Assassin's Creed: the more I play, the more I hate it!

Ok, the last sequence of this game made me hate it all the more. Who in the hell decided that making the last few levels play out like a Serious Sam game, with boatloads of guys being thrown at you over and over again was a good idea? And then to completely rob you of any kind of closure at the ending is complete BS.

As I've said before, this game shows so much potential, but in the end, it truly failed.

The game's ending was absolutely awful. No closure, no conclusion, just...nothing. That, IMO, was the only area in which Ubisoft Montreal dropped the ball. I loved AC all the way through. For all those people who claim that its repetitive, what did you expect from a game where the main purpose was the assassinate 9 targets. It isn't like you can just go into these sprawling cities, instantly stumble on your target and kill him. You had to hunt him down, learn who he was and find the right moment to strike. The game did that very well. It isn't like that process is suddenly going to change over the course of the game.-OmegaKnight-

Maybe it should, but hey maybe I'm expecting too much, as I was expecting a story/gameplay on par with the Splinter Cell series.

[QUOTE="-OmegaKnight-"]The game's ending was absolutely awful. No closure, no conclusion, just...nothing. That, IMO, was the only area in which Ubisoft Montreal dropped the ball. I loved AC all the way through. For all those people who claim that its repetitive, what did you expect from a game where the main purpose was the assassinate 9 targets. It isn't like you can just go into these sprawling cities, instantly stumble on your target and kill him. You had to hunt him down, learn who he was and find the right moment to strike. The game did that very well. It isn't like that process is suddenly going to change over the course of the game.HiResDes

Maybe it should, but hey maybe I'm expecting too much, as I was expecting a story/gameplay on par with the Splinter Cell series.

The Splinter Cell gameplay is largely the same thing over and over and over again and in some ways the gameplay in SC is far more restrictive.

As to story, I liked the narrative of Assassin's Creed and while the ending was abrupt it left me wanting the sequel very badly.

Ok, the last sequence of this game made me hate it all the more. Who in the hell decided that making the last few levels play out like a Serious Sam game, with boatloads of guys being thrown at you over and over again was a good idea? And then to completely rob you of any kind of closure at the ending is complete BS.

As I've said before, this game shows so much potential, but in the end, it truly failed.

TheCrazed420

No, it failed to deliver on your expectations, which is a different situation altogether.

I'm pretty sure the developers of the game are happy with the final product because it delivered the type of experience they have been talking about for years. That experience may not work for you personally but no game, no matter how amazing, works for everybody. Assassin's Creed took some big risks and for many, those risks paid off very well.

If the game didn't work for you that's understandable so move on and avoid the sequel.

In regard to the above 2 comments - even though many people have enjoyed AC, you must concede it doesn't deliver as full an experience as most other games that get such high scores, in that the content put into it is pretty basic & a little lazy. It is not enough to create a beautiful world, there must be substance to it. Splinter Cell Double Agent is probably one of the best looking games on the 360, and even though it's a linear game in nature it offers more options to the player in one room than AC does over a whole city.

[QUOTE="TheCrazed420"]

Ok, the last sequence of this game made me hate it all the more. Who in the hell decided that making the last few levels play out like a Serious Sam game, with boatloads of guys being thrown at you over and over again was a good idea? And then to completely rob you of any kind of closure at the ending is complete BS.

As I've said before, this game shows so much potential, but in the end, it truly failed.

Grammaton-Cleric

No, it failed to deliver on your expectations, which is a different situation altogether.

I'm pretty sure the developers of the game are happy with the final product because it delivered the type of experience they have been talking about for years. That experience may not work for you personally but no game, no matter how amazing, works for everybody. Assassin's Creed took some big risks and for many, those risks paid off very well.

If the game didn't work for you that's understandable so move on and avoid the sequel.

Big risks? Since when having an open world and free-roaming in a game is a big risk? I don't think this is the best thing ubisoft could come up with... The game-play lacked alot and I mentioned in one of the blogs that it had more negative aspects than positive ones... Here I go:

• You're not really "free" in AC, everything is timed including the battle
• You only have two tricks for hidining which are the curtains and hay.
• You don't play in the game as everything is scipted, the investigation is scripted so are the assassinations.
• There are many useless sequences in AC such as aquiring a view point and saving the citizens.
• The climbing is only done to help obtain a view point.
• The camera angles in the scenes are badly located. I know I can change it to three different positions but I wish the acting was on par with Heavnly Sword* the way characters moves and act*
• There has been a lack in Altair's movements like no swimming, crawling and other moves.

In regard to the above 2 comments - even though many people have enjoyed AC, you must concede it doesn't deliver as full an experience as most other games that get such high scores, in that the content put into it is pretty basic & a little lazy. It is not enough to create a beautiful world, there must be substance to it. Splinter Cell Double Agent is probably one of the best looking games on the 360, and even though it's a linear game in nature it offers more options to the player in one room than AC does over a whole city.

T-Law

I totally agree with you. POP deserves more praise and better scorers if AC was that good.

Assassin's Creed does have some problems. Biggest problem is that it is incomplete game, due to lack of variety in side missions.

However, the game is quite original in it's attempt to push sandbox gameplay to the next level. The interactions between NPCs and player feels very natural although the relationship between player and NPC is only skin deep. It's not like RPG where you can feel for the character by listening to all the side stories, but all the strangers you meet really feels like strangers and is part of a society.

The game certainly is repetitive. Even though they do add some small variety by putting other assassins as side quest givers, but mostly it is same 3 quest over and over again until you get to main quest of actually getting to assassinate someone. Then that part is broken up with cut scenes and really ridiculously long deaths of characters.

But there is this free roaming platform gameplay that really makes Assassin's Creed shine. By far it has the platform gameplay I've enjoyed the most, and yes that includes all the Mario games, which I've never really love besides the first one on Nintendo.

Also, if you think about it in other way, what game isn't repetitive? Resident Evil 4 was nothing but blasting zombies away with minor puzzles that was just waste of time than being actually interesting. It was one of the most repetitive games I've ever played.

Personally I think there is only 2 reasons why people have problems with Assassin's Creed. 1, there isn't that much killing and the action is on the dull side as it is more based on waiting and timing. 2, The lack of variety with the look of the missions. Most games use same missions over and over, but they do it in nice way by making it look slightly different, like by giving different enemies etc. Assassin's Creed side quest usually feels like straight copy and paste. If they at least tried to make it look little different, people would've liked it much more.

If you can stand still without killing anything for every 10 seconds, you will find Assassin's Creed a very nice game with free roaming platform gameplay and a world you might want to explore just because it looks interesting, not because you want to get something out of it.

I love this game. It is pretty much what I hoped gaming industry would reach. It feels more like virtual world than a game and the game isn't restricted by something so lame like level design. You are free to approach the game as you would like and that's something I wished for very long time.

And unlike most people out there, I actually like Assassin's Creed combat very much. I like that realistic feeling combat system.

I guess it is difference in taste.