ToastyAnakin (Topic Creator) Posted 3/10/2013 6:57:03 PM | I don't agree. In fact I cared little for Ezio's first adventure in AC2, other than the nice music, location and setting.
The whole 20 years plus time arc was nonsense, since they didn't bother to age the character models.
After the rich experience of AC1, I found AC2 to be hollow. More diversity in things to do, but hollow nonetheless.
---
"if gears can be done on the 360, than any game can be done on the 360" (Wisdom_Cube) "I am the content doesn't inst rest me yet"(theroc500) |
giled_tolgraPosted 3/10/2013 11:31:02 PM | Well, I think a lot of the hate is from launch when the game was pretty buggy. Its definitively not a bad game IMO. The ending is not even that bad
---
http://www.backloggery.com/main.php?user=Windsupernova
Play Whatever. No fanboyism. PW.President of the Biased club |
manila2k1Posted 3/11/2013 4:53:46 AM | AC3 is a good game, but its predecessors were great games. It's like medals in the Olympics: the bronze medalist is still a good athlete, but in the end of the day he'll be overshadowed by the guy who got the gold. |
Dark_EpathyPosted 3/11/2013 1:40:12 PM | The thing about AC3 is that it's just disappointing. Nothing wrong with it. But it's a little too big for its own good.
---
~@_@~
Why are you people so hung up on what's canon or not? - freakazaa |
LockeadonPosted 3/12/2013 7:06:44 AM | massive bugs everywhere is my only real problem. they are at like 2.1 already on patches and its still massively bugged. i like connor and basically everything else so far. especially hunting and the homestead missions.
but honestly it feels like they released the alpha build not a finished game. bugs EVERYWHERE.
---
everytime i think i've seen it all...
someone does something stupider |
Facebook | 
Twitter
