Ben-DutkaIs Assassin's Creed Syndicate good? Is it worth your time and money? Does it indicate a step forward for the long-running franchise?
Well, uh…that all depends on which review you read.
Critics are weighing in left and right on Ubisoft's latest blockbuster effort and the scores are all over the place. You've got a 4 from Telegraph , a 5 from Videogamer and 6s from Push Square , Hardcore Gamer and GamingTrend . These reviews claim the title is a serious misstep and an absolute shame.
On the flip side you've got 9s from GameSpot , Game Informer , XGN , and God is a Geek , along with 8.5s from ZTGD , Polygon and ActionTrip , and an 8.2 from IGN . There are a few larger sources in here, if that means anything to you.
The weird part is that the good reviews almost completely contradict the bad ones. It's not that critics are all citing the same things and some just dislike the drawbacks more than others; it's that some are really saying the game is a great new entry in the series, and one the franchise desperately needed. While at the same time, the naysayers are claiming almost precisely the opposite.
Always odd when this happens.
Ben, Whats your take on this game?
Going back to my shell….
Don't have one yet.
Again with the massive sized avatar?
overcompensating xD
haha…. one eyed soldier.
Last edited by Underdog15 on 10/23/2015 10:24:10 AM
Hey Gene can you increase the size of your avatar, please? It's not yet taken up 100% of my monitor's surface area.
Thanks!
PlEASE tell me how to make mine bigger! It keeps being tiny!
Maybe there is $$$ involved.
Maybe that's why its called syndicate…
Lol people still buy these?
Unfortunately yes, that's why we get the same game every year…
Lol more like everyone still read reviews ?
I hope it flops epicly so they can give up or reboot it big time.
"Lol more like everyone still read reviews"
MGS5 is a better game an AC.
😛
I'm torn on what to do about this game. I want to support the single-player only approach, and I don't mind if the gameplay is 'samey', but I haven't seen anything about the story or characters which really draws me in. I'll probably buy it eventually, whenever I have a gap in-between other games.
Im getting my copy in a few hours. I dont care what reviews say. Frankly who still follows reviews anyways
LOL I know right, and then when you have reviewers criticizing each other because someone's doing better than them that they feel isn't "qualified", you always got a bunch of rejects complaining about annual releases even though millions still buy them
people who are careful with $$
My game is downloading from ps store, i don't take much notice of review scores anymore unless they are by the excellent ben dutka, i got this game coz i honestly think it cud be quite a good game, an the london setting appeals alot.
Nice to see at least some outlets calling this series out for its copy pasta nonsense. I'll never understand how people can justify paying $60 every year play what is essentially the same game, whether it's this crap or Call of Duty crap.
Hell, Halo is pretty much the only franchise Microsoft has left at this point and even they take a year off once in awhile.
mmmmmm…. copy pasta….. *drool*
Copy pasta can be tasty, for sure. Realistically there wasn't any functional difference between the original God of War and Ghost of Sparta (the last GoW I played), but I enjoyed all of them very much.
But you can't eat copy pasta every year. It goes straight to your thighs.
As cod would put it: S.S.D.D! Same shit different day!
Copy pasta could become a thing you know. Halo 5 is just gonna be another serving of Copy Pasta. So will COD.
CoD is the pioneer in modern copy pasta. Halo is copy pasta lite because they take every other year off (usually), but they're still fighting the same fight, with the same hero, against the same enemies, despite the fact that Halo 3 should have put all that to rest, and Halo Reach should have given them a much better jumping off point.
Either way, both series got stale years ago.
So, just to clarify, you're obviously dismissing all the critics who gave the game a high score as idiots, right? I mean, you obviously haven't played the game and yet, the judgments are already here.
The dismissive elitist theory that all annualized games always suck is also dumb. Last year's Advanced Warfare was much better than the previous year's Ghosts in the Call of Duty realm, and it was obvious to all…except to you, apparently. I'm not supporter of releasing a game every year as we all know what the problems are, but to dismiss the entire franchise and just assume that every single entry is "copy pasta" is beyond ignorant.
Furthermore, the Digital Foundry analysis of Syndicate shows a marked improvement in game performance and fewer bugs when compared to last year's Unity, and I would imagine that critics who rewarded the game with 8s and 9s have fair points. But you outrank all, despite your zero experience, right?
Last edited by Ben Dutka PSXE on 10/23/2015 11:44:57 AM
Dude what are you even replying to? Because it isn't anything I've said.
Who did I call an idiot? Where did I say all annualized games suck? Where did I say that all annualized franchises always release continuously worse games? Where did I even talk about "game performance"?
If you have to put words in people's mouths just to respond to them the way you want to, that should be Clue 1 that maybe such a response isn't warranted to begin with.
"Nice to see at least some outlets calling this series out for its copy pasta nonsense. I'll never understand how people can justify paying $60 every year play what is essentially the same game, whether it's this crap or Call of Duty crap."
Yeah, that doesn't mean anything. You just called the entire Assassin's Creed and Call of Duty franchises "copy pasta" and "crap." Completely generalized and overarching. The first sentence also makes the clear implication that you know exactly what the critics should be "calling AC out" on.
Anything else you'd like to educate us about on games you never play?
Last edited by Ben Dutka PSXE on 10/23/2015 1:15:08 PM
Thank you Ben, you always got a bunch of these video game hipster retards everywhere that for some reason think if a game releases annually it isn't good even though they haven't played them, lol it's like "oh millions play this? well i wanna be unique so f@$k this game"
Many of the negative reviews of this game, Ben, cite the fact that Syndicate feels stuck in the past, that it hasn't evolved, and that the franchise's yearly cycle is starting to catch up to it. Given that I've had that feeling since the last AC game I played (III, which wasn't the last one I bought myself; that would be Revelations), I'm glad to see more people finally calling the series out for it.
I didn't call the entire AC or CoD franchise crap, either. Modern Warfare and Modern Warfare 2 are some of my favorite all time shooters. AC II is the tits, and Brotherhood was pretty damn good, and I replay the first AC all the time for reasons I can't even explain.
What I am tired of, specifically (and what I called out, specifically), is the endless recycling of these, and other, franchises. Several of my all-time favorite series are on my list of "franchises that need to go away now, please" including God of War, Halo, and Gears of War. There are only so many times you can rehash the same gameplay under a different setting and keep it fresh.
I don't know if you're just not reading carefully, simply jumping to conclusions, or flat out deliberately making strawman arguments, but it would be nice if, just once, you actually responded to things I said, instead of telling me what you think/wish I said and then responding to that. I don't get why you do that.
Souljah, millions of people listen to Nickelback. Me not liking them doesn't mean I'm trying to do anything, other than spare my ears.
By your logic, you can't complain about Game of War, since it has been downloaded over 100 million times on Android alone. The Kim Kardashian game has over 50 million installs, but I doubt anyone here is going to be singing its praises anytime soon.
Popularity and quality are two distinctly different things.
I responded to your exact quote, which can't be misinterpreted. You called the AC and Call of duty franchises copy pasta and crap. You didn't single out any one game in either franchise, and you further implied that people who spend $60 on them are basically morons.
You also made it clear that you didn't bother to read the positive reviews of Syndicate, because quite frankly, you don't want to.
You can try and avoid the obvious all you like by turning it around on me personally, as it's the only argument of which you're actually capable. Nobody can read your original comment any differently. Just keep clarifying your original retarded stance to people like souljah, or tell us we can't read, or we're just trying to be insulting, or any number of things to avoid admitting you overstated.
It's just pathetic.
Last edited by Ben Dutka PSXE on 10/23/2015 2:30:17 PM
Apparently my comment can be misinterpreted if you try hard enough, and you tried hard enough. The term 'copy pasta' should be pretty self-explanatory, and obviously limited to games where the formula is being repeated over and over, which obviously wouldn't apply to earlier entries in a franchise. How could it?
I never implied that people who keep buying the games are morons, that's just you being defensive and projecting, though I'm not sure why you'd care even IF I claimed you were a moron for buying a game. Seriously, why would you?
I wouldn't "turn it around on you", Ben, if you ever actually replied to the things I said, but you don't do that. I'm not going to be goaded into defending statements I never made, so I don't know why you keep telling me I said things I didn't. So long as you insist on doing that, it's the only way I CAN respond, since your replies have nothing to do with the things I actually said.
If you want a different response, you can always knock off the disingenuous replies. You could even (gasp) ask for clarification before assuming things and then going off half bent defending against something I never said. I think you just prefer going off half bent, though, which is fine. You do you, as they say.
Last edited by Bio on 10/23/2015 3:01:57 PM
Well i must be the biggest moron then?, i paid £69.99 for the gold version on ps store
Buying a game doesn't make you a moron, wambo. Thinking I called you a moron simply because Ben said I did, however, is another matter.
Tbh Im just annoyed that what start out as original new games soon turn into the milking of a series. Not to say these games are bad for what they are just that I dont like the rehashing of previous games every year.
I agree, Godslim. I think it'd be a lot less annoying if these companies would just slow their roll. Give people some time to breathe between sequels.
Maybe not go the Valve route and take a lifetime between Half Life games, but a couple years off, taking some time to flesh out new ideas along the way, maybe get off the god-awful-from-the-beginning Templar storyline.
Let me miss you for a bit, Assassin's Creed. LET ME LOVE YOU AGAIN.
yup its so much nicer when you get a really improved game which is a couple of years apart from the last instalment. For me changes in the formula and gameplay should be improved and usually are if there is a gap between games.
What those varying scores tell me is that they finally changed the formula up a bit, and some people love it…. and some people either hate it legitimately or just don't like change.
I find IGN's scores have come back to being reasonable in the last few years, so I'm inclined to think 8-range might be appropriate.
As for me, I'll pick it up if the general public reports the bugs aren't as terrible.
Performance is significantly improved according to the digital foundry. They say it feels nothing like the bug ridden mess that was AC Unity.
because perhaps they bought out half the reviews, and then there budget ran out? just kidding, but that is rather odd that they'd be all over the place. I'll just have to judge it for myself
Nah. These days pretty much any kid or emotional gamer with a computer and the Internet can be a game reviewer so as long as they can write formed points.
I think those critics who are offended by the annually released series choose to take the harshest stance.
that would include all sensible consumers too
Yeah I watched a review on Youtube, and Ubisoft gave him/them the game like a week early. What it sounded like, is if he did not give the game a 'nice' review, they would never send him/them another review copy of future Ubisoft games.
Definitely weird though.
That kind of implied blackmail is present with every publisher and every outlet, though. It's one of the big problems with game journalism, that you are beholden to the publishers if you want the content that makes your site money in a timely fashion.
It's one of those games. I thought I would dislike it, I'm actually really enjoying it so far.
If the combat doesn't feel like walking through sand then it could be something I can play.
Welcome to The Order 1886 territory AC.
Meh, the small amount of gun play in The Order is more enjoyable the all the combat in all AC games. The combat is atrocious. The platforming on the other hand is quite good.
Jawknee if you like generic cover based shooting gallery gun play check out Eat Lead on PS3. Blows The Order out of the water