Assassin's Creed: Director's Cut Edition Review

By Dan Whitehead Published 11 April, 2008

Altaired states.

Version tested: PC

Let's talk a little about the term "director's cut". If we were to take it literally, it would refer to those rare occasions upon which a maligned film director revisits a studio-butchered film and re-cuts it to his or her satisfaction. In reality, it usually means "we found an extra fifteen minutes of footage that we cut out to make the movie better, but now we've put it back in". But what does it mean in videogames and, in particular, what does it mean for this long-overdue PC version of last year's stabby console hit?

Assassin's Creed was a game burdened with potential, but one that could ultimately only earn the tag of "pretty vacant". For all its expansive medieval vistas and acrobatic action, there wasn't a whole lot going on in the long term. Once you'd guided Altair through his first assassination, you'd pretty much seen everything on offer in terms of gameplay. That you then had to repeat the process eight more times left some players feeling more than a little weary, no matter how lovely the view along the way. So does this "director's cut" represent the fruits of a re-energised creative team polishing a tarnished gem to their satisfaction? Or is it just a tardy port with some inconsequential new bits tacked on?

The second one, sadly.

'Assassin's Creed: Director's Cut Edition' Screenshot 1

The invisible waterslide was incredibly popular at Jerusalem World of Adventures.

When I hear the words "director's cut", I tend to expect some fairly substantial changes. New scenes, new characters, new levels, resolutions to otherwise unfinished plot arcs. That sort of thing. For Assassin's Creed PC, the net result of six months of additional work is four new types of "investigation mission". These are the secondary objectives you have to complete in order to amass enough information to launch an attack on one of your nine historical targets. In the console version there were only five such mission types, some of which involved nothing more involved than sitting on a bench and looking at someone. The shallow nature of the tasks, and the protracted repetition, soon began to grate. In theory, bumping that total up to nine should alleviate the problem. And it does. Slightly.

You see, there's nothing in any of the four new mission types that offers anything more in-depth than what PS3 and 360 owners got to sample in November. Rather than exciting new experiences, they're more like variations on established themes. Rooftop Race Challenge, for instance, requires you to run from one informant to another within a time limit. Another fun excuse to hurl yourself from rooftops and scramble up walls, but nothing you won't have already done in the existing flag race missions.

Archer Stealth Assassination asks you to bump off a set number of rooftop snipers without being seen. Again, if you played the console version then you've already done this - both as part of the main gameplay, and also in the missions where you must help a fellow assassin by stealthily killing a set number of ground-based targets. Assassin Escort is self-explanatory, and it'll be a cold day in Hell when I praise the addition of sodding escort missions as something to cheer about. That just leaves the Merchant Stand Destruction challenge in which you, well, destroy merchant stands. It's another simplistic and arbitrary task that hardly gets the blood pumping.

And that's the sum total of the new gameplay elements. They hardly justify the "director's cut" tag, nor do they seem like the sort of overhaul that needed six months to implement.

There are some minor technical improvements, of course. Most notably a couple of tweaks to the guard AI that makes it slightly less easy to murder dozens of soldiers by loitering near the scene of the crime with your head bowed but, again, this isn't a radical reinvention and many of the old exploits involving laughably illogical use of haystack hiding places still work. The undeniably gorgeous visuals look the business in the sort of resolutions that consoles can't manage, but for most people playing on an average home gaming rig the difference will be negligible at best, unattainable at worst. The game comes with some fairly daunting minimum specs, and if you don't have at least a 2.2GHz dual-core processor you can expect the game to chug like a traction engine as it struggles to render all those crowds.

DirectX 10 is supported, but generally seems to be more herky-jerky than a stable DirectX 9 system, so that's pretty much a big waste of time. Control, meanwhile, is decent but never particularly intuitive. Playing with a gamepad is the obvious choice, but as Windows can have trouble recognising the trigger buttons of a 360 pad then the game can become even more of a fiddle as you fight to overcome the instinctive forefinger reaction to tug on those triggers.

'Assassin's Creed: Director's Cut Edition' Screenshot 4

Third Crusade hip hop concerts: not particularly dope.

Keyboard and mouse control, on the other hand, also takes some getting used to. Running, climbing and basic fighting are easy enough to grasp but functions like the lock-on and modifying your actions from low to high visibility proves a bit of a fumble to begin with. It's nothing you won't get to grips with, but you're always aware that you're dealing with a control system originally designed specifically for a different input device. You can remap the controls on both gamepad and keyboard, and on-screen prompts remind you which buttons do what, but it still took me a while to find a setup that felt comfortable.

On the whole though, everything that's been added works well enough. What's depressing is what they haven't done. The new investigation missions make the bulk of the gameplay marginally less repetitive, but it's not a dramatic fix and these sections are still glaringly pointless, nothing more than a series of interchangeable chores that trigger the boss level once you've done enough donkey work.

The information you gather still has no bearing on the assassinations themselves, where you simply run up to your target, slaughter them in plain sight and then run away and hide until everybody forgets about you rather than planning anything based on what you discover. This half-baked execution of the game's core theme was annoying on consoles, but on the PC where memories of the more flexible Thief and the original Hitman still linger, this shallow, rigid structure is left embarrassingly exposed. You have a stunning free-roaming world, but the only things you can actually do are the handful of tasks the game offers. It looks like a real place, but it never actually feels like it. It's a backdrop. A very pretty, animated backdrop, but it's not a place worthy of exploration.

Of course, those sorts of changes would require a fairly major rewrite, but even the easy-to-fix grumbles haven't been addressed, such as the tiny pool of voice samples which leave you grinding your teeth at every cry of "I'll have your hand for that!" Or the way the difficulty of the game is crudely and obviously ratcheted up by populating the streets with increasing numbers of tenacious beggars and belligerent lepers, who only ever harass you out of the dozens of people wandering around. And there's no escaping the fact that, apart from the investigation missions, the only other thing to do in these richly realised environments is to either save peasants by grinding through more counter-based combat, or sproing around looking for hidden flags and Templars. As there's no Achievement system in place for the PC version, these collection quests are revealed as the hollow chore they always were. With no incentive to find them, and no benefits for their discovery, they might as well not exist.

'Assassin's Creed: Director's Cut Edition' Screenshot 6

Doctor, it really hurts when I wipe and...aah, that might explain it.

So Assassin's Creed on the PC proves to be dispiritingly similar to Assassin's Creed on the consoles, only six months late for a party most people have already grown tired of. This certainly leaves the unearned "director's cut" title looking a lot like a transparent marketing hook to make disgruntled PC owners feel like their half-year wait makes them favoured customers rather than a secondary concern. Sure, the game certainly looks lovely, and you'll ooh and aah at the way Altair glides seamlessly through a crowd, or climbs up a wall with his virtual hands visibly connecting with virtual outcrops. But the surface lustre soon wears off, and you're left with a game that goes to impressive lengths to make it fun to explore the environment, but still fails to give you any compelling reason to do so beyond empty eye candy.

Tom may have given the 360 version 7/10 back in November but even though the PC version is virtually identical I always found Assassin's Creed to be a 6/10 experience wrapped up in a 9/10 game engine. Waiting six months for what amounts to some minor tech tweaks and four additional mini-games certainly hasn't changed my mind, so...

6 / 10

Read the Eurogamer.net scoring policy
Picture of Dan.

About Dan Whitehead

Dan has been writing for Eurogamer since 2006 and specialises in RPGs, shooters and games for children. His bestest game ever is Julian Gollop's Chaos.

Read more articles from Dan by visiting the Dan Whitehead archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (72) Latest comment 4 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • HoriZon #1 4 years ago

    Still like it though :)

  • Tejstar #2 4 years ago

    Ooh, 6/10. Seems like a real marmite game.

    I've ordered it for the PC anway...

  • tomdominer #3 4 years ago

    Lets face it, this game is tits.

  • Crea #4 4 years ago

    "6/10 experience wrapped up in a 9/10 game engine."

    Bullseye.

  • UncleLou #5 4 years ago

    Tom may have given the 360 version 7/10 back in November but even though the PC version is virtually identical I always found Assassin's Creed to be a 6/10 experience wrapped up in a 9/10 game engine.

    From the 2 or 3 hours I've played, I couldn't agree more, although it's closer to 5/10 for me at the moment.

    Christ, what they could have/should have done! It's the most brutal case of a wasted opportunity I've played in years. instead of either a more PoP-like game, OR a Thief/Hitman-like game, OR a game with some RPG mechanics, it is 2007's Dragon's Lair. Climb on a tower to see the icons which trigger the minigames. The whole game is like a big Quick-Time-Event.
    Edited by 1 at 11/04/08 @ 11:32

  • Ryltar #6 4 years ago

    Fair review. I found that i really enjoyed playing the game in 1 hour daily chunks.

  • lost_soul #7 4 years ago

    "Christ, what they could have/should have done! It's the most brutal case of a wasted opportunity I've played in years. instead of either a more PoP-like game, OR a Thief/Hitman-like game, OR a game with some RPG mechanics, it is 2007's Dragon's Lair. Climb on a tower to see the icons which trigger the minigames. The whole game is like a big Quick-Time-Event."

    Oh. I was kind of looking forward to AC.

    /closes wallet

  • Darren #8 4 years ago

    Assassin's Creed is definitely a triumph of style over substance IMO but it was enjoyable enough for the time I spent with it on the Xbox 360.

  • viper_h #9 4 years ago

    Sadly, AC on the 360 was another one of those games which I enjoyed for the first few hours when I bought it, but after the initial play period, I never felt motivated to go back to it.

    I've got lots of games like that :(

  • MENTAL1ST Verified Senior Software Engineer, Picsel UK Ltd. #10 4 years ago

    Lets face it, this game is tits.

    Well, that's certainly what Ubisoft was selling when they were publicising it pre release...

  • Maximilian #11 4 years ago

    Since Ubisoft have stuck their two fingers up at me by not letting me buy this through Steam or any other digital service, I think I'll stick my own two fingers right back up at them by giving this a miss. Besides, sounds like a one trick, but very pretty, pony.

  • mingster #12 4 years ago

    This review is useless without mention of Jade Redmond.. hence 6/10

  • krudster #13 4 years ago

    Having just finished it belatedly on 360, I'm glad I didn't have to review it back in November. Once you've visited the three cities, to find that you're essentially doing the exact same thing a further two times is cheap to say the least. But what a game engine. The potential is there to make this an amazing game - they've just got to come up with some actual mission variation next time.

    I'm sure they must realise this...

  • 4thVariety #14 4 years ago

    It's the right rating and the right reasoning, especially the last part about a 6/10 gameplay in a 9/10 graphics wrapping.

  • Killerbee #15 4 years ago

    Having been a bit unsure about this after reading the console review, I'm now pretty much certain I'll give this a miss. Maybe if I had nothing else to play right now I'd get it and give it a whirl, but if anything, it's quite the opposite - I've got a stack of games to get through and no time for anyything less than brilliant.

    By the sounds of it, if I want to oggle some lush graphics, I'd be far better off replaying the first two-thirds of Crysis.
    Edited by 1 at 11/04/08 @ 12:00

  • Killdare #16 4 years ago

    it'll be a cold day in Hell when I praise the addition of sodding escort missions as something to cheer about

    ... hallelujah, brother!

  • anomagnus #17 4 years ago

    not the worst game in the world, but the plot, my god, why cut into the future with malcom, that was so bad it defied belief

    but they're right, killing the guy, then just running away was pants

    at the very least, a sub quest to get new clothes would have helped

  • DanWhitehead #18 4 years ago

    The potential is there to make this an amazing game - they've just got to come up with some actual mission variation next time.

    A Batman game using this engine, but with actual investigations and adventure game elements, would be amazing.

  • GregorV #19 4 years ago

    Fair review. I found that i really enjoyed playing the game in 1 hour daily chunks.

    Absolutely. It's more of an experience than a game that you need to beat. It's immensely satisfying when playing it in small chunks as it's very immersive, but in a long play session, just like with any game, the actual game mechanics becomes obvious, thus breaking the illusion and leaving the somewhat simplistic gameplay bare. Playing through it in one sitting is like watching the DVD of your favourite TV show all at once; it's going to start to grate no matter what.

    Not one of the best games ever, but easily amongst the most unique interactive experiences available.

  • krudster #20 4 years ago

    Some puzzles would be good too. Why the hell have puzzles in games gone out of fashion so much?

    You're spot on Dan - throw in some investigations too. Get your character to stalk, harass and interrogate people in a way that doesn't merely amount to sitting on a bench.

    I want some actual adventure with my action please. The templates already exist in dozens of games that are 15 years old now.
    Edited by 1 at 11/04/08 @ 12:18

  • themerlin13 #21 4 years ago

    So...worth writing that review and playing the PC version if you had decided it was a 6/10 before starting?

    Do agree that it's not as good as it should have been though.

  • DanWhitehead #22 4 years ago

    So...worth writing that review and playing the PC version if you had decided it was a 6/10 before starting?

    Well, I found the 360 version to be a 6/10. There was every chance - and even some naive hope on my part - that the additional six months of development would have improved the game for PC. I didn't think it would be magically transformed into a masterpiece, since fixing the core problems would essentially mean writing a new game using the same engine, but there are certainly lots of smaller improvements that could have been made.

  • JDub #23 4 years ago

    Completed some missions, then got a decent trade-in for Burnout Paradise - Job done! :)

  • menage #24 4 years ago

    If it didn't look this pretty people would be a lot harder on it. I actually think it doesn't even deserve a mark higher than 5.

    It's just boring as hell. And it's also extremely silly in it's story. I wish the whole future bit wasn't there to begin with. It's just lame talking about pharmaceutics in a extremely badly filmed cut scene.

  • jozz #25 4 years ago

    The new batman should just rip everything good out of AC and put it in Gotham city.

  • JonFE #26 4 years ago

    The way I see it, a Prince of Persia game using this engine and PoP's fighting mechanics should be on the cards... and that Batman game Dan mentions could indeed be amazing :)
    Edited by 1 at 11/04/08 @ 12:39

  • space_ace #27 4 years ago

    you dirty thief!

  • ZuluHero #28 4 years ago

    The new batman should just rip everything good out of AC and put it in Gotham city.

    surely thats everything - plus alot more needed to be added besides? :p

  • Katsumoto #29 4 years ago

    Glad I decided to get Mario Kart instead of this, then!

  • jimbo118 #30 4 years ago

    Agreed 100%

  • Shabtai #31 4 years ago

    I dont know why put much of the emphesis on the "Director's Cut" angle, did anyone really expect there to be new gameplay? It's a conversion, nothing more.

    What i would like to know from the pc\console reviewers is what version would they recommend to someone who is about to play the game for the first time? which version to get?

  • HyperShadow #32 4 years ago

    Gave it an hour and a half before bed last night, to be honest, i'm enjoying it. But i'll save any judgements until later, because from what I've read its the repetition that kills it. But still, I'm enjoying it so far..

    ...except giving away the twist right at the f'n start of the game. It looks like its trying to borrow from the Matrix, but has got the timing all wrong.

  • UncleLou #33 4 years ago

    Some puzzles would be good too. Why the hell have puzzles in games gone out of fashion so much?


    It wouldn't even need to be "classic" puzzles - just some elements you need to figure out for yourself - take the tower-climbing. What you do is keep two buttons pressed. Why net let me figure out a way to get up there, at the very least? While this wasn't too difficult in Prince of Persia, either, at least there was some skill and thinking involved.

  • mkreku #34 4 years ago

    If Jade says this is great, then it IS great. I trust Jade!

  • Kryon #35 4 years ago

    PCLOL!

    AMIRITE?

    /runs

  • UncleLou #36 4 years ago

    Nah, you misunderstood. Just higher standards.

  • muscleblade #37 4 years ago

    Better than the lackluster PS3 version for sure. Not quite as good as the 360 version i presume but close to it.

  • Durandle #38 4 years ago

    I take the point of lack of longterm gameplay, but lets face it, pushing unsuspecting guards of high places never gets old. Its flawed but fun, in small chunks.

  • Gaol #39 4 years ago

    "Playing with a gamepad is the obvious choice, but as Windows can have trouble recognising the trigger buttons of a 360 pad then the game can become even more of a fiddle as you fight to overcome the instinctive forefinger reaction to tug on those triggers"

    Eh? I would assume that a brand new game like this uses Microsoft's xinput drivers; trigger problems usually relate to incompatibilities with the old direct input drivers. Are you sure about this actually being a problem??

  • menage #40 4 years ago

    The 360 version was just as lackluster. Th game sucks by default.

  • muscleblade #41 4 years ago

    @menage

    Wrong!! Havent you read this among others. The difference is huge.

    [link url=http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=8846 1&page=3
    ]http://ww w.eurogamer.net/article.php?art...[/link]

  • rashes #42 4 years ago

    Most underrated game of last year.... by reviewers anyway. Games TM actually gave it a 4 which was ridiculous.
    I enjoyed this even more as I was surprised how good it was.

  • DanWhitehead #43 4 years ago

    Eh? I would assume that a brand new game like this uses Microsoft's xinput drivers; trigger problems usually relate to incompatibilities with the old direct input drivers. Are you sure about this actually being a problem??

    That's what I thought, which is why I said the problem can occur, but this was the first time I'd used a 360 pad on this particular PC so the drivers it installed should have been new. The triggers didn't work. It's not something that affected the score, and I'm aware that different installations will yield different results, but I thought it was worth flagging given that its a console port.

  • MENTAL1ST Verified Senior Software Engineer, Picsel UK Ltd. #44 4 years ago

    I wonder if that isn't shoddiness on the developers' part.

    As I recall, triggers didn't work on Tomb Raider Legend (until possibly after a patch), but they were OK from the start with Anniversary. It seems hard to believe that Ubisoft wouldn't test thoroughly with the de-facto standard PC joypad, though.

  • UncleLou #45 4 years ago

    Triggers work for me, FWIW.

  • BradMillette #46 4 years ago

    This game should have been called ASS CREED.

    I'm the first person to make that joke.

  • GlassMoon #47 4 years ago

    Absolutely spot on review

  • Nithron #48 4 years ago

    I've noticed that PC games tend to get a lower score than their console counterparts, even if they are, in quantifiable terms, actually better than their console brethren. Example: UT3 getting a score 1 lower on PC than it's PC counterpart despite the PC version offering four times the player capacity per map.

    What's up with that? Is it just that the PC has a much, much larger game library and so the games get judged more harshly by comparison?

  • DanWhitehead #49 4 years ago

    No, it's just that I liked Assassin's Creed exactly one less than Tom.

  • Nithron #50 4 years ago

    I was more asking about the general trend of other games getting lower scores on PC as well. But if that's the reason this particular time, fair do's.

  • Camorrista #51 4 years ago

    All right, who hired Gary Larson to do the screenshot captions?!

  • Whizzo #52 4 years ago

    Example: UT3 getting a score 1 lower on PC than it's PC counterpart despite the PC version offering four times the player capacity per map.

    In that case losing a point to the "been there, done that, bought the t-shirt" factor seems reasonable.

  • penhalion #53 4 years ago

    agreed.....nope that's all I have to say...6/10

  • DjFlex52 #54 4 years ago

    hmmm...a 6/10 reviewed new IP sells 5 million copies on consoles...no wonder they didn't think to make it a better game for PC.

  • Gurrah #55 4 years ago

    Full price? You've got to be kidding me! I am interested, but not if the console versions go for 10€ on eBay - brand new mind you.

  • Nill #56 4 years ago

    So the hype has finally wore off, eh? We should all know that hype awards an additional score. Bleh.

  • ChaK #57 4 years ago

    "6/10 experience wrapped up in a 9/10 game engine."

    exactly my though.

    Actually I couldn't even finish the game. Riding was fun for sure, graphics were more than twice OK, but everything else..meh

    Playing the same mini-games over and over again, climbing in such a weird way (just push the stick forward.. wow).
    They should have made climbing like a TQE game, where you press some buttons to climb, making it more interactive and less boring

    I killed the first 3 guys, and then I was bored, to bad.

  • FooAtari #58 4 years ago

    I've noticed that PC games tend to get a lower score than their console counterparts, even if they are, in quantifiable terms, actually better than their console brethren. Example: UT3 getting a score 1 lower on PC than it's PC counterpart despite the PC version offering four times the player capacity per map.

    What's up with that? Is it just that the PC has a much, much larger game library and so the games get judged more harshly by comparison?

    There is less advertising money to be had in PC games :p

    Seriously, I dunno I always find PC gaming to be kind of more "down to earth", I can't think of a better term. Games never seem to hyped up to ridiculous levels like on consoles and reviews are more realisitc IMO. I sometimes find issues are to quickly over looked in console reviews. Talk about tarring everything with the same brush huh.

  • convercide #59 4 years ago

    Rooftop acrobatics plus replacing throwing knives with shuriken plus fuedal Japan plus interesting missions and you'd have a GREAT stealth ninja game.

  • Sar #60 4 years ago

    I'm unashamedly a lover of this game on the 360, and it's the first game I got the full 1000G's for ever.

    I loved it to bits, and never found it repetitive. Then again I took my time and played each assassination out over the course of a couple of gameplay sessions, so it took me a while to finish the main story, and then another load of sessions to pick up all the flags.

    9/10

  • Agente_Silva #61 4 years ago

    The game is POINTLESS

  • darkphoenix #62 4 years ago

    I too love this game and it surprises me that it gets judged by being repetitive, yet every single racing game or generic FPS are the same and no one complaints about them.

    AC is a masterpiece, a revolutionary game in so many aspects and it is not receiving the praise it deserves.

    How can someone complaint about climbing the towers on AC?
    Those where fascinating moments in a world of generic-call-of-duty-4 gaming.

    Sometimes I wish the casual gamers find someother hobby to ruin, and leave videogaming for the ones who care, enjoy and demand evolution in the genre, rather than the same old boring story and concept wrapped up in shinny new graphics.

  • Trikk #63 4 years ago

    What's up with that? Is it just that the PC has a much, much larger game library and so the games get judged more harshly by comparison?
    I often get that impression. Console games are judged in comparison with what's been released on that console and maybe the previous console generation while PC games are judged in comparison with every PC game ever released.

    That's why Halo 3 is "10/10" and Crysis is "just graphics".

  • Haloboy #64 4 years ago

    I don't get it. I never played this on a console but it's just ruddy blowing my mind on the PC. It's completely amazing looking under directx 10 and plays like a dream. No idea how it got the label it of being "boring" after a few hours of play when it's anything but.

    9/10
    Edited by 1 at 13/04/08 @ 18:52

  • Bangaioh #65 4 years ago

    I remember putting this down after one of the dumbest AI ever seen... yeah, nice gfx and some nice moments but definitely no 9/10 experience.

  • Genome #66 4 years ago

    The problem with this game is that they found something that was really fun - free running and killing people on rooftops and so on - but didn't bother making it an engaging single player experience. Take it for what it became - a really fun free running game that includes killing people on rooftops. With knives. I'd personally rate it an 8/10, but then again, maybe Dan wants more story along with his fun.

  • Rosseh #67 4 years ago

    Maybe someone will make a mod.

  • Fusey #68 4 years ago

    This EG review is a bit too harsh to be honest.

    You should review games as if there are no other versions of the game other than this PC version. Comparing it to the console versions is both unproductive and offensive to PC gamers.

    I will give it 7.5/10

  • Shakermaker #69 4 years ago

    I don't understand the hate this game is getting. It's thoroughly enjoyable, for me at least. It probably depends on how you approach it. If you expect a GTA clone, you'll be let down. If you see the game as 'freeform Prince of Persia in the Middle-Ages', you'll love it.

  • Haloboy #70 4 years ago

    I'm just enjoying playing AC as completely sandbox style gaming experience. And if you have the specs to do it justice you will marvel at what's on offer. I have to say it's also one of Ubisoft's far better PC titles when it comes to bugs and general problems etc, I can't fault it on that front whatsoever.

    Loving every single minute of it so I'll back up the I don't know why it's getting mauled so much movement. It's all rather awesome.

  • Xpert #71 4 years ago

    The reviewer is biased and unfair in my opinion. Giving the game a 6 out of 10 simply because one doesn't agree with the title makes no sense whatsoever. I suspect the reviewer wasn't happy with the original version and just found one more thing wrong with it so they gave it a lower score. Irrelevant of this reviewer's opinion the game is selling, and selling well. There must be something there if it is doing so well.

    Let's start with the title. Many games these days are coming out with Collector's Edition or Director's Cut or Special Edition. GI (or similar) did an article a few months back about this trend. What do you get out of such things? Generally nothing worth the price. Take HGL for example. You get a comic book and an in-game pet that follows you around and can do absolutely...nothing. It isn't even available unless you play online. I'd daresay that naming AC Director's Cut because they added a couple of new missions would be reasonable. At least it has some impact on the game itself.

    Find a game, any game, that doesn't have repetitive gameplay. While some games do better than others they all suffer from the same issue. There's only so many different ways to write a quest. Look at some of the most popular games around like WoW: go out and kill something, grab new gear, sell or equip new gear, rinse and repeat... Come on, 6 out of 10 for a game that does the same thing as ever other game around. Give me a break. You can't possibly give any game that falls into this category a 6 otherwise your ratings would be 1-6.

    Let's move on to the AI. The reviewer complained about how unrealistic it was for you to assassinate someone and the guards eventually giving up. I particularly liked the comparison to Thief. I've played all the Thief games several times. It did the exact same thing. Given enough time the guards would resume their patrols. I don't find anything unrealistic about this. If the guards never gave up then the game would start to become to difficult. You'd have to reload if you messed up. That's never fun.

    The game does have its problems but I point to technical/port issues more than gameplay. There were some definite oversights when the port was done. Hopefully that will be resolved in the subsequent patch. Still I can't find the reviewer's score even remotely valid. Glad I don't trust other people's opinions. AC has been great fun (along the lines of Thief) and a nice break from all the medieval/space marine themes we've been seeing.

  • Luckz #72 4 years ago

    The moronic comments here leave me speechless.

    Oh, and thanks for helping me spare my wallet, EG.