Is assassin’s creed any good? Once a game becomes a franchise with a bajillion releases I just tune it out. Feel the same way about marvel movies. Maybe they’re good, maybe they’re bad, but I’m more annoyed that they’re trying to shove it down my throat, so I tune out.
There’s two or three good ones in the series. Thankfully the rest aren’t as bad as Far Cry which is just about the shittiest franchise I’ve ever had the displeasure of playing.
Obviously subjective, but I was a very big fan of the series for the first several entries, kinda began losing interest around Unity (although in hindsight, Unity is probably one of the best ones in a few ways, but at release it was a very buggy mess).
I am not personally a fan of the way they have ignored the modern day story line after around 3, as I am one of the few on the planet that actually found that part of the narrative compelling and the part I was really playing for.
I don’t like they gameplay changes since Origins, and it has increasingly become more of an action game over time and less of a dope assassin game.
Unity is flawed, but somewhat of an underrated gem. It’s such a shame that it released in the state it did and got the reception it did because that’s pretty much what caused Ubisoft to pivot into the style of the Origins and onwards style games.
Imagine what could have been if they built on what they had in Unity? The free run up/down system had so much potential and - while janky - the Unity parkour can produce some of the most pleasing, slick and stylish sequences. Just look at the stuff people are pulling off!
Also, revolutionary Paris is the best realised city they’ve ever made for an Assassin’s Creed game.
The downfall began when Ubisoft abruptly wrote Lucy out of the story after Kristen Bell asked for more money. Then they killed off the literal main character one game later, and nowadays you’d be excused for forgetting Desmond ever even existed given how little the modern day matters to the plot.
I’ve played pretty much all but the most recent. They have their ups and downs. The first was almost like a proof of concept. Kinda boring, but the story sets up the sequels. There was a good overall story arc in the Desmond/Ezio trilogy (Assassin’s Creed II, Brotherhood, and Revelations) that hasn’t been duplicated since.
AC3 was a bit of a breath of fresh air, being part of the American revolution, but it wasn’t for everyone. The story was being deviated from earlier games too much. AC4 is, for me, still the best single-player pirate game out there. It continues with Rogue. Both of those games I highly enjoyed.
Unity (Paris during French Revolution) and Syndicate (Victorian London) both have fantastic maps and character design, but gameplay and story just wasn’t as interesting to me. The series was feeling stale.
To Ubisoft’s credit, they knew that too and entirely revamped the gameplay and menu system starting with Origins (Ancient Egypt), then Odyssey (Ancient Greece), and Valhalla (Vikings during 9th Century). Valhalla was really fun. I love how they change certain villages up throughout the year… adding festivals/challenges depending on when you play. The maps were just getting too huge and overwhelming at this point.
I play the games now mainly for exploration. Gameplay and story are secondary as they aren’t as interesting anymore. They really put a lot of detail into their surroundings and do their research on history, whether real or fantastical. It’s escapism to another land in another time.
Ubisoft is not Rockstar. The story is no longer the reason to play these games. They are forgettable. The Desmond/Ezio storyline of the earlier games are no more. However, we don’t have to wait several years to play a sequel.
Valhalla was the only one that I paid full price for since it was 2020 and we were still basically trapped in our homes, but definitely got my money’s worth. They seemed to take more time making Mirage so I’ll check that out eventually. They are remastering some of their old games so I’d play those over the dated originals.
The Far Cry series has a similar feeling for me, but with a first person perspective. New lands to explore, new stories and characters, but some are better than others.
Meh. They might have not wanted to make Ep3, but the fans sure did.
I understand Valve works or used to work very differently, people collaborating without a strong top-down steering from management. Yet whatever explanation they have, we were punched in the gut at the end of Ep2, then left waiting, holding our breath. It’s just a piece of media, but it was an important part of my teenage years, and I could never experience the end of the story (outside of reading it in a blog) I waited so much for.
This made me really resent Valve, and soured my experience/memories with the series, I haven’t touched HL or other Valve game for 10+ years, and I don’t think I will in the future.
Half-Life 2 doesn’t even have a good combat loop. Half-Life 1 has more variety in the weapons and the map team in HL1 actually talked to the AI team. Notice how the combine just stand in doorways or out in the open? It’s lost, but I once saw a video showing that the combine can flank the player and do other complex maneuvers if the maps are properly designed, but Gabe was too obsessed with the Gravity Gun and everything else suffered. The “puzzles” are all either busy work or another seesaw task. I remember being hyped when Gabe said that Ep2 would have the biggest physics puzzle in it, but it ended up just being a huge seesaw “puzzle” that was solved just by clearing the cars off of it.
Every time I do a Half Life replay, I always end up getting bored in HL2 and skip to the community made stuff. Half-life Echoes and Entropy: Zero are musts.
There are so many landmark games. I’d say HL1 was more influential then HL2 anyway. Hell, I’d say Portal did more for first person puzzle games then HL2 did for FPS games.
It just handicapped itself by making the gravity gun such busy work and ignoring other aspects.
HL2 is more than just the gravity gun. The art style, the open levels on the beaches, the facial animations, the improved storytelling from HL1, the antlion army, game was so much more than just an updated half life. Without HL2, portal wouldn’t have any legs to stand on, valve took on narbacular drop, hired the team and put them to work on the source engine to make portal. Counter strike source was the defacto mp shooter for years if not decades, hell even the portal 2 goo came from half life 2 ep 3 just like they mention in the documentary. Saying they ignored all other aspects of the game for the gravity gun does half life 2 a disservice to what it accomplished.
Hey, here’s this cool thing. You can summon Antlions to fight with you, but only in two areas and never again. Oh, that boss fight in Ep2 where you could have gotten it again? Nope, but here’s a Defend Against Waves set piece instead.
What I’m saying is that the combat loop got ignored for the gravity gun. Where’s the Gluon Gun? Why is the Tau Cannon only mounted to the buggy? Why are both the SMG and AR2 full auto, spread weapons? If we’re doing wide open areas, the AR2 should really have a tighter spread for long range engagements.
Halo did wide open environments, did vehicles with mouse or analog stick steering was a joy to drive and actually used them in more then one area before HL2. Keyboard steering sucks.
What HL2 excels at is presentation of the story. It’s really not that deep of a story.
Also, never liked CS or military shooters, so that’s not exactly a going to sell me. And don’t get me started on the hat shit.
The combat may not have been the most interesting versus basic grunts, but it never got stale. I’ve never played another game where the core gameplay changed so much so frequently.
Physics interactions -> Basic FPS -> Fan Boat -> Mounted Gun -> Gravity Gun -> Zombies & Traps -> Car -> THE CRANE FIGHT -> Rockets & Gunships -> Ant Lions -> Ant Lion Minions -> Turrets -> Resistance Squads -> Striders -> Super Gravity Gun
Honestly the HL1 combat may have been somewhat more challengjng, but it was a grind. Fights were often just frustrating. I’ve abandonded playthroughs because I didn’t feel like spending another 10 hours beating my head against the endless amounts of enemies just to get to the end of… whatever I was doing I forgot.
HL1’s big innovation was never removing control from the player just to tell the story. Beyond that they also had some interesting AI behaviour and weapons. It was a game with old-school length and old-school difficulty.
HL2’s big innovation was the physics engine, and they played with it in so many ways, while polishing every other aspect of the design. They kept the gameplay tight and did something just long enough to explore it and then they moved on. They never forced you to hang out just repeating the same loop over and over to pad the length.
I respect Valve for Steam. It’s far and away the best platform.
But the bottom line is the Half-life series made Valve who they are. It made Gabe rich. Yet despite having all the money necessary to have all the resources necessary, they abandoned the series, letting millions of die hard fans down.
I’ve never seen a more beloved game series simply abandoned.
I would've wanted a conclusion just to shut up all of the dead-horse beating to dust memelords that for years have been wagoning their tiresome HL3 jokes.
But, it's like, how many games have we waited so long to be released whether it's to continue the story or end it and the reception being more of "...wait that's it?!" than "I'm satisified."
Gamers are the hardest people to appease, so I get the sentiment that Gabe not only felt stumped but written himself into a corner with HL3. Whatever hype at all that has been built, is insurmountably high that whatever Valve pitches out, it's going to be mixed. It'll have a higher chance of being what happened to Duke Nukem Forever in context, than it being what Baldur's Gate 3 became 23 years later after Baldur's Gate II. It's a very narrow window to hit that sweet spot.
I don’t know if this is a hot take, but I think allowing straight and cis people to identify as such is appropriate, because the alternative assumes that we live in a state of default heteronormativity.
If anything, I want to live in a world where homophobes get mad that if they want to be assumed to be straight online they have to identify like anyone else. No one gets assumed to be straight any more. That’s better imo.
No shade to my Ace friends intended. Totally possible to be horny for art or rock collecting or whatever. Doesn’t have to be a sexy thing. I’m horny for none of the above is totally valid.
heh, this totally reminds me of Terry Pratchett’s dwarves, that spend a lot of time trying to find out what’s under the beard of the other first without asking that akward question xD
as an almost maximally privileged person (cis straight etc), i want my whining fellows to shut the fuck up. Just stop. Stop taking up all the god damn space. Just be quiet. It’s okay not to be included in every scene all the time.
Your point about not assuming people are straight by default is valid. But I mostly just want some cis-het folks to stop embarrassing me by being fucking insufferable.
Calling Warcraft Rumble an RTS is like putting a hamburger patty on a plate and calling it a steak. You’re technically correct, but you’ve also completely missed the point in what people want.
pcgamer.com
Aktywne