Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood Preview

Free Rome.

An assassin's work - a bit like a postman's perhaps - is never done. Ezio Auditore's only just got back to his villa after prosecuting that whole blood-soaked vengeance deal at the end of Assassin's Creed II, and all of us a sudden there's cannon-fire shredding his bedroom as he tries to enjoy himself with a friendly lady. What a drag.

Luckily, it means that Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood kicks off in astonishing style, with Ezio staggering out onto the roof of his mansion to see 30,000 NPCs (full-disclosure: that's what the producer said; I didn't have time to count them) flocking over the hill. It's the Templars, out in force, and ready to do a little home-wrecking.

Not before a few mechanical tweaks have been introduced, mind you. The first few minutes of Brotherhood are filled with frantic spectacle as you're flung into Ezio's fancy boots just in time to receive orders from Uncle Mario - that still sounds weird - to hold off the attackers long enough to give the villa's staff time to get to safety.

That means using a cannon on the battlements to break up the advancing siege towers - and that, in turn, means an on-horseback dash through the streets surrounding the villa while Renaissance architecture comes toppling down all around you. If you spent a lot of time in the last game making your home look pretty, Ubisoft only needs 30 seconds or so to reduce it to rubble again.

The CGI E3 trailer for Brotherhood.

Horses will be a big feature of Brotherhood, as it happens. You'll be able to use them inside cities for the first time - racing through narrow streets looks reassuringly brilliant - and there's plenty of horse-based combat, as you use melee and ranged attacks from the saddle, and sample the pleasures offered by cutting an enemy's ride out from under them with a flash of steel.

Combat's been retooled even when you're on foot, as Ezio's eventual arrival on the battlements reveals. After the heavily counters-based focus of first two games, the team's mantra for Brotherhood is "Strike first, strike fast".

What this translates to in terms of swordplay is enemies who don't wait for their moment to attack you (unlike the previous game's villains, who would loiter politely, as though they were queuing up at a Waitrose cheese counter) and a much stronger emphasis on running people through the gut before they've laid a hand on you. Meanwhile, the animation, as ever with this series, can turn even the lamest of street scraps into something that looks thrilling and dramatic.

Before the introduction fades, you'll have had time to try out new cannons - you select a distant target and then watch with pleasure as a siege tower (or unfortunate barn) splinters cinematically under the force of your blow - and then an old friend is killed by Brotherhood's main villain, Ceasare, and the game starts for real.

At the moment, Ubisoft is only offering the tiniest glimpse of the game lurking beyond the hectic opener, but it seems, above all else, to be a genuine companion piece to Assassin's Creed II. Ezio may be back, but this is a fascinating variation on his earlier adventures, and while the trappings are familiar, the emphasis is all new. So if the earlier game was all about becoming a master assassin, this one's about what it's like to actually be one; if the last one was concerned with revenge, the second revolves around justice.

It also revolves around squads, but you'll rarely find yourself thinking about them that way. The latest game's main storyline quickly dumps you into a Rome made tatty by Templar rule. It's 1503, there's fear in streets and disco in the clubs, and Ezio's job is to form his own assassin's guild - a brotherhood that will clean up the city and bring hope to the populace in the process.

Ubisoft's gone a lot deeper with this one than the short turnaround time might lead you to expect. While the adventure may be primarily focused on a single city, Rome is enormous - three times the size of Florence in the last game, apparently - and the guild you're slowly piecing together is far more exciting than a limp meta-game to break up the drainpipe scampering.

Brotherhood members are recruited by winning over likely candidates in the city who need your help, and from there you'll have to send these NPCs out throughout Europe on contract assignments to train them up. It's a mixture of RPG levelling and gambling, by the looks of it, as you're always running the risk of getting promising recruits killed if you become impatient and send someone out to do a task they're not ready for yet.

Once they're fully levelled-up, the fun really kicks in, and you can start using your assassins in-game as Ezio goes about his own business. It's a stylish twist on special attacks for the most part, if a mission we're shown, drawn from later in the game, is to be trusted: Ezio's making his way into enemy territory, and after scoping out the perimeter defences, a whistle is all it takes to bring his brotherhood in to clear off gunmen lurking on the rooftops.

Ubisoft talks to EGTV about Brotherhood.

Hitting the streets, he can then call in an airstrike of arrows to take out perimeter guards, before ducking into a church to pull off an assassination using a crossbow, just one of the game's new weapons. (The crossbow works like a charm, too, seamlessly pulling the camera in close for over-the-shoulder targeting, and relying on a silvery line-of-sight reticule.)

Once outside again, a third and final whistle brings assassins dropping out of the sky to take on the Swiss guards that have cornered you, and it's only as Ezio saunters away through the fighting that you'll probably realise he only personally killed one man during the entire mission. When you're the best, it would seem, you can sit back and get other people to do your dirty work for you.

Calling in the brotherhood is currently mapped to the bumpers, and its implementation looks to be fairly contextual. It promises to tie into the puzzling aspects of the earlier game's assassinations, as you scope out your targets, look for weak points to exploit in the security, and then move in as elegantly as you can, and it adds a real touch of class to proceedings.

Rather than being the trainee, forever proving yourself, Brotherhood promises to deliver on the fantasy of being the man in charge - the person at the centre of it all who gets jobs done without ever breaking his cool. You'll have to build up your guild quite a bit to get to this level of omnipotence, however, and it's worth remembering that the brotherhood is merely a new tool amongst all the old reliable stuff, too.

It's a fascinating way to evolve the series, and I'd be tempted to say that the only way the people at Ubisoft could make Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood any better at the moment would be to slap an irritating embargo on all details of the game's excellent new multiplayer stuff until later in the week.

Happily, that's exactly what they've done. But while it's annoying not to be able to talk about the self-assurance with which this free-roaming single-player game has ventured online just yet, it's still nice to know that another chance to iterate on the main campaign mode has left the series looking smarter - and sharper - than ever before.

Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood is due out on 16th November for PS3 and Xbox 360.

Comments (28) Latest comment 2 years ago

Comments for this article are now closed, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • Antwandemarco #1 2 years ago

    Really no comments?

    Actually sounds pretty excellent. Although, it did seem fairly suspect when Rome had such a minor role in the previous game. While i don't like the Ubisoft trend of rehashing their titles, it seems fair enough to a certain degree with AC. They have a great engine and world to build on.

    The only aspect i'm not looking forward to is Desmond Miles. Fucking lame ass generic "naughties" man. Probably listens to Nickleback and plays Lacrosse.
  • drxym #2 2 years ago

    Hmm, sounds like a cheap way to avoid moving AC to another time period.
  • Genome #3 2 years ago

    If it takes place in 1503, I hope they change the cause of death of Alexander VI to "assassination for being an annoying bastard in ACII" instead of "a bad fever".

    Looking forward to this. Five months will hopefully pass quickly.
  • Drpwnage #4 2 years ago

    "Hmm, sounds like a cheap way to avoid moving AC to another time period. "

    Eh? when they have set the game in a whole new city - Rome, whether it's 1503 or 1903 the work for Ubi is still the same. The 15th/16th Century is a great period backdrop.
  • Bloke1182 #5 2 years ago

    I am really looking forward to this. Didn't play the second one, but this definitly sounds like a huge improvement over the first one.
  • Eraysor #6 2 years ago

    More storyline please! The last one was epic.
  • TeaFiend #7 2 years ago

    Still curious of multiplayer implementation.
  • drxym #8 2 years ago

    @Drpwnage Eh? when they have set the game in a whole new city - Rome, whether it's 1503 or 1903 the work for Ubi is still the same. The 15th/16th Century is a great period backdrop.

    Most of the character models, art, textures, ambient noises, AI, game engine etc. will be reusable from the existing game. Sure they might have to model a new city but it is a fraction of the effort required to move to a different era where pretty much all graphical and audio assets would have to be done from scratch.

    As for being a great period backdrop, there are lots of great period backdrops. For example an AC set in England during the restoration would have been a great backdrop, or perhaps set in feudal Japan etc. We'll never know what could have been because we're getting AC2 remixed.
  • EthanWoods #9 2 years ago

    @drxym

    "Most of the character models, art, textures, ambient noises, AI, game engine etc. will be reusable from the existing game. Sure they might have to model a new city but it is a fraction of the effort required to move to a different era where pretty much all graphical and audio assets would have to be done from scratch.

    As for being a great period backdrop, there are lots of great period backdrops. For example an AC set in England during the restoration would have been a great backdrop, or perhaps set in feudal Japan etc. We'll never know what could have been because we're getting AC2 remixed"

    I hope you're fully aware that this is a spin-off and not Assassin's Creed 3. Numbers are reserved for new ancestors and new timelines, which is why this does not have a number. It's also why they've said many times that this is not the third game in the planned trilogy.
  • geeza2020 #10 2 years ago

    soooo, its a cash-in then?
  • brseg #11 2 years ago

    I have to agree with some of the comments above, I expected a new time period/setting - I guess we have to wait for AC3. Being totally biased, I'd love the setting to be medieval London (I'm rubbish at history, but the days of the plague and so on). Old london streets would be an amazing setting, and plenty of history to draw from.
    Edited by brseg at 15/06/10 @ 11:46
  • JimmyT67 #12 2 years ago

    AC3?

    Assassins Credence: Brothers in da Hood
  • kangarootoo #13 2 years ago

    "Ubisoft's gone a lot deeper with this one than the short turnaround time might lead you to expect"

    They almost certainly started working on this before AC2 was finished, which is no bad thing at all.



    "Hmm, sounds like a cheap way to avoid moving AC to another time period."

    I haven't the faintest idea what that means.

    "soooo, its a cash-in then?"

    Or that.


    What exactly is the critisism. My spidey sense isn't working very well this morning, so I'm failing to gleen the constructive commentary (which I'm sure exists) behind some of the more crtyptic posts in this thread.
  • TeaFiend #14 2 years ago

    @kangarootoo:
    Because it is not AC3 and reuses a character it must be a total sell out. Duh. If they changed it to Ezio's cousin it might be ok?
  • drxym #15 2 years ago

    @kangarootoo if you don't know what I mean, perhaps you should have read my subsequent comments.

    It's a cheap way because they can substantially reuse existing assets. It sounds more like an expansion pack than a full game and I hope the price reflects that.
  • kangarootoo #16 2 years ago

    @TeaFiend

    Ah good point. They should have called him Petzio DeFlore.


    @drxym

    "It's a cheap way because they can substantially reuse existing assets"

    Well first, you show me a sequel that doesn't reuse something from the previous iteration. Maybe my eyes aren't working right, but AC2 looked a hell of a lot like AC1 to me. Did we get annoyed last time?

    And second, what do we care what it costs them to make it? So long as they end experience is good, I don't care if it was cheap or expensive for them to make it. Although, if I had to give an opinion I'd prefer it cost them less, as there is more likelyhood they will make another for me to enjoy.

    You seem to care far more about how much effort the sequel required to make than you do about the gameplay result you will actually experience.

    Yes a London setting would be nice, and a different era would also be nice. But are we going to hold those somewhat unimaginative specifics against what is very likely going to be a fantastic game in many other respects?

    Maybe, just maybe, they will add new things to this sequel that we didn't even think of? The words of this article certainly seem to suggest that far more original additions have been made than simply shifting the calendar forward 100 years and giving Ezio's grandson a fashionable new pair of trousers.
    Edited by kangarootoo at 15/06/10 @ 13:10
  • TeaFiend #17 2 years ago

    If I get enough hours of enjoyment out of it I will be happy.
  • drxym #18 2 years ago

    @kangarootoo reuse, refinement, enhancement are expected from a sequel. However substantially cutting and pasting what you've already done amounts to a glorified expansion pack not a new game.

    Second I care what it costs them to make because it should reflect in what it costs me to buy. It also reflects in the amount of development effort that has gone into the release. Thus I have no issue with GTA or HL episodic content because they're sold at a reduced price.

    As for "unimaginative specifics" I am writing a comment against a news article not a full blown game design. There are numerous ways a story set in the restoration (for example) could be developed (Royalists vs Roundheads, Cromwell, intrigues etc.), assuming Ubisoft weren't rehashing their existing one.
    Edited by drxym at 15/06/10 @ 13:53
  • kangarootoo #19 2 years ago

    @drxym

    At the risk of this turning into far bigger a deal than it really should (I'm just playing devil's advocate with you really), I shall respond :)


    "Second I care what it costs them to make because it should reflect in what it costs me to buy. It also reflects in the amount of development effort that has gone into the release."

    But that doesn't happen currently with any other game. Oblivion, GTAIV, HL2, AC2, Gran Turismo, Crackdown, Fallout 3, Red Dead R, Mass Effect 2... all these games probabnly had wildly different budgets, but they all had roughly the same RRP on launch. There is currently practically zero consistency between what a game costs to make and what it sells for in the shops.

    If that lack of consistency doesn't bother us with other games, why should it bother us now? Because we believe that we can see "where the money went"?

    How well a game is expected to sell might affect its RRP, but not the cost of production. It might appear to you than Brotherhood was cheap to make because there are some apparently very visible savings, but I'm not sure that is a reliable guide.

    Art assets aren't the only thing that costs money. Designing and coding new gameplay costs plenty of money, as does QA testing of said new stuff. In fact a new AC game with lots of new game mechanics but the same art assets probably costs more to make than a sequel with no new gameplay but lots of new city scapes (which can be outsourced relatively cheaply and reliably).

    And I agree there are lots of ways a game could be developed in a new time period, but outside of story and art style, I'm not sure what developments would DEPEND on a change in scenery. Surely the most innovative gameplay changes (combat, multiplayer, movement) could be implemented without having to change the historical context?


    Like I say, this risks sounding like a big deal and I'm not saying your wish for a new historical context is invalid (I like some of your suggestions a lot). I just think it is woefully narrow to write the game off on the basis that it is still set in roughly the same time period as AC2 and reuses some of the characters. The same can be said of lots of games. It sounds to me like lots of new gameplay variaty has been created, yet we are fixated on the time period.

    Question. If the AC series didn't place the POTENTIAL to change time period so firmly in view... would we really care that it hasn't?
  • geeza2020 #20 2 years ago

    ^^^
    "Why are there no toilets on the comments threads here?"
    "Oh, nobody at Eurogamer has an anus."
  • LiamK #21 2 years ago

    As an extra, if this game was known about while Assassin's Creed II was in development, it would have meant that they could have spent MORE on that world, knowing that they'd be able to spread the cost of investement over two games. They could hardly have charged £70 for it but said "don't worry, we'll be releasing an add-on/sequel that will be cheaper because we've already modelled Ezio's hair."
  • coomber #22 2 years ago

    Once again another Eurogamer preview I cannot bring myself to read as it is littered with spoilers.

    You are aware you can write about a game without resorting to "and then this happens, and then this happens, and then this happens"...aren't you?
  • geeza2020 #23 2 years ago

    Oh dear, looks like I hit a sore spot.

    Sense. of. humour. get. one.
  • kangarootoo #24 2 years ago

    @geeza2020

    I think actually, nobody understood the joke (I certainly didn't).
  • trip919 #25 2 years ago

    I’m quietly reassured by this. Creed 2 was one of the best games of last year – I can’t wait to jump back into that time period.
  • rickyhabana #26 2 years ago

    @gezza2020
    i assume that was a family guy reference.
    "blows tumbleweed"
  • geeza2020 #27 2 years ago

    if nobody has an anus = everbody is full of shite.

    not that hard to decipher is it?
  • RedSparrows #28 2 years ago

    Steam-Gothic-Victoriana-London plx