Let me start with some back story, (and no stops) I thought the first Assassin’s Creed was horrible, horrible. I got through most of the game until I just got angry at the game and stopped, so I gave the game a fair shake.
Now that we are done with that, I knew, just like everyone else knew, that there was going to be a sequel to this game. The game sold a boatload of copies and it would be stupid not to make another game, so I became optimistic because there were some reviewers out there in the world who shared my thoughts (Destructoid and the late EGM).
So my copy of Gameinformer arrived in the mail today and I will say the setting and the look of the game got me excited but that is what I thought of the last game and it was horrible, but I started to read. There is one thing that the first Assassin’s Creed should have had, the stupid structure of go to bureau crap is now gone and everything else stinks of the same thing wrong with the last game.
The magazine says that there are 16 unique mission types, I will believe them on that there are 16 types of missions but not all of them will probably be unique. In the magazine (this could be a problem with Gameinformer’s lack of writing skills but this is a reactionary post to the magazine article, I will still buy this game) they explain some of the missions that they saw. I won’t quote in fear of something happening but after they say there are 16 unique missions they explain two missions which come down to following people in a crowd. The only difference is that one is a male running and the other is a female walking.
The game looks effing amazing, there are side by side photos in the magazine of real and game and only one of the photos looks gamey. Speaking of gamey, the thing I hope for when Assassin’s Creed 2 comes out is that it is not as gamey as the original. But this article is not filling me with hope, which is never a good thing.
Madninja away….
Stop right there.
He's right. Assassin's Creed sucked. It was a bad game. It was do the same fucking mission a boatload of times.
*does first set of missions*
"That was awesome!"
*does next set of missions*
"Oh, uh, ok. Huh."
*does next set of missions*
"Fuck this shit. ITS THE SAME FUCKING TASK LIST LIKE, 9 TIMES IN A ROW"
yeah, there was a lot of repetition in the intelligence gathering parts, and the limited number of ways to hide from guards was disappointing I admit, but the immersion was the best I've ever seen in a game, the free-running mechanic was slick as shit, and the storyline was tits. If none of those things made you want to grin and bear the detracting parts just to see the story pan out then I don't really think you should get your hopes up for the second one. It'll be the same idea with some tweaks, not reworked completely. Since you didn't really seem to like much of any of it doesn't sound like it'll appeal to you, and that's cool, just don't get worked up about it.
Here's why I liked The dialogue between you and the Masyaf, you and your victims, and you and the grumpy old scientist was some of the most interesting stuff I've heard in dialogue hands down. I figure it's lost on you because you make puns becase a synonym for 'butt' is in a game's title.
I'm kidding, but it's kind of hard to not imagine most of the people that disliked AC as the kind of person who'd just go around murdering civilians and not listening to dialogue and cutscenes because their little ritalin ass can't pay attention for a minute without someone dying to stimulate them.
didn't you think it was cool how they downplayed violence? How not every mission was just you killing someone- like how sometimes you're just listening. or how every time you killed your target the conversation you had with them, they made your rationale for killing them seem less sound? I think the game was really damn cinematic, and definitely one of the best I've ever played easily.
whatever though, I'll buy it regardless of how much you bitch about it.
In fact, the biggest reason for me being upset with the game was that I could see its potential not being reached.
I don't know what all 16 mission types are going to be, but as long as they're aware that repetition is what was wrong with the first game, then I'm sure their attempt to fix the problem will be at least passable in my book. The actual assassination attempts seem to be getting spruced up as well, so that should make the games main objectives more enjoyable to complete.
Ubisoft recognized that the first game had problems, and all I've seen so far is news to show that they're trying to fix those problems. Considering my love for the first game despite its flaws, this is one of my most anticipated games to come out in the next year or so!
I actually give them credit for trying to do passive and sneaky and not killing but they reused it over and over and over again. And I said I was going to buy it and I said that this was a reaction to the Gameinformer article, and not about the first AC.
@Arttemis
Yeah the article said that Ubisoft spent months reading the reactions people had to the game and tried to mend the problems.