Support NeoGAF

[conman]

even more major spoilers...

I think you're right. It's right about the time that

Spoiler

Ezio gets to the Villa

that his story turns to mush. Honestly, I think the game just got to be too big of a project. There are so many gameplay and story elements going on that they just didn't have the time (or energy/desire) to polish up the main Ezio storyline. If there's one thing that the first game shows, it's that a simple story told well is always preferrable to a complex one told poorly.

I absolutely am a sucker for all the meta-story elements (Desmond, Templar conspiracy, etc). And I think that stuff is all handled well. But the Ezio stuff just falls off a cliff early on and never gets its head back above water.

I really love the game overall, but it could have been so much better. Obviously any developer would love extra time to polish up a game, but this is one case where I think some extra time early in development to flesh out the Ezio material would have paid off in spades. The fact that they had to chop all the Forli material and southern Florence material from the final game, combined with the unusually high number of bugs (for a game of this quality) tells me that this really needed more time in the cooker.

I'm sure if you asked any developer, they'd tell you that their game was released earlier than they would have liked, but for a game of this caliber, this is one situation where the extra time really would have paid off in terms of the quality of the experience. Sadly, however, from a business perspective, I'm sure the extra time wouldn't have paid off any greater in sales. So ultimately the artistic integrity of the work suffers because of simple economics. It's a shame.

 

[see5harp]

I absolutely am a sucker for all the meta-story elements (Desmond, Templar conspiracy, etc). And I think that stuff is all handled well. But the Ezio stuff just falls off a cliff early on and never gets its head back above water.

I totally agree on with that. The metastory with the references to history, especially the crazy stuff with the glyphs and Eden, was really the stuff compelling me to finish the game. A lot of people like that they don't do as many transitions back to Desmond like the first game, but I actually think they could have done more of that to continue to give the Ezio stuff more weight. They could have also done a better job at leading up to the part where the Ezio stuff and the meta story merges....that stuff all happens in the last 5% of the game, after you are already confused as to what is going on.

 

[Neuromancer]

I want to see as little as Desmond as possible. He's pretty goofy looking, especially when he runs during the loading screen. Seriously, have him run left or right and just take a look. He looks like an ostrich.

 

[practice02]

I want to see as little as Desmond as possible. He's pretty goofy looking, especially when he runs during the loading screen. Seriously, have him run left or right and just take a look. He looks like an ostrich.

Spoiler

Desmond and ezio are the same model

I totally agree on with that. The metastory with the references to history, especially the crazy stuff with the glyphs and Eden, was really the stuff compelling me to finish the game. A lot of people like that they don't do as many transitions back to Desmond like the first game, but I actually think they could have done more of that to continue to give the Ezio stuff more weight. They could have also done a better job at leading up to the part where the Ezio stuff and the meta story merges....that stuff all happens in the last 5% of the game, after you are already confused as to what is going on.

Ezio's story is a revenge story what more do you need?

 

[Neuromancer]

Spoiler

Desmond and ezio are the same model

The model may be the same but I submit to you that the running animation is not. Ezio runs and jumps like an athlete; Desmond runs like he's one of those frilly lizards that runs on its hind legs at high speeds across the desert.

 

[see5harp]

Spoiler

Desmond and ezio are the same model

Ezio's story is a revenge story what more do you need?

Well that's how it's starts for Ezio, but I would have liked more reinforcement behind the reasons you are there besides getting assassin skills. By the end of the game I was a little confused as to what I was doing besides running to icons and stabbing dudes. Personally, I got the most out of doing the glyph stuff which sorta fleshed out the conspiracy and Abstergo stories. That was entirely optional though, and I can see why someone may dislike the story if they just played straight through.

 

[practice02]

The model may be the same but I submit to you that the running animation is not. Ezio runs and jumps like an athlete; Desmond runs like he's one of those frilly lizards that runs on its hind legs at high speeds across the desert.

Spoiler

Desmond becomes a badass though.

Well that's how it's starts for Ezio, but I would have liked more reinforcement behind the reasons you are there besides getting assassin skills. By the end of the game I was a little confused as to what I was doing besides running to icons and stabbing dudes. Personally, I got the most out of doing the glyph stuff which sorta fleshed out the conspiracy and Abstergo stories. That was entirely optional though, and I can see why someone may dislike the story if they just played straight through.

I can what you are saying but it is obvious to me you become an assassin to 1. make money for your family and 2. exact revenge, it also implied in the begining that Ezio has no real interest or skill outside of getting laid and getting into fights. So naturally when he finds a place in the world as an assassin he also has the talent of

Spoiler

Eaglevision which desmond also has

which his

Spoiler

father mentions he should use to find his secret door to get his assassins gear

 

[MoonsaultSlayer]

Here's a quick summary of my history with AC1:

-First info/trailers: Couldn't wait. Loved the setting and potential

-Launch: Thanks to reviews and player feedback I decided to skip the game (not to mention Uncharted and Warhawk had a firm grip on my attention at the time).

-NeoGaf official thread: Spoiled myself and saw all kinds of crazy puzzles/glyphs/riddles what have you and fan interpretations and sort of became interested.

-Bought it off of my brother sometime in mid '08 and didn't play it until spring of '09. At that time, I loved it even though it was repetitive. I ignored it's shortcomings and just had fun.

NOW. I can't even recommend that game as part 2 is fantastic and way ahead of it's predecessor. I absolutely love it. If someone told me I had to get rid of all my games but one... I'd pick AC2.... even over some of my personal favs including UC2, SoTC, among others for the simple fact that there is so much to do and I've barely left the first city. Excellent.

 

[Tomasooie]

Then there was the lack of there being any real involvement with needing to plan your assassination. Simply rush, kill, leave. Some assassin.

Looks to me like you didn't even try to play like an assassin in the first game if you just rushed in and hacked the guy to death. So many people bitch about this, but it's their fault because they didn't even try to be stealthy. Every assassination in the game, but one or two, can be completed without being seen by the target or any of his guards. And yes, it takes planning. So don't say there's no involvement or planning. There is a ton of it -- you just never even tried to involve yourself. That's what the investigations give you -- information you can use to plan a stealthy assassination. I agree with you on Assassin's Creed II's assassinations being brain-dead, but so too were the many who played the first game and bitched about all of the assassinations being rush in and hack away. Even Eurogamer did this, and so Ubisoft saw fit to hold our hands the whole way through in the sequel.

Spoiler

This next bitching point I may be a bit off on--not paying full attention means I could have easily missed something--but, uh, how far into the game do they specifically say Rodrigo Borgia's full name in regards to him being the leader of the conspiracy? Early on, they constantly refer to him as The Spaniard in such a way that implies that they weren't sure of his identity, but if you go and read through everything in the options/data screen, he is identified as the leader pretty early on, I'm almost sure I noticed his name in the data files before his name was mentioned in the game.

Spoiler

Mario tells you while you're at the villa, after you kill Vieri de Pazzi, that Borgia = the Spaniard = Leader of the Templar Order. At 0:55. So very early in the game, and after that part of the game on the pause menu -- there's a list of conspirators with Borgia right in the middle.

I also think the controls are a bit worse than the first game. I never had very many problems in the first game, but in AC2 it seems like a duder can't even get a hooker without jumping down a hole or causing unintended disasters by giving the overly aggressive buskers the business.

What do you mean by this? And the game controls pretty much identically to the first.

 

[burgerdog]

The model may be the same but I submit to you that the running animation is not. Ezio runs and jumps like an athlete; Desmond runs like he's one of those frilly lizards that runs on its hind legs at high speeds across the desert.

:lol :lol :lol :lol

 

[Marty Chinn]

Looks to me like you didn't even try to play like an assassin in the first game if you just rushed in and hacked the guy to death. So many people bitch about this, but it's their fault because they didn't even try to be stealthy. Every assassination in the game, but one or two, can be completed without being seen by the target or any of his guards. And yes, it takes planning. So don't say there's no involvement or planning. There is a ton of it -- you just never even tried to involve yourself. That's what the investigations give you -- information you can use to plan a stealthy assassination. I agree with you on Assassin's Creed II's assassinations being brain-dead, but so too were the many who played the first game and bitched about all of the assassinations being rush in and hack away. Even Eurogamer did this, and so Ubisoft saw fit to hold our hands the whole way through in the sequel.

No I did in the first one and I found it to be pointless. There is absolutely no incentive to plan and go stealthy in the first one and the second one just throws even all that out the window. Go play Hitman. There are clear and obvious incentives, pros and cons of rushing vs planning your route and going stealthy. There is none of that here and I see no reason why I should spend 20 minutes trying to assassinate them when I could just run up to them, kill them, and then run away. I tried in the first one but there was just no point. Again, Hitman. Everyone who claims to love assassinations needs to go play Hitman and then come back to this game and see how uninvolved it is here.

 

[Tomasooie]

No I did in the first one and I found it to be pointless. There is absolutely no incentive to plan and go stealthy in the first one and the second one just throws even all that out the window. Go play Hitman. There are clear and obvious incentives, pros and cons of rushing vs planning your route and going stealthy. There is none of that here and I see no reason why I should spend 20 minutes trying to assassinate them when I could just run up to them, kill them, and then run away. I tried in the first one but there was just no point. Again, Hitman. Everyone who claims to love assassinations needs to go play Hitman and then come back to this game and see how uninvolved it is here.

Well for me the incentive is the fact that it's ten thousand times more fun to find a way to kill the target completely unnoticed than running up to him and mashing X. I think Ubisoft didn't want to force people to do it any one way, so they didn't add any incentives themselves other than one achievement.

 

[practice02]

No I did in the first one and I found it to be pointless. There is absolutely no incentive to plan and go stealthy in the first one and the second one just throws even all that out the window. Go play Hitman. There are clear and obvious incentives, pros and cons of rushing vs planning your route and going stealthy. There is none of that here and I see no reason why I should spend 20 minutes trying to assassinate them when I could just run up to them, kill them, and then run away. I tried in the first one but there was just no point. Again, Hitman. Everyone who claims to love assassinations needs to go play Hitman and then come back to this game and see how uninvolved it is here.

I think that if you plan a little in AC you will find it to be easier and more visually and personally satisfying then playing it like a brawler. I think that you are missing a huge peice of this puzzle is that one is an open world game and the other is fairly linear, as I recall there are a few you have to do it this way mission that you can only complete through trial and error in Hitman. you are arguing red apples to green apples here. not all games of a similar genre should play exactly the same. I mean I could say go play Sabotuer and come back to assassins creed 2 and you are going to like assassins creed more. At least those have more in common then Hitman and Assassins creed.

 

[CrunchinJelly]

The problem is that not only is there zero incentive for being stealthy with your assassinations (the AI is so terrible, you can lose your wanted level in a matter of seconds), but also the placement of the assassination targets is just dumb.

Honestly, when I got to that guy in the huge guarded building in Venice, the game played some cutscene or other, cuts to gameplay, and I literally jumped out of the window and the guy was right there so it was a straight assassination. I actually said 'this is such fucking bullshit' when I pulled it off.

You should not be able to pull shit like that. You have all these missions leading up to these assassinations and then when push comes to shove, it's like taking candy from a baby.

 

[silentspork]

What an awesome ending, bring on AC3!

 

[Neuromancer]

No I did in the first one and I found it to be pointless. There is absolutely no incentive to plan and go stealthy in the first one and the second one just throws even all that out the window. Go play Hitman. There are clear and obvious incentives, pros and cons of rushing vs planning your route and going stealthy. There is none of that here and I see no reason why I should spend 20 minutes trying to assassinate them when I could just run up to them, kill them, and then run away. I tried in the first one but there was just no point. Again, Hitman. Everyone who claims to love assassinations needs to go play Hitman and then come back to this game and see how uninvolved it is here.

I think more forgiving AI and scenarios make the game accessible for a broader audience. Which as far as I'm concerned is a good thing.

Honestly I think the average gamer would get frustrated if it was that much harder and required stealth more strictly. This may be why the Hitman series dropped off.

Edit: Froze up at the villa loading screen again. Grr...

 

[Tomasooie]

The problem is that not only is there zero incentive for being stealthy with your assassinations (the AI is so terrible, you can lose your wanted level in a matter of seconds), but also the placement of the assassination targets is just dumb.

I dunno if you played the first game or not, but the AI seemed much better. It definitely wasn't so easy to escape. It made for some really great chases. Now in the second game, I turn into an alleyway and they don't even follow me. A few seconds later, without even hiding (you almost always had to in the first game), and I'm anonymous again. I barely used any hiding spots in the game. So it saddens me that they fixed some problems while breaking things that were fine in the first game, just to make it more accessible. It was completely unnecessary too as the first game was already easy. I remember before the first game was finished, they were showing it off and Altair would die if he got hit once. I really wish they kept it like that, or let him take a more realistic number of hits -- around three, maybe. Ubisoft really need to implement difficulty options for the next game. I really love the series, but I wish it weren't so easy.

 

[Keikoku]

Has the PS3 version any issues ? I was planning to buy the 360 version (or maybe PC) but a friend of mine finished the game so I can borrow it to him. Should I ? I heard that it had framedrops on the PS3.

 

[Tomasooie]

Has the PS3 version any issues ? I was planning to buy the 360 version (or maybe PC) but a friend of mine finished the game so I can borrow it to him. Should I ? I heard that it had framedrops on the PS3.

You mean you're borrowing from your friend? There's no risk there really, so go ahead, but if you're buying it and have a choice, go with the 360 version or wait for the PC one. PS3 version does have the worst framerate and tearing.

 

[Keikoku]

You mean you're borrowing from your friend? There's no risk there really, so go ahead, but if you're buying it and have a choice, go with the 360 version or wait for the PC one. PS3 version does have the worst framerate and tearing.

Yes that's what I meant (wrong grammar ?)
As I hate tearing and framerate issues I think I'll just wait for the PC version then.

 

[practice02]

Yes that's what I meant (wrong grammar ?)
As I hate tearing and framerate issues I think I'll just wait for the PC version then.

the only tearing on the 360 version ive noticed is in the cutscenes

 

[conman]

Ezio's story is a revenge story what more do you need?

But it's not. That's the problem. They keep that motivation going for just the beginning of the game, but after

Spoiler

you meet your uncle and he quickly dumps the Assassin family history in your lap

the revenge plot vanishes. From there on out, you're just killing people randomly and with absolutely no motivation. The assassination targets aren't developed to any real degree, and they seem to have nothing to do with your need for revenge or your (tenuous) association with the Assassins. It's a pretty big fumble IMO.

The Ezio plot does improve towards the end of the game

Spoiler

once you get a sense for some of the behind-the-scenes stuff that's been guiding your actions throughout the game,

but since you don't know any of that while you're playing, I felt absolutely no motivation driving Ezio's actions. The game (not any substantial character or advisor) told me I had to kill someone to progress, so I did it. But those actions never felt deeply integrated into the story or into the character.

The first game did a much, much better job of motivating the assassinations, keeping the Altair plot moving, developing the characters you kill, and giving a clear structure to the Altair plot.

 

[Jazzy Network]

But it's not. That's the problem. They keep that motivation going for just the beginning of the game, but after

Spoiler

you meet your uncle and he quickly dumps the Assassin family history in your lap

the revenge plot vanishes. From there on out, you're just killing people randomly and with absolutely no motivation. The assassination targets aren't developed to any real degree, and they seem to have nothing to do with your need for revenge or your (tenuous) association with the Assassins. It's a pretty big fumble IMO.

The Ezio plot does improve towards the end of the game

Spoiler

once you get a sense for some of the behind-the-scenes stuff that's been guiding your actions throughout the game,

but since you don't know any of that while you're playing, I felt absolutely no motivation driving Ezio's actions. The game (not any substantial character or advisor) told me I had to kill someone to progress, so I did it. But those actions never felt deeply integrated into the story or into the character.

The first game did a much, much better job of motivating the assassinations, keeping the Altair plot moving, developing the characters you kill, and giving a clear structure to the Altair plot.

Yea the first one felt more of an assassin type game. 2 is an open world game with assassination missions. I loved both and both have their pros and cons. If you combine both games pros into 1 game, I'm hoping that it would result in the third game.

 

[Dragnet]

Just thought I'd say this...whenever you jump from a ledge into hay/leaves, I found it really nice to let go of my thoughts and take a big slow breath in as Ezio falls. Once he hits the hay, continue as normal. Really seemed to add something...sad I know but whatever, give it a shot.

Also wanted to say that I really enjoyed the

Spoiler

Altair part...total mindfuck out of nowhere, but was really enjoyable! Felt good to handle Altair in that environment without the game running like shit as it did in AC1 [PS3]

The end of it made me laugh too :lol

 

[Kronotech]

Almost done with the game. Loving it so far. I'm addicted to the clothe dye and the hiring of groups. Definitely getting the DLC.

p.s. OP states buying off Amazon gets you a $10 off a future purchase. I did such purchase but am too noob on Amazon to find out where my credit is. Does it expire?

 

[conman]

Yea the first one felt more of an assassin type game. 2 is an open world game with assassination missions. I loved both and both have their pros and cons. If you combine both games pros into 1 game, I'm hoping that it would result in the third game.

Story structure from AC1 + Gameplay from AC2 = Balls explodingly brilliant third game.

 

[Choabac]

Finished the game recently and I found it to be awesome ride.

I did find the depection of the Carnival to be a little underwhelming. I read the Count of Monte Cristo just a few months ago, so I still have a vivid image of what Carnivale probably was like.

The Carnivale here just seemed like a typical Friday night out in comparison. It was just a bunch of people milling about in random groups with some lights and some street entertainment.

I should point out the Carnivale in Monte
Cristo was set in Rome, not Venice. So maybe that why it doesn't seem quite as festive?

 

[Neuromancer]

Just thought I'd say this...whenever you jump from a ledge into hay/leaves, I found it really nice to let go of my thoughts and take a big slow breath in as Ezio falls. Once he hits the hay, continue as normal. Really seemed to add something...sad I know but whatever, give it a shot.

I like hanging from a ledge and falling with the B button into the hay. Different animation, still cool.

 

[Mejilan]

p.s. OP states buying off Amazon gets you a $10 off a future purchase. I did such purchase but am too noob on Amazon to find out where my credit is. Does it expire?

These promotions do expire; sometimes rather quickly. They get automatically applied to your next purchase, assuming all conditions for the credit are met. Some of the promotional credit I received during Q4 2009 was slated to expire by the end of Dec. 31st, for what it's worth.

 

[TTG]

Story structure from AC1 + Gameplay from AC2 = Balls explodingly brilliant third game.

Speaking of which, I wonder if AC3 will still be primarily in animus or in the present. It certainly seems like they are leaning towards the present, but I would still like another animus driven game. Maybe somewhere in the east?

 

[practice02]

But it's not. That's the problem. They keep that motivation going for just the beginning of the game, but after

Spoiler

you meet your uncle and he quickly dumps the Assassin family history in your lap

the revenge plot vanishes. From there on out, you're just killing people randomly and with absolutely no motivation. The assassination targets aren't developed to any real degree, and they seem to have nothing to do with your need for revenge or your (tenuous) association with the Assassins. It's a pretty big fumble IMO.

The Ezio plot does improve towards the end of the game

Spoiler

once you get a sense for some of the behind-the-scenes stuff that's been guiding your actions throughout the game,

but since you don't know any of that while you're playing, I felt absolutely no motivation driving Ezio's actions. The game (not any substantial character or advisor) told me I had to kill someone to progress, so I did it. But those actions never felt deeply integrated into the story or into the character.

The first game did a much, much better job of motivating the assassinations, keeping the Altair plot moving, developing the characters you kill, and giving a clear structure to the Altair plot.

What? when he meets up with the head of the Medici family all they do is talk about revenge he gives you the names of the conspirators and its all sneak and stab after that.

 

[sloppyjoe_gamer]

If i were to go for a Platinum with this, is it doable in one playthrough or no?

 

[BeeDog]

If i were to go for a Platinum with this, is it doable in one playthrough or no?

Yes it is, just make sure you don't miss the missable trophy (kicking down a soldier while flying).

 

[sloppyjoe_gamer]

Yes it is, just make sure you don't miss the missable trophy (kicking down a soldier while flying).

Ok cool...is there only one mission where im flying so i know not to miss this trophy?

 

[Meus Renaissance]

If i were to go for a Platinum with this, is it doable in one playthrough or no?

After you complete the story and the trophies that come with it, it allows you to explore the world (after the game ends) so you can collect feathers and stuff

 

[NinjaFridge]

Ok cool...is there only one mission where im flying so i know not to miss this trophy?

Yep, only one until the DLC.

 

[Struct09]

Ok cool...is there only one mission where im flying so i know not to miss this trophy?

There's technically two missions with the flying machine - the first is basically the tutorial, the second has the guards. It will be obvious though - when the guards are shooting at you, kick one.

 

[conman]

What? when he meets up with the head of the Medici family all they do is talk about revenge he gives you the names of the conspirators and its all sneak and stab after that.

That's early in the game and doesn't happen very often. I know the revenge stuff is explained, but that's different from having a convincing and consistently engaging story. You have to develop and build on a story idea. You don't just "set it and forget it." Just saying it's all about revenge doesn't make it convincingly so.

 

[see5harp]

the only tearing on the 360 version ive noticed is in the cutscenes

Yea that and when you syncronize on viewpoints...that's basically it for major tearing and framerate slowdowns on 360.

 

[Keikoku]

Yea that and when you syncronize on viewpoints...that's basically it for major tearing and framerate slowdowns on 360.

And during gameplay ? Has the PS3 version any tearing (including during gameplay sequences ?)

Man, now I'm hesitating between playing the PS3 version for free, buying the 360 version now or waiting for the PC version :lol

 

[practice02]

And during gameplay ? Has the PS3 version any tearing (including during gameplay sequences ?)

Man, now I'm hesitating between playing the PS3 version for free, buying the 360 version now or waiting for the PC version :lol

low res and some major tearing and framerate issues in the PS3 version from what ive heard I haven't put my hands on it.

 

[practice02]

Yea that and when you syncronize on viewpoints...that's basically it for major tearing and framerate slowdowns on 360.

I have yet to see any framerate issues or tearing in syncs I'll keep my eye out.

 

[Kronotech]

These promotions do expire; sometimes rather quickly. They get automatically applied to your next purchase, assuming all conditions for the credit are met. Some of the promotional credit I received during Q4 2009 was slated to expire by the end of Dec. 31st, for what it's worth.

Exactly what I needed to know. Thanks.

 

[conman]

And during gameplay ? Has the PS3 version any tearing (including during gameplay sequences ?)

Man, now I'm hesitating between playing the PS3 version for free, buying the 360 version now or waiting for the PC version :lol

If you have the option, choose the 360 version. If you don't have the option, the PS3 version is fine. The tearing and framerate issues are being blown out of proportion. If you're sensitive to a fluctuating framerate (you know if you are), then it'll bother you. Otherwise, don't worry about it. It frustrated the hell out of me, but most other people who've played the PS3 version haven't complained at all.

The only place I noticed tearing in the 360 version was during cutscenes.

 

[Freeza Under The Shower]

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.

It seems more likely that Ubi management just wanted to get rid of Raymond if the huge difference in story writing, delivery and quality between AC1 and AC2 is any indication.

Sure, the GTA-like buildup and more difference in missiontypes (allthough there seems even more kill, kill, kill to me in this game) does fix the problems people had with the first game, but it also removes the buildup for assasinations and the general grace the AC1 story had when it came to motivations for your targets. Not to mention any intellectual aspect of it.

And while it is wrong to pin such a difference on a single person (team effort, after all), I'm willing to believe that such an influence may have existed anyway.

 

[conman]

And while it is wrong to pin such a difference on a single person (team effort, after all), I'm willing to believe that such an influence may have existed anyway.

While I share your criticisms of AC2, my own guess is that it was just simple resource management that explains the difference. Less time spent writing and revising the Ezio plot, hammering out bugs, and finishing up the last two areas, and more time spent developing and coordinating the many different play types, new mechanics, and side-mission games. I'm sure they decided early on to dedicate as much time and resources as possible to "fixing" the things that loud game journalists didn't like about the first game.

It was clearly a huge project, and it's amazing they did so much in so little time. It's just a shame they couldn't take another 6 mos somewhere along the line to write and design a real story for Ezio and redesign the mission structure. It's a meandering jumble without any real sense of direction for most of the game. The teams working on the Desmond stuff, the glyph material, and the platforming sections were able to polish their stuff, but the primary Ezio line got the big shaft. The sad reality is that the extra time and effort probably wouldn't translate into any additional profits, certainly not enough to justify the extra hours it would take to get it right.

Again, love the game, but it sucks to see those great design aspects of the first game get lost along the way.

 

[silentspork]

Speaking of which, I wonder if AC3 will still be primarily in animus or in the present. It certainly seems like they are leaning towards the present, but I would still like another animus driven game. Maybe somewhere in the east?

I don't think they will ditch the animus just yet. I do think they will work more present day action into it in future installments but the historical aspect of AC is a big portion of the experience. If they do ditch the animus I doubt it will be in the next one.

 

[Pimpbaa]

Has the PS3 version any issues ? I was planning to buy the 360 version (or maybe PC) but a friend of mine finished the game so I can borrow it to him. Should I ? I heard that it had framedrops on the PS3.

PS3 version is fine. They really stepped up their game for the PS3 version this time.

 

[Naughtboy]

like Desmond said "WTF" at the ending of the game.....shit they took this to a completely different level. And the ending credits were awesome!!!!

Spoiler

Didn't really understand it too well, but WTF was with the ending? Aliens??? The sun exploding? so the original inhabiants of Earth rebuild the planet and it's about to explode again???

I'm confused as Hell but i'm awed at where they're taking this series...FUCKING AWESOME

 

[rareside]

I'm not finished with this game yet (probably 2/3 or 3/4 of the way through), but holy hell is this game amazing.

I was never swept up in the hype of the first game, only got around to playing it about a year ago and enjoyed it knowing what I was getting into after hearing bitchfests. But the sequel is just sooooo much fun, they really did a great job of mixing up the missions. Rarely does it feel repetitive.