Review | Assassin’s Creed II
Format: Xbox360/PS3/PC | Genre: Action adventure | Publisher: UbiSoft | Developer: UbiSoft | Release date: 20/11/09 | RRP: £34.99-£44.99
By Greg Giddens
Quality or quantity is usually a choice you have to make; Assassin’s Creed II attempts to prove it’s possible to have both.
Behind the rigid design and mechanical flaws of the original Assassin’s Creed hid a true gem of a title, a delightful free-running action adventure set in a historically rich world. Now, two years on, the sequel sets out to raise the series to a new level.
In many ways, it achieves just that, but there’s still a way to go before it can rest on its laurels. Indeed, though a number of changes have been made to the existing formula, it’s a lack of refinement in certain areas that lets Assassin’s Creed II down. Instead, it’s the quality of the storytelling that stands out, and drives you onwards through the game.
//Once upon a time
With the twist of the original revealed, Assassin’s Creed II had to rely more on substance, and absolutely delivers. The first game introduced us to Desmond Miles, an ancestor of an assassin called Altaïr. Through the use of a machine called the Animus, Desmond was able to experience memories, locked away in his genetic code, of Altaïr’s life. Just like the original, Assassin’s Creed II sees you begin in the present day (relative to the game), but quickly finding yourself using the Animus 2.0 to play through your ancestor Ezio’s various memories.
The majority of the game takes place in late 15th Century Italy, where you will explore the cities of Florence, Venice, Forli, San Gimignano, and The Vatican. The authenticity of these locations is spot-on, with famous landmarks having been recreated in incredible detail. And while the cities aren’t built to perfect scale, it’s close enough, showing off each area’s character and splendor to great effect. The grand nature of the game world is complemented by the narrative, a tale of betrayal and revenge that has rarely felt so fresh. After Ezio’s father and brothers murdered, he heads to his uncle’s villa with his sister and mother. With his remaining family safe, Ezio heads out to kill those responsible for his 
father’s and brothers’ deaths, with uncle Mario and his associates filling in information along the way about how the assassins and Templars fit in to his own personal tragedy. The tale spans a full decade, skipping years between each major assassination, and does a remarkable job of remaining interesting and maintaining a solid pace. It’s very well written, too, and compels you to see it through. With its superbly delivered dialogue, each character is brought to life in a genuine and convincing way.
If the narrative alone doesn’t pull you in, Assassin’s Creed II’s authenticity almost certainly will. It’s not just the fantastic recreation of cities, either, but smaller details like the introduction of a young Leonardo Da Vinci to hold historical interest. Assassin’s Creed II makes a point of including plenty of this historical information, delivered to you from your fellow modern-day assassins, programming information about people and places directly into the Animus that will pop-up on screen and allow you to access it from the option menu, letting you really get to know the era you’re exploring. The presentation may break immersion slightly, but no more so than any of the other mechanics introduced – and the nature of the Animus at the very least explains death and mission failure in an interesting way through memory de-synchronisation.
//The bigger they are…
Assassin’s Creed II is all about scale, and the lengthy narrative plays out in positively huge areas. Each city itself is massive, and included in each area is a surrounding countryside, similar to the original. Unlike the original, you now don’t travel directly to each city via the countryside; instead, when you reach the edge of the map, you’re warped directly to the next area, cutting down travel times considerably. Additionally, within each city is a fast travel stall, allowing you to skip certain areas entirely. But while the implementation of this fast travel system is certainly appreciated, there’s still no way to travel quickly from the middle of one city to another at will, so travel times and distances can still grind. Still, at least gives you the chance to see and appreciate the game’s impressive scale.
[Continues...]
Pages: 1 2
Wow! Someone didn’t have time to play this game properly, then.
I agree with Greg 100% on this review.
One of the things that has been bothering me since I got a few hours into the game was how everyone else (other sites) have rated it 9’s and 10’s, these being the same sites that rated the first game poorly. Yet hardly anything has changed!
I’m a huge fan of the series, having finished the first game on four separate occasions and other than it being set in Italy, having a few more collectibles and better construction in the story, it’s the same game. While not really a bad thing, it has had me confused on reviews, but Greg nailed exactly what I was thinking.
I deeply disliked the first game. Found it to be more pretentious and inpenetrable than any art game you care to offer. How’s this one in the brick-wall-fist-in-mouth nonsense stakes?
I’m curious as to why you didn’t mention his villa. I thought having a customisable mission hub and upgradeable weapons was a big, much-needed addition to the game, with the pointless weapon choices of the first relegating most players to the sword fairly rapidly.
I also think the fast-travel system should be removed altogether. I understand it’s convenient for a lot of people, but I don’t understand players who want an open-world game environment and then refuse to actually travel through it. Why have it open world? Why not simply have linear levels instead? The two wants/needs contradict eachother, I think.
I grabbed this at the duty-free on Saturday, and I’m due to play through it tomorrow, so we’ll see how it plays out, but I commend you for being honest. I played the original countless times and loved it, personally, and I look forward to seeing it again, but thank you for not following the IGN route and giving it a nine whilst saying it has a long way to go. Nice writing, Greg :).
I think you’ll enjoy this one a little more than the first one Lewis. As far as “brick-wall-fist-in-mouth nonsense” goes (awesome phrase by the way) the narrative whilst inside the Animus is much better, and much more very believable, a lot of effort seems to have gone into it this time around, but it’s still based on the same core elements of the original, so with you disliking the first one it’s hard to recommend this one.
I make mention of the villa and the economy involved with the renovations but you right in saying I didn’t mention the weapons upgrade system, mainly because although it sounds like a great addition, it didn’t really effect the game in any tangible way. Combat remained the same regardless of weapon and although health was upgraded along with armour, it still didn’t matter that much because your enemies didn’t have a clue how to hit you.
Thanks for the support with the score guys, I genuinely can’t understand why so many other publications are scoring it so high. Don’t get me wrong it’s still good, but not enough has changed.
The fact still remains however that when you put it up next to a majority of other titles, it is a better looking game, with better game play. I would play this any day over the clunky and dated gameplay of L4D2, which for all intents and purposes, is the same game…and just awful.
Lewis: My own review will be up on HG shortly (Jason seemed pretty eager to get it posted), and hopefully that will address your concerns. Was it the narrative you found pretentious, or the design itself? I’d say “interesting premise, but handled poorly” applies to pretty much every aspect of the original game, whereas AC2 in my mind hits all of the right notes.
I disagree with the assertion that nothing’s changed, to the point that I think it does an injustice to all of the complaints Ubisoft addressed in the sequel. The mechanics are mostly unchanged, but were they ever the problem? For me, it was the monotonous, unimaginative design the turned me off the original AC, whereas I finished AC2 a couple of days ago and I STILL want to go back and play it right now. It’s honestly one of the best sequels I’ve ever played, because it rights nearly all of the wrongs of its predecessor without undermining the elements that make THIS franchise distinct from any other.
i agree, whats the point of having a massive world and jumping from place to place just to save time
Have now played the entire game, and I have to agree, you do find yourself using fast-travel later on, though I did ride around occasionally for the sheer enjoyment of the horse-riding. At the moment, finding feathers and glyphs. Game of the year, for me.