Topic: Assassin's Creed II

I've just started playing this game, but it's an amazing game. This game introduced me to Ezio, one of the greatest game characters of all time. Also, it's got really great gameplay, combing open-world, platforming, and combat. The story feels like it's a movie or book. This truly is an amazing game.

Have you played one. How far are you into the game,

@shingi_70 Nope, I haven't played 1, and I just got the game, so I'm not that far. Just learned to camouflage and steal. Also, I don't have my sword anymore, where did it go?

Don't think you get it back for a while.

Also I would reccomend Getting number 1 (im replaying it right now). It should feel in alot of Backstory you haven't hit yet. You may have spoiled a few things about the first.

Ah, I played this game for hours just exploring how the game works, how the NPCs react and mostly pinching peoples money to start fights. I really liked the addition of weapon disarms but would like to have been able to throw away the weapon quickly so I can do empty handed throws and stuff easily. I didn't follow the story but the gameplay was fun.

There's something very satisfying about beating enemies with your fists until they run away screaming in fear. The bards even start singing about you like you're some kind of robin hood if you beat up on the guards enough.

I have this on my mac. What sucks is that I have no internet access, so I can't play the game. WTF Ubisoft...?

Don't mean to be a Debbie Downer here, but Assassin's Creed 2 was a game I just could not get into. The free-run system was great, but now that I've seen it in a few other games (the Arkham games, The Saboteur), I don't feel like it brings anything notably original to the table (with the exception of the setting which I thought was cool and unique for a game).

I guess my biggest gripe was that I never felt the weight of any of my actions. It was far too quick and easy an affair to one button assassinate a random NPC, scale a building, and jump into a haystack to avoid the gaurds. After 60 seconds, the whole affair is over and nobody really seems to care.

For a lot of people, I guess this is no big thing, but for me, if I'm playing a game about ASSASSINS I should feel accomplished in each assassination. It shouldn't be a one button affair. If any of you guys have played the Hitman series, you know how much patience those games require for a single kill that won't attract a lot of attention, not to mention the amount of resistance the game throws at you if you happen to get spotted. In Ass Creed, it doesn't matter if you kill someone in the middle of a town square, you can escape just as easily as you can killing someone in an open and abandoned field.

play the first game its harder in all respects.

color me interested. can you describe some of the gameplay differences? I've heard the resounding yell of people claiming Ass Creed 2 is leagues better, but there seems to be a small group who actually prefer the first game. Since I'm obviously not in the former group, why do you think those in the latter group prefer the first game to the second?

The enemy A.I. is mostly harder to escape and the way that the citys during the crusades were made you could easily caught places.

The Target's and Killings were much more elaborate with you having to gain information on the target before. It was usually getting Hard to read maps. If you used the infomation it was easier to kill a target compared to fightinb through waves of enemies.

The Crusades time period was used in story better than the backgroud of two.

cool, thx man. I'll give the original a shot!

I love the Assassin's Creed games...except for the first one. It's pretty terrible, IMO.

I'm still amazed how much was in Brotherhood. How'd they get a legit full single player game in there in a year along with multiplayer is beyond me.