surf dtoid with 
Rising (10+)
People you follow
send message
follow
followers
This has given me slightly more respect for the game after Jim's review, but also reinforced the notion that I don't really need to play it at all.
I've never played either Assassin's Creed. Maybe it would be worth $10 to rent, but I just can't get interested enough in it to spend even that much for a few days. It just sounds tedious! Like an open world that doesn't really have any emergent gameplay.
I've never played either Assassin's Creed. Maybe it would be worth $10 to rent, but I just can't get interested enough in it to spend even that much for a few days. It just sounds tedious! Like an open world that doesn't really have any emergent gameplay.
At least you found something you enjoyed in this one, Anthony.
Granted, the 360 version of AC I wasn't great, but I'm just glad AC II ended up being more acceptable to mainstream audiences, and now can be universally regarded as "good".
@Animated
Rent the second one ASAP.
Granted, the 360 version of AC I wasn't great, but I'm just glad AC II ended up being more acceptable to mainstream audiences, and now can be universally regarded as "good".
@Animated
Rent the second one ASAP.
To me the selling point of the game was always running/jumping/climbing and not seeking a challenge. I love both AC and AC2 equally.
you talking about MGS3:Snake Eater or MGS3:Substantativenecessity? Playing Snake Eater on any setting is maddening. Its just more sadistic the higher you go up. I've heard that the new camera angles on the latter help, but I wouldn't know as I gave up the series at MGS2 only to find the cheap snake eater appealing to me. Its a better game (than 2) just with a new horrible camera.
as for AC2...you pinpointed my biggest issue with the first. Not that there wasn't enough focus on doing things but that as I got better at the game, the game didn't get better with me. From all that I've seen, its still not at the point where its a must have instead of a lets see type of game.
as for AC2...you pinpointed my biggest issue with the first. Not that there wasn't enough focus on doing things but that as I got better at the game, the game didn't get better with me. From all that I've seen, its still not at the point where its a must have instead of a lets see type of game.
Why do you emphasize storyline so much in a game? Whenever I read or hear you talk about games it's always storyline first. And varied gameplay? Can't you just enjoy a game on its own style and gameplay? If a game does one thing, like Rampage, isn't that enough? Do you need justification to stomp buildings? And furthermore, not only play the game once for many levels but replay it again and again?
ah... and you've once again reinforced my lack of interest in the second game after playing the first. It's really too bad that they didn't take a giant leap forward with this franchise that has so much potential!
I agree on the difficulty. I find myself wishing for hundreds of enemies to fight, so I go through the towns pissing off guards just because it's fun to play around with the climbing and combat systems. But the customization part is pretty rewarding compared to the first game.
What part of the ending is "good in theory"? I have no intentions of playing the game so I watched some of the ending on Youtube - which was..uhm, okay-ish? Or is it the gameplay aspect/ending level of it I have to see and is it even possible to appreciate the ending without having played the game before it?
Playing the second one now. Rented it. Happy I did. Enjoyed the first though was let down by the monotony of it all. The second one has more things that interest me but, yeah, glad I rented it.
Have you seen the pilot for PATV? A potentially great videogame-related series. I'm sure you'd enjoy it.
Where's the digg button on the article?
It's really good, even though I haven't seen the first 3.... I will now.
It's really good, even though I haven't seen the first 3.... I will now.
Assassins creed in general seem to be something people love or hate. I like it but then again I also know exactly when to turn my brain off and have fun, vs. something I should actually think about.
randombullseye:
Did you even read what I wrote? I didn't emphasize storyline once.
manasteel88:
I'm talking about MGS3 substance, on expert. This will explain, maybe: http://www.destructoid.com/rev-rant-snakes-plants-and-difficulty-132878.phtml
Iron1c:
If someone described the last boss fight to me using words, I would think it sounded like the greatest thing ever.
Did you even read what I wrote? I didn't emphasize storyline once.
manasteel88:
I'm talking about MGS3 substance, on expert. This will explain, maybe: http://www.destructoid.com/rev-rant-snakes-plants-and-difficulty-132878.phtml
Iron1c:
If someone described the last boss fight to me using words, I would think it sounded like the greatest thing ever.
Sometime I feel like it's cool to hate on Assassin's Creed. I enjoyed the first game. If I played it for the first time now, I don't think it would be as impressive. But as a tech demo of sorts early on this gen, it was engrossing. I'm not even talking about OMFG GRAFFIX!!1!! AC was the first game where I felt that level of fidelity and reality from a game. The detail in the animations, the architecture, etc. made everything feel so tactile and alive in a way that wasn't previous before.
While it read like bad Dan Brown fan fic, I also enjoyed the story. It's an interesting device to take a narrative across multiple time lines. Story is my favorite part of games because it's such a unique way to unfold a narrative. While AC is flawed for sure, it hits all my needs very well.
While it read like bad Dan Brown fan fic, I also enjoyed the story. It's an interesting device to take a narrative across multiple time lines. Story is my favorite part of games because it's such a unique way to unfold a narrative. While AC is flawed for sure, it hits all my needs very well.
yeah, that's why I asked because you specifically make note that its Snake Eater 25 seconds in. I've been reading a few articles (Gamespite's article in particular) recently on Metal Gear Solid 3 and it seems that these great moments of clarity are taking place as they attack the same moments in drastically different ways, and it leads me to question whether they had played the actual original version of the game and felt this or not. As I had read that article, I questioned it in the same manner as I found no mention of anything about the camera.
One negative aspect that I have rarely heard any reviewer bring up about either Assassin's Creed II or its predecessor: the sheer pretentiousness of a game that forces the player to wait through boring, semi-interactive dialogues before getting back to the actual gameplay. Having already beaten the first game once, the fact that some idiot decided it would be a good idea to force me to sit through another eight minute ethics discussion with Al Mualim before ever being allowed to actually re-play a mission was not only infuriating, but it destroyed the replay value utterly and completely. Until Ubisoft decides to fix this flaw(although it's obviously intentional since skippable scenes have been around since the fucking VCR), I personally won't be buying another Assassin's Creed game. It's that bad.
Does AC2 have different difficulty settings? Cause I agree with you on that point; I personally had a blast playing the first game, but that was only because I forced myself to stay in character (only climbed buildings when no one was around to see, stayed hidden on rooftops, killed soldiers through stealth, etc), not because the game required me to. I was really hoping AC2 would ramp up the difficulty so I actually felt a need to do those things for the sake of survival, and not just for my own entertainment.
@king kong five
There is no difficulty setting, but something I find that helps if you're looking for a challenge is to change your armor back to the leather stuff in order to lower Ezio's health bar. Although the medicine aspect almost negates that strategy, it does make things a little more dangerous at least.
There is no difficulty setting, but something I find that helps if you're looking for a challenge is to change your armor back to the leather stuff in order to lower Ezio's health bar. Although the medicine aspect almost negates that strategy, it does make things a little more dangerous at least.
@brainderailment: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=shank
@danmartigan: also may i add wearing the auditore cape makes it more challenging
the best description ive heard of the game is simply just "a disappointment"
@danmartigan: also may i add wearing the auditore cape makes it more challenging
the best description ive heard of the game is simply just "a disappointment"
I mentioned this elsewhere here I know, but while I did like running and jumping around Venice and Florence I didn't feel as familiar with the subject matter compared to the first game. I liked the history lessons, but I never got into the story. It felt like I had to have intimate knowledge of Italian history to even remotly grasp why I should care what is going on in the game. Besides Da Vinci and the Meddci family I don't remember recognizing one single thing in the game. The part where I perked up was when (spoiler) I was going to go to Rome. I was like hells yea I get to run around Rome? And then it was just a small scripted end game scenario, and I felt cheated. I probably would have been more drawn into the game had it been set in Rome. Running around the Coloseum, the aquaducts, and every other landmark in that City you read about in history class would have been way cooler.
@ Corak: Although the Rome bit was just a small scripted bit, you still got to beat up the Pope, which is downright awesome.
And I think what Ubisoft needed to do is add a New Game + type option. Not in the sense that you kept all of your weapons/armour/etc, but maybe more so you could actually skip the cutscenes. Yeah, first time through, watching them is fair enough, seems it's part of the storyline, but 2nd/3rd/etc through, I know the story, I don't need to be retold it for 10 minutes at a time before missions.
And I think what Ubisoft needed to do is add a New Game + type option. Not in the sense that you kept all of your weapons/armour/etc, but maybe more so you could actually skip the cutscenes. Yeah, first time through, watching them is fair enough, seems it's part of the storyline, but 2nd/3rd/etc through, I know the story, I don't need to be retold it for 10 minutes at a time before missions.
"I still maintain that AC's combat should be really, really hard in order to encourage stealth and running and chases and all the items you've got -- like how MGS3 on normal mode is kind of boring, but on extreme it's a goddamn revelation."
Completely agree
Completely agree
I just watched the last boss fight in Assassin's Creed 2. I had no idea what you were talking about until I realized who the boss actually was. Now what I want to know is how do you screw that up?! That should be the greatest boss fight ever. Ugh, what a missed opportunity.
This is even worse than the last boss of Arkham Asylum, because in that case they'd kind of written themselves into a corner and while they should have done something else at least you understood the reasoning behind it. Here the concept was so brilliant and they totally blew it. Inexcusable. Not that I really care about this game, but still.
This is even worse than the last boss of Arkham Asylum, because in that case they'd kind of written themselves into a corner and while they should have done something else at least you understood the reasoning behind it. Here the concept was so brilliant and they totally blew it. Inexcusable. Not that I really care about this game, but still.
