Assassin's Creed Brotherhood |OT| where my bro's at?
- Thread starter iNvid02
- Start date
Sickboy007
Member
Ledsen said:
I like Black Cops personally.
I'm not talking about the story, I'm talking about the game structure (what you're actually doing from moment to moment). There's an important difference. For most of AC2, you're doing the mission equivalent of just looking down at the stones under your feet. You're never looking up at what's coming ahead. AC1 has a structure much more like levels or chapters where there's a particular target in one area. You gather info on that target, execute, and move on to the next chapter. In AC2, you're just connecting an arbitrary sequence of dots, but without ever seeing the picture you're constructing by connecting those dots.ZealousD said:
Don't get me wrong, I loved AC2 and the series as a whole. I just think AC2 went too far in the direction of raw "variety" and lost a lot of what made AC1 compellingly unique. The team was so terrified of the sequel being called "repetitious" that they avoided almost anything that looked like structural regularity and predictability. But I'm well aware I'm in the minority in my opinion.
DrBo42 said:
Can never bring myself to finish a SP version of AC but I like the concept. that's why MP is appealing to me. I just wonder if there is a true tension to be found in the MP portion that makes it a replayable experience and addictive fun. I currently play Reach, BO's and BC2 online and want change of pace online game but do not want to pay $60 for half-baked idea with small online community.
damn exclusive betas! :lol
Yeah, that was my impression, too. However, the single player is excellent and a 10-15 hour experience, they should have put more weight in marketing that (since the series' orientation obviously has always been focussed on SP). The MP is pretty good, though. It won't be a new Call of Duty, but it will find its fanbase.Victrix said:
dwebo said:
Nope, sorry. There's a new kind of puzzles based on
audio
However, I found the "couple of seconds of video" thing in ACII perfectly fitting the purpouse of the puzzles. When you unlocked each piece, it was always like you were a step away from figuring the whole scenario, while always being well far away. With each piece unlocked, I longed to see the next one. It's the same kind of narrative mechanism behind something like the dream sequences in Carpenter's masterpiece, Prince of Darkness.
Superfrog said:
The only way you'd get the impression that this was an MP only title is if you stopped paying attention after the game was initially announced. There are tons and tons of trailers about the game's SP portion.
I didn't get the impression that it was an MP only title. They just conveyed the impression that the MP was the main part by far and the SP was more in the likes of a typical DLC add-on episode (which is absolutely not the case, it's rather the other way around).ZealousD said:
BobTheFork
Member
well, there are tons of people who think/though it was mp only (myself included) so there is some kind of gap of information.ZealousD said:
mescalineeyes
Banned
So I'm installing this game on my debug ps3 right now. If anyone has any question technical questions, I'd be more than happy to check.
mescalineeyes
Banned
Irish said:
the installation is pretty smooth so far
alright, noted. I'll report back on that. I've been playing PC only for the past few months so I guess I'll by hyper-susceptible.mescalineeyes
Banned
ah fuck it, this is some old work in progress build.
sorry.
sorry.
faceless007
Member
The first game on PC leaked too and Ubisoft sued the disc manufacturer. Is security at disc plants really that bad?
I've been looking at some gameplay footage and now I can't remember if this was a feature in AC2. I remember in AC1 it had that awesome cloud lighting effect where it would be slightly darker if there were clouds blocking the sun, and the reverse. I think that wasn't implemented in AC2 or it was super subtle (jett would remember). However it seems to be in ACB. Can some of our reviewer friends confirm?
. I'm even sadder as I revealed that spoiler when I quoted you just now. Damnit! :lolEther_Snake
å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®
DrBo42 said:
It was also in AC2.
Snapshot King
Member
I'm so god damn hype for this. The multiplayer beta had me so wet.
Snapshot King
Member
Klocker said:
I know! Seriously though, can't wait to stab my pals. Anybody know what the extra gamemodes are?
Snapshot King
Member
Concept17 said:
Multiplayers particularly great if you love raging opponents. It's the perfect game for out of nowhere bullshit kills.
I know I'm a little late to the conversation here, but I figured I should share my views on the differences between the two main AC games. (Lol, I had trouble finding it because it was in a sales thread. Insane!)
__
Here are the areas where I believe the original Assassin's Creed was better than the sequel:
Story - Considering how much more involved the ACII story was supposed to be, it was odd how disconnected I felt from it all compared to AC's story. They try to toss you straight into Ezio's life, but it just doesn't seem to work out. Instead, you end up feeling more for Altair due to all of the dialogue between him and his master/contracts.
Combat - Sure, there were a ton more combat options in ACII, but it was almost impossible to get together a group of more than 6 people at a time. It just felt boring because the combat was over before it got a chance to begin. I loved running into a group of ten or twelve baddies in the original and completely destroying them using only hidden blade counters.
Art Style - I didn't really like the stylized look the characters and environments had in the sequel. Something about the "realistic" tone of the first game appealed to me. It was nice and gritty while Italy was way too clean.
Assassination Contracts - Altair didn't have a "personal" reason to kill his targets like Ezio did, but he seemed to connect to them more. Also, the targets really had a personality to them in the first game that made you want to kill them. For example, that Priest Doctor was experimenting on the beggars of the city. Cruel bastard. Every single one of the targets in AC had a unique personality. In ACII, they all just felt like random fodder.
Desmond Segments - I preferred the stealth aspect of these in the first game. It was fun sneaking around and decoding emails and the like. Doing the same thing I was doing in the past in the present but with less abilities was boring in ACII.
Mission Structure - I sorta liked the hub-like nature of the first game. The GTA-style missions in the second just felt stale.
____
Of course, there are a few things that ACII does better:
Character Design - Ezio has a far more interesting design than Altair.
Actual Missions - So much more variety here. Really cut down on the repetitive nature of the first.
Setting - Italy just appealed to me more.
Miscellaneous Stuff - Building up Monteriggioni, looking for treasure (even though the rewards were pretty stupid), the ability to dye your clothing, upgrading armor and weapons, and the sheer number of weapon types you end up with were all amazing parts of the game.
___
Now, I may not have gone much into some of the ACII stuff, but I really do believe that it improved upon the formula in a lot of good ways. I just think it took a step backwards in some.
__
Here are the areas where I believe the original Assassin's Creed was better than the sequel:
Story - Considering how much more involved the ACII story was supposed to be, it was odd how disconnected I felt from it all compared to AC's story. They try to toss you straight into Ezio's life, but it just doesn't seem to work out. Instead, you end up feeling more for Altair due to all of the dialogue between him and his master/contracts.
Combat - Sure, there were a ton more combat options in ACII, but it was almost impossible to get together a group of more than 6 people at a time. It just felt boring because the combat was over before it got a chance to begin. I loved running into a group of ten or twelve baddies in the original and completely destroying them using only hidden blade counters.
Art Style - I didn't really like the stylized look the characters and environments had in the sequel. Something about the "realistic" tone of the first game appealed to me. It was nice and gritty while Italy was way too clean.
Assassination Contracts - Altair didn't have a "personal" reason to kill his targets like Ezio did, but he seemed to connect to them more. Also, the targets really had a personality to them in the first game that made you want to kill them. For example, that Priest Doctor was experimenting on the beggars of the city. Cruel bastard. Every single one of the targets in AC had a unique personality. In ACII, they all just felt like random fodder.
Desmond Segments - I preferred the stealth aspect of these in the first game. It was fun sneaking around and decoding emails and the like. Doing the same thing I was doing in the past in the present but with less abilities was boring in ACII.
Mission Structure - I sorta liked the hub-like nature of the first game. The GTA-style missions in the second just felt stale.
____
Of course, there are a few things that ACII does better:
Character Design - Ezio has a far more interesting design than Altair.
Actual Missions - So much more variety here. Really cut down on the repetitive nature of the first.
Setting - Italy just appealed to me more.
Miscellaneous Stuff - Building up Monteriggioni, looking for treasure (even though the rewards were pretty stupid), the ability to dye your clothing, upgrading armor and weapons, and the sheer number of weapon types you end up with were all amazing parts of the game.
___
Now, I may not have gone much into some of the ACII stuff, but I really do believe that it improved upon the formula in a lot of good ways. I just think it took a step backwards in some.
Snapshot King
Member
Irish said:
I couldn't disagree with any of your dislikes more. Particularly where you said you enjoyed Altairs story more. Altair was a blank slate and a douchebag blank slate at that. He didn't even have a character, whereas Ezio is likeable and has a personal stake in what's going on.
iNvid02
Member
Ezio is a much better character than Altair, i think if they actually wrote something on the blank slate that was altair - the conversations with his master, the assassinations, the betrayal etc would have meant a lot more. Because Altair ended up like a "no face" it didn't have the impact it could have.
With Ezio they gave him a personality, and so you could connect better to the story
With Ezio they gave him a personality, and so you could connect better to the story
Snapshot King
Member
iNvidious01 said:
Not to mention how Altair was actually a BAD person and a douchebag at that. The first thing he does is murder a civilian for no reason.
iNvidious01 said:
the story of the Assassin's Creed games is completely bonkers, so pretty much the only thing one can connect to is the character and his family itself
so i was pretty
when they
hung his younger brother and the rest of the family
Was pretty well done, that whole scene. That's the type of stuff I like in these games, though, sucking up the atmosphere. If you start focusing on the overall story, you'll be in tears. Fucking
Mayan 2012 conspiracy theory shit for sure
Amir0x said:the story of the Assassin's Creed games is completely bonkers, so pretty much the only thing one can connect to is the character and his family itself
so i was prettyhung his younger brother and the rest of the family
Was pretty well done, that whole scene. That's the type of stuff I like in these games, though, sucking up the atmosphere. If you start focusing on the overall story, you'll be in tears. Fucking:lolMayan 2012 conspiracy theory shit for sure
Don't hate.
It's time to find some temples that will help us save the world...from the sun. Or something.
Similar threads
- Locked