For a variety of reasons I won't bother to get into, I passed on Assassin's Creed back in the day. It didn't appeal to me that much. But last night after reading Ryan's review for Assassin's Creed II, I found myself really interested and looked it up on a few other websites. Now I'm most likely gonna get it.
This is probably the first time that this has happened to me, that I actively passed on a game but became interested in its sequel. I mean, I like the Soul Calibur series, and I never played any of those games before SCII (there were like two or three games before "Soul Calibur", which is confusing), but that's not quite the same thing since I didn't know those games existed at the time.
How about you? Ever warmed up to a game after an iteration or two?
Have you ever liked a sequel, but not the games before it?
Yes, yes I have.
@Deusoma
said:I'm super stoked for Assassin's Creed 2. I really enjoyed first one, but it did have plenty of issues. It had all the mechanics and setup for a truly awesome experience, yet they somehow forgot to fit a game in there somewhere. If what everyone's saying is true about Assassin's Creed 2 it's probably going to climb onto a pretty comfortable spot on my 'favorite games of all time' list." For a variety of reasons I won't bother to get into, I passed on Assassin's Creed back in the day. It didn't appeal to me that much. But last night after reading Ryan's review for Assassin's Creed II, I found myself really interested and looked it up on a few other websites. Now I'm most likely gonna get it. "
Sadly I won't get to play until fucking March or something when it's released on PC 'cause their busy stuffing PhysX or some other bullshit in there that I don't know what it does or give two shits about. I'm fine with whatever the consoles are getting, thank you. They seem to be enjoying their games just fine.
I'm still playing the first one, but i understand why you are hyped.
The first one sure has faults, but it's really fun.
What are your gripes with it?
You should consider if you will find them in the second one, so you won't enjoy the game much or at all.
Answering the question of the op, i liked broken sword 3, but never got around to play the first two ones, though they are very different in style.
i also didn't like FF7 much, and i love FFX and FFXII.
The new castlevania games "metroidvania" style, but not the early ones.
cheers
Definitely Burnout with Burnout Paradise. All the pre-Paradise Burnouts seemed good to me, and I played most of them, they just didn't grab me as Paradise eventually did.
There was the stories of all the glitches (my favourite being a guy who said he pushed the 'dismount horse' button, and Altair ran off and left him in control of the horse) and the annoying way you get missions, but mostly I think it was that a lot of the articles and stuff on the game focused on the stealth aspects, and I never played a game with heavy stealth elements that I liked until Batman earlier this year. Maybe that's why I'm more willing to give it a try. I realize it won't be the crazy grapnel-to-the-ceiling stuff from that game, but it convinced me that stealth gameplay can be something other than absolute garbage.
My problems with the first is exactly what everyone's been complaining about since it released. You roll into town, climb a few buildings, beat up some guy and eavesdrop on a conversation before the game finally lets you assassinate. I mean, I get what they were trying to do with that stuff, you don't want players kicking down doors and ripping off heads the first thing they do in what's supposed to be a stealthy game, but it should be up to them to design the game in a manner where that's not a good option, not forcing me to perform these mundane tasks under some false pretense that I'm "researching my target"." I'm still playing the first one, but i understand why you are hyped. The first one sure has faults, but it's really fun. What are your gripes with it? You should consider if you will find them in the second one, so you won't enjoy the game much or at all.
Another problem is that they had this huge world with absolutely nothing to do except collecting flags and running to the next city. I couldn't even enjoy the scenery as fucking guards were chasing me wherever I went. It should have been a seamless world where you'd take missions, go to town, research and study the target yourself by plotting out his movements, talking to people, bribing guards and whatnot before finally catching him alone in his bedroom and sink a knife into his throat. Instead we got this stitched together, repetitive mess.
...that I still really liked. Don't get me wrong.
Kinda, I I played the hell out of Guitar hero 1 and 2 but didn't care for any after that but I have gotten way into Guitar Hero 5 lately.
The first one had some weird and funny bugs, but now they were mostly corrected.
The quest giving sure get annoying even because the pacing of the story is so poor that you tend to forget it.
The assassin's creed games aren't all about stealth. They have some elements of the gameplay that focus on that, but not all that much.
Most of the missions you can do them without any strategy or stealth.
@fuzzyponken:
I agree with you. Those are some great ideas there!
I think the game was structured this way as they never thought it would be a big hit, so they had a small budget and ambition.
Let's wait and see what they do with the next sequels...
There are going to be more most definitely.
And better ones as it has become a very profitable franchise.
" Does loving the original...then hating the sequel with an extreme passion.....then really loving the sequel to THAT game count? lol *cough* Devil May Cry *cough* "This definitely! Its really crazy how the second game was that much worse once the original creator left, but then the managed to get it back on track for the third game (at least that's what I understand happened). Generally though, I try to play games sequentially if possible. I don't know if this counts, but I couldn't get into the original Fallout games after I played Fallout 3, but they are very different games. I really thought I would like them too because I loved the Baldur's Gate series, but for some reason it just didn't happen for me. Owell.
"For a variety of reasons I won't bother to get into, I passed on Assassin's Creed back in the day. It didn't appeal to me that much. But last night after reading Ryan's review for Assassin's Creed II, I found myself really interested and looked it up on a few other websites. Now I'm most likely gonna get it. This is probably the first time that this has happened to me, that I actively passed on a game but became interested in its sequel. I mean, I like the Soul Calibur series, and I never played any of those games before SCII (there were like two or three games before "Soul Calibur", which is confusing), but that's not quite the same thing since I didn't know those games existed at the time. How about you? Ever warmed up to a game after an iteration or two?"
for me Tekken 3, but dont skip out on assassins creed 1, you will understand the story more if you play it, then play Assassin's Creed 2
I'm totally going through the same thing. I did not like a lot about the first one, but one thing I did like was some of the basic ideas. It sounds like they took the concept of the first game and put it into a far better functioning system. I'm pretty stoked to play it... although I still have not had a chance to. :(
kind of, i played uncharted 2 multiplayer demo/beta then i went out to buy uncharted 1. i looked at the game like wow 2 is so much upgraded graphics, things just felt better.
another thing playing gta 3 and then playing vice city and going back to 3. a big difference in things. san andreas probably changed that also i never tried them.
Yeah, definitely. Lots of times the game just doesn't quite get it right the first time, but then fixes up the problems and adds a pinch of awesomeness in the sequel.
I couldn't stand Morrowind but loved Oblivion. The opposite goes for Fallout 1&2 and Fallout 3. F3 was not a Fallout game by comparison.
I also thought San Andreas blew the first two in that series out of the water.
Dawn of War 2 is much more fun than Dawn of War.
Same for STALKER Call of Pripyat compared to Shadow of Chernobyl and Clear Sky. And I loved SoC.
Final Fantasy 6 was much better than the earlier ones.
I haven't finished AC1 yet. I got bored with it. Wasn't planning on trying 2 until 1 is done with.
anyway, depends. If they're the short trilogy type of series, not really, because the games rarely change enough to make a difference (halo/halo 2/halo 3/ODST), but for the longer ones, like Final Fantasy, yes, because some are good and some aren't. And if you define series even broader, like anything with mario slapped on the title, then yes, because mario party 3-3294830984209384293840923470932874320984093284 was crap (and more, im just not going to bother to find every mario branded game that was rubbish)
It does happen to me from time to time. I think the first time I ended up prefering a game's sequel over was with Double Dragon [NES] and Double Dragon 2: The Revenge [NES]. The second game is clearly the better game because the graphics, music, and game play are better. Also, the biggest thing that makes it better is that it actually has simultaneous cooperative play, unlike the first game for the NES (which had that crap trap Mode B arena duel feature). Now, the Sega Master System version of the first game did have simultaneous cooperative play . However, that's another matter all together...
The Half-life series. Maybe it's because I played Half-Life years and years after it came out, but I just couldn't get into it. Half-Life 2 (plus episodes 1 and 2) , on the other hand, is one my favourite games of all time. There really isn't a single thing about that game that's bad to me and the ending of episode 2 is probably the most emotional and gut wrenching finishes to any game I've ever played. I still feel kind of bad that I didn't give the first one enough of a go.
I absolutely adore Wipeout Pure, and I ended up buying all three PS1 Wipeouts in 2006 as a result. The original was too obsolete and punishing, XL had an unfavorable progression stucture, and I just never grew attached to 3. I always would rather play Pure. Now after owning HD for a few months, I still would still rather play Pure.
Also, Burnout 1 and 2 were never able to catch on after I had played and enjoyed Burnout 3 so much.
Well, I couldn't quite get into the first Baldur's Gate. I never finished it. Baldur's Gate 2, on the other hand, is my favorite game of all time. It's funny that they didn't make any huge changes between BG1 and 2, though. I think it was mainly the tons of tiny little additions and fixes (such as to the mapping and journal) that changed BG1 from an okay game with good ideas into an absolutely AMAZING BG2.
Resident Evil 4 is an obvious one, but I'll add my voice to others. I didn't like RE1 at all and the little I played of 2 and 3 let me know that I would hate them. RE4 is a great game, however.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment