Assassin's Creed?

[DiscipleofBob]

Once upon a time, I rented Assassin's Creed just to try it out. I'm not usually one for Stealth Games (aside from Hitman: Blood Money. Man I love that game) but I decided to try it out.

I barely got past the first level. The controls felt so clunky, I could barely walk across town. The whole "virtual reality" thing was so jarring it actually detracted from the experience. My fiance is a history buff so just watching me go through the ancient cities was fun for her.

But now the new Assassin's Creed game is set during her absolute favorite part of history: the American Revolution. I'm wondering a couple things:

1) Should I give the series another chance?

2) Would I be missing out if I didn't play through the previous games?

3) Would I find the game unnecessarily difficult because I didn't play through the previous games (and therefore didn't go through some learning curve throughout the games or something)?

[Comet]

I'd recommend giving Assassin's Creed 2 a try. Not only is it so much better than the first one, it's pretty well playable without having finished the first one as they recap the important story points for you anyway.

I'd imagine Ubisoft will provide some expositions for newcomers in the thirds game, too, as they'll likely want to introduce new audiences to the franchise with this game's dramatic change of scenery and game mechanics. You never know, though, hence my recommendation for AC2, which is a pretty excellent way to introduce yourself to the world of this franchise.

[Androgeus]

3) Would I find the game unnecessarily difficult because I didn't play through the previous games (and therefore didn't go through some learning curve throughout the games or something)?

We can't really answer this one seeing as the game hasn't been released. If the game is well designed, newcomers should be fine.

[Triscuitable]

3) Would I find the game unnecessarily difficult because I didn't play through the previous games (and therefore didn't go through some learning curve throughout the games or something)?

Seeing as how the previous games have been very good about walking the player through new and old mechanics, I don't see how this could ever present itself as an issue.

An example would be the hookblade tutorial in Revelations: you effectively know how to operate the device by the end of that mission, and the rest of the world is built around the little device, giving you a little playground to practice in between missions and side-quests.

[Brother Oni]

Seconding the 'yes' to giving the series another chance - the gameplay and engine has improved so much from the first game, it's not funny.

Since your fiancee is a history buff, persevering through the first game might still be worthwhile as she gets to see the differences between the different cities (and how much of a craphole Crusader controlled Acre was compared to the other Holy Land cities).

[Starscream]

The second game is basically improved in every way from the first.

I too found AC1 to be a little clunky and awkward. I stuck with it because I'd played 2 a little at a friends house, knew how much fun it was, and wanted to beat the first one before going out and buying my own copy.

Two is great. The controls are much more fluid, climbing and jumping works better, the environments are cooler and reward exploration a lot more, and there are plenty of sidequests and things to keep it from just being "Go to town/find Assassins headquarters/find info on target/kill target" over and over.

A lot of little things are improved, too. For example, there were those annoying beggars who were everywhere in the first one, and you could do nothing to get rid of them without drawing attention. In the second, you can actually toss money on the ground. And if you're being chased, people will scramble for it and trip up your pursuers. Fun!

[Mewtarthio]

You could grab the beggars and throw them. Costs you some health, but it's so worth it...

Anyway, I'm going to chime in with the others and say that the second game is way better than the first in every way*. Pretty much everything gets explained, too, so you don't really need the first game.

*Except for the assassin uniform. It makes sense in the first game, since they're just scholar's robes, but there's no way they'd let Ezio blend in.

[Gourtox]

You could grab the beggars and throw them. Costs you some health, but it's so worth it...

Anyway, I'm going to chime in with the others and say that the second game is way better than the first in every way*. Pretty much everything gets explained, too, so you don't really need the first game.

*Except for the assassin uniform. It makes sense in the first game, since they're just scholar's robes, but there's no way they'd let Ezio blend in.

Oh those beggars, I remember a few instances where I chased down the beggars just so I could beat until they were unconscious. That was the most satisfying thing I did in that game.

[MLai]

AC1... I liked the mechanics and the setting of the game, I liked just wander and absorbing the ambience of the ancient cities, but the repetitiveness of gameplay and plot caused me to just stop playing in the middle and never went back.

And yet if you asked me if AC1 was good, I'd say yes it is and it has some great Youtube moments.

So it's 1 of those few games I praise yet never bothered to finish. I bought the Steam AC pack a few months ago just to try to spur myself to return to the franchise, starting from 1 again (I've forgotten all of it anyways). Haven't gotten to it yet... currently learning Blood Bowl instead...

[DiscipleofBob]

Well, I ended up picking both AC1 and AC2 today (damn you Gamestop and your irresistible buy 2 get 1 free sales!) So far, I'm actually having a much easier time with AC1. I'm not sure why, but the controls seem a lot smoother than when I first played it.

Haven't quite gotten to Damascus yet, been busy picking up those eagle eye spots and random richard's flags. Are there any missables I should be worried about?

[Fri]

I'm just here to say that Assassin's Creed 2 is one of my favourite game of all time. Yes, it's in that list of mine. I've never actually played Assassin's Creed 1 though.

[Brother Oni]

Haven't quite gotten to Damascus yet, been busy picking up those eagle eye spots and random richard's flags. Are there any missables I should be worried about?

Unless you suffer from crippling OCD and have a burning desire to collect every flag in the game, there's nothing missable in AC1.

Even in the later games, there's nothing missable that you can't go back and get due to the nature of the Animus.
Sole exception are the Desmond sections in AC2: Brotherhood, but they have no effect on gameplay.

[DiscipleofBob]

Unless you suffer from crippling OCD and have a burning desire to collect every flag in the game, there's nothing missable in AC1.

Even in the later games, there's nothing missable that you can't go back and get due to the nature of the Animus.
Sole exception are the Desmond sections in AC2: Brotherhood, but they have no effect on gameplay.

Is there even any benefit to collecting flags other than "ooh, shiny?"

[Reverent-One]

Is there even any benefit to collecting flags other than "ooh, shiny?"

None, which was the final straw for me to just say "Forget you!" to the blasted things and move on.

[Brother Oni]

None, which was the final straw for me to just say "Forget you!" to the blasted things and move on.

I found all the flags in Masyaf, after that I did much the same as Reverent-One, although in much less polite terms.

[Androgeus]

Is there even any benefit to collecting flags other than "ooh, shiny?"

in 1? no. In 2 if you collect half of the feathers, you unlock a weapon, and a cape when you collect them all.

[VanBuren]

Is there even any benefit to collecting flags other than "ooh, shiny?"

An achievement in the console versions.

Your choice whether that's worth it or not.

[DiscipleofBob]

Finished the first target. I can see what people are talking about with the beggars.

I still haven't really "assassinated" anyone yet. Every time I try a stealth kill it seems Altair simply walks up to the target and politely asks "Excuse me, would you terribly mind if I murdered you?" to which the target replies "Actually I would, people murdering me is somewhat against my religious beliefs." Then we set aside our teacups and monocles and swordfight until one of us dies.

Is there a reason for the short sword? I only just got it but I can't really tell any difference between it and the regular sword.

[Opperhapsen]

Finished the first target. I can see what people are talking about with the beggars.

I still haven't really "assassinated" anyone yet. Every time I try a stealth kill it seems Altair simply walks up to the target and politely asks "Excuse me, would you terribly mind if I murdered you?" to which the target replies "Actually I would, people murdering me is somewhat against my religious beliefs." Then we set aside our teacups and monocles and swordfight until one of us dies.

Is there a reason for the short sword? I only just got it but I can't really tell any difference between it and the regular sword.What you should be asking is "Is there a reason for the sword when you have the awesome dagger", and the answer is "No, no there isn't".

They deal the same damage but the dagger is capable of just wailing on someone non-stop.

But yeah, assassinations don't happen very often, you need to sneak up on them from behind or from above to get any real assassination going.

[Ninjadeadbeard]

Honestly, I love the AC games. I have never been unhappy with purchasing them. AC1 did upset me at times during the final mission, but now I can breeze through the whole game if need be. The sequels only added to the world and made everything better.

The story is...depressing. The first game left me thinking the bad guys had a solid point. The Ezio Trilogy watched a young, goofy teenager go through 40+ years of hell and loss until he was a burnt out, cynical old man who had watched his whole life burn down around him multiple times.

But yeah, that dagger rocks. It's a great spamming weapon in the first game, while the longsword is far more forgiving with its Counters. For 9001+ Internets, try playing the whole game using the hidden blade in combat alone. I did it once. It hurts! But when you face...Al Mualim at the end, there is nothing in heaven or earth more satisfying than to hear his long-winded (though epic) Big Bad Monologue go on and on, only for you to plant the hidden blade in his chest and end the fight with a single stroke. Exquisite. :smallcool:

[Cespenar]

As far as I remember, straight out assassinations were hard in AC1. Most stuff devolved into "epic" swordfights of you vs. 15 guards and the target.

[Croakamancer]

:smallsmile: It's hard to pull an assassination in AC 1, and some enemies have a cutscene scripted in, but it is definitely doable. I can remember pulling it off with the Hospitalizer, which is probably easiest to do.

[Brother Oni]

The story is...depressing. The first game left me thinking the bad guys had a solid point. The Ezio Trilogy watched a young, goofy teenager go through 40+ years of hell and loss until he was a burnt out, cynical old man who had watched his whole life burn down around him multiple times.


Watch Embers. It gives closure to the Ezio arc of the story.

Spoilers for AC1/AC2 story discussion:
In contrast to Altair's interactions with the Templars, Ezio's is very much more biased, so while you get the sense that the Templars still had relatively high ideals back during the Crusades, they had become far more pragmatic by the Renaissance, forcing the Assassins to be even more ruthless.

I do like the games and media of AC2 for following Ezio from birth to death - it's rare that you can get this invested with a character in an action game.

AC: Lineage is also recommended for seeing how good Giovanni Auditore was at being an Assassin too.


I can remember pulling it off with the Hospitalizer, which is probably easiest to do.

I think you mean 'Hospitaller'. Hospitaliser implies something else entirely. :smalltongue:

[Croakamancer]

Well, to be fair, that guy kinda did both. ;) Du Montford, right?

[BRC]

In contrast to Altair's interactions with the Templars, Ezio's is very much more biased, so while you get the sense that the Templars still had relatively high ideals back during the Crusades, they had become far more pragmatic by the Renaissance, forcing the Assassins to be even more ruthless.

I do like the games and media of AC2 for following Ezio from birth to death - it's rare that you can get this invested with a character in an action game.


One of the few good things Revelations did was it finally gave us a clear picture of the ideological conflict between the Templars and the Assassins. In one, you knew the Templars had some plan to mind control people, and for the first two Ezio games the Templars were little more than scheming power-hungry villains.

In Revelations, you finally get a good idea about the differing philosophies: Templars feel that humanity is inherently selfish and evil, and therefore peace can only be achieved through control. They see themselves as Humanity's benevolent guardians, secretly saving civilization from itself.
The problem is that this philosophy causes them to try to seize, and expand power, and as we know, Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely.

The Assassins believe that Humanity is inherently good, and that nobody should be trusted with Absolute power. The Assassins therefore, while gladly working with those in power, avoid assuming political office themselves (The exception being Montegerioni, which was little more than a village and a manor house).



Also, you finally got an explanation for The Creed itself: "Nothing is true, all is permitted", which I always found odd, that the Assassins would have, as their most basic philosophy, the idea that you can just go out and do whatever you want. Ezio explains it to Sophia that it is not a command, but an observation. "Nothing is True" really means that nothing is Certain, and that you should always strive to find what is really there. "All is permitted" doesn't mean "Do whatever you want", quite the opposite. When they say "All is permitted" they mean that, in terms of the laws of physics, it is just as easy to do evil deeds as good ones, and that in the end you are responsible for the consequences of your own actions.

[Sith_Happens]

As far as I remember, straight out assassinations were hard in AC1. Most stuff devolved into "epic" swordfights of you vs. 15 guards and the target.

Oh yeah, weren't air assassinations not introduced until AC2? That's gotta be rough.

[Gnomish Wanderer]

I remember air assassinations in AC1... I think...

But the one aspect that I loved from AC1 is that they tried to make you plan out the best way to assassinate your target and get away. I felt like I could strategize and come up with a plan to get away and win. I normally didn't pull it off, but when I did it was SO rewarding. Spoiler on next games:
I wish the rest of the games didn't take out that planning aspect. ;_;
And I agree; I think the controls have gotten less clunky with each installment. That doesn't stop me from occasionally launching myself from a building but that's more a measurement to my impatience than a control problem, methinks. I still think the controls were on par with games like Prince of Persia, and at the time Assassin's Creed came out we didn't have games like Arkham Asylum or Infamous or Prototype to make us see how clunky it was.

Also the storyline is excellent. Assassin's Creed 1 is pretty good, but the Assassin's Creed 2/Brotherhood/Revelations is amazing. I haven't played any of the non-major sequels so I can't vouch for them, though.

One thing that's still super fun is the Assassin's Creed multiplayer from Brotherhood and Revelations, the latter moreso with its improvements to the multiplayer system. You basically are hiding out in a city with a bunch of other players hiding out in the city, all trying to ill each other. Usually stealthily, though you do get the occasional match of kids who just want to run around. :smallannoyed: It basically tests you on your ability to blend in to the crowd, spot others trying to blend in, and using your special abilities to their most effectiveness. Though a part of it is reaction speed.

Overall, I'd continue playing if I was you!

[Brother Oni]

One of the few good things Revelations did was it finally gave us a clear picture of the ideological conflict between the Templars and the Assassins. In one, you knew the Templars had some plan to mind control people, and for the first two Ezio games the Templars were little more than scheming power-hungry villains.

In Revelations, you finally get a good idea about the differing philosophies: Templars feel that humanity is inherently selfish and evil, and therefore peace can only be achieved through control. They see themselves as Humanity's benevolent guardians, secretly saving civilization from itself.



Hence my earlier comment about Ezio's interactions being biased.
They didn't appear to be anything more than power hungry villains (Italian politics at the time also colouring expectations) to Ezio, so that's all they appeared to be.
The Templars could have been literally saving the world and Ezio would have still gone round and killed them without a second thought.

In Revelations, Ezio is an old man and finally starts to become more introspective (wandering around looking for Masyaf probably helped) and starts considering the philosophical and idealogical differences between their respective sides.

He shows hints of it at the end of AC2 when he doesn't kill the Pope, but then they burn Monteriggioni to the ground at the start of Brotherhood, sparking off another 7 year campaign against the Borgia and the Templars.

I think another fact that colours the first part of AC2 is that it took 11 years from the deaths of his brothers and father until he was formally inducted into the Assassin order. 11 years of blundering around in the dark, just killing the Pazzi and later the Borgia, would be frustrating for anybody and Ezio mentions this in AC2.



[Creed explanation]

I always saw the Creed as a kind of Zen koan, something that should be thought about, discussed and puzzled over.

Ezio's interpretation is probably the most accurate, given his experiences but I suspect that explanations for the Creed vary from person to person.

If you asked Ezio what the Creed meant when he was first inducted, he'd probably come up with a very surface interpretation of 'doing whatever you like', whereas 23 years later, he gives the more introspective version you've mentioned.



I remember air assassinations in AC1... I think...

But the one aspect that I loved from AC1 is that they tried to make you plan out the best way to assassinate your target and get away. I felt like I could strategize and come up with a plan to get away and win. I normally didn't pull it off, but when I did it was SO rewarding.

AC1 had air assassinations, although they were much trickier to pull off than in AC2.

AC2 games retain some of the planning aspect (nailing some of the cowardly Templar captains was a pain in the arse).

I think the planning aspect of the first game was emphasised since Altair was a member of the Ḥashashin, renowned for their specific targeting of single high profile opponents.

Incidentally did anybody else get a kick out of the chasing guards shouting out "Assassin!", when the word actually meant someone from the Hashashin order rather than a generic word for a killer? :smallbiggrin:

[Cespenar]

Incidentally did anybody else get a kick out of the chasing guards shouting out "Assassin!", when the word actually meant someone from the Hashashin order rather than a generic word for a killer? :smallbiggrin:

The guards realize that the guy they're chasing is too handsome and well dressed to be a regular street killer, so they make an assumption. :smalltongue:

[Brother Oni]

The guards realize that the guy they're chasing is too handsome and well dressed to be a regular street killer, so they make an assumption. :smalltongue:

But how do they tell whether he's handsome due to the hood? :smalltongue:

As for the clothing - Altair dresses like a monk (http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=5UM_fufj8f0#t=102s), so he's obviously not well dressed either.

I think it's the fact that he's just stabbed someone important in broad daylight and dipped a feather in their blood that gives it away. :smalltongue:

[VanBuren]

But then in the Abstergo files you can unlock by playing multiplayer, Vidic just comes right out and admits that the Borgia were really just kinda doing their own thing and not really advancing the order's goals.

[Brother Oni]

But then in the Abstergo files you can unlock by playing multiplayer, Vidic just comes right out and admits that the Borgia were really just kinda doing their own thing and not really advancing the order's goals.

If that mode removed the level based unlocks or had better matchmaking then I might be tempted to play it again.

I got fed up with it the third time I got shot from behind with the hidden gun that round. For reference, I was only about level 5, so another 30-odd levels before I managed to unlock the hidden gun myself.

I calculated how long that would take at my current rate of progress and thought 'sod that'.

[Triscuitable]

Oh yeah, weren't air assassinations not introduced until AC2? That's gotta be rough.

Assassination methods in AC2:


From a hiding spot (benches, hay bales, etc.)
From a ledge (stab, pull over edge, plummet)
Dual kills
Counter kills (you can fight with the hidden blade in 2)

[DiscipleofBob]

I'm on the final mission in Jerusalem for AC1. The game's grown on me for the most part, but there are still some parts that really bother me.

For example, the forced cutscenes where you get to see just how much of a bastard your targets are, when you have a clear shot at them but you're forced to stand still and watch them until they've already made a near-clean getaway.

The worst example of that (at least thus far) was the book-burning scholar. I know which one it is, he's in a closed temple and I can kill him pretty easily right now before any guards get involved, so what does Altair do? Wait until he's out on the streets and you have to kill a bunch of impostors first and deal with tons of guards along the way.

And the mission on the docks in Acre was bad, but for completely different reasons. For some reason no matter what I did, Altair's first instinct was, instead of leaping to the next platform or chasing the target, leaping into the nearest body of fatal water. :smallannoyed:

[Brother Oni]

And the mission on the docks in Acre was bad, but for completely different reasons. For some reason no matter what I did, Altair's first instinct was, instead of leaping to the next platform or chasing the target, leaping into the nearest body of fatal water. :smallannoyed:

Which leads onto the primary reason why AC2 is so much better than AC1 - Ezio can swim. :smalltongue:

I believe it was retconned as being glitches in the Animus which the new software upgrade patched rather than Altair exhibiting extreme hydrophobia.

[DiscipleofBob]

Just finished the first game, moving on to the second one...

Seriously wtf ending. I know that's what they were going for, but still, not the slightest bit of closure.

Apparently I missed picking the pen out of Warren's pocket that would let me access his e-mails.

I take it after the credits all I can do is wander around the lab, look at creepy drawings, and kill time with the latest Nintendo peripheral the ANIMUS.

Anything else I should know going into 2? (missables, notable changes, etc.)

[Pronounceable]

Disregarding AC1 (which I didn't play because all evidence pointed to it being bad), Assassin's Creed is a nice enough series but it's nothing more than Poor Man's Prince. Also the present day Desmond story should not exist and is terrible. Also it gets worse with every "huge twist" at the end of each game, I'm sure tvtropes has a name for "piling questions upon questions without giving any answers until story gets crushed under its own weight and pisses off the audience".

Focusing on the awesomeness of running across roofs and shanking dudes in a Renaissence setting is the correct thing to do, because that's the only thing games actually have going for themselves: Hitman does stealth better, Prince does acrobatics better and both (along with most action games you care to name) do combat better.

[VanBuren]

Disregarding AC1 (which I didn't play because all evidence pointed to it being bad), Assassin's Creed is a nice enough series but it's nothing more than Poor Man's Prince. Also the present day Desmond story should not exist and is terrible. Also it gets worse with every "huge twist" at the end of each game, I'm sure tvtropes has a name for "piling questions upon questions without giving any answers until story gets crushed under its own weight and pisses off the audience".

Focusing on the awesomeness of running across roofs and shanking dudes in a Renaissence setting is the correct thing to do, because that's the only thing games actually have going for themselves: Hitman does stealth better, Prince does acrobatics better and both (along with most action games you care to name) do combat better.

Pssh. Without the Desmond plot, there isn't any point to the conflicts in the past.

Anyway, Revelations shed light on quite a bit, actually.

[VanBuren]

Disregarding AC1 (which I didn't play because all evidence pointed to it being bad), Assassin's Creed is a nice enough series but it's nothing more than Poor Man's Prince. Also the present day Desmond story should not exist and is terrible. Also it gets worse with every "huge twist" at the end of each game, I'm sure tvtropes has a name for "piling questions upon questions without giving any answers until story gets crushed under its own weight and pisses off the audience".

Focusing on the awesomeness of running across roofs and shanking dudes in a Renaissence setting is the correct thing to do, because that's the only thing games actually have going for themselves: Hitman does stealth better, Prince does acrobatics better and both (along with most action games you care to name) do combat better.

Pssh. Without the Desmond plot, there isn't any point to the conflicts in the past.

Anyway, Revelations shed light on quite a bit, actually.

[Brother Oni]

Just finished the first game, moving on to the second one...

Seriously wtf ending. I know that's what they were going for, but still, not the slightest bit of closure.

Apparently I missed picking the pen out of Warren's pocket that would let me access his e-mails.

I take it after the credits all I can do is wander around the lab, look at creepy drawings, and kill time with the latest Nintendo peripheral the ANIMUS.

Anything else I should know going into 2? (missables, notable changes, etc.)

Well the ending for AC1 threw up so much speculation that it fed the forums and discussion boards for months with people trying to piece together the pieces (it was quite entertaining and kept the conspiracy theorists happy).

Yup, that's all you can do at the end of the first game.

As for going into 2, there's nothing you need from one - you know about Altair and how the Assassins formally ended up opposing the Templars - that's all you really need to know. Just enjoy the improved control system in 2 and how much of a character Ezio is. :smallbiggrin:

Oh and ignore cnsvnc's naysaying. :smalltongue:

[DiscipleofBob]

Well, I have to agree Hitman: Blood Money did stealth better because you could actually choose HOW to kill your targets rather than engaged in a specific scenario, and no forced cutscene where you're forced to let the target escape from an exposed position to a fortress of guards before you kill them.

I would agree Prince of Persia did the acrobatics better (for that matter, so did The Saboteur when it came to those climbing sections).

But I have to give actual action sequences to Assassin's Creed. Mostly because Hitman was never about the fights themselves unless you screwed up, and the first in the Prince of Persia trilogy was pretty bad combat-wise. Assassin's Creed at least you can get in a swordfight with the entire town guard and expect to come out all right. And the chase scenes across rooftops with the city guard actually keeping pace was kind of cool.

[Croakamancer]

I'd say you're going to get more freedom as the games move on. Not really in the storyline stuff (at least not all the time) but it does come. And with Brotherhood and Revelations, you've got the Templar Captains to deal with, and you take them down pretty much entirely on your terms. (And IIRC, there's some freedom in the storyline too)

As to acrobatics though... Eh. I've only played the most recent Prince of Persia game, but did not like the acrobatics in it. Assassins' Creed still takes the top slot there for me.

[Mewtarthio]

By the way, I've noticed something odd while replaying the second game...

Borgia is now identified as "Rodrigo Borgia" from his first appearance. I thought I recalled him being designated "The Spaniard" until the final mission. Is this a new thing?

[Brother Oni]

By the way, I've noticed something odd while replaying the second game...

Borgia is now identified as "Rodrigo Borgia" from his first appearance. I thought I recalled him being designated "The Spaniard" until the final mission. Is this a new thing?

Is this in the conspiracy web thingy or in the profile bit?
I'm fairly sure he was referred to as 'The Spaniard' in both parts until the end as well.

Which platform are you playing it on? Do you have a previous save with a completed game on the same system (some sort of 'new game plus' info)?

[Mewtarthio]

Which platform are you playing it on? Do you have a previous save with a completed game on the same system (some sort of 'new game plus' info)?

X360. I had a completed game save, but I overwrote it.

[Brother Oni]

X360. I had a completed game save, but I overwrote it.

Maybe something to do with the Achievements, as they're save game independent but still linked to your account?

I haven't played AC2 on my current Xbox Live account - I'll check whether he's still called the Spaniard there.

[Croakamancer]

As I recall, he was referred to as both fairly freely, the Spaniard coming up as a 'game name', but Ezio generally giving his proper name more.

[Reverent-One]

I'm still playing AC2 for the first time on Steam, and Ezio does use his real name.

[Brother Oni]

I'm still playing AC2 for the first time on Steam, and Ezio does use his real name.

The question wasn't if Ezio used the Spaniard's real name, but when.


It's not until he's dealt with the Pazzi conspiracy that he discovers the involvement of the Spaniard at all, let alone his name.

[Mewtarthio]

Re: The Spaniard's name:
I'm now almost at Venice in my second playthrough, and Borgia has been identified by name twice: Mario identifies the Spaniard as "Rodrigo Borgia, Master of the Templars" shortly after Vieri's death, and Ezio himself identifies the soldiers that attack Leonardo as "Borgia's men."

That being said, I had been pretty sure he remained "The Spaniard" until the end of Venice. In fact, there's no reference to his alias at all, except in Francesco's datalog.

Anyone have an unpatched version of the game that they could check out?

[GolemsVoice]

Is this in the conspiracy web thingy or in the profile bit?
I'm fairly sure he was referred to as 'The Spaniard' in both parts until the end as well.

Which platform are you playing it on? Do you have a previous save with a completed game on the same system (some sort of 'new game plus' info)?

I think I heard "Borgia's troops" in one of the assassination missions from the pigeon boxes, and that was even before the scene in the amphitheater.

[DiscipleofBob]

Playing through the game for the first time right now. He's definitely referred to as Borgia first and later as 'The Spaniard' but so far only by the annoying British dude in Desmond-world who's job is to look up the targets on Wikipedia.

Pros of the game: I like Ezio much more than Altair. Much more personality. Also, at least so far, the bad guys aren't trying to convince me that they're really the good guys or anything, they're just straight up trying to kill people/take over, and I respect that. The combat seems to be tightened up and I LOVE 90% of the sidequests. The Assassin's tombs, rebuilding the town, buying weapons and paintings, the historical conspiracy puzzles of Subject 16, enjoy them all too much.

Cons: Still getting annoyed at the cinematic-kills. I'm fairly certain I could save at least some of these people if Ezio wasn't busy staring at his feet during the cinematic. And the acrobatics are awful. Those time trial missions are the worst, not because the obstacle courses are hard, but because Ezio decides that straightening his arm to reach a ledge is a little too much effort, or that getting onto the tightrope two inches to his left is far too demanding when there's a nice inviting ground 50 feet below, or the inverse where Ezio needs to get down to the street now but instead jumps uselessly between ledges and rooftops just cause.

[Maxios]

I got Revelations on Wednesday. It's very fun, the gameplay is even better then Brotherhood's. The plot, in my humble opinion, isn't as good as it was in Brotherhood, but there is a part in it that is hilarious.
Dressing up like a bard, and playing the songs

[Croakamancer]

Bob, I might be remembering this wrong, but IIRC, grabbing for a ledge, either above you or one you're jumping towards, is actually an unlocked move.

Yeah, one of the weak points of ACII, I'll give you that, but it should make acrobatics easier. You'll pick it up in Venice, if I'm remembering this right.

[Brother Oni]

Bob, I might be remembering this wrong, but IIRC, grabbing for a ledge, either above you or one you're jumping towards, is actually an unlocked move.

Jumping for a ledge above you is an unlocked move yes, but I think Bob is complaining about stuff that seems to be in reach but isn't.

The flashier jumps and leaps for further ledges require a bit of kit from Leonardo (I forget whether it's in AC2, as the thing you get in Brotherhood re-enables the trick you learn in Venice).

[Mewtarthio]

No, it looks more like the problem is that, occasionally, the freerunning system won't select a point you think you should be able to reach, either because it was really out of reach (and you couldn't tell) or because your aim was a bit off with the movement stick. It does kind of hurt the badass assassin mystique when Ezio cheerfully throws himself away from the next chimney/girder/conveniently decorated wall and plummets to the ground, shattering his armor.

[Sith_Happens]

No, it looks more like the problem is that, occasionally, the freerunning system won't select a point you think you should be able to reach, either because it was really out of reach (and you couldn't tell) or because your aim was a bit off with the movement stick. It does kind of hurt the badass assassin mystique when Ezio cheerfully throws himself away from the next chimney/girder/conveniently decorated wall and plummets to the ground, shattering his armor.

Yep, if I had a florin for every time that happened to me...:smallsigh:

[Brother Oni]

Yep, if I had a florin for every time that happened to me...:smallsigh:

Parachutes are your best friend. :smallbiggrin:

[GolemsVoice]

Actually, I thought the freerunning system is quite alright, and it really makes for some fluent rooftop running. Of course, sometimes it just fails, but usually, Tab let's you at least grab something on the way down.

[DiscipleofBob]

Also, I think every major boss fight in either game that isn't an assassination before they notice you can be summed up as such:

"So it's come to this, has it? A fight to the death, mano a mano, man to man, just you and me and my GUARDS!"

[GolemsVoice]

To wich Ezio replies: ".... and my AXE."

And then EVERYBODY IS SLAUGTHERED, because EXECUTION STREAK.

[Brother Oni]

"So it's come to this, has it? A fight to the death, mano a mano, man to man, just you and me and my GUARDS!"

Just wait until Brotherhood. :smallbiggrin:

[Hiro Protagonest]

To wich Ezio replies: ".... and my AXE."

And then EVERYBODY IS SLAUGTHERED, because EXECUTION STREAK.

I thought Connor gets the axe. Axes aren't very Italian. :smalltongue:

[Cespenar]

I thought Connor gets the axe. Axes aren't very Italian. :smalltongue:

True. They even chop trees with rapiers there in Italy.

[Hiro Protagonest]

True. They even chop trees with rapiers there in Italy.

They're not THAT hellbent on tradition.

They use slashing swords. :smalltongue:

Nah, but I have a hard time imagining that an Italian assassin/streetfighter uses an axe.

[GolemsVoice]

In Brotherhood he gets one, and it can be used to full effect. Although I too prefer swords, it really doesn't fit.

[Mewtarthio]

Also, I think every major boss fight in either game that isn't an assassination before they notice you can be summed up as such:

"So it's come to this, has it? A fight to the death, mano a mano, man to man, just you and me and my GUARDS!"

You forgot "Run away! Run away!" The Templar Brotherhood clearly has a good cardio program.

[GolemsVoice]

I really felt bad for the poor templar guards you chase in some of the levels. "Must... run... away... before he kills me." Poor guy, and you hunt him like an animal.

[DiscipleofBob]

I really felt bad for the poor templar guards you chase in some of the levels. "Must... run... away... before he kills me." Poor guy, and you hunt him like an animal.

I used to feel bad for all those archers I kill while traveling along the rooftops as well as all the guards I have to kill to get into restricted areas, but then I saw what the Venetian guards did to the local populace and my conscience was appeased. Sure I know on an intellectual level that their behavior shouldn't reflect on the guards in Florence or Tuscany, but on a subconscious level it helps me feel better.

[GolemsVoice]

Yeah, the comments of all guards as well as some actionas show that most of the guards are apparently depraved people on a power trip, but sometimes they show that they are only human, too. So my rule is: never kill guards that surrender or run away unless it is critical to the mission.
On my first playthrough of AC II I even tried to kill as little rooftop archers as possible, instead running away or hiding. But sometimes they go out of their way to be annoying-

[Mewtarthio]

I used to feel bad for all those archers I kill while traveling along the rooftops as well as all the guards I have to kill to get into restricted areas, but then I saw what the Venetian guards did to the local populace and my conscience was appeased. Sure I know on an intellectual level that their behavior shouldn't reflect on the guards in Florence or Tuscany, but on a subconscious level it helps me feel better.

I stopped feeling bad for the guards when I sicced a band of thieves on some Venetian soldiers, and all the civilians gathered around and started cheering for the thieves. You know those guys have to have been up to some serious cartoonish supervillainy there.

[Dusk Eclipse]

I am just going to pop in and say I love all the games, and I just recently finished a playthrough all the games from AC 1 up to Revelations.

My favourite part of revelations were the bombs, nothing as satisfying as droping a smoke bomb and kill all the guards before they can react (first game in which I actually used the Eagle's Vision unless it was required to identify a target).

[GolemsVoice]

I stopped feeling bad for the guards when I sicced a band of thieves on some Venetian soldiers, and all the civilians gathered around and started cheering for the thieves. You know those guys have to have been up to some serious cartoonish supervillainy there.

Well, they apparently beat citizens up for little to no reason, steal, run protection rackets, rape, delight in torture and harm, and generally look down on anybody who has less power than them, which is unfortunately, most of the population of the various cities.

By the way, the Assassins in Brotherhood are incredibly fun. You can watch every hiding spot, roof or doorway explode in a flurry of white-robed death the instant you call them.

[Brother Oni]

I really felt bad for the poor templar guards you chase in some of the levels. "Must... run... away... before he kills me." Poor guy, and you hunt him like an animal.

Ezio's been killing Templars for 35 years by the time he reaches Constantinople and has been head of the Assassins for about 20 of them.

I'm not surprised that in Revelations, he's is essentially an implacable deathbringing legend, a ghost story to scare the new Templar recruits with and why those damn Templar captains rabbit at the first sign of you showing up.

[GolemsVoice]

And he is! After you get the guilds and the assassins in Brotherhood, you basically have to go on a killing spree to fulfill the challenges and train your assassins. And then there's the regular killing. I think I've killed about 900 guards so far, and I'm only about 40% into the game.

[Sith_Happens]

Ezio's been killing Templars for 35 years by the time he reaches Constantinople and has been head of the Assassins for about 20 of them.

I'm not surprised that in Revelations, he's is essentially an implacable deathbringing legend, a ghost story to scare the new Templar recruits with and why those damn Templar captains rabbit at the first sign of you showing up.

Way earlier even than that; in Venice in ACII you overhear one of the conspirators panicking over the mere possibility that you might be in town.

[Brother Oni]

Way earlier even than that; in Venice in ACII you overhear one of the conspirators panicking over the mere possibility that you might be in town.

I think that was on a much more personal level, as in 'Ezio Auditore, expert killer and Assassin, might be in town to kill me' compared to 'Ezio Auditore, the Mentor, master Assassin and leader of our greatest foes, might be in town to stop us'.

By Venice, I believe Ezio's been chasing the conspirators for around 10 years but still hasn't been formally inducted into the Assassins yet.

[Cespenar]

Way earlier even than that; in Venice in ACII you overhear one of the conspirators panicking over the mere possibility that you might be in town.

Batman much?

[Sith_Happens]

Batman much?

Pretty much. Epecially given that the reason you overhear him in the first place is because you're already in his house, getting ready to make good on his fears.:smallcool:

[GolemsVoice]

That's actually not the only time he's compared to Batman, as far as I know. Only his entire shtick is actually killing his enemies.

[Cespenar]

That's actually not the only time he's compared to Batman, as far as I know. Only his entire shtick is actually killing his enemies.

Batman can learn a thing or two from him, then.

[DiscipleofBob]

I finally beat Assassin's Creed 2, completed everything except getting all the treasure chests and feathers.

Should I bother with any of the spinoff games before AC3 comes out?

[Comet]

Brotherhood is good fun, sure. Haven't bothered with Revelations, so I wouldn't know on that one.

[Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll]

Brotherhood is worth it. Never played Revelations.

[Brother Oni]

If you're at all interested in Ezio's life story, then Brotherhood and Revelations are worth it.

As games, Brotherhood is a significant improvement over AC2, with enough new elements and control system improvements to make it worthwhile.
Revelations unfortunately isn't such a big improvement over Brotherood, but I found it still worthwhile to play - you may feel differently, depending on how close you are to the AC3 release when you finish Brotherhood.

The other side games on the portable platforms have very little effect on the main plot and while most of them are decent enough, they're missable.

[Sith_Happens]

I finally beat Assassin's Creed 2, completed everything except getting all the treasure chests and feathers.

Should I bother with any of the spinoff games before AC3 comes out?

If you mean Brotherhood and Revelations then yes. I'd also like to nitpick for a moment and point out that both of those are honest-to-goodness sequels as opposed to "spinoffs;" the series just has a weird numbering system.

[Maxios]

Yeah. They only number the games with new Ancestors present within.

[DiscipleofBob]

So if my only desire was to go through the necessary plot in preparation for AC3, would I still need to go through Brotherhood and Revelations?

Also, is any of the AC2 DLC worth it?

[Nai_Calus]

Just beat Brotherhood last night. Now to drop back and play the first game, then on to Revelations. Might finish those in time for III. :smalltongue:

[Hiro Protagonest]

So if my only desire was to go through the necessary plot in preparation for AC3, would I still need to go through Brotherhood and Revelations?

Brotherhood and Revelations are both more important to the plot than AC1. Besides, better play experience.

[Knight13]

Revelations is particularly worth it if you're interested in what happened to Altair after AC1. You actually get to play portions of the game as Altair at various points in his life. He might not have been very interesting in AC1, but he gets up to quite a bit of interesting stuff after he becomes the leader of the Assassins.

You also learn more about the revelation at the end of ACII, as well as some stuff about Desmond, if you're at all interested in him.


Also, is any of the AC2 DLC worth it?
If you're talking about about the Siege of Forli and and the Bonfire of the Vanities, they're both pretty interesting. Especially if you know that the real Caterina Sforza really did that stuff.

[GolemsVoice]

I think Siege of Forli is almost essential to the game, because as far as I know, without it Forli is basically just an empty town. Bonfire of the vanities is ok, but it feels a little tacked on. Still, it's nice to see some more historical figures.

[Sith_Happens]

I think Siege of Forli is almost essential to the game, because as far as I know, without it Forli is basically just an empty town. Bonfire of the vanities is ok, but it feels a little tacked on. Still, it's nice to see some more historical figures.

IIRC, Bonfire of the Vanities is when you first meet Machiavelli, otherwise he just sort of comes out of nowhere in Brotherhood.

[VanBuren]

IIRC, Bonfire of the Vanities is when you first meet Machiavelli, otherwise he just sort of comes out of nowhere in Brotherhood.

Not so. You meet him when Ezio gets initiated into the order.

[Brother Oni]

If you're talking about about the Siege of Forli and and the Bonfire of the Vanities, they're both pretty interesting. Especially if you know that the real Caterina Sforza really did that stuff.

The sheer amount of abuse she hurls at her children's kidnappers makes her both terrifying and interesting too.

It's even funnier when you're rescuing her daughter and she's doing exactly the same. :smallbiggrin:

[Mewtarthio]

IIRC, Bonfire of the Vanities is when you first meet Machiavelli, otherwise he just sort of comes out of nowhere in Brotherhood.

Both DLC are set after you meet Machiavelli for the first time in the main game. They do give him and Caterina Sforza a bit more development beyond the brief cameos they had in the vanilla game.

I should note that, if you buy either DLC, you really should buy both DLCs. They do form a continuing story. "Battle of Forli" is just meaningless filler with out "Bonfire of the Vanities," and "Bonfire" comes out of nowhere without "Battle." I bought both together, so I'm not sure how they handle it if you've only got one, but I don't imagine it works very well.

As for the DLCs individually: I didn't like "Battle for Forli" all that much. Way too much combat for my tastes. If you like the game's combat system, you'll probably like it more; I personally play the game for the assassinations. I enjoyed "Bonfire of the Vanities" a lot more. That DLC is pretty much pure assassinations. You end up watching ten different Memory Corridor scenes over the course of that DLC.

Plot-wise, you're probably wondering how well a couple of interquels set during a timeskip fit in with the plot as a whole. As you can imagine, they don't do much to enhance the main plot: The timeskip in the vanilla game was a bit annoying, but it apparently didn't gloss over anything that crucial to understanding Borgia's evil plans or Ezio's counter-plans. That being said, I do feel like they enhance the story. "Bonfire" in particular has a pretty clear character-defining moment for Ezio. "Bonfire" has another great thing going for it:
It shows what happens when someone abuses the Apple of Eden. Yes, Al Mualim did go on a bit of a power trip at the end of the first game, but he never actually did anything with it. Savonarala, on the other hand, doesn't content himself with making people babble about the glories of the Master. "Bonfire" actually ends up being pretty creepy overall, particularly since so many of your targets snap out of it in the Memory Corridor.
"Battle for Forli," on the other hand, isn't all that relevant aside from setting up "Bonfire of the Vanities."

tl;dr: You can skip both DLCs if you like; they won't really impact your understanding of the plot that much. Still, "Bonfire of the Vanities" does enhance the story overall in my opinion, and "Battle for Forli" is pretty important for understanding the other DLC. Not that "Battle" is a bad DLC, mind you; it's just not as good as "Bonfire."

Oh, and as for the Templar Lairs: They're basically Assassin's Tombs, except without the cool unbreakable armor when you clear them all. No real additions to the plot: They're just a bunch of bonus levels.