Banned
I said this in many threads before and I'll say it again. Ubisoft is never gonna make a game as good as AC1 or AC2 if they only decide to work one year on it.
AC1 took 4 years to make, and was fantastic. So good that it was considered a new generation game.
AC2 took 2-3 years, and was amazing.
ACB too about a year. Ubisoft knew that their game was becoming a top seller and rushed through it so they can make some money, but it was a downfall in the series.
ACR took it back up slightly, but still wasn't what we expected.
They NEED to take time with their games! Over wise, we won't ever be getting something as good as the first 2 games.
Senior Member
No they don't. This game did fine. The story rocked.
They gave fans what they wanted which was to see the end of Altair and Ezio and to see who he passed his line on with.
Desmond didn't move that much forward because SURPRISE it isn't AC3 yet.
They are obviously saving that. This was just something to keep fans fed and have fun and they did a wonderful job with it.
Did you complain this much when Vice City or San Andreas came out and did nothing to the formula save add a few tweaks?
Probably not because you were still young and didn't think to complain about such things yet.
Treat Revelations and Broterhood like those. Because that's what they said they'd be.
AC3 will be different, obviously.
Senior Member
Your opinion is not the standard Ubi is looking for.Originally posted by Sarari:
I said this in many threads before and I'll say it again. Ubisoft is never gonna make a game as good as AC1 or AC2 if they only decide to work one year on it.
AC1 took 4 years to make, and was fantastic. So good that it was considered a new generation game.
AC2 took 2-3 years, and was amazing.
ACB too about a year. Ubisoft knew that their game was becoming a top seller and rushed through it so they can make some money, but it was a downfall in the series.
ACR took it back up slightly, but still wasn't what we expected.
They NEED to take time with their games! Over wise, we won't ever be getting something as good as the first 2 games.
Senior Member
Member
Stop being such a hipster...AC 1 wasn't that good. The gameplay was pretty bad. Remember all that repetitive stuff? Sure the story was great, but cmon...Originally posted by Sarari:
I said this in many threads before and I'll say it again. Ubisoft is never gonna make a game as good as AC1 or AC2 if they only decide to work one year on it.
AC1 took 4 years to make, and was fantastic. So good that it was considered a new generation game.
AC2 took 2-3 years, and was amazing.
ACB too about a year. Ubisoft knew that their game was becoming a top seller and rushed through it so they can make some money, but it was a downfall in the series.
ACR took it back up slightly, but still wasn't what we expected.
They NEED to take time with their games! Over wise, we won't ever be getting something as good as the first 2 games.
Senior Member
Stop being such a hipster...AC 1 wasn't that good. The gameplay was pretty bad. Remember all that repetitive stuff? Sure the story was great, but cmon... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Originally posted by chizzy12:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Sarari:
I said this in many threads before and I'll say it again. Ubisoft is never gonna make a game as good as AC1 or AC2 if they only decide to work one year on it.
AC1 took 4 years to make, and was fantastic. So good that it was considered a new generation game.
AC2 took 2-3 years, and was amazing.
ACB too about a year. Ubisoft knew that their game was becoming a top seller and rushed through it so they can make some money, but it was a downfall in the series.
ACR took it back up slightly, but still wasn't what we expected.
They NEED to take time with their games! Over wise, we won't ever be getting something as good as the first 2 games.
The gameplay was exactly the same except you didn't have bombs and guns.
Sure, you had to pickpocket the same way and listen from benches to acquire info.
But the assassinations were all different and awesome. The story rocked. The gameplay was practically the same.
People don't have the patience to tail and beat someone up or listen on a bench three times before going to a totally different assassination.
Seems like a bit of braindeadism need explosions go byebyeBOOM.
Member
Banned
I agree with Recta. And I'm not a hipster cause I like it so much. It had the best story to me. The gameplay might have not been the best, but I guarantee you that when it first came out, you were in love with it. And screw the repetitiveness. I didn't care that much about it, because I was so into the story and fighting guards and what not.
People only started to realize it was repetitive when they played AC2. If it wasn't for that, people would still think it's awesome.
Also, they fighting in that game was the most difficult, even though it was still easy. I think you guys hate on the first one too much. Loosen up a bit
Member
Banned
LOL I remember my friend had AC1 in late 2008, and he came to my house to play it. He was in the kingdom and did some leaps of faiths and I thought it was so stupid lol. But I thought the graphics were incredible. I still hated it though.
My friend let me borrow it cause he didn't want it anymore, and one day I just popped it in and started playing it, and I fell in love lol. I think the reason I like it the most is because it was like the first incredible game I've played.
