I had it on pre-order but, after the initial reports/reviews, was lucky enough to cancel it before the keys dropped.
Abort! Abort!
I haven’t had any issues with framerate. It seems like I’m one of the incredibly few (or I just don’t notice).
Also, I’m not finding the gameplay uninspired. But, I also haven’t played the last three games. If I’ve played the previous three I could totally see getting bored.
I attempted AC1 on the PC twice and quit both times due to it being monotonous, boring, and not fun.
Is AC2 really a huge jump up? I adored all the Prince of Persia games and love the Batham Arkham games.
AC2 is better in every single way.
Yes. AC2 has very little to do with AC1.
Lot more variety, much less repetitive “busywork” between the meat of the game - those scripted assassinations. More involved story. A witty and lovable protagonist who actually smiles from time to time. More varied combat that doesn’t boil down to “go into parry mode, wait until someone attacks, counter, repeat” (though it’s still nowhere near *Arkham *dynamism). Minstrel punching. Gorgeous architecture to Prince of Persia through. British sass.
AC2 was a good game, definitely. Plot basically dies like a dog once you get to Venice; the game is just flailing for something to do at that point and it got so boring. Otherwise, I agree with Kobal2. AC3 is just a problematic game.
However, the series as a whole has a serious problem with its moral compass, or lack thereof. From the beginning, the creators seemed to have nothing much more to say than a sort of warped nihilism, and its protagonists can’t even be called antiheroes in the main. This might be workable, but the games can’t seem to find any kind of functional message with it.
They games themselves don’t seem to know whether the Assassins are good guys, bad guys, antiheroes, anti-villains or something else. And the only thing they can come up with to deal with the fact that the protagonists are mass-murdering sociopaths who have don’t seem to have accomplished anything in history is… to make the Templars cartoon villains.
I read in a few places that the designers unintentionally shot themselves in the foot by so dramatically increasing the general, citizen NPC count. They said the game looks badass and the crowded streets are very impressive, but when you actually have to RUN through those streets the higher density of people makes it virtually impossible because you’re bouncing off everyone the whole time. This forces you onto the rooftops the whole time.
Dunno how true that is. Game is very visually appealing though.
For anyone still on the fence: do not buy Assassin’s Creed Unity. it isn’t worth it.
Have played it? Are the NPCs as congested as I’ve read?
They’re pretty congested in certain areas, such as the crowd in front of the guillotine. It makes it difficult to run through, but I’m ok with that. It’s a crowd. It’s what they do. Also makes it really easy to hide.
In random alleys there’s a lot more NPCs just hanging out (and getting in the way) than there were in previous titles.
Like I said above, I’m enjoying it now, but I’ve also not played the last three games. I could easily see being bored if I had. But because I haven’t been inundated with these games I’m a little more amendable to the repetitious nature.
2 big issues:
1: I’m starting to have frame rate issues. The game is still playable as it’s only happening every so often. I think I’m just lucky.
2: Microtransactions in the game. That’s some bullshit.
Ironically, one of the main gameplay criticisms I’ve seen (as opposed to technical criticisms) is that AC3 gave us naval warfare and wilderness and AC4 went even further with the piracy thing but Unity is just back to scaling ornate architecture and trotting across rooftops while following a couple talking dudes. It felt (to reviewers) like a big step backwards for the scope of the game.
Love love LOVED the sea based stuff in AC4. Bummed that there is no analog in this version.
Not much sea in Paris though :), and Revolutionary France wasn’t at war with England or Spain for once (well, not until it was, but if I understand things right while you do get to meet a young Nappy, the game’s chrono. span doesn’t extend into his Empire) so whom would you have been fighting at sea ? The age of piracy was well over by then so not much to go with there, either.
Dueling barges on the river Seine doesn’t quite have the same flair to it 
Have enough hours on Rogue to have developed some opinions, so here goes.
First off, and I hate to say it, but this seems like a really small game, even compared to the first. No multiplayer, obviously, and there are also only three areas and not a whole lot to the story. One of the things I liked about the series as a whole was the feeling of grandeur, the sheer vastness and majesty of the places you went to. Nothing like that here. And the main story is pretty short; I was actually surprised it ended where it did.
That said, UbiSoft is commendable when it comes to learning from their mistakes and trying to make things as enjoyable as possible. This is their grand sendoff for the PS3/XBox 360 generation, and they crammed with as many goodies from past games as possible. Naval combat is here and impressive as ever, all kinds of collectibles are here, and there’s an all-new naval campaign and all kinds of places to renovate. Fort battles no longer throw you up against unfair disadvantage, there are far fewer “don’t get detected” missions (I hate those, and judging by the comments I have a lot of company), there are no “nuisances” of any kind, rogue waves are a thing of the past, and overall the weather is a lot calmer, with virtually no storms cropping out out of flipping’ nowhere. This game is a whole lot more pleasant than recent offerings, and I appreciate that a lot.
Ben Franklin shows up again. Although he still (commendably) hasn’t become a new Leonardo Da Vinci, he plays a more active role in the story, and even spurs the key turning point. Haytham Kenway is here too, and every bit the smug bastard you remember him as. I liked seeing him in action, but I’m firmly convinced that he only works as a supporting character. He’s just too unlikable and full of himself to carry a whole game.
Storywise, it’s…kinda interesting. Our hero is Shay Cormack, in the beginning an Assassin who’s basically a good grunt who does what he’s told and doesn’t ask questions. A series of increasingly iffy assignments makes him question his steadfastness, and when a critical mission goes horribly wrong (you’ll know it when you see it, trust me), he angrily confronts the mentor, a young (and quite handsome IMO) Achilles Davenport. If he came across as an out-of-touch curmudgeon in 3, that was no coincidence, as he’s utterly callous to Shay’s concerns. He eventually turns away from the Assassin Brotherhood, and, after a series of events where he’s basically on his own and just trying to rebuild his life, he falls into the clutches of a dashing English gentleman named Haytham Kenway…and thus begins his road to revenge.
I was honestly concerned about how UbiSoft would handle a Templar protagonist, as, “both sides do it” garbage aside, everything I’ve actually seen about them in the games has pegged them as unequivocally evil. Could this game pull of a good Templar against evil Assassins? Guess what: they did. Shay may be a troubled soul, but he is not a villain, and there are very good reasons for him turning, not the least of which is that Achilles is a loose cannon who has no damn business running the order. And his main enemies are not champions of truth and justice like Ezio or righteous avengers like Connor, but a mob of bloodthirsty, ruthless, backstabbing (literally!) criminals who use their power to kill and plunder anyone who strays on their turf. The Assassin gangs are very nasty pieces of work, particularly in New York, where simply walking through the city can get you maimed. Naturally, that makes it all the more satisfying to take them down, but be warned that it’s going to take a lot of work and most likely be very painful (in every sense of the word).
Oh, the ending ties into Unity in a big way. Won’t say how. 
Overall impression: Good, absorbing, a lot of entertainment but nothing particularly revolutionary. Get it if you’re a fan, but don’t get too choked up if you can’t afford it. I’d say it’s worth about $45. Online is just the Naval Campaign and maybe the occasional treasure fleet, so you can wait for the price to drop.
Thanks for the thoughts on Rogue as I hadn’t heard much about it. My son has a PS3 so I was looking at it for a Christmas gift but the relative silence regarding it (compared to the Unity hubbub) made me wonder. I’ll have to see if it goes on a decent sale.
Man, I wish Rogue was the one on PS4. I think it sounds better than Unity. Does Unity even have any ship stuff? Alot of the reviews say the story is actually pretty well executed in general and is the highlight of the game.
I still have my 360 and may get it on there eventually but I have no doubt by next fall we’ll have “Ultimate HD Editions” of Rogue on PS4.
My only question with AC is: how do they constantly come out with games? There’s practically a new one every damn month.
It’s so bad that even my girlfriend who has only a passive knowledge/interest in video games realizes that they come out with a new one every 6 weeks.
and as not to seem like I’m threadshitting: I loved AC2 and loved the puzzles/circleboard/find the apple games. IT was a good break up of the story n such
It will be. They’re undoubtedly going to port it to PC, PS4 & XBox One.
No - it’d be rather hard to pull off pirate ship battles in the Seine, and the character really has no reason to leave.
The layers of “enhancements” are annoying as hell, though. There’s treasure chests that can only be opened if you use the separate app. And another group of treasure chests that can only be opened if you’ve linked most of the previous AC games to your “Initiates” account - which is sort-of-separate from UPlay. And no way of telling the damn map not to display crap you can’t use.
On a separate Ubisoft note, the secret alternate ending to FarCry4 is one of the most brilliantly subversive-to-standard-gaming things I’ve ever seen.
They have a crapton of different units working on the games. Unity’s been in production for, I think, three years now.
AC is done in house by Ubisoft (using different teams) but, if you want crazy, consider the Activision cash cow, Call of Duty. Per Wiki:
That’s how you keep a series cranking out titles faster than you can throw the plastic wrapping away.