Assasins Creed

[블라스]

Also, Fenrir beat the **** out of everyone who argued with him
If I ever need a lawyer I'm getting you, you bastard

 

[Fenrir]

If a game is getting 9s and 10s, then it should be one of the best released, period. That doesn't mean overlooking serious flaws, not small ones, because of one good element of the game.

But that's what I've been trying to cram into you blokes' heads all this time. The "flaws" you deem "serious" are quite negligible in the eyes of those who love the game. They're not "game-killers" for us, more like minor squabbles that can easily be overlooked on the basis of all the things the game does absolutely right. Why is it that difficult to understand?

 

[Fenrir]

There are plenty of games that came out this year that were better than AC, and those are the games that deserve 9s. AC is not one of the best games this gen, so it does not deserve a 9. If I were being generous, I'd give it an 8, but I can't overlook the problems enough to give it more than a 7. The game has a flawed structure, which is a much bigger deal than not having a certain feature or having a couple annoying bugs.

Actually those of us who rate the game a 9 or higher do think it is one of the best games this gen. I just find it appalling some of you crying foul over Ratchet and Clank getting scores below a 9 and then saying Assassin's Creed is a 7.5. Talk about lousy taste.

 

[Fenrir]

Also, Fenrir beat the **** out of everyone who argued with him
If I ever need a lawyer I'm getting you, you bastard

 

[Jerry!]

But that's what I've been trying to cram into you blokes' heads all this time. The "flaws" you deem "serious" are quite negligible in the eyes of those who love the game. They're not "game-killers" for us, more like minor squabbles that can easily be overlooked on the basis of all the things the game does absolutely right. Why is it that difficult to understand?

****, I guess if boring combat, bad AI and repetitious missions are minor squabbles I guess I would see this as one of the best next gen games as well. For everyone saying that AC is not what it was hyped up to be isn't just making this all up to bash the game. Some reviews of this game were misleading and undeserved. I don't buy the whole "rushed review deadline" bull****. So some sites and publications were rushed but got it right and others got it wrong? Even though they all had to review a lot of high profile games that month?

How do you explain IGN 3 divisions or factions or whatever handing some pretty diverse scores? It goes from 8.7 to 7.7 to 6.5. All with the main weakness being stated as the overall boring game play and with the lowest review saying that as a game AC fails. I wouldn't go that far, but getting reviews of 9 or 10 is ridiculous. The game does one thing really good. One thing. Everything else is a chore. If that one thing can cover up everything else for you, then fine this is the game for you. For a lot of people it can't. Why you are confused on that, I don't know.

I hope there is a sequel. I really do, because maybe they were just in over their heads a little on this one. Maybe now they recognize one side mission with the same thing over and over isn't going to work, isn't going to be enough. Maybe they will give us more an urge to go out and explore other than looking for those meaningless flags. There are promising things in the game other than free running, they just all seem to be like in the beta stage or something. Gotta make the combat more than it is, it's way too easy and gets old fast. I still have enough faith in Ubisoft that the sequel, if there is one, will be what this first one should have been. They have some of the base work down.

 

[Fenrir]

****, I guess if boring combat, bad AI and repetitious missions are minor squabbles I guess I would see this as one of the best next gen games as well. For everyone saying that AC is not what it was hyped up to be isn't just making this all up to bash the game. Some reviews of this game were misleading and undeserved. I don't buy the whole "rushed review deadline" bull****. So some sites and publications were rushed but got it right and others got it wrong? Even though they all had to review a lot of high profile games that month?

Boring combat? Weren't you the one who said that all you did was just overuse the counter button to get by the whole game? It's not the game's fault when players are too dumb or too lazy to properly utilize the wealth of options the game throws at them. I know for a fact that there is a certain section of the gaming populace that is too pent up with convenient routines and abusing easy, exploitable strategies rather than using their heads for change.

Repetitive missions? Go back to the post where I discussed the missions in detail and explained how complaints about the repetitiveness are grossly exaggerated, particularly when someone goes as far as saying they are "game-killers", which is just ridiculous.

Besides, just because all sites had to review high profile games that month doesn't mean that all of them managed the task the same way. Some could be short-staffed, some might not have received the game as early as others...I mean there could be any number of reasons. But I guess that's the MAIN problem with you blokes. You simply can't be persuaded to THINK.

How do you explain IGN 3 divisions or factions or whatever handing some pretty diverse scores? It goes from 8.7 to 7.7 to 6.5. All with the main weakness being stated as the overall boring game play and with the lowest review saying that as a game AC fails. I wouldn't go that far, but getting reviews of 9 or 10 is ridiculous. The game does one thing really good. One thing. Everything else is a chore. If that one thing can cover up everything else for you, then fine this is the game for you. For a lot of people it can't. Why you are confused on that, I don't know.

Since when have IGN and their divisions become the foremost authority on reviews in the gaming world? How are their editors any different or superior than any knowledgeable gamer? Or more appropriately, how are the opinions of the IGN reviewers more important or substantial than those of the majority of publications that gave Assassins' Creed scores higher than 85%? You just love quoting 1up, GT and IGN because they are in conformity with YOUR opinion of the game, but give no convincing reason as to why WE should listen to them and discard many others who praise the game.

I hope there is a sequel. I really do, because maybe they were just in over their heads a little on this one. Maybe now they recognize one side mission with the same thing over and over isn't going to work, isn't going to be enough. Maybe they will give us more an urge to go out and explore other than looking for those meaningless flags. There are promising things in the game other than free running, they just all seem to be like in the beta stage or something. Gotta make the combat more than it is, it's way too easy and gets old fast. I still have enough faith in Ubisoft that the sequel, if there is one, will be what this first one should have been. They have some of the base work down.

See, this is why I maintain why arguments of the critics of the game lack any substantial value. "The only thing the game does right is the free-running"? I guess we should throw away things like atmosphere, music, visuals, animation, attention-to-detail, controls, story, characters and innovative game mechanics - things that Assassin's Creed is almost peerless in its class. I mean, it's hard to take you seriously when you complain about the combat being too easy and getting old too fast when you can't be bothered to do anything else with it other than mashing on the counter button.

 

[Apollo]

awesome, i am at the crusade war part in the story.

before that i was at the funeral... it was hard, the people on the roof tops kept shooting me with arows, so i kept on dieing... but then i tought i would run out and seek out my vigilante friends! i ran to them, and it was like a group of 6! and they really helped a lot, and made it so much easier! it was fun too. t:

 

[Darthphere]

awesome, i am at the crusade war part in the story.

before that i was at the funeral... it was hard, the people on the roof tops kept shooting me with arows, so i kept on dieing... but then i tought i would run out and seek out my vigilante friends! i ran to them, and it was like a group of 6! and they really helped a lot, and made it so much easier! it was fun too. t:

All I did was kill the archers and stayed on a platform, they would come at me from downward, and I would get them one on one. Yay!

 

[Apollo]

hehe. the thing was, i didn't know they were up there, and every time i died i would start right where he says "kill him hes over there" so i never got the chance to kill them before hand.

i have a habit of going in and just killing everyone. Like with the execution guy.. i just ran in and killed him, then fought off all of his 25 men ( i counted afterward) i was surprised i didn't die. haha. the reason i stayed was because i thought you had to save the people who were about to be executed.. but once i got onto the platform you couldn't help them, they just stood there.

 

[블라스]

I hope they give Altair bow & arrows in the sequel

 

[Apollo]

my god, the ending is really hard! i can't beat it! and whats really stupid is when you knock the main guy on the ground, you can't hit him?? WTF?? thats so stupid..i mean i am already very low on health when fighting his men, so basically there is no fight between me an him before i die...whats dumb is you can hit ANYONE in the game when they are on the ground.. but not him!? i tried 3 times and the sword just goes right through his body, not even doing any damage... i don't think i can finish this, its to hard for me... LOL... especially when they pull gay **** where you cant hurt him on the ground

 

[StrainedEyes]

my god, the ending is really hard! i can't beat it! and whats really stupid is when you knock the main guy on the ground, you can't hit him?? WTF?? thats so stupid..i mean i am already very low on health when fighting his men, so basically there is no fight between me an him before i die...whats dumb is you can hit ANYONE in the game when they are on the ground.. but not him!? i tried 3 times and the sword just goes right through his body, not even doing any damage... i don't think i can finish this, its to hard for me... LOL... especially when they pull gay **** where you cant hurt him on the ground

It's because he teleports. You can't fully attack him until he stops and starts fighting.

 

[StrainedEyes]

I hope they give Altair bow & arrows in the sequel

He had a crossbow, but they nixed it for the throwing knives.

 

[Apollo]

Holy ****! my friend just killed him and he has never played the game before! thats shows how horrible i am!! t:

 

[cookiva]

He had a crossbow, but they nixed it for the throwing knives.

In the opening cut scene, he had a crossbow....

 

[StrainedEyes]

In the opening cut scene, he had a crossbow....

Yeah, because that was made before they did the switch.

 

[cookiva]

Yeah. I understand visually why the knives. Add a crossbow along with the sword, and how could anyone think you are a scholar....

 

[Apollo]

yea he had a crossbow in the movie, i wonder why they never had it in the game... but the ending of the game opens up for a sequel, i can't wait

so i just beat the game... the ending was crazy!

 

[Darthphere]

Speaking of sequel, you think we're going to get a lot more Desmond gameplay? I mean, like he follows Lucy as they escape from the lab and whatnot?

 

[Gilpesh]

Only if they make that entire portion of the game, not ******ed.

He moved like he was in a vat of custard.

 

[cookiva]

Your comma makes that sentence so idiotic its hilarious....

 

[Darthphere]

Only if they make that entire portion of the game, not ******ed.

He moved like he was in a vat of custard.

Yeah, I know. But I just imagine how cool it would be to free run through an urban center.

 

[Havok83]

I hope they give Altair bow & arrows in the sequel

if it switches things up and helps provide a bit more variety, then Im all for it

 

[Havok83]

Only if they make that entire portion of the game, not ******ed.

He moved like he was in a vat of custard.

IA, The Desmond parts were the worst. The movement was bad and good thing they didnt focus too much on it

 

[Timstuff]

Speaking of sequel, you think we're going to get a lot more Desmond gameplay? I mean, like he follows Lucy as they escape from the lab and whatnot?

They'd better have something like that. The end of the game implied that Desmond was starting to get some of Altair's abilities from the Animus, so I would only assume that the future of the franchise will eventually involve more of controlling Desmond. His half of the story was a lot more interesting than Altair's anyway, IMO. I just wish he didn't control like a tank. Hopefully that will change in the sequel, especially if he's getting some of Altair's skills.