Support NeoGAF

[Feindflug]

Sounds like you need to read up on Greek history and culture. There was no "Greece" in those days, and Alexander did much to unite the disparate city states that we now think of as modern "Greece." He was indeed from Macedonia as was his father. Nothing "political" about it.

EDIT: Especially if you consider that Macedon/ia was dismantled in the 2nd century BC! Unless you're from 156 BC, I have no idea what you could find "offensive." You seem to be confusing ancient Macedonia with modern Macedonia. Modern Macedonia is a creation of the 19th century.

Did you even see what I'm talking about? Maybe you confuse Ancient Greece with Modern Greece? Well I guess someone in Ubisoft Montreal needs to read up on Greek history and is confusing ancient Macedonia with the Skopje...I know that there was no Greece as we know it today in those days but why Perseus for example in the game is mentioned as being from Greece and not Argos? same with Jason and Achilles...

 

[Papa]

Just finished the game with 1000/1000. Overall, it was a solid game and a vast improvement on its predecessor but I still have mixed feelings about it. Some of the good/bad I felt were:

Good:

- Stunning visuals, beautiful setting
- Variety of weapons and abilities
- Combat was enjoyable for the most part
- Great attention to detail in the environments
- Monteriggioni slightly satisfied the RPG whore in me
- Pacing was top notch until the last few memories
- The assassin tombs were INCREDIBLE

Bad:

- Convoluted, nonsensical story
- Lack of proper boss fights
- Repetition was an issue towards the end of the game
- Most characters lacked personality; Ubisoft could take some lessons in character design from Rockstar
- Ezio's assassinate animation slides and causes him to fall off roofs when taking down archers
- Controls felt slightly sluggish at times

 

[1stStrike]

Just beat it tonight, myself. It was fun, but the storyline is definitely all over the place. It's like they weren't really sure what they wanted to do with it and came up with things along the way.

Also...wall jumping is annoying as ****. Many times I'd use it and Ezio would go flying the wrong direction and I'd either die or have to restart the puzzle/clock due to lack of time.

The ending of the game could've been a lot more...epic. I hate to bring in YAU2R (Yet Another Uncharted 2 Reference) but the ending of that game was all kinds of epic. AC2 needed something like that where you're fighting at the controls and everything is bat shit crazy instead of throwing more repetitive fights at you.

Also, agreed on the character models. They need some fixing up so they don't look so wooden. The only thing that wasn't wooden was the ass on that blond haired chick. I could follow her around all day.

Overall enjoyment: Much more than the first one. The beautiful environments, approvements across the board and the new weapons made things quite a bit more fun. However, once again, combat was too easy. The only time I ever struggled was when I ran into a bug and got put at a disadvantage (such as being caught in a corner while the camera is going crazy and I can't see anything but the sky).

Once you start combat you shouldn't be able to use your hidden blades to get quick kills on guys with full health. More often than not I'd walk up to a group of 4 guys, kill the first two with the dual blades then the next guy would get a blade to the gut and I'd then casually fight the other guy, disarm him and beat him to death with his own weapon. Rinse and repeat.

I hope the next one is in Desmond's time rather than another historic setting. We've done two games in the past an while there's differences between them they're still pretty similar. It's time to get futuristic.

 

[WrikaWrek]

The story is all over the place?

I had no trouble following it, and i'm no braniac. Some of you are either slow or dumb.

 

[conman]

Did you even see what I'm talking about? Maybe you confuse Ancient Greece with Modern Greece? Well I guess someone in Ubisoft Montreal needs to read up on Greek history and is confusing ancient Macedonia with the Skopje...I know that there was no Greece as we know it today in those days but why Perseus for example in the game is mentioned as being from Greece and not Argos? same with Jason and Achilles...

Huh? Ancient Macedonia was a Greek-speaking part of the Hellenic world. Skopje is a later name for a similar region, but a totally different people, culture, and language. Modern "Macedonia" doesn't exist until late in the 19th century and doesn't cover the same region as the ancient place of the same name. Nothing to do with Alexander.

 

[1stStrike]

The story is all over the place?

I had no trouble following it, and i'm no braniac. Some of you are either slow or dumb.

It's not a matter of it being hard to follow. It's a matter of it being all over the place.

The story doesn't flow smoothly. It's bumpy.

 

[Scotch]

Finished it last night. It's a lot better than AC1 (which I really enjoyed). For me, it has the same problem as the first game though: I have no desire to ever play it again.

I felt the game really hit its high point in the middle of the game, somewhere near the end of Florence. After that the repetition slowly kicks in and I found myself playing more just to finish it.

 

[DigitalDevil]

I've been playing the game for about 4 hours now, and I'm curious how far in I am. I've killed

Spoiler

umberto

and fixed my hidden blade. I haven't left Florence yet, and have collected all the treasures/codex pages/missions available to me in the first 2 areas. I've got 13 viewpoints, and 6 feathers I think.

Please tell me I am no more than 10% through the game, or else so far this game is not seeming THAT much longer than AC1 (which I loved).

 

[Minamu]

I've been playing the game for about 4 hours now, and I'm curious how far in I am. I've killed

Spoiler

umberto

and fixed my hidden blade. I haven't left Florence yet, and have collected all the treasures/codex pages/missions available to me in the first 2 areas. I've got 13 viewpoints, and 6 feathers I think.

Please tell me I am no more than 10% through the game, or else so far this game is not seeming THAT much longer than AC1 (which I loved).

When you leave Florence, you've done pretty much 50% of the game. There's 12 chapters/sequences, where are you? That's probably the easiest way to determine how much you have left. I'm pretty sure that AC2 is a lot longer than AC1. Certainly felt that way at least. Especially if you do all the side quest stuff.

 

[Peff]

When you leave Florence, you've done pretty much 50% of the game.

Hm, yes and no. Keep in mind that you

Spoiler

leave and then go back to Florence later to prevent Lorenzo's murder

. I'd say he's at around 20% of the main story, but the codex and tombs and extra missions should help add even more length.

 

[Risette]

Glyphs are definitely worth looking for, the stuff in them is pretty interesting.

Spoiler

So that "H." in Henry Ford's letter is Hitler, right? Just a guess. I'm assuming that by these things: the anti-semitic paper written by Ford in the puzzle, and the mention of war in Europe. Kinda obvious.

But still, this sort of fantasy-history stuff is really intriguing to me. Time to go find some more glyphs!

 

[KillerAJD]

Nooooooooo! My PS3 just got the YLoD when hunting for feathers Goddamnit! Not only do I not have any money to get it fixed (nor the tools to fix it myself) but I have ACII in the drive and I need to return it to Gamefly soon (my subscription ends Jan. 9th). I'm so fucked now :/

 

[The Librarian]

This just might be my GOTY.

 

[Talon]

I finished the game up earlier today and have to say I'm as satisfied with this game as any this generation.

That last section in

Spoiler

Rome

was amazing. The

Spoiler

stretch where you ran through the bridge taking down foes was awesome. Stealth killing from the haystacks and then executing double stabs on the next group was great.

 

[mochuuu]

I finished the game up earlier today and have to say I'm as satisfied with this game as any this generation.

That last section in

Spoiler

Rome

was amazing. The

Spoiler

stretch where you ran through the bridge taking down foes was awesome. Stealth killing from the haystacks and then executing double stabs on the next group was great.

Yeah I just did it this morning, and thought is was a great end sequence. Good set up of guards to let you just go bat shit on them, or taken them down stealthily.

Also, loved the way story's going now. Reading through all the codex pages and studying the drawings also gives a really cool look into the story.

 

[Achtius]

Just finished too. Boss fight was kinda disappointing

Spoiler

killed him by throwing knives

 

[bdouble]

I've been playing the game for about 4 hours now, and I'm curious how far in I am. I've killed

Spoiler

umberto

and fixed my hidden blade. I haven't left Florence yet, and have collected all the treasures/codex pages/missions available to me in the first 2 areas. I've got 13 viewpoints, and 6 feathers I think.

Please tell me I am no more than 10% through the game, or else so far this game is not seeming THAT much longer than AC1 (which I loved).

Florence is shorter. The parts leading up to and in Venice are the majority of the game. You have a ways to go. I finished at about 20 hours without many sidequests at all all.

I finished the game up earlier today and have to say I'm as satisfied with this game as any this generation.

That last section in

Spoiler

Rome

was amazing. The

Spoiler

stretch where you ran through the bridge taking down foes was awesome. Stealth killing from the haystacks and then executing double stabs on the next group was great.

I felt the same way about that part. I loved the feeling. It was designed so that I could be a bit more stealthy than most parts of the game. I wish that feeling was more apparent in the rest of the game.

 

[conman]

It's not a matter of it being hard to follow. It's a matter of it being all over the place.

The story doesn't flow smoothly. It's bumpy.

Precisely. Ezio's storyline is poorly told and even more poorly paced. Opens well and ends well, but everything in-between is a mess, and cutting the Forli missions seriously screws with the momentum of the game. There's little to no motivation for his killings, and his targets have absolutely no "substance" to them at all. There's no sense that anything you do matters through most of the game.

As a game, AC2 is great (which is where many thought the first game failed, though I disagree). As a story, it's not so great (though the Desmond stuff and overarching meta-story is excellent). Ezio may be more "complete" as a character when compared to Altair, but his actions aren't.

 

[1stStrike]

Precisely. Ezio's storyline is poorly told and even more poorly paced. Opens well and ends well, but everything in-between is a mess, and cutting the Forli missions seriously screws with the momentum of the game. There's little to no motivation for his killings, and his targets have absolutely no "substance" to them at all. There's no sense that anything you do matters through most of the game.

As a game, AC2 is great (which is where many thought the first game failed, though I disagree). As a story, it's not so great (though the Desmond stuff and overarching meta-story is excellent). Ezio may be more "complete" as a character when compared to Altair, but his actions aren't.

I'm glad I'm not the only one that's not blind to the story issues.

Spoiler

To further solidify the fact that what Ezio does has little meaning, Minerva basically tells him to shut up and color while she talks to Desmond. Ezio went through all of that shit just to fight the same guy 4 times (it was 4 total fights) and in the end he gets screwed over and forgotten.

 

[conman]

I'm glad I'm not the only one that's not blind to the story issues.

Spoiler

To further solidify the fact that what Ezio does has little meaning, Minerva basically tells him to shut up and color while she talks to Desmond. Ezio went through all of that shit just to fight the same guy 4 times (it was 4 total fights) and in the end he gets screwed over and forgotten.

Too true! :lol

Ubi Montreal decided to spend less time with Desmond this time around, but in the process ended up doing a much better job with his story than with Ezio's.

At least when I wandered around the cities with Altair in AC1, I was choosing to put the story on hold. In AC2 you have no choice; the story puts itself on hold! There's really only one villain in the game and he's the only one you have any real sense of as a character. And unlike the first game, you have no one like Al Mualim to help guide the story along. Lorenzo doesn't do anything and

Spoiler

your uncle disappears right after dumping the "Assassin Family History" in your lap.

That means that Ezio basically just wanders around aimlessly killing fools for no reason. Only towards the end of the game do you realize that

Spoiler

there were Assassin contacts along the way telling you what to do. But since you didn't know who they were, you had no reason to care about what they wanted you to do. By then it's too late to give your actions any real motivation since you've already killed all those people and played through 20+ hours of the game.

Dumb move. No surprise that Ezio's story gets much better from that point on.

 

[Miburou]

(Channeling shidoshi from the SHSM thread for a bit):

I can't believe no one finds the utter lack of challenge to not be a huge turn off. To me the entire game felt more like a tutorial because of that. No tension, no sense of danger, nothing. Seriously, only the races and to a lesser extent the tombs were any fun because of that.

 

[Ether_Snake]

I'm glad I'm not the only one that's not blind to the story issues.

Spoiler

To further solidify the fact that what Ezio does has little meaning, Minerva basically tells him to shut up and color while she talks to Desmond. Ezio went through all of that shit just to fight the same guy 4 times (it was 4 total fights) and in the end he gets screwed over and forgotten.

Spoiler

False. Her message is for Desmond. Ezio's goal was never to find her, he just figured he had to check what was in the vault after finding out there was something there. His story doesn't end there, it never had anything to do with it really, and he has the apple and the staff. Altair's journey only actually started AFTER AC1. It's not like Ezio and the others are going home and retiring now.

 

[conman]

Spoiler

False. Her message is for Desmond. Ezio's goal was never to find her, he just figured he had to check what was in the vault after finding out there was something there. His story doesn't end there, it never had anything to do with it really, and he has the apple and the staff. Altair's journey only actually started AFTER AC1. It's not like Ezio and the others are going home and retiring now.

But that's just it. Ezio never has any goal other than in the first and last few hours of the game.

Spoiler

He's simply an inert "prophet."

I think the story folks got too distracted by what they were doing with the Desmond story and forgot (or perhaps ran out of time) to make Ezio's story equally compelling on its own terms. It's a weak excuse to say that

Spoiler

Ezio's story doesn't start until after the game ends. Altair's in-game story was engaging and interesting and well structured, even if the most significant moments of his life happen after that game ends.

I can't believe no one finds the utter lack of challenge to not be a huge turn off. To me the entire game felt more like a tutorial because of that. No tension, no sense of danger, nothing. Seriously, only the races and to a lesser extent the tombs were any fun because of that.

Depends on how you define "challenge." Finding the glyphs is challenging. Solving the glyph puzzles is challenging. Playing without the HUD is challenging (and perfectly do-able). Finding the feathers is challenging. Finding all the secret locations in the tombs is challenging. There are all kinds of challenges in the game.

If you're referring to combat, that's because the game's not designed to be challenging that way. Combat is more of an inconvenience and a bother than anything else. The "challenge" in combat is in keeping your notoriety low enough to make traveling through cities easier. Combat is an obstacle, not because it can kill you, but because it slows you down and keeps you from getting to where you want to go. I found my notoriety level to be a much bigger source of tension and danger than my health bar (I kept the HUD off so I never knew what it was anyway and never died from combat). I thought it was a great substitute for the traditional "motivate-by-threat-of-death" design philosophy.

EDIT: Also, that's the whole point of the capes/cloaks you earn. They affect your notoriety thereby making combat a greater or lesser impediment to your mobility through the city.

 

[Miburou]

Depends on how you define "challenge." Finding the glyphs is challenging. Solving the glyph puzzles is challenging. Playing without the HUD is challenging (and perfectly do-able). Finding the feathers is challenging. Finding all the secret locations in the tombs is challenging. There are all kinds of challenges in the game.

Most, or all of what you mentioned is optional stuff. Pretty much any game can be challenging and/or lengthy if you go through the trouble of getting everything in it. Besides, finding the glyphs isn't really challenging, nor is finding the feathers (unless annoying is another synonym for challenging).

If you're referring to combat, that's because the game's not designed to be challenging that way. Combat is more of an inconvenience and a bother than anything else. The "challenge" in combat is in keeping your notoriety low enough to make traveling through cities easier. Combat is an obstacle, not because it can kill you, but because it slows you down and keeps you from getting to where you want to go. I found my notoriety level to be a much bigger source of tension and danger than my health bar (I kept the HUD off so I never knew what it was anyway and never died from combat). I thought it was a great substitute for the traditional "motivate-by-threat-of-death" design philosophy.

I'm not just talking about combat. I'm also talking about the generous time limits you're given for anything. I'm talking about in the mission where you need to protect a boat, being able to complete the mission successfully despite killing only some of the attackers. I'm talking about pursuing a guard in the tombs, falling through a gap, talking 5 minutes to get back up again and still finding the guard waiting for you to continue the chase. In other words I mean screwing up big time and still being given a pass.

I'm talking about every mission being broken down into small chunks and being told explicitly what you're supposed to do. Rather than being told "infiltrate the stronghold and assassinate this guy", you're told to jump over this wall, go through this door, pull this level, kill this glowing target, etc. There's no sense of figuring out stuff yourself.

And even with my notoriety level high, I rarely got bothered by guards, and even then it's so easy to get rid of them that I have yet to hear the chase music for more than a couple of seconds! (the one where the circle on the map turns yellow).

What kills me is that I'm totally in love with the art of this game. The graphics and music are amazing (my favorite thing to do in the game is walking around the wetland in the evening), the story and characters intriguing, and the glyph puzzles so fucked up (especially when you're high!), that finishing the game without feeling any sense of accomplishment is such a shame.

Anyway, thanks for sharing your point of view about the game's challenge, even if we don't agree.

 

[1stStrike]

If they gave the gamers that bought the game more credit we'd all be bitching about how hard it is, instead. They'd rather hold our hands the entire way through the game, though. I feel like many gaming companies believe the people that buy their games are too stupid to figure out puzzles or find their own way through a scenario without being told what to do every step of the way. It's irritating, really.

AC as a series could be so much better if they just gave the players more of a chance to figure things out on their own.

 

[Caj814]

Finished it quite awhile ago.It was a much better experience overall compared to AC1.One thing that I would like to see in AC3 is some enemies that can actually fight on par with an Assassin.I felt most of the enemies were too easy once again(like AC1)when I got a hang of the counters.

 

[Miburou]

If they gave the gamers that bought the game more credit we'd all be bitching about how hard it is, instead. They'd rather hold our hands the entire way through the game, though. I feel like many gaming companies believe the people that buy their games are too stupid to figure out puzzles or find their own way through a scenario without being told what to do every step of the way. It's irritating, really.

AC as a series could be so much better if they just gave the players more of a chance to figure things out on their own.

Actually, all I ask for is adjustable difficult levels. Give me more control over the game (and make it hidden in the options menu, so only those that seek more challenge need to bother with it).

It just blows my mind that I played ACII and MW2 so close to each other. One game is tough as nails and let's you adjust the difficulty (and in MW2 even things like time limits can be eliminated on recruit), while the other holds your hand and does not even let you adjust the level of challenge.

 

[Talon]

Actually, all I ask for is adjustable difficult levels. Give me more control over the game (and make it hidden in the options menu, so only those that seek more challenge need to bother with it).

It just blows my mind that I played ACII and MW2 so close to each other. One game is tough as nails and let's you adjust the difficulty (and in MW2 even things like time limits can be eliminated on recruit), while the other holds your hand and does not even let you adjust the level of challenge.

Modern Warfare 2 is tough as nails? I'm a bit surprised by that assertion. Even on Veteran, there's really maybe two sections that are genuinely difficult, and a third that's just a bitchfest because of the randomness.

ACII really could have used a little more polish. I'm not sure scaling difficulties (hints, really) is something Ubisoft would have bothered with, after all, most people that play this game won't mind the handholding.

On the other hand, the HUD options seemed very all-or-nothing. The options could have been more intuitive. No reason why I shouldn't still be able to see what I pick up from a guard pop up on screen even if my permanent Florins display is off or similar pop-up descriptions still occur with a clear HUD.

 

[Miburou]

Dude, difficulty is relative. You might have no trouble with MW2, but it's still more challenging than most games that were released this year...

 

[Scarecrow]

what are some of the achievements I might miss the first time through? preferably, being a little vague to avoid spoilers. The giant bomb guys mentioned one where you have to kick a guy with a glider, and I'm sure there's more. I'm somewhat near the beginning, just got through the first catacomb.

 

[Miburou]

That's the only one you need to worry about.

 

[Ilias78]

Finished it yesterday myself. I loved every minute of the game and averall it was a much better experience than the first one (although i feel that the first one is special too regarding its timeline). The game had issues ofc - the parkour was obviously bugged in some cases and the controls made the assassinations a pretty clunky affair at times. Compared to Batman: Arkam Asylum's controls and stealth takedowns, the game feels very buggy.

But it was a fun experience and a beautifully looking/detailed game with lots of info about Italy. Now lets see whats in store for Assassin's Creed 3...

 

[Scarecrow]

That's the only one you need to worry about.

alright. I was worried that I might have missed one when I wasn't paying attention to the controller during some earlier cutscenes that prompt you to push a button.

 

[The_Inquisitor]

Just left from first area and saw

Spoiler

Itsa me Mario!

WTF?! :lol :lol

 

[Miburou]

alright. I was worried that I might have missed one when I wasn't paying attention to the controller during some earlier cutscenes that prompt you to push a button.

Nah, those are just for show. I think out of those button prompts, I only did 1 or 2 (mainly because I would put the controller down during cut-scenes).

 

[1stStrike]

Actually, all I ask for is adjustable difficult levels. Give me more control over the game (and make it hidden in the options menu, so only those that seek more challenge need to bother with it).

It just blows my mind that I played ACII and MW2 so close to each other. One game is tough as nails and let's you adjust the difficulty (and in MW2 even things like time limits can be eliminated on recruit), while the other holds your hand and does not even let you adjust the level of challenge.

Adjustable difficulty would've helped. The bosses were much to easy too. Most of them didn't even put up a fight. The ones that did, well, it was just the same thing over and over. Block, dodge, hit, block, dodge, hit, until they died. Also, they often didn't follow through. If I messed up and got knocked off my feet they never came over and started pummeling me or stabbing me. They might stab the air or something with the spear but that's it. I'd just get back up, rip the spear out of the guard's hands and kill him with it then move on. Lame.

They need to find something in AC3 to mix the combat up a bit. I'd even take some QTE's. Just something that changes it up from the same ol, same ol and brings forth some of the potential epicness that the game has.

 

[see5harp]

I just started playing a few days ago and am really addicted to the game. Overall, the graphics and animations are impressive. One thing that still needs some work is the combat. Maybe in the next game they'll scale down the environments to provide a more controlled experience like Arkham Asylum. That way the entire stealth/close combat systems can be refined a bit. The movement and mechanics are miles ahead of GTAIV, but I still have issues here and there that seem to stem from technical issues.

 

[heinsmit]

Just left from first area and saw

Spoiler

Itsa me Mario!

WTF?! :lol :lol

Ah yes, I enjoyed the

Spoiler

I meant outlets besides vaginas

line as well

 

[zaidr]

I remember seeing a video before the game came out where Ezio slaps the lute out of the musician's hands, and he goes crying off. I don't know how to do that.

I've tried punching him, but that raises my notoriety and its not the same...anyone know how to do this?

 

[Struct09]

I remember seeing a video before the game came out where Ezio slaps the lute out of the musician's hands, and he goes crying off. I don't know how to do that.

I've tried punching him, but that raises my notoriety and its not the same...anyone know how to do this?

I think they'll drop the lute sometimes when you pickpocket them. Could be wrong...

 

[conman]

I'm talking about every mission being broken down into small chunks and being told explicitly what you're supposed to do. Rather than being told "infiltrate the stronghold and assassinate this guy", you're told to jump over this wall, go through this door, pull this level, kill this glowing target, etc. There's no sense of figuring out stuff yourself.

Gotcha. Well, as far as that goes, that was how AC1 worked. You see what most people thought of that. The bite-sized mission chunks in AC2 were a concession to the naysayers of the first game. The freedom you were allowed in AC1 either wasn't recognized or was ignored in favor of charging in and out through the front door. AC2 holds your hand so you don't just take the most expedient route. You can't have it both ways (my preference by far is for the first game's approach).

IMO this is what happens when you design your follow up according to the complaints against the prior game. They should have stuck to their design guns and found a way to win people over to their side rather than pander to the first game's detractors. Of course, sales and reviews of AC2 suggest that pandering pays off.

 

[infinityBCRT]

Huh?

Spoiler

Your mission is to assassinate Marco at the Carnivale.

As you walk into the Carnivale, she says "Marco is on a boat, just off shore. He's set to make a speech in a few minutes. Use my girls until then. Move with them to stay out of sight."

You walk in further, and a cutscene appears where the guard says "Find him!" This implies that you do not want them to find you.

Then you get a prompt that says "Stay anonymous." with a countdown.

I'm not sure how this mission could be any more clear. I disagree that it's bad design.

I get the stay anonymous part now. If it were on the screen for a bit longer or closer to the timer (and if they showed it after you failed) I wouldn't have missed it. I guess I'm the only dummy in this thread who missed it though :lol.

I don't think that part would cause people to stop playing the game because its something that can be figured out after a few tries. But it would be interesting to see where the 60% of people who didn't finish the game (a stat according to ubisoft) stopped playing. There are probably a lot of annoyances that all of us didn't experience because for whatever reason we were thinking along the same line as the developer, but a bunch of people out there obviously were not thinking along those lines and got frustrated. I could believe

Spoiler

the horse part in Rome (not jumping across the gap most of the time even though it should)

could make people stop playing despite the fact that there is a work around for it.

An aside, I think Ubisoft should really go for a 2 disc game (on 360) next time so they don't have to limit themselves to

Spoiler

small chunks of cities like they did with Acre and Rome

. Make it like Forza where you can install the second disc's contents to the Hard Drive through a menu, and if you don't install it, then you have to swap discs.

 

[infinityBCRT]

Gotcha. Well, as far as that goes, that was how AC1 worked. You see what most people thought of that. The bite-sized mission chunks in AC2 were a concession to the naysayers of the first game. The freedom you were allowed in AC1 either wasn't recognized or was ignored in favor of charging in and out through the front door. AC2 holds your hand so you don't just take the most expedient route. You can't have it both ways (my preference by far is for the first game's approach).

IMO this is what happens when you design your follow up according to the complaints against the prior game. They should have stuck to their design guns and found a way to win people over to their side rather than pander to the first game's detractors. Of course, sales and reviews of AC2 suggest that pandering pays off.

I did love the assassinations in AC1 because you could approach them so many ways. Then again, there are assassinations in AC2 which are more "open" than AC1-- I could be wrong, but I don't remember having to search an area for a target in AC1, whereas they have that in AC2.

 

[conman]

I did love the assassinations in AC1 because you could approach them so many ways. Then again, there are assassinations in AC2 which are more "open" than AC1-- I could be wrong, but I don't remember having to search an area for a target in AC1, whereas they have that in AC2.

Depends on if you played AC1 without the HUD and map or not. If you played without them, there were a couple of assassinations where you had to follow a series of location clues to find your target. The book burning one, for example, gave you a rough area and a series of descriptions from your information missions that successively narrowed down where your target would be (yet one more piece of evidence suggesting that this is how they originally designed the game to be played).

Also, that whole "target area" thing in AC2 comes from playing without the gps/map in AC1 where you could approximate a rough area using the clues you gathered, but not the exact location. The "area" missions in AC2 were Ubi Montreal's way of trying to get more people to play that way without making them have to follow clues (pictures, descriptions, etc).

 

[Pimpbaa]

Seeing a couple of statues of female assassins kinda makes me wish they would make an Assassins Creed with a female assissin.

 

[Miburou]

Gotcha. Well, as far as that goes, that was how AC1 worked. You see what most people thought of that. The bite-sized mission chunks in AC2 were a concession to the naysayers of the first game. The freedom you were allowed in AC1 either wasn't recognized or was ignored in favor of charging in and out through the front door. AC2 holds your hand so you don't just take the most expedient route. You can't have it both ways (my preference by far is for the first game's approach).

IMO this is what happens when you design your follow up according to the complaints against the prior game. They should have stuck to their design guns and found a way to win people over to their side rather than pander to the first game's detractors. Of course, sales and reviews of AC2 suggest that pandering pays off.

Yep, that's pretty much what I mean. It is a step down from AC1 in that regard. To be honest, though, AC1 sold pretty well (8M+) and most of the complaints were not directed towards the game's difficulty level. But it does seem like they wanted to make it even more accessible and went overboard. It's also possible some testers had trouble with the game's auto/digital controls, although those should only affect chase/race sequences.

 

[Pumpkins]

I just finished it and I have to say it was much better than the first.

However, I'm sick and tired of

Spoiler

cliffhanger endings!

It's kinda neat I guess, but at least

Spoiler

give the game itself a strong conclusion

.

 

[Socreges]

Just a few hours in and love it so far. Great atmosphere and once the game opens up it becomes another beast entirely. I'm a sucker for finding treasures and hunting down pick-pockets so I'll be taking my sweet time with this one.

 

[Oneself]

I'm at the beginning of the game and so far I like it. The original AC was a complete piece of crap and to my surprise, this one feels SO much better and I like it !!

One thing though

Spoiler

I just went outside to get Ezio's sister and mother to safety, then encountered the bastard musketeer-looking bad guy and his army.. and HATED the fact that he was just standing there, laughing as I tried to kill him,

just to see that the game didn't want me to do it. That's ridiculous.

And don't tell me it's done this way because "you play a memory" and all that crap. It's just badly done.

 

[infinityBCRT]

Spoiler

Isn't it weird that Jade was taken off of AC2 and put in charge of a game which has to do with the impending 2012 world disaster? (which is also something thats hinted at happening in AC2) I'm starting to think that I Am Alive is going to be based in the Assassin's Creed universe.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HZ6Aely9YrQ

Its a crazy thought, but it would be cool if they did do that.