HundredProofSam Posted May 6, 2011 Report Share Posted May 6, 2011 AC2 had Altair too, biggest WTF moment Exactly. And it was good that the Altair part was short-lived, because Ezio is a much better character. Plus, the AC1 game world wasn't nearly as exciting as the AC2 one, so the lesser they focus on the AC1 timeline, the better. Then again, sticking to Renaissance Italy just means its going to be AC2 and ACB all over again. It's a lose-lose, unless a major chunk plays out as Desmond, which I don't see happening, since they're projecting it as the end of Ezio's trilogy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HundredProofSam Posted May 6, 2011 Report Share Posted May 6, 2011 dont worry, have faith in ubi The last time I had faith in them, this happened Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nash Posted May 6, 2011 Report Share Posted May 6, 2011 I think more like Far Cry 2 happened. That game fkin sucked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tyler Posted May 6, 2011 Report Share Posted May 6, 2011 AC2 and AC:B were way better than expected. Especially Brotherhood, it looked like a shameless attempt at milking the franchise (which it was) but turned out to be the best game in the series so far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darkniks Posted May 6, 2011 Report Share Posted May 6, 2011 AC2 and AC:B were way better than expected. Especially Brotherhood, it looked like a shameless attempt at milking the franchise (which it was) but turned out to be the best game in the series so far. story wise it was but MP was but I hate story getting compromised for MP action Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
praveer Posted May 6, 2011 Report Share Posted May 6, 2011 Farcry 2 is still a unique game, there's nothing quite like it still. Its just that their vision was too ambitious...it just needed a bit more refining and it'd have been among the 'defining' games of this gen. It was a good game plagued by many minor flaws in the design. Hopefully they do that for Farcry 3. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tyler Posted May 6, 2011 Report Share Posted May 6, 2011 story wise it was but MP was but I hate story getting compromised for MP action I wasn't talking about the story but the gameplay itself was the best iteration of the series. The SP had so much to do. The missions and new gameplay elements were very well designed. Farcry 2 is still a unique game, there's nothing quite like it still. Its just that their vision was too ambitious...it just needed a bit more refining and it'd have been among the 'defining' games of this gen. It was a good game plagued by many minor flaws in the design. I liked it. My only problem with it was respawning checkpoints, otherwise it was a great game. The weapons were really cool and satisfying to use. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Boss Posted May 6, 2011 Report Share Posted May 6, 2011 but turned out to be the best game in the series so far. +1. I didn't expect it to be better, but they surprized me. They really are improving gameplay with every iteration in AC series. I am expecting Revealations to be even better. And about Far Cry 2, it had so much potential. But they ruined it like they ruined AC 1. I am sure that Far Cry 3 will be much better, the same way AC 2 was much better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nash Posted May 6, 2011 Report Share Posted May 6, 2011 +1. I didn't expect it to be better, but they surprized me. They really are improving gameplay with every iteration in AC series. I am expecting Revealations to be even better. And about Far Cry 2, it had so much potential. But they ruined it like they ruined AC 1. I am sure that Far Cry 3 will be much better, the same way AC 2 was much better. Yeah just like AC1, the repetition ruined the game for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nash Posted May 6, 2011 Report Share Posted May 6, 2011 Farcry 2 is still a unique game, there's nothing quite like it still. Its just that their vision was too ambitious...it just needed a bit more refining and it'd have been among the 'defining' games of this gen. It was a good game plagued by many minor flaws in the design. Hopefully they do that for Farcry 3. Unique in what way? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dylanjosh Posted May 6, 2011 Report Share Posted May 6, 2011 Plus, the AC1 game world wasn't nearly as exciting as the AC2 one, so the lesser they focus on the AC1 timeline, the better. Then again, sticking to Renaissance Italy just means its going to be AC2 and ACB all over again. It's a lose-lose, unless a major chunk plays out as Desmond, which I don't see happening, since they're projecting it as the end of Ezio's trilogy. Since when is Italy the same as Constantinople? +1, Play Brotherhood, then talk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
playstation Posted May 6, 2011 Report Share Posted May 6, 2011 Play Brotherhood, then talk well not played brotherhood but little bit of trailers and all have given me the idea....and so i feel it is giving me same vibes like what the AS:b images and all gave.....comeon want something different....cant have same thing over and over again . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CM Sunny Posted May 6, 2011 Report Share Posted May 6, 2011 well not played brotherhood but little bit of trailers and all have given me the idea....and so i feel it is giving me same vibes like what the AS:b images and all gave.....comeon want something different....cant have same thing over and over again . Its different Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Boss Posted May 6, 2011 Report Share Posted May 6, 2011 ^It is different. A lot has been improved over AC 2. It is like difference between UC2 and UC1. The add new varieties in combat, better graphics, more varied and sensible side missions, good travel options, and many more nicer features. If you plan to play future AC games, then I suggest you dont miss AC:B as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
playstation Posted May 6, 2011 Report Share Posted May 6, 2011 Its different ^It is different. A lot has been improved over AC 2. It is like difference between UC2 and UC1. The add new varieties in combat, better graphics, more varied and sensible side missions, good travel options, and many more nicer features. If you plan to play future AC games, then I suggest you dont miss AC:B as well. I am talking abt this game....i wished to see this being different in its setting and all.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
praveer Posted May 6, 2011 Report Share Posted May 6, 2011 Its different Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dylanjosh Posted May 6, 2011 Report Share Posted May 6, 2011 But it is different Alright at least wait for more screens to come out. Btw if you're planning to play this then don't skip ACB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
playstation Posted May 6, 2011 Report Share Posted May 6, 2011 But it is different Alright at least wait for more screens to come out. Btw if you're planning to play this then don't skip ACB ofcourse i wont...i am waiting for ACB with that Da vince code (ps3 version) to come here with price drop....like the GOTy edition came out here for Rs 1299... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarbonCore Posted May 6, 2011 Report Share Posted May 6, 2011 Since when is Italy the same as Constantinople? I don't think there's any "Italy" in AC2 or Brotherhood. I don't remember them saying that name, they just talk about individual cities and provinces and Roman empire as a whole, and Constantinople was part of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spindoctor Posted May 6, 2011 Report Share Posted May 6, 2011 I don't think there's any "Italy" in AC2 or Brotherhood. I don't remember them saying that name, they just talk about individual cities and provinces and Roman empire as a whole, and Constantinople was part of it. yep. there was no unified italy at the time... just provinces like napoli, firenze etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.