imported>Arcemz: Created page with "Personally, I thought they were all phenomenal, with only a few negatives. I thought AC1 was good because of the epic assassinations you did, it was just a bit repetitive. AC2..."

2012-04-11T00:28:54Z

Created page with "Personally, I thought they were all phenomenal, with only a few negatives. I thought AC1 was good because of the epic assassinations you did, it was just a bit repetitive. AC2..."

Páàjì titun

Personally, I thought they were all phenomenal, with only a few negatives.

I thought AC1 was good because of the epic assassinations you did, it was just a bit repetitive.

AC2 was amazing, barely anything wrong. Improved immensely and stunning ending.

ACB had a lot of variety in terms of side and main memories, the only thing was it didn't have a lot on the First Civilization or the main storyline. I did however enjoy controlling Desmond throught the tunnels under the Villa.

ACR was a bit familiar, but I enjoyed the hookblade. Most of all though I loved the emotional connection between Altair and Ezio and the epic ending talking to Jupiter.

<span style="font-style: normal; ">However, I don't think people are very empathetic to ubisoft. They have to create a game that satisfies the demand of millions of fans, who all want a different type of game. So don't go whining just because Assassin's Creed isn't what you wanted it to be. </span>

User blog comment:SpaceKat/assassin's creed in general/@comment-4950493-20120411002853 - Revision history

imported>Arcemz: Created page with "Personally, I thought they were all phenomenal, with only a few negatives. I thought AC1 was good because of the epic assassinations you did, it was just a bit repetitive. AC2..."