sense that you had to use different tactics for different guards but Unity is good in terms of challenge. I would take Unity's combat and tweak it so that it's a little bit faster (a la Witcher 3) and put in more animations.

cawatrooper9
10-19-2016, 02:35 PM
I remember watching a video online of Ubisoft getting feedback (https://youtu.be/BB0QPx7nSLc?t=3m14s) from fans about what they'd like to see in Syndicate and one of the fans said he wanted the combat to be more like Black Flag. I face plamed. Black Flag has the easiest and most tedious combat by far of any of the games. I feel Ubisoft pander too much to fans and as a result the latter titles feel soulless. Assassin's Creed 2 and 3 were good in the sense that you had to use different tactics for different guards but Unity is good in terms of challenge. I would take Unity's combat and tweak it so that it's a little bit faster (a la Witcher 3) and put in more animations.

See, I'd mostly agree that AC4's was the easiest, but AC2's was the most tedious by far. Countering seemed like a downgrade from AC1, and mostly just degraded to "hit them until their defenses finally give up and you trigger a kill animation"- or, my preferred method of going in using my fists and stealing a brute's weapon.

Fatal-Feit
10-20-2016, 12:07 AM
Just no....

Brotherhood's "combat" in THAT easy I find it offensive, period. One of the things that I hate THE most about the fan base: their enjoyment of being freaking demigods without ANY effort whatsoever. Not even ONCE I've been close to dying in that game. I've literally played with my eyes closed against the Papal Guards -only four during free roam- and the many guards of populating the bridge leading to The Vatican and won. And that's even with the glitch removing armor on....

Yeah it's fluid, if by fluid it means you can ONE shoot 4 millions guys without ANY skill given the opportunity. Fluid....... More fun that clunky AC II / AC IV/ ACR and cartoonish ACS. But far from AC III in the "fun department" and my personal favorites AC I and Unity's in terms of thrill.

The only combat system that I think one should find offensive is ACIV/RO's, and it's mostly because they're basically clunky QTEs with a lack of any depth or variety to make up for how poorly designed they are. Brotherhood's combat system may be what I'd personally prefer to call exploitable (it's at least harder than IV/RO's sad excuse of a difficulty), but it is arguably the most snappy and precise combat system we have to date. Everything from performing chain kills to executing multi tool kills just works reliably. And in a series where that level of accuracy is super rare, I have to give Brotherhood some major props for that.

And sure, Brotherhood's combat system is so exploitable that you can literally chain kill an entire army from the insane amount of ammo we're equipped with, but everything from the design of the controls to the well choreographed animations just feels near flawless to me. I miss it when the combat system focused on quick and effective finishers; practical things Assassins would do! I miss the lock on system. Ever since AC3, combat mode has been pretty abysmal and unreliable, especially in Unity where a box on the ground can interrupt your fight and make you sheath your weapon. Also, I think Brotherhood might be the only AC game that gave players a good amount of tools and weapons to play with. Unity's variety of weapons were awesome, but despite their unique heavies, there wasn't many distinctions between them besides stats, and the only difference in Syndicate are the animations. Besides unarmed combat, I really liked how combat with the crossbow played a bit differently, and how you can do a sweeping attack with a spear to kill all of the enemies surrounding you, or even toss it as a faraway target. I miss things like those that really helped define the open-world playground aspect of these games.

SixKeys
10-20-2016, 11:57 AM
Just no....

Brotherhood's "combat" in THAT easy I find it offensive, period. One of the things that I hate THE most about the fan base: their enjoyment of being freaking demigods without ANY effort whatsoever.

Yeah, how dare people enjoy different things! :rolleyes:

Yes, the combat is easy, but it's responsive and snappy. It gives me a thrill every time, it's like watching a deadly form of ballet. That aesthetic makes up for the lack of challenge. The best in terms of challenge is probably AC1 or Unity, but ACB's is the one I have most fun with.