APZonerunner
Member
There'll probably be a bunch of late reviews as Ubi moved the embargo up a bit.
Waiting for Jim Sterling's review.
I'm pretty sure Sterling isn't reviewing it.
From the Eurogamer review
Where have they been? It hasn't been like that since AC1.
Yeah, that's like saying you like foreplay but hate sex lol.
how can you like the first but not the second?
DTOID review from Conrad Zimmerman
http://www.destructoid.com/review-assassin-s-creed-iii-237623.phtml
7.5
This can't be. GAF told me it was supposed to suck!Oh noes, good game is good?
This can't be. GAF told me it was supposed to suck!
Just a reminder, Jim Sterling gave Assassins Creed 2 a 4.5:
http://www.destructoid.com/review-assassin-s-creed-ii-155807.phtml
Who are you going to trust? GAF or reviewers?
Pretty much. Same game diff name and its a 7tbh these are just normal AC reviews
all main AC games since the 2nd have got these scores
Doesnt but its easily the worst since AC1.This can't be. GAF told me it was supposed to suck!
Just a reminder, Jim Sterling gave Assassins Creed 2 a 4.5:
http://www.destructoid.com/review-assassin-s-creed-ii-155807.phtml
Can't be said enough, but fuck that guy.
Who are you going to trust? GAF or reviewers?
Let's face it, 7.5 ain't a good score these days, yet he makes the game sound awesome to me (other than the side stuff not really having much pay-off).
It's always been like that.
You've always been able to go the silent, deadly route, or full on action hero through the front gate style. It's just been up to the player, not the game.
In my opinion, anyway.
Any other vita reviews?
I find it worrying that Greg gave a Sony exclusive a pretty ok score.
Which I find personally interesting as I really have enjoyed the side quests immensly and more so then in other open world games.
But nobody else did! And they never made another one like it!But I liked the 1st one!
The simple answer would be that they are entirely different games.how can you like the first but not the second?
Hm, seems to be doing pretty well, but many of those scores are sub-85. I don't think these writers understand just how much money Ubisoft has put into ACIII.
Any other vita reviews?
I find it worrying that Greg gave a Sony exclusive a pretty ok score.
Hm, seems to be doing pretty well, but many of those scores are sub-85. I don't think these writers understand just how much money Ubisoft has put into ACIII.
Hm, seems to be doing pretty well, but many of those scores are sub-85. I don't think these writers understand just how much money Ubisoft has put into ACIII.
Let's face it, 7.5 ain't a good score these days, yet he makes the game sound awesome to me (other than the side stuff not really having much pay-off).
If this is as bad as it gets, I'm still going to love this game.
Playa please.Too much money into the game, not enough money into the reviewers pockets, i think.
It's never been much of a stealth game. I mean they didn't even have a lean against walls or crouch feature until this game, and going by the review it seems to be really clunky and attempting to be stealthy usually fails.
It's not really a problem either since I never considered this a stealth series. It was always one of these AAA action games like Uncharted that have some minor stealth elements thrown in. Really the biggest disappointment is that after the game's director was talking all that shit about them not making this piss easy for casuals the combat is still block/counter to win.
I love AC's side stuff too, often more than the main sequences. But it's always a sign of good design when it feels like you're properly rewarded for doing side stuff. Means it's well integrated into the campaign. He seems to suggest this isn't the case. But I'm not too worried. AC games are always about the journey for me, not the destination.
Stop being part of the problem.
I have an irrational adoration for the AC series, so hearing this one is huge and not complete shit is plenty enough to put my hype through the roof.
It's just a fact.