35 replies to this topic

[Authrix]

AC's stealth is easy to use even if you suck at stealth games (like me ).

@Fallen: I don't really want to play Feurer's Creed: Nazihood thanks.

[DAN8808]

I have been looking forward to a primarily naval theme AC game for a while. When the First AC came out it immediately hit the top of my favorite games list. One man being able to take out an army on his own if you tried hard enough was a great concept in its own right. But add acrobatic assassinations, stealth options and the ability to moved over any terrain and scale any building with such finesse and you've got a winner in my mind.

ACII was even better. Ezio was a serious badass and now you have an increased arsenal with more options. Renaissance Italy was an excellent setting as well.

Then AC Brotherhood came along. An even bigger arsenal and horses added as a more viable travel option was awesome. But now you can recruit assassins to your cause and use them as needed, basically an army on call. And nothing beats jumping off of the flag pole of the Castel Sant'Angelo or the top of the colliseum and seeing how far you can go with one of Leonardo Da'Vinci's parachutes.

With AC Revelations more game mechanics were built on to the already amazing AC engine. Using the hook to zipline from rooftop to rooftop, defending assassin dens, employing more creative bomb combinations. Truly this was a climax for AC game mechanics and storylines.

Then came the extremely disappointing AC3. Connor the bitch assassin as I prefer to call him. Yes there were some pretty amazing new things, like the Naval missions, always fun to ram the hell out of a manowar and blast the shit out of it. And having an entire village as your home was a very enticing prospect. Meeting the founding fathers of America was enticing yet never really surmounted as an important event in the game. The hunting and tree climbing mechanics were great, as well as the new weapons such as the bow and rope dart.

But getting around in Boston or New York was such a pain. Running on rooftops just wasn't an option anymore. Sure you could go to the end of the block but that was it until you had to jump down to street level or hope you could reach the wall of the nearest building and cling on somehow. I simply hated being in those cities, the only fun part was taking down a fort full of dimwitted soldiers. And for some stupid reason they completely changed the combat system. I had absolutely no idea how to fight with I was playing as Haytham and there was no tutorial to explain how to use this ridiculous combat system. It was only well into the game I started to get the hang of fighting. Trying to get a quick shot off with the bow was impossible, the mechanic took forever and by the time you could line up a shot the target was out of sight.

[J NOSK36]

NO lol in a world war two scenario, the Assassin would be a jewish born person, the Nazi's would be templars using the Pieces of eden to try and win the war, i think this would make a good game lol

[Talos Valcoran]

Looks awesome.

[JC 042]

We already know World War 2 was a set up to cover up the search for the Apple of Eden, or at least a piece of Eden. Go through all Subject 16's clues in AC2, there a reference to people well known people talking about it, and how 'H' is starting operations "... Europe could do with a good cleansing...".

[J NOSK36]

if you follow the lore, Joseph Stalin is a Templar

[Brother Agatone]

Then came the extremely disappointing AC3. Connor the bitch assassin as I prefer to call him. Yes there were some pretty amazing new things, like the Naval missions, always fun to ram the hell out of a manowar and blast the shit out of it. And having an entire village as your home was a very enticing prospect. Meeting the founding fathers of America was enticing yet never really surmounted as an important event in the game. The hunting and tree climbing mechanics were great, as well as the new weapons such as the bow and rope dart.

But getting around in Boston or New York was such a pain. Running on rooftops just wasn't an option anymore. Sure you could go to the end of the block but that was it until you had to jump down to street level or hope you could reach the wall of the nearest building and cling on somehow. I simply hated being in those cities, the only fun part was taking down a fort full of dimwitted soldiers. And for some stupid reason they completely changed the combat system. I had absolutely no idea how to fight with I was playing as Haytham and there was no tutorial to explain how to use this ridiculous combat system. It was only well into the game I started to get the hang of fighting. Trying to get a quick shot off with the bow was impossible, the mechanic took forever and by the time you could line up a shot the target was out of sight.

Yes, there was some disappointment to ac3 regarding Conners character, and yes the climbing was a bit bland, but overall I think the game really makes up for that by adding different regions and having a more dynamic storyline, in my opinion. Also you can get past blocks because every so often there's a connecting line between buildings also, that is just part of the historical setting, to have a city laid out like that. The combat, I thought was more smooth and easier to comprehend. Ac3 was my first assassins creed, and I liked it a lot so I bought the previous versions. The combat system in previous games was harder for example, I didn't realize what parry was until halfway through campaign in revelations, and with ac3 I got within an instant. Now Conners character was a bit bland, he seemed to be just a pissed of Mohawk running around the frontier at first, but if you actually listen to those extra conversations with the other characters, it sheds some light on his character, and also the homestead ones aren't very revealing the other ones are though.

Here's another topic that I'd like to address. It may seem that ubisoft is now putting out an ac title each year, but its not like there putting no thought together at once. In a recent article that I read about how soon ac4 had already been announced it mentioned that they have multiple subsidiaries working on the ac franchise, which means we probably will see a spin off of Ac3, but while they make that ac4 will come out, if this truly is the case then we probably could see more variety in the ac franchise, so many people think that ubisoft are becoming heartless bastards that are now just trying to crank out an ac title each year for money, but at least they give there developers time to develop a game that will be good, unlike call of duty which became so bland after modern warfare two.

[J NOSK36]

they have various teams working on various AC games, Four has been in development for years apparently

[Brother Agatone]

Yes, exactly so technically I have faith in the franchise, ather than being like cod where it was extremely repetitious. Seriously, I'm not kidding if you compare mw2 with mw3 it is basically the same game, only different setting.

[J NOSK36]

Yeah I see no difference between cod mw 2 and mw3

[Authrix]

There isn't one, except 3 tried to have more of a shock factor than 2

[J NOSK36]

and i think it failed

[Brother Agatone]

The thing that probably different was how you took down mackarov at the end.

[J NOSK36]

but with assassins creed i always enjoy playing

[Authrix]

The game play for brotherhood was good, easy to get into, and was backed up by a good musical score, great set pieces and good graphics. If the series continues in the same way it shouldn't fine.

[Brother Agatone]

I do agree, the theme music does was a part of convey ing the emotions in the game, best would have to revelations for me.