PDA

View Full Version : I really tried to like this game, but it doesn't live up to AC standards.



Six_Gun
12-05-2011, 09:22 PM
I really wanted to like this game. The whole AC series was pretty good up until now. This game has me ignoring assassin dens or breezing through Den Defense until they're lost because reclaiming them for some idiotic reason by comparison is easy as pie. I have zero attachment to citizens or main characters because too many of the missions have them as just idiots in your way. In past ACs I loved building wealth, but in ACR it's a ridiculous chore, so after unlocking and buying venues via viewpoint scaling, I only look for story missions now and ignore all the lock icons. I read that the game starts bad and gets better, can't say I've seen that to be the case. It started bad and it's getting nothing but worse. At this point I'm actually wondering for the first time ever if I'll even want to finish an AC game, and that's coming from someone that is, or was, an avid fan of the series. At this point I'm thinking they should have just ended the series with Brotherhood if this is all the better they can do.


Some of the worst things about ACR:
(not in order of significance)

1. Siege tanks and Den Defense in general are one of the worst things about this game.
2. The lighting is horrible (too dark in places/too bright in places),
3. Weapons are crap esp the way they ruined throwing knives and the crossbow
4. Missions often suck or end abruptly
5. Give me back the money and screw the Baskin & Robins 31 flavors of bombs crap
6. Hook blade makes no sense as a stab weapon
7. Enemies are very inconsistent within the same class with some being easy to kill, with others it's whip out the gun
8. Sending in assassins to take over cities takes friggin forever
9. Areas under control have no rhyme or reason with venues locked despite no presence of guards
10. The story is so weakly written with such little presence of meaningful characters
11. Audio is crap, often times there's a noticeable sync problem in battles

corenth18
12-06-2011, 01:13 AM
what the heck are you talking about? the variety in bombs is more modern, smokes, flash bangs, etc. your excuse about the throwing knives and the crossbow is just ignorance. did you even look at the game while you were playing it? yeah sure some things are a hastle. well so is life. if the game was too easy, it'd be pointless. the hook blade isnt just for combat if you would actually explore its other uses. and you dont need the gun to take out the harder enemies. it's called use hidden blade, or use bare hands and disarm them. you apparently lack imagination my friend. your little "this game stinks" topic is a waste of breath.

YuurHeen
12-06-2011, 02:51 AM
you are not rebuilding a city like you had to in ac2 and acb so that is put to the background but really ac aint about that.

Ferrith
12-06-2011, 03:40 AM
Originally posted by Six_Gun:
10. The story is so weakly written with such little presence of meaningful characters
11. Audio is crap, often times there's a noticeable sync problem in battles

I will agree with these two points. The sound is horrible, and the first AC game in the series poorly-written. My main grief is about the development of the characters, save for Altair perhaps. However, the writer has already shown he is talented, so I blame Ubisoft for their deadlines.
I'd suggest you to stick with it and finish it. If nothing else, for the money you spent.

@corenth18:

if the game was too easy, it'd be pointless.

Well, this game is the easiest in the series, in my opinion, and it is because of the use of bombs.

Six_Gun
12-06-2011, 04:05 AM
Originally posted by corenth18:
what the heck are you talking about? the variety in bombs is more modern, smokes, flash bangs, etc. It's way over the top and unnecessary. I get by without them. I should be saying WTF are YOU talking about what with your moderness slant. This isn't supposed to be modern warfare here chap. "Flash bangs"? What, is Ezio in the SAS now? LOL
your excuse about the throwing knives and the crossbow is just ignorance. did you even look at the game while you were playing it? "Excuse"? I don't need an excuse to critique a game, just solid reasons. The implementation of throwing knives is slow and clumsy compared to the way it was. It didn't need changing and had a feel of skillful stealth and precision before. Now throwing knives and even crossbow bolts are much less effective, often times turning the game into more of a shooter than it should be.
yeah sure some things are a hastle. well so is life. if the game was too easy, it'd be pointless. I never said the game was too hard, it's just not as balanced as before where often one tactic was just as useful as the next. It's just poorly structured this time around in everything from missions, to combat to lighting, etc. Funny how when contrasting opinions come up the fanyboys of a given title like to ASSume a lot.
the hook blade isnt just for combat if you would actually explore its other uses. You should feel more dense than brilliant saying that because the game actually puts you through an obvious tutorial where the first uses of it are anything but combat. It would make sense if you only use the hook blade for zip lines and pulling things and foes down, but clearly the game shows it to unrealistically be a stabbing weapon too, or did you somehow miss that?
and you dont need the gun to take out the harder enemies. it's called use hidden blade, or use bare hands and disarm them. you apparently lack imagination my friend. Once surrounded by the oddly more powerful then their comrades masked guys, it's effective but a bit slow to keep using the hidden blades in between groin kicks and dodges, or take your time to disarm each one. By the time I take out a few that way I can easily kill half a dozen with the gun or be on my way. There's missions where your suggestion just unnecessarily prolongs a difficult escape.
your little "this game stinks" topic is a waste of breath. It's my opinion like it or not, and the only thing "little" is your tolerance for those which contrast with yours, which again makes you sound like an unconditionally supportive dime a dozen butt kissing fanboy of ACR.

KelThuzad0398
12-06-2011, 05:57 AM
Originally posted by Ferrith:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Six_Gun:
10. The story is so weakly written with such little presence of meaningful characters
11. Audio is crap, often times there's a noticeable sync problem in battles

I will agree with these two points. The sound is horrible, and the first AC game in the series poorly-written. My main grief is about the development of the characters, save for Altair perhaps. However, the writer has already shown he is talented, so I blame Ubisoft for their deadlines.
I'd suggest you to stick with it and finish it. If nothing else, for the money you spent.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'm sorry, but you're describing the Assassin's Creed games as well written?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KUEKOHSLRZk&t=27m18s

Let's not pretend that this series is something it's not.

BlancoCreed
12-06-2011, 09:45 AM
It's very well written if you ask me.. It's not like any of us could have done better, stop complaining and enjoy the game.

tdtdtdtd
12-06-2011, 12:26 PM
I'm sorry, did someone just say these games aren't well written? I'd say they're the most well written games of all times. Would you care to post examples of "Well written" games? Because we might have different definitions of said concept.

D.I.D.
12-06-2011, 01:08 PM
Originally posted by tdtdtdtd:
I'm sorry, did someone just say these games aren't well written? I'd say they're the most well written games of all times. Would you care to post examples of "Well written" games? Because we might have different definitions of said concept.

I'm sure even the writers would acknowledge that all games, including AC, have a long way to go before they're truly carrying the weight of a plot. If people hadn't demanded more than previous peaks in games story writing, you wouldn't have had AC at all.

tdtdtdtd
12-06-2011, 02:08 PM
I'm not sure the purpose of this post. I didn't say the storylines were perfect, just better than anything else I've ever played.

Six_Gun
12-06-2011, 02:28 PM
Past AC titles yes I would say are pretty well written. This one has annoying characters with very little development, and a flashback with Altair pretty much proving all the build up of the honor and purpose of the assassin's to be wasted on a barbaric display no better than the Templars when Altair's wife and son are murdered followed by Altair himself being chased out of town. Up until now I felt the creed served a crude but human purpose. Now they are painted as mere puppets of corruption like those they fight against.

KelThuzad0398
12-06-2011, 03:51 PM
Originally posted by tdtdtdtd:
I'm sorry, did someone just say these games aren't well written? I'd say they're the most well written games of all times. Would you care to post examples of "Well written" games? Because we might have different definitions of said concept.

Just because most games aren't well-written doesn't mean that this one is. I love the series, but it's not well-written. I loved Brotherhood and Revelations has made major gameplay improvements, but none of the games are well-written. The major villain of the game getting away when he's surrounded by main characters is not exactly an example of good writing.

To the original poster, how is the crossbow worse? It seems the same to me.

SaintPerkele
12-06-2011, 03:56 PM
1. Siege tanks and Den Defense in general are one of the worst things about this game.
That's simply an opinion. I really enjoyed the Den Defence and was actually somewhat sad when I completed all Master Assassin missions and couldn't defend my dens anymore. And if you consider them too hard.. Just let the Templars conquer your den and then retake it.

2. The lighting is horrible (too dark in places/too bright in places),
The lighting was fantastic and actually quite similar compared to the real Istanbul, believe me. In fact, the lighting was better than AC (where there was no night at all), AC2 (where there was hardly ever any real sunshine) and ACB (were the nights were almost as bright as the day).

3. Weapons are crap esp the way they ruined throwing knives and the crossbow
For the first time since the first AC I used the throwing knives again, especially due to the dual weapon combat system. The crossbow has absolutely no purpose in ACR anymore, as it's quite slow and deals about the same amount of damage as the throwing knives. I'm glad about that though - the crossbow was fairly overpowered in ACB and made most missions way too easy.

4. Missions often suck or end abruptly
Might I have a specific example? Almost every single mission was better than the ACB ones, which I did not really enjoy. Yes, AC 2 missions are still better, but that doesn't mean that the new ones are bad.

5. Give me back the money and screw the Baskin & Robins 31 flavors of bombs crap
What? Throwing money's still there, if that's what you mean. And bombs are optional - besides the Piri Reis missions, you are never made using them. I agree that they made some missions too easy - but isn't the point in the AC series to complete any mission the way you want? Either sneaky or as a direct offensive approach? Challenge yourself or don't, it's up to you.

6. Hook blade makes no sense as a stab weapon
That's called nitpicking. There was a lot of concept art which showed the hook being below the blade, by the way. If it's really bothering you though.. We're talking about a man who can jump from a tower into a bale of hay without breakin any bone, and you're complaining that you can't stab people with a hook? Seriously?

7. Enemies are very inconsistent within the same class with some being easy to kill, with others it's whip out the gun
That's nothing new, is it? It has always been like that in AC. Once again, you're not forced to use the gun. And some of us, like me, enjoy the challenge of fighting against a large group of elite guards without a gun, bombs or apprentices.

8. Sending in assassins to take over cities takes friggin forever
Yeah, and that's great. Besides making quite a lot of sense, it's nice to progress through the game during the main story line, eventually having all of the cities under your control. And if you're recruits are on a high level, just retake the city instantly which will usually last about 15 minutes or so. Not much, if you ask me.

9. Areas under control have no rhyme or reason with venues locked despite no presence of guards
I never enjoyed the rebuilding part of ACB and ACR anyway, to be honest. Renovating some buildings is alright, but having to buy every single shop in a huge city with an existing economy doesn't make much sense. Long story short, I agree, but that's nothing that was introduced in ACR.

10. The story is so weakly written with such little presence of meaningful characters
While the story might not be as good as the one of AC 2 (and yes, a bit short in all fairness), it was still really good, actually even better than the Brotherhood one (which had almost no real story at all besides 'Borgias attack Monteriggioni, steal the PoE, you want to kill Cesare and take it back, but first you need to gain access to the Castello', that's the whole story of ACB). The story had a great opening, a nice and calm introduction to Constantinople, a slowly increasing suspense, mixed with false assumptions and false allies, eventually ending in a conclusion to both Ezio's and Altair's story which nearly made me shed manly tears (seriously, both the last Ezio and Altair scene, just wow. And then the last scene in the Black Room, the TWCB-clip and the awakening.. some really great moments if you ask me.

11. Audio is crap, often times there's a noticeable sync problem in battles
I didn't encounter any problems at all, might be your computer.

tdtdtdtd
12-06-2011, 09:47 PM
Originally posted by KelThuzad0398:

Just because most games aren't well-written doesn't mean that this one is. I love the series, but it's not well-written. I loved Brotherhood and Revelations has made major gameplay improvements, but none of the games are well-written. The major villain of the game getting away when he's surrounded by main characters is not exactly an example of good writing.

To the original poster, how is the crossbow worse? It seems the same to me.

YOu still have not explained how this game wasn't well written, or poorly written or whatever. What is "off" about the series? There are no continuity issues, they seem to have dotted all the I's. What's the problem?

Six_Gun
12-06-2011, 10:22 PM
Originally posted by SaintPerkele:
That's simply an opinion. I really enjoyed the Den Defence and was actually somewhat sad when I completed all Master Assassin missions and couldn't defend my dens anymore. And if you consider them too hard.. Just let the Templars conquer your den and then retake it. I already said it's easy to retake them, which also makes DD a somewhat pointless feature, and that's not just opinion, it's my pointing out the obvious poor game structure like it or not.

The lighting was fantastic and actually quite similar compared to the real Istanbul, believe me. In fact, the lighting was better than AC (where there was no night at all), AC2 (where there was hardly ever any real sunshine) and ACB (were the nights were almost as bright as the day). I have no problem with a realistic day/night cycle, and I'm not so much talking about the sky as the poor output of light from wall torches and lack of them where needed. Another example of the poor lighting is the Eagle Vision only works in certain places where objects like wooden surfaces light up with a slight blue tint in tombs and underground places. In dark stairways and alleys outdoors it does no good whatsoever. Another way of looking at it is the cutscenes that have low light conditions like camp fires and such use WAY more light than the game actually does near fire lit light sources. If the game had lighting like the cutscenes, there wouldn't be a problem. Even if just the Eagle Vision was better and more consistent it would be way more playable. I have a hard time believing no one else out there hasn't either turned the brightness up and down, or taken way longer than they should have to to find their way in dark areas.
For the first time since the first AC I used the throwing knives again, especially due to the dual weapon combat system. The crossbow has absolutely no purpose in ACR anymore, as it's quite slow and deals about the same amount of damage as the throwing knives. I'm glad about that though - the crossbow was fairly overpowered in ACB and made most missions way too easy. Throwing knives were not only quicker and easier to toss in previous games, they were more effective, as they should be in the hands of a highly skilled assassin whom is trained how to use them. That said, if you think a crossbow should only have the power of a throwing knife, you're sadly mistaken.
Might I have a specific example? Almost every single mission was better than the ACB ones, which I did not really enjoy. Yes, AC 2 missions are still better, but that doesn't mean that the new ones are bad. There's too many to list really. Suffice it to say the ones in previous games were longer and more elaborate and interesting, often with a few stages to them. Many in this game are short, uninteresting and/or end abruptly. They even warp you back to the game after tombs vs exiting. There's too many short, easy filler missions just to facilitate telling parts of the story with too, like the ones where you take out the crusader as Altair and later return as the mentor.
What? Throwing money's still there, if that's what you mean. And bombs are optional - besides the Piri Reis missions, you are never made using them. I agree that they made some missions too easy - but isn't the point in the AC series to complete any mission the way you want? Either sneaky or as a direct offensive approach? Challenge yourself or don't, it's up to you.
LOL, I'm talking about looting chests resulting in money vs stuff I don't need/want. You even said yourself bombs aren't necessary. Chalk up another pointless game feature along with Den Defense. In the past AC has appropriately been mainly about stealth. This one plays up guns, bombs, and battlefield warfare too much. Ezio's supposed to be a covert leader of an underground creed, not a friggin general.
That's called nitpicking. There was a lot of concept art which showed the hook being below the blade, by the way. If it's really bothering you though.. We're talking about a man who can jump from a tower into a bale of hay without breakin any bone, and you're complaining that you can't stab people with a hook? Seriously? Ironically you made my point in a way. If he can dive into haystacks from great heights, why the zip lines, and what purpose do they even serve the citizens? They're clearly not for hanging laundry and no guards use them. Zip lines and the hook blade are just a couple more pointless features. Since they insisted on it though, they could at least have had the intelligence to have a dual blade combo. Instead of two hidden stab blades it would be a hook on one side, a stab blade on the other. The zip lines could have even made SOME sport of sense had they tied them in with some kind of mail, garbage or supply drop offs. Problem solved, without adding more ridiculous haystack dive suspension of belief elements, which I agree has always been one of the most fantastical things about the game.
That's nothing new, is it? It has always been like that in AC. Once again, you're not forced to use the gun. And some of us, like me, enjoy the challenge of fighting against a large group of elite guards without a gun, bombs or apprentices. Actually guards with the same uniforms in past games offered the same skill pretty much, and it's not so much that they can't be beaten without the gun, it's that they place several of them that can run very fast in missions where you need to escape the area, so it becomes more pointless to fight them via slower means, like I already said. Again, mission structure has a lot to do with it. I'd enjoy fighting them a lot more were they placed better.

Yeah, and that's great. Besides making quite a lot of sense, it's nice to progress through the game during the main story line, eventually having all of the cities under your control. And if you're recruits are on a high level, just retake the city instantly which will usually last about 15 minutes or so. Not much, if you ask me. I just prefer the way it was done in ACB. Here it's too tedious, I get bored with it. It starts feeling like an RTS instead of an action RPG.

I never enjoyed the rebuilding part of ACB and ACR anyway, to be honest. Renovating some buildings is alright, but having to buy every single shop in a huge city with an existing economy doesn't make much sense. Long story short, I agree, but that's nothing that was introduced in ACR. Again, I just liked the way they did it in ACB a lot better. It felt more balanced. At any given time I could focus on any element of the game without worrying about spending lots of uninterrupted time on one element to build up wealth, renovate, etc. You said in assassin takeovers it should take time. Well yeah, that and wealth building does in real life. This is a game however, where you see a person age decades over the course of less than a day's worth of playing hour wise though. Things should happen at a flowing pace, if they don't it starts feeling monotonous.

While the story might not be as good as the one of AC 2 (and yes, a bit short in all fairness), it was still really good, actually even better than the Brotherhood one (which had almost no real story at all besides 'Borgias attack Monteriggioni, steal the PoE, you want to kill Cesare and take it back, but first you need to gain access to the Castello', that's the whole story of ACB). The story had a great opening, a nice and calm introduction to Constantinople, a slowly increasing suspense, mixed with false assumptions and false allies, eventually ending in a conclusion to both Ezio's and Altair's story which nearly made me shed manly tears (seriously, both the last Ezio and Altair scene, just wow. And then the last scene in the Black Room, the TWCB-clip and the awakening.. some really great moments if you ask me. Personally I don't just evaluate a story on what happens in it. I evaluate it as well on how well the characters are developed and how their roles intertwine with that of the protagonist. ACB had a quality to it where the villains stood out and you despised them. It carried that over well from past titles. It's called immersion. Granted the opening was great. I'm still wondering if the first cutscene in this game is the best and most real looking I've ever seen. The gameplay even started out fairly good with the initial escape segment, though IMO it was ruined by the ghost chasing, vs letting the player find the route.
I didn't encounter any problems at all, might be your computer. I have an i7 950 @ 3.2GHz, a GTS 250 1GB @ 760/1800/1000, and 6 GB low latency RAM, and while it's not by any means a stellar rig, I can play at shadow level 2, post effects off, and everything else maxed at 1280x720 with plenty good FPS and no lag or stutter. My audio is Realtek HD onboard, which is pretty common among gamers. I don't have audio sync problems in any other games including all Crysis titles, Metro 2033, BF3, MF3, Batman AA, AC, etc. You name it, If it's a top rated FPS, action adventure or race game, I've probably played it.

Ferrith
12-07-2011, 03:57 AM
Originally posted by KelThuzad0398:
I'm sorry, but you're describing the Assassin's Creed games as well written?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KUEKOHSLRZk&t=27m18s

Let's not pretend that this series is something it's not.
I was talking about the main idea for the game's story and the plot as the game progresses. I don't count game-play silliness like the one you show on the video. I have read history, I undertand where the story is based on [and contrary to some fellow players, I wasn't surprised to hear about Cyprus in ACII, when Borgia comes with the apple); I can recognise the links to historical events as well as the inaccuracies and poetic license when these appear in the game. From this aspect the story is not bad really. But then you have to fit the game-play in all these, and you get some grotesque results.

Compare to other contemporary games, yes, AC is not that bad as some claim. If you want to judge it alone and according to what a well-written game actually stands for, then probably it won't qualify as such. You might as well end under the impression that we are talking about a hybrid, an action game introducing a story that would benefit better in a role-playing game.


Originally posted by tdtdtdtd:
There are no continuity issues, they seem to have dotted all the I's.
I have played the game only once so far and was in a hurry to finish it and see what happens, but I got a feeling there were some inconsistencies in AC:R. I need a second, thorough play-through to spot them and come back with a solid argument.


Originally posted by Six_Gun:
Personally I don't just evaluate a story on what happens in it. I evaluate it as well on how well the characters are developed and how their roles intertwine with that of the protagonist. ACB had a quality to it where the villains stood out and you despised them. It carried that over well from past titles. It's called immersion. Granted the opening was great. I'm still wondering if the first cutscene in this game is the best and most real looking I've ever seen. The gameplay even started out fairly good with the initial escape segment, though IMO it was ruined by the ghost chasing, vs letting the player find the route.
I know what you mean and I do agree with the characters being under-developed and lacking depth this time. It might be just me, but I had the feeling there was more into what happened and the people Ezio met, yet everything seemed to stay on the surface. Perhaps AC:R was just a filler before the release of AC III.

tdtdtdtd
12-07-2011, 05:26 AM
If he thinks AC is poorly written, I can't wait to find out what he considers a "well written" game.

Fristi61
12-07-2011, 05:53 AM
Originally posted by Six_Gun:
Ironically you made my point in a way. If he can dive into haystacks from great heights, why the zip lines, and what purpose do they even serve the citizens? They're clearly not for hanging laundry and no guards use them. Zip lines and the hook blade are just a couple more pointless features. Since they insisted on it though, they could at least have had the intelligence to have a dual blade combo. Instead of two hidden stab blades it would be a hook on one side, a stab blade on the other. The zip lines could have even made SOME sport of sense had they tied them in with some kind of mail, garbage or supply drop offs. Problem solved, without adding more ridiculous haystack dive suspension of belief elements, which I agree has always been one of the most fantastical things about the game.

Actually, didn't Yusuf state at the beginning of the game that the ziplines were put up by and for the assassins? Correct me if I'm wrong though.

Sometimes I've even seen some byzantine guards on the rooftops whacking at them with a hammer as if they were trying to take them down.

IMRicko
12-07-2011, 06:28 AM
Have been looking at this discussion for a few days. In my opinion ACR is another enjoayble game from ubisoft but it didn't really make it to my expectation due to the connection of the story. It is great having ezio following the footsteps of altair's to reveal the true secret of the order. But ubisoft do not clear up about what was the event that made ezio wanted to follow altair's footsteps besides the letter that his father wrote before he was born. From the gameplay mechanics, as usual, always about free run and, stalking and assassinating. New moves such as hook and run was in my ac wishlist for ac2 but it didn't make it that time so it was good for me. Ziplines are actually a good addition to the gameplay mechanic but it is only for self pleasure as we don't really use it during missions as the ziplines are hardly located in the places where missions occur. Weapons such as throwing knife should have been tweaked to be weaker just like in ac2 where it takes 2 or 3 knives to kill a guard. Crossbow is kinda useless due to the presence of the throwing knives. Missions and storyline i can't say anything about it since the team that created ACR is different from ac2 and acb so their objective is just to tie up the whole story of altair and ezio because they want to focus on ac3 which is gonna be a totally new project so do not blame them. They just want to tie up loose ends since some of the community want to know what happened to ezio and altair after all. Hook blade, ahhh a nice addition for climbing. I really enjoy it as i can actually climb really fast and the finishing move during combat are (to me) awesome. Enemies are about the same as acb just that this time we have two different sides but in the end they are all the same. AC really should add game difficulty so that we can actually enjoy the combat sequences. The enemies AI also have to be higher. For example we go to a restricted place with a hay stack around and there is an enemy spotted us and before the meter is full we just have to hide inside the haystack. I mean come on you all know what i mean. To me i just bought this game because i just want to know the ending of ezio and altair as well as self pleasure by exploring ubisoft style of istanbul and also the multiplayer modes. Still looking forward to ac3. I hope they will revamped the gameplay mechanics into a more fluid gameplay from characters movement and more meaningful and satisfying combat as well as improved graphics with a lonng, very long story line just like what ubisoft did in ac2

tdtdtdtd
12-07-2011, 08:34 AM
Ezio was forced into this life and it seemed like he was very interested in his father's secret identity, and then the assassins and templars as a whole. It started out as revenge but ended up being his duty, as it was Altair's. But it seems that he did not continue running the Assassins at the end of Revelations, understanding that he was just a messenger and he wanted to live a simple life. Maybe that's why in the 20th century the Assassins are so behind the templars in everything, because Ezio didn't continue what he should have, what Altair did.

RzaRecta357
12-07-2011, 08:47 AM
No, they're behind because Daniel killed the mentor in 2000 and then told them the locations of all assassin camps and now there is only a small band of losing assassins left.

Anyway, this is just you being picky. The characters were great. WTF are you even going on about? The young prince was awesome and they laid it down perfect for the man he'd become.

I don't know, I loved it all. I didn't really like AC2 or ACBs characters. I was even disappointed with Ezio in AC2 but grew to like him. ACB kind of wrecked him with his Robinhood theory. But ACR restored that.

Yeah, as I sit back and think of my 3 playthroughs that were totally glitch free and the sound worked perfect I just can't help but wonder why you didn't enjoy those characters. They were very well done.

Honestly? Cesare? You enjoyed his "Developement"? More like his WHINEWHINEWHINEWHINEWHINEWHINEWHINE.

GIVEMETHEAPPLEIWANTTHEAPPLEITSMINENOTYOURSGIVEMETH EAPPLEIWANTTHEAPPLEITSMINENOTYOURS!

Haha, that writing was terrible. That was totally hey lets make a super evil and then have robinhood go save the day.

ACB was by far the most cheese and worst written.

tdtdtdtd
12-07-2011, 09:51 AM
I must disagree with your assessment of AC 2. I think THAT was the most perfect game I've ever played. It was incredibly long which is great, the storyline was awesome, character development was perfect.. These last two have been great as well but AC2 was the grand daddy.

YuurHeen
12-07-2011, 12:32 PM
acr has the best story since ac1. ac2 and acb characters were cheesy, childish and corny.
both in ac1 and in acr the main enemies at least try to explain themselfs in a way that you could feel that they truely think they do a good thing.

Six_Gun
12-07-2011, 01:01 PM
Originally posted by Fristi61:
Actually, didn't Yusuf state at the beginning of the game that the ziplines were put up by and for the assassins? Correct me if I'm wrong though.

Sometimes I've even seen some byzantine guards on the rooftops whacking at them with a hammer as if they were trying to take them down. I never heard mention of anyone say assassins put them up, Yusif only says you must take to the air. If he and his men had constructed them, don't you think he would have mentioned that to Ezio when first showing them to him? That wouldn't even make sense anyway given when they're on the roofs they're always running to avoid detection. You really expect they could put up such an elaborate network of ziplines without being noticed? I've also never seen any guards trying to take them down.

As for the comment on Cesare, the fact that you despised his whining kinda makes my point, and how else would you expect a spoiled brat Borgia with too much power to behave, esp since it was revealed he had VD from incest. Regardless of what one thinks about characters though, the missions were more elaborate. There were a lot of good lengthy tail, stealth infiltration, assassination and escape missions. In this one they're far too quick and simple.

KelThuzad0398
12-07-2011, 11:19 PM
I thought ACB was better from a gameplay perspective; I'm still playing Revelations so I'm not sure if it's better yet.

The plot of the series is funny, but it's still not well written. I'm a bit surprised some people are saying that AC2 had a really good story. There were a lot of inconsistencies in that game, one of which I already pointed out. The last hour of the game was incredibly stupid story-wise.

OT: Playing through Revelations, Ezio keeps having qualms about killing honest people, but he has no trouble thieving and pickpocketing. Aren't you hurting them with either of those actions? What about the hundreds of guards who might have just been doing their duty?

Fristi61
12-08-2011, 06:52 AM
Originally posted by Six_Gun:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Fristi61:
Actually, didn't Yusuf state at the beginning of the game that the ziplines were put up by and for the assassins? Correct me if I'm wrong though.

Sometimes I've even seen some byzantine guards on the rooftops whacking at them with a hammer as if they were trying to take them down. I never heard mention of anyone say assassins put them up, Yusif only says you must take to the air. If he and his men had constructed them, don't you think he would have mentioned that to Ezio when first showing them to him? That wouldn't even make sense anyway given when they're on the roofs they're always running to avoid detection. You really expect they could put up such an elaborate network of ziplines without being noticed? I've also never seen any guards trying to take them down.

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Okay, I just looked back and you were right, Yusuf never says that, I don't remember where I got that from now... Sorry about that.
However, while doing that, I noticed that each zipline pole has a little flagpole on top of it and on top of that flagpole... is a little ornamental assassins symbol.

So there you go, I guess the assassins did put them up there, allthough ofcourse its a little strange to imagine them trying to stealthily put those up there without any guards noticing.

tdtdtdtd
12-08-2011, 01:06 PM
The plot of the series is funny, but it's still not well written. I'm a bit surprised some people are saying that AC2 had a really good story. There were a lot of inconsistencies in that game, one of which I already pointed out. The last hour of the game was incredibly stupid story-wise.

For the good of the group, can you once again summarize the inconsistencies? I have beaten the game 5-6 times and I thought the storyline was perfect.

Six_Gun
12-08-2011, 01:37 PM
Originally posted by Fristi61:
However, while doing that, I noticed that each zipline pole has a little flagpole on top of it and on top of that flagpole... is a little ornamental assassins symbol.
I still don't see that as proof the assassins built them. It's more likely Ubi's way of marking them either for art's sake and/or so the player can more easily find them while engaged in a panicked parkour escape.

There's often things that don't make sense in games, after all, they'e games, not real life. This one however has MANY things that either don't make sense outright or by extension don't make sense because they serve so little purpose they can be avoided entirely.

KelThuzad0398
12-08-2011, 02:04 PM
Spoilers

I believe the ending where you meet the rest of the Assassins and you all fight Borgia is not well written. Near the end he's surrounded and he simply kicks Ezio and gets away. None of the other assassins surrounding you do anything.

Then you go to Rome and try to assassinate Borgia as the pope. I thought this was a lot of fun, but that doesn't mean it's well written. You air assassinate him and he somehow manages to survive that, then you fight him for a while until he suddenly uses the staff to become invisible, a power which had never been hinted at or explained and is never seen again. Then he stabs you and walks away. You survive somehow (that's not explained either) and then chase him inside the chamber. Don't sneak up and assassinate this villain who has now managed to get away multiple times and is the cause of Ezio losing his family. Then you fist fight the pope, somehow managing to converse about his actions and philosophy while you take him down with a thousand punches. You beat him, and then you let him leave, even though he is, again, the cause of Ezio becoming an assassin. I understand the idea that killing him won't bring back his family, but killing the thousand guards it took you to get here didn't bring back your family either. Why have mercy on him when he's been the cause of the deaths of many innocent people?

So you have mercy on him, and he becomes one of the major villains of Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood. There was no reason to let him live or let him leave.

Let me again say that I love this series; the games are quite a lot of fun, and I am actually going to play revelations some more once this is posted. I can't agree, however, with the idea that these games are well written. I will say that the story of Assassin's Creed 1 was better, in that at least the villains were sympathetic. In Assassin's Creed 2 it's the simple "I'm a bad guy, let's kill off your family and then TAKE OVER THE WORLD MUAHAHAHA."

Good games, yes. Good story? No.

Ferrith
12-08-2011, 02:46 PM
Originally posted by KelThuzad0398:
I thought ACB was better from a gameplay perspective; I'm still playing Revelations so I'm not sure if it's better yet.

The plot of the series is funny, but it's still not well written. I'm a bit surprised some people are saying that AC2 had a really good story.
It had. I like how it took historical figures and events from a specific era and brought them all together into a flawless AC environment. The reconstruction of Renaissance Italy was also a big plus in my book.
With the original AC aside, which I love, I too think AC II was probably the best in the series.

There were a lot of inconsistencies in that game, one of which I already pointed out.
If you mean the video you linked to, this is related to game-play, not to the story.


OT: Playing through Revelations, Ezio keeps having qualms about killing honest people, but he has no trouble thieving and pickpocketing. Aren't you hurting them with either of those actions? What about the hundreds of guards who might have just been doing their duty?
If I recall correctly there are only two instances of pickpocketing in AC:R and they are both about keys. As for the guards, well, it's either you or them, if they corner you, so no question there. There is another thread questioning Assassins' actions here: http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...1039408/m/1501016369 (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/9011039408/m/1501016369)

Do you want to add your voice to the crowd yelling "I'm rooting for Abstergo"? I don't. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif

EDIT -- SPOILERS --
.
.
.
.
.
.

Then you go to Rome and try to assassinate Borgia as the pope. I thought this was a lot of fun, but that doesn't mean it's well written. You air assassinate him and he somehow manages to survive that,
Not "somehow". It's the staff that protects him.


then you fight him for a while until he suddenly uses the staff to become invisible, a power which had never been hinted at or explained and is never seen again.
I don't remember if he becomes invisible exactly, but in the Truth puzzles there were several references to the staff as another piece of Eden. All the pieces of Eden have great powers, don't they?

KelThuzad0398
12-08-2011, 03:08 PM
I don't know, the Apple doesn't stop you from dying. If he could not die when he had the staff why did he agree to fist fight Ezio?

Also, in the first game the Templars were a group that believed that humanity could be led better by good individuals under a totalitarian society. In the following games in the series, they're just bad guys out for power.

Ferrith
12-08-2011, 03:33 PM
-- SPOILERS --
.
.
.
.
.

Originally posted by KelThuzad0398:
I don't know, the Apple doesn't stop you from dying. If he could not die when he had the staff why did he agree to fist fight Ezio?
He is cornered inside the Vault, he is desperate to unlock its secrets, Ezio brought the second key required for the task, the apple... it seems to me he had no other choice but to agree.


Also, in the first game the Templars were a group that believed that humanity could be led better by good individuals under a totalitarian society. In the following games in the series, they're just bad guys out for power.

"by good individuals"? Define "good". Who was "good" in AC I?

Templars' creed and goals have remained unchanged ever since. What changes from one installment to the next is the historical periods; as time passes people might change, their minds and attitude might change, but the goal is still the same. During the Crusades period AC I takes place the Templars were trying to take control and power by means of wealth. As time passes they discover other means as well. Historically speaking, the real Templars had extraordinary wealth for a monastic Order; they used to control large regions by buying them off, and they had also invented a banking system. In modern terms, you could say the Templars were the first bankers and probably the first corporation in history.

KelThuzad0398
12-08-2011, 04:05 PM
Okay, I see now that Rodrigo had no choice but to accept the fight but I still don't understand why you let him get away.



Well, of course Abstergo and the Templars are evil but you could understand their position instead of them being generic bad guy villains. The multiplayer story in Revelations actually brought some of that back in the Dossiers, but it was nonexistent in AC2 and Brotherhood.

Ferrith
12-08-2011, 05:44 PM
Templars do not become "generic villains" in AC II and AC:B. It's the specific historical period and the particular families involved that make it look as such. Italian noble families were deep in intrigues, conspiracies, murder. That's the way it was. The Borgias were probably the most corrupted of all. Shaun's videos [in-game]playing when a new character is introduced are a precise representation of that.

To the first part, I think that till that moment Ezio was after Borgia to get revenge, but then, when he came face to face with an old, powerless man, he realised he had to let it go.

KelThuzad0398
12-08-2011, 06:30 PM
He's not an old powerless man, he's the pope, and he goes on to create massive trouble for Ezio and the Brotherhood in the following game. Ezio had killed (or murdered) many other people to get to this guy, and he didn't have qualms about mowing through them. This is the man that drove Ezio to become an assassin because of the death of his family. He is demonstrably worse than every other templar you killed in the game. It's all his fault, and you let him run away so that he can be more trouble?

The story of AC2 really fell apart at the end. Most of my story-based complaints are with that part of the game.

Ferrith
12-08-2011, 07:06 PM
-- SPOILERS --


He is the Pope for the people outside; but in the Vault he is just a beaten old man, an easy prey to Ezio's blade. Ezio has only to activate his hidden blade and the old man is dead. Instead, he shows him some mercy. Perhaps, this is a sign he matures, or becomes wiser. I can't be certain which exactly is it.

In AC:B it is not really him who causes troubles, but his son, Cesare. It was Cesare who led his army to attack Monteriggioni and steal the Apple. It was Cesare's hunger for ultimate power this time, not Rodrigo's.

KelThuzad0398
12-08-2011, 07:39 PM
Maybe he should have spared all the other people too. They didn't commit the atrocities that he did. He taunts you during the fight, telling you your family didn't need to die but he did it to teach a lesson to the others!

Showing him mercy is just stupid if you're only considering AC2 and becomes monumentally stupid if you consider AC:B, where, though Cesare takes over in the latter half (and takes your revenge away), he still causes trouble and arranges the problems for the assassins at first. This man orchestrated the death of innocents and is not only not repentant, but is fully ready to continue committing these atrocities once he gets away. Ezio also only shows this mercy in the last 10 minutes of the game, though they've continued with it in the next 2 games most of the time. Ezio didn't show mercy to the other templar characters within AC2 who were surely less guilty than Borgia. Ezio's character arc only comes into play in the last few missions of AC2; if they had spread it out more it might have been better. Even then, letting Borgia go seems like a mistake.

tdtdtdtd
12-10-2011, 01:36 PM
Received my white version of the Assassins Creed Encyclopedia yesterday and am half done with it. I must say, this is priceless as far as video games are concerned. The way ubisoft threw in the entire premise of AC into the history of our world was flawless, as was the various events over millennia for which the Templars and Assassins were responsible for. This is just great.

McFuggit
12-11-2011, 06:00 AM
I agree. They didn't put much effort into this one. AC2 and Brotherhood were much more playable. Revelations is crap in my opinion; such a garbage game. I was so hyped up for it too.

Windrius
12-11-2011, 07:49 AM
Originally posted by Six_Gun:
Past AC titles yes I would say are pretty well written.

LOL are you serious?
AC:B was THE WORSE AC title. The story simply sucked as hell.
AC:R was way better compared to AC:B, not as good as AC or AC2 tho. However I didn't like the start of AC:R, that kinda sucked.

tdtdtdtd
12-13-2011, 11:33 AM
What part of the story "sucked" exactly?

Six_Gun
12-13-2011, 04:33 PM
I have no qualms with AC2 or ACB, I just don't like the story in this one compared to those. There was better character development and missions where you got to know the characters both friendly and foe even whilst ON some missions.

This one has a lot of brief, often cheeky encounters, and very short linear missions, many of which are only there to add small pieces to the story vs having substantial objectives of their own. Yusif often sounds arrogant and disrespectful of Ezio's mentoring, actually implying he's doing more teaching than learning. I felt no sorrow when he died.

There's also more feeling of attachment to the optional goals of wealth building and even assassin recruiting/training in past titles. The story was written in such a way that you felt the trepidation of losing everything and having to start over after great family tragedy and escaping peril. Here you're pretty much thrust into a situation that involves little emotional attachment.

Even the relationships between new found friends was far more substantial, like that between Ezio and Rosa. Now much of this is because of the circumstances, after all Ezio was younger and more attractive to women back then, but now he seems overly cold and stand offish by comparison. I think they could have done better (as far as Ezio and Sophia) than numerous narrated letters to Claudia, a brief picnic encounter, a few vague discussions about each's work, and a brief desperate mission to save her after capture. AC2 and ACB's stories were more robust in every way. Some of the missions in ACR are just ridiculous, on rails cinematic fluff too, often nonsensical in their content, like the absurd parachute bit with the horse and carriage.

Of course these are matters of personal preference, but complaints of short, simple missions and less developed story and characters are fairly common opinions of the game. My only hope is that AC3, which appears to be the direction of the next installment, will be as good as the titles previous to ACR. I have my doubts though, because it's looking like they're going to write it around Desmond in modern times somewhere in northern Europe.

Ferrith
12-14-2011, 06:44 AM
I will agree on the brief encounters and the very short missions adding only fragments of the story part. However, Yusuf, despite being sound disrespectful, looks more the kind of an open-heart and cheerful guy than arrogant. I think Yusuf represents a different mentality than those we have encountered before, although under-developed.

As for Ezio, I liked how we were becoming aware of his thoughts through his letters to Claudia, but you are right: he was still overly cold and unexpectedly distanced, without the game giving a convincing reason /justification of his attitude. It is one thing to say "Ezio feels uncertain" and totally another to *show* his uncertainty through actions and deeds. Another case of under-developed character, in my opinion.

I also didn't like the face-lift in AC:R. Both Ezio and Altair have now oblong faces, which reminds me... of horses. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Six_Gun
12-14-2011, 01:48 PM
Originally posted by Ferrith:
However, Yusuf, despite being sound disrespectful, looks more the kind of an open-heart and cheerful guy than arrogant. I would describe him as more happy go lucky and at times very flippant and disrespectful. You don't see even young recruits acting this way, they have a very serious tone appropriate to the creed. When Yusif died the thought DID come to my mind that despite it being an understandable story element, it was expected given his overly jovial persona.

I agree about the face changes of Ezio and Altair. There was no reason to and it's one small part of what makes this title less attached to those that preceded it. Even Desmond's face was changed quite a bit. I also don't like the way they styled Yusif's appearance. The first thing that came to mind when I saw him was Prince of Persia, which was part of the reason I was put off by him.

value_zero
12-15-2011, 02:58 AM
Yusuf in real life:


http://i.fanpix.net/images/orig/r/u/rujbese4d2qzurb2.jpg

value_zero
12-15-2011, 03:00 AM
http://foto.kanald.com.tr/FotoGaleriler/Galeriler/2010/7/14/Galeri14720104887/106.jpg

Ferrith
12-15-2011, 06:10 AM
Originally posted by Six_Gun:
I would describe him as more happy go luck and at times very flippant and disrespectful. You don't see even young recruits acting this way, they have a very serious tone appropriate to the creed.

There. Let's give some credit to AC:R regarding the recruits: they behave as they should, whereas in AC:B they were acting stupid and indifferent whenever Ezio was visiting their hideout.

-- SPOILERS --


When Yusif died the thought DID come to my mind that despite it being an understandable story element, it was expected given his overly jovial persona.
For a moment I freezed and felt sad, but then I thought the same thing. He was reckless and probably over-confident.


I also don't like the way they styled Yusif's appearance. The first thing that came to mind when I saw him was Prince of Persia, which was part of the reason I was put off by him.
Ah.I was wondering about that but never made the connection with Prince of Persia. Of course I have only played the first title at a friend's, so I wouldn't know.

@value_zero
Yusuf's real life is inside AC:R. I don't know who is this guy you posted photos of. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

value_zero
12-15-2011, 06:53 AM
Ok, sorry then, lol this is yusuf out of the virtual world, i cant stop laughing over this.