PDA

View Full Version : Whats your favorite Assassin's Creed?



BrianSherwood
05-06-2011, 01:28 AM
What's your favorite Assassin's Creed?

BrianSherwood
05-06-2011, 01:28 AM
What's your favorite Assassin's Creed?

Xanatos2007
05-06-2011, 02:14 AM
AC1, and with the direction Ubisoft is taking the series it will always be AC1.

Keith.El
05-06-2011, 02:19 AM
I have yet to complete AC1 (I find it very repetitive - should I keep going though?)

I have voted for AC2 simply as it was the game to draw me into the series. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

L.Cie
05-06-2011, 02:35 AM
Assassin's Creed. It had that revolutionary feel to it, that it was a landmark of its time. The only think I've ever disliked about it was the unskippable dialogue, which I found rather tedious on my second and third playthroughs.

The art style was beautiful and realistic, the combat was great and challenging and, well, when I think of the Assassin's Creed brand the first thought to mind is Alta´r's escapades.

I liked Assassin's Creed II, but it lacked that certain feel, that realism, that rawness. It doesn't play good enough to match the look of the enviroments.
As great a game as it is, I can't say I found it utterly amazing like I did AC1. <STRIKE>Ezio is absoultely gorgeous, however. </STRIKE>Brotherhood will probably never be regarded by me as even an equal to AC2. I'll have to wait and see, though. Currently, I've shelved it in favour of Red Dead Redemption, Dragon Age Origins and II, and Tactics Ogre.

For me, the best game in the series is, hands down, Assassin's Creed.

eagleforlife1
05-06-2011, 02:53 AM
Assassin's Creed II storywise for me was perfect. I liked the way we got to travel to other cities without the extensive horse rides. Brotherhood had the best gameplay mechanics but I loved II.

persiateddy95
05-06-2011, 03:39 AM
I love both AC1 and 2 alot, but I'll go for AC2 because of its awesome epic music and character development with Ezio, it was amazing. Although in Brotherhood all of it was gone, so it's my least favourite.

AC1 is awesome because of both the story and Altair, a badass.
The chase theme was also pretty epic.

But still, I vote for AC2.

phil.llllll
05-06-2011, 04:03 AM
AC1 easily. Best story, best character, best art direction, and time period/levels were amazing - it had an atmosphere that the others just couldn't touch. Also the actual assassinations have yet to be topped.

AntiChrist7
05-06-2011, 04:40 AM
brotherhood: awesome multiplayer, more options (replay missions, VR), connectivity with PL.

ACI had great story, but very repetitive missions, and always have to sit through 5 minutes of cutscene when you replay

Colossus_1191
05-06-2011, 07:30 AM
AC1.

It had a deeper storyline and dialogue, where Altair starts to question his own actions and orders.

The investigations could have been more varied, but just having to do investigations alone makes it far more assassin like than with later games GTA style mission structure.

The combat is better. The guards are a little bit tougher. The Templars you come across are actually pretty good fighters too, and easily the best opponents in all of the games. That isn't to say the game still isn't easy, but it is definitely a bit more challenging than II and Brotherhood.

And quite frankly, the graphics are better. The pop-in is minimal in the first game , and it overall has a more gritty, realistic look to it.

iN3krO
05-06-2011, 07:50 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Colossus_1191:
AC1.

It had a deeper storyline and dialogue, where Altair starts to question his own actions and orders.

The investigations could have been more varied, but just having to do investigations alone makes it far more assassin like than with later games GTA style mission structure.

The combat is better. The guards are a little bit tougher. The Templars you come across are actually pretty good fighters too, and easily the best opponents in all of the games. That isn't to say the game still isn't easy, but it is definitely a bit more challenging than II and Brotherhood.

And quite frankly, the graphics are better. The pop-in is minimal in the first game , and it overall has a more gritty, realistic look to it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think a mixture of GTA Type missions and AC1 Type missions would be better... Plus, if they make guards strongers (papal guards are easy as hell to kill compared to Templars on ac1)...

Except that, i would say AC:B &gt; AC1 &gt; AC2...

Let's hope AC:R make it a bit more ac1 like :P

NORTHBOERN1
05-06-2011, 08:17 AM
I haven't played AC1 yet (but it's next on my list), but have enjoyed the other 2 a ton!. I wish they had varying levels of difficulty...they're way to easy in my opinion.

I approach AC:B like the end chapter of AC:II, not a seperate game, and AC:B makes more sense...than as a stand alone game. I've got a feeling AC:1 is going to be great.

Requiscent
05-06-2011, 08:24 AM
I would have to say AC II, it just made love the series much more. Note that I still loved AC I, but II is what sold me for sure on the series. Brotherhood was okay, its on par with I for me.

LadyGahan2010
05-06-2011, 08:32 AM
AC1 was rigid and repetitive... Maybe I'm missing something but it seems to me a mission can be done only in ONE way.
Voted for AC2 although it misses replaying main missions from DNA. Brotherhood follows very closely after AC2 because of the MP.

phil.llllll
05-06-2011, 09:16 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LadyGahan2010:
Maybe I'm missing something but it seems to me a mission can be done only in ONE way.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'd say you missed a lot. Most assassinations can be done in any way you want (e.g. use stealth, go high profile but risk having to chase your target down, etc...).

itsamea-mario
05-06-2011, 09:48 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by eagleforlife1:
Assassin's Creed II storywise for me was perfect. I liked the way we got to travel to other cities without the extensive horse rides. Brotherhood had the best gameplay mechanics but I loved II. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You only had to do that once for each city, and you know, if you ever got of your horse and looked around you'd find some pretty cool stuff.
One of the things i disliked about AC2 was the abcense of a central area, e.g, the kingdom in AC1.
@ladygahan, no in AC2 there was only one way to do a mission, with most missions, no matter what you did previously, it would end in a fight or a chase.
In AC1 you could do missions however you wanted, stealth, combat, or just run in and stab 'em.

AC1 felt far more solid, there may have been less of it, but it stuck together well. AC2 felt 'loose' and brotherhood just felt like slightly worse AC2.
I didn't find AC1 that repetitive, but i did find AC2 to be very linear, (then again i suppose it's supposed to be.

As for story, yeah AC2 was good, very generic, but good.
AC1 however was much better IMO, if you thought it wasn't then that just means you don't like using your brain. or you really like italians.

AC2 was still amazing though.

Then again i am playing AC1 right now, so maybe a bit biased.

Xanatos2007
05-06-2011, 10:21 AM
I didn't really notice AC1's repetition until everybody pointed it out, because if you think about it a lot of games are quite repetitive. The majority of action games (which make up the majority of games) involve you walking into an area, enemies spawn, and you kill them.

iN3krO
05-06-2011, 12:40 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Xanatos2007:
I didn't really notice AC1's repetition until everybody pointed it out, because if you think about it a lot of games are quite repetitive. The majority of action games (which make up the majority of games) involve you walking into an area, enemies spawn, and you kill them. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

But the reason you kill them are changing (ac2) while in ac1 you got 4 types of missions and that's all.... i still prefer ac1 but ac2/b wasn't bad at all..

xCr0wnedNorris
05-06-2011, 12:55 PM
My vote went to AC:B mostly for the multiplayer. The story in AC:B was alright, but the character development wasn't as good as the previous games, and especailly not as good as AC2. Although the gameplay aspects in Brotherhood were phenominal in my opinion, and I really liked the addition of Virtual Training.

By the way, welcome to the Forums OP! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

LadyGahan2010
05-06-2011, 01:05 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by phil.llllll:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LadyGahan2010:
Maybe I'm missing something but it seems to me a mission can be done only in ONE way.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'd say you missed a lot. Most assassinations can be done in any way you want (e.g. use stealth, go high profile but risk having to chase your target down, etc...). </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, I did try, twice... Since PSN is down (still) and am going through it for the 3rd time, I'll make some effort again http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/sadeyes.gif

TorQue1988
05-06-2011, 01:10 PM
Assassins Creed 2 had the best story and better gameplay that the first one,Assassin's Creed Brotherhood had the best gameplay features but shorter story,and Assassin's Creed 1 had a good story but mediocre and repetitive gameplay...so the best one so far was Assassin's Creed 2.

lilbacchant
05-06-2011, 01:12 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by phil.llllll:
AC1 easily. Best story, best character, best art direction, and time period/levels were amazing - it had an atmosphere that the others just couldn't touch. Also the actual assassinations have yet to be topped. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's EXACTLY* what I was gonna say. Thanks for stealing my thunder, Phil.

*[Just with substantially less eloquence.]

Skaevola
05-06-2011, 01:31 PM
AC:B. The huge improvements in combat, the new horsey system, the economy, the Da Vinci missions, and the Brotherhood management push it way over the top for me.

AC1 had so much more variety in assassinations because assassinations were ALL you did, and leading up to the physical kill, all the assassinations were extremely repetitive. It may have been a different case if, in order to succeed, it was practically required to formulate a plan. But there was really no need. If I went in guns blazing, I'd get the assassination. If I sneaked past the guards, I'd get the assassination. If I spent an hour mapping the area and carefully reading through the clues I'd collected, then methodically removing archers before I killed the leader and escaped without alerting anyone, I'd get the assassination, but I'm just making work for myself. By the end of the game (on my first playthrough... AC is one of only two games for which I've gotten every achievement), I found myself just walking in, killing the guy, and running out so I could move on to the next assassination. IMO, the "variety" in the assassinations in AC1 translates to "no matter what you do, you can't screw it up". The linearity of AC2 and AC:B assassinations provided some challenge.

And, like I said, the assassinations were all the game had. AC2 has optional missions, guild-related mini games, a functional economy, hidden treasures, and a little town to micro-manage as you progress through the years. AC:B added even more, with the Brotherhood, the training mode, the Da Vinci missions, the extra challenge modes for every mission, and an entire city to rebuild and upgrade. Not to mention the expanded Desmond scenes, which were totally awesome. And multiplayer. MULTIPLAYER! AC:B really had it all. So I voted for it.

crash3
05-06-2011, 02:28 PM
if ubisoft continue to make the same rate improvements to gameplay and graphics at the same time then ACR will be my favourite!

Valaquen_
05-06-2011, 11:27 PM
I don't think I can choose.

AC1 was the first instalment I played, I remember watching the trailers for it before release. I'm not sure how much nostalgia is playing with me, but I remember a very smooth, adult gaming experience that was very atmospheric. The characters were great, the switching between time periods great, but the story a little derivative [I knew after my first or second kill that the guys I was killing weren't black-and-white evil and that Al Mualim was a trickster], but I got a real kick out of how similar the game was story-wise to Blood Omen: Legacy of Kain and Altair's development [conveyed through Malik's dialogue of him, it seems] was great. I would've killed for some pre-rendered, cinematic cutscenes though, and some PS3 trophy support http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

AC2 improved on AC1's deficits, really gave a time-spanning story, and was all round better mechanically, though I missed Altair severely and the Middle-East. It lacked the gloomy atmosphere of the first game.

Brotherhood was AC2 with fixed mechanics but with stripped down story. A real shame on the story front, as I thought they hit the nail on the head with the second game. The story itself was sound but the presentation lacklustre - so many events were relayed in a summary fashion and the actual Brotherhood itself was underutilised. I really expected a showdown ala the cinematic intro. A shame there, but gameplay wise, it's a real joy. I don't find myself just walking and enjoying the scenery like I did in the original game though - but, several of the scenes with Desmond seeing Ezio in the 2012 period Monteriggioni really struck a chord.

Heck, I love 'em all.

xsatanicjokerx
05-06-2011, 11:53 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">
I liked Assassin's Creed II, but it lacked that certain feel, that realism, that rawness. It doesn't play good enough to match the look of the enviroments.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>
This.
Altair had intence intelligence that Ezio could never rival.

eagleforlife1
05-07-2011, 01:08 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by xsatanicjokerx:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">
I liked Assassin's Creed II, but it lacked that certain feel, that realism, that rawness. It doesn't play good enough to match the look of the enviroments.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>
This.
Altair had intence intelligence that Ezio could never rival. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Except the question didn't ask who's more intelligent.

Oatkeeper
05-07-2011, 07:39 PM
AC1, i would explain but others have already said said the general stuff and Im tired of repeating it in thread after thread.

So instead ill link you to an amazing article about it:
http://www.gamasutra.com/blogs...nd_its_Aftermath.php (http://www.gamasutra.com/blogs/MatthewLoPresti/20101217/6470/Assassins_Creed_The_Failed_Hashshashin_Simulator_a nd_its_Aftermath.php)

IIwangcarsII
05-07-2011, 08:19 PM
The first assassins creed game, and my first game on my xbox was AC2. So I was astounded at how brilliant the game was! Then I got intrigued and bought the first one after I completed AC2, I enjoyed it don't get me wrong, but assassins creed 2 was the best for me! Brotherhood was just assassins creed 2 with multiplayer and I got incredibly bored of Rome! So I'm hoping Revelations will be my favourite and then AC3 when it eventually comes ouT! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif AC FTW!

rain89c
05-07-2011, 08:41 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Xanatos2007:
AC1, and with the direction Ubisoft is taking the series it will always be AC1. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Agreed.
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by L.Cie:
Assassin's Creed. It had that revolutionary feel to it, that it was a landmark of its time. The only think I've ever disliked about it was the unskippable dialogue, which I found rather tedious on my second and third playthroughs.

The art style was beautiful and realistic, the combat was great and challenging and, well, when I think of the Assassin's Creed brand the first thought to mind is Alta´r's escapades.

I liked Assassin's Creed II, but it lacked that certain feel, that realism, that rawness. It doesn't play good enough to match the look of the enviroments.
As great a game as it is, I can't say I found it utterly amazing like I did AC1. <STRIKE>Ezio is absoultely gorgeous, however. </STRIKE>Brotherhood will probably never be regarded by me as even an equal to AC2. I'll have to wait and see, though. Currently, I've shelved it in favour of Red Dead Redemption, Dragon Age Origins and II, and Tactics Ogre.

For me, the best game in the series is, hands down, Assassin's Creed. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Agreed.

gamertam
05-07-2011, 10:02 PM
So far the poll is at 21 apiece AC1 and AC2.

I am voting for AC2. Clearly, it's everything AC1 had to offered and had expanded beyond anyone (gamers&fans) expectation. I've said it before and again i'll say it again: AC2 should've been Game of The Year. If anyone who not convinced, please go play AC2. No question ask, nor an answer will provided.

On top of that, the soundtracks is bar none.

It's a game at it's peek pinnacle, which future AC titles will be mirror off of or should be. My only regret still this day is, i missed the opportunity to own the collector's edition.

Fedeaf
05-07-2011, 10:24 PM
AC1. Its the beginning of Assassin's Creed series and Altair is(for me) the best chararcter in the games.

iBoba
05-07-2011, 11:16 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BrianSherwood:
What's your favorite Assassin's Creed? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
What the **** AC1? that game just gives the starting line while AC2 runs the race and BROTHERHOOD WINS the race...

DavidPV86
05-08-2011, 01:05 AM
AC1 had the most interesting setting ever done in the series so far, that includes atmosphere, soldiers and templars, however the missions were BORING AND REPETITIVE and besides the free roaming, I only "replay" the last 2 sequences, which I find AWESOME by the way.

AC2 improved A LOT the gameplay,diversity of missions, assassins tombs, templar lairs, also provided interesting info about landmarks and targets, which really set the game in a realistic mode AC1 sometimes did not have, but at the same time, also lacked the raw feeling of the previous one and the option of replay the main story, oh!! and Secuence 14 is inferior to Arsuf/Masyaf and Viana by the way.

ACB is feels like a rushed expansion, for example, the depiction given to Rome PALES in comparison to that of Florence and Venice, the landmarks appear to be "unfinished" and considering that we only play ONE city, the free roaming experience is much inferior to AC2 and even AC1, I hope does not happen again with Constantinople/Istanbul.

It┤s pretty good to replay memories and killing the targets as much as you want, but the problem is that story is not very good either, I think the developers focused more on multiplayer and side missions that on the main story and thats a huge con. But not everything is "bad" in this game, all the "machine" missions are pretty good actually, the combat is improved and the killings are awesome.


So among the 3, AC2 is the one I have played the most, but if I have to make the perfect AC, I would choose Altair, the Crusades and all the variety of missions of the last two.

phil.llllll
05-08-2011, 05:33 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Oatkeeper:
AC1, i would explain but others have already said said the general stuff and Im tired of repeating it in thread after thread.

So instead ill link you to an amazing article about it:
http://www.gamasutra.com/blogs...nd_its_Aftermath.php (http://www.gamasutra.com/blogs/MatthewLoPresti/20101217/6470/Assassins_Creed_The_Failed_Hashshashin_Simulator_a nd_its_Aftermath.php) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I like the article and it raised some interesting points, however, I don't know how he came to the conclusion that it failed. It failed neither commercially (it was a huge and continued success, selling over 8 or 9 million last time I heard) nor critically (it has an 80 something on metacritic and had several 90+ scores from a lot of the biggest gaming sites).

ChaosxNetwork
05-08-2011, 05:52 AM
ACI,
Everyone says about graphics and repetitiveness, but it was the first in the series. It is what made Assassin's Creed a franchise. The story was great, Altair was amazing, the "Eagle" was an actual symbol (one that was lost in the next to games). The way you could chose to kill your targets was different, planing of the kill, searching for clues, no overpowered fight system (I prefer the new fight system by far! but the difficulty needs to be vastly increased) More running from fights/less mass killing of innocent guards (People just trying to feed their families)
I would love to go on.
If Revelations is a compilation of all the games we are set. If Revelations adds a lot of new stuff (Which I think it will) then it will be another (Like Brotherhood) test for the supernova that will be ACIII

itsamea-mario
05-08-2011, 08:15 AM
You know what's boring and repetitive, people who keep saying it's boring and repetitive.

At first AC2 had a great story, then it sort of descends into a stringy mess, alot of the animations were poorely done and it didn't feel 'real'.

The story of AC1 was solid and it had a philosophical element that AC2 couldn't touch (apart from the parts refering to altair)
The animations weren't buggy, people and faces looked more realistic. Combat felt more intense, brutal, not just the moves but the way the game presented them such as the way the blood worked, In AC1 there was a sort of cloud of blood which looked cool, in AC2 there was a dodgy squirting red thing. also the sound affects, the sound of steel entering flesh, rather than the metallic sounds of AC2.
Don't care what you say AC1's graphics were more realistic, and landscapes looked (to use a word i rarely do) beutiful.
Not only that AC1 was 1000x times better at creating an atmosphere, walk around the streets of damascus, merchants, pots and other things lying around on the floor, you can hear people going on with their lives the general hum of the people, the sound of things falling to the floor, the calm music playing, not to mention the definition of shadow and the colour.

AC2's streets are bare and the people are all the same.

AC2 is still one of the best games out there though, and ACB is alright.

Oatkeeper
05-08-2011, 09:56 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by phil.llllll:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Oatkeeper:
AC1, i would explain but others have already said said the general stuff and Im tired of repeating it in thread after thread.

So instead ill link you to an amazing article about it:
http://www.gamasutra.com/blogs...nd_its_Aftermath.php (http://www.gamasutra.com/blogs/MatthewLoPresti/20101217/6470/Assassins_Creed_The_Failed_Hashshashin_Simulator_a nd_its_Aftermath.php) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I like the article and it raised some interesting points, however, I don't know how he came to the conclusion that it failed. It failed neither commercially (it was a huge and continued success, selling over 8 or 9 million last time I heard) nor critically (it has an 80 something on metacritic and had several 90+ scores from a lot of the biggest gaming sites). </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

He didnt really say it failed commercially, so much as it divide people who liked it and didnt. As he said, all those copies of AC1 where in fact sold. And Ubi could not afford to make the same mistakes that divided people on AC1. But Ubisoft took the wrong approach in thinking AC2 needed to be more mainstream, at least in the ways they took it.

I would never say AC2 was a bad game, but it lacked a lot of the elements that made AC1 so compelling despite its flaws.

phil.llllll
05-08-2011, 10:05 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Oatkeeper:
He didnt reallly say it failed commercially, so much as it did Critically. As he said, all those copies of AC1 where in fact sold. And Ubi could not aford to make the same mistakes. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well that was sort of my point; it didn't fail critically either (unless a metacritic under 90 is considered a failure).

Even on forums I still see a lot more love for the game than I do hate - as proved by this thread.

Oh and one point I did like in the article is where he says to play with the hud off - very immersive and forces the player to pay attention and notice elements of their surroundings.


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Oatkeeper:
But Ubisoft took the wrong approach in thinking AC2 needed to be more mainstream, at least in the ways they took it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Completely agreed. If anything I wanted to see them improve the idea of the first (which regardless of whether people liked the game or not, it was an awesome idea) not ditch it and go for GTA.


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Oatkeeper:
I would never say AC2 was a bad game, but it lacked a lot of the elements that made AC1 so compelling despite its flaws. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Agreed again.

Oatkeeper
05-08-2011, 10:37 AM
I actually edited my post to something more along the lines that it split players more than critics. And I agree that a 90 Metacritic is good (though Metacritic itself is not always the best source for general opinions). But when Im at work and talk about AC, I get a lot of people tell me the first game was boring.

Im still waiting for the game that combines the good elements from all the games.

NORTHBOERN1
05-11-2011, 07:45 AM
I've been playing AC1 this week (after finishing II and ACB), and I'd have to say so far it's lacking a fun factor the 2nd two games have. Maybe if the combat mechanics improve as I progress in the game.

But for me this was the same thing as the POP series. The latest game was the first one I played, and is my favorite compared to the #1 game voted by the forum members, POP 2008.

Bruno_Berg
05-13-2011, 12:16 PM
Tough question. AC1 had the deep, great dialogues but other than that it wasn't too great. AC2 did everything a lot better and it's what really made me a huge fan of the series. AC:B improved the gameplay but lacked the story of the second game, so for me it's a tie between the second and third game.

GallopRider
05-13-2011, 12:56 PM
AC1 was alright. I see it as a nostalgic experience, but not my favourite of the series. Although, Altair had the whole "strong and silent type" down pat, which just makes him more bada$$. But the mini-quests were very repetitive...and there were a LOT of 'em. And the guards/soldiers in the widerness... don't get me started. The dialogues between Al Mualim and Altair are probably my favourite parts of the game, and the parts I remember the most. Al Mualim had some good wisdom...

I really loved AC2. The story (both Renaissance and Modern-day) captured my heart, the music is phenomenal, and of course there's Leonardo da Vinci! The characters made the story. Little Petruccio, Federico, Rosa, Catarina Sforza, and the other Assassins. I cried when Ezio's brothers and father died. I loved the Carnevale and all the beautiful cities(although the canals of Venice drove me nuts trying to find a way around them) you could travel to. And I have yet to behold a more beautiful videogame scene/vista as those you see while riding through the Apennine Mountains [spellcheck?]. And of course, our handsome main character has a *****y personality. Seriously, when was the last time you saw a videogame character roll their eyes at an NPC's comment?

Brotherhood did good for the combat. You can tell Ezio has matured and honed his skills. But the story (Aside from the Christina missions. Those are on par with AC2 as far as emotion goes.) is lacking somewhat. Now I'm not bashing, but I just don't see how you can top the story in AC2. On the other hand, the modern-day story (once it got going) was exciting; a real cliffhanger.

I look forward to seeing what Revelations brings to the table.

vorenus73
05-13-2011, 01:58 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by TorQue1988:
Assassins Creed 2 had the best story and better gameplay that the first one,Assassin's Creed Brotherhood had the best gameplay features but shorter story,and Assassin's Creed 1 had a good story but mediocre and repetitive gameplay...so the best one so far was Assassin's Creed 2. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>my thoughts exactly.

SixKeys
05-13-2011, 01:58 PM
I have beat AC1 five or six times. I keep coming back to it because of the atmosphere. I like how the music isn't constantly present, sometimes it stops for long stretches of time and you can just listen to all the different sounds of the city; merchants' calls, citizens in distress calling for help, an eastern flute playing in the distance, general crowd noise.... As much as I love the soundtracks to all the games, I miss hearing all those sounds that made the city feel more alive. Turning down the music volume in the sequels doesn't have the same effect as the sound is generally worse than in AC1. If I'm up on the roof, I don't hear the crowds talking below.

I also agree what other people have said about the gritty, realistic feel of AC1 compared to the others. It may not have been quite as varied or colorful as the sequels, but it was the one with the best atmosphere. Combat was also more challenging since the enemies could counter you and you only got a few weapons in the entire game.

AC1 will always be special to me. However, purely based on how much worth you get for your money, I have to say ACB is the best game in the franchise so far. You've got Desmond exploring the modern world, Ezio in Rome, virtual training, Lairs of Romulus, Templar agents, guild challenges, 100% sync completion, renovating landmarks, Cristina missions, glyph puzzles, Borgia towers, flags and feathers, assassin training, contracts, Leonardo's machines AND multiplayer. I don't get why so many people complain about ACB being short. It took me one dedicated week of gaming to complete AC2, it was just too easy. Completing ACB took me longer than either of the previous titles combined, and I'm still working on getting 100% sync and some virtual training medals. Maybe it feels short if you only concentrate on the main missions, but I had my hands full running around the map doing side missions. Add to that improved graphics, stealth elements, cut scenes and slightly more challenging enemies (even if the toughest ones still don't come close to the Templars in AC1).

I voted for AC1 because it's my favorite in the series, but on the whole ACB is the best game.

Grandmaster_Z
05-13-2011, 02:08 PM
i think i played through AC1 like 5 or 6 times also, lol

PhiIs1618033
05-13-2011, 03:54 PM
Definitely AC1. I take the HUD off and go be a badass assassin.

Why AC1? Immersion. AC1 is the only game where I actually prefer to walk through the city, in order to avoid arousing suspicion. Neither AC2 nor ACB provides that immersive experience. They really feel like going from mission to mission, almost like watching a movie. In AC1 (without the HUD), you spend a lot more time searching for clues (especially if you want to get all of them), but having gone through so much effort and then performing a perfect kill and escape feels so satisfying. You feel that you've actually accomplished something.
The feel AC1 gives is better as well, with the sounds, the gritty realistic style and the music that's there sometimes and sometimes not. The cities feel alive, unlike AC2 and AC:B where you really notice that it's a computer-modelled world.

On overall narrative, AC1 is definitely the best. It was a philosophical, deep narrative, not shallow at all. There were twists you just didn't expect. The narrative was delivered not only through dialogue, but also through gameplay. Rising through the ranks, you gained more abilities. Great job. The dialogue itself was awesome, well voiced. I didn't mind Alta´r's accent, it set him apart. Besides, his Arabic sounded pretty good. AC2's story was nice, but it felt so generic, shallow. There is no mention whatsoever about the meaning of the Creed. It's become some pretty words now. Also, what the Leap of Faith means. It has this deep poetic meaning, explored in AC1, yet Ezio never has even thought about it, it seems. He just jumps down in a haystack. Anyone of you have seen the movie Primer? Now that is an awesome movie to me. It's a pretty niche film. We can compare this to AC1's story. If we then take AC2's story, we get our generic Hollywood blockbuster. Nice, but not so satisfyingly awesome. AC:B had a pretty good storyline (especially the traitor part), but it really lacked narrative delivery and that just blew it. It was more like a not-so-good 15 hour long movie than a video game.
Also, the conversations in the memory corridor. They were awesome, really made you think about the game if you listened to them. What the targets said revealed a lot about them and the Templar side of things. In AC2, they became more bland, too short. Ezio is just busy asking questions and the characters point of view gets cut short. There is no place for the Templar side of things. It feels black and white. In AC:B they were crap. Pure crap. Seriously, Ubi, if you're going to do it that way from now on, just stop. Don't do it. It's horrible. No narrative delivery at all, no nothing. Just an old man saying 'Requiescat in pace' and maybe some more words. Yawn.

On game elements, AC1 wins just purely by just delivering the narrative of the game in a sandbox-setting. True sandbox, where you complete tasks in any order, in any way you see fit. You learn what you have to do, what you can do, before actually doing it. You get to explore the locations, prepare, analyze and all that jazz. AC1 delivers the narrative. Nothing more. AC2 and AC:B feel so cluttered with all these side-missions, renovations and other crap. I'm a completionist, so I do it anyway, but it is a boring task. Satisfaction only comes from completion, knowing that everything is done now.
Also, AC2 and AC:B don't really feel sandbox to me anymore. The only time you really get to choose (not blindly taking an option, but actually having knowledge beforehand) is when going from one marker to another. In the mission itself, you're forced on a linear path towards the end. The only choices you make is where you climb up the building, not much different from the choice of a certain cover spot in Gears of War.

On gameplay mechanics, still AC1. I like simple things that pack a lot of power. There are merely four weapons, but already the hidden blade on its own has a myriad of options. Then there's the sword, which has it's place in all combat, the shortblade which is interesting because it's coupled with throwing knives and the fists because sometimes you're just not going to kill (immediately). In AC2 and AC:B, there's a complete arsenal, but the full weapon weel doesn't feel the sameway the four weapons from AC1 did. You really got to know the weapons in that game. In the others, you are drowned by the total number of swords, daggers and all that. The differences between weapons are barely noticable (I've never noticed any difference between a shortblade and a sword in the last two games) and the hidden blades have become just like swords, just with more counter ability. In AC1, the hidden blade was a different class of weapon altogether: very deadly, but also very difficult to wield.

The game mechanics have hardly improved. Not that that was necessary, AC1's mechanics are great. Freerunning? The venetian climbing jump is and never will be realistic. Neither will the spidey-climb Ezio does. Alta´r's climbing feels skilled, but not unrealistic. Yes he's slow, but I don't think many people will be able to scale a wall that fast. It's still an effort, you know. AC2 and AC:B have this effortless climbing that makes Ezio feel like he's flying instead of climbing. I'm not too sure on the idea of ziplines for AC:R. Let's see how that packs out. Then there's the combat mechanics. Fighting was a challenge in AC1 and not even remotely difficult in AC2 and AC:B. For AC2, just hold RT/R2 and press X/Square at the right time. Not to mention the counter window's grown, so that has become easier as well. In AC1, guards could break your defense and actually act upon that. For me, they don't seem to take longer to attack than AC:B's guards, who were advertised as more aggressive. In AC:B, you just perform one counter, then you can just bash X/Square while pointing the directional stick in any direction. Guaranteed kills, just make sure to pull RT/R2 at the right time if someone attacks you. This allows you to power through millions of guards in very little time. More than ten guards should be enough to kill anyone, no matter how skilled. They all just attack at the same time and you're dead. I much prefer the freerunning and combat of the first game. It also helps that, somehow, my reflexes are better aligned to the first game.

Finally, to the guy that said that the assassinations in AC1 felt repetitive: I don't know, but I hate botching an assassination and having to chase down my target or to fight him. At least I get to fix my own mess. In AC2 and AC:B, you don't even have to sort out your own mess, as if you were a toddler. You either desynchronize or you get a scripted assassination, both of which break immersion.


Man, this is one long-*** post. I think I've covered most of what I wanted to say.

cptn_k
05-13-2011, 04:45 PM
AC1.

Mainly because it's so damn gorgeous.
Love the detail in the maps, completely immersive, and it was so original.
Only thing that let it down was the repetition of the game play.

However, I would LOVE the style of maps and cities from AC1 together with the mechanics (especially MP) of ACB, and a story line like AC2, which I found engrossing.

I live in hope...

phil.llllll
05-13-2011, 05:48 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by PhiIs1618033...:
Definitely AC1. I take the HUD off and go be a badass assassin.

Why AC1? Immersion. AC1 is the only game where I actually prefer to walk through the city, in order to avoid arousing suspicion. Neither AC2 nor ACB provides that immersive experience. They really feel like going from mission to mission, almost like watching a movie. In AC1 (without the HUD), you spend a lot more time searching for clues (especially if you want to get all of them), but having gone through so much effort and then performing a perfect kill and escape feels so satisfying. You feel that you've actually accomplished something.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The game really is so much better without the hud (Oathkeeper posted a link a page back on with some thoughts on the subject). Without it, there's definitely a better sense of the practical, both in the mechanics and Altair's abilities. Viewpoints actually become necessary, not just to gain a quick five second view of some nice scenery but to actually spot investigations and citizens (this is were real use of eagle vision actually comes into play).

Not only that but it also forces the player to actually listen to the bureau leader's advice, and subsequently put it to good use.

In AC1 I actually felt like an assassin (a hunter hunting his prey). All that is gone in AC2/B replaced by go here markers and scripted sequences. What's even worse is that eagle vision is further set back instead of evolved, really only being useful to spot feathers or flags.

And I definitely agree about the perfect kills. Putting the information found to use (e.g. finding the perfect path to take or where to slip in from) and then going and getting the perfect air-to-assassinate on the target was extremely satisfying.

Excellent post overall by the way (pretty much echoes my sentiments exactly). http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

NoCrowdedSky
05-13-2011, 06:18 PM
I think everyone is getting at here is that they like the realism of Ac1 which made if feel like you were an assassin, they need to implament this into Acr

iN3krO
05-13-2011, 06:24 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by phil.llllll:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by PhiIs1618033...:
Definitely AC1. I take the HUD off and go be a badass assassin.

Why AC1? Immersion. AC1 is the only game where I actually prefer to walk through the city, in order to avoid arousing suspicion. Neither AC2 nor ACB provides that immersive experience. They really feel like going from mission to mission, almost like watching a movie. In AC1 (without the HUD), you spend a lot more time searching for clues (especially if you want to get all of them), but having gone through so much effort and then performing a perfect kill and escape feels so satisfying. You feel that you've actually accomplished something.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The game really is so much better without the hud (Oathkeeper posted a link a page back on with some thoughts on the subject). Without it, there's definitely a better sense of the practical, both in the mechanics and Altair's abilities. Viewpoints actually become necessary, not just to gain a quick five second view of some nice scenery but to actually spot investigations and citizens (this is were real use of eagle vision actually comes into play).

Not only that but it also forces the player to actually listen to the bureau leader's advice, and subsequently put it to good use.

In AC1 I actually felt like an assassin (a hunter hunting his prey). All that is gone in AC2/B replaced by go here markers and scripted sequences. What's even worse is that eagle vision is further set back instead of evolved, really only being useful to spot feathers or flags.

And I definitely agree about the perfect kills. Putting the information found to use (e.g. finding the perfect path to take or where to slip in from) and then going and getting the perfect air-to-assassinate on the target was extremely satisfying.

Excellent post overall by the way (pretty much echoes my sentiments exactly). http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You agree with me but you ignore my suggestions.. how would i be? -.-''

CanterburyTales
05-13-2011, 08:53 PM
Brotherhood is my favorite, although I do have reservations about the Rifts - not the puzzles themselves, but rather their content (they come off as hypocritical due to being anti-capitalistic in a product whose purpose is to make make a profit for the guys making it); but that's a topic for another discussion (one called "the irony of this series"). Still, I like Brotherhood for its story and gameplay.

Azugo
05-13-2011, 10:57 PM
Gameplay-wise? Brotherhood.

Story-wise? AC1.

Overall? AC2.

PhiIs1618033
05-14-2011, 03:04 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by daniel_gervide:
You agree with me but you ignore my suggestions.. how would i be? -.-'' </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Your suggestions aren't exactly what I want the game to be, there's much more to it than that. Also, your spelling is absolutely atrocious. Even though you're probably not, it comes across as dumb. If the grammar and all that isn't good, the point doesn't come across as well. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif
That's why I haven't been reposting your suggestions.

AA--92
05-14-2011, 03:49 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Azugo:
Gameplay-wise? Brotherhood.

Story-wise? AC1.

Overall? AC2. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

BeCk41
05-14-2011, 04:11 AM
Brotherhood Definately has me hooked on the series, it's clearer, offers more variety, different types of missions, etc. To me, Brotherhood wins! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

CFord664
05-14-2011, 03:46 PM
ACI.

Creed I had the original concept, the artistic style was unique, different, and injected originality into the era. (Also, Altair's robes didn't scream the Assassin logo everywhere like II or Brotherhood, but you knew it was an Assassin).

Creed I also spawned the subculture that's developing around Creed. That alone wins it major points.

Also, the environment felt more realistic...

payrob07
05-14-2011, 04:05 PM
The problem I had with AC1 was that I played it after ACII. Therefore I thought it sucked. I thought the visuals were bad and the story went all SCI-FI on us in the end.

ACII was the best for me. The details of the cities, and the people actually had faces. The story was more realistic, yes even the gods felt more real than the zombie like people in the end. Ezio felt like a human, not some monominded killer. He had a story that was more like an epic tale. He is easily connectable for us, we've all lost people close to us, we've all had to get up off the ground after losing a lover... Altair was just kinda.. meh.

Brotherhood sucked on many levels. Mainly how you were stuck in Rome and it really got boring running in circles. The gameplay was better though.

phil.llllll
05-14-2011, 05:30 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by payrob07:
I thought the visuals were bad and the story went all SCI-FI on us in the end. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It was all sci-fi from the beginning. Plus AC2 went way further with that than the first did, so I'm not sure how that would be a negative if you liked the second.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by payrob07:
and the people actually had faces. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The people in the first didn't have faces? I'm not sure what you're getting at here.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by payrob07:
He is easily connectable for us, </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Speak for yourself. I barely felt any connection to him at all.

AMuppetMatt
05-15-2011, 07:23 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Xanatos2007:
AC1, and with the direction Ubisoft is taking the series it will always be AC1. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


The first response to the thread and I'm quoting you. I'm not even going to bother reading the next two pages.
Other than the repetitiveness it is the best AC game by miles. Should have just focussed on improving graphics, blending ability and fix the repetitiveness with AC2 and Brotherhood instead of doing all the extra cr@p they put in http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif



EDIT: @PhiIs1618033...
You are spot on with that mate, couldn't have put it better myself

yly3
05-15-2011, 08:39 AM
AC1 because it was a work of art. Do not mistake it with a game being a work of art. But a work of art transcended in a game, while AC2 was "just" a very artistic game.


AC1 is about an experience, atmosphere. And when I hear those people complaining about not being able to skip conversations in AC1, they already didn't get the game. I did not feel it repetitive not one single time because I was so soaked in it. And yes, it was harder.

I also like AC2 because it's a cool game with a great story, a great game story, not a standalone unique work of art like AC1 is.

AC1 = a universe of its own, not meant to please the hardcore gamer. IMHO. Peace

an-assassin
05-16-2011, 07:49 AM
My favorite is AC: II. AC 1 comes after and the worst was brotherhood. AC: II and AC 1 was both amazing and AC:B where just "good." Which means it was a bit of a disapointment.

ShotintheButt5
05-20-2011, 12:50 PM
ac1: had the best story and main character

AC2: is my vote... i love this game, I played this like no tomorrow.. I loved everything about it.. story characters, graphics, gameplay etc...

AC-B: I love the gameplay but that's where it ends....this game was really glitchy.. had way to many following people missions, those machine missions just sucked due to bad controls. The MP was awful, bland and boring... and why is it in AC2 there are 14 sequences but in AC-b there are 9.... I swear the MP is the reason the story wasn't better and more spread out evenly (like AC2). The camera wasn't that good ..All those thing u claim they fixed must of been small cuz majority of issues i had in 2 i still have in Brotherhood

NORTHBOERN1
05-20-2011, 12:59 PM
I just finished AC1 after playing the other 2, and by far it's my least favorite. I'm actually wondering if I missed something, but I think it comes down the the sequence you play the games.

Turkiye96
05-20-2011, 01:02 PM
that question is too hard. each game has something better that the other. thats why Relelations is gona be awesome ( because is puts them all together) AC1 hod the coolest character AC2 had the best story and a bunch of locations ACB had more options with the whole game including traveling, fighting and even how u wanted to do the missions.

iN3krO
05-20-2011, 01:08 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Keith.El:
I have yet to complete AC1 (I find it very repetitive - should I keep going though?)

I have voted for AC2 simply as it was the game to draw me into the series. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Though mini missions are repetitive, main missions are much better than ac2 and brotherhood and you should pay attention in every word said in the dialogues they are really important http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Telabir
05-20-2011, 01:16 PM
AC1 was brilliant in its historical realism and difficulty. The emphasis on stealth and hiding was superb and seems to be missing from the other games. I liked the philisophical aspect and the evolution of Altair was well thought out, if a little forced.

For me AC2 was the most beautiful game and the characters were perfect. The improvement in acrobatics and diversity of play was very well appreciated. I also love the idea of a game running through a detailed 23 years of a persons life, giving them proper time to develop as a character. I felt it was missing something combat-wise though, as well as the lack of replays being somewhat frustrating.

ACB wasn't so much a serious game to me as it was a series of ideas Ubisoft strung together to see what works. Although the new combat and acrobatic systems were excellent for a time until they became repetative. The recruits were a stroke of genius and partially made up for the lack of storyline (the instances with Machievelli excluded). I adore the setting of the game, as well as certain merges from both AC1 and AC2, although the game wasn't as thought out as it could be.

My favourite has to be AC1, most likely as it was what drew me to the series. Hopefully ACR will combine the best bits of all three to create something awesome, which will hopefully be surpassed by an even more awesome AC3.