I'm finding AC:BH a very tedious game to play through, and every time I play it, I soon wish I was playing AC2 instead. The mechanics are essentially the same, yet the disparities in narrative and mission design overwhelm the similarities and pros it has with AC2. To me, Brotherhood feels severely disjointed, to the point that it starts disrupting the narrative's flow. So many parts of the game feel like a chore; even Ezio feels more like Ezio: Runner of Errands rather than the excellent character he was in AC2. The strict mission design isn't necessarily difficult, but I often find myself running out of time simply because I took a few seconds to get my bearings and figure out how exactly I would get to the objective. I realize its more like real life when you only have a small window, but games aren't supposed to be real. I think there's too much confusion between plausibility and realism. For me, Brotherhood is too focused on the plausible--it attempts to shoehorn in a bunch of requirements because, well, Desmond is exploring Ezio's memories and must therefore adhere to his historical actions.
The problem is that the game is supposed to be free roaming and open world, which is in direct conflict with the premise of replicating the ancestor's memories. What I liked about AC2 so much was not just the variety, but the game was more flexible; I felt there was greater freedom in approaching any one task. I felt I had greater freedom to approach a situation how I chose. In Brotherhood, however, any one mission will have a big checklist of requirements and failure of these results at worst in restarting the level, or at best, getting only 50% synchronization. And there's another contrived problem there. I feel the whole 50/100 sync thing was merely there to cater to trophy whoring and bragging rights. The level of sync and the requirement itself are totally arbitrary. How is it that swimming when I wasn't supposed to (even though it was the most logical step) is weighed just as heavily as finishing the mission--you know, where I stopped a misinformed assassination and saved one of our leaders? The half synchronization is a minor gripe, however, because I'm more concerned with how the instant-fails affect the flow of the narrative. Too often, I found myself simply doing things by trial-and-error--which, by itself, isn't a bad thing; games like World of Goo or Portal 2 are good because they cause you to think about your mistakes. But with a game like Brotherhood, where narrative and flow are (or should) be such crucial components of the experience, trial-and-error kills the pacing.
I miss Venezia, Toscana, and Firenze. To be honest, I don't like Roma very much, and the sheer size of it makes for tedious travel. The visual style isn't as vibrant and everything has a rather grungy look. The lairs of Romulus are rather disappointing as well. I loved the Assassin's Tombs--maybe because I love spins on iconography. I mean, there's an assassin's tomb at the top of the freaking Duomo and another in the San Marco Basilica. These were gorgeous set-pieces and covered a very wide variety of locales (not only polished cathedrals, but grungy dungeons deep below the fortress walls). The Romulus lairs, however, all exude the same grungy look (I still have one more to finish but I'm not holding my breath) that makes it difficult to see what I can jump onto and pretty much forces me to do everything by trial and error. It's not that any of these dungeons (AC2 or BH) are particularly difficult, but the ones in AC2 actually try to give a decent (fun) sort of challenge, whereas the BH ones just give you tedious ones.
I'm not sure I like the combat tweaks either; most of them feel unnecessary. I don't like the offensive approach, because I find myself button mashing more. Sure, it's faster, but combat feels sloppier. The gunblast "finisher" seems kind of pointless, too. I'm a trained assassin and I just ran him through with a sword. Is a gunblast to the face really necessary? And the recruits--the thing I was most looking forward to--are kind of cheap, to the point that the combat becomes disappointingly vicarious. I actually have to force myself not to use them because I find Ezio's skills (mine) will get soft if I just L2 a nice, easy insta-kill.
If my use of the recruits is indicative of anything, it's that Ezio isn't just becoming an errand runner; he's become a half-assed errand runner and letting others do his dirty work for him. This isn't just my play style, however. I think the writers have actually made me like Ezio less. It's not that they made him repugnant; he's just totally uninteresting here. Everyone in this game (except for Bartolomeo) has lost their sense of humor and charm. da Vinci and Claudia, who were so vibrant and humorous in AC2, seem hardened and stoic in their new positions--da Vinci as a prisoner and Claudia as the brothel manager/assassin contact.
I guess what made the writing in AC2 good (very rare, I think, for any video game) was that it understood the difference between plot and story in developing a compelling narrative. For me, plot is next to meaningless in evaluating narrative. What value does story have if it's lacking in emotion? What value is a corpse without life? What good is a clothesline without clothes? Or a building without people? AC2 grounds its narrative (and pretty much all its missions) in a very concrete and identifiable situation. Ezio is young and inexperienced and the whole game sings with vibrancy and life. Brotherhood, by comparison, is all business--lots of business meetings, transactions and hires.
I guess that's about it. I like a lot of Brotherhood, but it's so tedious and grungy. I'm not even sure I want to finish it and it really does feel like a chore. Here's hoping Revelations doesn't make the same mistake.
No comments:
Post a Comment