Assassin's Creed (From the eyes of a Teen)

[Brightshadow 5]

NOTE: This was done in half and hour, and has not been editted. So sue me.

Assassin?s Creed. I expect everyone remembers the massive amount of hype that surrounded this game during its development, and pretty much everyone I knew said it was going to be the greatest thing since bread came pre-sliced. But myself, being the cynical guy I am, refused to believe these rumors and automatically assumed it was going to play like a two legged horse on stilts. I?ve found that games that receive this much attention, like the halo series, prove to be adequate at best, and at worst a pile of crap I wouldn?t even poke with a stick.

So when it finally came out I found myself forced to sneak over to my friends house and play it since the only console I had was the Wii, and we all know the Wii is too wimpy to plays games with graphical quality such as these. And four hours later, after having gotten nowhere, I went home to think about more important things like homework, girls, and the meaning of life. That game play experience left me feeling a bit empty, and I had the strange desire to actually assassinate someone instead of running around and bashing people senseless with my fists.

Anyhow, I finally got the PS3 for Christmas and was overjoyed to find Assassin?s creed perched precariously in my stocking. So I plugged it in and expected to be thoroughly entertained by a compelling story and about average sequences. Instead what happened was four hours later I put down my controller and went outside freeze my brain solid and prepare myself for the sheer mind-numbing repetitiveness that makes up the entirety of this game.

Yes, I know we?ve all played it already, but I just got my hands on it and I want to review and if you have a problem with that you can just stop reading this for all I care.
I?ll do a quick overview of the plot just incase you?ve been living under a rock for the past month ? for the parts of the game that actually matter you play as Altair, a member of the assassin?s during the age of the crusades. But soon after you power up the game, you realize something is horribly wrong when random voices start to pop up all over the place and the screen looks like it?s having some sort of epileptic seizure. And then you discover the horribly twisted plot that this game sports like a third eyeball in the middle of it?s forehead.

In reality, you?re simply reliving his genetic memories through his great-great-great something or other grandson Desmond in a twisted version of the future. But I said screw that and refused to acknowledge Desmond?s existence just because he was so unlikeable and annoying, unlike his apparently god-like ancestor with that strange American accent.

First impressions were actually pretty good. I was surprised to see how much of that synchronization bar I had, and thought that the game was going to only get easier from there. But then I was proven wrong when Altair managed to piss of his boss, who proceeds to knock him unconscious strip him of his title, rank, and apparently any dignity this guy had to begin with.

So after our friend wakes up, you discover what the games actually about. Altair is given a chance at redemption, but in order to do so he has to travel all over the holy land and slit up nine guys that apparently have been pissing off the assassin?s. At this point I realize the Altair is as much of a?okay, I can?t say that word here so I?ll go with jerk as his great-great-too-lazy-too-put-in-any-more-greats grandson. Apparently he?s so used to killing he just stabs up people instead of letting them live, and by the way he speaks you get that he has the ego about the size of Oprah Winfrey. So after yet another un-skippable cut scene, you jump on you?re little pony like an obedient puppy, ride out into the sunset and begin a quest that probably gets you super psyched from there.

I?ll make this next part as brief as possible ? in short, you run around the holy land and visits a grand total of four cities located oddly close to each other, stabbing up power-corrupted men and guards, all the while redeeming yourself and performing the same information gathering jobs over and over again. And each time you stab up these power-hungry psychopaths, they start to babble on about how Altair is being deceived and how he should abandon his mission. And so Altiar says the same stuff to his boss, who proceeds to call Altair a gullible moron before sending him off another mission with some kind of new weapon or technique that has nothing to do with the equipment he just received.

That?s about as deep into the plot as I?m willing to go, so let?s get to the important part of any game ? the actual game play. The controls on the whole feel pretty natural ? you?ve got you?re left analogue stick to move, you?re right analogue stick to move the camera, and you?ve got weapons assigned to your directional buttons. You control Altiar as if he were some kind of marionette ? each button let?s you control a different part of his body. The triangle button put?s you into first person view and activates eagle vision (a little trick that let?s you distinguish citizens from informers and guards), the square button control your weapon hand, the circle you open hand, and X let?s you control your legs.

Then there? the profile option ? by pressing the R1 button you can switch between low profile actions , like gentling pushing away guards or blending in a crowd, or high profile actions, like tackling people or hacking off their heads. Knowing when to use both profiles is a key mechanic in the game, and surprisingly easy to use.

Then there?s the alert mechanic ? a little flashing light at the top of your screen tells you how suspicious guards are of you. Unless you?re out of sight, the thing almost always flashes yellow; which means they always think you?re up to something. If you happen to slaughter someone and stand by the body, it flashes red for about half a second before every crusader within ten miles becomes aware of you presence and attempts to hack you into tiny, bit size pieces. The only way to go back to the flashing yellow light is to break the guards line of sight and hide in one of the conveniently placed hiding places.

But it amazes me just how suspicious of you these morons are. For example, if you simply walk while on your horse every crusader within a five mile radius immediately assumes you?re a threat to society and attempts ram a sword through your head. But if you hold down a button that let?s you walk a tiny bit slower, they suddenly don?t care and tell you to get lost. Can someone explain to me how that makes sense?

Okay, let?s move on to the important part of any combat game ? the actual combat. At first, I thought it was witty and entertaining, but after a while I realized I had more fun watching paint dry while someone stuffed my boxers with poison ivy. I found the best way to kill people was to simply mash the square button as much as possible, occasionally pausing to use a counterattack before continuing my thumb-numbing madness. After about five minutes of that about thirty guards would be lying on the gourds bleeding, while I stood on top of them with hardly a scratch on me. I have this much to say ? speed kill systems suck.

It?s not only that, but there?s almost no variety in these fights. Sure, you can occasionally break out a smaller sword and throwing daggers, but using those in a big fight is like try to kill a dragon with a wooden stake. I actually found the only way to quickly kill people with the short sword was to counterattack like there was no tomorrow and run like the freaking devil was chomping at my rear.

And then there?s the assassinations themselves? call me crazy, but when you assassinate someone isn?t it supposed to be stealth-like and all? Sure, in the beginning no one really gives a crap who you are, but the minute you step within ten feet of these guys they scream assassin and suddenly every guard in the area is trying to lop off your head. And because of this almost every one of them turns into a massive brawl, forcing you to fight about a dozen guards while hacking at some evil dude who apparently is to godly to die at the hands of a counterattack. I understand assassinations are this games equivalent of a boss battle, but for Pete?s sake, I?m pretty sure assassin?s don?t raise hell every tie they try to kill someone. If they did they wouldn?t be much of an assassin, they?d be more like?the godfather or some other game about senseless violence.

And let?s not forget about the games AI itself ? on the whole NPC?s probably have to average intelligence of a retarded giraffe. Every one of them doesn?t seem to grasp the concept that you should try and avoid the guy with all the blades, not run right into him, mouth off, and send him flying through the air. The guards usually don?t understand that if fifty bodies are lying on the ground and only one guy is standing on top of them, it?s probably not a good idea to piss him off. And for some reason both the beggars and the crazy lepers will only pick on you and completely ignore the rest of society until you either draw a weapon, assassinate them, or hurl them through the air like a Frisbee.

And since I?m running out of time, I?ll point out the good things about the game. You?re allowed to run and jump and climb wherever you want, which gives the player a great sense of freedom. I personally enjoyed jumping from rooftop to rooftop and stabbing up the random guards posted there for no apparent reason. The story itself is very interesting (if you ignore the whole future thing), even though you can?t skip the cut scenes and have to fid something more interesting to do while they?re going on.

And with that, I?ll leave you with this no-where near finished or edited review, seeing as I have to go do things that actually matter. So go ahead and tell me how incompetent I am and such, seeing as I'll most likey ignore your flames and go on to take downNintendo next. Until then, I?m signing out.

 

[REDPill357]

Long review, but it seems like you watched Yahtzee's review a lot. Most of the points you made seem to have been lifted from his review.

 

[ChrisP.Lettuce]

Wow you're right. This reads like Yahtzee's before he decided to make it more crazy-go-nuts.

 

[J-Val]

Long review, but it seems like you watched Yahtzee's review a lot. Most of the points you made seem to have been lifted from his review.

Yahtzee doesn't own Patent Pending on the problems with Assassin's Creed.

 

[cavicchia]

no patent, sure, but half the comedy from this is word for word from yahtzee.

 

[Larenxis]

After about five minutes of that about thirty guards would be lying on the gourds bleeding, while I stood on top of them with hardly a scratch on me.

Deadly squash!

 

[Fire Daemon]

I only played the game far enough to assassinate one guy but I decided that i didn't want to play anymore.

 

[Brightshadow 5]

WEll, this is certainly unexpected.

I've never even seen Yahtzee's review of Assassin's creed, and i decided to check it out. And I cna't deny that there are a number of similarites between my half-hour rambling and Zero Punctuations. Wierd.

I guess I should have typed up the other half of this thing for diverstity, huh?

 

[dade-]

Late reply, but who cares eh?

While what most of you say is true, I will pick you up on the AI part. Yes, the AI in Assassin's Creed is somewhat shocking considering they were doing a bit of hype on this. But then in saying that there are few games where AI is perfect. This is mostly due to the fact that if you input every single variable, modifier, exceptions, and outcome in a piece of code you're going to have a very bogged down and inefficient piece of software.

That said, there is definitely room for major improvement.

All in all I agree. The game promised a lot, but lacked more. I persevered with the game until just over half way through before I decided with was a pile of tripe and switched it off never to be played again. My only good comment is the fact that there was a fantastic amount of free running in the game, and the mechanics of it were rather well done. Aside from this I do not rate the game so highly.

Sacrificing gameplay for a little more time on the story and AI would have been welcomed.

 

[EtherAMP]

Do you know why people like the reviews on Zero Punctuation? Aside from the genuine humor, people understand that there is a grain (or in some cases, a silo) of truth underneath all of the hate-speech. Unless Yahtzee's target is a truly abysmal game (I'm looking at you, Jericho), he mixes the good with the bad. You have failed to do so, and as such, have revoked your own credibility.

I know, I know: you don't care, you did this in only "half and hour", etc.

That's fine. Most of the off-the-cuff reviewing here is very much like that. That doesn't mean you shouldn't try and add some legitimacy to your words.

In a game that forces cutscenes upon you (a poor design choice, perhaps, but honestly, without them, I daresay even the most intuitive of players would be lost entirely by the time the final battle rolls around), you basically ignore the plot. Assassin's Creed is one of the more intricately-built game plots I've come across this decade. Not only is it compelling (if you're into that sort of thing), but the game actually lets you decide how far you'd like to look into it. A large number of the scenes outside of the Animus are completely optional; the game is only forcing those scenes that explain the immediate plot.

Without commentary on the plot, a review of this game is incomplete. The game is a story, complemented by fantastic atmosphere, be it through the graphics or the soundtrack.

As far as your commentary on the guards' inherent suspicion of your character (written in a manner so similarly to the Zero Punctuation review as to gain immediate comments on that oddity), it only fits the setting. Running around, you see guards harassing citizens throughout the cities. On top of that, it is well-known that the Assassins emulate scholars, so it only fits that guards would become suspicious of you. Why does the "blend" command help lower their suspicions? Well, it slows your pace to below useful as you drudge about at the pace of the regular citizens. The thought of an Assassin walking at that horrendously slow pace is laughable (apparently), so the guards pay you no mind.

No, really, you just blend more easily if you walk at their pace. Your normal gait is much more noticeable, so changing it just makes sense as a way to mask your intentions.

The way the guards detect you while you're on horseback seems out of place, but honestly, we don't get to see reactions to other characters on horses simply because there are no other characters on horses. The guards can easily be out-run by maintaining a gallop, but it does detract from the mood if you can't explore the "overworld" very readily.

Your point about the cities all being very close together is a divisive one. While on the one hand, I can't help but think that that was lifted almost completely from the Zero Punctuation review, on the other hand, I can only imagine the outcry if the developers made you run a realistic distance from city to city. This is just a point that can't be won, as someone will whine either way.

To say that you did not like the assassinations being stealthy enough is really just a way of indicating that you were not particularly great at the game. Most of the targets can be gotten to and stealth-killed without too much difficulty. Escaping (in all but a few situations) is more like that battle scene that you describe, but understand that you just killed the most important figure in the city at that point in time; to expect no one to notice is foolhardy.

You also note that guards should be smart enough to avoid the assassin, if there's a giant pile of bodies at his feet. I suppose you've either ignored or simply not noticed this, but if you take out a large number of the group quickly, some guards will turn tail and run. Granted, I usually did not let them (the hidden blade tackle is one of my favorite motions in the game, so I would run them down as they ran from me, for kicks), but that was still in there. Give the guards some credit: you keep referring to them as morons, but at the same time, you call them overly-intuitive, and here we can see that they occasionally know when they've been bested. Your message is mixed.

Finally, you state that the story is interesting ("if you ignore the whole future thing"). That's like saying that "Meet the Spartans" is a great movie, if you ignore the fact that they're parodying current culture. The future sequences put proper perspective on the story and (more importantly) set the stage for the rest of the series. To ignore it is to ignore what this game is truly about.

Now I know I sound like an Assassin's Creed lover. I admit, I probably enjoyed it more than most, especially considering the $38 price tag. This game does have its flaws, but at its core, it's both a fantastic sci-fi story with a great historical perspective thrown in, and the basics of its gameplay are very solid (freerunning is as good as it ever was in the Prince of Persia series, and even if the combat is simple, you can't deny that it fits the mood: smooth and very stylish). The beyond-slow pace is certainly what gives it its bad name; a release on the Xbox 360 ("shoot-em box") and the PS3 ("really expensive, moderately reliable Blu-Ray player") is not what a depth-based game needs. If you trimmed down the cutscenes and sped up the pace, I'm sure there would have been a much greater following from the general public. Unfortunately, doing those things really eliminates a lot of what this game is striving to be: a complex, methodical plot that is enhanced by some beautiful mastery of the hardware.

Final Note: Yes, Altair and Desmond both have awful Voice Actors. If there is any justice, someone out there is suing Philip Shahbaz and Nolan North for damages for their terrible performances.

 

[The Q]

New franchise = game that is not perfect.

Sequel to new franchise = game that is still not perfect.

Solution: Ya can't please everyone.

In playing Ass' Creed (which is what we call it on the streets when we're standing around flaming oil drums trying to keep our hands warm and our spirits high) you're playing something with visuals that don't suck, and gameplay moments that aren't horrible. Maybe it was too short, maybe watching the AI was like watching a drunk man try to cross and icy street (thanks Studio 60), and maybe the story wasn't a big surprise (Nothin' but love for ya Kristen Bell, but next time let's do without the spoilers). I found a lot of enjoyment in it, and for me, that's all I need. Well...that...and the air I breathe...but that's another subject.

 

[dade-]

While Assassin's Creed tried something new, it tried it in a fairly linear way. I can't help but feel I was being pushed down the story more than a little abruptly, which is not something I enjoy in a game that was (at the time of the first screens and videos) promising freedom. Perhaps they meant freedom in movement and I merely misinterpreted the fact, in which case it did a fine job. The effort put into the free-climbing/running mechanics was superbly done. I have to say I wasn't expecting it to be as smooth as it was.

A point of irritation would be how they closed of parts of the city to you because that wasn't a part of the memory. I don't know.. felt like it gave the player no choice but to progress because everything else was sort of done. I could list a bunch of improvements for the game, but I'm not going to because let's be fair it was still an enjoyable game despite its vices. I'll swallow my own tongue if ever an absolutely perfect game was released

 

[Drong]

I liked your review, sure people are gonna bash cause it does sound a little like a certain other well known motor mouthed reviewer (particually the horse speed line which was nearly word for word) but you raise alot of other good issues too.

All in all i enjoyed the game but really did not like the sci fi aspect of the story, i mean it was a good device to drive things along but i'd have much rather they kept it all in the same era, i like sci fi and i like medevil psuedo history but if you mix them up then most of the time it's just going to come off (like this does) as a bit cheesey and ott 'B' movie esque.

the gaurds are a bit dumb to say the least, it's like as they surround you it should have another (un-skipable) of you going "ok chaps, Marquess of Queensbury rules, no gouging, no biting no hitting below the belt or in the back now come at me one at a time and let us do battle"

 

[neems]

The way the guards detect you while you're on horseback seems out of place, but honestly, we don't get to see reactions to other characters on horses simply because there are no other characters on horses.

I think you've answered your own point there. Presumably (I haven't played the game) the guards are suspicious BECAUSE you have a horse. Who is this dude in white robes with a horse? A visiting dignitary? Nobody told me. He doesn't look rich enough to afford a donkey, never mind a horse. Best keep an eye on that one. And so on and so forth.

I definitely approve of your explanation of the guards' suspicions though. In fact your 'review' has pretty much made up my mind to buy it, assuming the pc version doesn't suck.

 

[The Q]

They should set the next one in feudal Japan...and we all know there's going to be a next one.

 

[EtherAMP]

Well, Neems, the only time you ever use your horse is as a mode of transportation between your starting point and your destination city, so it's not as if you are actually riding through crowds of people in the streets. It just seemed odd being the only character riding a horse, though. Again, since the bulk of the content of the game takes place in the cities, making the horse sequences minor, at best. Incidentally, the PC version is supposed to be pretty solid, assuming you have the hardware to run it (recommended requirements are expected to be between Bioshock and Crysis).

And yeah, there are major hints that the next game takes place in Japan. The series has been confirmed as a trilogy, with the final game rumored to take place in the modern day, strangely enough. I don't know what I think about that, but I'll reserve judgment until after "Assassin's Creed 2: Ninja's Cleeduuu" is released.

 

[Nerdfury]

Do you know why people like the reviews on Zero Punctuation? Aside from the genuine humor, people understand that there is a grain (or in some cases, a silo) of truth underneath all of the hate-speech. Unless Yahtzee's target is a truly abysmal game (I'm looking at you, Jericho), he mixes the good with the bad. You have failed to do so, and as such, have revoked your own credibility.

Excellent rebuff, champ. It's pretty clear that OP just took some key lines from ZP and ran with it. The only reason people dislike slower games like this - especially when walking slowly or riding slowly - is because people are impatient. I'm the same - I get bored/frustrated with watching a guy slowly walking from point A to point B. I'm used to swiftly moving characters like in platformers, and don't enjoy playing a game to slowly creep along.

That being said, for all the 'flaws' in the game (mostly being repetitiveness of investigation and fights), this game is still a winner. I'm not a huge fanboy, but I still enjoy it thoroughly.

 

[xMacx]

To say that you did not like the assassinations being stealthy enough is really just a way of indicating that you were not particularly great at the game.

Ouch! Or particularly fair to the genre or the poster. I would agree with the OP; the assassinations didn't require stealth. They didn't even require much beyond a dash and button mashing. In short, those were some of the most uninspired assassination targets ever.

A good stealth game generally provides enough feedback to intuit multiple solutions, but enough constraints to prevent a thoughtless entry. AC provided neither. The boss assassinations were a poor attempt at providing challenge; just because you don't agree with the poster doesn't reflect on their skill level or ability - that's a logical fallacy.

When it's possible to take out each target like a bull in a China shop in a stealth game without a noticable increase in the level of difficulty, something is wrong. Free-running was great, but AC dropped the ball in so many other ways.

Most of the targets can be gotten to and stealth-killed without too much difficulty. Escaping (in all but a few situations) is more like that battle scene that you describe, but understand that you just killed the most important figure in the city at that point in time; to expect no one to notice is foolhardy.

I would suggest playing any of the Metal Gear or Hitman series and then get back to us about this statement. It reeks of a lack of concern for the overall user experience. If every assassination ends the same way, why attempt to explore multiple, compelling routes to accomplish a target?

A good game shouldn't require explanation or justification. And your essay of a post was nothing but justifications for game decisions that didn't take the overall user experience in mind. AC was interesting, but it was far from a great game.

 

[EtherAMP]

just because you don't agree with the poster doesn't reflect on their skill level or ability - that's a logical fallacy.

I don't think that that's as plain as you make it out to be. What lead me to that conclusion was the following statement:

the minute you step within ten feet of these guys they scream assassin and suddenly every guard in the area is trying to lop off your head. And because of this almost every one of them turns into a massive brawl, forcing you to fight about a dozen guards while hacking at some evil dude who apparently is to godly to die at the hands of a counterattack.

It seems that he either decided to forego stealthiness entirely and just ran by the guards, or attempted to stealth in, and was unsuccessful. I'll attack a reviewer's format, or his grammar, or any number of things out in the open, but it's very rare that I make a pointed statement regarding their ability to play the game. This is just one of those situations where the description seemed to imply enough.

When it's possible to take out each target like a bull in a China shop in a stealth game without a noticable increase in the level of difficulty, something is wrong.

I have to disagree, only in principle. Assassin's Creed was marketed on the idea that you would have an incredible number of choices. Many people seem to say that that really only applied to the free-running, but honestly, it applies to the style of the game, as well. If you want to make this game into a "One-Man Army" game, feel free. As long as you're proficient with counterattacks, your crowd control should be strong enough to pull that off. If you want to make this as stealthy as possible, go for it. For the perfect example of a well-designed stealth-based mission, go back to Memory Block 5 - Meister Sibrand. You can get on his ship, make the kill, and leave it without an aggressive response from the guards.

My intuition would tell me that the more difficult of the two would be the stealth assassination. This hold true, in my mind.

If every assassination ends the same way, why attempt to explore multiple, compelling routes to accomplish a target?

It's about how much fun you'd like to make the game, honestly. Yes, as I've said, you can rush in, swords swinging. Is that what you really want to do? I expect not. That is your motivation for finding a "compelling" route. The sense of accomplishment is greater if you do pull off that smooth kill; counter-attacking his life away until the game's "auto-kill" animation kicks in is disappointing, by comparison. I suppose, then, that I feel like this game has the potential to be a good one, but it requires the user's frame of mind to be in the right place.

At the root, this is an inherent flaw in "free" game design. If there's really so much freedom, choosing the wrong paths will make a player feel alienated (like those who expected this to be Hitmanesque, only with more style, thanks to the freerunning), while it may be the perfect fit for others. In this case, the most obvious paths are the frustrating ones, leading away from the perceived true purpose of the game. Unfortunately, a game that promises so much freedom requires a fair amount of work to be played properly. I hate to use that phrase, since gaming should never be judged on a correct v. incorrect scale, but we're gradually drifting that direction.

A good game shouldn't require explanation or justification.

As much as I wish that were true, I find it only applies in a handful of situations, anymore. Don't get me started on how I'm justifying Halo 3 to myself, or we're opening a brand new case of worms.