User:Alientraveller

AC and me

First time I saw Assassin's Creed was a two-page ad in Empire magazine of Altair reaching out to stab a Knight Templar: my reaction was, "Gosh, they've made a game about the Hashashin." I was really intrigued, but was disappointed by the mixed reviews and the modern day subplot, which I thought diluted the concept.

A couple of years later, I heard about Assassin's Creed II and while I felt sad they were abandoning the Islamic Golden Age (an era I hope Ubisoft revisits someday, even if it's a remake), I was intrigued by the Renaissance setting and heartened by promises it would improve on its predecessor.

I eventually rented the game and I loved it: Ezio was cool even before donning his father's robes, and I was happily wrong about the modern day story. The whole idea of the First Civilization and Pieces of Eden was a fantastic way to tie mythology into the historical playground of the series (even though I am a Christian, I wasn't bothered by the alien astronaut notion either). ACII was the first game I actually played from start to finish, and was perfectly fine with the controls.

I was sad Ezio's fate would probably be only discussed in ACIII, so I was heartened by news of Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood, which I bought a PS3 for. I loved seeing all the characters again as well as the city of Rome, and the War Machines missions. But looking back, the game was glorified DLC and was frustrated they still didn't conclude Ezio's story. Cesare Borgia was also an irritatingly childish punk, not loathable or sinister the way a great villain ought to be. Two awful missions also prevent me from replaying the side missions (Young At Heart and Malpractice).

I enjoyed Assassin's Creed: Revelations because Constantinople was a breath of fresh air and the ziplines made navigating it so much fun. The pacing was off compared to the other games, due to the repetitive main mission structure, but that didn't mean the platforming missions and Sofia romance were bad. I felt the side mission structure was a lot more sensible too, with you liberating zones and recruiting people to protect them. I found the ending incredibly moving too: the sacrifice of 16, the death of Altair, Ezio's farewell and seeing the tragedy that befell the FC. (Moreso than Assassin's Creed: Embers, which left me more perplexed than tearful.)

ACR PS3 copies also came with ACI, so I played that between the first and second Altair memories: it really was a slog. People claimed Ezio wasn't stealthy yet I was slaughtering entire armies to protect women with short term memory. I think Kieron Gillen put it best on Twitter when he described ACI as basically walking slowly between concrete buildings. Altair's arc was good but I liked him more from reading the Codex and reading Assassin's Creed: The Secret Crusade.

I loved Assassin's Creed III almost as much as ACII: sadly volunteering here spoiled the first few plot twists, diluting their impact on me, but I still enjoyed the whole epic, and Haytham and Connor, and all their acquaintances, though not as lovable as Ezio and his merry men, were still complex and intriguing protagonists. (Can't wait to meet grandpa.) I think this review sums up how rich and deep ACIII's story was better than I ever could.

That doesn't mean ACIII wasn't ambitiously flawed: overhauling freerunning led to a lot of problems on buildings; the amazing Aquila missions felt constrained by the land-based main game; and making stealth harder seemed to involve guards seeing through buildings or having to backtrack when eavesdropping left you exposed. The Homesteaders were wonderful, but the generic civilian AI could've benefitted from this R&D as their behaviour doesn't really change despite the weather. It's also frustrating I had to read Assassin's Creed: Forsaken to get clarification on what happened to Connor's mother, and missing dialogue explaining her relationship to Achilles.

Though I enjoyed Desmond's missions (each representing the gameplay pillars of navigation, stealth and combat), Daniel Cross's appearance ruined Assassin's Creed: The Fall. To be honest though, I was astounded by the ending - though I knew many would hate it - and its implications. To be frank, ACII had a more disappointing ending as at the time I had no idea whether Ezio's story would be followed on so soon. I'm not sad to see Desmond go: I liked him but did not love him like Ezio, Connor and even Altair or Shaun, and at least the beige guy got to save the world.

I used to say Altair was like Superman, the archetype, Ezio was Batman, the archetype made into a three-dimensional character, and Connor would be Wonder Woman, the freedom fighting minority figure with an axe. After playing ACIII I'd say Ezio is Iron Man due to his brashness, and Connor is the uncompromising Rorschach. I also used to say Desmond was Nightwing, Batman's protege who named himself after a Kryptonian bird, but now I'd say he's Robin because you can't swing a dead cat without hitting a dead one.