This review is kinda backward. They say the plot is ridiculous and the game is too hard. The plot is a continuation of a game they praised for having a "riveting" plot (check the GC prequel's review), and the game is easier than the GC one, which they scored an 8.6. Backwards, I say. Probably had a guy that doesn't like strategy games review it. The summary even says it is best left for the strategists, which implies that he is not one.

Personally I think sites should do 3-person reviews, like EGM does, to avoid stuff like this.

[QUOTE="catlin_czirr"][QUOTE="musicalmac"]I'm pleased with how Assassin's Creed looks, to be very frank with you all. One of the most exciting aspects is the ability to climb, and honestly, the animations best what I've seen out of Uncharted so far. No awkward transitions FTW.musicalmac

I am TOTALLY with you. Jungles aren't fun, and only Harrison Ford can pull off Indy.

PS3, because it can play PS2 games anyway. I'd choose it for Bluray as well, and then use my 360 for this-gen games.SolidSnake35

Not everyone's PS3 plays PS2 games.

This is an interesting topic.

A Wii, a DS, a fairly competent PC, and a 360.

Playing SMG, CoD4 (360), Phantom Hourglass still, a little bit of Orange Box (PC) and MLB2k7.

Miyamoto invented everything, seriously. 'Cept the internet.

Actually, I don't know. Might have.

[QUOTE="BlueBarad"]You can always choose not to buy it.catlin_czirr

Uh, welcome to life.

That said, AC is still one of the better games of the year, if only for being relentlessly ambitious. I'm sure it's fun as hell, too.

The new FF does look like dreck, I've never wanted to be 13 again like I do now.

But people are still gonna buy the **** out of it, and reviewers are gonna drool about it, only to call it overrated a few years down the line, like they always do.