It’s fair to say that the Assassin’s Creed IP is unlike any other franchise in gaming at the moment. The series takes you back to times and places that no other series can offer and, to be honest, I’m a massive fan. The fourth game in the main story line, Assassin’s Creed: Revelations was released just under a month ago [at the time of writing]- and I was incredibly excited.
The game takes place in a magnificently recreated 16th century Constantinople (now Istanbul) and continues and concludes the stories of both Ezio Auditore and Altair Ibn La ’Had, the stars of the previous games.
The game does well to continue the magic of the previous instalments with some fantastic set pieces, interesting characters (and accents), engaging gameplay and a genuinely exciting multiplayer. However there are some flaws in this game which I cannot ignore, most of which are linked to the story and pacing of the game.
I’ll start off with the good, of which, to be fair to Ubisoft Montréal, there is a great deal. As with all the games in the series Revelations’ gameplay is great; the controls feel tighter and more slick, and no game makes you feel quite as badass as one in which you race across rooftops in a far off land.
The combat itself is still really enjoyable, there have been a tweaks since the previous instalment, notably some awesome brand new finishing moves and a switch of focus to the counter-kills that populated AC 2, as opposed to the button bashing style of Brotherhood. For me this was a welcome surprise and one that I was glad to see, as the play-style of ACB didn’t feel that comfortable for me.
The platforming and free-running mechanics have not changed significantly, they just feel more fluid and more fun; this is mainly due to the introduction of the hookblade. This addition allows you to glide between many of Constantinople’s buildings of special zip lines, potentially assassinating guards as you do- the hookblade also allows for an improved version of Brotherhood’s long jump. These small differences just expand the action slightly, giving the controls some fun variation.
A brand new addition to the Assassin’s Creed formula is the introduction of the first person, puzzle platformer sections known as ‘Desmond’s Journey’. The sections are entirely optional but I highly recommend them. They go a long way to expanding the usually fairly boring character of Desmond; expanding on a lot of little hints that we got in the first game.
The sections are not particularly challenging but certainly offer an entirely new experience in an Assassin’s Creed game.
The game looks fantastic, straight up. I’ve long considered the AC franchise overlooked when it comes to graphical prowess but they always seem to deliver real flair and style to their locations, the individual colour schemes of each game and the overall sense of place that the art style creates has always astounded me. This is maintained in Revelations as Constantinople is beautifully rendered in a blend of sepia and purple hues, the city is teeming with life and it is easy to be swept up in the hustle and bustle of the games many civilian-based side quests. Many of the set-pieces look phenomenal.
There are less large linear dungeons than previous games but the ones that are there are often breath-taking, as are almost all of the set-pieces- the blazing dock in particular stands out in my mind. Characters look great, and the attention to detail in things such as costumes and weapons is consistently impressive.
Finally I come to it, writing what I’ve dreaded writing from the moment I finished the main storyline of this oh-so-close game. My big problem with the game lies in its pacing, especially the latter quarter of the game. I say that, although even THAT I can’t be sure of, as I didn’t even realise the game was close to ending until I saw the final epic cinematic scenes. There was no sense of progression through the story, I had no clue that the final battle(s) were round the corner or that this would be the last hour I played as Ezio.
This problem, in my opinion, comes from what’s a very cloudy story- it lacks the direction and focus that drove the narrative of the previous games, I had no real clue who the main enemy or faction I was fighting was, or what their aims were. I’m not saying that all games need to have a clear, linear structure- but the formulaic nature of Assassin’s Creed kind of does, it encourages you to explore the rest of the world and become drawn in to the story more.
This was lacking in Revelations and so I never really connected with it, Ezio’s final story that is; Altair’s segments were different, and truly great. This wouldn't be so annoying for me if I didn’t really enjoy the AC series’ stories and characters. All that said, the very final moments of the game were well executed and were fitting endings to these characters that I love so much- I just wish I’d had one last great adventure with them.
Roll on the next game then, hopefully a clean slate will regenerate a series that, whilst still holding much appeal, does seem to be beginning to drag. 7.5/10
LAG - "The video game industry is flooded by long running sequels. It takes only one look at the Wii’s library to realize great intellectual properties are a rare sight to see. That is why this week’s top ten focuses on those series that only just began this generation. It doesn’t have to be entirely original, but it cannot be an extension of a series from previous generations. That basically means Mario Galaxy and Modern Warfare does not count as “new”. The series can be on Wii, PS3, Xbox 360, and PC, but had to have begun no earlier than 2005. This is a top ten based on series, that means at least two games. Remember, quality is always better than quantity, so just because a series has more games does not make it a better new series."
that's a pretty good list. i think they definitely got the top 2 right, it just comes down to preference for which is #1. i do think Bioshock should be on there, though.
You are right that it deserves a mention, I added it to honourable mentions. While I loved the first game, as a series it hasn't hit a home run for me yet.
He should've just labeled it "From Software's 'Souls' series" rather than "Demon's Souls series". You can't call Dark Souls a sequel when it introduces a different universe (although similar).
Thank you for taking your taking your time to edit that. Good work on the list, if I may add.
Demons Souls is a PS3 exclusive, why is it listed on Xbox 360 as well?
anyway my top new franchises are:
- Assassin's Creed
- Uncharted
I had it listed as Demon's Souls(series), and Dark Souls is on 360. It's in italics meaning the entire series isn't on the system.
The autumn months are now the videogame industry’s equivalent of cinema’s blockbuster season; it’s the time of year where the medium’s most expensive games are rolled out in time for Christmas. And like most summer blockbuster movies, this season’s big games are almost exclusively sequels – the past few weeks have seen the likes of Arkham City, Battlefield 3 and Uncharted 3 all arrive in a swirl of hype and excitement.
well considering I just talked about Brotherhood (theres not really many recent games with Brotherhood in the title), it's pretty obvious I was talking about Assassin's Creed ¬¬
Because he also refers to "Brotherhood"? Or the fact that the first batman game was called Arkham Asylum, which would have AA as its initials, not AC. Or just the fact that it is somewhat common knowledge among gamers that AC refers to Assasins Creed. And I presume I'm being trolled.
"Brotherhood"? I can't recall a Batman game ever titled or subtitled Brotherhood in it.
Sequels are alays a tough one to judge, in my opinion. On the one hand, changing it too much alienates the fan base and generally makes it feels as though it's not part of the series. On other hand, failing to change anything makes the series stagnant.
Call of Duty is a prime example of both arguments: if they radically changed the game, then all those people complaining about it never changing would suddenly start complaining about how it isn't Call of Duty anymore. And yes, I am saying that a lot of gamers are hypocrits. On the other hand, don't change it and you start to get bored of the series, wishing that they would at least try something a little different.
Of course, the other argument would be that after 7 (or is it 8?) Call of Duty games it would be pretty hard to actually add anything new because you've already done it.
Another example would be the AC series, as Kran above me was saying. The leap from AC2 to AC2 was huge, but then Brotherhood was a smaller leap. The first reason for this, of course, is actually because Brotherhood and Revelations are only part of a sub-series, not the actual main series, so hopefully we'll see a bigger leap in AC3. The other is that they'd gotten it concept pretty much nailed in AC2, so they could only really refine it for ACB and add in smaller new features. With this logic it's hard to expect huge new things from Revelations, because where do they go with it now? What do they add to it?
And did any of this make sense? No? That's probably for the best, then :)
I got it and agree... Some gamers are just a ficky bunch, I like cod for what it is. Leave the franchise and it's millions of fans alone. Crying as if there isn't enough shooters out already
You use the base formula that made the original so great and add to it with more stuff and take away the bad parts for a sequel
If the game is one with a decent story, such as uncharted then they just need to move forward on the story, gameplay improvements are optional. On the other hand if it's a game with little story, such as COD, then they had better improve on the gameplay.
This time, the latest trailer depicts the inside-news of Abstergo Industries
Nice review. I would give the game probably the same score, although admittedly for quite different reasons (except for the story which I agree about).
I felt like AC was showing its age in ACB in regards to the combat system and its lack of any real change since the first game, and as well the complete lack of direction and importance in the story. I felt ACR had a more complete ending, with Altair's life, Ezio's life and Desmond's (continuing his) life tying together, the former two to also to a close. But I agree about the majority of ACR, there was no main enemy or faction, there was no direction for Ezio's story once again just like in ACB where we "relentlessly" pursued Cesare Borgia to take back the Apple which Ezio lost, something which was far from necessary to the main plot, just as was Cesare's iunclusion in basically the whole story.
Any way basically apart from the combat I agree with you mostly, I've been a big fan of AC for a while now but I really am becoming tired of it despite my previous love for the story, Ubisoft don't seem to care that much for it any more in my own eyes because they're just acting careless now, and I know I'm not the only one who feels that way. Not to mention that leaked DLC audio, I haven't a single clue why none of that was in the actual Revelations game, seems the greed is getting to them.
I will not buy ACR. Its CODified. I'll get AC3 though.