Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

Assassin's Creed Series

Last response: in Video Games
Share
September 21, 2011 11:47:34 AM

I'm looking at giving the AC series a shot. I've received AC 2 and AC 2: Brotherhood. I haven't ordered AC 1 though.
Simple question: Is it necessary to play the first part to enjoy the subsequent releases? Will I be missing out on something by not playing them in sequence ,i.e, 1, 2 and then Brotherhood?

More about : assassin creed series

September 21, 2011 11:52:22 AM

I started playing AC 1 and stopped before the 1st assassination. so many little annoying issues. these were fixed in AC2 though, and i've been enjoying that immensely. just get the basic story of AC1 and you should be fine. most of the game is played as a totally different assassin in a totally different era anyway :) 
Score
0
September 21, 2011 12:09:49 PM

Thanks! So AC 1 can be disconnected from AC2 and Brotherhood? I'm reading the gameplay/ plot etc of AC 1 on google (in office right now!), so will that suffice to start from AC 2?

Also, I'm assuming that AC2 should be played before brotherhood bcoz the story is in continuation, unlike AC1 and AC2.....is that right?
Score
0
Related resources

Best solution

September 21, 2011 12:29:33 PM

namelessonez said:
Thanks! So AC 1 can be disconnected from AC2 and Brotherhood? I'm reading the gameplay/ plot etc of AC 1 on google (in office right now!), so will that suffice to start from AC 2?

Also, I'm assuming that AC2 should be played before brotherhood bcoz the story is in continuation, unlike AC1 and AC2.....is that right?


You should play AC 1 as well... because in AC Revelations you will be playing (partly) with the character from AC 1; you will also visit places from AC 1. I strongly advise you to play AC 1, in fact, I guess that in Revelations you will be brought to speed with the events from AC 1 and 2, and/or Brotherhood too. And trust me, once you get the hang of it, you can easily overlook the slightly annoying parts in AC 1; of course it gets better in AC 2 and Brotherhood, but I still recommend playing the first one too. The game is as beautiful as ever.
Share
September 21, 2011 12:30:55 PM

AC2 and AC3 both uses the same assasin, Ezio. AC1 had Altair, although all assasins are actually portrayed by Desmond.

I liked all 3 games, but I played them on the PS3. You can probably get away with not playing the 1st one, though I recommend all 3.
Score
0
September 21, 2011 12:31:57 PM

If you haven't played AC 1 or 2 before you should start with AC1, cuz you'll get to know all the moves and fight combos in addition, all the map marks and locations which will help you understand the game, you'll enjoy the story really with AC1 and i don't see any benefit from playing AC2 directly.
Score
0
September 21, 2011 12:52:35 PM

you only need to play ac1

if you want to know what happens to damen before he is at the assasins hideout

played the first one of ps3, was boring but managed to finish it

played all the rest on pc, and im glad i did because i perfer the controlls on the pc
Score
0
September 21, 2011 1:00:06 PM

Talk about being unanimous! :D  My only concern is that since AC 1 came out quite some time ago, the graphics from back in the day may put me off as compared to AC 2 and Brotherhood, which seem to have relatively better graphics. But then again, Far Cry 1 had pretty amazing graphics, even when compared to Far Cry 2 (which was loads better, no doubt!).

Has Ubisoft managed the same with the graphics in Ac 1 in comparison to AC 2? I mean, both Far Cry 1 and 2 were by Ubisoft and neither of the 2 games' graphics puts me off.
Score
0
September 21, 2011 1:03:51 PM

no, not really the graphics of the AC1 is really fine, i remember buying the HD 4870 for that game specifically.
you should stop asking so many questions and start playing :) 
Score
0
September 21, 2011 1:04:56 PM

namelessonez said:
Talk about being unanimous! :D  My only concern is that since AC 1 came out quite some time ago, the graphics from back in the day may put me off as compared to AC 2 and Brotherhood, which seem to have relatively better graphics. But then again, Far Cry 1 had pretty amazing graphics, even when compared to Far Cry 2 (which was loads better, no doubt!).

Has Ubisoft managed the same with the graphics in Ac 1 in comparison to AC 2? I mean, both Far Cry 1 and 2 were by Ubisoft and neither of the 2 games' graphics puts me off.


As a matter of fact, I have tried playing AC 1 when it hit the shelves, and really couldn't as my laptop would overheat like crazy. Then I got the desktop I am now using, and played AC 2, then Brotherhood, and now I am halfway through AC 1, a little backwards. And the graphics @1080p look still amazing. You won't be disappointed. Plus the fact you will be able to visit some locations that are available only in AC 1... do play it, mate :) 
Score
0
September 21, 2011 1:05:58 PM

ilysaml said:
no, not really the graphics of the AC1 is really fine, i remember buying the HD 4870 for that game specifically.
you should stop asking so many questions and start playing :) 


Exactly... play it already! NOW! :) 
Score
0
September 21, 2011 1:11:36 PM

Lol!! Alright, alright.....going ahead with AC1 first!

Thanks for the reco's....as always, appreciate it! :) 
Score
0
September 21, 2011 1:13:08 PM

Best answer selected by namelessonez.
Score
0
February 25, 2012 1:13:13 PM

This topic has been closed by Mousemonkey
Score
0
!