I don't hate any of the games in the series. My only issue is certain aspects or moments in the story that could have been approached better. With AC1, the only issue was repetition, but they addressed that in every game since.
With AC3, it felt rushed, and the ending just....doesn't sit well with me. I'll definitely be interested in what they come up with in AC4 if they actually plan on making it. --- Panda Pounce! PSN: Rhaazerus
AC2 had that perfect balance of main story content to side mission content. In AC1, if you weren't killing your target, then everything you were doing was setting up your next kill target. Whereas with the other AC games after 2, I think that balance is going a little lopsided to where the side content is take prevalence over the main story.
I totally agree. 1 feels almost incomplete, but everything after 2 feels like its just nonsense and unnecessary clutter and detracts from the main focus of the game. The series got too bogged down in its own silliness after 2. --- Terrible, take a lap.
I don't know the DMC2 deal but AC was a good game when it came out but the reason why I don't like it anymore is because the series has evolved to the point where playing a stripped down version of the game is frustrating and boring. --- PSN torlon
I think AC1 had the best structure for main assassinations, which imo are the heart of the game and what made it unique, and because of this it has a strong following in the AC community.
I think the enironment was outstanding though, I still think the graphics are amazing in that game, the background and setting was perfect and I still enjoy searching for flags and templars at my own pace in the Kingdom area, it was a nice area to relax and do stuff without thinking too much about the rest of the game, the background music was also ver well done.
However, I will admit the game could have improved on a lot of things, such as being less repetitive in the pace of assassinations, and making the sidemissions a little more stimulating.
The way Ubisoft rseponded to this complaint was absolutely appauling. Instead they decided to focus the entire series on the side missions. Hell even the main major assassinations now feel like side missions, trivial bite sized missions with no real substance, no real quality. The pace of the game is now like a movie, although I have to say AC3 really did fix with the amount of different side missions you could do, such as naval missions, frontier stuff, and city...stuff. --- MGS3 Ghost Run: Foxhound Rank: Official Ghost Runner of MGS http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL4D335DDB9C9BAEDD&feature=plcp
I thought AC1 was an absolute chore to finish (but I managed). I actually tried to complete it years ago, quit early on, and only came back to it because my boyfriend was playing EzioTrilogy+3 and it looked interesting. Anyway, Ezio trilogy was fantastic, and I'm starting AC3 in the next few days. :]
I played and loved every AC until AC3. I got it on release date, played it for a couple of hours, and just haven't been able to get myself to pick it up since. So AC3 is my personal DMC2 of the series. --- Obligatory sig alert
AC1 Was just so boring & dragged out it ruined any feelings I had to continue the series. But when I saw AC3, I decided to give the franchise another chance. --- psn:REXX_ANATOR_01 sub accnt:DELTA1-5-5 Official MK9 Champion Of Kratos.