Indsendt: 28. februar
Adding to what most major commentors have posted, I feel that most do not mention or even consider the context of this game, in regards to its problems as well as achievements:
Most reviews are written several years post release, and it started to get the attention it deserved by the masses starting AC2, which was 2 years after release.
To start, this game is a very deep and plays magnificently with your imagination.
+ An audience which does not consider philosophical/theological as well as historical, anthropological and political matters will not get the full depth of this game. Since it will not resonate or inspire their imagination as much.
+ Supporting the previous point: the historical accuracy/plausibility is brilliant, considering how history is normally retold in the media.
+ In connection to the first point: The main character is not as bland as he seems (nor does any other character to be honest). We have seen multiple main characters in many other games that said and did less. Clearly this main character hasn't resonated with everyone in the audience, but not everyone is capable of understanding the depth behind his statements, the fact that they're at times laconic gives them more depth (however, not everyone perceives it so).
+ A great many small details which show the care of the development team (ex: the changing of the sword which you carry as the game progresses, this is not easily noticeable. Enemies that are not hit fatal blows will yell and bleed on the floor in agony, just as real sword battles should do. You can even end their misery. Ability to switch between weapons and fighting styles, very easily. Environmental ambience, architecture, music, character modelling, and actors. They thought of having the A.I react to you climbing, by throwing rocks at you. Having an enemy climb down a ladder while you are on it, they will kick you. Ability to push enemies off roofs to their deaths mid-combat. Tons of details)
+ A wide range of new inovations or smoother implementations of mechanics and aspects are presented in this game, which makes it more noteworthy. (i.e: freerunning, melee combat, horse riding)
- Game is made for consoles, so the PC version has more bugs and glitches. Full HD resolution is also unstable, which is why it is greyed out in the menu. I have replayed this game on xbox without facing any bugs, however I tried to revisit it on PC and it was a bit bothersome, especially with the game randomly crashing at times (since, I was trying to play it in full resolution.
+ The amazing quality of the graphics (in full resolution only), everytime I revisit or look again at this game, I am simply amazed by how visually appealing this game is.
-+ The repetitive format of the missions was for a reason, adding to the realism by needing to scout and survey before actually doing the mission. (This along with a few other small aspects from AC 1 and 2 are echoed but not well enough in AC:Unity). However, I agree that it negatively impacts that section of the game's replayability. +But these are optional and you are not forced to complete them.
-+ Hand to hand combat isn't that great either, the fact that the option is there is good though (however you are forced to use it in some side missions), but the ability to use it to throw enemies as a finisher is pretty cool. In AC 2 they address this melee problem and make it very desirable to use since you can start using any enemy weapon through this, also fun to watch disarms (I'm not sure about being able to kick your opponents when they're on the ground was added in AC 1 or 2, so I wont place it).
+-Not being able to swim isn't a negative, considering how much the developers worked on the huge range of things in the game. I think the reason they did this (choosing not to implement swimming) was because of the A.I, which might be why in the following ACs, the AI still cannot swim and die when they touch the water.
+ Adding to the previous note on Altair, his voice actor here is brilliant, unlike the later AC:Revelations actor who gives the young version of Altair a very American Hollywood accent. Then again, a big part of the original team, including Patrice Désilets (One of the main creators of the game) was forced to quit around the time of the development of AC:Brotherhood (which I consider the beginning of the winding road which sent the series to its demise, losing most of what it originally had, with whatever remaining as bare bones).
+ This game replies to real world context of a prejudiced audience and biased media. Which again, links to the first point regarding the historical links, philosophy, movement of people and ideas. I truly felt (and still do) that this game broke through multiple barriers.
To elaborate on this character's development, and compare him to the similar theme with other AC main characters. We see him in the beginning as brash, arrogant and impetuous. However, when faced with the reality (of whatever, the real world, 'the truth', responsibility, or you could consider all the above), they quickly mature and become the wise and calm sage-like individuals (or at least calmer, they're still human). This again links to the pursuit of knowledge, truth and philosophy, mentioned above. We see this pattern with all the main characters, but most quickly with Altair, which Ezio remarks on in admiration when he was discovering the past of his ancestor. This is why I liked AC:Revelations more in comparison to Brotherhood, since you get to see the older Altair as well as the older Ezio, with the similarities more explicitly shown, and one of the many patterns of humans and individuals is shown, simply put as 'the repetition of history', which is another major theme in the series.
And replying to 3 unique criticisms, which I felt rated the game on idealistic, current (2014-2015) expectations:
-Little Interaction with crowds: What? This game putting in a huge and vibrant crowd, which is pretty amazing considering its pioneering position. In the sequel which is released 2 years later, they make it possible to hide within crowds. In this game however, you see early mechanics of such, ex: sitting on benches between people, using monks to hide between them as your crowd to blend in.
-Emptiness between cities: this “emptiness” was quite a rich area, which showed small farming towns, with farmers, military outposts, trade checkpoints, patrols, rich and diverse landscape of the Levant, with mountains and open fields. It was actually quite impressive, and a great way to explore the new horse riding system they implemented.
-The cliff-hanger ending: This game was released as simply “Assassin’s Creed” and not “Assassin’s Creed: Arrival”. The game needed an ending which showed the continuity of the story and history, that you (as desmond) are nothing special, and that you are simply a piece of a long line of others like you. And at the time of the release, it was not certain that they would or would not make a sequel, which is why they left it with a possibly open ended ending so to be able to carry on from it. I remember it was amazing to see such an ending and I truly hoped to see a continuation, which was very well done with the elaboration regarding the First Civilization and conspiracy theories (I can’t say the same about the later conspiracy puzzles and such, which for example: was noted in Brotherhood for its sub-par quality in comparison to 2, which is why they completely removed those conspiracy puzzles).
Thus in context, this game did so much that was right for its time, that it released a very long and drawn out series because of it. A very similar comparison is with CoD 1 and its later successors.
In summary, this is one of the games that I would consider well made and it doesn't deserve the 7/10s that have been posted by so many others. This game truly deserves a 9.5/10 considering the huge step it to it took in so many aspects.