Ever since I saw someone play the end of ACII I have been interested in the series. I then bought brotherhood then revelations,but I have never played through the first through. Should I invest in them
Nah, AC2 was the best, because it fixed every single flaw in the original and made everything so much deeper and more fun. The addition of a currency sysytem was perfect, the cities were much better and more colorful, the setting was more interesting, and the combat was much better. Also, dual hidden blades are awesome, though the entire game was just a bit too easy. But AC1 was definetly second best, it made you feel like an assassin, it had more interesting and likeable characters than the others, and it was presented in a masterful fashion that gave you just enough information to be interested, never explaining the goings-on too clearly, so the player was left scavenging info from e-mails and overheard conversations. So the first one had the player most interested, but the second game was the most fun.
AC 1 was the best if you can avoid the repetitiveness of the game at the beginning :- Best way to enjoy, first try to go to each viewpoint as soon as possible with in the area available & also look out for side missions esp. save people as they are most useful when the main guy tries to run from you. Also lookout for easy missions like evesdrop, pickpocket & interrogation as only 3-4 of these will allow you to get permission from AC-HQ to go for the target.... This way you won't be fooling around the city and can enjoy the game with much more connectivity & less repetativeness. Things i like most about AC 1 :- 1. One of the best story in a game. 2. Best dialogues of all AC games. 3. Best environment. 4. Huge open world (Not just a city like last 2 AC games....) 5. Nice graphics. 6. Best combat. 7. Nice gameplay (can be played both ways - Allout attack or steath hidden kills) 8. Best fight (More challenging than the later AC games) & looked way more believable. 9. Best period for the AC game. 10. Much more challenging assassinations (e.g. last assassination where many archers attack you....) 11. Game was more about Assassinations & less about people's lives. 12. Most interesting conversations between the target & assassin. 13. Pickpocketing in the AC 1 was different than all the AC games & it was the best (Had to choose right timing, correct side etc.) What more can i say.... If you want a real assassin experience try to enjoy the fight in the first game more and keep getting in troubles.... You will enjoy much more. Remember that developing something new is much more difficult than to improve upon it...... This is where the story began which laid foundations for improved gaming experience in other AC games so try to play with open mind & don't go by opinions on the net because as far as i can tell most people who are criticizing first game didn't even finished the game, be the judge yourself.
Honestly I think I have to agree with you. It was simple and the story wasn't total **** like it is now. I mean I thought the whole Desmond story was cool at first, but its seriously borderline retarded now. I just finished Revalations. I hope 3 focuses on the Revolutionary War and we hear little of the other ****. Seriously we just want to play the Assassin and get just a little bit of a backstory that isn't retarded
Put me down for 2 overall. I WOULD say 1, but the truth is, the game just wasn't fleshed out enough at that point and it got really repetitive and boring. I liked the setting and story of 1 the best though. 2 was where the series came into its own as a full-fledged game. Brotherhood added a few new things but didn't do much to improve on the basic formula, plus it was kind of depressing. Revelations, haven't even played, mostly cuz it had lackluster reviews and I can only do one game at a time anyway, too busy. I was only here to check back in on what people had said about it, thinking maybe I'll get it now ahead of 3 which does look good.
I liked AC1 the best aswell. I think the whole series started seriously going downhill with ac2. Some italian theme (What the hell?) Hashashins (who were the assassins that really existed) in Italy? gimme a break. Ac2 was just marketed to a more broader audience. It was the perfect concept to get more folks interest. A protagonist with charm/persona , cliche epic action scenes, sex , cool looking outfit, more gadgets ... and the side missions, these side missions and all the other extra things was totally unneeded and an sign the developers being lazy, somebody just said "Lets add some more sh*t so players will be busy for a few more weeks"...Sorry but i prefer quality over quantity (wich ac1 was) instead of quantity over quality, wich sadly seems to be with almost every game nowadays...Just by adding more sh*t doesnt make it better... So what if ac1 didnt have side missions? It had one of the best storys and actually a wise philosophy that probably a small ammount of players understand...Thats why they thought it was boring, because they didnt understand sh*t from the wise sayings in the game...
Also, what i liked in ac1 was how Altaiir sorta "progressed" as the story went forward. In the beginning Altaiir was a complete dickhead, but when nearing the end of the game he started to become enlightened. I must say that AC Revelations was one game that i actually enjoyed, way more than i enjoyed ac2 and ac brotherhood, those games were dull and cliche. AC Revelations Wrapped up Altaiirs and Ezios story, wich was fantastic, i liked that the developers had actually payed attention on the first assassins creed game and they hadnt forgotten about the philosophy of the first game...I was actually crying during the last scene where altaiir just walked to the chair and sat there untill he died with an empty library...What an ending.