@barney_ross: Assassins Creed is a tech demo built around poor gameplay, I recall spamming the throw knives to beat the entire game. It has bad level design as well, sold on graphics and false promises Ubisoft couldn't deliver at the time. Not worth looking back on. I'd even take Duke Nukem Forever over this game.
Already mentioned Crysis a few times in GD and I know it has a niche following here so will simply sum-up_ Much like Assassins; Crysis heavily, heavily sold on how it looked. Unlike Assassins, can't entirely state it's shallow, Crysis had a few fun tools that didn't really add depth sure, just exploited the moronic A.I. further, though suppose early-on is fun to play with. Conclusion- Even if I removed the likes of the vastly superior FPS Bioshock, in 2007 better options existed. Crysis is more known for pushing graphical aspects (despite being an optimised mess). Which is all the signs for a game to never stand on its mechanical merits. Much like D00M III. Again, (personally speaking) not worth looking back on.
*Haven't played the others but based on those two flashy games with little substance, I should consider my fortune.
Log in to comment