You can just take less time if the missions. Each mission consists of gathering info about your target, then taking them out. You only need 3 to start the assassination memory, but gathering more gives you more context. I generally gathered it all, but just going straight for the kill will speed your game along a fair amount.
The biggest problem I have with the mission structure is having to ride the f***ing horse to the cities each time.
- Forums
- Cross Site
- General Video Game Discussion
- Assassin's Creed III
Assassin's Creed III Follow
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people
lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
idiggory, King of Bards wrote:
My point isn't the he didn't change, it's that the game failed to make a real story out of it. Those conversations with the old guy, and a few with Malak, contain all of Altair's character development until you approach the end of the game. It's extremely limited, and gives it a really odd, stuttering nature. He doesn't develop smoothly, over time. If the premise of the game is that I'm experiencing this person's life through genetic memory, I shouldn't be only experiencing that change in bursts in between the major missions. Everything should be developing the character, influencing them.
AC2 and Brotherhood did that very well. Assassin's Creed 1 didn't do that at all.
I didn't mind the repetition as much as other people did, and I legitimately enjoyed the game. I always thoroughly investigated my targets. But that's the real weakness, imo.
Does Altair go from being a stuck up *** to a more reverent and honorable assassin? Yes. But the character development is such that it's easily shown via a single line of storyboards, and that's what I take issue with.
AC2 and Brotherhood did that very well. Assassin's Creed 1 didn't do that at all.
I didn't mind the repetition as much as other people did, and I legitimately enjoyed the game. I always thoroughly investigated my targets. But that's the real weakness, imo.
Does Altair go from being a stuck up *** to a more reverent and honorable assassin? Yes. But the character development is such that it's easily shown via a single line of storyboards, and that's what I take issue with.
I found he developed rather believably. I think you're too dismissive of the conversations with Al Mualim; they're rather long, and it's easy to believe that the salient points Al Mualim makes affect Altair on the spot, or that he (and/or the player) ruminates on them during the windup to the assassinations. Though I'll concede that perhaps some narrated thoughts during those portions would help to round things out. I'll point out that you're also forgetting the conversations that occur with the assassination targets, some of which are also fairly long, and reveal Altair's changing attitude.
I'm also not letting you off the hook for saying that the game didn't have a story, by the way. It very clearly did.
Edited, Mar 7th 2012 12:26pm by Eske
I never said it didn't. I said that AC2 actually had one--I meant for it to be relative. Does AC2 have a story? Yes. But it's very, very bare-bones. Like the skeleton of a story that you would establish when making your initial outlines. It's still a story, but it definitely isn't a rich one.
[EDIT]
Also, my issue is like looking at a bar graph that lists populations in 50 year increments. Yeah, you know the population didn't double in one year. But without more data, like a line to show you population over time, it's hard to keep yourself from being impressed otherwise.
That's my issue with the first game. Even if the character development happens at a realistic pace, it doesn't give the player the proper experience of it for that to feel like it's so. I enjoyed it, but I'm not going to pretend I didn't have issues.
Edited, Mar 7th 2012 1:26pm by idiggory
[EDIT]
Also, my issue is like looking at a bar graph that lists populations in 50 year increments. Yeah, you know the population didn't double in one year. But without more data, like a line to show you population over time, it's hard to keep yourself from being impressed otherwise.
That's my issue with the first game. Even if the character development happens at a realistic pace, it doesn't give the player the proper experience of it for that to feel like it's so. I enjoyed it, but I'm not going to pretend I didn't have issues.
Edited, Mar 7th 2012 1:26pm by idiggory
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people
lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
idiggory, King of Bards wrote:
I never said it didn't. I said that AC2 actually had one--I meant for it to be relative.
I understand if you meant it to be relative. But please, just say that you misspoke, or that it was hyperbole. The phrasing:
Quote:
ACII is WAY different than the first game though. It actually has a story
...is a contrast between the two relating to the 'having of stories'. AC2 is different from AC1 because it 'has one'. Therefore, AC1 does not.
Apologies for being pedantic, but I'm a bit of a stickler for these things.
To the rest, I'll just say that I suspect I don't share your view on what makes a rich story. That's not to say that I found AC1's story to be particularly amazing (To me, it was solid, but unspectacular. The dialogue and setting carried the game for me much more than the story). But I found AC2's to be roughly the same, with much more hokeyness Riding Da Vinci's flying machine, fighting the pope, etc. that put me off just a bit.
I'm hoping that the third game brings back some of the gravitas of the first. Were either Brotherhood or Revelations darker than AC2?
Yeah, that's fine. My bad for not being clear with my intent--fault definitely isn't on you.
I haven't played Revelations, but there were ways in which AC2 was darker, ways in which Brotherhood was. In Brotherhood, you feel like you are in a much less fortified position, which I like more.
I haven't played Revelations, but there were ways in which AC2 was darker, ways in which Brotherhood was. In Brotherhood, you feel like you are in a much less fortified position, which I like more.
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people
lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
idiggory, King of Bards wrote:
Yeah, that's fine. My bad for not being clear with my intent--fault definitely isn't on you.
I haven't played Revelations, but there were ways in which AC2 was darker, ways in which Brotherhood was. In Brotherhood, you feel like you are in a much less fortified position, which I like more.
I haven't played Revelations, but there were ways in which AC2 was darker, ways in which Brotherhood was. In Brotherhood, you feel like you are in a much less fortified position, which I like more.
One or the other (Brotherhood, I think?) should be going up on sale on the PSN this week, IIRC, because it was one of the winners in the "Best of PSN" contest thing. 30% off for regular users, and 50% off for PS Plus, which I just subscribed to.
I think I'll give it a look.
Err, just checked, and yeah, it's Brotherhood.
And on an unrelated note, Journey is absolutely gorgeous. Anyone with a Playstation should play it.
Edited, Mar 7th 2012 3:00pm by Eske
Jophiel wrote:
Luckily, I got AC (the first) for free so I suppose if it's balls, I'll just play long enough to get the jist of it and move on.
Recent Visitors: 119
All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (119)
- Forums
- Cross Site
- General Video Game Discussion
- Assassin's Creed III
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC