*blocks your path*

*blocks your path*

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=9Yw5jkAHgME
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

>tfw brainlet

>people had problems with this
hope you got that game journalist job you always dreamt of

>climbs the tallest tower in allahu ackbar land just for some roastie

What a loser.

you're a pair of liars if you are saying you didn't struggle on this bit

How the fuck could people fail this? I know you're never required to do the move at any other point in the game but still, the controls are intuitive enough that it's easy to figure out.

well, to be fair fuck you

I didn't. I regularly used to run up walls and jump to the side. It's more reliable than trying to position yourself directly below the object you're trying to climb.

not everyone is a scrublord like you user

Really?

>telling fibs on an anonymous computer game imageboard

because the games condition you to never try this over several years, and then suddenly pull it out of the hat in some fever dream

Not only that, but you can't jump on the beam from the side, which was everyone's first idea.

*blocks your path*

This part was shit because you had to do a move you never normally had to do and also it was a very specific point.

The horror...

The horror...

youtube.com/watch?v=9Yw5jkAHgME

It's just wallrun + jump; the game teaches you that move right at the beginning.

Wasnt there a feather on one of the city walls that very clearly required that move? I knew what to do when I got to that point.

>you had to do a move you never normally had to do
god forbid you try anything outside of what the tutorial taught you while you roam

What was the problem with this tower exactly?

no man can be that retarded

I haven't played this in years what were you supposed to do here?

fucking kek I remember this
there's also some fucked geometry along the walls where you kill Robert de Sable

Just jump straight in the air while standing still

AC Origins doesn't even let you do a jump after a wall run anymore

>casuals

>asscreed is presented as superior

Fucking qte generation.

>try from the left
doesn't work
>can deduce it won't work from the right
>try the front
>it works
Basic problem solving Sup Forums

>How to spot someone that didnt played 1
Fucking plebs I swear

1 was honestly pretty average, 2 was better in every aspect

>1 was honestly pretty average
1 was horrible tbqh. Tho I like it a lot and it gets a pass on my book for being experimental as shit. I love experimental games.

>experimental
It was just Prince of Persia in a different setting

1 was horrible
2 was mediocre
everything else is also mediocre

Probably the most normie and overrated series today.

>It was just Prince of Persia in a different setting
The tech for the game was completely new and the design of the game is completely different, being open world and mission free. The closest thing it has with PoP is the parkour. What the fuck is wrong with you?

Actually was prince of Persia at the start of development
Cunt

Movement and parkour which is like 80% of the game

To be fair, this is the only part in both AC1 and 2 where the parkour actually requires you to use your brain, and climbing that tower was optional in 1.

Only because you played the games when you were 15 doesnt make them good, dipshit.

AC1 is honestly a 7/10 game. The only flaws is repetitive side missions and there being only a handful of kill options for targets. Other than that, it has the best story and combat in the series and if you play with the mini-map off, it's immersive.

>AC1 is honestly a 3/10 game. And the rest of the AC franchise is on average a 5/10
Fixed that for you

For me the combat only got good in Brotherhood with the introduction of the chain kills. That put an end to the waiting game it was before.

You have clearly not played many games if AC1 is your definition of a 3/10.

Imagine if they did modern ass creed with better combat, but brought back the intel/tracking of the first game, done properly, and the conspiracy shit of the second.

>presented as superior
I have some bad news user

What the fuck was the point of that sequence again?

The combat in 1 was the best because it was simple:

You had a sword for general combat, a short blade for faster attacking speed at a greater risk to yourself, a hidden blade for risky instakills, and your fists for civilians. You had so many overpowered tools in 2 onwards that you could just drop a smoke bomb, stab everyone and move on. Don't even get me started on the RPG upgrades which gave you a ridiculous amount of health, or the fact that you didn't need to time your counters anymore.

Putting combat aside, I also felt that 1 had fewer scripted assassinations compared to 2. There where targets in 2 you could kill anyway you wanted, but there were also gimmicky targets that could only be killed in a specific way. Every target in AC1 could be reached without raising the alarm if you actually put the effort in.

To write themselves into a corner by saying that genetic memory tracking switches to embryos.

That's exactly what that is, though. They are arguing that simpler is better.

I frequently did that jump on my own

>the girl from mirrors edge and ezio are no longer relevant
feelsweirdman

>presented as
Yes, because the artist shows Ezio performing more with less while Faith's stuck on the ground because she missed an input. It's not correct, but that's what it's being presented as.

If he played many games it makes sense to give it a 3/10 since he has developed taste

It's not that complex. It just shows asscreed requires less controls. You even see ezio doing acrobatic moves while jumping because it's easy. It's only meant to be a joke to the movements of the characters.

When you hit 3/10, you're talking about games that are barely playable due to how broken and glitchy they are and/or are poor on a technical level. AC1 could never be lower than a 5/10 since it has good tech, sound design, graphics (for the time) and is completely playable.

Sup Forums has a bad habit of taking a game's problems and exaggerating them to the point where they'll say "0/10, it's shit" just because a game isn't literally perfect. It's like IGN on Opposite Day.