[Aptorian]

Just finished Assassins Creed this weekend and I was blown away at how awesome the game was.



I'd bought the game originally for the PC before I owned a console, but the controls were a bit wonky on a keyboard and the whole "I am a guy in the future using a machine to access DNA memory"-plot threw me for a loop. I believe I put it aside to play Half Life 2 and just never picked it up again.

But then I saw the latest Quick Look for Assassins Creed: Brotherhood and I thought it looked so amazing that I had try it again. So, I spontaneously bought AC1+2 since they were both on sale on an online store I use. Here's the Quick Look if you want to see it, it's beautiful:

http://www.giantbomb...erhood/17-3503/

After I finally got used to the fiddly controls (no wonder I didn't like it on a keyboard) the game really came into its own. The movements of Altair the Assassin is amazingly life like and felt right when you were climbing up buildings and running through crowds. And the cities (Damascus, Jerusalem and Acre) were breathtaking. I cannot for the life of me understand how GTA4 could be so butt ugly, when Ubisoft managed to build not one but 3 cities that look like they were built by hand. Exploring the many landmarks was amazing. The cities and the landscapes really felt organic.

But the thing that really struck me about the game was the story. It's basically a mix between the story from Wanted and Jumper with some Christian mythology and historical liberties thrown into the mix, set in the middle east during the 3rd crusade. But what makes it good is that it is a story about right and wrong and how one should wield the power you posses. You're an arrogant assassin, who thinks he knows everything, who as a punishment for big fuck up, is sent out to kill 9 men who are a threat to the population they rule. What really struck me was that, with a few exceptions, it was hard to not sympathise with the bad guys. What they were doing was cruel and treacherous for numerous reasons, but what they intended was for the greater good. Many times I was wondering if they were not the ones who were in the right and this brotherhood of Assassins were the ones who were evil. And the story writer really played on this, as limited as the games story telling device was, the game still managed to bring up some great questions about morals and authority.

The big flaw with the game I think is that for an Assassin, Altair really is a clown. Your methods of attacking are so limited and the scenarios the set up so strict, that every assassination attempt becomes a battle royal or mad dash through the streets to catch the bad guy when he ran away from you. You feel kind of stupid when your best assassination attempt was the time you accidentally fell off the roof and landed on the target ass first and managed to stab him in the throat as you were trying to stand up while a soldier was chopping at you with a sword. On the other hand, nothing feels as good as taking on ten men with a short blade or a sword and killing them with beautiful choreography.

But now on to Assassins Creed 2. I just started it and in every way possible it seems to have improved. The inventory system. The city design. The character interaction and so much background history attached to everything.

This post has been edited by Apt: 23 November 2014 - 09:47 PM

[Ulrik]

I really liked Altair, but Ezio is completely different. AC1 looks like demo when compared. Living story, good characters, nice tweaks... And MP in AC:B is great:)

[Morgoth]

You really learn to appreciate Altaier's terse, cynical view of life when playing Ezio.

Amusingly, when playing AC1, one of my flat mates sometimes sat down to watch. He was doing a PHD in Arabic and enjoyed watching my character run through streets and climb on buildings he recognized from his visits.

[Dolorous Menhir]

Only have the first one - looks good and the free-running through the city was good fun. But the game mechanics just didn't work very well. Could finish it, got tired of the repetitive tasks, the clock-work fights, and especially the main assassinations.

edit - also, you had to exit the game several times when you wanted to quit? Leave the past, exit the menus on that machine, then finally quit for real once you were back in that lab. Just plain awkward.

This post has been edited by Dolorous Menhir: 28 November 2010 - 08:00 PM

[Grief]

I played the first one and thought it was decent, but didn't buy it. The game looks great, but I found the fighting and quests pretty repetitive. Same with the climbing at times, when I was just spamming "up".

However, someone bought me two, and I did find it better. The fighting was improved a bit(though still too easy), the game still looked great, and the quests didn't feel quite as repetitive. There were still flaws, but it was an improvement.

The biggest flaw was possibly the Desmond sections, which I didn't think were great.

I'm now seriously considering buying brotherhood(will probably ask for it for christmas) because even if the single player is pretty much the same, the multiplayer looks ace.

[Ulrik]

Morgoth, on 28 November 2010 - 07:52 PM, said:

Amusingly, when playing AC1, one of my flat mates sometimes sat down to watch. He was doing a PHD in Arabic and enjoyed watching my character run through streets and climb on buildings he recognized from his visits.

Yup, its great I really liked like they include assassin history into game and made few articles about how accurate and inaccurate it is...mostly the first one:)

And for Ezio - I had to try it in Firenze on this years trip...and hell yeah, I know that he is more stylish, but he wasnt attempting it with twenty cops behind corner! (and I really didnt want to desacre such great piece of architecture... And that hoodie went to trash...

Ulrik tries to be Ezio

This post has been edited by Ulrik: 28 November 2010 - 08:18 PM

[Ulrik]

Dolorous Menhir, on 28 November 2010 - 07:59 PM, said:

Only have the first one - looks good and the free-running through the city was good fun.  But the game mechanics just didn't work very well.  Could finish it, got tired of the repetitive tasks, the clock-work fights, and especially the main assassinations.

I suggest the second game. Repetetive missions went to hell, its really different from all POVs.

[Aptorian]

Morgoth, on 28 November 2010 - 07:52 PM, said:

You really learn to appreciate Altaier's terse, cynical view of life when playing Ezio.

Amusingly, when playing AC1, one of my flat mates sometimes sat down to watch. He was doing a PHD in Arabic and enjoyed watching my character run through streets and climb on buildings he recognized from his visits.

A girl I work with is also a big Assassins Creed fan. She went to Italy this summer and visited several of the place that also feature in the game. She says that the architectual and geographical detail in the game is eerily close to reality, to such an extend that she could remember various scenes from the game when looking at the buildings.

Kind of cool. I'm guessing this is becoming more and more prevalent as the big franchises have millions to spend on that kind of research.

Dolorous Menhir, on 28 November 2010 - 07:59 PM, said:

Only have the first one - looks good and the free-running through the city was good fun. But the game mechanics just didn't work very well. Could finish it, got tired of the repetitive tasks, the clock-work fights, and especially the main assassinations.

edit - also, you had to exit the game several times when you wanted to quit? Leave the past, exit the menus on that machine, then finally quit for real once you were back in that lab. Just plain awkward.

I'm only a little while into the game and being introduced to the various new features in the game, but I can already now tell you that things like combat and evading, and the way you can approach a task has become much more versatile. It's not so much, hack, repartee, hack, repartee now as it is hack, hack, hack, hack from various angles and your target is done for. I throroughly enjoy the ability to headbutt people I don't like.

As for leaving the game, on the PS3, you can just push the PS button that brings you to the playstation menu and lets you simply quit the game then and there. And yes, that did save me a lot of grief. How ever, one of the reasons why you are capable of leaving the animus, is because you can do a little bit of research, if you leave the machine in between the planned sessions. For example I left the machine at one point and pick pocketed the bad doctors key code and used it to snoop in on their e-mail exchanges.

This post has been edited by Aptorian: 28 November 2010 - 08:28 PM

[Aptorian]

Grief, on 28 November 2010 - 08:13 PM, said:

The biggest flaw was possibly the Desmond sections, which I didn't think were great.

Yeah, I'm hoping, and have heard, that the Desmond (out of the Animus) sections become better in AC2.

The thing that was so weird in the first game was that the guy apparently had had some assassin training, but made no attempts to escape what so ever. Now, seeing as we learn more about the building he was held captive in, in the opening of AC2, why he didn't try to escape seems clear enough. But in AC1 they really should have placed some Guard NPCs at the two exits as an explanation for why Desmond didn't try to escape or, you know, stab the evil doctor to death with a pencil or something... that smug son of a bitch.

[Traveller]

I liked the 1st one, looks absolutely beautiful, and yes, the cities are so detailed - there was just never very much to actually do in them. I finished the game using pretty much the same combo, and I couldn't be arsed to run round collecting flags for no reward.

The second one... so much better! They got rid of the out of animus interuptions, and put in a load of stuff worth collecting, plus the tomb raids, which were pretty fun. And puzzles to solve. (I'm sure games used to have harder puzzles in them than they do now).
And the double blade trick.. walk up to two guards, assassinate both at the same time, walk on through the door they were guarding..

The detail is again spectacular, even right at the top of the highest tower you'll find a sculpted frieze or something.

I think I'll have to check out Brotherhood, a it seems to be a sequel to the sequel, carrying on where 2 leaves off.

[Sinisdar Toste]

i've always loved AC, the free-running and stalking guards and everything. i'd agree that the main assassinations in the first one did annoy me with their insistence on being huge events, why can't i just toss a knife in his neck from fifty feet away god dammit? but the second one makes some huge improvements, not least of which is the great story, the historical characters and the beautiful cityscapes. probably gonna pick up brotherhood soon as well, if the trailers for it are accurate, i'm gonna enjoy javelining people.

[Silencer]

The first game was better as far as replayability goes, though. It was fun just to walk around throwing knives at guards and shit, moreso than in the second game, I felt.

Two improved on almost everything, though, the story, the gameplay, the cities (except for aforementioned lessening of replay value), and I think I enjoyed it more...but I haven't played it nearly as much as I played the first.

The reason I haven't (and refuse to) purchased Brotherhood, is because, as far as I'm concerned, it's content that should have been in AC:2 from the start. Ever notice in the game, that you skip from memory block 12 to block 14 or some shit? Well, when is Brotherhood set? Yeah, you going around in Rome weakening Borgia. Which, it so happens, occurs before you do the final mission in AC:2. They put in a crappy "you're going to Rome" bit which actually didn't really transpire (the closed-off final level is not Rome proper, it doesn't count) and skipped things out - imo, SO they could then charge you full price for content you should have already had.

That being said, I don't really care...it's an expansion, and it doesn't add much to the story, so I shall wait for AC3.

>.>

[Ulrik]

To defend ACB - it adds many new elements, technically couldnt be in AC2 (its also stand alone). Whole assassin recruitment and making brotherhood is fine, mutiplayer is great, story is solid, Rome is great and bigger cca 4x Firenze or Venice. IMO first two elements are really above classic AC2 experience.

[Aptorian]

Well, according to what I have heard, Brotherhood has just as much content as the first, with the added benifit of improving on the old content.

If you liked the gameplay of the first one and wanted to experience more of the history, then why not play the game?

Also, as usual, I'm not going to buy this game at its release price. When it is 60% off I will buy it, which is in a years time or so.

[Silencer]

Ulrik, on 29 November 2010 - 04:15 AM, said:

To defend ACB - it adds many new elements, technically couldnt be in AC2 (its also stand alone). Whole assassin recruitment and making brotherhood is fine, mutiplayer is great, story is solid, Rome is great and bigger cca 4x Firenze or Venice. IMO first two elements are really above classic AC2 experience.

Indeed, but that's just justifying the price, and to me, while I like the new area and its size and so forth, it's still not worth them screwing people over by cutting existing storyline into a new game.

Aptorian, on 29 November 2010 - 04:16 AM, said:

Well, according to what I have heard, Brotherhood has just as much content as the first, with the added benifit of improving on the old content.

If you liked the gameplay of the first one and wanted to experience more of the history, then why not play the game?

Also, as usual, I'm not going to buy this game at its release price. When it is 60% off I will buy it, which is in a years time or so.

One, it's the principle of the thing. Two, I don't think the experience justifies the price, like you.

[MTS]

Silencer, on 29 November 2010 - 02:34 AM, said:

The reason I haven't (and refuse to) purchased Brotherhood, is because, as far as I'm concerned, it's content that should have been in AC:2 from the start. Ever notice in the game, that you skip from memory block 12 to block 14 or some shit? Well, when is Brotherhood set? Yeah, you going around in Rome weakening Borgia. Which, it so happens, occurs before you do the final mission in AC:2. They put in a crappy "you're going to Rome" bit which actually didn't really transpire (the closed-off final level is not Rome proper, it doesn't count) and skipped things out - imo, SO they could then charge you full price for content you should have already had.

That being said, I don't really care...it's an expansion, and it doesn't add much to the story, so I shall wait for AC3.

>.>

Well, that's where you're wrong Silencer. It can't be classed as an expansion as it is just such a big game with its own continuing storyline, and the inaccessible memory blocks are actually the AC2 DLC, Battle of Forli and Bonfire of the Vanities, which are fairly inconsequential story-wise. Brotherhood is set after the events in AC2, but I will say that the only reason the Brotherhood story exists is because Ezio stupidly chose not to do something at the end of the game:

Spoiler

kill Rodrigo Borgia. I figured they were trying to be historically accurate (he was poisoned in real life apparently), but then you only see him about three times throughout Brotherhood, and gets taken out like a historically-inaccurate little bitch at the end anyway (and not by you).

So basically the story in Brotherhood is based on a cop-out, but it does advance it a fair ways (not perhaps in terms of Desmond's story but pretty much finishes Ezio's), and (of course) ends in a very intriguing cliffhanger, and raises a lot of interesting questions, like about Subject 16 and Lucy. You'll probably be mightily confused at the start of AC3 if you miss out on this one.

Plus, the game is kickass, and multiplayer is also fairly cool (damn roof runners...). As a classicist I also liked being able to explore all the old Roman ruins too.

This post has been edited by MTS: 29 November 2010 - 10:17 AM

[Aptorian]

Holy Shit these "truth puzzles" in AC2 are doing my head in. The pseudo historic conspiracy theory stuff is really awesome but the puzzles! God damn they are hardcore.

At first they were easy enough "connect the dots" type of things, now, half way through, they are like some kind of crazy WW2 type of cryptography craziness, like if the puzzles were done by a really brilliant monkey throwing poo at a history book. I really tried to figure them out by myself but more and more I am just looking up the solution in the walk throughs and holy crap does the solutions not make any sense.

Take this one for example I just looked up:

Quote

Hint: "The seeds were planted as two worlds became one. Behold, the Assassins, the children of two worlds," is the big hint this time around for matching up the paintings. The hint means you should choose paintings where gods mingle with humans. If you know Greek mythology it's easy. The correct paintings are listed below:

• Jupiter and Io
• Danae Visited by Zeus
• Cupid and Psyche
• Leda and the Swan
• Rape of Europa

How in the fuck am I supposed to get this shit unless I have an undergrad in historical arts? "If you know greek mythology" my ass. It's not like the characters are labled with a big pink neon sign. some of the pictures are just a blur of pink flesh and dark colors.

I was looking at the pictures and trying to find out which ones had children in them. Or apples, there's apples in lots of them. And how am I supposed to guess they are greek gods when they all have angel wings!?

Maybe I am supposed to buy the pictures in the art shops and read up on them... but that is still crazy.

This post has been edited by Jenisand Rul: 03 December 2010 - 07:53 PM

[MTS]

I loved the Truth puzzles in these games, it was incredibly rewarding to figure them out. The Greek/Roman mythology stuff never bothered me, since that's (roughly) my area of study, it was the cryptogram puzzles that always threw me for a loop. Like the one with the ancient Sumerian letters in the code wheel? That took me forever to figure out.

It staggers me how much effort they put into what is at this point a relatively minor part of the games. The Truth puzzles in Brotherhood have phone records that you have to decrypt, and recent events like the Deepwater Horizon spill even make their way into the conspiracy. It remains my favourite part about the non-Animus world they've created, the present-day characters just bore me.

[Defiance]

AC1 was alright; I enjoyed it for what it was. The story got pretty lame at the end, and the last boss was one of the dumbest fights I've ever seen in a video game.

AC2 was great. I only played through it once, but it took pretty much everything that was wrong and fixed it. Storywise:

Spoiler

I'm still not overly impressed with the plotline (how long until we're scaling buildings in New York like spiderman? What happens when the modern world catches up and we have guns?). Still, kicking the pope's ass at the end of 2 was hilarious.

Haven't played Brotherhood yet.

[Roldom]

<sup>i thought ac1 was great and ac2 was even better, i didnt like the money system, the whole inventory of weapons and the paintings and costumes and house repairs annoyed the hell out of me.

The little tombs with all the jumping around to get the assaisns seals for atiars armour bugged the crap out of me also....

loved the truth puzzles, cant w8 to see them continued

will get acb, but not sure if i wanna pay full price, ive gotta lot spare time and some cash behind me atm so maybe ill treat myself at christmas....</sup>