Assassins Creed
Never played one. Started Black Flag the other day, and spent a half hour chasing this guy around a beach.
Is this just a bad part of a good game? Should I have started with III instead? Is the series in general worth playing?
If AC is any good, rank/rate the games in the series, and why one is above the other..
I really liked the combat in 1, felt more realistic then the rest of the series, not that any of it is realistic, but its far more realistic then any of the later entries, and it gives you what you pay for, being an assassin instead of being pirate or a scholar or a legionnaire, you're an Assassin, nothing more, nothing less, which is why it's my favorite.
Also "The Kingdom" was pretty f*cking huge, place where you can explore and make your own adventure.
Super interesting. But I also enjoyed Brotherhood, II, IV.
Hmmm. Always found it difficult to rank them because there's elements of each I prefer over the others and some I can't stand in otherwise great games.
Brotherhood had the overall best for me. It's story wasn't as solid as AC2 but it was bigger in scope. Really liked the recruiting of other assassin's and dispatching them on missions.
AC 2 next. Ezio is the best protagonist of them all and the story is one of the best in gaming.
Origins would be next for me. Totally reinvigorated the series and I liked Bayek's story. The mechanics much more follow the Witcher 3 although the combat doesn't require as much skill.
Revelations next as it concludes the Ezio story but has a terrible ending for Desmond and his lore. Loved the addition of the hookblade mechanic but hated the "base" defence stuff.
Odyssey next for me. It was very similar to Origins in overall gameplay as it was made side by side and while it's far bigger in scope and has tremendous additions in fantasy lore with the Greek legends it suffered from a weaker main story and weaker protagonists than Origins. You can also complete the main game and the lengthy Atlantis side mission without going to all the islands. The combat was improved over origins and the powering up of the broken Leonidas spear is great. The map doesn't have the diversity of Origins either even if it is bigger. As much as I hated the sea faring stuff and there's a lot of it it was much more tolerable in this than other AC games
AC3 next. Much improved the overall mechanics of the Ezio trilogy but Connor was probably the most boring protagonist. I liked the building and improving of your community aspect but the trading for goods and supplies could take a significant amount of time that I wasn't really willing to invest. I wasn't a huge fan of RPG's at the time though so I might like it more now. The addition of the sea battles I detested which is why I never really gave the next few games a chance and turned off the AC series for a while.
Black Flag I never played for the reason above.
Rogue I never played
Unity I never played
Syndicate I only briefly played but never really gave it a chance.
Originally posted by jaden_2.0
Hmmm. Always found it difficult to rank them because there's elements of each I prefer over the others and some I can't stand in otherwise great games.Brotherhood had the overall best for me. It's story wasn't as solid as AC2 but it was bigger in scope. Really liked the recruiting of other assassin's and dispatching them on missions.
AC 2 next. Ezio is the best protagonist of them all and the story is one of the best in gaming.
Origins would be next for me. Totally reinvigorated the series and I liked Bayek's story. The mechanics much more follow the Witcher 3 although the combat doesn't require as much skill.
Revelations next as it concludes the Ezio story but has a terrible ending for Desmond and his lore. Loved the addition of the hookblade mechanic but hated the "base" defence stuff.
Odyssey next for me. It was very similar to Origins in overall gameplay as it was made side by side and while it's far bigger in scope and has tremendous additions in fantasy lore with the Greek legends it suffered from a weaker main story and weaker protagonists than Origins. You can also complete the main game and the lengthy Atlantis side mission without going to all the islands. The combat was improved over origins and the powering up of the broken Leonidas spear is great. The map doesn't have the diversity of Origins either even if it is bigger. As much as I hated the sea faring stuff and there's a lot of it it was much more tolerable in this than other AC games
AC3 next. Much improved the overall mechanics of the Ezio trilogy but Connor was probably the most boring protagonist. I liked the building and improving of your community aspect but the trading for goods and supplies could take a significant amount of time that I wasn't really willing to invest. I wasn't a huge fan of RPG's at the time though so I might like it more now. The addition of the sea battles I detested which is why I never really gave the next few games a chance and turned off the AC series for a while.
Black Flag I never played for the reason above.
Rogue I never played
Unity I never played
Syndicate I only briefly played but never really gave it a chance.
You didn't even mention AC1?...
Originally posted by Jmanghan
I really liked the combat in 1, felt more realistic then the rest of the series, not that any of it is realistic, but its far more realistic then any of the later entries, and it gives you what you pay for, being an assassin instead of being pirate or a scholar or a legionnaire, you're an Assassin, nothing more, nothing less, which is why it's my favorite.
First game is garbage, It really needs to be remade.