Should I pick up the first 4 games before picking up the 3rd?

  • 64 results
  • 1
  • 2
#1 Edited by DarthOrange (3858 posts) -

I was recently going to pick up Mass Effect 1-3 but it sounds like the third one is a disappointment and worse it comes on multiple discs so I decided not to get any of them. So now I'm thinking about catching up with Assassins Creed. Do you think I should skip the first one, or the first two or should I just wait for the third one and say screw the story? Is the story any good? Please no spoilers, I may still pick these up.

Edit:

Thanks for all the answers guys! I ended up picking up Assassins Creed 1 & 2 as well as Alan Wake. I am playing through the first one now (am on the fourth assassination) and it is really fun aside from some platforming jank. Based on the advice given here I am going to do the first 2 games back to back, then play Alan Wake to break things up. After that I will pick up Brotherhood followed by American Nightmare and then conclude with Revelations and I will officially be caught up with both the Alan Wake and Assassins Creed games. I may end up diving into Mass Effect afterwords, seems like I am going to just keep my expectations low with the third one. Then again, some of you said to skip the first Assassins Creed and I am glad I didn't.

Hopefully this helps out anyone else looking to catch up with the series.

#2 Posted by Jimbo (9800 posts) -

Best franchise of this generation. Play all of 'em. If you're gonna skip any, skip Revelations. Ironically, there aren't really any important revelations and it just hits you over the head with stuff you should have picked up in Brotherhood. You should play Mass Effect as well though. Srsly, what have you been doing for the last 5 years to miss both of them?

#3 Edited by mlarrabee (2927 posts) -

The stories seem to be fairly stand-alone, although I've played only the first two.

If I were you, I'd find the first one and give the mechanics a shot. You can find it for five-eight dollars at most retailers, and while AC1 has some annoyances that were corrected in the sequels, the core running, jumping, and crowd mechanics aren't too dissimilar between games.

I played the first one when it came out and enjoyed it, but when I bought AC2 and played a bit, I realized that my appreciation of the original was founded on a poor selection of available titles at the time - I'd nothing to compare it to, so it seemed decent.

Basically, what I'm saying is, if you've never played any of the Assassin's Creed games don't assume you'll enjoy them. Find the cheapest copy possible of any of the series, and see what you think.

I'm still trying to get around to finishing AC2, and recently I purchased Brotherhood for twenty dollars before remembering, "Hey, I disagree with most reviewers about this series! Why did I just buy that!?" and promptly giving it away.

EDIT:

@ShadowConqueror said:

What a strange thing the game industry has become for that thread title not to be complete fucking nonsense.

And this. Absolutely this.

#4 Posted by ShadowConqueror (3050 posts) -

What a strange thing the game industry has become for that thread title not to be complete fucking nonsense.

#5 Posted by JackSukeru (5910 posts) -

I haven't played Revelations, but I've stopped giving much of a crap about the overarching story at this point. I say either wait for Assassin's Creed 3 or, if you want to get into the series, play Assassin's Creed 2. 2 is definetly better, gameplay-wise, than the first game and it'll probably clue you in on what's going on in the main plotline better than Brotherhood would, of course I can't speak for Revelations at this point.

#6 Posted by EnchantedEcho (739 posts) -

Just get AC 2 and Brotherhood, or even just AC 2.

#7 Posted by hoossy (933 posts) -

Play 2 and Brotherhood... that's all you need

#8 Posted by Zacagawea (1590 posts) -

Get 2 and Brohood.

Also, you should probably play Mass Effect.

#9 Posted by LordXavierBritish (6320 posts) -

I'm starting to think the overarching story is getting a little long in the tooth. I really wish they'd drop the whole Animus thing and just give us more interesting time periods to dick around in.
 
That said all the games are fucking great, perhaps with the exception of AC1 which is still decent, and they are all worth playing.
 
If you want a starting point I'd say ACII. ACI has some relevant plot points but your not going to miss anything by just reading a wiki page.

#10 Posted by FancySoapsMan (5816 posts) -

You'll probably get burnt out after a while since they're all so similar. 
 
but if that's not a problem for you then don't pay any attention to me.

#11 Posted by shootermcclay (219 posts) -

Read the wiki for I, play 2, it's a toss up for Brotherhood, and read the wiki for Revelations.

#12 Posted by Rittsy (77 posts) -

Mechanically you'll be fine starting from 3. Certain aspects of the story will probably seem a little confusing, but odds are they'll include a "previously on Assassins Creed..." to fill those in. I didn't play the first, but picked up the story pretty quickly playing number 2, and I don't really plan on playing Brotherhood or Revelations (not because they're bad or anything, I just feel like I burned out on the second and I wasn't that much of a fan of Ezio).

They're fun games, maybe get number 2, it's pretty cheap now.

#13 Posted by SomeDeliCook (2294 posts) -

The only Assassin's Creed games I played to completion was the first one, but honestly I say skip that and go right onto the second game.

I feel like the repetitive gameplay ruined what could've been a really great series for me, so when the second game came around with all tons of new features, it was too little too late for me. I would've loved to have gotten into the series though.

Going to say to play the second one, and brotherhood too, because I hear a lot of good about it.

#14 Posted by Harpell (158 posts) -

Everyone else is saying to skip the first one, which I totally understand, but I gotta say, that game blew my mind when I first played it. The story beats it sets up are pretty integral for the overarching plot, and the gameplay holds up fairly well for me, although the sequels definitely improve upon it.

I'd say give it a shot, you could probably find it for like 6 bucks at this point.

#15 Posted by Lazyaza (2176 posts) -

I wouldn't recommend people new to AC play the original at all. That game is broken and frustrating as hell. I am still amazed I got through as much as it as I did before finally saying "fuck this" and watching the last hour or so online.

#16 Posted by GloriousDinosaur (433 posts) -

I would only go for 2. It was a tremendously fun experience - new style of gameplay, great setting etc. Brotherhood was really the same game...

#17 Posted by Benny (1952 posts) -

Seen this topic a lot this week. Play 2 and brotherhood, YouTube the rest.

#18 Posted by DeF (4861 posts) -

Ubisoft says apparently you don't need to in order to jump into III.

But AC II and Brotherhood are fantastic games. You should also be aware that they are all quite similar so you might burn out before AC III even comes out. Also, note that the PS3 version of AC: Revelations has the first game as a bonus on the disc (I'm mentioning this because your name is blue ...^^) so don't buy the first one separately! I don't know where you got that Revelations comes on multiple discs, it's just not true. It's one Blu Ray with two games on it!

Ask yourself this though, why haven't you played one of them until now?

#19 Posted by Doctorchimp (4074 posts) -

Youtube like the beginning and ending of Assassin's Creed 1 and maybe read the wiki.

Play 2 and Brotherhood

Youtube Revelations and read the wiki.

#20 Posted by ajamafalous (11959 posts) -

2 and AssBro.

#21 Edited by Jimbo (9800 posts) -
@Harpell said:

Everyone else is saying to skip the first one, which I totally understand, but I gotta say, that game blew my mind when I first played it. The story beats it sets up are pretty integral for the overarching plot, and the gameplay holds up fairly well for me, although the sequels definitely improve upon it. I'd say give it a shot, you could probably find it for like 6 bucks at this point.

I agree.  Narratively, AC1 is the foundation for the entire franchise. Skipping it would be an absurd decision for somebody intending to really get into the franchise.
 
Reading a wiki as an alternative is the choice of the anti-gaming savage and the philistine, imo.
#22 Posted by Winternet (8014 posts) -

How many of these threads are there? jeez

#23 Edited by Bourbon_Warrior (4523 posts) -

2 and Brotherhood.

#24 Posted by Rolyatkcinmai (2686 posts) -

@DarthOrange said:

I was recently going to pick up Mass Effect 1-3 but it sounds like the third one is a disappointment

Nope. It's fucking incredible. I fully support you playing all the AC games (they're great), but don't be an idiot. Play ME some time as well. That is genuinely the best franchise around right now.

#25 Edited by WilltheMagicAsian (1544 posts) -

I think the AC games are great games two years a part, but they're horrible marathon games. Cramming all four is going to be tough.

#26 Posted by DeF (4861 posts) -

@ShadowConqueror said:

What a strange thing the game industry has become for that thread title not to be complete fucking nonsense.

It might be even weirder since I only realized what you meant after reading it again a few hours later :D

#27 Posted by MideonNViscera (2257 posts) -

@DarthOrange said:

I was recently going to pick up Mass Effect 1-3 but it sounds like the third one is a disappointment and worse it comes on multiple discs so I decided not to get any of them. So now I'm thinking about catching up with Assassins Creed. Do you think I should skip the first one, or the first two or should I just wait for the third one and say screw the story? Is the story any good? Please no spoilers, I may still pick these up.

Being on multiple discs is worse than sucking?

#28 Posted by zombie2011 (4972 posts) -

@DarthOrange said:

I was recently going to pick up Mass Effect 1-3 but it sounds like the third one is a disappointment and worse it comes on multiple discs so I decided not to get any of them.

Perfect reason not to play the best franchise of this generation.

#29 Posted by AhmadMetallic (18955 posts) -

I want to find each and every one of you telling this man to skip the first game and assassinate you. 
 
I HATEZ YOU ALLZ.

#30 Posted by ttocs (763 posts) -

My opinion is to just pick up 2.  That's the best one so far.  Sure, Brotherhood is amazing, but you really only need to play 2 to get a feel for the game and then you can safely move on to the new one.  If you have time though, def. get brotherhood.

#31 Posted by Dany (7887 posts) -

Play 2 and then brotherhood. 1st game is clunky, story isn't there yet. Revelations is not a good game.

#32 Edited by MrKlorox (11209 posts) -
@EnchantedEcho said:

Just get AC 2 and Brotherhood, or even just AC 2.

This. AC1 was little more than a tech demo compared to AC2. You should watch the cutscenes and stuff for AC1 on yourube since the majority of the gameplay is super repetitive. AC2 is where the series really spread its wings. I was ready to give up on the franchise after AC1, but hearing all the praise of AC2 on the bombcast made me give it a shot, and I loved it. Brotherhood was also better than AC1, but I played it too soon after AC2 and was burnt out on the formula by then. Don't make that mistake preparing for AC3.
#33 Posted by Sjupp (1910 posts) -

@ajamafalous said:

2 and AssBro.

Where can I find this AssBro game? It sounds.. Interesting.

#34 Posted by Gamer_152 (14072 posts) -

The narratives aren't bad but you'll really wanna pace yourself if you plan to play all of these or you're going to be rather burned out. It seems the opinion of most that AC1 was good in its time but at a certain way in gets very repetitive and that Revelations doesn't add a whole lot new to the games either. Personally I'd play II and Brotherhood and skip 1 and Revelations, but if you really want to invest yourself in the story get all of them I guess.

Moderator
#35 Posted by TooWalrus (13169 posts) -
@WilltheMagicAsian

I think the AC games are great games two years a part, but they're horrible marathon games. Cramming all four is going to be tough.

I disagree- I played the first three back-to-back, and it's so great when the games end on those crazy cliffhangers and you don't have to wait two years to see the next part.
#36 Posted by plaintomato (599 posts) -

@DarthOrange said:

I was recently going to pick up Mass Effect 1-3 but it sounds like the third one is a disappointment and worse it comes on multiple discs so I decided not to get any of them. So now I'm thinking about catching up with Assassins Creed. Do you think I should skip the first one, or the first two or should I just wait for the third one and say screw the story? Is the story any good? Please no spoilers, I may still pick these up.

The ME series is probably the only game where I'd recommend picking up 1-3 due to the way the stories and your choices feed into the next game(s). I've been thinking I wish I hadn't played ME1 & 2 so I could hit them all in sequence sometime; but I'm sure burnout would be a factor.

As far as AC - you wouldn't be missing much to skip the previous games, you could always catch up on story on the web and no big thing. I would never want to play the first one again...it was cool with new concepts but they aren't new anymore and in comparison to the sequels it's not that great. 2 was great, but soooo much to do that I was too burned out to enjoy Brotherhood, let alone Revelations (which came with a lot of the same disappointment you hear about ME3). And you already know there will be yet another one next year and every year until people stop buying them. If you want to burn out, play them all, but you won't, you'll burn out by the end of AC2. I'd pick up Brotherhood, skip 1, 2 and Revelations, and then pick up the new one next year.

#37 Posted by Hosstile17 (763 posts) -

@hoossy said:

Play 2 and Brotherhood... that's all you need

Revelations is worth playing. It does flesh out some characters and close some books on Altair and Ezio. But, yeah. 2 and Brotherhood are all that are required.

#38 Posted by BrockNRolla (1702 posts) -

There are signficant story bits you might miss, but honestly, if you play all those games you're going to be too burned out of AC to play III.

#39 Edited by handlas (2675 posts) -

Just play the 2nd one and Brotherhood. Those are the only good ones.

....imo of course. Brotherhood was excellent. Revelations never hooked me, never got far in it. Traveling between the 2 parts of the city was annoying, the climbing hook thing didn't interest me, and the tower defense stuff was dumb. Excited for 3 tho.

#40 Edited by louiedog (2335 posts) -

I played the first one and own a copy of Brotherhood that I have not touched yet. There's no way I'll find time to play all three of the Ezio games so I'll just consult wikipedia to fill in what I missed. I bet I'd get burned out trying and have a worse experience if I even attempted it by the fall.

#41 Posted by DjCmeP (1148 posts) -

Skip the first one. You'll be fine if you just play the 2nd one.Brotherhood is ok at best.

#42 Posted by iAmJohn (6117 posts) -

The first one sucks and is not worth playing. Read what happens on Wikipedia if you need to. ACII and Brotherhood are the ones you need to play. Revelations has some great story payoffs at the ending and some excellent mission design, but a lot of filler to get there; I wouldn't say it's skippable like the first game is, but unless you really want to play more ACII and experience the end of Ezio, you probably don't need to play it.

#43 Posted by WilltheMagicAsian (1544 posts) -

@TooWalrus said:

@WilltheMagicAsian

I think the AC games are great games two years a part, but they're horrible marathon games. Cramming all four is going to be tough.

I disagree- I played the first three back-to-back, and it's so great when the games end on those crazy cliffhangers and you don't have to wait two years to see the next part.

Well, I kind of enjoy the wait, it's the same with a good series of books. Playing them all back to back kind of cheapens the experience for me.

#44 Posted by CaptainTightPants (2834 posts) -

Definitely not. Just like the Ratchet and Clank franchise, if you play any two of them too quickly after each other you will grow tired of the repetition and how similar they all are. 
You can skip the first and just read up on it. You should definitely play AC II, wait a good long while and then move on to Brotherhood. Skip Revelations.

#45 Posted by MikkaQ (10283 posts) -

Yeah you kinda have to, if you want to get the story. Unfortunately the sequels to 2 are pretty abysmal, but yeah you kinda need to trudge through them for the plot.

#46 Posted by Jayzilla (2560 posts) -

1 really sets up the story well, but it didn't know what t wanted to be all the way yet. 2 and Brotherhood are the best ones. If you can grit your teeth a little bit at the monotony of 1, then I say play through it to get the story down. If not, just play 2 and Bro'hood.

#47 Posted by laserbolts (5319 posts) -

@DarthOrange: Get them all and definitly dont let something as dumb as number of discs stop you from playing something. Mass effect 3 is great and the first 2 are as well.

#48 Posted by Toms115 (2316 posts) -

@ShadowConqueror said:

What a strange thing the game industry has become for that thread title not to be complete fucking nonsense.

hahaha. it hurts my brain still.

#49 Posted by gla55jAw (2687 posts) -

I say, watch some of the first AC online, or read up on it, so you know what is going on with Desmond. I liked it, but never finished it. I would say start with it since it is so cheap, but if give up on it and never play AC 2, you will be missing out. I loved AC 2, so much so, that I S ranked it. Like others said, take a break after that before you go into Brotherhood. I played a few hours of Brotherhood directly after 2 and have yet to go back (I will after ME3).

As for Mass Effect, don't just give up on it because you've read some negative stuff online about 3, I'm fully enjoying it so far and I'm 9 hours in. It would probably be amazing if you can play them back-to-back-to-back.

#50 Posted by wjb (1656 posts) -

II & Brotherhood, definitely. The other two if you just have to play them.

Online

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.