We've given Ubisoft's Assassin's Creed: Revelations a lot of love over the past few months. We've glowed at its enhanced stealth systems, gushed at its restructured, padded-out multiplayer component. Throwing caution to the winds, we've argued that it "fixes" Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood in at least nine ways.
Finally getting a chance to go hands-on with the single player, we discovered that our initial enthusiasm was justified... for the most part. Revelations has the makings of another great game, but it leaves us a little worried in a couple of ways, and utterly baffled in one.
Constantinople, the new setting, looks lush as all hell: exquisite textiles stand out against what might otherwise have been a drearily sandy burg, and a range of new incidental actions and animations set the game's citizenry apart from their Italian counterparts. It's as grand yet deftly observed a panorama as you'd expect - dazzling with architectural enormities like the Hagia Sophia, while offering up quietly charming touches like the incense burners that simmer in most doorways. But as a staging ground for Ezio's acrobatic move set? It doesn't feel terribly new right now, even given new tools like the Hookblade (which lets you zipline and gives your ledge grabs more reach).
As in Brotherhood and Assassin's Creed 2, there are dalliances with more limiting game types to break up the experience of exploring the city. As in Brotherhood and Assassin's Creed 2, those dalliances stick out like sore thumbs. Take the horse-drawn carriage chase early on - a dismally uncoordinated episode in which Ezio must first survive being dragged behind a fleeing Templar's vehicle, then sideswipe said Templar's vehicle to bits, having mounted a carriage of his own. There's little skill involved, none of the subtlety and grace of the main game - just the patience to keep plugging till the next cut scene.
The implementation isn't bad, but nor is it remarkable, and the feature is jarringly incongruous - teleporting you to a generic defence map with its own micro-climate, and stripping away normal controls in favour of a cursor on left analogue stick. If the idea was to build on the last game's brotherhood mechanic (which saw you fire-and-forgetting recruits at guards you couldn't be bothered killing yourself), the option to station Assassins around the main environment would have suited Revelations' purposes far better.
13 comments so far...
Bezza89 on 21 Oct '11 said:
I hope it does fail, in that I don't want them to carry on with these yearly outings, just finish the series with AC3 then do your damned other games.
hillumsy on 21 Oct '11 said:
I thoroughly enjoyed Assassins Creed and even more so Assassins Creed 2. I'm currently part way through Assassins Creed Brotherhood and it is really starting to feel a bit "samey". Of course they chuck in new weapons, gadgets, little clans like the Theives Guild etc but it really isn't offering much new apart from more icons on the map.
I have a horrible feeling Revelations is going to be the same!
In my opinion I would rather Ubisoft released the games every 2-3 years, rather than every 9-12 months, and actually made it different
There are so many more historical and geographical settings they could use. And this is turn would change the gameplay slightly and the objectives. Which could only be a good thing.
They could do an Aztec one, Vikings, Norman's, 1600's-1800's Britain, Roman (with Gladiators and a Colosseum story line)...........even a Iron Age or Stone Age one. There are countless different era's they could try.
I'm just bored of the Renaissance one now! Anyone else?
joeyraccoon on 21 Oct '11 said:
They seem to be dragging the whole concept out instead of getting on with the story and taking things forward . . . (milking it) . . . I've had enough of this and will be waiting until this one hits the bargain bins . . . if i bother with it at all.
It seems to me that i could just play the first two again and again until i'm bored . . . wait . . .
Windowlicker79 on 21 Oct '11 said:
I really think that Revelations really needs to wrap up this whole story arc. If they continue to make Assassin's Creed games then I think they need to take it to an entirely new location, with new stories, new character and everything else refreshed. Its the only way they will keep the franchise alive.
buckleboff94 on 21 Oct '11 said:
totally agree with everything already said.
i want a new protagonist, new era and wrapping up ezios arc- its gone on too long now.
ill wait 3 months and itll be 15 quid like brotherhood was
msbhvn on 21 Oct '11 said:
I played the first few hours of Brotherhood and got bored. I've had enough of Ezio, and not even the promise of more Altaïr will make me buy Revelations. AC3 better be out next year with a new character and a new time period or I'm going to get all Medieval on their asses!
Grummy on 22 Oct '11 said:
I've said it all along, and nothing here has shown me anything different. The AC games have gotten worse with each installment. They've taken a great and unique single player experience and made it into a rinse and repeat, by the numbers actioner. It's become boring and predictable.
Cdr JamesCool on 23 Oct '11 said:
They should go back to having 2 year gaps at least between releases, they realy improved the AC series with AC 2 but didn't change much with brotherhood.
razor6494 on 23 Oct '11 said:
Assassins Creed 1 stole my heart, then I thought it couldn't get better but...wait, what's that..... assassins creed 2!!!
Then the franchise was on a whole new level. I spent countless hours on the two original games.
Then comes along Brotherhood, i got Brotherhood for christmas and only finished it last month, I got bored, I was done with AC1 and AC2, I wanted something new, Brotherhood was not it, it was (and it pains me to say it) boring. Just completely boring. I finished it just for the respect that i had of Ubisoft for making AC1 and 2.
They have now turned this franchise into, call of duty with swords. The same each year, with a slight change, I hope they wait at least 2 years before they bring out AC3, and give us something completely different.
Ubisoft I'm losing faith in you. :/
alongmarch on 23 Oct '11 said:
I think that the first Assassin's Creed was good to get the story going and focused less on the mechanics of things like combat and parkor. However since AC II, I have thoroughly enjoyed both the gameplay and the storylines and long may it continue in AC: Revelations. Ezio is older and there are more gadgets to get used to. Looks like so much fun and very much looking forward to it.
CunningSmile on 24 Oct '11 said:
The high point of the series for me was AC2. I found Altair very boring and one dimensional, whilst following Ezio through his life really helped make him real. Brotherhood was a bit of a dip, with way too many fetch quests and assassinations that weren't (they really painted themselves into a corner with the Borgias, most of whom died of natural causes) but this is still a franchise I look forward to with baited breath each year, and the overall arc still has me gripped.
<POSSIBLE SPOILER>
For those who are hoping for a big gap between Revelations and AC3 you're going to be out of luck. Desmond's story is set in 2012, and releasing a "world is going to end in 2012 and we better stop it" game in 2013 or 2014 just isn't going to work.
Ninja Squirrel on 27 Oct '11 said:
Will have a dabble with this but I just want AC3 not AC2.8
hugagent1 on 8 Nov '11 said:
i want the game to be good but i think assassins creed lost its 'fizz' when brotherhood came out so i'm not expecting anything spectacular. at the moment i'm not really very excited about it but i am pretty sure i will get it as i said the same thing about brotherhood and ended up getting it eventually