Which one do you prefer?

  • 52 results
  • 1
  • 2
#1 Posted by WoodenPlatypus (1365 posts) -
#2 Posted by WoodenPlatypus (1365 posts) -


With the new game on the horizon Im just wondering what AC was everyones favourite and why? Be it story, playability, character, weapons or maybe the beautiful women?

Let it be known!

 

 

Im sorry if this thread/poll has been done these days...

#3 Posted by Snuggle (4 posts) -

Being a PC-only gamer I had to make due with awful controls, and so I've also had some aversions towards the AC games. However, I much preferred the original, mostly because of the awful pacing and blander "side-quests" in AC2. While the setting and story was far more intriguing than in the first one, the original still felt fresher. I never completed the second one, and I haven't played Brotherhood, nor do I have any plans of doing so. I only wish they'd focused more on the story missions, which are always spectacularly fun, rather than the filler missions, designed only to make the game last longer.

#4 Posted by MordeaniisChaos (5730 posts) -

I miss having to get crazy creative with some of the original assassinations. I wish the second had focused less on diversity and more on making the more diverse missions with room to kind of figure it out and go from there. It feels extremely guided and linear in 2, where as 1 usually it felt like you were really getting information, hunting down, and killing your target, and there was usually a lot of ways you could do that.

Story and presentation in 2 was pretty amazing, and the combat felt a bit better beyond being simplified (which made it much more repetitive). I have yet to play Brotherhood.

#5 Posted by UnrealDP (1222 posts) -

As the newest AC i think brotherhood is the best with streamlining and i great ending, but the first one is still one of my favorite games of all time.
#6 Posted by ryanwho (12082 posts) -
@Snuggle said:
" Being a PC-only gamer I had to make due with awful controls, and so I've also had some aversions towards the AC games. However, I much preferred the original, mostly because of the awful pacing and blander "side-quests" in AC2. While the setting and story was far more intriguing than in the first one, the original still felt fresher. I never completed the second one, and I haven't played Brotherhood, nor do I have any plans of doing so. I only wish they'd focused more on the story missions, which are always spectacularly fun, rather than the filler missions, designed only to make the game last longer. "
Um, you know you coulda played it with a 360 controller, right?
#7 Posted by EvilTwin (3324 posts) -

I find 2 kind of hard to play after Brotherhood and 1 isn't even in the conversation for my money.

Brotherhood.

#8 Posted by mau64 (539 posts) -

I have to say Assassins Creed 2 because I have yet to play Brotherhood. Probably will find some time soon to play it before AC:R comes out.

#9 Posted by PhatSeeJay (3322 posts) -

I loved Brotherhood but it's just more of Assassin's Creed 2, so AC2 for me.

#10 Edited by Snuggle (4 posts) -
@ryanwho said:
" @Snuggle said:
" Being a PC-only gamer I had to make due with awful controls, and so I've also had some aversions towards the AC games. However, I much preferred the original, mostly because of the awful pacing and blander "side-quests" in AC2. While the setting and story was far more intriguing than in the first one, the original still felt fresher. I never completed the second one, and I haven't played Brotherhood, nor do I have any plans of doing so. I only wish they'd focused more on the story missions, which are always spectacularly fun, rather than the filler missions, designed only to make the game last longer. "
Um, you know you coulda played it with a 360 controller, right? "

@ryanwho:
Uhm, yes, but I didn't really wanna spend money for a controller for a single game (mouse and keyboard are superior to everything! Apart from platformer-esque games. Besides, I got both laughably cheap so it wasn't that bad. And I think I could've tolerated the controls if the second game hadn't been so dull.
#11 Posted by Unchained (1080 posts) -

I loved them all, but Brotherhood really stood out to me. While I don't play multiplayer, I liked the setting of Rome, the recruiting of assassins and the continuation of Ezio's  story. 

#12 Posted by EliminatoR (237 posts) -

Haven't played the games but my friends say that AC2 is the overall better game.

#13 Posted by Hizang (8533 posts) -

Assassains Creed was the first PS3 game I played and owned, the graphics just blew my mind, the game was decent to. I spent hours just scouring the city climbing to the top of buildings, the second one I do have but did not like the way the story went, I much prefered a darker assassain. Altair FTW!

#14 Posted by Aaron_G (1611 posts) -

AC2 and Brotherhood were really good. Brotherhood wins it for me because of the Assassin's Guild Stuff.  

#15 Posted by bongoboy (105 posts) -

Both Assassin's Creed 2 and Brotherhood were good, but Brotherhood wins it because I had features like the Assassin's Guild.

The original Assassin's Creed started to get boring after the first few assassinations because it felt super repetitive. 
#16 Posted by MysteriousBob (6272 posts) -

Only played the second one.

#17 Posted by Dimsey (950 posts) -

AC2 and Brotherhood are completely equal in my book, both great games.
Voted for Brotherhood though simply because it's newer and has pretty good multiplayer to boot.

#18 Posted by Underachiever007 (2468 posts) -

Brotherhood.

#19 Posted by GJSmitty (651 posts) -

I played AC2 and Brotherhood back to back for the first time, and Brotherhood pretty much takes the awesomeness that is AC2 and makes it better.

So Brotherhood
#20 Posted by crusader8463 (14419 posts) -

Never finished AC 1, 2 was ok, and I actively hated Brotherhood so I picked 2.

Online
#21 Posted by AhmadMetallic (18955 posts) -

AC1 is the masterpiece 

#22 Posted by FlamingHobo (4482 posts) -

Whilst I know that Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood is the better game, I enjoyed Assassin's Creed II more by far.

#23 Posted by Bloodgraiv3 (2712 posts) -


Brotherhood, though I found the places visited in AC2 to be a lot more diverse and better looking.

 

#24 Posted by TheSeductiveMoose (3617 posts) -

Uno.

Online
#25 Posted by Vestigial_Man (311 posts) -

Despite Brotherhood's improved mechanics, I think the original AC's story and setting were the most interesting of the three and I enjoyed the structure of it far more than the other games. There are also a few mechanics in the new ones that I don't like so much.

#26 Posted by MattBosten (497 posts) -

Brotherhood for me. AC to AC2 was a massive step up; AC:B had some minor additions that helped it improve on AC2. 

#27 Posted by TooWalrus (13155 posts) -
@Snuggle said:
" @ryanwho said:
" @Snuggle said:
" Being a PC-only gamer I had to make due with awful controls, and so I've also had some aversions towards the AC games. However, I much preferred the original, mostly because of the awful pacing and blander "side-quests" in AC2. While the setting and story was far more intriguing than in the first one, the original still felt fresher. I never completed the second one, and I haven't played Brotherhood, nor do I have any plans of doing so. I only wish they'd focused more on the story missions, which are always spectacularly fun, rather than the filler missions, designed only to make the game last longer. "
Um, you know you coulda played it with a 360 controller, right? "

@ryanwho: Uhm, yes, but I didn't really wanna spend money for a controller for a single game (mouse and keyboard are superior to everything! Apart from platformer-esque games. Besides, I got both laughably cheap so it wasn't that bad. And I think I could've tolerated the controls if the second game hadn't been so dull. "
I know I don't want to use the mouse/keyboard to play Street Fighter, Burnout or Final Fantasy XIII- in fact, I wouldn't want to play any fighting games, racing games or RPGs on mouse/keyboard when a controller is an option. I'm pretty sure the keyboard is only superior if you're playing FPS or RTS games.
#28 Posted by HitmanAgent47 (8576 posts) -

brotherhood

#29 Posted by Joru (311 posts) -

I prefer AC1. It's definitely worse in terms of variety than the others, but I preferred the feel of the world which is really important to me since I enjoy simply running around looking at buildings and so on in games. Also, medieval times are just cooler and more interesting than the renaissance in my opinion.


Brotherhood is best as a game, but it falls short in terms of story compared to 2, so it would be difficult to choose between those two, they're very similar. I do hope they rework the engine and flow of the game a bit for the future since it is starting to get a little bit stale.
#30 Posted by Snuggle (4 posts) -
@TooWalrus said:
" @Snuggle said:
" @ryanwho said:
" @Snuggle said:
" Being a PC-only gamer I had to make due with awful controls, and so I've also had some aversions towards the AC games. However, I much preferred the original, mostly because of the awful pacing and blander "side-quests" in AC2. While the setting and story was far more intriguing than in the first one, the original still felt fresher. I never completed the second one, and I haven't played Brotherhood, nor do I have any plans of doing so. I only wish they'd focused more on the story missions, which are always spectacularly fun, rather than the filler missions, designed only to make the game last longer. "
Um, you know you coulda played it with a 360 controller, right? "

@ryanwho: Uhm, yes, but I didn't really wanna spend money for a controller for a single game (mouse and keyboard are superior to everything! Apart from platformer-esque games. Besides, I got both laughably cheap so it wasn't that bad. And I think I could've tolerated the controls if the second game hadn't been so dull. "
I know I don't want to use the mouse/keyboard to play Street Fighter, Burnout or Final Fantasy XIII- in fact, I wouldn't want to play any fighting games, racing games or RPGs on mouse/keyboard when a controller is an option. I'm pretty sure the keyboard is only superior if you're playing FPS or RTS games. "
Yeah, well, that sentence was supposed to be a tad sarcastic, but whatever. However, I would add that most CRPGs are better with keyboard/mouse as well. Games that are developed specifically for the PC-market generally seem to have better mouse/keyboard controls than console to PC ports, which really isn't that surprising.
#31 Posted by SethPhotopoulos (5210 posts) -

I love 'em all but Brotherhood is a perfection of the other 2's good parts.

#32 Posted by wealllikepie (757 posts) -

AC 1 cuz Altair is infinite times more badass than ezio

#33 Posted by The_Grindilow (430 posts) -

AC2 is definately my fav from the three, managed to 100% sync it! Closely followed by Brotherhood, which is a fantastic game, it's just been a little buggy for me, so i'd have to go with number 2.

#34 Posted by Lelcar (599 posts) -

I really feel like this series gets better as it progresses. So Brotherhood by far. The multiplayer isn't half bad also, but it took me a while to really appreciate it.

#35 Posted by Gabriel (4058 posts) -

I was way more impressed with AC2 than Brotherhood. The Assassins Guild while cool in concept doesn't really do that much for me, I like rolling solo in AC. 

#36 Posted by Getz (2995 posts) -

AC2 was the one that blew me away, Brotherhood was just more of the same. Not to knock AssBro, it just didn't have the same wow factor.

#37 Posted by Landon (4133 posts) -
@ryanwho said:
" @Snuggle said:
" Being a PC-only gamer I had to make due with awful controls, and so I've also had some aversions towards the AC games. However, I much preferred the original, mostly because of the awful pacing and blander "side-quests" in AC2. While the setting and story was far more intriguing than in the first one, the original still felt fresher. I never completed the second one, and I haven't played Brotherhood, nor do I have any plans of doing so. I only wish they'd focused more on the story missions, which are always spectacularly fun, rather than the filler missions, designed only to make the game last longer. "
Um, you know you coulda played it with a 360 controller, right? "
I have AC1 for PC and the 360 controller does not work.
#38 Posted by Gamer_152 (14065 posts) -

It's a tough call between II and Brotherhood for me. I think I have to go with Brotherhood, the series just felt so refined by that point.

Moderator
#39 Posted by Lemegeton (780 posts) -

i played the first 2 and was bored stupid by the end of the second. i wont touch the franchise again until they do something about the awful combat.
once you have seen all the counter and kill animations tedium set in very quick

#40 Posted by predator (350 posts) -
@Lemegeton said:
" i played the first 2 and was bored stupid by the end of the second. i wont touch the franchise again until they do something about the awful combat. once you have seen all the counter and kill animations tedium set in very quick "
They changed the combat in Brotherhood...

#41 Posted by Xpgamer7 (2379 posts) -

Brotherhood. All the awesomeness of AC2 (plus some) with a kickass multiplayer as well.

#42 Posted by Hexogen (766 posts) -

Brotherhood, by a little bit. I prefer AC2's story pacing and diversity in locations, but Brotherhood makes some nice improvements that make the game more fun to play. The combat is faster paced and comes with a few cool new moves, less reliance on specific gameplay mechanics (i.e. no more tailing someone who walks past a line of guards, and then hiring a conveniently placed group of courtesans to distract them every time), and some really cool new equipment (crossbow, parachutes, etc.), and more diversity in the side missions (even if they all still boil down to run here and kill some guys). The multiplayer is pretty neat too, but even without taking that into account I'd still choose Brotherhood. AC2 is a fantastic game, but as they continue to improve the gameplay in each game, it seems hard to go back to the older ones.

#43 Posted by Arker101 (1474 posts) -

In terms of story and gameplay improvement I have to say AC2. Brotherhood was fun, but it was more AC2. The ending in 2 blew my mind whereas AC:B 's just made me wonder "wait what"?

#44 Edited by mutha3 (4985 posts) -
@Snuggle said:

" B "side-quests" in AC2. While the setting and story was far more intriguing than in the first one, the original still felt fresher. I never completed the second one, and I haven't played Brotherhood, nor do I have any plans of doing so. I only wish they'd focused more on the story missions, which are always spectacularly fun, rather than the filler missions, designed only to make the game last longer. "

.....Or how about this:

Don't play the dumb side-missions.
#45 Edited by Keenblaze (471 posts) -

A friend of mine told me that he preferred the first one because the gameplay was better in his opinion. It blew my mind that he enjoyed the repetitive combat and side quests of the original more than the variety of the sequel. The first game wasn't terrible, but I couldn't wait for the end of the game to come since I had had enough of sitting on a bench listening to someone, doing nothing but countering attacks, and enduring Altair's bland monologues. 



@Snuggle said:

"However, I much preferred the original, mostly because of the awful pacing and blander "side-quests" in AC2. "

I think you've got your games mixed up, duder. The original AC literally had you do nothing but sit on a bench listening to someone talk, AND THAT WAS THE SIDE MISSION. The AC2 side missions still weren't phenomenal, but at least you weren't forced to do them and they were a little more entertaining.
#46 Posted by mutha3 (4985 posts) -
@Keenblaze said:
" I think you've got your games mixed up, duder. The original AC literally had you do nothing but sit on a bench listening to someone talk, AND THAT WAS THE SIDE MISSION. The AC2 side missions still weren't phenomenal, but at least you weren't forced to do them and they were a little more entertaining. "
If only those retarded pickpocketing missions were side missions and not mandatory to finishing the game.

Sadly, you had to do that same repetitive shit 9 times. Each time requiring to do 4 terribly constructed minigame-like challenges. 9 frickin times'.

.....I do agree that Assassin's Creed 1's biggest strength- the different ways you could approach the targets- is dearly missed in 2.
#47 Posted by mercutio123 (468 posts) -

Do not like the first one. love AC2 and ACB is the superior game. I think the first one looks better than the second though

#48 Posted by WoodenPlatypus (1365 posts) -

@mercutio123: 
I played the first one a little bit before I got my own Xbox and was blown away, I borrowed it for a few days when I eventually bought my own and was never off it, I didnt have time to complete it though so I moved on.

I got AC2 for christmas off my friends and completed that, then decided to go back and buy number 1. Im gutted now because I cant play one properly as it feels so much more stiff and harder to control.

#49 Posted by Lemegeton (780 posts) -

@predator

not in any meaningful way they didn't. it still boils down to you sitting back waiting for the enemies to attack one at a time and hit the counter button

#50 Edited by wolf_blitzer85 (5254 posts) -

The first one was awesome in scale but horribly repetetive. The second one fixed the first one. Brotherhood let's you call in rainy death arrows.

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.