Did anybody else like Brotherhood a whole lot more than this game?

#1RubedoXTPosted 1/20/2013 1:34:58 PM
I don't care if it's mainly set in Rome, it's a great place to roam architecturally anyway. DEMROOFTOPS!!! Also, Brotherhood just seemed to start right away. No slow build up that leads to a barely meaty middle and anti-climactic ending. No sailing around in a ship doing nothing for an hour...I mean I enjoyed ACIII because I haven't played AC since the 2nd one came out. But backtracking in the series and deciding to play the Ezio spin offs, I'm starting to appreciate him and the Reneissance a whole lot more. Plus the platforming in Brotherhood is so much fun! That mission where you have to infiltrate the Sant'Angelo tower to rescue Catalina was the greatest AC mission I've played. I know stealth was optional, but I kept starting over if I got caught because it felt rewarding as opposed to tedious to do the optional stuff in Brotherhood than in ACIII.
---
We can waste time arguing, or we can get things done!
#2Rannek17Posted 1/20/2013 1:39:44 PM
Totally agree, brotherhood was the best in the series.
---
GT-Rannek17
#3bobbyrkPosted 1/20/2013 1:53:23 PM
Gameplay-wise... meh. I think that there were definitely good elements to Brotherhood, and AC3 is definitely lacking in terms of side content that isn't fetch quests, but I think the actual combat is better in AC3, though Brotherhood's free-running is a bit more controlled than AC3's.

Story-wise, I disagree. AC3 might not have had the execution it really needed, but it had a lot more going for it thematically than Brotherhood did.
---
Behold the angry wizard putt-putt-putting away.
#4dave_is_slickPosted 1/21/2013 4:23:35 AM
Brotherhood was the best one.
---
Clementine is my baby. I will fight anyone to the death if they say otherwise!!
#5alphaaltairPosted 1/21/2013 5:13:28 AM
Bah! After AC2, Brotherhood was a massive let down, what with its 3 main assassination missions (2 of which were ridiculously linear) and it's whopping 10 pretty ordinary side assassination missions. Not to mention the slapdash story and high school calibre writing.

AC3 is probably on a par with ACB for me. AC1 and 2 will always be the high points of the series it seems. Shame.
---
([ { < ]})=====>
#6thespecialcPosted 1/21/2013 10:30:33 AM
I find AC3 to be a better overall total package.

I actually enjoy the Naval stuff, and the MP is very well done. AC3s biggest flaw was the awful trading/crafting system, but then again the upgrading rome system was pretty stupid too, but at least it was easy to deal with. Money just doesn't matter in any of the games.

AC3 did the assassin interface much better with the multiple abilities and only 6 assassins to keep up with, and actually having individual characters for your comrades instead of random people.

Also, I found the peg leg missions MUCH more enjoyable than the hidden lairs in the other games. I always despised doing those but actually enjoyed the peg leg missions.
#7thespecialcPosted 1/21/2013 10:34:29 AM
Sorry for the double post.

Storywise AC3 takes the cake. I admit the ending was anti-climactic. But I thought the Villians were much better in this game. Connor is slightly less enjoyable to play as than Ezio but Charles lee, Thomos Hickey, and Haytham were great antagonists. The Voice Acting for Charles Lee was top notch and I really enjoyed the sequences in which he was involved.
#8gillriPosted 1/21/2013 2:29:02 PM
I love Brotherhood as its got my favourite city..Rome, architecturally the most interesting. I think there is a case to say that the campaign is better than AC3

but if you take everything into account I think AC3 is better than AC:B

The sheer amount of brilliant side content including the homestead, ship and frontierman mission and the awesome frontier and tree climbing mean I prefer AC3 all in all