Yeah I am, you CAN'T fully understand whole story if you haven't played every single title. The fact is that it includes historic character is so much fun.You must be a more hardcore fan then.
ahhhhhhh, Pokemon. I remember when we did that story xD
Yeah I am, you CAN'T fully understand whole story if you haven't played every single title. The fact is that it includes historic character is so much fun.
Obviously not but it's important if you're playing it for a story. If you know what's going on, you'll definitely won't mind Desmond parts for story. Though I still think it should be reduced to minimum.Do you enjoy the Desmond sections of the game? I certainly wish they weren't there and frankly don't care about his story.
That's because game never attaches us to Desmond Character.Yes, his parts matter for the overall story. But I consider his story weak regardless and play the game for the historical character's story. If Desmond were to fall off a cliff and die halfway through the game, it wouldn't concern me if it had no effect on Connor or Ezio or whoever.
AC II has pretty good story itself not just one continued from previous game. (The way Ezio becomes assassin and how the story moves). It's only at the end when you feel you should have played previous Assassin Creed to understand much better. AC II is the best in series imo followed by AC:Brotherhood (never played AC:R due to dead graphic card). If I'll ever play Revelations, it will be only for story.If I someone asked me if they needed to play previous Assassin's Creeds to enjoy the game, I personally would tell them they didn't need to or that AC II would be enough since it's the best.