Assassin's Creed sucks

[Lookingglassman]

I finally broke down and bought the first game (luckily I got it used for $14) and after playing it for the past three days, I am hating it.

The fighting is a pain in the butt. Trying to remember which buttons to press to do what is also a pain in the butt. Too many buttons to press, getting my butt kicked all the time in fights and the endless babble drove me nuts and that is why I am returning it tomorrow for something else.

 

[AlphaMan]

I had a similar experience last year before AC2 was released. It had to be the first game I traded in without even finishing it.

A friend of mine tells me that AC2 is much better... so I picked it up used on Black Friday with Game Stop's B2G1 sale. I haven't played it yet, but we'll see.

 

[Jax]

Love both ganes (not played AC:BH), big fan of the stealth genre and also being in the past with great recreations of ancient cities is just amazing. I think the combat is too easy at times, which bugs me and the inability to skip cutscenes can be annoying.

AC2 is more refined than number 1 but AC2 seems to have less assassinations, which bugged me. The games need a less scripted nature in the future and expanded co-op but apart from that I look forward to the future of the series...

Easily some of the most fun games I have ever played .

 

[AlphaMan]

I'm sure it is... AC2 was nominated for GOTY in 2009, so I'm sure it's good, but AC1 just couldn't hook me. Since I got AC2 for free, I figured I'd take another chance on the franchise.

 

[Mr Light]

AC2 is *SO* much better than AC1 in every possible way. AC1 was an exercise in repetition and frustration but AC2 was a truly stellar game. They really improved everything that was wrong with the first one.

 

[Geck]

I'm at the end of AC1 now and hope to finish it tomorrow. Overall it's been pretty easy, but too repetitive, I agree. There's no real variation, they just make the guards a bit tougher and add more beggars and drunks to get in your way as the game goes on. It's pretty mindless fun though. Can't say I'm too interested in the story, unfortunately...I tend to only half pay attention during cutscenes.

I'm looking forward to picking up AC2 and AC:B soon.

 

[Alidar Jarok]

Assassins Creed 2 is supposed to be better. If I had a gaming system from this millennium, I would definitely get it. Plus I'm a sucker for the setting for that game. You've got the Medici, the Borgias, and others. Absolutely fucking crazy time in Italy (yeah, I realize the first one has the Crusades, which is pretty damn crazy too, but still).

 

[TheGodBen]

AC1 was a great idea but a horribly repetitive game. The core idea of going into a city with the goal of assassinating a target, finding out their location, their routine and any weaknesses they have, then using that information to carry out a perfect assassination... such a brilliant concept. Sadly, the way this was implemented was awful and involved you repeating the same boring tasks 9 times, hacking and slashing your way to the target, and then running away. The parkour was great, but not much else was.

AC2 is absurdly better than AC1, but that comes at the expense of the original concept. AC2 plays like a normal sandbox game where you have missions dotted around the map, there's cutscenes, a story, sidequests... it's like GTA: 15th Century Italy. While it's sad that they couldn't get the assassination concept from AC1 to work and instead went for a standard sandbox formula, the trade-off is well worth it and the game is fantastic. It was my GOTY last year.

I haven't played AC:B yet, but I'm definitely going to as it's meant to be just as good as AC2.

 

[Skywalker]

Assassins Creed 2 is supposed to be better. If I had a gaming system from this millennium, I would definitely get it. Plus I'm a sucker for the setting for that game. You've got the Medici, the Borgias, and others. Absolutely fucking crazy time in Italy (yeah, I realize the first one has the Crusades, which is pretty damn crazy too, but still).

I'm trying to figure out what could be a similarly appropriate setting for an Assassin's Creed III. Maybe Revolutionary France?

 

[BigFoot]

^ Yeah I really want AC3 to take place in France. Being able to climb every building in Paris would be awesome.

 

[archeryguy1701]

I have a bad habit of starting games and then never finishing them simply because I move onto a different game for one reason or another. AC1 is the first game I've failed to finish specifically because I couldn't make myself finish. It was absolutely boring. Even Bioshock, which I found the gameplay extremely boring in, had at least an interesting enough story that I was able to force myself through it just to see the story out. AC1 is just too repetetive and boring.

 

[Kelthaz]

I played the first game and I disliked it too. It was just dull and repetitive. Of course, I felt at the time (long before the sequel came out) that the game had a fantastic concept that was simply poorly executed. I figured that if there was a sequel it would probably be much better. And, based on the reception to AC2, I was right. If you hate the first game but love the concept, go for the sequel. You won't be disappointed.

Well, as for me, I absolutely hate sandbox games, so I'll pass. It's probably a great game though.

 

[Jax]

I must be weird because I hear loads about AC 1 being repetetive/boring and I can understand where they are coming from yet I loved AC1. Its probably because I was willing to overlook the flaws because of the concept and it tried something different than most other video games, I loved the setting and being a big Hitman Blood Money fan...I do love a good hit on a target

When I played AC2 I realised it improved upon AC1 in almost every way yet came away a little dissapointed because the main theme of the game "Taking out targets" seemed a little diluted.

oh well I gave both games 9 out of 10 on my Gamespot reviews (I've never given any game more than 9 and they joined an elite club with 13 other games)

 

[BigFoot]

Yeah I also enjoyed AC. True, it was repetitive, but I thought it at least tried to do something new. And I just loved climbing buildings, I really did. I never get bored of that.

 

[Jax]

And I just loved climbing buildings, I really did. I never get bored of that.

Agreed, in my gamespot review I pretty much said I could probably just play a game based off AC's free running and climbing system...

sadly Mirrors Edge came out after and was crap

 

[Lonemagpie]

^ Yeah I really want AC3 to take place in France. Being able to climb every building in Paris would be awesome.

That's called The Saboteur....

Revolutionary France would be my pick for the next one - but I bet they'll go for Revolutionary America, seeing as the modern day sections are US-set.

The first game *is* repetitive, and dying as soon as you step in water is dumb, but I don't find the combat system hard at all. It's really a tech demo for the blending thing for Splinter Cell V, stretched out to full game length.

It's not a brilliant game, but it looks so gorgeous that I don't mind - it's fun for wandering around the crusades and chopping people up for a bit of cathartic fun.

I've also thought since both games came out, that if you could blend the dropping-from-the-rooftops-to-whack-people stuff from AC with the first-person free-running from Mirror's Edge, you'd have the perfect Batman game... (though Arkham Asylum then turned out to be almost perfect as a third-person version)

Anyway, right now I'm playing through it again, trying to collect all the flags, and enjoying myself quite a bit - it's something I can dip in and out of for the odd half hour here and there when I've got a break

 

[BigFoot]

^ Yeah I also Saboteur.

Saboteur and AC2 are actually two of only seven games I've Platinumed so far.

 

[Alidar Jarok]

Assassins Creed 2 is supposed to be better. If I had a gaming system from this millennium, I would definitely get it. Plus I'm a sucker for the setting for that game. You've got the Medici, the Borgias, and others. Absolutely fucking crazy time in Italy (yeah, I realize the first one has the Crusades, which is pretty damn crazy too, but still).

I'm trying to figure out what could be a similarly appropriate setting for an Assassin's Creed III. Maybe Revolutionary France?

I think they're going to go with the modern guy now. One thing I liked about AC2 was there were a lot of real world assassinations going on this time. Revolutionary France would be cool (I'd love to see Paris in that time period), although the switch to more gunpowder weaponry will probably hurt the game a bit.

 

[TheGodBen]

Even Bioshock, which I found the gameplay extremely boring in, had at least an interesting enough story that I was able to force myself through it just to see the story out. AC1 is just too repetetive and boring.

That was one of my problems with the game as well, there was no story until the very end, and when the story showed up it was so asinine that I regretted asking for it in the first place. AC2 is better because it has a story and you're given very personal reasons for going after the bad guys (unlike AC1 where you kill people because an old man tells you to), but the ending of the story is...

Spoiler: AC2 ending

...the most ridiculous thing I've ever experienced in a game. You fight the Pope who has a magic staff that turns him into 6 Popes, in the Sistine Chapel, and fight your way into a secret chamber where you get a message from aliens from the Sun that the world will end in 2012? Why couldn't this franchise be a straight-up historical assassination game, why does it have to have such a ridiculous plot?

 

[SPCTRE]

AC1 was a great idea but a horribly repetitive game. The core idea of going into a city with the goal of assassinating a target, finding out their location, their routine and any weaknesses they have, then using that information to carry out a perfect assassination... such a brilliant concept. Sadly, the way this was implemented was awful and involved you repeating the same boring tasks 9 times, hacking and slashing your way to the target, and then running away. The parkour was great, but not much else was.

AC2 is absurdly better than AC1, but that comes at the expense of the original concept. AC2 plays like a normal sandbox game where you have missions dotted around the map, there's cutscenes, a story, sidequests... it's like GTA: 15th Century Italy. While it's sad that they couldn't get the assassination concept from AC1 to work and instead went for a standard sandbox formula, the trade-off is well worth it and the game is fantastic. It was my GOTY last year.

I haven't played AC:B yet, but I'm definitely going to as it's meant to be just as good as AC2.

Thanks, you just reinforced my opinion that I have to play both AC1 and 2 before getting into Brotherhood.