Kantor said:
Shinobi-san said:
Does anybody know why they decided to change the combat after brotherhood? I mean the combat in brotherhood was perfect. I would spend hours trying to perfect and complete the challenges. It was quite similar to Batman's combat but i would say even better due to variety of moves you needed to do to deal with different enemy types. Whereas with Batman its mostly counter attacking and timing.
Anyways i dont think AC3 was bad because of glitches...i hardly came across any during my PS3 playthrough. But the game was a mess. Literally it was a mess. i cant find a better word to describe it. The game is all over the place...insanely long tutorial/intro...switching from Kenway to the main character...going from the towns to the wild...no real pacing to the story....urgh. Complete mess. I really tried so hard to get into the game  |
Brotherhood's combat was extremely easy, and one of the few things with which I can credit AC3 is that it was more challenging.
Like you, I had no problem with bugs, and I agree completely. The story was a mess, Connor was rubbish and completely inconsistent, the cities were dull and lifeless, there was little meaningful side content, the hunting and trading were pointless, and the ending was one of the worst I have ever seen.
|
Can't quite remember Brotherhood, but the combat in AC3 is much much easier than in Revelations.
