Sorry your browser is not supported!

I'm currently playing the game as I just got it, but I can't put it down! I love everything about it, even the slow riding through the country stuff, because it's just do much fun to get caught (which is not hard) and take on like ten people and whoop them all. I also love the graphics of the game, even the weird way he is controlled.

I can't seem to figure out how to unlock different parts of the city yet, I just assassinated my third guy, some doctor prick. However I'm sure they will be unlocked somehow.

Anyways a little story, so I was riding through the country when a lone guard on a lone guard tower in the middle of nowhere spots me and yells ASSASSIN! and I was just like "oh...your dead..." so I climb up to kill him and he knocks me off and I hit the ground, now I was mad, when all of a sudden the guard trys to jump off after me and kills himself! I was laughing for so long.

So what did you people think of the game?

Repetition gameplay city...

I mean it isn't a bad game, just it's basically Prince of Persia in a weird trying to be real-but-not-actually-reading-a-history-book sorta way in the middle-eastern christian(well jewish) prodominant nations that oddly by some natural disaster have become far closer together than physically possible without damaging any of the cities or culture plus a huge focus on combat which quite frankly has never been Prince of Persia's strong suit... and unfortunately they never really quite got that aspect right.

While I do love the whole choice of 3/6 possible tasks to get an assasination mark, with the AI doing a really nice job to allow for replayability for each mission; problem is each damn mission and list of tasks is identical. Alright so often different locations but realistically they all work identically.

The same for loosing the crusader heat too, there's like 4-5 ways to do it; with them being able to be dropped into 2 catagories.
Hiding, or Running Away Quickly.

There's no real way to beat you way out of a situation (especially later on) with seemingly endless crusaders. Seriously if King Richard had this many guys on his side, he could've trounced the sodding Romans (if you forgive the fact they never were in the same time period )

The phasing back to "reality" is a nice break, but again there is very little to do.

I mean once you get past the whole free-running aspect the game is seriously prince of persia... without the well thought out platforming puzzle areas. Which kinda defeats the point.

Going back to the main base each mission for a sodding lecture (which you can't skip on the PS3) just is annoying, same goes for the Metal Gear Solid taunting and death speeches.

I wouldn't be so irritated with them if they weren't all out to make you feel like the biggest dick on the planet for offing them despite it being your job, although in the end you find out why; there is no actual distinction between good and evil. This in itself is cool and I did like how they were trying to show both side of the coin at the same time; but the way it is all presented just took the joy out of killing each one of them. Especially when it's every bloody one!! If one or two actually deserved it, that'd be cool; or if the story twisted at some point and you were like "Oh wait, wtf dude I'm totally on the wrong side" or even better you did things like in Splinter Cell Double Agent to choose a side would've been better.

Instead you get none of that. I mean it's a game designed to not only make you feel stupid, but provides you no choice but to mindlessly do your masters bidding... with yes that annoying repetition.

Grand Theft Auto was the same, which yeah I also found fun. Problem is this only ends up being limited fun; especially with such a bloody linear storyline.

They've tried to artificially extended the lifespan of the game (which believe me is too damn short for this sort of title), and force you through a linear as hell storyline that in the end you probably won't care about. Again much like GTA.

Only reason I completed the game, was cause it was like 6hrs.
It doesn't even really have any side missions, I mean it does... but they're all the damn same, so realistically it doesn't. As you get bored of them quickly.

Then you get into the whole crowd npc issues of where the entire city pretty much treats you and you alone like dirt; yet god forbid you do anything back as the game will instantly make you feel like the reincarnation of hitler for it.

I found it pretty hard to fight the urge not to constantly thin out the retarded gene-pools of people who obviously needed some sorta hobby so they don't get stabbed in such dangerous cities.. cause I quite frankly didn't want to have to fight or hide from another endless wave of guards and crusaders.

Probably the same reason I held own the "sneak" button while riding about, which ironically is only slightly slower than regular walking or trotting pace. You end up doing it though cause aparently 3mph is fine, but 4mph is completely over the limit and make it obvious that you an assasin (which the crusaders would often yell if I ever did over this ridiculously strict speed limit)

Add to this you're the only bugger on a horse most of the time, if not all the time in real-time gameplay (as opposed to cut-scenes)

I mean wasn't bad... just is one of those games I reckon I'd have enjoyed much more if people hadn't been crowing it'd be the next best thing to sliced bread, which if we were all living in Altairs era perhaps this'd be true as well given it probably wasn't invented yet.

Enevitabily you'll be disappointed with the story you have to endure to complete it (and earn all those lovely "accolades" or achievements if you have a real gaming machine ) you'll probably play it again to abuse people in the world, but certainly won't do it to actually play through it again to complete.

I'm begining to think the current game budgets only cover the actual concept for a game, cause from what I'm seeing right now it certainly as hell ain't going on anything else in many.

Look at Crysis, it's a bog standard shooter.. hell it's worse cause it's a bog-standard shooter with "super-powers" given via a suit which frankly I think you only have cause of the realistic nature of the weaponry and sheer numbers of enemies (which good god gets weird about half way through)... still you don't really change from start to finish and the freedom truely kills the whole experience.

Especially when you think about how advanced the engine is, yet it's never put to any decent damn use; and the only people actually capable of running it at a reasonable speed are those who've dropped nearly £1,500 for their brand-spanking-new-rigs.

I certainly as hell wouldn't have dropped £300 to get a top-notch graphics card, just to play that game.. or any of the current wave of games really. Given Call of Duty 4 imo is currently the best damn one out currently for multi-platforms, and it runs perfectly find on sodding IGPs why the hell anyone would run out and get a nice new GeForce 8800 or Radeon 2900 for almost £300 is beyond me just to play these new games.

I'm all for graphics being pushed, but frankly having to update cards every 6months is just ridiculous. I mean for gods sake unless you have SLi or Crossfire cards, you just can't get Crysis to max out and maintain a reasonable framerate (I've heard the same about Assasins Creed, and Gears of War, although Gears I have running fine on a mid-range card; with medium graphics (about the same as the 360) which tbh suits me just fine)

Could just be me, but I'd actually perfer content and substance over graphics. It's about bloody time some developers (hardware and software) learnt this cold hard fact too.

I mean the current selection of graphics cards is a joke.
You can't really tell performance between each card, there's too sodding many that do too many different things on the market with wildly fluctuating prices not really relating to their performance at all.

For gods sake, while we all can marvel over the £450 giant 8800 Ultra for it's performance; people realise that under DirectX9 it's only marginally quicker than the 7950-series which costs almost 1/4 the price. Seriously, with DirectX10 performance what it is why not just buy a sodding mid-range last-generation card and spend what you save on getting a console you know will last you 4-5years at this point with zero compatibility issues?

To me consoles are really starting to show more and more their worth, just a shame your only real choice for a gaming platform is the 360; given the Wii will leave you with limp wrists after an hour of play, and the PS3 seems to constantly be suffering an identity crisis. Is it a gaming machine? Is it a media centre? Is it a movie player? Is it a desktop pc? At this point you just don't bloody know. It really does need to decide what it wants to be and focus on it!

I know it's a long rant, but probably won't get to do another for a good week or so; and frankly the games industry is just pissing me off on the whole right now.

I have to admit, I killed every single beggar woman and retard leper I could find, because frankly, they annoyed the hell outta me.

*toggle*

I read it all but damn raven..you do bring up good points that I can't turn away.

I loved the story, the ending (after-credits) is ubercool and the sci-fi aspect. Controls are inituitive, the gameplay gets repetive if you play it quick. One kill per day, or per few day, and it's much better to do. The four hiding items are total nonsense, and the biggest disappointment in the game for me.


If they wouldn't be as briliant as they are, I'd agree. Every time I've played MGS (over 20 times, I think) - I've watched every, single, scene. They keep being of cinematic quality.

Back to AC: I agree mostly with Gil's review in U2.

Whenever I've stumbled upon my flatmate's room and he's playing it I just see the same thing - gameplay looks awesome but I get the impression that'll it'll get samey after a while - heck I didn't see any real change of environment, I suppose I should ask him if I could have a go and find out for myself.

Lol, same here, sometimes I just punched them if there was a guard nearby .

For my opinions of AC, check out my review in Untitled 2, it mostly agrees with Ravens.

Ugh, I really want it, but won't get it until my 360 gets fixed.

haha. Yeah.

This is a Games For Windows deal too right?

Don't even get me started on how I'm upset that Microsoft now plasters it's label on everything these days, then again I guess it's mainly about how the design company is affiliated with Microsoft. But whatever. lol.

Lol i just assassinated them even if there was a guard near by, they seemed to agree with me that they should be killed!

Not as far as I know. Microsoft doesn't have anything to do with it--- it's also on the PS3.

Myself, I never had a single interest in this game. I'm too busy enjoying Uncharted

You already have Uncharted? Hmmm. Can I drop you a mail? Or you drop me a mail? I've mailed you on several occasions, but I think your mail address isn't correct or something.

Yah, I'm almost finished Uncharted. It is one of the best games I've played in a long time--- one of the first good examples of playing a game that feels like a movie I sent you an email.

@AaronG: It's coming out for PC after Christmas

Well I'm happy, it seems the game is part of a trilogy of games. However there was also supposed to be a book trilogy that went along with it, but a group of people got all pissy about the religious aspect of the book, and Ubisoft decided to pull it rather than do what they should have done, tell them to piss off.

They only said they'd make more if people like this one, they're trying to replace prince of persia with their own IP. Doesn't seem to have gone to plan, but is probably doing well enough to warrant a new one.

The game is part of a trilogy. The story, ending and everything implies it's not over.

Countless games do that, it doesn't guarantee said sequel(s) will be made

For Ubisoft? Come on. Assassins Creed is a mayor title. It's a top seller. The story is there, the concept is clearly there (check the cryptic clues at the end of the game), everything is in place - including the money. They'll sequel it.

I wanted to have the crossbow from the trailer...but alas I only got throwing knives.

The game could have been good, but they rushed it. One of the developers even said it himself; "We would have added swimming, or better fighting, but we dont have much time so we left it as is, so when you go in the water, you simply die". Yeah, that makes sense, a trained assassin, jumping off buildings 30 metres high and withstanding sword attacks while still being able to run and hop around... can't swim in a 3 metre deep river.

Anyways I agree with Raven on a lot of it. It's way too repetetive, each mission is pretty much exactly the same; fine a few eagle-vision points, visit the bureau, interrogate someone, do a small objective, then assassinate such and such.

So like I said, the game COULD have been great; had they added more variety to the missions, worked a little harder on the combat, and most importantly, added a multiplayer feature (which in my opinion has basically become the standard nowadays, anyone I talk to / myself will only buy a game if it has xbox live features, otherwise once you beat it there is nothing to do... might as well just rent it. And with blockbuster's "keep it as long as you like" deal, that tends to always be the case).

The only good things I found were the free running aspect (very very well done, you can grab onto almost anything... and the transitions are very smooth) and the graphics.

Its a cured seas around the holy land....


What kind of multiplayer would they have added? I mean it would be weird to have assassins running around a city killing each other.

They could base it on "assassin training". Make a few custom "arenas" designed for the assassin's to test their skill in. Now you can plug in the generic death matches, team death matches, capture the flags, etc.

Probably better though would be to have a guard - vs - assassin setting. Then you could have games like;

- One person is an assassin and everyone else is a guard. The guards have to protect either an AI or another user while the assassin has to kill them.

- A team of assassin's vs a team of guards...same idea as above, or the assassin's need to steal something.

- A team of assassins vs a team of one of the other clans, like that first clan that is looking for the arc that you steal from them. Both teams could be trying to either get to the arc first, or steal it from each other in a defense - offense type game.

You dont think those would be fun? Especially if you could customize your assassin's look so the enemy team wouldn't know what you looked like. Most of those gametypes have been done in other games, just altered slightly, and have been pretty successful.

That does sound pretty fun. I mean like people trying to sneak in somewhere and creating distractions and such.

RUCCUS is thinking Splinter Cell on XTC. How would the guards, who aren't that movable, stand a chance besides for camping near the target? Multiplayer in AC? No way. That would destroy any feeling of being special. Your other points, on the other hand, are completely good.

How aren't the guards movable? They can free-run just like the assassin can, they have weapons, they can sprint... I dont see the problem. And in the game when there is only 1 assassin and all of those guards... you think the guards wouldn't stand a chance? Those were quick ideas I thought up anyways; ok, guards are slow, then change it to another clan's assassins, problem solved (though I still dont agree that the guards aren't that movable... yes they're slow in the game but thats due to faulty AI).

Lol the guards in AC move exactly like the assassin, they can freaking jump like ten feet and follow me very well, even though they are for the most part in heavy armor haha.

Some people, including myself, could care less about multiplayer if the game is truly amazing on its own. Would Mario Galaxy be better with an online multiplayer hack-n-slash? No. I'd rather the developers focus on gameplay and visuals over a half-baked multiplayer mode that *nobody* will be playing in a few months anyway. Half of the games I try to play on XBLA have nobody else in the online rooms.

Yes.

"Yes. "

Agreed... And I didnt say anything about reducing the initial single player game quality. The point is studios like ubisoft are rushing themselves too much, putting release dates in higher importance over playability and entertainment. XBL increases the playability of games because once the game is over, you can make your own "Stories" with your friends, and show off your skill. The only reason adding XBL capabilities would reduce the quality of the solo-play, is if they tried to do it in the same time period, which is what I've been trying to say this hole time; shouldn't be done.

I'd of rather waited another year, and ended up with a slightly better solo-gameplay and an additional XBL gameplay experience.

I find it repetitive as hell, really though my major gripe with it is how bloomin easy it is to do all that Parkour stuff. I'd prefer if there was a lot more skill involved, even the old original Prince of Persia had some flow to it, with Creed you just point and run and you end up climbing massive heights with no effort. It's just another one of those overly easy games set to impress people who haven't played it yet. I think what we've ended up with is a sickly mix of Prince of Persia, Tenchu and Crackdown, but dumbed down so a 2 year old could play it.

I'm not sure that multiplayer mode would improve things very much, it's not like there's a skill involved, if you had to be good to get away from people, or could get to higher areas with skill then it might be interesting.

The most original multiplayer mode recently has to be on Kane and Lynch, working together to rob a bank (or whatever the mission entails), then being able to betray your team and steal their money is just great fun - I hope they fix the bugs soon though.

So an entire year with ~100 individuals to make it slightly to moderately better? It doesn't make sense financially. Ubisoft is huge, but they know when to stop production.

It isn't left on a huge "to be continued" style cliffhanger though. Alright so it's obvious they plan to work on a new one, but I know I certainly didn't get the impression that the game would have to have a sequal for the story to feel complete.

I felt that part of the game was quite good, and if they do make another 1, 2, 3, or more games that they keep that aspect so that each game could be played independantly without having to play the last one just to know what's going on.




The bugs are what really let the game down imo
It has a nice storyline (atleast as far as I could get before finding a seemingly invincible boss) and the multiplayer aspect is cool. Just so many show stopping bugs on what could've been a really nice game.



Assasins Creed doesn't need multiplayer, I mean I can think of possibly a way it could be done; but realistically it is Prince of Persia in a new outfit, and I've not once though in either "oh this would be better online"

Splinter Cell is alright online, but realistically I've only spent about 3 hours in total on all of the online capable SC games (which I have all of them). They're a nice bonus, but not something I would've bought the game for as they're just not really as much fun.



Actually I think it would be quite cool if it had something similar to NintendoDS Mario64DS, but not really required. Personally I think Mario Galaxy would be better with the option of using the classic/gamecube controller... but that might be because unlike a 3yo I just hate the Wiimote for everything apart from stupid party style games.

I think I'm going to return it, I hate the whole mind machine idea with the two storylines, it is completely needless and a blatant excuse to make the main character an American instead of an Arab like he should have been.
Why couldn't this be a straight medieval game, why does there always have to be some gay twist!?
I don't find the game that fun to play, I am very impressed by the graphics and like to climb up walls in different ways to see how clever the limb animations are I was amazed when doing the tutorial and seeing him push two people aside at once.

I agree with Van B on the free-running easiness, where is my magic parkour button?

A lot of the game seems to be based around the idea that you don't actually have to be able to do things, you just have to show that you intend to do them.

[edit]
I've turned off all the HUD and the game is much more fun
I like having to find places now instead of just looking on the GPS (which I think were pretty rare around 1100AD )
The map shows your orientation so it's not too hard, my sense of direction is getting better because the first few minutes I kept going in the opposite direction haha

I think we're being a bit unfair to this game, we have to give developers time to adjust to the new systems.

You could do MP where every assassin has either a different target, or the same target, and whoever kills the target first wins. Assassins could also fight amongst themseleves to kill others before they could assassinate the target. You could even have it with multiple targets, one after the other, and whoever scores the most kills

Wow, thanks for the spoilers, Obese87

And how can you just return the game? You bought it from a store that will take returns simply because you don't like the game? Bizarre.

I don't get how people say it's repetitive. I mean how could you mix up finding the targets? The only way to do it is really doing what you do, or just have someone tell you everything...so really thats all they could have done. Unless you just want the guy to just tell you what to do like your a child.

SPOILERS:

It's all there. It's not a cliffhanger and I thank them for that. Please not another Halo 2. A story should stand on itself.