[Official] Assassin's Creed 2


Recommended Posts

but how long does it take you think?

I mean I like massacering guards but yeah. and running on buildings is sweet

GameTrailers said it would be between 9-12 hours of gameplay (more if you want to get all the achievements).

http://www.gametrailers.com/game/assassins-creed-ii/11094

I have to say, while I am truly enjoying this game, I really do not see massive leaps and bounds in gameplay from the first game. They have definietly refined a lot of aspects for sure, no doubt about it, but I am not sure I quite get the talk from a lot of reviews I have read about how it is a huge improvement over the last and that much better of a game. All they really have done IMO is fix the largest issues with the first one. This is the game I think they wanted to release to begin with but just could not at the time. So yes, that undeniably means it is a much better game than the first, but the way it has been getting reviewed and praised I was expecting something much more drastic than the first one. Perhaps it was just me reading into things to much and forgetting the hype involved.

GameTrailers said it would be between 9-12 hours of gameplay (more if you want to get all the achievements).

http://www.gametrailers.com/game/assassins-creed-ii/11094

so it will get a good 30 hours of play

12 hours for me and 12 hours for my little brother. plus all the times when i am bored and decide to go building hoping

but my mom got it for me and my little brothers birthday. even though I was there. she wouldnt get a roll of duct tape so I could **** my little brother off right now. its installing right now I think its done so im gonna go play :)

I love this game, but the jumping puzzles and timings with the Assassin's Tombs sucked. Altair's armor looks really good though when you wear it.

I figure I have a couple of hours left before finishing it. Definitely better than AC1!

I have to say, while I am truly enjoying this game, I really do not see massive leaps and bounds in gameplay from the first game. They have definietly refined a lot of aspects for sure, no doubt about it, but I am not sure I quite get the talk from a lot of reviews I have read about how it is a huge improvement over the last and that much better of a game. All they really have done IMO is fix the largest issues with the first one. This is the game I think they wanted to release to begin with but just could not at the time. So yes, that undeniably means it is a much better game than the first, but the way it has been getting reviewed and praised I was expecting something much more drastic than the first one. Perhaps it was just me reading into things to much and forgetting the hype involved.

I'm fine with hearing that, I liked the first one enough that I got to the point in the story where the wanting to figure out the rest of the story was stronger than the want to stop playing due to repetitiveness. If that repetitiveness is virtually gone compared to the first then it just makes it that much more fun for me (once it hits PC, that is). I just hope they spend time refining the PC version and we don't get a crappy port like GTA:IV was.

I'm fine with hearing that, I liked the first one enough that I got to the point in the story where the wanting to figure out the rest of the story was stronger than the want to stop playing due to repetitiveness. If that repetitiveness is virtually gone compared to the first then it just makes it that much more fun for me (once it hits PC, that is). I just hope they spend time refining the PC version and we don't get a crappy port like GTA:IV was.

YES! same. the first port of ac1 was horribly done as well. They could have optimized it much better.

hey do you guys know by the end of the game can you get back into the Animus? or just stuck out side in the real world like in AC1? I need to know because there are some achievements I need to get .. O_o.

nvm..

I have to say, while I am truly enjoying this game, I really do not see massive leaps and bounds in gameplay from the first game. They have definietly refined a lot of aspects for sure, no doubt about it, but I am not sure I quite get the talk from a lot of reviews I have read about how it is a huge improvement over the last and that much better of a game. All they really have done IMO is fix the largest issues with the first one. This is the game I think they wanted to release to begin with but just could not at the time. So yes, that undeniably means it is a much better game than the first, but the way it has been getting reviewed and praised I was expecting something much more drastic than the first one. Perhaps it was just me reading into things to much and forgetting the hype involved.

The biggest complaint about the first was the repetition. That's gone. I think that's why it's getting praised so much. I loved the first one, repetition and all, so for me it's not all that much better. But they fixed that and various other things, so people don't have much to complain about anymore.

One thing I noticed is that when you basically have a straight line to climb up, you go MUCH faster than in the first one.

I just finished the game! What an awesome game. :D Just have to get all the achievements now. I can't wait for AC3 now.

By the way, best three words to "end" the game (the part before the credits). "What. The. ****." :laugh:

I just finished the game! What an awesome game. :D Just have to get all the achievements now. I can't wait for AC3 now.

By the way, best three words to "end" the game (the part before the credits). "What. The. ****." :laugh:

indeed, I said it completely in sync actually, what a conclusion to the game. can't wait for AC3, it will be so badass freerunning in the "present"

Why the hell must the PC version be so far off, I really want to try this :(

Probably so they can add in some anti-piracy measures that will prevent people from pirating the game for an extra week after release, as opposed to releasing it now and boosting PC sales from people who are not going to wait for it to release on PC, instead of the small amount who will decide to buy it (instead of pirating it) to get it a week sooner. :p

Probably so they can add in some anti-piracy measures that will prevent people from pirating the game for an extra week after release, as opposed to releasing it now and boosting PC sales from people who are not going to wait for it to release on PC, instead of the small amount who will decide to buy it (instead of pirating it) to get it a week sooner. :p

People wonder why PC gaming is dying (except for MMOs). :p

So I dont know how far I am into the game, I just left the Villa and Mario to go back to talk to Leonardo Da Vinci and I learned some new assassination techniques, so I am maybe only a few hours in, but I have to say the more I play the more I really am enjoying the overall game itself.

They really have refined so many aspects that were not so good the last time around and overall it is a much more enjoyable experience. The amount of detail is insane, and if I had to make one negative comment it almost seems like there is to much going on at the same time, like way to many things to choose to do. So I am still pretty much sticking to the main story and trying to move it along, but the playability factor in this game seems off the charts and it appears there are way more things to do than your average game these days. So for this reason alone I would think it is appealing to gamers who have a lot of time to dedicate to playing games and truly want to get engrossed and wrapped up into completing one game.

I just hope it is not so long that I never beat it, which very well may happen as I tend to lose interest in really long games and / or just got distracted by other games. We shall see.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • The quantum search for Time's origin had an equally mind-boggling conclusion by Sayan Sen Image by Steve Johnson via Pexels A theoretical study from researchers at the University of Surrey suggested that the direction of time may not be fundamentally fixed in certain quantum systems. The work, published in Scientific Reports, examined how the “arrow of time” could emerge from microscopic physics and found that time-reversal symmetry can remain intact even in models used to describe processes such as energy loss and thermalisation. The arrow of time refers to the observed one-way direction from past to future in everyday life. In macroscopic processes, this is easy to see. Spilled milk spreads across a table and does not gather back into a glass, and heat flows from hotter objects to colder ones. These processes shape the common sense idea that time moves in a single direction. However, at the level of fundamental physics, many equations do not prefer a direction of time. Time-reversal symmetry means that the same physical laws can describe a system whether time moves forward or backward. This has made it difficult to explain why irreversible behaviour appears in the large-scale world even when the underlying rules do not require it. Dr Andrea Rocco, Associate Professor in Physics and Mathematical Biology at the University of Surrey, described this contrast: "One way to explain this is when you look at a process like spilt milk spreading across a table, it's clear that time is moving forward. But if you were to play that in reverse, like a movie, you'd immediately know something was wrong – it would be hard to believe milk could just gather back into a glass. However, there are processes, such as the motion of a pendulum, that look just as believable in reverse. The puzzle is that, at the most fundamental level, the laws of physics resemble the pendulum; they do not account for irreversible processes. Our findings suggest that while our common experience tells us that time only moves one way, we are just unaware that the opposite direction would have been equally possible." The study focused on open quantum systems, which are quantum systems that interact with a surrounding environment. This environment, often described as a heat bath, can exchange energy and information with the system. The researchers used this framework to study how a direction of time might appear even when the underlying physics does not enforce one. A key part of the analysis involved the Markov approximation. This is a simplification used in many models where the system is assumed not to retain memory of its past states. The idea is that changes depend only on the current state, not on earlier history. This is commonly used when studying thermalisation, which is the process where a system settles into equilibrium with its environment. The study also used concepts such as master equations, including the Lindblad and Pauli equations, which describe how probabilities of different quantum states change over time. Another related model discussed was quantum Brownian motion, which describes the random-like movement of a quantum particle interacting continuously with its environment. In these descriptions, a “memory kernel” can appear, which is a mathematical term that accounts for how past states influence current behaviour. The researchers found that applying the Markov approximation did not break time-reversal symmetry. Even when the system interacted with an effectively infinite heat bath, the resulting equations of motion remained symmetric in time. This meant that the same mathematical description could, in principle, run forward or backward in time without contradiction. The study further showed that standard frameworks used in open quantum systems, including quantum Brownian motion and master equations like the Lindblad and Pauli forms, could be written in a time-symmetric way. These equations are typically used to describe processes that look irreversible, such as dissipation and thermalisation, but the results suggested they can also be interpreted as allowing evolution in both time directions. Thomas Guff, Research Fellow in Quantum Thermodynamics, said: "The surprising part of this project was that even after making the standard simplifying assumption to our equations describing open quantum systems, the equations still behaved the same way whether the system was moving forwards or backwards in time. When we carefully worked through the maths, we found that this behaviour had to be the case because a key part of the equation, the "memory kernel," is symmetrical in time. We also found a small but important detail which is usually overlooked – a time discontinuous factor emerged that kept the time-symmetry property intact. It’s unusual to see such a mathematical mechanism in a physics equation because it's not continuous, and it was very surprising to see it appear so naturally." The researchers also noted that deriving a one-way arrow of time from time-reversal symmetric microscopic dynamics remains an open problem across fields such as thermodynamics, statistical mechanics, particle physics, and cosmology. Their results suggested that some standard descriptions of irreversible behaviour in open quantum systems may be better understood using a time-symmetric formulation of Markovianity. According to the study, processes such as thermalisation, which are usually treated as irreversible, could in theory be described in a way that allows evolution in either time direction under the same rules. This does not imply that time reversal occurs in everyday life, but rather that the underlying equations do not strictly enforce a single direction. Overall, the findings suggested that the perceived direction of time may emerge from how physical systems are modelled and approximated, rather than from a fundamental asymmetry in the laws themselves. The researchers noted that this perspective could have implications for ongoing work in quantum mechanics, thermodynamics, and cosmology on the origin of time’s arrow. Source: University of Surrey, Nature This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing
    • A bit premature... 100% Marketing. Bizarre.
    • A $300 price hike is insane! No one is going to want to pay that much!
    • Since the 1st one flopped, there is really no reason to make another one. It's just losing money left and right.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Reacting Well
      BizSAR earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • First Post
      AndreaB earned a badge
      First Post
    • Week One Done
      Huge Trailer earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Classifyskilleducation earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      eurospharma62 earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      579
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      182
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      74
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      71
    5. 5
      neufuse
      64
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!