My Gripe with Assassin's Creed

Assassin's Creed was one of those games that pulls you into a world of a bygone era and gives you a glimpse of a life that you had only read had existed.

That was the pull, the USP of the games, to draw the gamer in and let her or him imagine themselves living a life in that era.

One would imagine that life would have been much simpler all those years ago without the politics and betrayal and pressures of being accepted in society. But for those who haven't studied history extensively- like me- will find that things may be (at least comparatively) better now.

No capital punishment for one.

I played Assassin's Creed 2 even before the first one and was totally captured by the spell it weaved. Renaissance has its own magic- the period where art and culture took front seat. In this game, you are thrust into this period and live the life of Ezio Auditore da Firenze who is unaware of his own destiny.

After his family is betrayed and executed in front of him, he escapes with his Mother and Sister and meets with his Uncle who reveals the family's hidden heritage. Ezio, reluctant at first, accepts this as his destiny and seeks vengeance against the people who betrayed his Father.

In the end of this game, and after eliminating several conspirators, he shows forgiveness to the one man who had planned this all. His decision to spare this man is regretted when his Uncle is killed in the sequel by the son of Rodrigo Borgia- the villain.

I won't go into how the graphics were and how smooth or rough the gameplay was, because the truth is that the story was compelling enough for me to not notice any errors in technicalities.

It was after Assassin's Creed 2 and Assassin's Creed Brotherhood that I played the first game with Altair as the hero.

I struggled at first with the game play and didn't take to the arrogant protagonist who redeems himself in the end. But I did enjoy the game as a whole only because it had the essence of what these games were about.

When Assassin's Creed Revelations was announced and released, I rejoiced because that meant my favorite hero Ezio Auditore had gotten yet another game. This was supposed to be his last game and I was all ready to shed some tears for the climax.

Let's just say I was a tad disappointed. The story wasn't as compelling enough, Ezio's character had taken on major changes and not only looks-wise but also personality-wise and the reasons on why he engaged in the politics of Constantinople weren't entirely justified.  

Nevertheless, this game did a fine job in bringing Altair and Ezio together in one scene and if anything, it was an acceptable ending.

Then the third game was announced and though I was sad about letting Ezio go, I was ready to move on.

In my opinion, the major mistake made here was following up a charismatic hero with an arrogant boring character.

Connor- the hero of AC 3- repeated the same story of betrayal as his predecessor. I could look away from all that if the hero had some personality. He didn't seem a victim of circumstances but a bitter man who sought revenge.

That was not the Assassin Creed way. In the first four games we were taught how noble the Assassins were and how their aim was to protect humanity, to forgive, to seek redemption and yes, not kill innocents.

Connor seemed to do exactly the opposite of these tenets and I found myself siding with the Templars who were the enemy. It didn't help that we get to play as a Templar in the first hour or so in the game that was a hundred times likeable than Connor.

Connor doesn't seem to respect anyone, kills anyone who doesn't agree with him and is angry with everyone. There were at least two sequences in the game where I thought he could have overpowered his opponent and tied them down instead of killing them.

I could forgive the numerous glitches in the game, the boring character, the lack of female characters in this game and that the background score was lacking. But I could not forgive Connor killing the only likeable character in the game when he clearly didn't need to. If this was a ploy to show how much Connor sacrificed and how difficult his life was- it didn't!

I was more than happy to move on from that game- the only one that I didn't play at least twice.

The fourth was announced and I wasn't elated as I used to be with the Assassin's Creed games. Here's why- the fourth game in the series was on the life of Edward Kenway- the grandfather of Connor. Now why wasn't it just a sub game of the third, I have no idea.

I knew I wasn't going to like this game when I saw the trailer. For one, I'm not a fan of the new graphics. They give a sort of cold vibe and not personal like in AC 2 and ACB.

The next was the ships and naval missions. I did not care for them in AC3 and hoped that it wasn't going to be a major part of the game. The game is called Black Flag and is on pirates, but still....I was hoping that wouldn't be a major part of the game. It was.

Edward is a slight improvement over Connor but that doesn't win him too many points. The games move on from characters and focuses on the story and the one thing I thought the series succeeded in was to create relatable characters.

Edward's story in the beginning wasn't absorbing enough for me to form a connection with him. He was just okay and I would have liked him more if the game didn't shift to missions that do nothing to impress.

In the previous games, I can name every mission by its name because of the way I was impressed by the story.

Even AC3 had one mission in the beginning and then in the end that leaves an impression. This game however did not. It's way too reminiscent of Red Dead Redemption in terms of hunting and finding buried treasure. Red Dead Redemption is in a league of its own because that game excelled in creating characters that you instantly cared about.

Coming back to this game, the biggest gripe I had with this was the lack of female characters.

I guess there were only strong women in the 1500's because after that women wore bonnets and strolled the streets and bought vegetables and fruits in the market because I couldn't think of a single female character in both AC3 and AC 4.

And now the most annoying point- The series doesn't even try to cater to the female gamers anymore. AC4 is a rich example that shows how little they care about the female gamers. Everything in the game is about blowing up ships and plundering and killing enemies.

I'm not saying they should show sappy romance scenes, but why not have at least one engaging female character? Or give the option to skip through some extremely boring naval missions?

Oh and I have yet another complain. I love open world games, but what I hate the most is when Crafting is added to these games. Hate it with a passion.

And why is there crafting in the newer games anyway? In AC2, ACB and ACR, we could purchase pouches, health packs and everything. Now we have to make the pouches to carry our weapons? That's a downgrade.

While I'm listing down complains, here's another one: I hate that they changed the controls ever since AC3. In the previous games, to counter attacks the player had only to hold down R1 and square (PS3). Now, I have to hold onto O and then press square and hope I don't die because the developers made away with the health packs too!

Regenerating health meters are a hassle because you only recover when you're in hiding. So if you're surrounded by enemies and at the last point in your health meter, you might as well just give up and desynchronize.

Everything about this and the previous games seems like such a downgrade. The game play was supposed to be simpler, the characters, though not Ezio, were supposed to have personality and likeability and yes, where the heck are the female characters?

I can only hope that the next game would be a major improvement from these dismal two games or else I would have to give up the only series that would fill me with excitement before every release.