Assassin's Creed in a nutshell.

Yep.

thats a shame.

So.... who remembers when assassin's creed was about assassinating people and climbing high ****?

It's journalism's fault this series is ruined, they chuffed up the watered down sequels to assassins creed 2 and then as a result we get stuck with this turd of a video game that isn't anything to do with being stealthy anymore..

Serious_Much wrote:So.... who remembers when assassin's creed was about assassinating people and climbing high ****?

It's journalism's fault this series is ruined, they chuffed up the watered down sequels to assassins creed 2 and then as a result we get stuck with this turd of a video game that isn't anything to do with being stealthy anymore..

I agree, Assasin's Creed 1 > all others. Maybe 2 but it didn't felt as fresh as the 1st.

1 = awesome, though a bit too repetitive at parts, and was too easy, counter-attack = WIN
2 = exactly the same with some new stuff
Brotherhood = exactly the same but with summonable useless allies or a OP ability (kill everyone around you instantly), this made the game EVEN easier
Revelations = oh look we have bombs! now the game is EASIER (even more), and well that's it, rest are aesthitics useless addons, the story was lame, it was so boring I didn't even finished
3 = looks more boring than the others, full of bugs, and most people tell me the story is a joke, like the protagonist (flat boring character) was in every thing that happened during that time, it felt forced, he met everyone, he was in every key point in all the places of history...

I thought the 2nd was an improvement in many ways.. it got rid of the tedium that was involved in the missions you did on assassins creed 1, but the biggest problem was it switched emphasis too much. I'm all for adding in the extra storyline and having varied missions, but there still needed to be a core of assassination and preparation in there..

I guess it just lost focus and became all about the *** around sandbox that it's become.

Serious_Much wrote:I thought the 2nd was an improvement in many ways.. it got rid of the tedium that was involved in the missions you did on assassins creed 1, but the biggest problem was it switched emphasis too much. I'm all for adding in the extra storyline and having varied missions, but there still needed to be a core of assassination and preparation in there..

I guess it just lost focus and became all about the *** around sandbox that it's become.

YOU CAN HUNT NOW! Isn't that ALL YOU EVER WANTED IN AN ASSASSIN'S CREED?

I edited my post, re-read it.

I liked brotherhood. But I agree that the killing spree system ruined battles with multiple people.

I enjoyed most side quests

There is no stealth in AC3, it was a poorly executed beat em up. And the ending, don't get me started, it was worse than Mass Effect 3's original ending, I won't spoil it for anyone wanting to play the game, but the ending was like Ubisoft just took a massive dump in my face for playing the AC series. And every mission seemed drag out and repetitive and did I mention no stealth?

A huge disappointment in my book.

The series was never really about assassinations in the first place, the combat mechanic is so easy that stealth was really optional.
Also the story on III is a huge mess, not that it was ever strong prior to this instalment, but it's noticeably bad here.
The only modern game that has done stealth well and made it rewarding is Deus EX: HR.
Also Keanu Reeves is more engaging and life like than Conner.

I will argue that Dishonored and Hitman had a good stealth system (at least for me, but I haven't played the other Hitman games).

Either way I hope there aren't any more sequels to Assassin's Creed. Just let the series die here and now.

If any more Assasin's Creeds come out, I'm ignoring them. Even if they improve EVERYTHING from III it was just too large a disappointment for anything to bring it back.

You couldn't even tree run till about 3 hours into the game, that was the selling point Ubisoft, TREE RUNNING.

GrinTwist wrote:

Either way I hope there aren't any more sequels to Assassin's Creed. Just let the series die here and now.

Considering Far Cry 3's successes, Ubisoft will probably move across to milking that series instead.

I really don't know why I still buy their games, still p*ssed about the fact that they killed off the World in Conflict series.

I don't usually boycott whole companies. Some companies, like Square Enix, can ruin one franchise, but they can build a good IP which stops me from boycotting a whole company. Like Capcom, after their horrendous screw ups with tonnes of games, I'd be in good mind to leave them alone, but Dragon's Dogma was good. The big guys don't suffer from you not buying their games, it's their little developers that lose their job. The big guys don't give a crap, it's the little guys who try to make good games under the big guy's banner who will be left out in the rain if you boycott the big guy.

Onion Knight wrote:

GrinTwist wrote:

Either way I hope there aren't any more sequels to Assassin's Creed. Just let the series die here and now.

Considering Far Cry 3's successes, Ubisoft will probably move across to milking that series instead.

I really don't know why I still buy their games, still p*ssed about the fact that they killed off the World in Conflict series.

That is the one thing I hope I don't see. It's normally after the third game that the developers start something new and if they don't that's when a series starts getting milked for money.

Ghost Recon Future Soldier turned me against Ubisoft, ACIII sealed the boycott deal. I'm no longer buying from them on principle.

I really hope Ubisoft doesn't mess up Watch Dogs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watch_Dogs) because that's one of the 5 games I look forward to this year.

But I totally agree with everyone, (even thouh i havnt even played AC games from Brotherhood to 3) Ubisoft stinks! =/

An about the " It's normally after the third game that the developers start something new"-comment from GrinTwist, they usually do more than 3 games when milking. AC series is 5 games for example, and DMC is going for a fifth instalment aswell. So the risk of ubi milking Farcry is pretty high =/

Just to put in my 2 cents: I've never played other AC's, but I'm almost at platinum on AC3. I think that outside of missions, stealth is certainly not emphasized. But in missions, a ton of them have an optional objective that requires that you not get detected (so, in that regard, it does try to force you to be stealthy). God... I HATE those optional objectives. They ticked me off more than Dark Souls. Of course, apart from those optional objectives, AC3 is a really easy game in terms of combat; I've died more times playing LEGO: Star Wars. There's only a few things that I actually really liked. After enjoying Dark Souls' co-op option, I'm really enjoying co-op in other games as well, including in AC3's Wolfpack. Also, the way that they integrated story mode hacks (cheats) with the pivots was pretty cool. But, that's about it!