Oh? I didn't read the comments. Thanks for pointing that out.
I was lead to think it was objective by the way it handles the data. But if it's getting things wrong, then I guess we should all move on.
At least there's this.
"But as is often the case, once the pace quickens, the game struggles to keep up with you. Climbing building exteriors is faster and slicker than ever - even sheer walls are no match for Arno's scrabbling - but once you start moving horizontally, hurrying anywhere in the company of low walls and doorways is hazardous. Free-running in Assassin's Creed tries to judge where you want to go and help articulate the necessary actions, but it feels more like an overzealous autocorrect as...
Finally, an objective review. Thanks for highlighting that snippet.
As I said on another thread, watching livestreams of this games has showed me that it really hasn't advanced much beyond previous iterations of the series. Combat in particular still looks stunted at the early-PS3 era.
I'm confused by the notion of "re-narrowed focus" on a single city, as if that was originally part of the series. That level of focus first appeared with Brot...
This is the most objective review I'd read so far. And that it gets an 8/10 in this context makes me feel good.
Totally disagree. First, there's no guarantee bugs will be fixed. Second, reviews are of the game as released. Why? Because they can't be of anything else (see point 1). Third, reviews are used *as a guide to buying*. In that capacity, I as buyer want to know what the bugs are. Severely bugged games need to reflect that fact in the review score.
Example: Reviews of BF4 shouldn't have been 9 or 10. They should have been 5 or 6. Why? Because they game was unplayabl...
You know, I haven't played this game yet, but I've watched a fair number of live streams on the PS4. So far, I'm not super impressed. The big issue for me is the combat - it doesn't look great. In fact, it looks like it has all the same issues in every previous AC game. After playing Shadow of Mordor for awhile and enjoying its fantastic combat system, ACU looks ridiculously dated.
And I'm not just talking about combat mechanics. The animations look terri...
Wasn't there a major study last year or the year before that concluded that playing most video games improved cognitive functionality, hand-eye-coordination, and a few other things?
Ouch! Fitting from what I've heard.
I'm surprised this got a 10/10 given the reports that are coming out of the problems.
Gameplay and story wise, I'd agree.
But to my mind it's still one of the best open world experiences yet. I really hope they retain the scale of the setting in the new game.
I chose to wait. Ubi has screwed me before with their hasty releases. The first sure evidence I had though was the parity fiasco. It wasn't so much the parity per se, but their reason: first avoiding debates, then the need for NPC AI. The vacillating on the reason coupled with the desire for 5000 NPCs clued me in to Ubi's bad choices.
Well Bioware did the right thing. They took time to correct their previous mistakes, to make a good game, and to allow early reviews.
Maybe we should all make a special point of remembering Bioware's efforts. For my part, I'll be buying ACU used, but will buy DAI at full price.
Sure looks like that's why the embargo was in place...
Man o man, I'm glad I didn't buy this. After my prior experience with Ubi, I decided never to buy their games on release again.
Sucks for those who paid full price. People really need to stop trusting Ubi, or perhaps hoping that Ubi has changed.
:(
7 more days...
Yup. I'm thinking I'm going to love it in a few days.
Yeah, that's quite the claim.
In short, the controls SUCK.