Is this game worth playing/revisiting today? has it aged well?

[Sodie Popping]

I remember playing this back on the ps3 and loving it however the more i desire to play it again the more i look at this game and not like the muddy look, the memories of uninteresting missions such as tail missions, a limited open world, basic combat and lack of stealth mechanics, so is it all just nostalgia or has this game aged as well (that goes for AC2 as well)

[BloodyMares]

I'd say Brotherhood has aged better than AC2.

[apterous]

still one of the best ac campaigns

[Cat on Linux]

story wise it's good. controls, camera are terrible, comparable to AC 1 and much worse than AC 2. too many timed missions that rely on you to navigate fast in buildings, when you try to run thru open door it thinks you want to grab a ledge. you can't make small jump ahead of yourself, if you need to jump one step down to reach the chest on tiny platform you will jump over it. clunky and cheap for a 3d game in series. Ubisoft has to learn something from their previous games but they never learned that lesson. They still make games with awful handicapped controls (The Division for example, abomination where you can't jump, can't run, crouch and much more). My point is, play it only if you can stomach bad controls and bad camera and won't be frustrated to replay chunks of the game because of flaws.