AC Unity vs Shadow of Mordor(a comparison)

First off I haven't played Shadow of Mordor and I'm not going to pretend I have. But I've watched a ton of youtube videos. I got AC Unity and spent as much time watching youtube thinking maybe I got the wrong game.

AC Unity to me is a beautiful looking game although sort of a cardboard cutout of what I'd imagine Paris would be. The tech is there with the crowds and cutscenes and special effects especially during transition missions where it has you in kind of God of War scenarios and cool stuff. Outside of that it's an incredibly unbalanced game with a map loaded iwth content which you literally have to avoid the main story to complete. You run around in circles to complete certain tasks that are so tedious and numerous it's ridiculous to even try. Most of the world itself is not interactive and it ends up feeling incredibly empty imo. The story is mediocre. The assassinations missions are good, but bugs and poor controls really take away from the gameplay imo. IT's somewhat understandable with the scope of the game and with all that it's trying to do. But it's also not with Ubisofts budget, regardless of whether they are trying to rush the process and release the game yearly. I enjoy the sneaking aspects of AC and pacing and ability to approach missions differently but it all doesn't work well. A lot of the time glitches happen that take you completely out of the sneaking aspect of the game. The world itself no matter how good it looks, ends up feeling more like AC1 and a return to just an overstuffed world that feels empty.

Shadow of Mordor seems to be much more tactical and what AC should be in ways. There actually is strategy involved with how you decide to make your way through the mission structure and execute. It's all done on the fly without all the fluff and ends up being a much more cohesive package and game. The map itself is not filled with a million things to do. Missions themselves and the nemesis system and how each mission is set up and how you decide to pick off enemies and infiltrate is all done on the fly. It might not look as good but overall what it's attempting to do just comes off as more of a game vs chores that you have to complete. I'm not sure where the depth in the game goes beyond that but that's the jist I get. It seems somewhat repetitive in it's current state.

Has anyone played both? Am I about right? Or am I wrong and Shadow of Mordor is just a movie game with more hype behind it that in reality is just an AC knockoff?

Haven't played Unity, but I got bored of Mordor after about 10 hours. Totally surprised to see the game picking up GOTY awards, I thought outside of the combat system it was pretty mediocre.

That's what I was wondering. It seems like it gets repetitive and really isn't much depth outside of that one thing they do. Just different design and got hyped like it's this big next gen thing when it's just a different combat system. Where have the good game makers gone. These games have huge budgets and hype behind them but as far as actual games and time being invested into making a really good game I'm not seeing it.

Because that's totally the same thing.

Shadow of Mordor was alot of fun, but then the novelty wore off.

Plus Mordor isn't too fun to explore.

ACU isn't exactly "great" but Paris is simply incredible to explore.

is shadows of mordor combat more repetivive than holding down the right trigger in Dragon age inquistion?

if so i dunno how the heck smash bro or whatever lose to these trash games for the year

I don't know if it's incredible to explore. It's pretty to look at and run around aimlessly. I'm not really sure what I'm exploring.

it isn't the same thing. That's why i made this thread but i think i can see where shadow of mordor is overhyped too. It gets repetitive and the amazing nemesis system is not like some of these sites make it out to be.

They have the basis down for the next one though. A decent engine, a great combat system. I would rather they went with an original IP than LotR. Don't get me wrong I like LotR, but trying to cram a story between what already exists just isn't that interesting (look at War in the North as another example).

They should have gone for a victorian steampunk aesthetic and just fucking made up a decent story with enemies and characters and actually put you right in the thick of it (like the Batman and AC games have, at least in the past).

As someone said above, Mordor was boring to explore, on both sides of the half way mark.

Shadow of Mordor=good game

Assassin's Creed=not a good game

Really simple.

If you haven't played Mordor, why make a comparison? Mordor is my GOTY.

because i'm curious what other people think who have played both because im just gathering information and might purchase it. I don't trust people though too much, so i've researched it myself and thought it would make a good topic on two similar games that do things differently.

I got ya.....Mordor is great and worthy of the GS award IMO

I played both and got bored of both. Mordor has an interesting gimmick in the form of the Nemesis system but it's not something I'd consider revolutionary or groundbreaking. It certainly doesn't make up for a bland story and piss-easy combat.

I don't like Mordor but I am enjoying Unity.

I just beat Mordor, and while I didn't care for the story... especially the ending, the one thing I prefer greatly over the AC philosophy is that there was just the right amount of side missions. I got 100% and didn't have to go all OCD. AC Unity, by contrast, has a map that looks like the Milky Way galaxy. I tried to get back into the game after abandoning it shortly after launch, and it felt aimless and muddled. I applaud the busy feel of Paris, but it's just too much stuff that isn't that fun to do. And don't even get me started on those chests you have to unlock through external apps/websites... I checked AC Initiates and it was down, now months after launch. Just terrible.

So I prefer Mordor, though AC wins in the story department.... barely.

haha woooow

I haven't played this game yet but this video just shattered my hype for the game's combat

Christ. This about sums up my experience with the game. I didn't realize how overpowered dodging was mainly because I never felt a need to dodge, since attack and counter were the only buttons I needed to press in combat.

I liked both and somehow Ac Unity grabbed me for longer (haven't bothered finishing SoM yet).

SoM is great but when I prefer to play dota 2 or dark souls 2 over it (my core games right now), then that means it's a fail in my book.

I liked it, that's all I can say. But I also liked AC Unity.

That's what they want you to think in ways. They have people dying and offering them a challenge and people get mad and quit that's not good for business so they don't concentrate on good mechanics and just dumb the game down so a chimp can play it and find enjoyment by tricking them that way. I won't be buying the game mainly due in thanks to that video. I've been there. Not quite that mad lol. But I've been told im this that and this just because im analytical and have a cs degree and know bad AI when I see it. Whatever sells and puts money in their pockets. It's greed. They won't be getting my money.

I have both games and definitely like Assassins Creed better. I enjoyed Shadow of Mordor at first but in my opinion it's much more repetitive than Unity. I've been very impressed with Unity honestly although I know a lot of people haven't been. I guess it's because I hated Black Flag and all of the sailing involved and wasn't a big fan of AC3 either. Unity, to me, brought the series back to its roots. Also, the world in Mordor sucks compared to Paris

BHUR THUR NEMESIZ SYSTUR!!! OMGURZ

Yeah i feel the same. Unity doenst look that interesting either, have not even cared to finish black flag...

SoM shows one part of a AC game and does it in a way that is fun.
AC games have never been fun, not in terms of combat, story, side content, collectibles, main quest or anything except the traversal.
SoM tells me that AC combat and world responding to the player can be done properly. That it can work.
I think the AC devs are on to something. I also think they will never be able to let go of most of the things that make AC bad.

Yeah I didn't like the sailing bits in Black Flag either.

I've played both. Unity was actually a pretty good AC game once htey squashed the frame rate issues. I like having a lot of options for side missions, and the assassination missions were finally done right, making the older AC games feel like they lost out by not doing it this way.

Mordor, was ok, fun combat if you like batman style fighting, but there was almost nothing to the story, and the battles got super repetitive after a while. The 'stealth' of it was practically non existent, and you just end up going all out battle for 10 minutes on a group of orcs until you defeat their leader, then on to the next rinse repeat.

Both games have issues at some level but I found Unity more compelling to beat.

SoM is the better game. The story is lacking and the world feels a bit empty, but the game is just a lot of fun to play.

Even without the bugs, Unity is just a bad game. The story is abysmal, I can't even tell you who I was assassiniating the whole game. The relationship with Elise is okay, but it could've been better. It tries to make improvements to the franchise, but it's less fun to play than previous AC games. Side missions are uncompelling and boring. I don't even like the graphics in this game. The lighting is great but the amount of pop-in is distracting.

SoM is better, although I traded that game in too once I finished it to completion.