that's exactly what i've been trying to tell some of my friends. all of them seem to be trying hard to defend this game when i just tell them to STFU because all ubi wants is their money, not their sympathy and happiness. seriously, people should just learn to accept when a game is good, and when it is just plain "blah".

But Linde, all of these videos of the glitches in the game are hilarious! I don't even own a 360, but I can easily say that it is the most entertaining game of the year!

(I am quite surprised at the ratings it's getting, though. Feedback I've been getting from friends about the game have been lukewarm at best.)

Riser: Incidentally, there was one other review that really took AC to task over its failings that wasn't Anthony: the venerable Chris Kohler. Nice to see a bit of sanity in this otherwise batshit insane fandango that's revolved around the game.

Cause Jade has bewbs? to all your questions.

You know, my friend keeps comparing Ass Creed (hehehe) to Spider-Man 2: The Game. And as I read the reviews that leaning negative towards Ass Creed (it's fun!), I'm starting to see what he means.

I may give it a rent when I get a 360 in a couple of weeks (woot) just so I get into the loop.

"*Note: The above contained Assassin's Creed spoilers."

HA! Brilliant.

[note: these negative reviews are telling me more about the game than the positive ones. Coincidence?]

Hrn, I can't say I've encountered all that much(in fact, any) blind loyalty to ubi montreal. Personally, I'm not a big ubi fan for all of the many, many times they released games that just didn't seem to be quite finished. That said, I think sands of time was completely awesome, and I don't understand at all why king kong was so maligned(I played it without knowing anything about it and loved it). I guess a company earns a person's loyalty by fairly consistently making games that person likes, which is the precise reason I'm such a big nintendo, bioware or team ico fan.

What I'm curious about is why the hell a game like assassin's creed gets assailed by gamers willing to burn ubi montreal's headquarters to the ground for it when they clearly put an ungodly amount of work into it. It's by no means perfect, and I get the feeling it could have used a bit more QA, but considering how ambitious a project it was, I firmly believe it was a success. No game is perfect, not even mario galaxy(as damn near as it comes) or *insert favourite game here*. AC is incredibly beautiful though, and as much as I feel gameplay takes precedence, the importance of a resplendent presentation should never be underestimated. Also, I find the parokour exploration and combat/assassinations more than enjoyable enough to propel me through the most certainly repetitive structure.

So why do people make posts defending the game? The same reason you made a post damning it. I guess it's a kind of love/hate thing where the one side can't quite understand why the other side feels the way they do. Also, I think PA's gabe gave a pretty good take on it.

Playing a game at a brutal pace shouldn't eliminate the fun. If Gabe's argument is that searching for a hundred fucking hidden flags in a giant city will make me feel better about the fact that, fundamentally, there's only four things to do, it's an argument I don't agree with.

Games shouldn't be about making your own fun.

Its a tough nut to crack. On one hand the game is absolutly beautiful, on the other its repetitive. The parkour movements are incredible, but the guards are dimwitted. Its definatly not a game of the year canidate, in my opinion anyway, but it does bring some interesting things to the table.

The free running is very enjoyable. The crowds in the city feel more real than any other game I've played to date. Climbing doesn't seem awkward, in so far as there are no obvious "ok here is where I can climb" moments. A halfway decent story and voice acting are present. It at least allows for some freedom in how you go about your main assassination, although there are "best" ways to do it.

The game does have problems too. The guards can be pretty dumb at times, stab somebody in the back in front of one and hit blend immeadiatly and you might as well be invisible. Linear story, it would have been cool to be able to choose your assassination target in the game and have it affect the outcome somehow, similar to the bioshock choice to kill the little girls or save them. It is repetitive, go here, collect information, climb stuff, impress your local assassination dude and then go kill your guy, repeat 9 times.

I think knowing what this game could have been makes me a little sadder. However, for myself I love the history at this time, the free climbing and look of the game made it worth it for me even if it is repetitive. If its not your thing, maybe give it a rent and at least see for yourself.

It doesn't bother me that people like it despite its faults -- what bugs me how far people will go to defend it against those who disagree, so much so that they ignore everything that makes it imperfect. 150 comments over Rev's 5.5? Jesus Christ.

but I like it...

You know what? Why the fuck is everyone attacking Jade Raymond? Fair enough she is a very pretty lady. She's refused a maxim shoot, she's a programmer, managed a HUGE team for the game and only reason the game got over-promoted by her was because everyone was begging for her and all she can do is say how great her game is! Any MALE in that position would of done the same but because Jade is pretty you all make out like she's some whore. :/

To be honest, I think all the high expectations that the industry had for this game are just that: High. Everyone and their mother was interested in this game way back in the "PS3 exclusive" exclusive days, and it has had a long road of traveling since then.

I certainly don't think that anyone should lower their standards for gaming to enjoy this, or any other game, but keep in mind that more people are mad a AC not jut for being mediocre, but because that pretty girl promised you it wouldn't be.

There are many, many young and attractive producers in this industry, all who make popular games, and the only difference between them and Jade Raymond is that you don't know who they are. Their respective companies have not decided to put them out in the public to promote their product. And while this is just a matter of apples and oranges, it makes you -- the consumer -- judge the game on its own merits.

Kinda like you should be doing. And, I know that hating on this game is all "the rage" right now, but each and every single gamer I know, including my roommate, my friends, and the forty gamers I work with at the game company I work for, think that AC is pretty awesome.

But are they wrong and you're right? Vice Versa, maybe? Who knows, it's all subjective. All I know is that I can easily say that they've judged the game based on their experience with, and not on some sort of preconceived notion based on internet PR.

If you're judging the game on that concept then congrats, you're just part of the crowd right now. If you're judging the game based on you hands-on playtime, without any care to all the blow back that this game is getting on the 'nets, then feel free to say whatever you want about it. You've earned it.

But don't act out because you're mad you fell for one of the oldest PR tricks in the world. It happens. Move on. Maybe everyone should take a second look at this game minus all th hyper and PR blunders, and just look at it for what it is, ya know? Maybe just do a STFUAJPG?

If it is still as bad as you say, then stand by that decision. If, for some reason, you've find that you've been swayed by this PR debacle and everybody acting like children, then you just may find a game worth playing.

i don't think its a great game, but i like the fact that it brings something new to the table, flaws and all. personally, i have a bigger problem with halo 3, which was far more hyped, got 9 and 10's from "reputable" review sites, sold far more copies, but in the end, was the same old shit two years later...halo 3 type development (big budget, little innovation, huge marketing muscle behind it) are far deadlier to the gaming industry.

slam ass creed all you want, but at least it didn't feed the masses the same old crap with shinier graphics.

I'm not here to attack Jade Raymond or talk about anything other than the game, which to me is a disappointment from what it was built up to be, but it is decidedly average. It has so much potential that's been wasted that I don't want to play it just yet. Maybe they could be working on an update that resolves a lot of these bugs, but I don't know.

Games shouldn't be about making your own fun.

And why exactly not? Garry's mod seems pretty damn popular, and little big planet is garnering a lot of(well deserved) attention. The main distinction between gaming and other art/entertainment is interactivity, and giving a user control over how they play is about the ultimate in that. I don't think it's fair to criticise a game for not holding your hand the whole time while telling you the correct way to enjoy it.

The most similar game to AC I've played, and I'm surprised I've never read anyone else mention the likeness, is crackdown. In crackdown, you have only one objective; infiltrate gang HQs and take out the boss. Sure, there's other stuff to do, but who wants to go searching for a hundred fucking hidden orbs, am I right? My point is, crackdown was extremely fun, and I'm sure most of you will agree with that. The difference between AC and crackdown is that while AC was hyped to high heaven, crackdown was just the halo 3 beta pack-in, so enjoyment gleamed from it was serendipitous.

Also, I think kohler's review is completely fair. Those flaws mentioned are present in abundance, but the entire package as a whole was fun enough for me to consider it an awesome game. Also, I think mentioning jade raymond as a pro/con for this game should be considered some kind of goodwin variant. Yes, she's hot. No, that has no bearing on the game.

Also, inre bioshock: gameplay-wise, it really doesn't have shit on deus ex(a game that preceded it by over 7 years). There was virtually no variety of play, just shooting splicer clones over, and over, and over again with the odd(identical) big daddy fight, or tubehack puzzle. Plasmids were more of a novelty than anything else, as they were only ever situationally semi-useful, and tonics were a joke. Don't get me wrong, I love bioshock, I'm just illustrating the point that it's really easy to criticise a game if all you're trying to do is pick it apart.

Sort of like bioshock?

Alright, you're probably looking for some qualification, so here it is: most games, unless they're WarioWare, establish core gameplay principles and form the experience around those principles. BioShock and Assassin's Creed both do that. But here's where the similarities end: BioShock's reach doesn't extend beyond its capabilities. At its heart it's a pretty simple FPS, but it's in the application of these basic gameplay principles that it becomes fun. And while you're essentially doing the same things (collecting items, destroying baddos, solving puzzles, etc), the elements are rearranged and presented in ways that keep the experience fresh, offered in a wide variety of configurations. Of the six marks I've taken out in Assassin's Creed, the experience almost always comes down the same way: pickpocket, eavesdrop, interrogate (all of which occur without variation or complication), and slay the mark.

Again, most games are "repetitive" in that they establish a core gameplay schema which drives the experience. But Assassin's Creed and Crackdown are exceptional in that they make no efforts to dress up the tasks to refresh the player.

Alrighty, although I was hoping of a little more in ways of explanation.

I think I've figured out the cause of this disagreement though. The advocates think the criticisers are saying the game is shit and not worth playing, while the criticisers think the advocates are saying the game is perfect and everyone should be forced to love it at gunpoint. I imagine the fact of the matter is that complaining about it doesn't mean you hate it, and defending it doesn't mean you think it's the second coming. My only reason for being a vocal proponent for AC is because I don't want people to see the tempestuous dirge negative comments about it here at dtoid and just assume it's not worth their time. At very, very, ultimate uber-worst, the game is still at least a rental, because it's unique enough that I think everyone with any slight interest should try it out.

brad drac.. i have to say, of all the people on this site, i disagree with you the most. every comment you make nicely put, somewhat pretentious, but dude... assassins creed is not a good game. and i liked playing it!! for a while...

you sound like you know a lot of stuff, but you just put them in the wrong sense every time. talking about fear other people have of having a game "not holding your hand" is completely out of context.

no one has mentioned crackdown?! almost every major site has mentioned crackdown as a likeness to ac.

sorry, i just... have never in my life disagreed with a person more than this. but keep it up man, you're comments are interesting, they're just inaccurate

Aye, much like the inevitable vocal minority of "worst game evar" idiots. I don't think the game is, as a whole, average. Average games, considering the unbelievable number of awesome releases of late, shouldn't really even be in your console unless you've got a hell of a lot more free time than I. Anyway, I don't think average is the right word. You may consider it mediocre, but it isn't mundane.

Dragging back to the repetitiveness issue(I know, sorry) I think, like gabe said, if you play the game as if it's a chore, you won't find any fun at all. You could actually just do the quickest and easiest investigations, and then just storm your target's location with sword swinging rampantly, but it'd be shit. A lot of the fun I have with is by sneaking around, even when it's not necessarily the easiest thing to do, and doing cool executions, then pegging it when the guards give chase even though I could kill them all in a fair fight pretty easily. It is a design flaw that playing this way has no in-game benefit whatsoever, but it's still the only way I'd play it.

->xper: It think "self-important" would be more apt than "pretentious", but I get the gist. But goddamnit, I can't help it if I'm better than everyone else!

Everyone has their own opinion, and thank you for not being as much of a huge, gaping, fire-breathing asshole as others are. We also thank you for voicing your opinion as a whole, and shall work hard to achieve set goals.

My old one was daterape. This new one is just good ol' fashioned sexy.

i dunno.
glitches are actually good entertainment
take the grand theft auto series, the codes almost let you break the game and allowed for some seriously weird glitches to happen.

but that's one of the things i actually really liked about the game. maybe because there seems that there's always more to discover.

although a glory hole isn't a great discovery, something like the two altair's is interesting.

I had two cars...









but I rectum.

but...but i like Ubi Montreal :(

they gave me Naruto Rise of a Ninja (AWSUMZ) and if i remember correctly, they gave me 2 Prince of Persias that were godly (Warrior Within was between ok). I like Montreal

so..what companies, can i love without receiving a beating, mr Linde?