View Single Post
10-28-2012, 10:39 AM
Registered User
tyratoku's Avatar
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Grand Forks, ND
Country: United States
Posts: 7,530
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Dee Oh Cee View Post
This is an interesting question...

Like others have said there are definitely some things you would be confused about in terms of the actual storyline. Basically, the game is in the future where you are a guy and you use a machine that lets you inhabit the body of one of your ancestors. So in the first game you look back and 'play' your ancestor Altair's memories in places like Jerusalem, Acre, Damascus, etc. These parts of the game don't really need any prefacing.

So what I'd say for AC III is that you'd be completely lost on the 'present time' parts of the game but in regards to the parts where you're playing as Connor during the American Revolution I think you'd be fine.

Sidenote: I get that AC was repetitive and a little boring after a while, but when you think of it you have to think of it in terms of how it was the first of the series and there wasn't anything to compare it to as of yet. I was fine with AC and thought it was a great concept and game (and still do for the most part) but only when ACII and others came out did it become boring...if that makes any sense.
I agree with what DOC is saying here. And really, Prov, the "future"/current timeline segments don't make up much of the actual gameplay at all, at least from the AC games released so far. You'd miss out on some of the story elements, sure, but they're not a big deal. I'm sure a guy like Jarick or myself could provide a concise summary of the games so far in like 2-3 paragraphs at most. The story isn't all that deep, IMO. It's good, but doesn't take much to figure out.

tyratoku is offline