Some Thoughts On Reviews

It's nice to see superheroes get some love, but full marks?

Videogame reviews are an often contentious subject, their broad significance and final scores usually the biggest topics up for debate. They’re constantly complained about; their integrity is often contested; and it’s not uncommon to find people question the meaning of scores, particularly these days after the creation of aggregate sites like Metacritic. Add in the fanboy ingredient -- where people are so infatuated with their favourite franchises and/or developers that they can’t see things rationally or objectively, nor accept another person’s opinion -- and you have an egregious, somewhat explosive (unnecessarily) subject that does more harm than good, and which causes pointless hostility between people who should be sharing in their passion, videogames, rather than arguing over it.

Personally, it’s a topic that I have mostly avoided because I find the discussion over reviews to be, mostly, redundant, and because I’m open-minded enough to be interested in what other people think about a particular game, and how they felt about their experience with it. I couldn’t care less whether a big blockbuster game scores a perfect ten or only receives a seven; I have no interest in whether a review should be a “buyer’s guide” or if it should approach a game critically; and I certainly don’t care about the perceived narrow spectrum of scoring, where videogames are supposedly only scored between the seven-to-nine range. I’d much prefer to be talking about something else, in other words, so I have kept quiet about reviews because I know which ones are the kind I would like to read, and whose opinions are most likely to represent (or at the very least, correlate with) my own.

But lately, there has been a semi-related issue regarding reviews that I am more interested in, and one that, if I am to be honest, has me feeling somewhat concerned and uncomfortable.

As most gamers would know we are currently in the midst of what I call ‘Onslaught Season’: the period in which most developers and publishers release their biggest titles, and where we as players are insanely excited for these games as well as worried that we’re not going to be able to afford them all. This means that blockbuster franchises like The Elder Scrolls and Uncharted make their return, and publishers like Activision will make a lot of money due to yet another release in their Call Of Duty series. It’s crazy season, basically, and definitely one of the most enjoyable times of the year due to the enthusiasm and anticipation that drives it. A byproduct of this period, however, is the way in which these giant games are reviewed and, more importantly, whether the authors of these evaluations are able to cast aside their personal preferences and elation to make a better informed and more meaningful assessment.

Yet another GOTY in the making?

This year alone, we’ve already seen three titles that have received 10/10s at various publications. And while such scores might not be consistent with every website and magazine, the general perception is that these games -- Batman: Arkham City, Uncharted 3: Drake’s Deception and, seemingly, The Legend Of Zelda: Skyward Sword -- are the year’s best thus far, and the cream of the crop of modern gaming. Now I have no problem with games receiving full marks and actually believe they should get that level of recognition if they deserve it -- unlike others who believe that the aforementioned spectrum of 7-9 is more applicable -- but I do have some concerns if these scores are seemingly thrown around in a carefree manner.

By giving these titles top marks, whether they deserve it or not (I can’t comment on that since, aside from Uncharted 3, I have not played them), the reviewers of this industry send out a message that suggests that these titles are some of the finest you will ever play. That’s fine if these authors mean it and can justify their opinion, but it isn’t good if the result of that message insinuates something that mightn’t be necessarily true later, once this exciting rush of games has passed. It also suggests that these games are better than some of the big name titles from previous years, the ones that are otherwise agreed upon to be this generation’s defining games.

Are we really sure that -- as a collective industry that includes critics, developers and publishers, and players -- we want to claim that Batman: Arkham City or Skyward Sword is better than, say, Portal* or Assassin's Creed II, both games that are regarded exceptionally highly and yet didn’t necessarily receive those elusive 10/10s on release? What about the reputation that such high scores bestow upon the developers behind these wonderful games -- do we want to imply that Rocksteady or Naughty Dog** are better than a Rockstar or Irrational? If yes to both questions, why? Now I’m not saying that these developers or games don’t deserve such praise and adulation, especially when I haven’t had the pleasure of playing them yet, but what I am saying is that do we really want to convey that message -- that these games are better -- because they’re the ones getting perfect scores when other high profile games may not have received similar recognition? If we do then fair enough, but if we don’t because next year when the insanity has died down and we’ve gotten over the initial awe of playing these brilliant games we’ve realised that maybe they aren’t as good as this generation’s best names, then how are we going to deal with that? How are we going to assess and analyse these games, and their position within the wider medium, when we’ve already sent the message out that they’re so phenomenal that they deserve the best scores. When singing the praises of Portal or BioShock, yet again because they really are that good, will we put them above or below the games that have received full marks this year? And what of next year’s titles which have the potential to go even higher?

I’m not arguing any particular point here nor am I trying to suggest these games -- or any others in the future -- don’t deserve 10/10s. What I am saying, however, is that full marks have been appearing quite frequently lately and I just want to make sure it is for the right reasons, rather than because the people awarding these high scores are influenced by the gorgeous graphics, spectacle and riveting gameplay that these titles have to offer. I’m saying that the industry as a whole needs to be careful, because once it has committed to a perspective there is no changing it and we should be wary of the future whilst we are enjoying the present. You only need to look at games like The Legend Of Zelda: Twilight Princess or BioShock 2 to see an example of the way in which these titles can have a backlash post-release, so just be mindful of what you’re doing when assessing these games and please, ensure that you own your opinion and mean every word you use to convey it -- failure to do so is failure to represent the medium sincerely, and none of us want that.

**It should be noted that The Orange Box, the package that Portal originally came in, did receive full marks at a variety of publications, but it wasn’t until subsequent rereleases (such as on XBLA) that the game itself got judged individually.

**Disclaimer: I personally do believe that Naughty Dog deserve to be seen in the same light as a Rockstar or a Valve, and can only hope that the success of Uncharted 3: Drake’s Deception will get them there. Guess time will tell on that one.

Liberty Blues

Images taken from the glorious DeadEndThrills.com

Grand Theft Auto IV's Liberty City is, easily, my favourite videogame setting around. That may surprise you given my bias towards certain games and, indeed, their own locations, but Rockstar's faux-version of New York is king because it continues to surprise me each and every time I visit.

Every three months or so I fire up GTA IV simply to go for a walk or drive around Liberty City. I do this, I guess, because I want to relive my experiences of playing the game when it first came out, or when the Episodes proved that the city had many stories to tell. I also do it because its huge size, impressive design and sense of life is unparalleled in this medium, even three years after its release. You know something was incredible when even L.A. Noire's Los Angeles -- already impressive in its own way -- can't match Liberty City's scope or awe. It truly does feel like Liberty City exists whether you're visiting it or not, and this distinct difference elevates it above any other game setting as the best one I have ever had the luxury of visiting; of inhabiting.

Verisimilitude is wonderful and certainly something that has seen substantial progress within this current generation, but it means nothing if these wonderful worlds that get built for games like Mass Effect, Fallout 3 and Red Dead Redemption are under-utilised or, worse, forgotten about. Obviously that's a non-issue at the moment as these games and their amazing environments are absolutely relevant to us right now, but my fear is that as we continue to progress and continue to move forward with technology, new hardware and new, amazing intellectual property (IP), these places of wonder will exist only in memory and nothing more. This might have been acceptable (to a degree) in the past where the medium's evolution was such a significant force, but as we reach and surpass the uncanny valley and photo-realism, I don't think it will be right to forget about Venice in Assassin's Creed II, Empire Bay in Mafia II or, yes, Liberty City in GTA IV. So much effort, time and resources go into making these virtual masterpieces but, because of the always looking forward mentality (that I keep bringing up on this blog) and the perception that what has come before must be outdone, I'm seriously worried that these wonderful game settings, these amazing spaces, will be left behind. Whether they are or not remains to be seen, but if it does happen then losing the brilliance of Liberty City will be the biggest loss, I think.

Think about it for a second. The Episodes From Liberty City downloadable content bucked the trend of DLC by redefining the city through new, fresh perspectives, adding a different take on a place we had all become familiar with. Like, say, Minerva's Den (also fantastic) from BioShock 2, this content took what we knew about these worlds and showed us that this was only just a small part of their overall make-up, that our insight was just a small component of a much bigger, much more incredible picture. They made something old new again, and definitely enhanced our overall enjoyment (and perception) of Liberty City as a whole. But, now that those episodes have been and gone, where do we go from here? Towards the next instalment of GTA (whatever that happens to be), of course, leaving Liberty City as nothing more than a memory -- an amazing memory, sure, but still a memory.

This year's E3 is the perfect example of this situation: every single press conference that opened the show was met with gamers everywhere anticipating the announcement of the next Grand Theft Auto. Like Half Life Episode Three (or, indeed, Half Life 3) the announcement never came, but the point is that everyone is ready to move on and experience the next title in Rockstar's seminal franchise, and they can't wait to hear about even just confirmation that it is coming. These people have moved on, in other words, and while they can reflect upon their time in GTA IV's Liberty City and acknowledge how great it is, it's no longer relevant to their gaming habits because they're too busy awaiting the future. This is understandable, of course, and I don't begrudge anyone who is excited to see where the GTA franchise goes next (both literally, in terms of where it is set, and figuratively in terms of the impact it will have) -- I know I'm anxious to know as well -- but as such an immense fan of Liberty City, it's somewhat disheartening and definitely disappointing to know that no one cares about it like they used to.

I don't know -- I look at Liberty City and see a gigantic metropolis with so much to see, so much to do, and also get the impression that we know so little about this remarkable city. Sure, we may have it memorised (I certainly do, thanks photographic memory!) and may know where we can go to play darts or go bowling, but as a whole we are a very small element in the city's massive scale, and despite three adventures within it, we've made such a little impact on it overall. At the end of the day we're just one person roaming the streets, with thousands more like us clearly visible amongst Liberty City's hustle and bustle. We may be the protagonist and, like all games, the experience may be centered around us and us only, but as I suggested before Liberty City leaves me with a sense that it exists whether I am there or not, and that my presence won't affect its ability to be home to so many civilians. It is kind of like New York for me in real life -- I know it is there and I'd like to visit one day, but it means nothing to my life here in Australia unless I actively seek to change that by hopping on a plane and flying to America. My concern is that no one will make the effort to make the trip to Liberty City any more, and the reason for that will be because they are always more interested in visiting the places that the various videogames out there take us next.

That's not necessarily a bad thing, but Liberty City isn't exactly a disposable thing, either -- it is still the most stunning technical achievement and fascinating environment videogames have ever seen, but all of that will be forgotten once brand new games, perhaps even the next GTA, come along to wow us with their own amazing locations. New York will never be forgotten -- why does Liberty City have to be?

Living By The Creed #3: A Discourse On Assassin's Creed II

And so we come to part three of our discussion of the Assassin's Creed series. Once again my partner in crime is Joseph Rositano from Australian videogame website PALGN, and in this particular exchange we discuss mostly mechanical inclusions: the collectibles, weapon and enemy variety and the videos of the intriguing Subject 16 character. Before we get to that I'd like to quickly apologise for the delay with this post. Life commitments on both sides meant we had to hold off for a while but the good news is everything is back on track and our discussion about Assassin's Creed II can continue. Away we go.

Need a refresher?
Living By The Creed #1
Living By The Creed #2

----

Joseph: Hi Steven. Well, I have decided to take a break from the main story (though I believe I’m not too far off from completing it) and have started hunting down the various collectibles in ACII.

I hadn’t actually realised this until now but the paintings you purchase from art merchants are automatically hung in Uncle Mario’s villa. I never even noticed those blank frames in the building. It was by chance that I bought a random painting and walked past it in the foyer when I was visiting the place. I think it’s actually a pretty neat, though somewhat limited, idea. It reminds me of Luigi’s Mansion for the GameCube, how you’d turn ghosts into portraits and then be able to view them in the Gallery. I actually did a Year 12 Case Study on Roman art, so it has been interesting to see how many of the pieces reflect on mythological, historical and legendary figures – Ubisoft certainly did their research!

Another collectible I found interesting were the eagle feathers. Obviously these replace the flags from the original Assassin’s Creed, but are a little more meaningful due to the way the story is integrated. I won’t say too much as we’re planning on doing an in-depth post relating to the plot, but I actually want to collect all of them just for Ezio’s mother. I got about half of them and was even rewarded with a new weapon, which is certainly more appealing than a couple of achievement points. Also, is it just me or are the feathers easier to find than the flags were? It might be because most of them hang on ledges and are out in the open, or it could be because they’re a blinding-white colour. Either way, I think Ubisoft has balanced it out more.

The new weapon and enemy varieties have also taken my interest. While I still prefer using the tired and proved sword, I like how the hammer, axe and spear feel different and add some strategic elements to the gameplay. For example, using a sword against Brutes is next to useless. Being bigger and well-armed, Brutes are able to easily defend and knock you back. After a few encounters however, I discovered they weren’t so good at dealing with the hidden blade, so now whenever I see them I automatically switch to that weapon. It makes fights in later scenarios a little more interesting actually, particularly when you have to combat different enemy variants at the same time. Aside from the Brutes there are regular guards and enemies which are a little more agile than most; in other words if you run away they can chase you and land a blow or two. One thing I didn’t like however is how you have to go to the villa every time you want to change weapons, surely a simple visit to the nearest blacksmith would have sufficed?

Another captivating feature is the Subject 16 videos. What I like mostly is how you can be walking past a seemingly innocent building and then an info screen pops up saying one of Subject 16’s videos are there. I tend to completely drop what I’m doing and investigate it. Normally within a few minutes I can find the puzzle that unlocks the video, though there have been a few that I couldn’t locate immediately. Out of interest, what is your take on the puzzles? There’s a Da Vinci-like vibe coming from them, and they certainly have varying difficulty levels. Some puzzles, for instance, just have you highlighting where a Piece of Eden is in a photo, while others have you breaking codes and spinning circles around to complete a full painting. It almost feels completely disconnected from the main game itself, yet at the same time has that Assassin’s Creed feel to it. Of course, it does help the puzzles make revelations on how the Pieces of Eden have been passed down through various dictators and world leaders throughout history. It’s certainly a nice little side-story and makes the Pieces of Eden a little more impacting than they were in the first game.

Well, I think that will do for now. Time to go back to assassinating corrupt Italians while I let you take the floor…

----

Steven: I think that, like everything else, the collectibles in Assassin's Creed II are well considered and implemented in a way that makes sense within the boundaries of the narrative, unlike the flags of Assassin's Creed, but it's also too easy to look past the simple explanations Ubisoft provided and see them exactly as they are: mechanics that mostly mean nothing to the overall experience and are provided to extend a player's time, potentially, in the game. That said, I'm a completionist so I actively seek these things out by default and, unlike other like-minded gamers, I actually enjoy chasing after hidden collectibles as I use it as an excuse to spend time in a game's world and take it all in. Assassin's Creed as a series in particular provides awesome, awe-inspiring locations that are very enjoyable to just spend time in, so the flags, feathers, treasure chests and whatever else Ubisoft decide to throw our way are definitely objects that I will pursue throughout the course of the game. While I do see these collectibles as the distractions they are, I still appreciate that the developers took the time to associate them with the characters we meet throughout our travels and the elements of play we interact with -- it just makes it more cohesive, something I've come to really admire most in the games that I play. I'm quite surprised actually that people aren't complaining about the treasure chests. To me, it feels like there are too many and as we all know a lot of people complained about the amount of flags there were to find. I suppose these treasure chests are located in easier to reach areas and are more obvious to spot than the flags, but out of the chests and the feathers it is the latter that I prefer to try and find. Lastly, I am pleased that Ubisoft tracked these collectibles via maps or information in the pause menu. It meant I was able to head to the cities in the game where I was still missing a few instead of wasting time searching an area where I had already acquired the hidden collectibles.

Being a sequel, it makes sense that Ubisoft wanted to include more weapons this time around. I remarked in our discussion of the original game that a lot of people found Assassin's Creed's combat to be too easy due to the use of the X button (360 controller) for attacking and defending. Despite this being largely true, the issue didn't bother me as I enjoyed mixing my combat up and trying to choreograph my own epic fights, making the combat more enjoyable for me personally. Assassin's Creed II's combat is undoubtedly improved but it is still too easy to rely on that X button, the enemies you face and the weapons you use varying the dynamics of combat rather than player input. While I understand that this occurs in order to benefit accessibility, I still find it an issue when it's up to the player's initiative to make combat varied and unpredictable as opposed to the game's dynamics. As you say, there are different kinds of enemies in ACII that do change things up, but I just feel the changes aren't enough. There's the sword for normal enemies, the more agile ones and even the archers on the rooftops, whilst the hidden blade is effective against the spear-wielding Brutes. It's just too easy in my view to fall into a routine that dispatches foes quickly and allows you to escape or continue pursuing your objective. But, I want to be clear here and say that I absolutely love the combat system -- the way it feels, the different ways foes can be dispatched, the animations as Ezio counters and conquers and, of course, the way it all sounds -- and I believe that it suits the needs of the game and accommodates a player's desire for the most part, it's just the ease for repetition through routine that is my sticking point as opposed to the actual act of fighting. I don't know, I guess you could say that I feel as if sometimes the combat feels artificial as a result of its accessibility, which is disappointing given how visceral and satisfying it can also be. Experimenting with the weapons, or even techniques (such as throwing dust into enemy eyes) was good fun though and I'm definitely glad some more variety was included.

Subject 16's videos were certainly interesting but they felt too abrupt and broke the flow of immersion for me a little. It's explained through the narrative well enough -- Subject 16 being the Abstergo Animus experiment before Desmond, who left messages inside the Animus' code before his untimely demise -- but it was still jarring as far as I'm concerned. Reminding you that you're in the Animus reliving an ancestor's memory isn't the problem, nor is the implication of a nearby glyph and the discovery of it, but rather the actual puzzles you work with. They're static for a start, meaning you're staring at what is mostly a blank screen so the focus can be on what you're supposed to do -- find the hidden Piece of Eden in a picture; arrange layers of a wheel to form a picture -- and once you've started one, you can't stop and save it for another time. You must complete it to continue on, which is fine when they're easy and pose a quick distraction but is frustrating when you are struggling to solve it and would like to continue playing. It's a trivial thing, to be sure, but I feel as if they detract too much from the overall experience to justify their inclusion. Like the additional weapons and enemies above, I admire the inclusion but don't find the execution to be as fleshed out as it could have been.

At the very least, the Subject 16 videos do flesh out the narrative somewhat so in a very convenient segue-way, what are your thoughts about the plot, characters and events of the game now that you've finished it?

----

As implied above, our next exchange surrounds the narrative of the game and what we thought of it. Depending on the flow of conversation, we'll either wrap the series up there or have a shorter conclusion afterwards to summarise our overall thoughts about Assassin's Creed II. In the meantime, if you have any thoughts regarding what was discussed above or indeed in the series so far, feel free to jump in and have your say in the comments.

Games Of The Year 2009: Assassin's Creed II

Above: How not to play Catch-And-Kiss.

I almost didn't include Assassin's Creed II in my list this year by virtue of the fact that I have only just finished it and that I was still in the process of writing about it, but there's no denying that it doesn't deserve a nod.

Assassin's Creed II is a game rife with quality, with every aspect of it created with the overall experience in mind: The story of Ezio is fleshed out more cohesively than that of Altair's, making his desires for revenge more interesting and compelling; the fluidity of movement is more refined, allowing subtle yet effective maneuvers throughout the streets and rooftops that make up the game's cities; secondary quests and collectibles are tied into the main narrative, making them more fun to do or find, and less like a chore as a direct result of blatant attempts to extend gameplay; and the sense of place -- be it where you are within it, or the awe that stems from the beauty of the Italian Renaissance setting -- is a lot more fun to just be in, the discoveries leading to unexpected and fulfilling rewards.

To put it simply it's hard to fault, making it a remarkable improvement on the original, but the praise stops there because, while it's impressive, it's also exactly what the first game should have been. I liked the original Assassin's Creed, loved it even, but it did have its flaws. Assassin's Creed II fixes them, shows how enjoyable and fun the franchise can be, and not much more. As it stands, that's a good thing, but it's not the ideal thing. If it took Ubisoft two games to get their formula right, then let's hope it only takes one more to completely blow us away; to meet the incredible potential the franchise has; and to elevate the repution of the Assassin's Creed name to the level that the likes of Grand Theft Auto, World Of Warcraft, BioShock and Metal Gear Solid all share -- the absolute cream of the crop. That's what I would like to see. That is what I believe would be ideal.

Living By The Creed #2: A Discourse On Assassin's Creed II

Welcome to part two of my mini-series covering the Assassin's Creed franchise, but mostly its recently released sequel Assassin's Creed II. Once again my good friend Joseph from PALGN is joining me, and in this particular exchange we discuss our initial thoughts about the game. We are both about halfway through and already the game has presented a wide range of topics to think about. Some of those are discussed below, but there are many more in my head. We've got a couple more exchanges after this one, but after that don't be surprised to see even more Assassin's Creed II coverage here. There just seems to be something about it that has put my mind into overdrive. Anyway, onto the good stuff.

----

Steven: So Joseph, I have spent a few nights with Assassin’s Creed II, as I’m sure you have as well, so I figured it was time to discuss some of our initial thoughts and impressions of it. To change things up, I’ll go first this time.

The first thing I noticed with Assassin’s Creed II, when comparing it to the original game, is the difference in how Ubisoft have approached Ezio’s story when compared to that of Altair’s; effort has been put in to ensure that Ezio’s story is more involving and, arguably, the end result is a story that’s more compelling than Altair’s. As we discussed in our first exchange, I felt like Altair was a conduit at times for the main gameplay, with the narrative enjoyment coming from Desmond’s side of things instead. It is different here and I actually find myself interested in Ezio’s story. Part of that, I think, is how the story is introduced: the tutorials don’t just serve as explanations for the game’s mechanics; they also introduce you to Ezio’s family. More importantly, they allow you to interact with his family – from racing his brother to helping his mum as she visits a friend – and it is this short time that draws you into the overall narrative. Sure, bells and whistles aside it’s just a prelude to the main thing, but unlike the original Assassin’s Creed it does a better job of immersing you within the game, and that’s impressive.

It’s not perfect, however; these tutorial or ‘ease the player in’ missions as a whole take far too long and there are too many of them. Maybe it’s just me, but there is something wrong when 3 hours into the game, I am still being taught how to play the game or how to use a newly acquired item or skill. Sure, they’re designed to ease you into the narrative as well as new players into the mechanics, but then again, they’re not; I think it is the third mission that sees you racing against your brother, the endpoint being a marker that’s on a rooftop not far from where you begin. Despite having experience from the first game, I actually had to retry this mission because I was still getting (re)accustomed to the controls, as well as getting my bearings. The game, in my view, assumed I had played the first one and expected me to be more efficient with my skills as a result. I’ve noticed other, minor examples of this throughout so if I’m right and assumptions are being made, then that is in direct conflict with the amount of tutorial missions there are and the length they go for. Just something I observed and thought was odd.

I don’t want to discuss the characters or the narrative too much, as I’d like to play more of the game for one and I think it’s deserving of its own exchange for two, so let me change pace and mention the structure of the game as well as the design of the cities.

Another thing I noticed instantly was how easy it was to get my bearings. Maybe it’s a credit to the early mission design, maybe not, but so far it seems like the game’s cities (I’ll pause there to mention that I’ve only seen three so far: Florence, Monteriggioni and Tuscany) are designed a lot more fluidly than the ones in the original Assassin’s Creed, with more landmarks and distinctive buildings than before. It makes navigation down in the streets a lot easier which is nice because it’s not always feasible to be traveling across the rooftops. The immersion of these cities is as good as it was in Assassin’s Creed, if not better, with an atmosphere that makes them feel as if they are occupied with living, breathing people. It just exudes a sense of active, yet relaxed activity that makes them feel populated without being cramped, making it a joy to just walk around in but irrelevant when it comes to the proper meat of the game: the various missions and objectives.

There’s a lot more variety here, all of it breaking up the pace by changing things up and distracting you, and that’s a marked improvement over the repetition seen in the original. Throw in the emergent pace enacted by the player – the ability to do whatever, whenever -- and it keeps things fresh without being overwhelming. With all that said and done, however, I do get the feeling that it is perhaps a bit conservative. While I still enjoy climbing up to another viewpoint or racing across the rooftops in an allocated time, I do wonder if that style of play is going to get stale if it continues in future installments. Even the new additions such as the underground tombs aren’t as compelling as I feel like they could be. I mean, at the end of the day, all you’re doing is exactly what you can do outside: jump, climb, and run from one location to the next, usually because of a desired goal. To me, there’s not much difference between the hunt for another sarcophagus and an attempt to reach another viewpoint; one is inside, directed and a bit more passive, while the other can be approached from any angle but ultimately there is only one, maybe two ways to reach the top. Don’t get me wrong, as it is now it is enjoyable and I’m glad Ubisoft added these tombs – admittedly, I’ve only seen a handful – but if it continues in future installments then I’m not sure whether it is something I will continue to enjoy, that’s all. It just feels like what we’ve gotten is iteration on what came before – a good thing – wrapped up in a better structure that doesn’t get repetitive. Iteration is welcome, but so is innovation, and that is something I’d like to see alongside the main stuff in the inevitable sequel.

I have much more I could say about this game and it’s still only early days, but I’ll stop it there to allow you to respond and offer your own thoughts about your time with the game so far. So how are you finding it? I think it’s safe to say it’s an improvement upon the original game, but how much of one, do you think? Take it away.

----

Joseph: Hi Steven. Much like you said in our previous exchange, I too seem to be noticing and liking the same things you are.

After watching some trailers for the game I immediately knew Ezio’s story would be much stronger than Altair’s. I like how the game opens up showing him as a cocky, obnoxious teenager who gets into fights and what not. But, you also get a sense of just how much pride he takes in his family – escorting his mother to the shops, looking out for his kid brother and sister, and of course the level of respect he displays for his father and older brother. I thought it made the tutorials a little more interesting as it introduced you to Ezio’s family and gave you a little more insight to their relationships, but as you said it did feel a little slow to start off with. In fact I felt the game didn’t truly pick up until Ezio had met up with his uncle, of course that isn’t to say the game was boring up until that point.

Again, I am simply enjoying walking around the environments and exploring my surroundings. The various streets and suburbs are definitely more recognisable this time around, arguably due to the inclusion of landmarks and other unique structures. If we look back at the original Assassin’s Creed, while the cities were huge and had distinguishable areas (rich/moderate/poor districts), you could easily get lost walking in the streets as everything looked the same. Churches were the same height and width, housing was identical on nearly every corner, and evening gathering spots looked like they had been recycled. In Assassin’s Creed II however, I’m seeing these marketplaces, prisons, unique housing structures such as apartments and villas, and churches that have distinguishable towers and courtyards. Ubisoft has clearly put a lot of effort into designing levels, and the result is an even more engaging experience than the original.

A few other things I’m enjoying at the moment are the economy and notoriety systems. When Ubisoft first announced these would be a component of the gameplay I was skeptical if it would suit the game’s atmosphere and setting, well, more so the economy system than the notoriety system. The economy system is a relatively minor feature actually. I mean, you’re rewarded money for completing missions, so it’s not like you have to do any mundane tasks such as chopping wood or bar tending (ala Fable II). But, I like how there’s a small emphasis on being careful how you spend your money. At the top of my head you have to restock throwing knives and poisons, as well as repair your armour, make regular trips to the doctor to heal yourself, and hire henchmen to do your bidding (I’ll touch on this a bit more later). Various armour and weapon upgrades become available later in the game, so by the time you spend your money doing the former, you won’t be able to purchase that stronger sword from the blacksmith. Or if you wanted to do it the other way around, you might not have sufficient funds to heal Ezio if you bought a new weapon. It’s not necessarily innovative to the industry, but it adds that extra element to what was already established in the original. As for the notoriety system, again it’s just a step up from the original and makes things feel a little more realistic. If Ezio committed crimes in a real-world city, chances are people would be on the look out for him. He wouldn’t be able to stay hidden for a few minutes then duck out I broad day light all fine and content with being in public view. I must admit though, I probably like the feature as it’s reminiscent of the Hitman series, only more refined.

I made a quick mention before about hiring henchmen (courtesans, thieves and mercenaries). Again, it’s something that isn’t new to the industry but adds to the Assassin’s Creed experience. I must admit, I have a bit of a soft spot for hiring the courtesans. The way they flirt with the guards, how crowds whistle and cheer as they walk by, and how Ezio is standing in the centre of the group like a pimp spending a night out on the town; it’s just plain good fun. Of course, when I’m scaling the rooftops the thieves are my companions of choice, although I have noticed they tend to be a little less mobile than Ezio and can sometimes end up a fair distance away from you -- certainly not good when you’re taking on enemy watchmen. The mercenaries are my least favourite. I don’t know why exactly, but it’s probably because they lack the style of the other two. That said, they do manage to help me out in sword fights by distracting guards long enough for me to creep up behind them and deliver a fatal blow to the neck. CLING! Got to love that sound effect.

As for your little comments about the tombs, if anything I think there aren’t enough of them. I can see what you’re trying to get at, but I actually like how Ubisoft has focused the gameplay mechanics in an enclosed environment. The tombs make the game feel a lot like a platformer, and I’m not too sure which ones you’ve explored, but quite often you have to race against a timer. An example is flicking a switch which causes doors to open, and your aim is to race through a specific route before they close. In the ones I’ve explored so far I’ve actually had to stop for a bit and think how I’m going approach the challenge. Some sections are definitely head-scratchers while others are a walk in the park, but it adds variety and is a compelling part of the game. Going by the achievement list though, it seems there are only six different tombs to explore, so hopefully the recently announced DLC will include a few more locations.

To simplify everything I’ve said, from what I’ve seen so far I am liking the minor additions to gameplay and how Ubisoft has refined some elements from the original Assassin’s Creed. I’m particularly looking forward to how the story progresses as it’s interesting watching Ezio grow from a cocky kid into a mature adult. It’s certainly an inspiring tale of manhood and revenge, which is something I’d like to touch on further in a future exchange.

----

I hope you enjoyed our initial thoughts about Assassin's Creed II. In our next exchange, we will be discussing the weapons and enemies found in the game, as well as how the game implements its collectibles and the intriguing addition of Subject 16's strange videos. In the meantime, feel free to read part one of our exchange which discusses the original Assassin's Creed, and as always feel free to engage the discussion -- the more the merrier, as they say.