haven't played revelations but i was able to beat the first assassin's creed and didn't finish 3 although i didn't hate it as much as some.

Revelations is the only one I quit halfway through. People can bitch all they want about 3, but Revelations is easily the one game that suffered the most from sequelitis while also failing drastically at the few things it added. It's the game in the series that made it utterly obvious that things needed to change.

All of them

Especially AC2

I don't know if that's fair, considering how everyone is still asking about Desmond during AC4 really is telling just how much all those little things value to others.

Rev is relatively the worst I'd say, compared to all the others, but overall the first is easily the worst. The first was just so boring and repetitive and while they were neat for the time the free running was so janky. Rev was just disappointing as it was barely different from Brotherhood and was cluttered with equipment that was useless upon getting the crossbow.

I don't get the hate for 3, yeah it isn't as good as 2 or Brotherhood but it is still pretty fun. The story is pretty bad but the overall gameplay for me was pretty great. I didn't have the issues many others did with some of the missions though.

AC is the worst by a lot, it's not even close to being a good game, the mechanics are bad, the game is bad. ACR is mediocre but not particularly bad in any general respect. AC3 is contentious on the singleplayer front but still fully functional and enjoyable, introduced the ship mechanics which everyone loves in ACIV; the multiplayer in AC3 is by far the best in the series.

I'm actually surprised to see the votes skewing towards the first one...

Revelations, easily. I just beat 3, and yeah, the ending is pretty terrible. Everything before the end of sequence 11 however is fantastic, and mechanically it's the best playing game in the series, excluding 4 which I haven't gotten around to yet.

Revelations had the slowest, longest, and most uninteresting start, all of the Altair moments were underwhelming, the combat was rote at that point, and the resolution was just as uninteresting and underwhelming as everything that came before. In fairness, using the hookblade and the parachute was fun, and some of the missions were entertaining.

1 was the highest point for me. The world felt bleak and serious (something 3 got back to), the combat was tense and dangerous where running was often the better option, the assassinations required more thought and care, and the story is the most grounded and consistently interesting, both inside and outside the animus.

I like that the main series seems to alternate between bleak seriousness and roguish charm. As much as just want to blow up more ships, I'm a bit burnt out on AC games. Probably the way folks felt when AC3 came out, but less bummed out. I played Revelations when it came out, stopped cause it was boring, took a nice couple of years off from the series before starting Rev over recently and then immediately onto 3. I'll play Liberation HD when it comes out, and then 4 when I'm good and ready.

1 and 3. 1 was repetitive and boring, 3 was flat out terrible

IV includes the refinements of III, plus some new shiny toys and even more improvements. It's pretty great. Also, I voted for AC1.

Revelations then 3. Ac1 is a great game.

YOU GUYS ARE VOTING FOR THE ORIGINAL? BAD COMMUNITY.

BAD, STOP.

There was so little variety in the first one, you literally did like 3 things over and over in that game. I really liked the setting, but it got boring rather fast imo.

The one that doesn't run for more than 10 minutes.

@twinsun: You could run on rooftops and stab things like a ninja! Just climbing things was fun! All the repetitve parts took at most 20 minutes or so out of a very unique experience in a unique locale with totally alright combat!

Now it doesn't hold up worth shit. Especially not compared to Brotherhood, but please. Have some mercy on the origins of the series.

The first game was the one that I enjoyed the least. The middle six hours or so were just so tedious. When it started to work up to the final revelation it was a better game, but getting there was frustratingly boring.

Well, fair enough.. But still, if you are asking which one I find the least enjoyable, I would still have to say the first, even if it at the time did some cool stuff.

AC 3 for me. I found Connor unlikeable and at times completely insufferable, also fuck that ending.

I really liked revelations and AC3, but the first game is by far the worst

Revelations is the best of these 3, pointless addition of moronic tower defence mini game aside it was still a reasonable game if not a little worn. AC3 was the failed promise of a refresh, by far the worst objectively. A new protagonist with all the character and charm of block of wood, length ass dull tutorials and one of the worst final sequences in modern games. AC1 was a flawed titled but a massive pile of potential which they were able to build on in 2, it also had a very unique atmosphere which the other games sort of left behind... also the Twin Short Blade counter kills with Altair were just so fantastically brutal (man I miss that weapon).

In context, AC3 is by far the worst. Assassins Creed was repetitive but it was the first in the series, I thought the Abstergo story was interesting and it was amazing as a proof of concept, climbing buildings, stabbing dudes, it was fantastic.

Revelations was wholly unnecessary and unmemlrable, but was not a bad game.

There was no reason for AC3 to be as bad as it was. The world it was set in is another fascinating one but the story was insufferably bad. I don't know all that much American History and the story of AC3 made it really really boring. I was pretty bored playing the game. The naval stuff was cool but not much else. I actually liked playing as Haytham, Connor was such a dull character though.

After playing the first one and enjoying it I got into the second one and hated it, but I don't think the series is for me, as from what I have seen the second one bares closer resemblance to the rest of the series.

I think the second one strayed into becoming a bit action focussed to improve the gameplay and that just wasn't my thing. I also found it frustrating to even attempt to stealth in that game, where you are presented with what look like stealth opportunities but you are not provided with the right (for lack of a better word) mechanics to actually come at the situation in a stealthy way. That is all coming from a big stealth fan, so I guess it's a bit harsh ribbing on something that doesn't solely focus on stealth gameplay.

I liked the improvement in the story department though, which was much more compelling than the first game.

The one where they introduced Ezio and turned the protagonist into a joke. Altair was actually a well developed character that grew throughout the series then they went with the whole "ehh it's a me Mario!" aesthetic and stuck around for 2 games too many.

In terms of numbering, well I haven't played AC3 despite owning it thanks to a SSD I bought, so I'd have to say Revelations..? But I don't even feel that strongly about it - there were a lot of neat concepts in that game that sadly got overshadowed by the repetitious nature of AC gameplay that failed to push the envelope. The hook was a neat, if not minuscule addition. The pseudo-Prince-of-Persia Templar crypts were actually pretty fun to traverse. In terms of customization it was capes-galore for Ezio. I mean don't get me wrong, I love customization probably more than anything, but at this point the assassin garb got so ridiculously ostentatious that a blind man would be able to spot Ezio from a mile away simply from the hushed whispers of the crowd pointing fingers at this man wearing a purple mane of fur with silver eagles jutting from his pauldrons.

The plot got pretty bad and as a personal pet peeve they really ruined Altair's backstory, making him look fairly incompetent. So I'd say it was mechanically the strongest of all the games, but in terms of evolution it was much more a gentle simmer than any sort of revelation.

i'm really finding it hard to finish 2. i hate the missions, i just want to finish the story so i can maybe go back to do the open world stuff, but i find the mission parameters aggravating and counter-intuitive, and even considering how much the game likes to pigeonhole you into doing things one way, they usually end up being farcical, with you chasing some guy like an idiot while a billion guards prod you and you fall over like an old woman. also the fricking minstrels, and the sucky easy time consuming combat, and the washed out look of it, and the jank.

i way prefer the world and the look of 1, even though the missions there weren't all that much better, i'm way more likely to get all the flags than i am to even go back to 2.

it's ridiculous to assume that everyone likes 2 and brotherhood.

I like AC I, I tolerate AC III but ACR was just boooooooring

1 was alright for a new IP but 3....man that game was some hot bullshit. I am glad AC IV got the series back to being good.

Since I am one of those crazy people that actually felt like the games were building up a fairly interesting narrative throughout the series, I would definitely say ACIII. I felt like they dropped the ball on that one, didn't feel like it was actually moving in the same direction as the other ones and I feel like they concluded what they had built with Desmond in a way "because it had to" not because it was particularly well thought out or interesting. And honestly, those cities were boring as hell to run around in. As it was said when it came out, it highlighted Assassin's Creed distaste for horizontal traversal. It's just not that fun.

Overall I just felt like the game lacked a sense of mystery that the previous entries had. And Connor wasn't even remotely interesting as a character. I was more curious by what motivated his father than him, and that's a real issue. Mechanically the game was great and the tree traversal was a nice addition to the engine. The boat combat was great and I am sure Black Flag will be fun to get into because of that. But most about the franchise that I actually cared about felt rushed or ignored in that one and as a result it was at best a well playing game, but not a lot more. Also, fuck that homestead system.

I'm not sure why half the games aren't available to be voted on, but I pick AC II. Hate Ezio and didn't care about his story. The controls were wonky and led to a lot of frustration running up or off of things I didn't want to. The combat was a really boring waiting game. Somehow, every one of these issues was fixed in Brotherhood which is easily the best game in the series. Plus it added the summonable assassins

I couldn't even get past the 4 hour tutorial for AC3. At least Revelations still has old man Ezio. I don't think it can ever be possible for me to give a shit about being a guy named "Haytham Conway" or whatever the hell his name was.

I guess I have a higher tolerance for repetition than most people but I loved the first AC. It felt new and fresh. I had never seen anything quite like it in games before even if I'll readily admit that its sequels surpassed it in every way. I finished that game multiple times and climbing the tallest towers in the game never stopped feeling amazing.

AC3 was horrible. After all the anticipation of an AC set during the American Revolution, that's what we got. That game featured one of my least favorite characters in gaming (Connor), who underwent almost no significant development throughout the game. Besides Connor, the game was filled with underdeveloped characters who seemed to not want to be in the game. On top of that, there was that super long tutorial section that seemed to go on FOREVER, not that the rest of the game's pacing was any better. The game was laggy and glitchy also. My personal most disappointing game of 2012.

AC3 by far.

Didn't play 3. Played a few hours of Revelations and realized I didn't need any more of that in my life. The first game was really cool at the time but got repetitive. If you look back at it without the context of it's time and place I guess I could understand why some people would call it the weakest. That would be doing it a disservice though.

@korwin: Hahaha, oh man. I completely forgot about the tower defense nonsense in Revelations. Ok. Now I remember when I gave up on it.

Assassin's Creed III.

I loved the bit you play as Haytham, but once you switch to Connor the game becomes an insufferable mess.

AC1 is awful. Repetitive mess.

Ace Combat 5 was pretty bad.

AC1 may not have the gameplay, but in a series that, for me, gets half of its charm from the detail in its environments and the cohesiveness of the world it lets you roam around in, I still think AC1 is among the strongest entries. I found the world far more interesting and grounded than in any other AC (at that point even the out of the animus stuff was fascinating, because the storyline behind it was so muted).

AC3 was rough, but I still think Revelations was just a boring slog. I could never bring myself to even get deep into that game, let alone actually finish it.

I kept wondering what the point of playing Revelations was.I wanted to fall asleep at the end.

I know it's not in the options and it seems like an unpopular opinion, but I'm finding AC: Black Flag nearly as frustrating and glitchy as AC 3. It never quite reaches the lowest points of AC 3, but I haven't enjoyed it anywhere as much as the earlier entries in the series. Might just be franchise fatigue at this point.

There wasn't much wrong with the first one aside from high expectations from mountains of hype. Many were pissed at the whole animus thing. Also the missions were repetitive. It probably doesn't hold up against the newer ones but the first one was pretty decent at the time, the assassinations were a much bigger focus and every side mission you did leading up to each assassination was some sort of hint for acing the next assassination - guard placement, back entrances etc. There was some thought provoking themes and dialogue coming out after assassinations, which i feel like they always sort of half ass in more recent games.

I skipped revelations, so i would say three is definitely my weak link.

Revelations, no question. 3 is disappointing and had a lot of really flawed elements but Revelations was abysmal. Honestly coming into 3 I was happy because it was a lot more ambitious and somewhat more successful than Revelations. But that doesn't count for much.

I really liked Revelations. It had some fun story stuff and was a nice goodbye to both Ezio and Altair. The mission with Ezio as a musician is possibly one of his finest moments.

People saying 3 is worse than 1 are CRAZY!

AC tried. It also had a neat story. There is nothing to feel good about in 3.

1 was great. Haven't played 3, but supposedly it's pretty bad.

AC3 was awful.

ACIV is the only one I've liked so far, so all of them. I was so mad at myself after I beat ACII for playing such a bad game, god what a horrible dumb ending.

I'm not going to vote because I haven't played Rev and 3.

I'm only here to defend the first one, while it has aged and I wouldn't recommend someone to play it unless they enjoy the universe of the franchise, but at the time that was a solid game with weak spots that overtime got really annoying. If you take out doing the 4 activities over and over again it is a fantastic game but they are there and it is annoying and frustrating. But I still stand that it is the only AC game that you feel like an assassin. I love the idea of being able to sneak in, take out the target and get out without noticing or at least no conflict. I hate in 2 and Brotherhood where you just massacre most of Europe but you are actually a terrible assassin. Few things in games this past generation have been as satisfying as sneaking on to the boat, stabbing the target and getting out before someone spotted me.

Yes Altair has no personality, the open world is really bland and boring, the side activities wore overtime, and repeated character models all show how far we have come in gaming. But I'll take plotting the assassination, executing it perfectly, escaping without conflict more so than just running and stabbing every motherfucker and having a shitting ending, I'm looking at YOU AC2! (Both endings were lackluster and terrible but 2 was way worse, you make me fight the pope guy NOT until is health bar is empty, but when he is done speaking, ugh. Actually all the AC games I've played have shitty endings.)

And you forgot about Liberation, I played about 2 hours and regretted buying it, some day I'll beat it….some day.

Just coming by to tell anyone that tries to shoe horn Liberation into this thread that I've got a knuckle sandwich with their name on it.