Assassin's Creed - Discussion (spoilers) - Main forum

TheBeagle

Since 6610 Days

Posted by Jollipop

All i can say is pick another site.

Na, 1up is great.

In reply to

deftangel

Since 6873 Days

Penny-Arcade weigh in on some of the reviews;-

http://www.penny-arcade.com/2007/11/14#1195073220

Posted by PennyArcade

I think the biggest complaint I saw was that the missions become repetitive and boring. I actually didn't understand this complaint at all until just the other day. I had gotten an early copy of the game just like everyone else in the media but I was just playing it for fun. I'd cracked into it over the weekend and when I got into the office on Monday I started seeing these negative reviews. When I saw the low scores I was actually really upset and I wanted to talk about the game here on the site. I wanted to tell everyone that these guys were full of shit. However, since so many of the complaints were based on the ending I wanted to beat it first so I was sure I wasn't missing anything. I attacked the game again but this time with the goal of beating it as fast as I could. I was determined to get a post up on Tuesday and I was pushing through the game as fast as I could. I went from finding every high perch in a district to only getting the ones I needed to advance the story. I stopped saving every citizen and avoided any unnecessary confrontations. The informer missions that I had really enjoyed before, I now avoided because I knew they took too long to complete. I did the bare minimum of missions to progress the story and anything that "hindered" my progress was frustrating. Monday night after skipping over another combat (something I used to really enjoy) I stopped myself. What the fuck was I doing? I wasn't playing the game because I wanted to I was playing it because I had a deadline and I needed to beat it. I stopped immediately and decided I'd write about the game whenever I got around to beating it. I spent another day and a half with it and during that time I hunted for hidden flags and explored the cities again. I came in this morning and finally did beat it but I did it at my own pace and I enjoyed every part of it.

Imagine what an open ended sandbox title must look like to a reviewer especially right now. How many games do they have piling up on their desks? A game like Assassins creed isn't meant to be played under a deadline. You shouldn't be trying to beat it as fast as you can so you can move on to Mass Effect or Mario Galaxy. As soon as I gave myself a deadline all of a sudden I understood all their complaints. It was like a fucking Escher painting. I had put myself in their shoes and suddenly the landscape flipped and I could see games from their perspective. In the end I wasn't angry at them for their bad reviews. I actually just felt bad for them.

In reply to

Penny-Arcade weigh in on some of the reviews;-

http://www.penny-arcade.com/2007/11/14#1195073220

[quote=PennyArcade]
I think the biggest complaint I saw was that the missions become repetitive and boring. I actually didn't understand this complaint at all until just the other day. I had gotten an early copy of the game just like everyone else in the media but I was just playing it for fun. I'd cracked into it over the weekend and when I got into the office on Monday I started seeing these negative reviews. When I saw the low scores I was actually really upset and I wanted to talk about the game here on the site. I wanted to tell everyone that these guys were full of shit. However, since so many of the complaints were based on the ending I wanted to beat it first so I was sure I wasn't missing anything. I attacked the game again but this time with the goal of beating it as fast as I could. I was determined to get a post up on Tuesday and I was pushing through the game as fast as I could. I went from finding every high perch in a district to only getting the ones I needed to advance the story. I stopped saving every citizen and avoided any unnecessary confrontations. The informer missions that I had really enjoyed before, I now avoided because I knew they took too long to complete. I did the bare minimum of missions to progress the story and anything that "hindered" my progress was frustrating. Monday night after skipping over another combat (something I used to really enjoy) I stopped myself. What the fuck was I doing? I wasn't playing the game because I wanted to I was playing it because I had a deadline and I needed to beat it. I stopped immediately and decided I'd write about the game whenever I got around to beating it. I spent another day and a half with it and during that time I hunted for hidden flags and explored the cities again. I came in this morning and finally did beat it but I did it at my own pace and I enjoyed every part of it.

Imagine what an open ended sandbox title must look like to a reviewer especially right now. How many games do they have piling up on their desks? A game like Assassins creed isn't meant to be played under a deadline. You shouldn't be trying to beat it as fast as you can so you can move on to Mass Effect or Mario Galaxy. As soon as I gave myself a deadline all of a sudden I understood all their complaints. It was like a fucking Escher painting. I had put myself in their shoes and suddenly  the landscape flipped and I could see games from their perspective. In the end I wasn't angry at them for their bad reviews. I actually just felt bad for them.[/quote]

XBL/PSN: deftangel. Views are my own and not representative of my employers. Boulets aren't the end of the world, you will get over them! Reading and constructive discussion classes are available, enquire via PM :)

TheBeagle

Since 6610 Days

Thats some good insight.

In reply to

Phaethon360

Since 6851 Days

That was a really smart assessment.

In reply to

"For seven hours, all we could do was sit still and listen to them hunting us. All we could do is sit, and wait for Phaethon."

UrukHaiPT

Since 6532 Days

Hopefully will find it tomorrow in Portuguese stores *crosses fingers*
Love the medieval times, swords, the crusades, cant wait :)

In reply to

LEBATO

Since 7127 Days

I'm telling you all this because I want you to understand that if Assassins Creed actually was a 7.0 game I'd tell you. I also want you to know that when I tell you it's fucking incredible I'm not bullshitting you because we're running ads for the game.

And who the heck are you? I LEBATO tell you PGR4 is not a 8's game, believe me, I would tell you! If you want ultimate proof, I have uploaded photomode pictures!!! Running ads can't compare to that!

I wasn't playing the game because I wanted to I was playing it because I had a deadline and I needed to beat it.

I, I, I, I.

A game like Assassins creed isn't meant to be played under a deadline.

Oh, one of those excuses eh? You could have found something better really.

Honestly, what this ordinary guy is saying has no more value to me than what the other guys are saying. His position is obvious, way too obvious perhaps. The fact is that this game divides opinions in half and no middle ground. "I don't like it", and "I love it" (and I don't know what my opinion is, the only thing I know is that I'm not interested or excited to play it)

This guy has to understand that. All games reviewed by every other site are done so under a deadline, what makes reviewing this game so different to reviewing a GTA game where there's so much to do?

As long as they are consistent (all reviews have deadlines), I don't see what the big deal is.

Besides that he assumes too much. What happens when ME comes out, lots of reviews will agree the game is awesome including him, how come?

Honestly, his post is nothing more than that of one more forum user.

In reply to

[quote]I'm telling you all this because I want you to understand that if Assassins Creed actually was a 7.0 game I'd tell you. I also want you to know that when I tell you it's fucking incredible I'm not bullshitting you because we're running ads for the game.[/quote]
And who the heck are you? I LEBATO tell you PGR4 is not a 8's game, believe me, I would tell you! If you want ultimate proof, I have uploaded photomode pictures!!!  Running ads can't compare to that!

[quote]I wasn't playing the game because I wanted to I was playing it because I had a deadline and I needed to beat it.[/quote] I, I, I, I.

[quote]A game like Assassins creed isn't meant to be played under a deadline.[/quote]
Oh, one of those excuses eh?  You could have found something better really.

Honestly, what this ordinary guy is saying has no more value to me than what the other guys are saying.  His position is obvious, way too obvious perhaps.  The fact is that this game divides opinions in half and no middle ground.  "I don't like it", and "I love it" (and I don't know what my opinion is, the only thing I know is that I'm not interested or excited to play it)

This guy has to understand that.  All games reviewed by every other site are done so under a deadline, what makes reviewing this game so different to reviewing a GTA game where there's so much to do?

As long as they are consistent (all reviews have deadlines), I don't see what the big deal is.

Besides that he assumes too much.  What happens when ME comes out, lots of reviews will agree the game is awesome including him, how come?

Honestly, his post is nothing more than that of one more forum user.

Mods, stop changing my SIG! I'm going to end up banning you!

deftangel

Since 6873 Days

Actually I think Penny Arcade's opinion should carry a bit more weight than "just another forum user". If you read the entire post you'll see their advertising policy and some previous with Ubi that backs them up.

Essentially he's putting his money where his mouth is.

And moreover I'd say his point is a valid one. A reviewer is experiencing the game in a different way to how a consumer would. Good reviewers I'm sure compensate for this and write accordingly but I think it's fair to point out that this game isn't inherently more repetitive than many others, playing this particular title in a rushed fashion is more likely to instill a false proportion of repetition than some others and it's possible when you consider some of the real world practicalities of reviewing AAA titles in November this might be a contributory factor in some of the reviews.

Mass Effect is unlikely to garner similar treatment because it's a game you can't physically rush, even if you try. I know how long it takes a tester to do a bare minimum playthrough of that game and it's not quick. Assassin's Creed and Crackdown are games that you could rush. I could "finish" Crackdown if I was a very good player by killing three people. Does that mean it's a short game?

Even if you don't agree with the argument I don't think it can be dismissed as "one more forum user". If I said that to you during one of our frequent pleasant debates you would go mental!

In reply to

Actually I think Penny Arcade's opinion should carry a bit more weight than "just another forum user". If you read the entire post you'll see their advertising policy and  some previous with Ubi that backs them up.

Essentially he's putting his money where his mouth is.

And moreover I'd say his point is a valid one. A reviewer is experiencing the game in a different way to how a consumer would. Good reviewers I'm sure compensate for this and write accordingly  but I think it's fair to point out that this game isn't inherently more repetitive than many others, playing this particular title in a rushed fashion is more likely to instill a false proportion of repetition than some others and it's possible when you consider some of the real world practicalities of reviewing AAA titles in November this might be a contributory factor in some of the reviews.

Mass Effect is unlikely to garner similar treatment because it's a game you can't physically rush, even if you try. I know how long it takes a tester to do a bare minimum playthrough of that game and it's not quick. Assassin's Creed and Crackdown are games that you could rush. I could "finish" Crackdown if I was a very good player by killing three people. Does that mean it's a short game?

Even if you don't agree with the argument I don't think it can be dismissed as "one more forum user". If I said that to you during one of our frequent pleasant debates you would go mental!

XBL/PSN: deftangel. Views are my own and not representative of my employers. Boulets aren't the end of the world, you will get over them! Reading and constructive discussion classes are available, enquire via PM :)

LEBATO

Since 7127 Days

Hmn. I did read the whole thing.

Reviewers are consumers, they are gamers too, they are not simply "reviewers", and this is for reviewers of ANYTHING. And again, they play all games in a rush. I seriously doubt they had an extremely short deadline with this game. Like I said, as long as they are consistent, I don't see the problem.

And we are starting to assume too much thanks to that guy. We have no idea on how tight this deadline was (perhaps you do), but I really don't see any unfair practices really. Should we also complain about COD4? But what for, there's nothing to discuss, the game got AAA scores everywhere.

"playing this particular title in a rushed fashion is more likely to instill a false proportion of repetition than some others"

I don't know what to say to that. Does it really? is the question here. Is it really a false assumption of repetition? With so many AAA titles out there this month, why didn't that apply to others, what is it that makes this game more prone to that?

And see, the reason I said he's just one more forum user is because you are obviously linking to that to say, "here is the truth" "this guy tells it how it is". His opinion is no more than that of the others, that's my point, and I really don't believe in the "it's because they rushed" and then of course he goes on to say he doesn't believe many of these 7's reviewers even finished the game, or watched until the last bit of the credits.

As for Crackdown, hmn.......I think it might just be impossible to simply kill three people without doing something else first, I honestly do. Besides I typed a whole page about that and repetition and none of the Creed players seem to have been bothered to come up with something like I did. No one is able to tell me how doing the same activities over and over does not get boring/repetitive considerably quicker than in a game like Crackdown, what makes stabbing a random guy from the back different than stabbing another random guy in the back, etc etc. What keeps climbing buildings interesting from a gameplay standpoint?

In reply to

Hmn.  I did read the whole thing.

Reviewers are consumers, they are gamers too, they are not simply "reviewers", and this is for reviewers of ANYTHING.  And again, they play all games in a rush.  I seriously doubt they had an extremely short deadline with this game.  Like I said, as long as they are consistent, I don't see the problem.

And we are starting to assume too much thanks to that guy.  We have no idea on how tight this deadline was (perhaps you do), but I really don't see any unfair practices really.  Should we also complain about COD4?  But what for, there's nothing to discuss, the game got AAA scores everywhere.

"playing this particular title in a rushed fashion is more likely to instill a false proportion of repetition than some others"

I don't know what to say to that.  Does it really? is the question here.  Is it really a false assumption of repetition?  With so many AAA titles out there this month, why didn't that apply to others, what is it that makes this game more prone to that?

And see, the reason I said he's just one more forum user is because you are obviously linking to that to say, "here is the truth"  "this guy tells it how it is".  His opinion is no more than that of the others, that's my point, and I really don't believe in the "it's because they rushed" and then of course he goes on to say he doesn't believe many of these 7's reviewers even finished the game, or watched until the last bit of the credits.

As for Crackdown, hmn.......I think it might just be impossible to simply kill three people without doing something else first, I honestly do.   Besides I typed a whole page about that and repetition and none of the Creed players seem to have been bothered to come up with something like I did.  No one is able to tell me how doing the same activities over and over does not get boring/repetitive considerably quicker than in a game like Crackdown, what makes stabbing a random guy from the back different than stabbing another random guy in the back, etc etc.  What keeps climbing buildings interesting from a gameplay standpoint?

Mods, stop changing my SIG! I'm going to end up banning you!

INDIGO

Since 7707 Days

Penny Arcade is spot on. Bravo.

In reply to

SimonM7

Since 7028 Days

what makes stabbing a random guy from the back different than stabbing another random guy in the back, etc etc. What keeps climbing buildings interesting from a gameplay standpoint?

-- disclaimer: I haven't played it, yadda yadda, all assumption and opinion etc --

This is sort of what had me worried long before reviews started coming in. I was sitting there pondering "what will actually make this game fantastic?". Like I've stated before, they have apparently removed everything that was appealing about Sands of Time, pretty much, and yet that game is the reason I had so much faith in this game to begin with. The parkour stuff is supposed to make this game special, but it's reduced to watching this guy do it without fail, so you might aswell have been traversing normal environments. Sure, it would've been far fetched to make the climbing as elaborate as Sands of Time, but surely they should make it some sort of challenge at least, or at least a risk/reward system.

It reminds me of when Buffy ended and Marty Noxon (writer closest to show creator Joss Whedon) ran off to make her own show, and she was like "well I've done Buffy so I rock!"

And she essentially went "we'll remove the humour and charm first of all, all the tongue in cheek self referential stuff that kept Buffy grounded, make it dead serious and fall into all the genre traps Buffy avoided with said humour and call it POINT PLEASANT!"

You ended up with a show that had all of the things Buffy had going against it, whilst having willingly given up the stuff that made Buffy really great. Put into Blade speak - all of its weaknesses and none of its strengths.

Hype prolly got to Altair more than anything. Not the kind of superficial hype created deliberately by game companies or anything like that. The hype - simply - of having made Sands of Time. A game TRULY unique in its appeal, promising something likewise stimulating in a new way with this. I'm guessing this just got too disappointingly normal for a lot of these people. Merely a great game where they expected to see grandeur.

I can live with that though. I loved King Kong for what it was; a beautiful journey and little else. I'm sure I'll enjoy this too, but if I run out and get it now it'll prolly be disappointingly normal to my expectations of grandeur. Oh and tomorrow Mario is-a waiting, so I'll be busy soaring across space.

In reply to

[quote]what makes stabbing a random guy from the back different than stabbing another random guy in the back, etc etc. What keeps climbing buildings interesting from a gameplay standpoint?[/quote]

-- disclaimer: I haven't played it, yadda yadda, all assumption and opinion etc --

This is sort of what had me worried long before reviews started coming in. I was sitting there pondering "what will actually make this game fantastic?". Like I've stated before, they have apparently removed everything that was appealing about Sands of Time, pretty much, and yet that game is the reason I had so much faith in this game to begin with. The parkour stuff is supposed to make this game special, but it's reduced to watching this guy do it without fail, so you might aswell have been traversing normal environments. Sure, it would've been far fetched to make the climbing as elaborate as Sands of Time, but surely they should make it some sort of challenge at least, or at least a risk/reward system.

It reminds me of when Buffy ended and Marty Noxon (writer closest to show creator Joss Whedon) ran off to make her own show, and she was like "well I've done Buffy so I rock!"

And she essentially went "we'll remove the humour and charm first of all, all the tongue in cheek self referential stuff that kept Buffy grounded, make it dead serious and fall into all the genre traps Buffy avoided with said humour and call it POINT PLEASANT!"

You ended up with a show that had all of the things Buffy had going against it, whilst having willingly given up the stuff that made Buffy really great. Put into Blade speak - all of its weaknesses and none of its strengths.

Hype prolly got to Altair more than anything. Not the kind of superficial hype created deliberately by game companies or anything like that. The hype - simply - of having made Sands of Time. A game TRULY unique in its appeal, promising something likewise stimulating in a new way with this. I'm guessing this just got too disappointingly normal for a lot of these people. Merely a great game where they expected to see grandeur.

I can live with that though. I loved King Kong for what it was; a beautiful journey and little else. I'm sure I'll enjoy this too, but if I run out and get it now it'll prolly be disappointingly normal to my expectations of grandeur. Oh and tomorrow Mario is-a waiting, so I'll be busy soaring across space.

alimokrane

Since 6935 Days

DAMN THE BLOODY Gamestation! THEY SUCK BIG TIME! They still havent dispatched my assassins copy. I only went there because I could get it with mass effect and eternal sonata and an Arcade 360 console for £249.99 ....

The arcade is going to a mate of mine for 179.99 which effectively outs the three games (eternal sonata+mass effect+assassins creed) for £60 Woooot! Not bad Eh ? I guess for that I could just live with the delay then hehe :D hopefully it'll be dispatched tomorrow and I can get it Saturday ... Fingers Crossed!

if you have a mate who wants a 360 THIS IS THE BEST DEAL YOU COULD EVER DO! and your friends can get the 360 arcade £20 cheaper! :D go for the deal of Xbox 360 arcade plus three games for £249.99

In reply to

Bring on Lost Odyssey!

alimokrane

Since 6935 Days

Ooops First that £60 should have been £70 and my Mistake too, my mate is getting it for £170 so that puts the three games at £80 not £70 still a f****** good deal for a poor man like me for Very new Games! :D

God I edited this so many times ... Maths! :D

In reply to

Bring on Lost Odyssey!

Jollipop

Since 6888 Days

Personally I think you should play the game before you have an opinion on it, its a little blind sighted to say "I don't like the look of it", just rent it or something.

There are many times I have picked up a game and been surprised by it, Assasins Creed is one of them.

In reply to

Marumaro for the WIN !!

LEBATO

Since 7127 Days

Posted by Jollipop

Personally I think you should play the game before you have an opinion on it, its a little blind sighted to say "I don't like the look of it", just rent it or something.

There are many times I have picked up a game and been surprised by it, Assasins Creed is one of them.

I get what you are saying, but I have NEVER been surprised if videos of the game don't spark any interest, honest fact.

In reply to

Mods, stop changing my SIG! I'm going to end up banning you!

Optimusv2

Since 6897 Days

Posted by INDIGO

Penny Arcade is spot on. Bravo.

Agreed. I believe Blue Dragon especially suffered from the "lets through the game to meet this deadline mindset" Perhaps even far more so than that of Assassin's Creed, but of course thats a topic for another discussion.

In reply to

Hironobu Sakaguchi is coming back to reclaim the throne :)

October 20th 2007 (A good day)

Don't ask any questions just shut up and buy Halo : Ghosts of the Onyx one of the greatest books ever.

pssh! more like electronic gay-ming monthly! amirite

Sath

Since 6871 Days

http://www.gametrailers.com/player/28005.html

Comparison between 360 and PS3.

I know that the PS3 is brighter, but you can obviously turn down the gamma to match the 360 version...I did that with the Jericho demos long time ago and it was identical.

The only thing that worries me is...people are saying that the PS3 has alot of framrate issues.
I have come across on the 360 version like 2-3 times in various places, but I dont know about the PS3 version.

The reason why I want the PS3 version is that its quiter and the controller is smaller and comfortable for this type of game.

In reply to

Playing: Call of Duty 4, Assassin's Creed - Xbox 360

Mass Effect - Next week!

*A New Form of Change*

GriftGFX

Since 7005 Days

How is a central analog stick more comfortable for a third person game?

In reply to

Sath

Since 6871 Days

Posted by GriftGFX

How is a central analog stick more comfortable for a third person game?

I like it...I liked how I played Uncharted, Ninja Gaiden Sigma, R&C with that controller.

When I played NG Black long time ago on the 360, the controller was good yes, but the buttons were too seperated for its kind.

Thats atleast what I prefer.

PS. And here is the more different (better?) comparison between the PS3 and 360 for AC.
http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?i...

I think they turned down the gamma on Ps3 or something.

But both looks identical to me, with just slight of different color filters here and there.

In reply to

Playing: Call of Duty 4, Assassin's Creed - Xbox 360

Mass Effect - Next week!

*A New Form of Change*

GriftGFX

Since 7005 Days

If you read any of the reviews they almost all say that the PS3 version has really bad framerate performance. I find that pretty surprising that people prefer the PS3 pad for anything but its d-pad personally. I think the only thing the DualShake is better for is 2D games personally. But that just comes down to personal preference.

In reply to

Optimusv2

Since 6897 Days

I've had the pleasure of seeing both the 360 version and ps3 version and even playing both and there is no question the 360 version is the better version of the 2.

I'd be crazy to recommend the ps3 version to anyone over the 360 version after what I saw.

In reply to

Hironobu Sakaguchi is coming back to reclaim the throne :)

October 20th 2007 (A good day)

Don't ask any questions just shut up and buy Halo : Ghosts of the Onyx one of the greatest books ever.

pssh! more like electronic gay-ming monthly! amirite

Sath

Since 6871 Days

Grfit...regular gamers have said that it has some framerate issues, but not as "badly" as the gamesites or game magazines says it is.

The 360 version isnt running smooth anyway.
For example if two guys were playing both versions side by side...one guy suddenly gets bad framerate while the other one isnt, and couple of minutes or hours it gets vice versa.

Op...saying that you had the pleasure of seeing both and you recommend the 360 version is just wrong...makes you look like a fanboy, which isnt you.

Care to say why, or is it that you cant or wont.

In reply to

Playing: Call of Duty 4, Assassin's Creed - Xbox 360

Mass Effect - Next week!

*A New Form of Change*

GriftGFX

Since 7005 Days

Plenty of people have said that the PS3 version is obviously the worse of the two when it comes to having very poor framerate performance. But okay. Just write them all off as fanboys and buy the inferior product because you like the inferior controller :P

And yes--Critics have said it more than regular gamers--which means people who have actually seen the majority of both games, cover to cover. While regular gamers don't often buy the same game for two different platforms just to compare them.

In reply to

Phellan_Wolf

Since 6350 Days

Posted by Optimusv2

I've had the pleasure of seeing both the 360 version and ps3 version and even playing both and there is no question the 360 version is the better version of the 2.

I'd be crazy to recommend the ps3 version to anyone over the 360 version after what I saw.

So, is it true then that you can notice the difference other than the gamma?
Can't believe it after seeing how well COD 4 performs on the PS 3.

In reply to

Sath

Since 6871 Days

I dont do that...makes me look bad :P

By just looking at the PS3 version alone without the 360 on the side, it doesnt look any different than what the 360 version is like.

I played the game for hours yesterday, and pretty much acts the same...meaning no slow or faster framerate.

Some people do have sharp eye for seeing like framerate o screentearing, and I sometimes do see them if its alot.

I saw screen tearing here and there on the 360 version for sure, but not so much, and the framerate drops when there is too much open scale to it and everything is happening at the same time.

In reply to

Playing: Call of Duty 4, Assassin's Creed - Xbox 360

Mass Effect - Next week!

*A New Form of Change*

Optimusv2

Since 6897 Days

Yea Phellan I feel the difference is very noticable I'd probably go as far as to say the most notable difference in a multiplatform game this gen or maybe I say such a thing because its one of the main titles I was really excited for. Normally I brush aside minor differences and such, but I think the 360 version easily stands out over the ps3.

Thats just my opinion though I'm not saying people out there can't or wont enjoy the ps3 version of the game, but I just don't think I could play the ps3 version after experiencing the 360 version. Only way that I could see that happening is if I didn't own a 360 and only owned a ps3.

In reply to

Hironobu Sakaguchi is coming back to reclaim the throne :)

October 20th 2007 (A good day)

Don't ask any questions just shut up and buy Halo : Ghosts of the Onyx one of the greatest books ever.

pssh! more like electronic gay-ming monthly! amirite

Assassin's Creed - Discussion (spoilers)

Microsoft Flight Simulator 2024

S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2: Heart of Chornobyl

Indiana Jones and the Great Circle

PS5 Pro HQ video coverage: Day Six

PS5 Pro HQ video coverage: Day Five

We reviewed LEGO Horizon Adventures