Remember, this game also added money, looting bodies, shops, levelling up your skills through ancient documents, upgrading your gear through shops, levelling up your town, getting side quests from NPCs (Beat up missions, race missions, etc.) on top of the story elements.
My main problem is that it's mindless. Assassin's Creed forced you to think about what you were going to do. Assassin's Creed II makes sure you never have to. You get a mission for figuratively every single step you need to take in the game. And while I expect the game will get harder further on, I do not expect it to require more thought.
It's funny that you say that, because in the original, you 'more or less' had to do 2-6 of the repetitive, tedious information gathering missions. In this game, you had to do over 9 of them. And at least in the first game, doing those missions gave you something useful.
Except I was playing this game for its gameplay elements. If I wanted the story, I would have read the novelisation. Not like the story is that great thus far anyway. Every twelve year old Dungeons and Dragons players has made a character whose history was "my family was killed by X and now my character wants to get revenge against X."
Trust me, I am
.
I mean, it sounds like your main problem is that the game isn't structured like AC1.
My main problem is that it's mindless. Assassin's Creed forced you to think about what you were going to do. Assassin's Creed II makes sure you never have to. You get a mission for figuratively every single step you need to take in the game. And while I expect the game will get harder further on, I do not expect it to require more thought.
AC1 was extremely mission-based. Each "chapter" focused on killing one dude. And then you more or less HAD to do the repetitive, tedious "information gathering" sidequests.
It's funny that you say that, because in the original, you 'more or less' had to do 2-6 of the repetitive, tedious information gathering missions. In this game, you had to do over 9 of them. And at least in the first game, doing those missions gave you something useful.
One of the things I think AC2 does better is shake up that formula. The plot flows much better. The tutorial missions, instead of being in some cold Animus database, are playing as Ezio in his youth. The story and characters develop, instead of just being "Now you will kill this man."
Just racing ahead to get to the next "main" assassination sort of defeats the purpose, I think.
Just racing ahead to get to the next "main" assassination sort of defeats the purpose, I think.
Except I was playing this game for its gameplay elements. If I wanted the story, I would have read the novelisation. Not like the story is that great thus far anyway. Every twelve year old Dungeons and Dragons players has made a character whose history was "my family was killed by X and now my character wants to get revenge against X."
The collectibles in Assassin's Creed games have usually been terrible. AC2's feathers are AC1's flags- just ignore them.
Trust me, I am
.
The first rule of being a ninja is "do no harm". Unless you intend to do harm, then do lots of harm.
~Master Splinter
Victorious in Bergioyn's legendary 'Reverse Mafia'. *MySmiley*
~Master Splinter
Victorious in Bergioyn's legendary 'Reverse Mafia'. *MySmiley*
Since everyone is making Assassin's Creed threads, I might as well do so 
. (Complete)
- 04/11/2012 08:15:03 AM
836 Views
. (Complete)
- 04/11/2012 08:15:03 AM
836 Views
Character background and motivation doesn't equal RPG
- 06/11/2012 02:29:57 PM
549 Views
But that's not all.
- 06/11/2012 06:04:47 PM
760 Views
I won't argue with your points, but I will say: I loved AC2, and enjoyed it far more than 1.
- 08/11/2012 07:58:52 PM
645 Views
One of the problems everyone (including me) has is that the AC games are not actually stealth games
- 13/11/2012 04:04:50 PM
562 Views