I am going to go ahead and admit that I was really looking forward to Assassin's Creed. I don't really pay too much attention to hype machines surrounding a game's release, but with so much hype surrounding Assassin's Creed it was hard not to get excited. I knew the very basics of the story: You're an assassin in 1191 A.D. Sweet story, right? Sounded sweet to me. I asked for it for Christmas, but my girlfriend couldn't find it anywhere (I quite happily got a K-Mart gift card instead). My friend got a copy from his brother, so I borrowed it from him and recently finished it. So, my thoughts...
First off, you'll notice right away that the graphics in this game are beautiful. Definitley top notch stuff: Taking a swan dive off of a 30 story building in 1080P is something to be in awe at. The graphics are so good, in fact, that there is no difference between in-game cut scenes and actual gameplay (Yeah, I'm old school; I remember back when CG cut scenes were all the rage and the sprites of gameplay couldn't compare.) Using the game engine for each cutscene definitley tells you there's some power there. There were a few instances where I noticed some clipping, but these were very few and far between. Now, while the graphics are great, the landscape is, well, quite drab. I realize it is The Holy Land in 1191 A.D., but everything looks more or less the same. There is only a few styles of NPCs, and the three cities pretty much look the same. I would have forgotten which one I was in if it not for the 360 (no pun intended) demeanor of the Assassin's Bureau informants.
Gameplay is solid, though quite repetitive. You'll go to each city, climb some tall buildings, do a few investigative missions, talk, assassinate, talk longer, rinse and repeat....nine times in total. While it is awe-inspiring your first time in Damascus, by the time your second trip to Jerusalem comes around, you're pretty much bored of the whole thing.
Of course, you could save some citizens in each section of each city. These consist of fighting a couple guards, and then listening to the same lines from the rescued citizens. The saved citizens help you if you're running from guards, but other than the achievements that go along with it there really is no reason to do them. Combat is difficult at first, but painstakingly simple once you get the hang of it (and relearn counter). After a while, you'll learn how to fight with two buttons (right-trigger and X) and never get hit.
And if you're bored of that, you can always run around like a fool collecting about a million flags. They're basically Crackdown's orbs, but with no positive affect whatsoever. Actually, the only reason I can see to collect the flags would be the achievements, so PS3 owners must be mighty bored.
The controls take a little adjusting, and for a game in which you're suppose to do a lot of climbing I found the climbing controls to be quite clunky and unresponsive at times. Climbing and jumping could have been a lot more accurate. Another thing that really annoyed me was the fact that you couldn't really run most of the time unless you wanted to start a brawl. At first I found myself slowly walking through the Kingdom and taking forever to get anywhere, and then I just ran through it all, over twenty enemies following after me. I understand it's a stealth game and running can arouse suspision, but it was annoying to walk, I mean literally WALK, everywhere.
Now, I enjoyed the "concept" of the story. You're an assassin in 1191 A.D. assassinating corrupt officials, uncovering and murdering Templars, etc. I'm a sucker for conspiracy theories and Da Vinci Code-type stories, so it sounds good. That is, until you hash it out in painstakingly long, boring dialogue screens. Remember what I said before about using the in-game engine for cutscenes? This means you can still move during them, which makes you quite bored since the only thing to look at on screen are two characters. I found myself running around in circles, cycling through cameras, anything I could do to appease boredom during these.
Another aspect of the story I could've done without is the Sci-Fi twist of being in the future, going through your ancestor's memories. I've read things like "Oh, well it's unique in it's story." Yeah, well I liked the original concept much better, and besides, how many games do you play as a stealth assassin murdering Templars in 1191 A.D.? That's pretty unique to me. This seemed tacked on, and again just made me bored. While I wanted to plunge my blade into the back of a guard, I ended up having to return to the present for yet more boring dialogue in which I can't do much. This must have something to do with the fact that Ubisoft is calling it a "franchise." If there is an Assassin's Creed 2 in the works, it needs to be overhauled.
In the end, you'll find that an open-sandbox GTA-style stealth action Metal Gear game just doesn't work. The open sandbox doesn't work in a stealth game; it sounds great at first, but it really isn't. It seems like the only reason Ubisoft went this way is because Sand Box games are all the rage: Everybody's doing it!
Assassin's Creed is not a bad game, and I really wanted to like it, but the more I played the more I disliked it. It's a beautiful game with great sound effects, but the flashy presentation has no substance when you get right down to the game. Assassin's Creed: The Movie may have been the direction Ubisoft should have went in. I actually feel kind of bad giving such a high-profile game such a low score, but at the same time I don't. Ubi hyped this game for two years, it was suppose to be something great, but when I finally played it I found it was nothing like what it promised. Ubisoft needs to act more like a mute mailman: Don't talk, deliver!
Check Assassin's Creed out if you want, but definitley rent it before you drop $60 on it, because you may just find that you have gotten something like a case with no disc inside: Nice art, great presentation, but nothing actually inside. I'm sure there's an Assassin's Creed 2 in the works (just judging from the ending), so if they're serious about this game as a franchise they need to start from scratch. With some work, they may be able to delive the game they promised, however this was not it.
In the end, I found that Assassin's Creed delivers gorgeous graphics, top-notch sound, and some nice gameplay features. However, it is quite repetitive, some poor controls, simple combat, and, for all the hype surrounding it, the game just doesn't deliver what it promised. What could have been a great game, gets a 6 out of 10 from me.
Final Score: 6.0/10
First off, you'll notice right away that the graphics in this game are beautiful. Definitley top notch stuff: Taking a swan dive off of a 30 story building in 1080P is something to be in awe at. The graphics are so good, in fact, that there is no difference between in-game cut scenes and actual gameplay (Yeah, I'm old school; I remember back when CG cut scenes were all the rage and the sprites of gameplay couldn't compare.) Using the game engine for each cutscene definitley tells you there's some power there. There were a few instances where I noticed some clipping, but these were very few and far between. Now, while the graphics are great, the landscape is, well, quite drab. I realize it is The Holy Land in 1191 A.D., but everything looks more or less the same. There is only a few styles of NPCs, and the three cities pretty much look the same. I would have forgotten which one I was in if it not for the 360 (no pun intended) demeanor of the Assassin's Bureau informants.
Gameplay is solid, though quite repetitive. You'll go to each city, climb some tall buildings, do a few investigative missions, talk, assassinate, talk longer, rinse and repeat....nine times in total. While it is awe-inspiring your first time in Damascus, by the time your second trip to Jerusalem comes around, you're pretty much bored of the whole thing.
Of course, you could save some citizens in each section of each city. These consist of fighting a couple guards, and then listening to the same lines from the rescued citizens. The saved citizens help you if you're running from guards, but other than the achievements that go along with it there really is no reason to do them. Combat is difficult at first, but painstakingly simple once you get the hang of it (and relearn counter). After a while, you'll learn how to fight with two buttons (right-trigger and X) and never get hit.
And if you're bored of that, you can always run around like a fool collecting about a million flags. They're basically Crackdown's orbs, but with no positive affect whatsoever. Actually, the only reason I can see to collect the flags would be the achievements, so PS3 owners must be mighty bored.
The controls take a little adjusting, and for a game in which you're suppose to do a lot of climbing I found the climbing controls to be quite clunky and unresponsive at times. Climbing and jumping could have been a lot more accurate. Another thing that really annoyed me was the fact that you couldn't really run most of the time unless you wanted to start a brawl. At first I found myself slowly walking through the Kingdom and taking forever to get anywhere, and then I just ran through it all, over twenty enemies following after me. I understand it's a stealth game and running can arouse suspision, but it was annoying to walk, I mean literally WALK, everywhere.
Now, I enjoyed the "concept" of the story. You're an assassin in 1191 A.D. assassinating corrupt officials, uncovering and murdering Templars, etc. I'm a sucker for conspiracy theories and Da Vinci Code-type stories, so it sounds good. That is, until you hash it out in painstakingly long, boring dialogue screens. Remember what I said before about using the in-game engine for cutscenes? This means you can still move during them, which makes you quite bored since the only thing to look at on screen are two characters. I found myself running around in circles, cycling through cameras, anything I could do to appease boredom during these.
Another aspect of the story I could've done without is the Sci-Fi twist of being in the future, going through your ancestor's memories. I've read things like "Oh, well it's unique in it's story." Yeah, well I liked the original concept much better, and besides, how many games do you play as a stealth assassin murdering Templars in 1191 A.D.? That's pretty unique to me. This seemed tacked on, and again just made me bored. While I wanted to plunge my blade into the back of a guard, I ended up having to return to the present for yet more boring dialogue in which I can't do much. This must have something to do with the fact that Ubisoft is calling it a "franchise." If there is an Assassin's Creed 2 in the works, it needs to be overhauled.
In the end, you'll find that an open-sandbox GTA-style stealth action Metal Gear game just doesn't work. The open sandbox doesn't work in a stealth game; it sounds great at first, but it really isn't. It seems like the only reason Ubisoft went this way is because Sand Box games are all the rage: Everybody's doing it!
Assassin's Creed is not a bad game, and I really wanted to like it, but the more I played the more I disliked it. It's a beautiful game with great sound effects, but the flashy presentation has no substance when you get right down to the game. Assassin's Creed: The Movie may have been the direction Ubisoft should have went in. I actually feel kind of bad giving such a high-profile game such a low score, but at the same time I don't. Ubi hyped this game for two years, it was suppose to be something great, but when I finally played it I found it was nothing like what it promised. Ubisoft needs to act more like a mute mailman: Don't talk, deliver!
Check Assassin's Creed out if you want, but definitley rent it before you drop $60 on it, because you may just find that you have gotten something like a case with no disc inside: Nice art, great presentation, but nothing actually inside. I'm sure there's an Assassin's Creed 2 in the works (just judging from the ending), so if they're serious about this game as a franchise they need to start from scratch. With some work, they may be able to delive the game they promised, however this was not it.
In the end, I found that Assassin's Creed delivers gorgeous graphics, top-notch sound, and some nice gameplay features. However, it is quite repetitive, some poor controls, simple combat, and, for all the hype surrounding it, the game just doesn't deliver what it promised. What could have been a great game, gets a 6 out of 10 from me.
Final Score: 6.0/10
