"Better." I see you've never used the fists. Use them. And come back.


Again, the above.


Yes yes. Why should you run around doing things in a game. Why can't things all come to you! Why should you kill guards. Why! Why! Wah!



I was hinting at this before, but I'll be a little more blunt, because this is exactly my point. "Assassins' Creed" is about assassinations. Honestly, I was forced into combat after a cut scene or two... but other than that, if you "got forced into combat" it's due to your overall lack of skill at the game in and of itself, and not the game's fault (although the AI does need work).

"Remember that group of guards you had to run through? There was a wall right there you could have vaulted up and over" is my point, basically.
You were rarely ever "forced" into fighting "anything" unless you lacked the mindset of being a stealthy Assassin in a game of Assassins.



Two things. 1) Brink. & 2) You're trying to combine his argument with yours. That doesn't work. He talked about the "stupid-ness" of the AIs while you spoke of the lack of storyline.

To each it's own.



Oh, but don't let me speak http://ps3.ign.com/objects/772/772025.html. Let the gamers speak for themselves, in the form of funding/sales, reviews, and overall ratings. (if #1 didn't make money from sales from it being such a horrible game, there'd be no #2, and so on)

MHO: #1 was a great start, a 7.5-8.0 #2 was a beautiful 8.5 four star game. #3 should be even better. I need sleep.... let the thread digression begin. :flamethrower:

I liked the first, loved the second, but I'm not really interested in this interlude - Ezio's done, let it die - I'm just gonna buy AC3 when Ubi decides to stop cocking about.

Xunnamius you're grasping at straws. If people don't like the game trying to convince them won't work.

Anyway, I only played AC1 on the PC, and the first city was all right. Afterward it was the damn same thing so it was very, very boring. I only completed it because at the time I was interested in AC2, so I wanted to know the story. I haven't yet played AC2 though, are there any problems on the PC? Apart from the horrible DRM, but I'll see what I can do about that.

The game would be much better if it wasn't some machine dream thingy, but it was actually set in the past.

Grasping at straws? Really? Because those are some huge straws, sir. They weren't that hard to, as you say, "grasp."

Anyway.



Now this I can drink to. I wholeheartedly agree.
Still, what else is a forum for besides conversing with people of varied opinions? :wink_smile:

Outside of the usual timed button presses you'll be using anyway, can they one-hit kill an enemy? No. Can they one-hit kill two enemies? No. Will they change the way I play and beat up the bad guys? No, not really.


The gun is slow, clumsy, leaves me open to attacks, and the game has both a lousy lock-on targeting system and inventory-changing system. Used in the midst of combat, it'll just get you whacked in the face, and when used as an opening attack on some unsuspecting fool, will just draw attention to you. Outside the small number of incidents intentionally designed for you to use it, it's an impractical novelty.


Stop putting words in my mouth. My point is that there's little reward to running around getting the chests. All you get is chump change for your efforts, and after sufficiently upgrading the villa (which doesn't take too long), the game just gives you more money than you'll know what to do with. Same goes for just about everything else, it's a lot of work for little in-game reward, and I found little of it to be all that fun to do on its own merits.


Really? Can you avoid fighting in the early mission where you and all the mercenaries get together to storm Tuscany and kill Vieri de'Pazzi? Or in the big fight where you have to protect Lorenzo? Can you avoid having to slaughter guards as you babysit the injured thief chick? How about the showdown against Rodrigo and his flunkies in the penultimate mission?

Despite your claims, many missions require you to forgo this game's brand of "stealth" (and acting "like an assassin") many times to fight openly.


Popularity does not equal quality, nor does it have any bearing on my opinion. If you can't handle people not liking your game as much as you do, maybe you shouldn't have bothered asking for opinions on it.

Yup, that's what is is, this Brotherhood game is basically AC2.5. A spinoff.

EDIT: Also, what's the complains about combat all about? Sure, typically Assassins are stealthy, but being able to actually fight like a man shouldn't be an afterthought as an assassin, I think the game had a good blend of plain combat and slightly stealthier assassinations. I never minded being "forced" into combat, I often chose combat if a stealthy approach seemed like it would be less effective.

The first game left such a sour taste in my mouth that I didn't bother to get the second one and neither do I have the slightest intention to get the next one. The thing that really annoyed me the most in the first game was that they created such a large and pretty world but there was hardly anyone or anything at all to interact with.

To be fair, that wasn't really the point of the game, it wasn't an RPG. Besides, the second game was in my opinion a vast imrpovement. I liked the little details they added in AC2 that don't really have that much of a function beyond just being there, like customizing clothing colour schemes and such, those little things make me enjoy a game so much more.

Well, I only own the 1st one and I've only seen gameplay of the 2nd one. But I do have to say, the 3rd one looks amazing. I'm guessing sneaking about is not as much a part of the 3rd one as it was for the 1st one and assuming the 2nd?

A friend of mine owns AC2 on PC, and he had no trouble with it, I'm not sure about the DRM as I have it on Xbox myself. I don't think it bothered him that much, we're always online anyway, if the internet goes out then there's always movies or the outside world to turn too.

By III do you mean Brotherhood which is not III?

I got AC2 for my birthday and it's pretty good so far.

Not going to buy Brotherhood. I enjoyed AC I to an extent(it felt more like a proof of concept, but I'm a svcker for free-roaming in cities), and absolutely LOVED AC II, but Brotherhood reeks of "milk the fans as quickly as possible."

I'm not interested at all in multiplayer, it sounds like there's much less focus in creating the cities(which is half the draw for me), and it's set in the same period as AC II. :yawn:

I just hope AC III(the real one) isn't set in Desmond's time. Don't get me wrong, I want them to find a way to involve his storyline more, but for me half the brilliance of the series is roaming around historical cities.

I just finished AC2 a day or two ago and thoroughly enjoyed it, although it does have a few annoyances. It definitely improved on the first game a lot by adding more variety and a more colourful setting, but there are still things that could be improved.

I agree with Freddo on the story, it would be improved greatly if the whole future animus crap was taken out entirely. I found all the future sequences to be an annoyance when I was perfectly happy running around in Renaissance Italy stabbing people and then was forced to walk around some dingy warehouse in the present just to progress the rubbish story.

I agree. I wonder what the next time period will be....



I blame the time period, where there was not much variety in the weapons that were actually available. Although, the game could have done better with a longbow/crossbow available to the character...

I probably won't buy Brotherhood. I liked the series alot, but I don't want to shell out 60$ for something that won't continue the main storyline.

http://kotaku.com/5618406/recruiting-rogues-and-restoring-rome-in-assassins-creed-brotherhood

Played the first one and liked it even though it felt a bit repetitive. Played the second and just got bored.

Like everyone else is saying, it's fun for a little while (at least for me it was), but it still got repetitive eventually.
There was plenty to do, but not much of it was interesting or added much to the game. Sure I could run around and find glyphs and tombs and stuff, but it was all just tedious and I didn't feel rewarded for doing so.
Customizing your villa didn't feel like customizing, it felt like spending money on it just to get it built up. If I'm going to have my "own" villa, I want a say in what goes where, and things like that.
The combat is too easy, with enemies who circle around you attacking one at a time instead of stabbing you in the back or teaming up and fighting together like they should be doing.
I'm not going to complain about the parkour, because it wasn't really bad, but I just wasn't very good at it. A lot of the times I would try to do something and Ezio would do something totally different, or he would jump and totally miss a ledge right in front of him. Annoying stuff like that just took away from the experience a bit.

All that said, I think I'm still going to rent Brotherhood, if only to see what the multiplayer is like. If there's some kind of free roam aspect to it, a la GTA 4 or RDR, then I will be happy.

I wait until I can get a used version pretty cheaply.

I don't know about Brotherhood. I haven't played AC1, but AC2 is probably one of my favorite games of all time. It's just that from I've seen Brotherhood is just a large expansion, like Warhead or ODST. And multiplayer? Really?

This applies to me as well. I don't understand why they would add multiplayer all of a sudden in the 3rd game, like what BioWare is trying to do with Mass Effect 3.

This.

I hate the multiplayer part, but I'd like to believe Brotherhood is to Assassin's Creed II what New Vegas is to Fallout 3.

I'm worried about a lack of content in the single-player mode, but I read somewhere that the story will be almost as long as Assassin's Creed II's, I got 25-30 hours out of an Assassin's Creed II playthrough, and I replayed through the story once fully and once halfway through, so I feel that I got my money's worth. I hope "almost" means no shorter than 2-3 hours. Still, I pre-ordered it just because I really liked Assassin's Creed II and was curious about what happened next in Ezio's story. It's not Assassin's Creed III, but it interests me.

Eh, I liked the first, but it had way too limited gameplay. I liked the second a lot as well. So yeah, I will buy this, maybe not pre-purchase though.

Is it coming to PC right of the bat or do I have to wait as with the others?

I bought both for ￡20, i oved everything about them, i prefferred the HUD on #1, but #2 is so great and really long. I really cant wait for the third, i want to know about the ending. Oh and i loved the feeling of being powerful in that game, i stood amongst 20 guards outside the palace in Venice and killed them all with by dual blades :toughninja:


I think this is an appropriate place to ask my question... On #2 there is an achievement to collect all the Montergionni statues, how do i do this?

The statues are collectables that are found hidden in the villa and named after the Greek/Roman Gods (can't remember which exactly) and are placed on these pedestals in the Manor's yard. If you want specific locations then print out a map of them from the internet.