PDA

View Full Version : Wow.2012 was the year of Assassins....read to know why...



salman147
01-08-2014, 06:12 PM
Assassins Creed 3 was released.Hitman Absolution was released.Dishonored was released and even Mark of the Ninja.The common thing between them? All of them featured Assassins as protagonists and all were released during 2012.
There's more.There was a film called The Assassins (or sth similar) released on 2012 too.
Again Far Cry 3 was released too which many claimed to be a comparable Assassins Creed game...
Is it a coincidence or am I thinking too much?

RinoTheBouncer
01-08-2014, 06:16 PM
I think it’s the year of the Assassins because it had the last Assassin’s Creed game that feels like Assassin’s Creed.

SixKeys
01-08-2014, 06:33 PM
I think it’s the year of the Assassins because it had the last Assassin’s Creed game that feels like Assassin’s Creed.

But AC4 came out in 2013. :confused:

pacmanate
01-08-2014, 06:43 PM
I think it’s the year of the Assassins because it had the last Assassin’s Creed game that feels like Assassin’s Creed.

AC4 had more Creed than AC2, AC:B, AC:R and AC3.

ziljn
01-08-2014, 09:26 PM
AC4 had more Creed than AC2, AC:B, AC:R and AC3.

Funny.

In AC4 we had the creed but no Assassin, and in AC3 we had an Assassin but no creed.

Maybe we can have them together in the next installment. Would be a welcome change.

RinoTheBouncer
01-08-2014, 09:28 PM
Funny.

In AC4 we had the creed but no Assassin, and in AC3 we had an Assassin but no creed.

Maybe we can have them together in the next installment. Would be a welcome change.

PERFECTLY SAID.
However AC4 had a creed but not in a way that really matters much.


But AC4 came out in 2013. :confused:
Yeah and it felt like a historical GTA.


AC4 had more Creed than AC2, AC:B, AC:R and AC3.

I hope you’re kidding because those you’ve just mentioned were the foundation of the franchise.

Wolfmeister1010
01-08-2014, 09:33 PM
AC4 felt least like an AC to me. The assassins made literally no appearance for a 6-7 sequence chunk in the middle of the game. AC3 felt plenty like an AC to me. Less talk about the creed, sure..but..

pacmanate
01-08-2014, 09:34 PM
I hope you’re kidding because those you’ve just mentioned were the foundation of the franchise.

Only because people liked Ezio, he was a likable character and you could stab people, of course it was the foundation.

AC2 = Noblemans child out for Revenge, only becomes an Asssassin at the end
AC:B = No creed whatsoever apart from stopping something that should have been stopped in AC2.
AC:R = Vanity path.

Wolfmeister1010
01-08-2014, 09:34 PM
AC4 had more Creed than AC2, AC:B, AC:R and AC3.

LOL. I hope you are joking

Wolfmeister1010
01-08-2014, 09:35 PM
Only because people liked Ezio, he was a likable character and you could stab people, of course it was the foundation.

AC2 = Noblemans child out for Revenge, only becomes an Asssassin at the end
AC:B = No creed whatsoever apart from stopping something that should have been stopped in AC2.
AC:R = Vanity path.

Edward completely ignored every aspect of the creed until the second to last sequence. LOL He didnt even become an assassin until.after the game ended, some time. At least AC2 HAD assassins for a chunk of the story bigger than 3 sequences

RinoTheBouncer
01-08-2014, 09:44 PM
Only because people liked Ezio, he was a likable character and you could stab people, of course it was the foundation.

AC2 = Noblemans child out for Revenge, only becomes an Asssassin at the end
AC:B = No creed whatsoever apart from stopping something that should have been stopped in AC2.
AC:R = Vanity path.

ACII is exactly what ACIV wanted to be but failed. ACII gave a reason, a look from the outside to the Creed that we were part of in ACI, yet however, despite being inducting in the very last 2 sequences, he very well did walk through the creed and the whole game felt like a part of the creed and the end was more like a celebration that he is an assassin rather than JUST being a part of the Assassin’s Creed.

AC:B had much more entertaining present day and a story that is short but really entertaining and going hand in hand with present day and what’s really at stake. There was character development compared to ACII.

AC:R was totally epic. It had a warm feeling, a new, mature Ezio. A small but warm love story and of course a lot about exploring the Creed from a different culture's perspective. It had lots of storytelling and the ending makes me cry every time I see it. Not to mention how amazing Desmond’s Journey and The Lost Archive were. There was something about it that made me feel like I’m studying something, that I’m reading a book or being so eager to find more and the ending was more than satisfying despite being a clear cliffhanger. ACIII was really good and new and original despite Connor being not as likable as Ezio, present day missions were epic yet however, the ending was disappointing and it’s not just the death of a character I love, but it was simply badly directed and unfulfilling.

ACIV had a great character. I LOVED Edward, but however, the story lacked any epic moments like those in the past games. It’s like being promised of a big event and then waiting for tomorrow for it to happen and nothing happens.

Wolfmeister1010
01-08-2014, 09:47 PM
ACII is exactly what ACIV wanted to be but failed. ACII gave a reason, a look from the outside to the Creed that we were part of in ACI, yet however, despite being inducting in the very last 2 sequences, he very well did walk through the creed and the whole game felt like a part of the creed and the end was more like a celebration that he is an assassin rather than JUST being a part of the Assassin’s Creed.

AC:B had much more entertaining present day and a story that is short but really entertaining and going hand in hand with present day and what’s really at stake. There was character development compared to ACII.

AC:R was totally epic. It had a warm feeling, a new, mature Ezio. A small but warm love story and of course a lot about exploring the Creed from a different culture's perspective. It had lots of storytelling and the ending makes me cry every time I see it. Not to mention how amazing Desmond’s Journey and The Lost Archive were. There was something about it that made me feel like I’m studying something, that I’m reading a book or being so eager to find more and the ending was more than satisfying despite being a clear cliffhanger. ACIII was really good and new and original despite Connor being not as likable as Ezio, present day missions were epic yet however, the ending was disappointing and it’s not just the death of a character I love, but it was simply badly directed and unfulfilling.

ACIV had a great character. I LOVED Edward, but however, the story lacked any epic moments like those in the past games. It’s like being promised of a big event and then waiting for tomorrow for it to happen and nothing happens.

I'm sorry, did you just call The Last Archive "awesome"?

RinoTheBouncer
01-08-2014, 09:48 PM
I'm sorry, did you just call The Last Archive "awesome"?

Awesome, epic, heart-shattering, interesting. Any of those works for me.

lothario-da-be
01-08-2014, 09:53 PM
Reminds me i still have to buy dishonored. Just bought The last of us, far cry 3 and gow ascension. So i don't think it will be for the next months.

Wolfmeister1010
01-08-2014, 10:28 PM
Reminds me i still have to buy dishonored. Just bought The last of us, far cry 3 and gow ascension. So i don't think it will be for the next months.

it is a FANTASTIC game with a kinda short campaign but extremely high level of replayability. get it NAO

DisbandedBox359
01-08-2014, 11:28 PM
Reminds me i still have to buy dishonored. Just bought The last of us, far cry 3 and gow ascension. So i don't think it will be for the next months.

You won't regret it, great game

SixKeys
01-09-2014, 02:10 AM
Yeah and it felt like a historical GTA.


And that is different from the Ezio games how? Beating up husbands, racing against thieves, delivering letters, collecting paintings, pimping your mansion.... Wow. Such assassin. Many creed.

pacmanate
01-09-2014, 02:45 AM
ACII is exactly what ACIV wanted to be but failed. ACII gave a reason, a look from the outside to the Creed that we were part of in ACI, yet however, despite being inducting in the very last 2 sequences, he very well did walk through the creed and the whole game felt like a part of the creed and the end was more like a celebration that he is an assassin rather than JUST being a part of the Assassin’s Creed.

AC:B had much more entertaining present day and a story that is short but really entertaining and going hand in hand with present day and what’s really at stake. There was character development compared to ACII.

AC:R was totally epic. It had a warm feeling, a new, mature Ezio. A small but warm love story and of course a lot about exploring the Creed from a different culture's perspective. It had lots of storytelling and the ending makes me cry every time I see it. Not to mention how amazing Desmond’s Journey and The Lost Archive were. There was something about it that made me feel like I’m studying something, that I’m reading a book or being so eager to find more and the ending was more than satisfying despite being a clear cliffhanger. ACIII was really good and new and original despite Connor being not as likable as Ezio, present day missions were epic yet however, the ending was disappointing and it’s not just the death of a character I love, but it was simply badly directed and unfulfilling.
.

Everything in red has nothing to do with the creed.
And as for AC:R seeing the Creed from a different cultures perspective, it really wasn't. The motive was Ezio wanting to know what his life meant.
Your description of AC3 being a good game had nothing about the Creed either, it was non existent in the Universe due to Achilles and therefore non existent from the game.

pirate1802
01-09-2014, 03:13 AM
But AC4 came out in 2013. :confused:

Well played.


Edward completely ignored every aspect of the creed until the second to last sequence. LOL He didnt even become an assassin until.after the game ended, some time. At least AC2 HAD assassins for a chunk of the story bigger than 3 sequences

How so? Edward being an Assassin or not doesn't matter, we're talking about involvement of the Creed. There was plenty of involvement. The templar hunt missions showed us different sides of the assassin struggle. And to top that off you had your involvement on Templar side as well. AC2 had the beginning sequence in montereggioni and then the initiation in Venice. Nothing between them whatsoever. Seriously failing to see how AC2 had more assassin involvement than AC4. I guess its because Ezio wore papa's robes.. Heck in AC4 atleast the assassin contracts come from ASSASSINS, not from some dude with dubious intentions posing as my friends while not related to assassins in any way. In AC4 the assassins atleast looked like actual assassins, not a motley crowd of thieves and *****s in the hiding. Visiting Tulum gave me the feeling I got in AC1 visiting Masayf. While Villa was just another town, nothing assassiny about it whatsoever. You cant spot a single assassin in it (except mario). So yeah, still scratching my head.

RinoTheBouncer
01-09-2014, 11:46 AM
Everything in red has nothing to do with the creed.
And as for AC:R seeing the Creed from a different cultures perspective, it really wasn't. The motive was Ezio wanting to know what his life meant.
Your description of AC3 being a good game had nothing about the Creed either, it was non existent in the Universe due to Achilles and therefore non existent from the game.

Perhaps our ways of admiring an AC games are different. But I honestly did enjoy games up until ACIII. I have nothing personal against Darby or Ashraf to attempt to boycott their game. It’s just that I couldn’t find the spark that I found in the past in addition to the balance between modern and historical periods. The game changed, but to me, it wasn’t a change for the best. Again, I’m gonna say that ACIV had a perfect gameplay but the story wasn’t interesting to me at all.


And that is different from the Ezio games how? Beating up husbands, racing against thieves, delivering letters, collecting paintings, pimping your mansion.... Wow. Such assassin. Many creed.

Those were good extras but having a strong story, and a connected over-all story of modern, historical and first civ. factions was good enough even if the rest of the side missions were to play Barbie house. At least the 10-15 hours you’d spend finishing the story makes you wanna come back and watch the cutscenes again.

TexasToast712
01-09-2014, 12:05 PM
AC4 was a nice twist on the formula. It showed us what happens when someone gets introduced to the assassins but has no personal motivation to join at the drop of a hat. LIke Altair being born into it or Ezio seeking revenge.

pirate1802
01-09-2014, 12:10 PM
AC4 was a nice twist on the formula. It showed us what happens when someone gets introduced to the assassins but has no personal motivation to join at the drop of a hat. LIke Altair being born into it or Ezio seeking revenge.

Na bro, he no ture assassin!!!!one!1!

the obligatory Pirate's Creed comment.

SixKeys
01-09-2014, 01:02 PM
Perhaps our ways of admiring an AC games are different. But I honestly did enjoy games up until ACIII. I have nothing personal against Darby or Ashraf to attempt to boycott their game. Itís just that I couldnít find the spark that I found in the past in addition to the balance between modern and historical periods. The game changed, but to me, it wasnít a change for the best. Again, Iím gonna say that ACIV had a perfect gameplay but the story wasnít interesting to me at all.

Those were good extras but having a strong story, and a connected over-all story of modern, historical and first civ. factions was good enough even if the rest of the side missions were to play Barbie house. At least the 10-15 hours youíd spend finishing the story makes you wanna come back and watch the cutscenes again.

For me it was the complete opposite with AC4. I wasn't impressed with Revelations or AC3, AC3 feels like the least AC-like game of all to me. I was afraid I'd never feel that same excitement and joy as I did while playing the first three games, but AC4 brought that feeling back. Not because of the story, but everything else surrounding it. For the first time in a long time, the side missions were enjoyable and varied again, not just the same old races and beat-up missions or some random person asking us to craft dolls and buttons for them. I found ACR's and AC3's handling of the modern day atrocious, but AC4 felt fresh and brought back the mysteries and puzzles that had been missing for so long.

AC2 is still unbeatable in terms of how well everything was put together. I don't think we'll ever see that kind of dedication to the overall narrative since Patrice left. I don't worship the ground he walks on or anything, but his original concept and passion was undeniably the driving force behind the first games and why they felt special. To be frank, AC4 might be my last AC game, at least one I've bought at release. It's a good place to step out. ACR and AC3 were disappointing and I would have been sad if those had been my last games because they represent everything about the series' downfall, IMO. But AC4 brought back one last hurrah, it gave me some of that same joy and freshness that I got from playing the first three games.

TexasToast712
01-09-2014, 01:59 PM
For me it was the complete opposite with AC4. I wasn't impressed with Revelations or AC3, AC3 feels like the least AC-like game of all to me. I was afraid I'd never feel that same excitement and joy as I did while playing the first three games, but AC4 brought that feeling back. Not because of the story, but everything else surrounding it. For the first time in a long time, the side missions were enjoyable and varied again, not just the same old races and beat-up missions or some random person asking us to craft dolls and buttons for them. I found ACR's and AC3's handling of the modern day atrocious, but AC4 felt fresh and brought back the mysteries and puzzles that had been missing for so long.

AC2 is still unbeatable in terms of how well everything was put together. I don't think we'll ever see that kind of dedication to the overall narrative since Patrice left. I don't worship the ground he walks on or anything, but his original concept and passion was undeniably the driving force behind the first games and why they felt special. To be frank, AC4 might be my last AC game, at least one I've bought at release. It's a good place to step out. ACR and AC3 were disappointing and I would have been sad if those had been my last games because they represent everything about the series' downfall, IMO. But AC4 brought back one last hurrah, it gave me some of that same joy and freshness that I got from playing the first three games.
What are your complaints about ACR? I loved it. My only complaint was how they fudged up Desmond and Ezio's face.

DinoSteve1
01-09-2014, 02:20 PM
For me it was the complete opposite with AC4. I wasn't impressed with Revelations or AC3, AC3 feels like the least AC-like game of all to me. I was afraid I'd never feel that same excitement and joy as I did while playing the first three games, but AC4 brought that feeling back. Not because of the story, but everything else surrounding it. For the first time in a long time, the side missions were enjoyable and varied again, not just the same old races and beat-up missions or some random person asking us to craft dolls and buttons for them. I found ACR's and AC3's handling of the modern day atrocious, but AC4 felt fresh and brought back the mysteries and puzzles that had been missing for so long.

AC2 is still unbeatable in terms of how well everything was put together. I don't think we'll ever see that kind of dedication to the overall narrative since Patrice left. I don't worship the ground he walks on or anything, but his original concept and passion was undeniably the driving force behind the first games and why they felt special. To be frank, AC4 might be my last AC game, at least one I've bought at release. It's a good place to step out. ACR and AC3 were disappointing and I would have been sad if those had been my last games because they represent everything about the series' downfall, IMO. But AC4 brought back one last hurrah, it gave me some of that same joy and freshness that I got from playing the first three games.

Right! I swear after the subpar ACR and the disaster that was AC3 I was done with Assassins Creed, Then ACIV came out and I seen some in game footage and thought I'd give it a shot and now I love Assassins Creed again.

pacmanate
01-09-2014, 02:57 PM
Perhaps our ways of admiring an AC games are different. But I honestly did enjoy games up until ACIII. I have nothing personal against Darby or Ashraf to attempt to boycott their game. Itís just that I couldnít find the spark that I found in the past in addition to the balance between modern and historical periods. The game changed, but to me, it wasnít a change for the best. Again, Iím gonna say that ACIV had a perfect gameplay but the story wasnít interesting to me at all.


Maybe how we admire the games is different... I'm not saying that I don't enjoy some AC games, I just feel like if there is a lack of Creed, then why is it even under the AC title?

I agree with AC4's story to an extent. I did find that it sort of strayed from what I thought was the main path, and I kind of found the Observatory to be an anti climax for what it was. As for the Modern Day parts, it was a nice different take but I would rather have a 3rd person character again. Then I would like the devs to invest proper time in the modern day protag so people don't hate him, eg Desmond

SixKeys
01-09-2014, 05:44 PM
What are your complaints about ACR? I loved it. My only complaint was how they fudged up Desmond and Ezio's face.

Let's see:

-Short campaign, tiny city
-Not enough side missions
-Boring characters
-Den Defense
-Desmond being in a coma was the lamest excuse ever to stretch out the story and they barely even touched on the massive cliffhanger from the end of the previous game, the very reason most people bought the game.
-Speaking of which, shifting the Lucy-is-a-Templar plot twist into a throwaway DLC
-Too much copy-and-paste. Renovating Constantinople was a pointless chore as there was no visible effect on the city or its inhabitants, the factions were the same, notoriety was the same, the brotherhood was the same....Basically they just took ACB, made it 50% smaller and charged 60 bucks for it.
-Too much emphasis on cinematic action. Greek fire, blowing up Cappadocia (with innocent people inside), linear assassinations etc. The parachute chase and sky fight at the end are among the most embarrassing scenes in the series.

salman147
01-09-2014, 05:56 PM
WOW.Thread diverted...... I can see what long discussions lead to.
AC3 had more about Assassins Creed Black Flag.But BF had more Creed which Ed liked to ignore.
Both have their own flaws.
My fav=AC1-a true AC game.True to everything about the series.Except repetitiveness.....

itsamea-mario
01-09-2014, 06:09 PM
But Assassins creed 3 wasn't that good, Hitman was a massive disappointment and Dishonoured was only ok.

pirate1802
01-09-2014, 06:23 PM
Constantinople wasn't that small, I think it was as big as Rome? But yeah, agreed with the other points. Lack of side activities was sorely felt, as you had this beautiful city but barely anything to do except kill templar captains.

SixKeys
01-09-2014, 08:54 PM
Constantinople wasn't that small, I think it was as big as Rome? But yeah, agreed with the other points. Lack of side activities was sorely felt, as you had this beautiful city but barely anything to do except kill templar captains.

It was definitely smaller. Granted, much of Rome was countryside whereas Constantinople was a bunch of tightly bunched up buildings. Rome just concealed its size better because there was always a ton of stuff to do.

lothario-da-be
01-09-2014, 09:28 PM
It was definitely smaller. Granted, much of Rome was countryside whereas Constantinople was a bunch of tightly bunched up buildings. Rome just concealed its size better because there was always a ton of stuff to do.
Constantinople is so underrated imo. As a city it was much better then Rome, yes it has less side content, but that has nothing to do with the city.

pirate1802
01-10-2014, 03:47 AM
It was definitely smaller. Granted, much of Rome was countryside whereas Constantinople was a bunch of tightly bunched up buildings. Rome just concealed its size better because there was always a ton of stuff to do.

I'll do some measurements the next time I play the games because I remember both cities being roughly equal in size. . But then again, I may have remembered wrong, I have a goldfish's memory afterall.


Constantinople is so underrated imo. As a city it was much better then Rome, yes it has less side content, but that has nothing to do with the city.

Agreed. Its one of my franchise favourites.

RinoTheBouncer
01-10-2014, 10:59 AM
Constantinople is so underrated imo. As a city it was much better then Rome, yes it has less side content, but that has nothing to do with the city.

I totally agree with you. AC:R, in general is my most favorite, alongside ACII. The city, Ezio, the other characters, the atmosphere. I felt so much warmth in it and it was a big change as ACII and AC:B were a lot similar.