From One End Of Assassin's Creed: Revelations To The Other

I went to the nothern edge of Assassin's Creed: Revelations's version of 16th-century Constantinople.

I made sure our hero Ezio de Auditore was wearing his best armour. (Find out how to get it in these Starter Tips I wrong for the game.)

Then I ran. And climbed. And flew. And swam. I hustled to a certain spot on the southern edge. I didn't do it for speed. I stopped and goofed around with the guards a few times. I had a couple of spills.

What better way to see the sights?


    "I wrong for the game"

    by chance, did you mean "I wrote for the game"?

    I could almost believe Altair could climb that well wearing his robes and a sword, but Ezio wearing half his body-weight in armour and another half in weapons ... for me (as a rock-climber admittedly) it breaks my connection with these awesome games a bit. How old is he now? 50? He climbs like a Gibbon with a rocket up it's ass.

      The first part of the game is a bit more authentic, but only because Ezio is injured.

      Jeeze, you'll hate Half Life 2 then. It has a gun that lifts and throws objects! These damn game designers choosing fun over realism.

        There's a difference between pushing technological capabilities and pushing physical human capabilities. As much as I love the AC series I agree with Gleno.

          I like impossible things in games (half-life 2 gun etc.) if there is at least a story/pseudo-science behind it. The whole AC premise is pretty much impossible and I enjoy it, I like that science-fiction meets history aspect.

          He's not supposed to be a superhero though, so he should react like he's carrying some extra weight when he's carrying a metric-tonne of steel-work. The way it is he should also have the strength to throw dead bodies up onto roofs out of sight, and hulk-smash walls open.

      The problem with these sorts of things is when it comes to choosing between realism and fun, 99 times out of 100 fun is the way to go. Sure, sometimes a lack of realism can break the experience that you're having, but realism shouldn't come at the expense of gameplay. I would imagine that if Altair/Ezio/Desmond were doing the things they do in a purely realistic sense, they'd be constantly twisting ankles and breaking bones, which would make stopping the Templars a futile goal.

      And really, there are plenty of things about Assassin's Creed worth picking on other than Ezio's ability to climb while wearing ridiculous amounts of armour (the series penchant for explaining away any oddities in gameplay as 'bugs in the Animus', for example).

        Good points. Wouldn't want to stop playing for a week while Ezio is convalescing with a sprained ankle.

        I suppose what I'm really saying is, I don't really feel like an assassin when I have to stop and decide which weapon out of the arsenal I've hauled up a tower I'm going to use to dispatch some over-confident douche-bag who I could beat with my fists without losing a block of life.

        Obviously each game needs to develop on the last. But all I need is the assassins blade (double is good), some smoke bombs and some leather armour. It's nice to have the option to use all the other cool stuff, but to carry it all everywhere, without any extra effort, is ridiculous.

        I'd much rather the developments be in the control system, give me even more freedom in climbing, creeping about without accidentally brutally murdering civilians, or swan-diving into a pile of hay instead of jumping on to a cable during a rooftop pursuit. And in the world, A.I. etc.

        Every game has to strike a balance between fantasy and fun (except SR3), and you can't please everyone.

        *sigh* come on Ezio, let's go kill this politician. Don't forget your battle-axe.

    Don't even get me started on The Force in the original Star Wars trilogy...

Join the discussion!