Can you play Black Flag w/o playing previous AC games?

I'm asking from narrative point of view. Does the story require the knowledge of previous developments? Would the story make sense to me? I know fundamentals behind the story of the first game, I played it for 2 hours then I lost interest for some reason, it seemed formulaic to me, but now I'm sure I'd love the series. I want to play all the games in the series eventually but I won't be able to afford them all - only one at a time and that's why I'm asking if there's no harm in playing Black Flag now. For the record I have ACII on my console currently as a part of Games with Gold. Any help is appreciated. Btw is it possible to finish all games full-stealth on?

I don't know anything about the story of AC4 so I have no clue if you actually require that knowledge but I'm pretty sure that it wouldn't hurt. Considering that you can get all previous games combined for less money than the new one I would do that. In fact I did. Played the first game ages ago but never finished it. I was close to the end but for some reason I couldn't get to the last city. I was riding around on my stupid horse for hours without being able to get near it, so I gave up and never touched it again. I know how it ends though.

Got AC2 and played it for a bit and then put it away for several years. A few weeks ago I forced myself to start it again because it has been sitting around for so long and I was surprised at how much I liked it. I enjoyed every minute (well, except the two additional chapters that were included in my PS3 version... they were beyond boring) and when I was done I was hungry for more and got all the other games right away. The story is good if you like that kind of stuff and I wouldn't want to miss it before starting Black Flag.

Yes

its better if u play the previous first.. yeahh start from ACII

I played the first when it released, forced myself to finish it. It got way too monotonous. Never went back to series until this year. I have 2, brotherhood, 3 on PS3 hdd and revelations on disc, as well as Liberation on Vita. I plan on playing them in order then getting black flag. I don't mind because A) I'm not competing with anyone, B)I just like doing things like this. I will every so often run through a game series for the fun of it. I don't know if you NEED to play others to get 4, but I am.

Knowing the narrative helps a lot to make sense of the world when playing AC, so, it's recommended to play, or read up on the previous games.

Also, no, there's simply no way to play all the AC games full stealth-on. In the newer AC games, there's a lot of focus on the action.

How linked are ACIII and ACIV? I have played and completed all but ACIII, which I started but got bored in the stupidly long tutorial and gave up.

You need to know nothing about the other games.

Avoiding spoilers the other have a character in the present day whose story wraps up at the end of 3 interacting with the past.

Black Flag - You play as a researcher who has to investigate the past for fiction purposes.

Some of the themes will cross over but they are not very deep or complete and I could explain them in 3 lines if I made this thread with spoilers.

Yes.

Besides, Desmond's story & Animus are the worst part of the series. The series' success stems from its focus on immersion in history, and it'd be just as successful, if not more, if it drops everything else for history.

rent AC3...let the bad taste it leaves in ur mouth....dont touch AC4 because the bad taste is still there

To be honest the overarching story of the series isn't as good as it seems, there was so much potential to what they could've done with it but the potential was never fulfilled. I'd say just go read all the spoilers if you're curious, while there were some interesting things it's not worth the time playing through all of them.

I just started playing ACII today, and my gosh are the graphics disastrous for a late 2009 game...The story set in present times seems to be utter nonsense as well, and like someone else said, the good bit lies in the immersion in history.

Yeah, AC II has a terrible problem with rendering anything at a distance, the textures look horrible. It's bad on the PC, don't even want to imagine how bad is it on consoles.

Hell, even in the first AC, the distant textures didn't lose so much detail... fortunately, Brotherhood did bring a few improvements, while Revelations and AC III fixed it almost completely.

Yep, distant textures looked horrendous and took me out of that game so much. AC: Brotherhood looks incredible though. One of the better looking games this gen.

I think you can skip the earlier games. I haven't played Revelations or ACIII, but I've heard a lot gets wrapped up in the last one. So I think Black Flag is a good entry for new players. The series has 6 games spanning over 6 years. It would be ridiculous if Ubisoft forced people to play all the previous games to understand the story.

I'd actually recommend you skip the previous games. The yearly rehashing would likely turn you off of the series, like it has many others.

Ok, I could buy the first one, still coz I like the setting and it's dirt cheap, so which of the remaining ones from ACIII to Black Flag are worth playing if you could pick just one?

The new one, I haven't even played it but I'd be amazed if it was worse than AC3.

AC has a cringe worthy storyline.

You're not missing much, just enjoy the gameplay.

Let us put it like this:

AC tends to have a self contained story in a historical setting in each game (ok a bit of a stretch since there were like 3 AC2 games, yeh I kid you now)

And a continued story through the Animus future setting.

Basicly if it is the pirate story you want, then no you do not have to play anything, if its the animus part, and the Whole templer assassin part (although they likely will cover it within the first hours of the game) Then you would likel want to play or simply read up on the previous games.

I see, I can be fine with just AC1 and 2 and then jump on a pirate ship with Black Flag, coz I loved Sid Meier's Pirates and I heard the game's a bit similar to it...

I recall that the Events you actually care about (here's a hint it's not the modern times) ACIV takes place before ACIII.

I sure hope so, I haven't finished a single game.

I've played about 4 hours of the game and I can say that, so far, it's the first Assassin's Creed that doesn't need any back story from the games that came before it.

There's the story line that runs through Assassin's Creed, Assassin's Creed II, Assassin's Creed Brotherhood, Assassin's Creed Revelations, and Assassin's Creed III

then you have the story line in Assassin's Creed IV Black Flag being almost entirely detached from those. Maybe just brush up on info from the assassin's order and the templars though

Is Desmond or the whole modern-day storyline even in AC4?

If not, I'll pre-order this shit on Steam right now.

AC 2 and Brotherhood are the only ones worthy to check. You can skip on Revelations and AC3 as they sucked balls.

Anyway, every new installments resumes pretty well the latest events like an episode of a TV show.

No Desmond, and going by the reviews, the modern-day storyline is kept to a minimum.

If you want to pre-order, get it on GMG, and use the 25% off voucher... it's what I did.

Yeah. Some of the things won't make sense in the metastory, but in the main plotline, the pirate plotline, it's al standalone, and it actually serves as a great entry point for those new to the series.

Is the voucher not available for NA or something? Doesn't work for me

It does not. The story in AC4 is completely tangential to the first 5 games and frankly offensive. You play a random no name, technically a bad guy, in the current time period - he has no purpose whatsoever. Edward Kenway is still part of Desmond's bloodline but I'm pretty sure even the Kenway storyline is meaningless. I also must note I quit at chapter 2 because it was boring.

I like all the lame-asses on here going "**** the modern storyline."

The modern storyline was the entire storyline. Everything that happened in the past was only explored for a) because you have to to make a game and b) because it was completely and directly related to what they were doing in the present.

The purpose of the modern story in the new game is retarded - they use the memories to make "movies".

Even I thought it was bullshit to have a modern storyline, YEARS ago when AC1 came out, but I found out I was wrong.

Please explain to me why you all hate 3 so much. I don't particularly love it, but I want to know what was supposedly so horrid - other than being forced to play Kenway for several hours before getting to the actual main character. And obviously excluding the god awful 100% synch troll-ass objectives that Ubisoft purposely designed with the sole intent of infuriating completionists.

Sure.......You just buy the game and play it.......just kidding.......just kidding,I had to.On a serious note I went from the first one straight to the third one so ya I would say it does'nt really matter.

I have no idea... guess they removed the offer. I pre-oredered about a week ago.

I think you should rush out and get number 2 first. I skipped the first because it sucked but I played the rest and from what I know you shouldn't hesistate to get 4 but if you really want to play AC play 2 first you won't regret it.