Twinfinite Writes: The Assassin's Creed series just received an update with Origins, so we take a look at the best main characters of the series and how they stack up.
It took going back to a much older game to realise just how empty Assassin's Creed Shadows feels.
"I've never thought feudal Japan would be a good Assassin's Creed setting. Give me 1960s southern England with mods and rockers."
Aaaaaaand that's where I stopped reading.
And shadows reminds me of something origins is lacking. Virtually every game is lacking something. It is because it is lacking, that it has what it isnt. Funny dichotomy that…
Origins is a beautiful game made by talented people that got turned into a brutal level-gate fest by the CEOs.
There are only a few Assassin's Creed games I played. Original, The Ezio Collection, and what I think is probably the best in the series Assassin's Creed Odyssey with the DLC. I'm done with the series, it's the same shit.
IGN - Assassin's Creed's focus on character-driven storytelling has been buried by its RPG sandbox features, and the series is weaker for it.
A rare W opinion piece from IGN.
IMO, Ubisoft needs to setup two primary AC dev teams. 1 would focus on and release character-driven OG-style AC games for OG fans and the other would continue the current RPG-ified AC style for current fans.
Release by them Bi-annually and alternatively. There'd less fatigue and a boost to quality.
I definitely appreciate 3 more after playing it again in recent years along with the Liberation game. Back when 3 was new I was still riding high on AC2 and Brotherhood so when I played 3 I felt a bit let down. Even the ship battles grew on me.
AC2 - Yes
AC3 - Urm...I don't know
I feel they kind of dropped the ball with AC3 and with the way the story went it just didn't make sense to me at all. I felt it would have made more sense lore wise if they had it so the Red Coats were mostly Assassins and the Templars were mostly the Colonists who wanted this "new world" as a fresh start for their operations, to build a country up they'd have full control of from the start so they manufacture the war as something else while really it's just a front for the Templars vs Assassins.
It just meant that since the Red coats lose the war it explains how the Templars have gained full control of future America and how the Assassins have slowly died out by then. This entire event would have been the turning point of how things went to s**t for the Assassins and how there's not many of them left in the present.
Haythem was a lot more interesting than Connor and he should have been the main Assassin of AC3.
I thought AC2 was the greatest of the series and it is but replaying it recently, I stared to see more flaws in the game. Basically every single mission is an assassination besides a few tailing missions lol. Still, the implementation of all the new mechanics were great. The smoke bombs, disarming guards, story, hidden tombs, swimming, flying machine, multiple locations, etc. it definitely felt a bit more special to me at the time of release though
Dunno about 3, the 1st act was cool, then i couldn't tell you what happens after that. But 2 was so good! The entire acts 1-3 were al memorable, whereas i really couldn't even tell you what happens in any other AC game
Ubisoft shared a developer Q&A about Assassin's Creed Origins, clearing up pretty much any doubt you could possibly have regarding the game.
AC Origins is the last great Ubisoft game. Period. This game show how great the Ubisoft story writing once was. Also the meticulous research Ubisoft did in the field of Egyptology. Ubisoft was so pride of their research that it made a separate Touring mode just to showcase all of their study.