Assasins Creed

The problem was, the flaws were not just the little nitpicks that you claim could just be brushed under the rug. The flaws actually caused the game to stop being fun for me after a while. You cannot say that "rinse and repeat gameplay" is something that you can just ignore and that the game deserves a 9. The 9.0 is a very high score that I reserve for games that I truly love from start to finish and beyond, like Oblivion, Call of Duty 4, and so on. With Assassin's Creed, I cannot understand why anyone would go back and play it a second time, because I almost didn't finish it the first time through. The game GOT STALE HALF-WAY THROUGH. And that is why it did not deserve a 9.0. I cannot just say to myself "Well, this game deserves a 9 or 10 if you can just accept that it stops being fun before it's over" as many of the other posters in this thread claim. A game that stops being fun before you finish it does not deserve a score that is reserved for only the best bang-for-your-buck games on the market.

Funny that you should say that, considering how rinse and repeat Oblivion was. "Fast travel to town, go through Oblivion gate, fast travel to town, go through Oblivion gate." Hell, even the environments in that game were incredibly rinse and repeat. Not to mention that they had the worst case of Killzone-syndrome I've seen in a RPG. Washed-out, grey, dull, lifeless, same-y. Utterly boring. The only thing that saved that game was the expansion.

But all right, Assassin's Creed is rinse and repeat. And Oblivion is one of the most intricately-carved and varied experiences ever to beset the modern world. Open your eyes.

:o
 
I didn't say the game was bad, and I myself had fun with it. However, just because you like a game doesn't mean it deserves a 9.0. I have have enjoyed quite a few games that I personally rated around 7.0, because I knew that they could have been better, and / or that they were not on par with the kinds of games that I feel the 9.0 rating should be reserved for. Assassin's Creed was extremely repetitive and had no replay value, so that was the difference between a "pretty fun" game and a "great" game."
 
Funny that you should say that, considering how rinse and repeat Oblivion was. "Fast travel to town, go through Oblivion gate, fast travel to town, go through Oblivion gate." Hell, even the environments in that game were incredibly rinse and repeat. Not to mention that they had the worst case of Killzone-syndrome I've seen in a RPG. Washed-out, grey, dull, lifeless, same-y. Utterly boring. The only thing that saved that game was the expansion.

But all right, Assassin's Creed is rinse and repeat. And Oblivion is one of the most intricately-carved and varied experiences ever to beset the modern world. Open your eyes.

:o

In Oblvion, you don't have to close all the oblivion gates outside the towns to finish the game. It makes one part of the game a little easier, but it's not a necessity. The difference between Oblivion and Assassin's Creed is, that in Oblivion, you don't have to "rinse and repeat." You can play it at your own pace, doing whatever you want whenever you want. In Assassin' Creed, you HAVE TO eavesdrop on the guy and pick his pocket, beat up, interrogate, and kill the stooge, and perch on top of a dozen tall objects. It's not like you can just go and find something more interesting to do until you feel like doing your main objective, because that's all there is to do.

And if you need some more opinions to back up mine, then look at the Metacritic for Oblivion vs. Assassin's Creed.

http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/xbox360/elderscrolls4oblivion?q=oblivion

Oblivion has 90 reviews with an average of 94/100, and not one of them is lower than 8/10.

http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/xbox360/assassinscreed?q=assassin's creed

AC has 66 reviews with an average of 8.2, with exactly 1/3 of them being in a range of 50/100 to 79/100.

Another thing to remember is that Oblivion will take most people about 60 hours before they complete the main quest, if not longer. While there is some repetition in the game, there's so much variety that by the time you have to repeat something, you'll have already have done lots of other interesting stuff. In Assassin's Creed, the only place where there's variety is the actual assassinations, and unfortunately those usually don't take longer than 10 minutes to complete.
 
And we're not needlessly over-praising for no reason at all. We give it such high marks because in our experience, it really was that fantastic a game and we had an absolute blast with it. Why is it so hard to understand for you blokes? And don't give this "it isn't perfect" bullcrap. No f**kin' game is, so why even bother bringing up something as pointless as that?


If thats teh case then why rate it as such? Thats the point that has stumped me about all those reviews

The game's flaws in our eyes are nowhere near as serious as you chaps keep honking your horn over "they are all VALID!", because the many things Assassin's Creed over accomplishes in deem those shortcomings almost immaterial. Just because your unrealistic hopes of the game failing to give you the heavenly pleasure equivalent of your first *******, hey, that's not our problem now is it?
No its not your fault; it's Ubisoft's

cookiva said:
Wow, do you think we are lying to you? Do you think there is an internet conspiracy against you? You make it sound like we are the idiots for liking the game, whereas you and one other person in this thread dont.
As if those pro-AC havent made those who arent jumping for joy over it, havent made it sound like they are idiots for not thinking its the best thing since slice bread. It goes both ways buddy

fenrir said:
Take for example the poster who was crying about the drunken sailors pushing him in the water all the time. It's just...sad how much he sucks at this game. If he had paid attention, one of the investigations clearly tell the player to keep away from drunken sailors, another investigation says to keep away from that area altogether and approach the target from the seaside overlooking the tower because it's free from guard patrols. Heck, a pickpocket mission even gives you a map highlighting the most advisable route. That's THREE bloody times the game cautions you not to mess with those drunken sailors
And how do you get that out? By replaying the SAME boring repetitve side missions. I tried to do as much as possible in the beginning until I realized that it was all teh same thing and not fun after doing it over and over and over again. You see, that ugly flaw rears its head again.
 
In Oblvion, you don't have to close all the oblivion gates outside the towns to finish the game. It makes one part of the game a little easier, but it's not a necessity. The difference between Oblivion and Assassin's Creed is, that in Oblivion, you don't have to "rinse and repeat." You can play it at your own pace, doing whatever you want whenever you want. In Assassin' Creed, you HAVE TO eavesdrop on the guy and pick his pocket, beat up, interrogate, and kill the stooge, and perch on top of a dozen tall objects. It's not like you can just go and find something more interesting to do until you feel like doing your main objective, because that's all there is to do.

And if you need some more opinions to back up mine, then look at the Metacritic for Oblivion vs. Assassin's Creed.

http://www.metacritic.com/games/pla...rms/xbox360/assassinscreed?q=assassin's creed

AC has 66 reviews with an average of 8.2, with exactly 1/3 of them being 50/100 to 79/100.

Another thing to remember is that Oblivion will take most people about 60 hours before they complete the main quest, if not longer. While there is some repetition in the game, there's so much variety that by the time you have to repeat something, you'll have already have done lots of other interesting stuff. In Assassin's Creed, the only place where there's variety is the actual assassinations, and unfortunately those usually don't take longer than 10 minutes to complete.

I don't care about Oblivion's reviews. The reviewers that marked it up so highly need to have their heads checked. To explain this to you, I'll just re-post one of my previous rants.

...When I played Morrowind, I thought it was a beautifully crafted game. I enjoyed the story, enjoyed the large and very distinct world, etc and so on in that direction. I thought the whole continent/subcontinent of Morrowind was beautifully realized and executed in its entirety. Might not of had the most beautiful graphics or best swordplay, but I thought it was more than adequate in those two areas. My opinion of Bethesda upon the release of that game was fairly high.

However, when Oblivion was released, I was instantly disappointed. Character creation/customization was complex, but half-assed in its complexity. The graphics were pretty, but otherwise all else left me rather let-down. (The story was good too, just short) Fast travel ruined the whole adventurous feeling of the last game to me. Instead of trekking through mountains and swamps, I was trekking through the almighty load screen to quickly get from point A to point B. Even if I did take the time to ride/run from one area to another, I didn't particularly feel the need to. The environments looked as if the designers took the same 8 set pieces, made slight alterations, and filled the game world with them.

With that said, the entire game was one large cookie cutter. You have your forests, snowed on forests, slightly droopy forests... add in a river or two there and some ocean and that was the game. Oh yes, and the dozens of ayleid ruins with almost the exact same layout and look, and the imperial fortresses with the same. Ditto with mines. Oh, and let's not forget those pesky Oblivion planes! Most were incredibly cookie cutter and really didn't have their own "personality" per se. On top of that, the environments looked washed out. I'll warn you, I'm a staunch defender and enthusiast of Fable... and that left me expecting much more out of games. I expect colors that pop out and thoughtfully-placed environmental effects. Instead, I got Killzone-syndrome. Which a lot of "next-gen" games tend to have. Washed-out, dull look. No life, no color, no personality. Utterly boring to look at.

/end rant...

And to add onto that spiel, those "things you can do" in between fast-traveling from town to town, closing Oblivion gates over and over in planes that look exactly the same were also exactly the same. Hey! Why don't we plunder one of those Ayleid Ruins that all look exactly the same with one or two exceptions. Or maybe one of those imperial fortresses that also all feel the exact same, with the same group of 5 or 6 bandits and/or some skeletons and zombies sprinkled in! Or hey, maybe we can go take a nice stroll through town, in which almost all of the houses look exactly the same, with NPCs that all have the same 10 lines of dialogue! Woohoo! Or, maybe we can climb to the top of a mountain and look down upon an in-game world that all looks like one big ****ing forest made of the same 3 trees, yayyy!!! At least Assassin's Creed had some interesting vistas, damn.

Or hey, maybe we can go do cookie cutter missions for a Daedric prince that all involve the same basic premise. "Go here, kill some people, come back and get your reward!" Hell, the only ones that didn't involve actively killing people to pursue an outcome were those for Nocturne (stealing back the Eye of Nocturne) and Molag Bal whom had you get killed by some random *******.

The game was primarily composed of battling the same eight or nine enemies: Mystic Dawn brainwashees, Bandits (Highwaymen, Marauder, all the same damn thing), Clannfears, Churls or whatever the hell they were called, Skeletons/Zombies/Ghosts, and Scamps. Woo-****ing-hoo. That was probably one of the most varied parts of my whole play experience. Killing the same nine enemies over and over until the cows came home. And no, you could not get around going through 10+ Oblivion gates throughout the game. That's what the main quest line was pretty much composed of. Not to mention that exploring the world was so boring that I spent most of the time in my loading screen impatiently waiting to insta-travel to some random location I had the unenviable task of having to travel to the first time.

The whole game was built with a same-y mentality. Sure, you could do sidequests to fill up the time, but all they really boiled down to was either go here and kill this or sneak over there and steal that. Meh and a half.
 
Guys, there is only one game that isnt cookie cutter....

covercv2.jpg
 
[/b]If thats teh case then why rate it as such? Thats the point that has stumped me about all those reviews

That's because they think it is THAT amazing, that it is ******ed NOT to give anything 10/10 because it's not perfect when nothing is, which would render the score very much pointless. Of course, I won't give AC a 10, just giving you an idea about why others would.

No its not your fault; it's Ubisoft's


It's Ubisoft's fault they didn't give you the pleasure of your first *******? :confuseD:
 
It's Ubisoft's fault they didn't give you the pleasure of your first *******? :confuseD:
No its Ubisoft's fault for not satisfying me with the product they put out. I guess I can blame some of that on the hype as well. Its okay though bc after selling it, I only lost about $3 on it, which could have been worse
 
No its Ubisoft's fault for not satisfying me with the product they put out. I guess I can blame some of that on the hype as well. Its okay though bc after selling it, I only lost about $3 on it, which could have been worse

Actually, it's not their fault considering that many others did enjoy it. It's your fault for not being able to get over the minute details and enjoy the game for what it is.
 
Actually, it's not their fault considering that many others did enjoy it. It's your fault for not being able to get over the minute details and enjoy the game for what it is.
I did enjoy it for what it was and then got rid of it as I saw no replay value in it to entice me to play again. I just to make it clear that I did like AC, but thought it could have been alot better than it was and Ive explained why over and over again in this thread
 
And how do you get that out? By replaying the SAME boring repetitve side missions. I tried to do as much as possible in the beginning until I realized that it was all teh same thing and not fun after doing it over and over and over again. You see, that ugly flaw rears its head again.

They are repetitive only if you can't think of anything to spice up your game thanks to the many number of options available in the game. The save the citizen missions? I don't play them all like a dumbass by always standing in the middle of 5 guards using just one weapon with my finger twitching over the counter button. I deliberately change weapons often, use block breakers, evade attacks, throw guards into objects and each other, have them chase me up a roof just so I can throw them back down again...there are SO MANY ways to keep things fresh and interesting if you try. I just find it stupid that people complaining about the game being too repetitive never really play and experiment with the many tools the game gives you.

The pickpocket missions? They take less than a minute if you're good, so it's no big deal. So do interrogations and eavesdropping The timed assassinations and flag collection ones are quite fun though. And a couple of the viewpoint scaling missions are an absolute blast, particularly the more higher ones which you have to figure a way around by zigzagging through the architecture. Not to mention using eagle vision from the viewpoints allows you to easily track down flags and templars if you're interested.

That is why I think all this crap about the game being too repetitive and having no variety is insubstantial. It's a lot like the complaints I keep hearing about Crysis, that it is little more than a standard shooter and nowhere near as revolutionary and groundbreaking as people tout it to be and whatnot. Fact of the matter is, both these games reward players who take the time to really discover and play with the massive number of options the game provides them. Sure, the situations both games put you in aren't that much different, but the way you work your way around them can really be quite varied if you've got the brains and the creativity for it. That's what I love about Crysis and Assassin's Creed. They don't FORCE the player into exploring their options to give some false sense of variety. It's really upto the player, to observe, adapt and improvise.

My honest no B.S. assessment.
 
No its Ubisoft's fault for not satisfying me with the product they put out. I guess I can blame some of that on the hype as well. Its okay though bc after selling it, I only lost about $3 on it, which could have been worse

I pity the fools who buy into the hype of a game and then cry over it because it didn't meet their expectations instead of playing the game with an objective mindset and judging it on the basis of what it IS instead of what it SHOULD HAVE BEEN. :dry:
 
That is why I think all this crap about the game being too repetitive and having no variety is insubstantial. It's a lot like the complaints I keep hearing about Crysis, that it is little more than a standard shooter and nowhere near as revolutionary and groundbreaking as people tout it to be and whatnot. Fact of the matter is, both these games reward players who take the time to really discover and play with the massive number of options the game provides them. Sure, the situations both games put you in aren't that much different, but the way you work your way around them can really be quite varied if you've got the brains and the creativity for it. That's what I love about Crysis and Assassin's Creed. They don't FORCE the player into exploring their options to give some false sense of variety. It's really upto the player, to observe, adapt and improvise.

My honest no B.S. assessment.


Word
 
The timed assassinations and flag collection ones are quite fun though. And a couple of the viewpoint scaling missions are an absolute blast, particularly the more higher ones which you have to figure a way around by zigzagging through the architecture. Not to mention using eagle vision from the viewpoints allows you to easily track down flags and templars if you're interested.
I have to admit, that the flag collecting Informat missions were fun but there werent enough of them. 8 times out of 10, Id get the Guard assination ones with the Informant instead of the flag collecting. Those didnt get old and boring but I guess it could be bc I wasnt doing it constantly

I pity the fools who buy into the hype of a game and then cry over it because it didn't meet their expectations instead of playing the game with an objective mindset and judging it on the basis of what it IS instead of what it SHOULD HAVE BEEN
And it was judged on what it is. A good game with flaws which unfortunetly causes it to get stale fast due to its repetitiveness and boring side missions
 
And it was judged on what it is.

Which would explain why two-thirds of the number reviews the game received gave it a score of 8.5 or more. :up:

As for the rest, well, they were probably more like the poster who kept complaining about the drunken sailors pushing him in the water all the time. :D
 
I am definitely going back so I can fart around inside the world and kill whoever I want. I like this digital world they made for the game and even if it is the same thing over and over, I still have fun.

You could have done that in your first play through and it would have no impact on the game. The whole killing the citizens thing isn't that big a deal. Just wait for your thing to sync up again, it doesn't take long. I got so bored with the game that I basically decimated an entire population of villagers in one area and the bodies were strewn all over the place, guards, citizens everywhere. Then I left that area, bodies disappeared and everything went on as it normally would, no big deal. I lost count of the times where a guard would come across this massacre with me standing over the newly killed dead guard's body with my sword out smeared with blood and he would kneel down and say "Who did this?!?"

They have to get more side missions in the next game. Save the citizen over and over again gets boring as ****, especially when the dialogue lines of the citizen after you save them are THE SAME EXACT ONES repeated over and over again.
 
They're using the good old "You weren't having fun because you played it wrong!" argument. That one did wonders for Lair. When a game is well designed, "playing it wrong" is not an issue.
 
so i just killed the Book burning guy.. i think that was my seventh assassination.. so there is 2 more people to kill right, a total of nine? or was it a 8? i have to kill the guy at the docks, and he'd be the 8th, i'm not sure who the 9th is.
 
They're using the good old "You weren't having fun because you played it wrong!" argument. That one did wonders for Lair. When a game is well designed, "playing it wrong" is not an issue.

Has anyone played that game right yet? Think we are still waiting on word if that has happened.
 
so i just killed the Book burning guy.. i think that was my seventh assassination.. so there is 2 more people to kill right, a total of nine? or was it a 8? i have to kill the guy at the docks, and he'd be the 8th, i'm not sure who the 9th is.

Technicallly [BLACKOUT]it's 10[/BLACKOUT] but you don't learn that till later. ;)
 
They're using the good old "You weren't having fun because you played it wrong!" argument. That one did wonders for Lair. When a game is well designed, "playing it wrong" is not an issue.

Wrong. You don't play Hitman and Splinter Cell like a run'n gun game and then complain it sucks. And you don't play Assassin's Creed like Ryu Hayabusa and then say it sucks. Like it or not, there is a right way to play a game to derive maximum satisfaction out of it.
 
They're using the good old "You weren't having fun because you played it wrong!" argument. That one did wonders for Lair. When a game is well designed, "playing it wrong" is not an issue.

No. Pretty sure Lair was just.....bleh...
 
Lair was very "bleh." And while overall Assassin's Creed was pretty good, there were some very "bleh" parts of it that kept it from greatness.

Wrong. You don't play Hitman and Splinter Cell like a run'n gun game and then complain it sucks. And you don't play Assassin's Creed like Ryu Hayabusa and then say it sucks. Like it or not, there is a right way to play a game to derive maximum satisfaction out of it.

I haven't played a Hitman game in a while, but in Hitman 2 you could go in guns blazing, but you'd get a terrible score. If you wanted to unlock cool loot, you would play it sneaky. And at least Splinter Cell had a training session so that you'd know "the right way to play it." It all comes down to the game's design, and I'm afraid that Assassin's Creed's design was more roughly hewn than I thought was acceptable.
 
Anyone feel like making a pro and con list of the game?? hehe :woot: :oldrazz:

Pros
If you are good at the game, you will have fun.
Can climb buildings.
can climb down buildings
can jump off buildings into haystacks
Can jump all around.
great overall platforming.
awesome retractable arm spike weapon.
can throw people off cliffs, buildings and into water.
Amazing graphics.
very well done architecture
Overall Beautiful cities.
Nice looking white hooded costume...i want it!
Can ride a horse.
can fight on the horse
retractable arm spike weapon.
Nice fighting animations
Overall great animations
Very interesting story.
It feels epic, will make a good movie one day.
The game feels like its alive.
can throw knives at people
funny drunk people
If you tackle someone and they fall into the water, its not counted at murder.
retractable arm spike weapon! :woot:
great character voice acting.
nice music.
free running
The cites and places are huge!
worth playing.



cons
If you are bad at the game, you will not have fun.
Can't swim
can't climb trees
Can't climb up rocks or rocky walls.
Pots and boxes disappear into the ground when they break.
Bushes don't move or make sound when you walk into them.
soldiers and civilians say the same things.
Friend soldiers will try and kill you if you run into them at masyaf.
chance it could freeze or you can get stuck in a wall.
may feel repetitive.
Fighting can go on for very long, especially groups of 20 :oldrazz:
some shadows look pixalated.
some shadows will move and flicker.
No night time.
Not a lot of different places to hide.
can't give coins to begger women.
sun looks too big and too bright, can't see the shape of the sun.
Can't look directly upwards.
can walk right through dead bodies.
the dead Bodies don't movie when you walk on them
can't knell, or crawl.
only one player.



feel free to add more to the list!!
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"