@Iddhi This is a prime example of how swiftly the gaming community evolved in this generation. We're so direly pressed to believe that high-octane action is the way to go with a "great game."
If you had played Assassin's Creed in 2007 or right before Assassin's Creed II released in 2009 - I did this and am glad I did - then you'd probably have a different appreciation for what it does/did for a lot of the more recent adventure games on the market.
That's not to say, "You did it wrong! Fail!" It's just pointing out that gaming has moved to something different from what the original was, sadly, and now the Assassin's Creed series has moved away from what made it so alluring.
@Bleedingeejit Exactly! These checklists are cancerous to this series.
The impression that you are less a gamer or a less talented Assassin's Creed player because you didn't accomplish the goal in a specific timeframe is hurtful to this series. It becomes less about experiencing the game and just completing a shopping list so you can say, "I didn't it and now I have the little checks to prove it."
What's sad is that in today's era of gaming, in comparison to 2007, there is too much demand on high action.
A lot of what made Assassin's Creed (the original) great was the allure with "time travel" and exploring a world that was meant to be as accurate to history as possible. The rest kind of fell around it. The design was meant to make you feel like you were a part of something bigger, but you weren't so big that this world stopped for you or that you were so massive an influence.
This carried extremely well into Assassin's Creed II. The world was one that is beloved throughout history and had such an amazing impact on the world as we know it today. The game's world and mechanics were done with love and precision, and that showed throughout the entire game. It was a rare case where the descendant exceeded the predecessor.
The others started the downward spiral of grinding out a product, instead of evolving a love affair. It helped us embrace the notion that games need to be done annually or include multiplayer or be high-octane instead of deep. It helped to persuade the gaming community that CoD-level action was what sold and that you, as a developer, had to adhere to that or risk failure. If any game in the series proves this, it is the most recent iteration, Assassin's Creed III.
ACIII demonstrated how allure towards a specific time period wasn't enough to make a great Assassin's Creed game, as its world was a skeleton of its promise and its characters were a let down. And, as Danny points out, its mechanics gave little to the imagination of the player. It left most of us feeling that we weren't a part of this world, but simply viewing it, separating us from the idea that we were actually in the Animus, living and breathing in the world of our ancestor.
Phew. After that long-winded, tl;dr type of comment, I will simply say that I hope that Assassin's Creed IV: Black Flag is more than just a digital display of "a pirate's life for me!" Here's hoping that there was more love put into this than its predecessor and lives up to the namesake of Assassin's Creed, as we should expect from such a name.
@ConsoleContempt But the point is, Gamespot isn't responsible for the internet's reaction, only the content of their writers. If they felt her article was fair, why should they keep it to themselves for the sake of keeping the crazies at bay?
Your intentions are good. I respect that, but your argument inadvertently pushes the idea that if Gamespot didn't publish this, then it wouldn't have happened. While that's correct, it doesn't do anything to make people not be jerks. It's the same as saying about a rape victim, "She knows that these guys get drunk and unruly, so why did she dress the way she did and go to that club?" It's not the intent to be nasty or blaming, but it's not actually taking into account where the responsibility truly lies.
@DankDutch @carolynmichelle @hasleftThebuild God, that's like saying, "A woman is okay with it when you yell nasty things at her, because at least she's getting attention, and she likes attention."
@docampo @robbristow I'm sorry, are you saying that they shouldn't be offended when someone says bigoted and even life-threatening things? It's "inevitable" is a poor excuse to let people keep being immature with their responses.
Sure, Gamespot isn't responsible for other people's words, but they (Gamespot) are still people and should speak up against horrible, shallow-minded, immature responses.
@frozenux The people that Johnny is pointing out, were.
The issue wasn't how people weren't happy she made the comment. It's how they voiced their displeasure. There's mature discourse and then there's being a reactionary child (not directed at you). The latter was far more common on Monday.
GamerCents' comments