Sign on Options
Theme:

An Assassin's Revelation

How the latest game in the Assassin's Creed series has affected one fan's hopes for its future.

Assassin's Creed

Back in 2009, GameSpot sent more than a few readers into a tizzy when we named Demon's Souls game of the year over the universally acclaimed Uncharted 2. That decision was never an easy one. Both games were superb experiences. Both were the sort of games you could praise for hours on end without running out of steam. And neither was my favorite game of 2009.

No, that honor went to Assassin's Creed II, the game that cemented my love affair with the series. I had a terrific time with the original Assassin's Creed back in 2007, but like so many others, I knew in the back of my mind that this game's best quality was its potential for what might come next.

What that first game did right, it did exceptionally well. That feeling of boundless momentum as you leaped across rooftops and scaled entire buildings, the sinister joy of stalking your target, planning a kill, and executing it to perfection. It had a style and flair all its own, but it hadn't yet translated that into an identity.

With Assassin's Creed II, the folks at Ubisoft Montreal did just that. Here was a sequel that took the core elements from the first game--the stylish movement, the thrill of a perfectly executed assassination--and expanded on them in just about every conceivable way, thereby establishing a distinct personality in the process.

One of the many features that made Assassin's Creed II great.

Whereas the first game suffered from repetition and a pervasive feeling of deja vu, the sequel gave us a feature-rich open world brimming with reasons to go exploring. I can't tell you how much time I spent searching for glyphs, trekking through those beautifully designed underground tombs, or simply wandering the streets and rooftops looking for historical landmarks. If Assassin's Creed gave you the ability to run and jump like a maniac unconcerned with gravity, then Assassin's Creed II gave you a reason to do so.

Assassin's Creed II also gave me a reason to care. It presented the debut of a new protagonist, the young Florentine nobleman Ezio Auditore da Firenze. Ezio began the story as an affable ladies' man in the carefree haze of youth, but his life took an abrupt turn for the worse when several family members were publicly hanged as a result of some sort of political conspiracy. This sent Ezio and what was left of his family into hiding, which then began his search for answers and vengeance.

If Assassin's Creed gave you the ability to run and jump like a maniac, then Assassin's Creed II gave you a reason. It was a story anchored in universal themes: the desire to protect one's family and our inclination to return the favor against those who've wronged us. Unlike Assassin's Creed's stoic and mysterious protagonist Altair Ibn-La'Ahad, we were given plenty of reasons to empathize with Ezio. He was more than a ruthless killing machine: he was a guy with a family trying to figure out his place in the world…who also happened to be very good at stabbing people in the face.

Assassin's Creed II was a remarkable achievement--my favorite game of the year by a pretty comfortable margin. After all was said and done, I couldn't wait to see what Ubisoft had in store for Assassin's Creed III.

Well, that was silly of me, wasn't it? You know how this story turns out.

Rather than wait a few years and give fans another leap forward on the level of Assassin's Creed II, Ubisoft took the Activision route and turned the franchise into an annualized series. 2010 continued Ezio's story with Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood, and 2011 did the same with Assassin's Creed: Revelations.

I don't know whether I'd consider either of those games full-on sequels. To me, they occupy some nebulous space between sequel and expansion pack, adding layers of new gameplay mechanics and story continuation without doing much to the core elements that have made Assassin's Creed one of my favorite franchises of the past decade. I loved Brotherhood, and I liked Revelations, but neither one of them hit me with the same impact as Ezio's debut back in 2009.

And that's been bothering me. With each successive game--particularly in the case of Revelations--it feels like the series is veering further and further from what I've enjoyed most about it. There's a gradual loss of focus, a series morphing into a pastiche of new ideas and experiments that sometimes work but more often don't. I wouldn't go so far as to call the games bloated, but I've certainly had to work that much harder to be the assassin that I enjoy being.

Brotherhood did a lot of great things, but managing assassins didn't pull me in.

With Brotherhood, it was more of a hint of things to come. Its failures were largely offset by some genuinely great elements, like a terrific multiplayer component, even better underground caverns, and an improved economy that fixed a glaring issue in ACII where you literally earned more money than you could spend. But the system of recruiting and managing assassins fell flat with me, failing to establish any meaningful connection to Ezio's immediate surroundings. Renovating landmarks lacked the practical value of renovating shops, and the various Da Vinci war-machine missions were a weirdly inconsistent exercise in frantically learning new control schemes just in time to not need them anymore.

I've had to work that much harder to be the assassin that I enjoy being. This past year's Assassin's Creed: Revelations lacks Brotherhood's flashes of brilliance; it refines a few elements here and there but fails to bring forward any meaningful contributions to the formula. There's really nothing bad about what Revelations introduces to the series, but so much of it feels unnecessary and incongruous with the rest of the game.

The den defense sections, with Ezio placing troops while standing as still as a statue, couldn't be further removed from what I love about freely darting across rooftops. Bombcrafting makes for an interesting diversion, but like calling in assassin strikes, it's a superfluous aid in a franchise where combat is already incredibly forgiving. And then there are the Desmond sections, which are a confusing mix between enjoyable character exposition and clumsy, bewildering puzzle platforming.

All too often, Revelations feels like one missed opportunity after another layered into an increasingly massive web of distractions. On top of that, Ezio's role in the story has been reduced to a vehicle for exploring more obtuse historical secrets and political intrigue. He's as likable and charming as ever when the story allows for it, but the bulk of the game doesn't really feel like his journey. That personal connection I felt toward him in ACII is gone; now, he's more like Atlas bearing the weight of the ever-growing Assassin's Creed canon, one pained grunt at a time.

I'm sure Revelations, if viewed in a bubble, is a highly enjoyable experience.The core of the series that I love so much--the feeling of effortlessly jumping across rooftops and stalking targets for the perfect strike--remains perfectly intact. It just feels ignored and a bit dusty. Instead, you have all of these different elements swirling around that core that fail to really move the series forward, and the end result is a game that feels redundant and oftentimes unnecessary.

…like Atlas bearing the weight of the ever-growing Assassin's Creed canon, one pained grunt at a time. And now, thanks to the level of honesty you can only find in corporate earnings calls, we know that yet another Assassin's Creed game is on the way later this year. All the rumors suggest that there will be a brand new character in a new historical setting, but I'd be lying if I said there wasn't a faint worry in the back of my mind that the series has established a certain trajectory with the past few games and that this next game will only continue it.

It's an odd position to be in. I love this series like few others, and in spite of my issues with Revelations, I still managed to have a good time with the game. But it definitely feels like I'm approaching a crossroads here. I can easily see "good time" eventually becoming "guilty pleasure."

So here's what I'm hoping to see. I want to see the next game come along and floor me with its fresh new take on the Assassin's Creed formula. I want to see a game that builds on the core of the series in a meaningful way, bells and whistles be damned. I want to see a game that remembers its identity and builds on that.

The hook blade did a little bit to liven up your movements, but I'd loved to have seen it do more.

I think there are a few ways that this can happen. First and foremost: Ubisoft Montreal has to take every last advantage of the new historical setting. Use the new timeline and environment to build on the way players move throughout the gameworld. The feeling of momentum and acrobatic wizardry is without a doubt the best part of this series, but it has to evolve.

Ubisoft Montreal has to take every last advantage of the new historical setting. The hookblade was a good start. Make sure this new era means new technology is at our disposal for maneuvering through the gameworld. And make sure the new city's architecture affects our traversal as well. If it's something like 19th-century New York City and the streets are much wider than Rome or Istanbul, give us a fun new toy for making those massive leaps across rooftops. Let us hitch a ride on trolley cars or zip across power and telegraph cables. Hell, set the game during winter time and let us slide across ice-covered rooftops.

Outside of evolving how we move through the world, give us new reasons to explore that gameworld. The scattered Animus fragments in Revelations didn't do it for me because they were tied to those awkward Desmond sections, but the glyphs in ACII led us to delightfully ridiculous puzzles which themselves unlocked another chunk of of that excellent Eden video. Build on that with new incentives to explore the city and attach them with meaningful rewards.

And, finally, give us a story anchored by a character worth caring about, and don't let his or her personality be overshadowed by the canon. Ezio is one of my favorite video game characters of the past decade, but his role in the story seemed to grow smaller and smaller with each successive installment as those games focused on diving into ever-deepening pools of mystery and conspiracy. Start off by giving us a reason to care about this person, and let that personality shine even as the character unravels the bizarre secrets of the war between Templars and Assassins.

I have no doubt that the team at Ubisoft Montreal is capable of breathing new life into this series. Anyone who has played one of these games before knows the artistic talent and sheer attention to detail that goes into creating an Assassin's Creed game. But I'm truly hoping that the team uses this next game, with its new setting and characters, as an opportunity to return its attention to the core of Assassin's Creed and really move that part of the game forward. Forget the menu-based strategy minigames and tower-defense mechanics. Remember what made this series stand out in the first place and give those elements the update they deserve.

323 Comments

  • Gladiator_Sofi

    Posted Jan 13, 2012 12:16 am GMT

    I'm Not Asking For Much With AC III, I Just Want To Feel What I Felt When I Played AC II The First Time. That Great Feeling You Get When You're Playing an Amazing Epic Game. So I'm Not Asking UBISOFT For Any Specifics or Anything, I Just Wanna Have That Feeling Again.

  • princeraj1

    Posted Jan 10, 2012 8:10 pm GMT

    Assassin's creed series is the best game series ever.It implimented a new graphics and combo style.New dressing style,New killing method,and a new theme of story like Templar and assassin fight,tons of features.I can guess its developers worked how much...

  • kserpen

    Posted Jan 10, 2012 3:36 pm GMT

    I live in Istanbul, i read a lot of history. I am interested in Alamut Castle and the real stories of Assasin's and Templars and so on... I was amazed by the execution of AC serious so far... Questions about the end of the world, references to ancient knowledge, forcing people to read about what they are playing all the time. It was thrilling, the doze was perfect. However I am totally disappointed by the execution of Revelations... They've downgraded the guy who made the first map of South America in the world, PIRI REIS, to a mere bomb expert...

    They've downgraded Suleyman The Magnificent, the Sultan who was about to conquer all Europe in his time, to a weak young guy, whom Ezio met on his travel to Istanbul... I was seriously excited when i heard Revelations were gonna take place in the golden time of Ottoman Empire, in and around Istanbul. But my excitement turned into serious disappointment because i faced a real shallow game. UBISOFT, turned this great venture into a crappy series... I hope people who are preparing AC3 read the comments here and stops insulting the brains and intellect of people... And they must also remember PS3 and other mediums are now GLOBAL mediums, effecting and being followed by millions of people worldwide.

  • Slyfur

    Posted Jan 10, 2012 2:01 pm GMT

    I have to say I'm a complete Assassin's Creed fangirl and refuse to see any flaws in the series... but I admit that I agree with this. Each game still draws me in, but just... less and less each time (though that doesn't lessen my enjoyment of them). I did love ACII and Brotherhood/Revelations have both been amazing games, and although I disagree with some small things here, the big picture is something I agree with.

    To get to the point, I'd love to see Assassin's Creed III return to it's roots, so to speak. *cough* And more Desmond would be appreciated. *cough, cough*

  • TommyT456

    Posted Jan 10, 2012 12:41 pm GMT

    @DoubleclickTF I must admit I've not played Revelations yet so the areas you mentioned the game lacks in in particular weren't considered in my comment but the fact that I haven't played it yet probably backs up your hopes that this incarnation doesn't do as well as previous games, moving Ubisoft to put more work in next time. I will play the game when the price drops but the reason I didn't do so immediately was because of Brotherhood. It was still a great game and lived up to the Assassins Creed name but wasn't exactly a huge leap forward from number 2. That's why I am thinking that maybe Ubisoft have pretty much taken the series as far as it can go on this generations platforms. And when I heard that Revelations was even less of an improvement, or even possibly a back pedal, then I decided to wait for a price drop. This is happening a lot though, even with games that are going to go down in legend as classics. For instance Uncharted 3 was an incredible game, but wasn't a huge leap forward from UC2 simply because I think we have reached the potential of today's consoles. If there was more to give then if anyone could manage it Naughty Dog would have done but although they gave us a masterpiece it was still based on all the gameplay mechanics and level design of the 2nd game. Not a bad thing when the formula is nigh on perfect but still I think the time has come for a new console announcement and low and behold since my last comment we have been promised such a thing

  • mtbrdude87

    Posted Jan 10, 2012 5:05 am GMT

    AC2 is the only game that I've gotten all the achievements for (on 360). I beat it 100% in about 2 weeks. I've had revelations since release and have barely touched it. It just doesn't suck me in the same way AC2 did.

  • ztg360

    Posted Jan 9, 2012 5:47 pm GMT

    This guy feels exactly like I feel I was simply amazed at ac2 I couldn't get enough I felt like it was the best game of that year and thus was quite annoyed at the fact that demon souls got the nod. I enjoyed brotherhood and revelations is solid just not amazing but I want to get that feeling I got with ac2 the long hours spent in it which seemed to go by all too quickly, the actual attachment to the protagonist and his cohorts, the rich story that boiled up into an exhilarating climax, and finally the near perfect gameplay that kept me coming back for more and more.

  • DoubleclickTF

    Posted Jan 9, 2012 4:54 pm GMT

    @LEALR - I like the 100% sync, as long as it's a restriction that makes you breathe a sigh of relief when you achieve it. It's all the ones in Revelations that add nothing to the fun that annoyed me, or don't fit the reason that the protagonist is exceptionally heroic and therefore did it *this* way. Too many in ACR were just token conditions, like they'd forgotten what the justification and design ideas behind the sync were. They were more of a memory test, to see if you'd recall the shopping list of 5 guys you had to kill with [weapon x].

  • persianlink

    Posted Jan 9, 2012 3:46 pm GMT

    Every time I hear Iron by Woodkid, every time I watch the trailer, I remember the experience, the very feeling of being an assassin. Family, Justice, Honor. These are the values guiding my blade.
    AC:R does not live up to the high hopes put into it at all. In fact, it was the first game which I simply but down in the middle of the story. I couldn't take it anymore. For two month already, I refuse to continue past chapter 5. More and more, I listen to Iron. The only thing about AC:R that really gives me the feeling of being an assassin.
    Another point that shows how Ubisoft turns AC into another yearly industry cash in are the different Collector's Editions. I got them all. From ACII Master Edition, which had a beautiful Ezio figurine, a tin box and artwork, to the AC:B Codex Edition with the nice chest and the codex finally down to the Animus Edition, which only had the Encyclopedia, it appears to me that we get less and less value for the same price every year. But that's just a materialistic indicator showing what we know already about the series: It's going down.
    So, I guess I'll finally turn my back on the series and confine myself to Parkour, Martial Arts and engineering hidden blades in real life.AC just can't delive anymore.

  • Bensonator

    Posted Jan 9, 2012 3:17 pm GMT

    This could be the most honest & true thing I've read on Gamespot. ACII was the first game I ever played on the PS3 and fell in love with it. I later played the first game and even though it was a lot more restrictive than ACII I still loved the experience. Brotherhood just didn't do it enough for me to make me rush out to get Relevations and as my best friend put it 'How many roof tops can you run across before you get fed up' - I agree that they should have kept 'the same trajectory' and done a new time & setting and put out AC3 and not just new idea's in the same setting. I'll get Revelations on the cheap and see what come next to decide if this is an amazing series or just 2 original fantastic games that were squeezd dry

  • fullxtent

    Posted Jan 9, 2012 1:48 pm GMT

    to me, assassin's Creed has become the Call of Duty of action adventure games. I mean I would play it, but they are getting less like new games, and more like very large DLC.

  • joeyd66

    Posted Jan 9, 2012 12:44 pm GMT

    Somebody from Ubisoft, read this article and look at everybody who feels the same. They encapsulate perfectly what I love about assassins creed into their online game (I am an assassin, that is my target. Prepare to be unexpectedly owned), so why are they reverting the games culture when everybody loves what they do already

  • endorbr

    Posted Jan 9, 2012 11:52 am GMT

    It's called jumping the shark and I think most people are just too hopeful and absorbed in what they do like about the series to admit that this series did it early. With each incarnation the games move further away from the elements that made it what it was to begin with, just becoming any other yearly industry cash in disguised in an Assassin's Creed skin to keep luring fans back.

  • rpg-god

    Posted Jan 9, 2012 11:37 am GMT

    i'm glad to see that i'm not the only one who feels this away about the A.C series

  • Aragorn931

    Posted Jan 9, 2012 9:05 am GMT

    Congratulations @shaunmc since you captured all the main points most people are complaining about. Just imagin the "planning the assassination" mechanics of the first game with the variety of missions from AC2 and you can definitely see an amazing game. They should also try to make the combat more challenging since after AC2, making a single kill meant killing everyone else in a chain.

  • TZN83

    Posted Jan 9, 2012 8:35 am GMT

    Captured my sentiments perfectly Shaun. Thank you.

    Can someone please forward this to the the next games' developers?

  • msz006c1

    Posted Jan 9, 2012 8:25 am GMT

    Assassin's at Chicago mob war time... That would be fun...

  • fursecu

    Posted Jan 9, 2012 8:16 am GMT

    you definitely wrote the words i was thinking! superb! and can't wait for the next AC. Gamespot, please write more fan-articles

  • LEALR

    Posted Jan 9, 2012 8:14 am GMT

    I wish the "100 % sync" would stop. For me it takes away the freedom of thinking and gameplay.

  • allnyda

    Posted Jan 9, 2012 8:10 am GMT

    I am one of those AC fans that was permanently hooked by the end of AC2 and during Brotherhood found myself less enthused by the series. Although Revelations and Brotherhood were good and just as beautiful at their predecessors they were certainly lacking something to really pull me in and get me excited like the first two. As a fan of the series I would love to see Ubisoft Montreal breathe life into the series to make me say "Man you have to play AC3! I can't even explain it but you MUST get it". It would be interesting to see them go beyond the Middle Ages and mix into Asia with the Timurid Dynasty if they want to stick with an incremental timeline. Honestly ever since the first AC I’ve wanted to see Ubisoft find a way to weave a storyline that bounces between the far past (with swords, crossbows, and the like) and a more modern past maybe a century or so before Desmond’s time (with modern weaponry and all new techniques). I haven’t yet pictured in my head how it would work out but I’d love to see something like that where more layers to the history of the Assassins Creed can be revealed and simultaneously added. If anyone could make it work it would be team Ubisoft Montreal. Whatever comes down the pipeline I really hope it can renew the insane infatuation I had after AC2. fingers crossed

  • turok0

    Posted Jan 9, 2012 8:06 am GMT

    Assasin's Creed sucks. btw, GOTY 2011 = Dark Souls

  • oldschoolvandal

    Posted Jan 9, 2012 7:41 am GMT

    Outstanding article! Way to go GS!
    Shaun McInnis has hit home in every comment and has translated gamers (and specially fan) worries.

    Hopefully we can make enough noise to make Ubisoft take a step back and realize that if they really keep releasing the same game again and again the series will be soon forgoten.

  • decebal

    Posted Jan 9, 2012 7:11 am GMT

    the templars and the assassins most likely were involved in ww2.

  • decebal

    Posted Jan 9, 2012 7:11 am GMT

    ww2 would be cool.

  • xXl_z3r0_lXx

    Posted Jan 9, 2012 6:54 am GMT

    Really hope Ubi reads this article, i loved Brotherhood, and Revelations was kind of fun, but i hated maintaining my assassin cities. It felt like a chore. I hope ACIII does have a new character, and that they cram close to as many IMPROVEMENTS as ACII did to the series. Don't get me wrong, ACR has good multiplayer, and the story is fun when it lets itself be. I just hope that in the end they decide not to annualize it in the end. I have really loved AC series but i hope they return to what made it so fun.

  • wwlettsome

    Posted Jan 9, 2012 5:53 am GMT

    Totally agree with this article. AC II was a perfect blend of story and game play. Even parts like renovating shops and upgrading your town fit in very well with the rest of the game. Brotherhood was a good add on but the various assassin development felt like an interesting idea that was rushed into the game with bad execution. And remodeling landmarks didn't feel like something that Enzio would need/want to do. Haven't played Revelations yet but I'm guessing it will be similar...more new ideas that don't add to the game and don't really feel like they belong.

    Don't mind seeing new ideas added to the series but let's not add them without more thought about what they are really adding to the game.

  • sayondas4

    Posted Jan 9, 2012 5:35 am GMT

    ac 2 had a marvelous balance between desmond's story, ezio's personal story, templars,etc...and each sequence was like a concluding chapter in a book,but in brotherhood the sequences suddenly ends..

  • ChiefFreeman

    Posted Jan 9, 2012 5:10 am GMT

    I lost interest in AC after part 2. Yearly installments of once big games remove the luster and excitement.

  • Vikramaditya_80

    Posted Jan 9, 2012 3:30 am GMT

    I completely agree with the article. AC brotherhood was good but slightly disappointing compared to AC II. and after reading the reviews for AC revelations I was not keen on buying it especially since there are so many awesome games this year. I hope they read this article and work towards some of the points.

  • xsonicchaos

    Posted Jan 9, 2012 2:29 am GMT

    i loved all the AC games equally. well, some more equally than others (intended), but i'm somehow glad it's over with Ezio. I was getting tired just looking at his tired old face. and that began with Brotherhood. i'm sorry you superfans, that's how i feel. and also i have the feeling that Embers is not just a wink, but a big arrow sign pointing to the next path. i'm not gonna tell you, cause it seems people just like to make up their own stories, just watch the damn thing.
    what i want from the next chapter? even more and varied arhitecture, more space, and a less overpowered assassin. more focus on the protagonist and main characters, more varied and expanded missions and story. also a good balance between rpg and action-adventure, unlike the last two games in the series. more damn puzzles.

  • kattiavinash

    Posted Jan 9, 2012 1:51 am GMT

    not bad

  • eliebaz

    Posted Jan 9, 2012 1:46 am GMT

    I've loved assassins creed up to brotherhood where i spent most my time playing the multiplayer and everytime i come to buy revelations i feel there are so much better games to buy and feel as if i need to buy it rather than actually want to, to enhance my collection of titles in my drawer but i do hope they make AC3 soon with new mechanics this review was spot on

  • awwitz

    Posted Jan 9, 2012 1:32 am GMT

    cool assessment. Ubisoft should definitely read this.

  • Link1218

    Posted Jan 9, 2012 12:58 am GMT

    Speak it man!

  • Brutenuke

    Posted Jan 9, 2012 12:18 am GMT

    i know world war 2 has been done but i think putting a creed twist on it might make it great

  • Brutenuke posted Jan 9, 2012 12:11 am GMT (does not meet display criteria. sign in to show)

    Brutenuke

    Posted Jan 9, 2012 12:11 am GMT (hide)

    i want to see Desmond fight nazis in world war two

  • Bhargav_pvs

    Posted Jan 8, 2012 11:53 pm GMT

    Altair the master.......

  • Arsyad00

    Posted Jan 8, 2012 10:07 pm GMT

    Heil Altair

  • Kabals

    Posted Jan 8, 2012 7:58 pm GMT

    I simply ignored the Desmond missions. As for the rest of Revelations, I thought it had the best story of the three. Ezio's first game, the story got away from us at certain points and while Brotherhood was more concise, Revelations had an emotional anchor to Ezio that I didn't feel as strongly in the other two. Maybe it was because he was older; whatever the case, I found his story much more emotional.

  • rltw123

    Posted Jan 8, 2012 7:31 pm GMT

    Amen to that. I loved ACI and II but it seems to be getting a little dumbed down now, and I feel like i'm doing chores in the games like running all over and defending dens and sending other assassins on missions etc.

  • tonyhawksP8

    Posted Jan 8, 2012 7:21 pm GMT

    I still say AC1 is the best without it every other AC wouldn't exist.

  • Blakeandjake

    Posted Jan 8, 2012 6:30 pm GMT

    @Blballerboy

    Don't expect them to wait a "Few years". After all, the game wil supposedly end in 2012, at the "end of the world", and they want the release to correspond with that date in the real world. And I agree with that, it's interesting for gamers, making it a good marketing technique. BUT, what they did with Revelations and Brotherhood was bad marketing. Brotherhood should have been a massive update/DLC to ACII, not its own game, then Revelations should have been its own game, and they would have had an extra year to make it a good game, then ACIII in 2012.

  • Blballerboy

    Posted Jan 8, 2012 5:36 pm GMT

    @9Dguy So to sum up what the article said, AC is turning into COD, and Ubisoft need to step back, wait a few years and GIVE US AC3. Im so happy I didnt buy revelations, t was a good RENT, but not worth \$60. The SAD thing is that no, Ubi is not saving resources for AC3, they dont have some team of developers thats been hidden away working on AC3 for the past 2 years, and it clear that this year were going to get the same BS. But like I read a couple of moths ago that a member posted on the forums "Whats the point if millions of people are just gonna keep buying it every year regardless".

  • Gen_Belisarius

    Posted Jan 8, 2012 4:51 pm GMT

    I would've enjoyed Revelations much more if my favorite historical civilization didn't get beaten and abused by the writers. RIP Basileia ton Rhomaion

  • 9Dguy

    Posted Jan 8, 2012 4:45 pm GMT

    I agree with every word of the article but at the same time I'm not exactly worried. The past two AC games haven't been made by the same development team that AC1 and AC2 were made by and undoubtedly they were saving up resources for AC3 anyway. This next game is gonna be a full sequel and I'll be shocked if it doesn't deliver.

  • MrScoobJr

    Posted Jan 8, 2012 4:39 pm GMT

    Now I don't know if it is just me, but it seems like Brotherhood and Revelations were more multiplayer expansion pack than sequels, and to me it seems like the bigger multiplayer becomes, the less Ubisoft puts into the story.

  • onthego88

    Posted Jan 8, 2012 4:32 pm GMT

    You sir, are absolutely correct. Milking is a term I associate more with AC nowadays.

  • DoubleclickTF

    Posted Jan 8, 2012 3:52 pm GMT

    @TommyT456 - It's true that they kind of made a rod for their own backs with ACII, but would you not agree that other things have slipped? I've played every game more than once, and until Revelations I could spend a little time examining the architecture to figure out better ways to approach a mission, with a different strategy each time. There were occasions during some missions (tomb missions especially) where I'd have to think for a while to figure out the next move. Revelations is significantly dumbed down: no puzzles, no politics, no difficulty. I take your point - "they've made a lot of money, so who can blame them?" - but they made a lot of money out of a brave, well-crafted series. If, as I suspect, Revelations does poorly then I hope they take note of this and remember that games should provide exhilaration and a sense of accomplishment, not an easy route to the end of a story.

  • TommyT456

    Posted Jan 8, 2012 2:57 pm GMT

    Ubisoft have been undone by their own greatness. By that I mean that it seems with AC2 they had reached the pinnacle of what assassins creed could become on this generation of consoles. If that is the case it was quite an accomplishment reaching a consoles potential that early on, and although we always want companies to be striving to create the best games they can, if they manage this then where do they go? If anything they should have waited longer between releases to allow time for technological advancement and for more ideas to flow rather than creating sequels so quickly that no time had passed for any kind of real improvement. But then again they have made alot of money with each release so who can blame them. This is why I am looking forward to the new consoles because although there is clearly life left in the current platforms I also think that alot of the best series have got into a rut because the best developers out there that are responsible for the best games series have the ability to have already reached the consoles potential and so they have gotten stuck in a rut. And it has become to easy for companies to rely on sales without much innovation, we need new consoles in the next couple of years to freshen and shake things up

  • RuthlessRich

    Posted Jan 8, 2012 2:43 pm GMT

    I agree with every word in this article

Subscribe to GameSpot's YouTube Channel