I hated AC1, but took a stab in the dark on AC2, and it's really really good. Who thought running around Italy in the 14th century would feel so cool? If only the guards were a little smarter.

Anyways, I have no idea what the hell the computer dudes are talking about coz I didn't finish AC1 (didn't play it for more than 30 minutes). What's the basic plot and outcome of the first game, and how does it figure into the second game? Don't spoil AC2 details though. I just wanna figure out what's going on.

I'd check it out on wikipedia, they normally summarize the whole plot of a game, don't they?

I would be, but YLOD

Anyway, Altair did some stuff that was bad, so Al Mualim killed him, but he lived, but Al Mualim was EVIL so Altair became head of the Hashashin and founded it in its current state.

And Al Mualim had the Apple, and presumably Altair took it.

That's basically all that ACTUALLY happened.

EDIT: Al Mualim was a Templar.

I would also suggest Wikipedia, but Kantor gave the very general outline of the story from the first game.

*POSSIBLE SPOILERS*
@ Kantor, there is strong evidence in the second game (Altair's journal thingy) that says he took the Piece of Eden.  It's the whole Codex page thing. Altair talks about some of the things he tried using it for. I believe one of those things was allowing him to make the Armor of Altair that's so helpful in AC2. It's been a while since I read through all of that though.

The second game was a blast, and the platinum trophy is a pretty easy one to get.

a trolls response: screw AC1 and just play AC2! lol thats kinda wat i did :P

Wait, what do you mean "The computer dudes"? The Assassins? Nothing they talk about has anything to do with the original, really...

Just the basics of Assassins vs. Templars, the workings of the Animus and ABSTERGO.

For some reason I feel the exact opposite - Loved the first one but just can't bring myself to have any fun at all with the second one.

Different strokes for different folks, I guess.

I...don't follow.

I'm all for respecting opinions, but I don't see how AC1 was better than ACII in any way, shape, form or attribute. Seriously, it's a repetitive, dull, incomprehensible mess, where ACII is a fresh, original and varied experience with a great story. In my opinion.

I don't think AC2 is fresh at all. It's clearly a well-made game in every sense of the word, but if I'm playing it for 10+ hours and not having a lick of fun, I mean, what am I doing? It's completely managed to irk me and has largely turned me off from gaming at all for the last month or so.

I can just about understand not enjoying ACII. It's the fact that you liked AC1 that confuses me. Perhaps you were just in a better mood when you played the original?