View Full Version : Is it worthwhile playing AC1 after playing AC2?

09-18-2010, 04:15 AM

I finished AC2 twice already and it seems Brotherhood won't be available for PC this year.
I was wondering if anybody played AC2 (without prior knowledge of AC1), and then played AC1.
Do you think it's worthwhile playing AC1 after playing AC2?

I was told the arsenal is more limited, also moves and features (e.g. night vision). What about story? What about graphics? I would assume it looks more primitive being 2 years older.
All in all, would it be an enjoyable experience or rather feel like a poor man's AC2?

09-18-2010, 04:15 AM

I finished AC2 twice already and it seems Brotherhood won't be available for PC this year.
I was wondering if anybody played AC2 (without prior knowledge of AC1), and then played AC1.
Do you think it's worthwhile playing AC1 after playing AC2?

I was told the arsenal is more limited, also moves and features (e.g. night vision). What about story? What about graphics? I would assume it looks more primitive being 2 years older.
All in all, would it be an enjoyable experience or rather feel like a poor man's AC2?

09-18-2010, 04:21 AM
You'll get tons of different opinions with the Graphics, Gameplay etc, but i think it's definately worth a play, even though you've played AC2 first, souly because of a great story and because it's helpful with getting to know the story as well!

You might find AC2 a bit better, because of things you'll discover if you play AC1 (like the repetitive missions), but it's still a good play

I know you asked for people who played AC2 first, but i felt like expressing my Opinion! I would recommend playing it!

09-18-2010, 04:23 AM
AC is tha starter of the series, and if you want to know a little more about Desmond, Lucy or Vidic, you should play it.

The graphics are not bad as you think but may be a little better then AC2's graphics..

The Eagle Vision is NOT called "Night Vision"...

09-18-2010, 04:36 AM
Gameplay wise, you may find yourself slightly underwhelmed, although the combat is quite good, much more gritty and brutal.

The graphics, eren't too bad in my opinion, looking out at a city from a high view point gives you a much greater sense of grandeur. i personally find the landscape and cityscape views is AC1 to be far superior than those of AC2.

The story is quite good aswell, though slow i think there's much more 'developement' than in AC2, plus obviously it is the start of the franchise and sort of the begining of the story, you may find a few things explained, that where a mystery to you in AC2.

overall, i recomend you play it, to get the full story if nothing else.

09-18-2010, 05:08 AM
I played AC2 first and then got AC1 so I could understand the story. I would recommend that you get it so you can understand the story better and the combat felt for "real". I must just warn you that it is a VERY short game, I finished the game in one afternoon (about 5 hours). Anyway I sau go for it http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

09-18-2010, 05:25 AM
ive finished them bout like 10 times and i dont mind playing then again i just finished them like last week so il complete them again the day i receive my ac brotherhood

09-18-2010, 05:55 AM
I know you want the opinion of people who played AC2 first, and I didn't, but still...

Assassin's Creed 1 will lessen your probable confusion in AC2. While I played through the second one, I saw things that would have been super confusing for someone without AC1.
I like the combat more in AC1, because Altair's more of a "Brutal" fighter. I say yes to you getting it, as it's a fun game, that will help the story of AC2 come together, and it has a good storyline. And it has beggars who throw rocks at you if you try to climb away from them.

09-18-2010, 06:32 AM
It is worth it, especially for the story ideals. It's more of a philosophical approach.. Altair carried more radical ideas given his day and locale. It will also make some things mentioned in AC2 make more sense due to the fact that it IS the beginning of the story.

The mechanics of gameplay can be a little irritating from time to time (climbing, Altair's water solubility) and the beeping when the crusaders are on high alert can be repetitive and annoying, but otherwise, it's a good (relatively) chill back game. The fights are more involved from the AI too, so that makes things interesting as well.

09-18-2010, 01:25 PM
If you liked feather collecting in AC2, you'll love the flag collecting in AC.

Seriously though, I played AC2 first and it made a lot more sense (esp. the codex stuff) after playing AC.

You might find the much more rigid, repetitive structure of AC less engaging than AC2, some elements weirdly missing (no money, no shopping!) and some worth inclusion in AC3 (interrogation, eavesdropping, etc).

09-18-2010, 01:52 PM
intresting story, with great twists
good graphics

too much story
repetitive gameplay all around
too much desmond
tends to take too long to reach destination
crusaders are too jumpy even when there is no sign of danger
alltogether its fun it lookes quite good, its intresting when you get down to it. its a good buy, but be prepared for some teeth grinding. a LOT of teeth grinding.

09-18-2010, 02:07 PM
Along with everyone else on here, I highly recommend buying/playing AC1 before you play AC2. The Assasin's Creed series is one of the most storyline-heavy videogame series out there. And AC2 begins right where AC1 left off. So, playing the first one would save you some confusion in the second one. When AC2 dropped for the PC, I actually bought AC1(it's only about 20 bucks these days,) and played them back-to-back. Istarted playing AC1 again, because I wanted to do the same thing with Brotherhood: play thhrough AC1, AC2, then finish by the time Brotherhood came out.(I started before news of the PC version delay hit).

I think that AC1 is a pretty fun game. I think it's bad reputation is richly undeserved. I actually enjoyed all of the investigations you do before you can actually carry out your mission. It added to the feel of infiltrating a city, planning a mission out, striking, then disappearing.

09-18-2010, 04:53 PM
I started AC1 last summer, was completely loving it, then the repetition really kicked in around memory block 4.

After starting and completing AC2 over the last few months I've gone back to AC1 again and am enjoying it a lot more. I'm more used to the style of gameplay, I guess.

And the graphics are amazing. For a 3 year old game, it still looks incredible. I'm glad they ditched some of the repetitive assignments though. I only ever do the minimum needed to get to the assassination target sequence.

13 months between achievements - quite a gap! hehe

09-18-2010, 05:07 PM
In my opinion AC1 is even better than the second one. Assassins and Jerusalem and so on just fits better than assassins and italy. Of course it's a little bit monotonous but it hasn't disturbed me. The graphics are a lot better than the graphics in AC2 and the game is also more brutal.

The worst part about AC1 is the social stealth ... it doesn't work at all. All you can do is hiding in a group of monks.

09-18-2010, 08:39 PM
It's definitely not a poor mans AC2. It's an amazing game in it's own right. If you're only interested in gameplay you might be a bit disappointed as it sort of has a repetitive and non challenging mission structure (PC version is better in this regard). I'd actually say combat is better in the first game (more challenging and more combinations of moves) though.

Honestly, if you care about story at all, it's worth playing for that alone. Oh and you get to hear some more awesome set inspired tracks from Jesper Kyd. Basically, don't pass it up!

09-19-2010, 02:40 PM
AC1 has better:
-Stealth (mostly on account of the game actually asks that you use it, where as AC2 stealth is a bit more backseat)
-Escape sequences (You'll find that the Chase AI is much more relentless in how they chase you down, running becomes a tension filled escape where you are desperately looking for a split second opening to break the line of sight and hide, its overall more fun IMO and the parts where the entire city is on full alert make the player nervous of getting seen at any second)
-Story (The story will make the player think alot more about what the templars are doing and why they choose said methods, in AC2 the villains are a much more generic brand of evil, not to mention there is much more discover about whats happening in modern times, not to mention AC1 has a much bigger focus on the creed)
-Assassinations (AC1 Assassinations, with the exception of 2 of them, are much more free in the "kill your target your way" approach, as opposed the AC2s often over scripted approach of how things happen.
- Cities (Cities are much easier to navigate on your own and have a bit more variety because they try to pack more into smaller cities, but there is still a lot to discover youll be surprised what you don't find in areas you constantly pass through)

AC2 has:
better mission structure (AC1 was very repetitive in the non boss missions)
More tools (much more tools and ways to kill)

I actually replay AC1 much more than i do AC2, mostly because AC1 has much more focus on being an Assassin (sneaking into cities and learning about your target where you eventually take him down when he least expects it) and having a creed. where as AC2 is more of "Guy in white who murders 20 people at once and assassinates to satisfy his revenge"

09-19-2010, 06:26 PM
Oats is right, mostly.

There are missions in AC2 that allow the player to kill the target the way they choose. More than in AC1 even. In amount, that is; I'm not referring to a percentile.

Another thing AC1 had over AC2 was a complex conspiracy to uncover. AC2, at first, was simply, "Hey, we're going to kill the Medici. Jacopo, you go get everyone excited, we'll run up and stab them, and the kid will stay here to babysit the mercenaries." Then you go to Venice and it changes to "We don't like this Doge. We're going to kill this Doge. Silvio has the poison. Get on it, Carlo." It's almost as if Rodrigo is the only actual Templar and he's just manipulating influential families to expand templar power. In AC1 the conspiracy has depth, an actual plan, a purpose/motivation, reasonable goals, and an endgame. I won't summarize it so that you can discover it for yourself. I'm sure others who have experienced it will agree.

I don't understand entirely why some say they keep coming back to it. The story is its most redeeming quality in my eyes and even that didn't motivate me to play it more than the handful of times it took to memorize the general ideas. If it weren't so cheap to buy I would say rent it, but with the chance you will find yourself among those who keep coming back I recommend purchasing the game, the sound track, and maybe a t-shirt.

11-26-2010, 06:04 PM
Thanks to everybody for your input!
As you can see it took me 2 months to decide, purchase and finish AC1, quite a while.

For the good part:
* Altair is indeed more brutal and spectacular than Ezio, in spite of the more limited arsenal.
* AI is also more agressive and involved, which gives certain realism to the fights.
* The land/cityscape artwork is (at times) more beautiful than AC2, and the music more suitable and immersive.

For the bad part...

* if AC2 was a bit repetitive at times, AC1 is seriously boring.
* I was supposed to get enlightened about the whole assasin vs templar business, but I couldn't help getting the "psycho babble BS" feeling, especially when the game/characters don't know when to shut up. Makes me think of one review I just read about AC Brotherhood "carefully treading the fine line between a good mystery and overly obscure nonsense."
* It's hard not to find grinding irritating. And unlike some RPG games, grinding in AC isn't optional, nor does it increase your stats in any way. Each time I was attacked/followed (for no reason) by a pack of soldiers, I was thinking: "look guys, didn't you see what happened to the other 20 idiots I just trashed 50 meters down the road from here?".
* The developers lack of immagination is exasperating at times. While riding to Arsuf, you get attacked by 5 guys, then 10, then 20... they keep piling up enemies until it gets so crowded that you end up landing on some guy's sword whateever you do. After confronting Robert de Sable you return to Al Mualim, and guess what... more enemies, all the same, pulling the same old tricks.
Honestly I can't remember last time I was so eager to finish a game (and not primarily to learn the outcome).

If I were to give an overall score, I'm 40% glad and 60% ****ed off I played this game.
Maybe I'm getting too picky or too old for this sort of thing...

11-26-2010, 06:27 PM
I played AC1 and got stuck pretty early... Bought AC2 (I know, that's crazy) and actually AC2 taught me how to play AC1. Altair fights seems very mechanical to me, something I couldn't get when I tried first time, I assumed more AI (not sure why).
So finished AC2 and then went back and finished AC1. And I agree with the repetitiveness that gets boring at some point in Altair's missions but heck, I WILL come back to it very soon.

11-26-2010, 06:29 PM
It's a great game and the graphics are still excellent, one of the things that annoys me most strangely enough is the lack of ledge and aerial assassinations, it's so annoying to e hanging underneath a guard, used to being able to just pull them off the roof, hit 'x' a couple of times and realise 'damn, can't do that anymore http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif'

11-26-2010, 07:29 PM
I loved AC1. Still do. The difficulty curve compared to AC2 and especially AC:B, you really have to brace yourself for, however, ESPECIALLY before you unlock your counter kill ability. Get pinned by more than 3 guards and you're gonna have to bolt, probably.

11-26-2010, 09:56 PM
Absolutely play it. I think it's like 20 bucks at best buy now and it is just a great game. In my opinion, best game of the franchise so far in terms of the fun I had playing.