Sign In
Register
Help
I played this game for about 6 hours at a friends house. I didn't really enjoy the first game, but this one is leaps and BOUNDS better. I was really enjoying it.
Assassin's Creed 2 Officialness not required . . .
MultiQuote
#92 Posted 30 November 2009 - 08:56 AM
I never liked this series because it's too Matrixy for it's own good. Why couldn't they just make a game that happens to take place in these time periods? No, they had to go and get all sci-fi on everybody. So whack...so much potential to take on say, Zelda?
Xbox Live: Z0RiN
"Doom 4"
...and uhh, Paul Allen. I killed Paul Allen with an axe..in the face. His body is dissolving in a bathtub in Hell's Kitchen.
#93 Posted 30 November 2009 - 02:17 PM
Sly_Ry, on Nov 30 2009, 03:56 AM, said:
I never liked this series because it's too Matrixy for it's own good. Why couldn't they just make a game that happens to take place in these time periods? No, they had to go and get all sci-fi on everybody. So whack...so much potential to take on say, Zelda?
lulwut?
Zelda? Really? Did you really just say that? Those two games bare almost no resemblance to each other other than the fact you play with with a controller.
Anyways, the Sci-Fi elements seem to make more sense in the 2nd game, because they touch upon the grander scale of what's going on. Also, if there was no Sci-Fi elements to tie the two games together it would feel like it lacked purpose. Or at least lack that sense of "grandeur" (bad choice of words, I know) that the current plot gives you.
#94 Posted 30 November 2009 - 05:52 PM
( sic ), on Nov 30 2009, 04:17 PM, said:
lulwut?
Zelda? Really? Did you really just say that? Those two games bare almost no resemblance to each other other than the fact you play with with a controller.
Anyways, the Sci-Fi elements seem to make more sense in the 2nd game, because they touch upon the grander scale of what's going on. Also, if there was no Sci-Fi elements to tie the two games together it would feel like it lacked purpose. Or at least lack that sense of "grandeur" (bad choice of words, I know) that the current plot gives you.
Zelda? Really? Did you really just say that? Those two games bare almost no resemblance to each other other than the fact you play with with a controller.
Anyways, the Sci-Fi elements seem to make more sense in the 2nd game, because they touch upon the grander scale of what's going on. Also, if there was no Sci-Fi elements to tie the two games together it would feel like it lacked purpose. Or at least lack that sense of "grandeur" (bad choice of words, I know) that the current plot gives you.
I can see the similarities with zelda, especially in the second game. But i do agree that the sci-fi elements are what makes the game that much more interesting, it gives the game another level of depth and it allows the devs to get around the video gamey stuff like loading screens and maps instead of them just being there for no reason at all, and of course it allows for the other games to be set in different time periods etc... I think it's a pretty cool idea and they pulled it off quite nicely in this game with not spending much time at all out of the animus, i can't wait to see what they do with the next one
SteamID: neva- :PSN
#97 Posted 07 December 2009 - 10:10 AM
Just finished it.
After a while of playing at the beginning it at a 9.5.
After 8 hours it was a 9.
After 12 it was an 8.5.
After 17 it was an 8.
After finishing it at 20 hours it was a 7.5.
I don't like writing long reviews that no one likes to read but I'll say this:
Ubisoft needs to stop with the insane amount of item collecting in their games, they obviously do this to sell guides for people who don't know the internet exists, but it's still ridiculous. There's 66 viewpoints in the game 40% which are recycled buildings, and if you want to get all codec pages (which you need to unlock the final mission in the game) you need to find every codec, of which there are 30, to find codes you can either spend an eternity looking for them or just buy a map and have them be displayed on your radar, however, for them to appear on your radar you first must make the map of the city you're in appear by climbing the buildings marked as viewpoints. This is all great until you're climbing a huge building for the 40th time to unlock a small part of the map and have another viewpoint appear. There's also a hundred feathers to collect which thankfully is optional, though kind of obligatory if you want to see a bonus cutscene and unlock a powerful new weapon.
The story starts out great but then goes downhill, characters keep getting introduced then they disappear; Ezio's mother and sister are a good example of this. Near the end it goes from 1489 to 1499, apparently there'll be some DLC (which you'll obviously have to pay for) that is supposed to fill in what happened in those missing years. The frequent time skipping in the plot makes for some noticeable problems as well, 10 years may have passed in Venice, but heralds still talk about the same things they did 10 years ago. Everyone still looks the same too, and even Enzio, who is in his early 40's/late 30's by the end of the game, still looks and mostly sounds the same unshaven look aside.
Camera and controls were fine except for some occasions, particularly two of the hidden tombs missions.
Something that got irritating near the end where the archers, they tell you to get back on the ground if they see you on roofs and attack if you ignore their warning or stand there for too long, this is fine throughout the whole game except for when you want to collect all the feathers. Running from roof to roof while looking for feathers means you'll be entering combat every 10 seconds. You get capes after completing every mission in a city that allow your notoriety level not to increase, why can't they make archers not give a damn as well?
mass effect lover dialogue tree home (you know who you are)
7.5 (Almost great)
I thought this would beat Batman as my second GOTY, but I was obviously wrong.
That is all.
Edit: I'm going to be really surprised if the next game is set in modern times and they don't pad out the series with 10 more games set in the past instead.
After a while of playing at the beginning it at a 9.5.
After 8 hours it was a 9.
After 12 it was an 8.5.
After 17 it was an 8.
After finishing it at 20 hours it was a 7.5.
I don't like writing long reviews that no one likes to read but I'll say this:
Ubisoft needs to stop with the insane amount of item collecting in their games, they obviously do this to sell guides for people who don't know the internet exists, but it's still ridiculous. There's 66 viewpoints in the game 40% which are recycled buildings, and if you want to get all codec pages (which you need to unlock the final mission in the game) you need to find every codec, of which there are 30, to find codes you can either spend an eternity looking for them or just buy a map and have them be displayed on your radar, however, for them to appear on your radar you first must make the map of the city you're in appear by climbing the buildings marked as viewpoints. This is all great until you're climbing a huge building for the 40th time to unlock a small part of the map and have another viewpoint appear. There's also a hundred feathers to collect which thankfully is optional, though kind of obligatory if you want to see a bonus cutscene and unlock a powerful new weapon.
The story starts out great but then goes downhill, characters keep getting introduced then they disappear; Ezio's mother and sister are a good example of this. Near the end it goes from 1489 to 1499, apparently there'll be some DLC (which you'll obviously have to pay for) that is supposed to fill in what happened in those missing years. The frequent time skipping in the plot makes for some noticeable problems as well, 10 years may have passed in Venice, but heralds still talk about the same things they did 10 years ago. Everyone still looks the same too, and even Enzio, who is in his early 40's/late 30's by the end of the game, still looks and mostly sounds the same unshaven look aside.
Camera and controls were fine except for some occasions, particularly two of the hidden tombs missions.
Something that got irritating near the end where the archers, they tell you to get back on the ground if they see you on roofs and attack if you ignore their warning or stand there for too long, this is fine throughout the whole game except for when you want to collect all the feathers. Running from roof to roof while looking for feathers means you'll be entering combat every 10 seconds. You get capes after completing every mission in a city that allow your notoriety level not to increase, why can't they make archers not give a damn as well?
mass effect lover dialogue tree home (you know who you are)
7.5 (Almost great)
I thought this would beat Batman as my second GOTY, but I was obviously wrong.
That is all.
Edit: I'm going to be really surprised if the next game is set in modern times and they don't pad out the series with 10 more games set in the past instead.
#98 Posted 07 December 2009 - 05:51 PM
If they replace the history angle with machine guns and skyscrapers, they will become the biggest laughing stock of the game industry. Why kill the goose that lays golden eggs? I'm pretty sure it will be set in another historical period, most probably in New world around 1700s. Lots of big name good guys and evil doers during those times (Ben Franklin as your new Leonardo ;0
As for your criticisms, 90% of the things you listed are optional. You don't need to climb every tower, collect every feather and raid every tomb to finish the game. Only thing you need are the codex pages and by the time you get to the final act, the game will display all of their locations on the map (if you missed them). I had lots of fun with the guards in getting them. You can either:
1) Walk up with dual blades and ZING
2) Draw your sword for man-o-man
3) Distract them with hookers, thieves and fighters
4) smoke bomb them
5) Throw knife/shoot bullet at them
6) Or a combination of any of these
I always tried new stuff, and it was fun. I finished the game in 15 hours with Montineggiro completely renovated along with all the statues, truth files, armors and weapons (including Altair's armor). I didn't get all the feathers, viewpoints and assassination contracts, which I'm doing right now post-game.
Oh and as for archers, walk up to them, grab them, and flick them off rooftops. MUCH more quicker and satisfying. I did that to almost every archer that wanted to pick a fight with me.
As for your criticisms, 90% of the things you listed are optional. You don't need to climb every tower, collect every feather and raid every tomb to finish the game. Only thing you need are the codex pages and by the time you get to the final act, the game will display all of their locations on the map (if you missed them). I had lots of fun with the guards in getting them. You can either:
1) Walk up with dual blades and ZING
2) Draw your sword for man-o-man
3) Distract them with hookers, thieves and fighters
4) smoke bomb them
5) Throw knife/shoot bullet at them
6) Or a combination of any of these
I always tried new stuff, and it was fun. I finished the game in 15 hours with Montineggiro completely renovated along with all the statues, truth files, armors and weapons (including Altair's armor). I didn't get all the feathers, viewpoints and assassination contracts, which I'm doing right now post-game.
Oh and as for archers, walk up to them, grab them, and flick them off rooftops. MUCH more quicker and satisfying. I did that to almost every archer that wanted to pick a fight with me.
#99 Posted 07 December 2009 - 07:45 PM
So in all honesty is it just like the 1st one or is it better (alot better)? I played the 1st one till the 3rd citiy and said..wow its the same crap and almost the same city ...F this game. And unistalled it. I can't believe it won awards it was so damn boring. All it had was graphics and was fun for like the 1st 2hrs of game play MAX.
They used to call me FatFunkey
#100 Posted 07 December 2009 - 07:49 PM
There's plenty of historical places in modern times, setting it in 2012 doesn't mean you need to have Desmond take a leap of faith from the empire state building and fight templars in the White House.
As for the codec pages, even if you have the map that shows where they are you also need to activate the viewpoints for them to appear in it, unless during the endgame they appear on the radar no matter what.
Edit: The missions are way more varied than in the first one, but some of the core problems (e.g the combat) are still there.
As for the codec pages, even if you have the map that shows where they are you also need to activate the viewpoints for them to appear in it, unless during the endgame they appear on the radar no matter what.
Edit: The missions are way more varied than in the first one, but some of the core problems (e.g the combat) are still there.
#101 Posted 07 December 2009 - 08:09 PM
El Inspector, on Dec 7 2009, 01:49 PM, said:
unless during the endgame they appear on the radar no matter what.
This happens.
Also, NO. Down with modern setting! There is absolutely no way Assassins Creed can work in modern setting. You will have to get rid of the deep combat system and replace it with guns. Climbing and other stuff may work, but it will look ridiculous. I cringed at the AC2 ending,
Spoiler
#102 Posted 07 December 2009 - 08:19 PM
What deep combat.
Here's the combat in this and the past game:
Hold the block button and wait for enemy to attack.
Press X (or square if you're on the PS3) to counter attack and do an instakill move.
If the enemy has a long range weapon press B to grab him then cut his neck with your sword.
If the enemy is heavily armored do a counter attack with your fists to rob his weapon and instakill him.
If the enemy is lightly armored weaken him a bit by mashing the attack button then counter attack to instantly kill him.
The combat isn't deep nor challenging, I only died once during the very beginning and that was because I wasn't used to how the targeting worked.
And you wouldn't have to get rid of melee combat if it were set in a modern setting, in fact, you could just mix both guns and melee to make it more entertaining.
Here's the combat in this and the past game:
Hold the block button and wait for enemy to attack.
Press X (or square if you're on the PS3) to counter attack and do an instakill move.
If the enemy has a long range weapon press B to grab him then cut his neck with your sword.
If the enemy is heavily armored do a counter attack with your fists to rob his weapon and instakill him.
If the enemy is lightly armored weaken him a bit by mashing the attack button then counter attack to instantly kill him.
The combat isn't deep nor challenging, I only died once during the very beginning and that was because I wasn't used to how the targeting worked.
And you wouldn't have to get rid of melee combat if it were set in a modern setting, in fact, you could just mix both guns and melee to make it more entertaining.
#103 Posted 09 December 2009 - 09:35 PM
El Inspector, on Dec 7 2009, 02:19 PM, said:
What deep combat.
Here's the combat in this and the past game:
Hold the block button and wait for enemy to attack.
Press X (or square if you're on the PS3) to counter attack and do an instakill move.
If the enemy has a long range weapon press B to grab him then cut his neck with your sword.
If the enemy is heavily armored do a counter attack with your fists to rob his weapon and instakill him.
If the enemy is lightly armored weaken him a bit by mashing the attack button then counter attack to instantly kill him.
The combat isn't deep nor challenging, I only died once during the very beginning and that was because I wasn't used to how the targeting worked.
And you wouldn't have to get rid of melee combat if it were set in a modern setting, in fact, you could just mix both guns and melee to make it more entertaining.
Here's the combat in this and the past game:
Hold the block button and wait for enemy to attack.
Press X (or square if you're on the PS3) to counter attack and do an instakill move.
If the enemy has a long range weapon press B to grab him then cut his neck with your sword.
If the enemy is heavily armored do a counter attack with your fists to rob his weapon and instakill him.
If the enemy is lightly armored weaken him a bit by mashing the attack button then counter attack to instantly kill him.
The combat isn't deep nor challenging, I only died once during the very beginning and that was because I wasn't used to how the targeting worked.
And you wouldn't have to get rid of melee combat if it were set in a modern setting, in fact, you could just mix both guns and melee to make it more entertaining.
Well I did say few pages ago that the core combat is intact from the first game, so if you hated the first one's you will probably not like the second one. But there is variety as well, which was missing from first one. The first game did not have brutes or agile guards, even though the ones in 2 can be taken out with a pattern. It was fun for me, and I tried to get into as much combat as possible cuz it was so cool to do counters and stuff.
Modern setting with guns and swordplay?
Sure, there's space for that. But don't be expecting to fight like a secret Assassin. Only way a stealthy type game can work in modern setting is with advanced weaponry and sneak kills, like Metal gear solid, Splinter cell or James Bond. There is no place for swords and stuff.
