Well i'm surprised about this AC Syndicate.
It's like AC2 in the mood (discovering a revolution around many topics: medecine, trains, technology), it's really cool. And Evie... she's the best assassin since Haytham or Ezio in Brotherhood.
Truth is Assassin's Creed games are not good historical games. The setting is the pretext, the excuse. When you read research about how they worked (on AC2,ACB but same goes for the others) you see that only search for functional facts and stories with little understanding of what history is, or can be. Basically it means they want a theme park that fits a representation they already have while using historians and history only when it suits that representation and that theme park. So you think you discovered a "period" and a "location" but in fact it is very poor despite the gigantic cities and thousands of npcs.
Question is why have I learned and experienced after playing the games ? Have I just seen pretty (and less pretty) buildings/landscapes, played features that makes sense with the time period, and seen cutscenes with famous historical characters ?
AC:Unity is for instance the worst story you could have done about French Revolution. The scenario is a conspiracy mess like AC2*, it is strongly biased if you look up at the historiography and even the narrative content that could have been cool (what happens in the streets like bullies and thieves, side-missions or the co-op missions) are massive failures...even if these were honorable attempts.
*you could argue that the whole franchise is based on a conspiracy mess, and that's part of why history is these historical game is so bad
That's something that should have more place in the reviews because we tend to forget that Assassin's Creed is an historical fiction, one of the most ambitious one. AC combo is "time travel in exotic time period with immediately fun parkour and combat in a fully explorable lively open world". Get back time travel in exotic time period and you lose the formula. But reviews only focus on the little difference(s) between games, the immediate experience.
Ubisoft could make far better historical games if they also took time on that part and changed their point of view. The potential is here, sometimes they almost reached it, but they never achieved what Rockstar did with Red Dead or GTA IV (these games being not focused on delivering a "time travel experience" in the first place but paradoxically achieving that goal way better than every single AC game (didn't play Syndicate yet but I doubt they made a big leap forward))
edit : When thinking about it, AC4:Black Flag (and AC4:the-DLC-with-Adewale) is maybe the one that succeeded the most in the historical part. It really captured something and both the scenario and the narrative worked damn well. A better achieved AC1 I must say.
Digging this topic would be interesting because there is much more to say, and room for debate.