First game was amazing.

Well I played the first one and loved it, as much as buggy as it was I still really got into it, then 2 came out and i was just like omg the improvments where great, but the narritive expirence is alot better when you play the first one!

Oh Assassin's Creed. How you were annoying as fuck to S Rank. I guess its cool for them to give it away to people but I dont really see the point when the games already easy to find in bargain bins so really people just save like $7.

Does it at least come with trophy support this time?

Whats with all the hate for AC1... I loved that game. I never owned it but I beat it in one sitting at a friends house the day he bought it and beat it...Friend got so pissed i beat the game before he did that he never finished it :D I never really found any flaws with it like others have said but i do not remember playing it much as it was a long time ago except that it was fun.

Fun bonus! I think it's good they do these sort of things.

I personally already have the 1st, and will be playing it on Xbox, but it is a good move on Ubi's part nonetheless.

Despite it's flaws, still have a lot of love for the original Assassin's Creed.

Can't complain about free stuff.

I already have the first one. They should have bundled the revelations game with more revelations content.

@patrickklepek:

I don't think it's worthwhile. You're all caught up with the story.. and if not, there is always... well, this site.

Look toward the future!

Despite all the hate for AC1, I thought it was brilliant. Sure, it's not as slick as AC2 and Brohood, but story interested me 10x more.

If they would remove water-deaths I might go and play it again. DAMN DRUNKS GETTOFFAMABOAT!

If you really liked AC:2 and AC:B then you should be fine playing the first one. Sure, it's not that good as those two, but it's not a bad game. I recommend it.

Cool bonus I guess. The first game is terrible, though.

I had fun with AC1, but I can't play through it again, especially after playing AC2 and Brotherhood.

Two full blown games in one disc. Yes please.

I thought AC was pretty great when it was released, but I don't think it would be a worthwhile experience if you've already played the sequels.

@RE_Player92 said:

Loving all these extras the PS3 is getting. The exclusive SSX mountain, Bioshock 1 is coming with Infinite, Battlefield 1943 with 3, exclusive Need fo Speed cars and all the other ones that came out this year like Dead Space Extraction being packed in with 2. It makes up for some of the key titles I've missed no longer owning a 360, like Dead Rising Case Zero along with other exclusives.

it's funny cause I sold AC1 last year .... now I get it back for free :D

same thing happened with LittleBigPlanet ... sold it last year and then came the PSN welcome back thing ..

I should sell more games :P

Would have preferred any other game than Assassins Creed to be on the disk. AC1 is just soooooo boring, but i guess they know that that is why it is free on the disc.

@jasonefmonk said:

Patching the multiple Trophy glitches in AC2 would also make me happier about these games.

There is? I plat'd ACII w/o any problems

The first game had really annoying combat and guards who would attack you for no reason every time you walked by. That was probably the biggest issue I had with it.

This isn't really a huge selling point, the first was primitive in ideas where the second cleaned up a lot more.

AC1 was a great game that was demonized by it's admittedly huge flaws, but I feel that it was deserving of more praise than just 'It's alright'. Though the later games do play better, I'll always have a place in my gaming heart for the first game where I could stab people in the mother-fucking face.

I feel the first game had more ambition. AC2 became basically GTA, with multiple side characters giving you missions in a non-linear fashion, plus all the side quests. It was a better game as a result, but I still feel AC1 has something going for it. It was like Shadow of the Colossus, with bad mission design and some stupid limitations, but still something you don't see everyday.

I would've loved to see AC2 fix what was wrong with AC1 instead of throwing everything out the window. What they gave up was special.

The best version of AC1 was for PC.

On consoles there were i think 3 mission types.

On PC there were 5 or 6.

Was perhaps a bit boring, but I think that it has a tone that none of the Ezio games have.

Altair always seemed to be more of a deadly, badass, assassin. Ezio is more like a charasmatic one man army.

IMO The original Assassins Creed is anomaly of a game if you've played the the Ezio Trilogy first.

I beat the first Assassins Creed the year it came out on the PS3, thought it was a pretty good experience, pushing for innovation in on foot mobility in games.

I played AC2 the week of release and had a blast with it, wasn't too mad of the character change but it was understandable.

The story is so much more tolerable rather than the procedural go to this city do some unrelated side missions then Assassinate the "big bad guy"

I recently played through AC1 on the 360 (for achievements and to get a refresh on the story as I play catch up having not played Brotherhood at all yet) and found it very repetitive and wash rinse repeat in terms of the main gameplay. However I did enjoy going through the back stories from the emails and various readable text from the game.

If you really want to get into the AC universe playing the first is a must.

I think its a bad exclusive. after playing the last 2 AC, the first one is old and dull.

The first one is great until about 3-4 hours in and you realise you are doing the same thing over and over again. The second one and Brotherhood did a good job of fixing this and are much more entertaining because if it.

I have three copies of the first game for some reason.
 
Originally bought the PS3 version when it was first released.   Then Steam had it on sale for 5$ so i picked it up.   Then i borrowed my nephews copy for the xbox so i can get some Achievements, but he never asked for it back.

@kmg90: Man, I thought that ending was god damn awful...it just brought flash backs to that ending in Halo 2 only it was much worse since that was the worst clifffhanger I've seen...ever....

As bad as 1 is compared to 2 (especially) and Brotherhood, I'd say it's worth it just for the sake of it being a history lesson with regards to the most revolutionary sandbox game since GTA3 (in my eyes, anyway). Coincidentally, I hated GTA3 even more than I disliked many aspects of AC1.

Well that's one way to get me to play AC1. My GameOCD won't let me not play it if it comes in the box.

This does not encourage me want to buy AC:R any more than I would have before this was announced.

This is.... strange. The original Assassin's Creed sold fantastically, so it's not like there are tons of people who missed out. Then again, you can't really argue with free games, so sure, why not?

A reminder that a disappointing and overrated game can sometimes lead to unbridled super-awesomeness down the road. I wish that were a true story more often.

This is great news! I just picked up ACII

Call me crazy, but in some ways I like the original better than the sequals. For one thing, it was actually about assassinations. I enjoyed scouting out the locations, planning my entrance and looking for exits. Sure, the missions were a bit repetitative, but if you played it at a slower pace (say, an assassination per day) it was a really cool experience.

@AlmostSwedish: You're not crazy at all. The first game had a real sense of danger and consequence that has been substantially watered down in the sequels.

I guess that's cool of them. I've still have to play brotherhood though, give me that instead

@Degringolade said:

@AlmostSwedish: You're not crazy at all. The first game had a real sense of danger and consequence that has been substantially watered down in the sequels.

Yep. I'm with you guys, too. There was a clear touch of Hitman to the first game that I liked. Plus, all those repetitive side quests? They were optional, which a lot of people seem to forget. They were just meant to get additional intel for the actual killings, which were the point of the game.

Also, it was a game that relied a lot on player immersion. If you role played the situations you could work around the repetitive design, trying to pull off the killings and chases without being seen or to avoid confrontation by running instead of exploiting the combat. Granted, that required active cooperation, and the game got kinda broken if you brute forced it, but that's also true of, again, the Hitman series, so I was willing to give it that.

Unfortunately for them, I already own that game, so this does little to change my mind about avoiding another Ezio-based half-step to the series. I couldn't be bothered to finish Brotherhood, and I don't think this one will rope me back in.

I picked up AC2 first as well. After a couple of missions I stopped playing it, immediately found myself a cheap copy of the first game and blasted through it. And you know what? I thoroughly enjoyed it. Criticisms about the repetitive nature of the missions you do before you can take on each assassination are valid, and while the visuals are great there are some pretty dodgy audio samples and mixing. But the moment to moment gameplay is solid (stabbing dudes is never not fun), the story is interesting, and the tone and atmosphere of the game are significantly different to what follows. Don't get me wrong, I'm a big fan of the swashbuckling nature engendered in Ezio's adventures, but the more serious nature of Altair and the people he encounters sell the fiction a little better I think.

Didn't the sell a bajillion copies of the game anyway? It's certainly a nice bonus though.

@GaspoweR said:

@kmg90: Man, I thought that ending was god damn awful...it just brought flash backs to that ending in Halo 2 only it was much worse since that was the worst clifffhanger I've seen...ever....

Yeah the ending gave me a "TO BE CONTINUED" in your face kind of feeling when I finished the year it came out, it made me feel like I finished the game way to early (as in should waited for the sequel to be coming out) and that I would probably need another play through once a sequel was released.

Looking back, it seems funny that my first playthrough I was trying to get over the story to get the most of out the gameplay, but on my 2nd I was trying to get over the gameplay flaws that were fixed in the sequels for the understanding of the story of said sequels.

say what you will, first game's a classic. play it Klepek.

ED: do you know if it includes the PC?

AC1 was great! But no trophies...Shakes fist a UbiSoft

I would be totally willing to replay the original AC. I feel that, while 2 and Bro are mechanically better, Assassin's Creed 1 still manages to hit the "assassin" vibe better.

Also wouldn't mind some trophies patched in for the deal...

Unless they are making some significant changes to the game this seems kinda pointless when you can buy AC1 for $10-$20.

If you haven't played the original then it's worth going back for the story, atleast IMHO. All the inovations of the recent games make it a little too easy.

@kmg90: You know what, despite the fact that ending was so bad, it indirectly did help in making me more invested in the series than what I originally thought. If you follow a middling first game with a vastly improved and exponentially better sequel, it just made the experience a whole lot sweeter. In a way, it made me excited for Brotherhood and now for Revelations.

I S-ranked that bitch on the 360...twice. So either this new version has trophies or it ain't gonna happen.

@StingingVelvet: I'm with you on this. The side missions in AC 1 were all at least related to the story. I was less crazy about "random race mission against thief X" or "killing this totally unrelated character" side missions, and I didn't care much for the "Assassin Tycoon" game in revelations.