So AC doesn't require different approaches to countering enemies? Are the countering windows and options for lancers, light enemies and heavies the same as standard ones? You clearly didn't think this post through.
You're right, I didn't think it through because I certainly don't remember any of that crap. Why don't I remember? Because it sure didn't seem to change how I played 2 and Bro. It was still stand around as they attack me 1 by 1 and press counter. Who cares if the windows are different if I still play it the same way and do the same thing? So no, it dosen't require different approaches because the only thing I change is when I press Y. In Batman of course I just counter a regular thug, but if a knife dude comes the counter is a bit different, so maybe I counter him or a I jump and move around because I got tons of other dudes also attacking me. I jump over the knife dude to strike his back. A shield guy pops up so I cape him, get some punches t, but not too much because I have to actually counter the dudes attacking me. Oh no gun dud, drop everything go after him and so on and so on. The game isn't rocket science, but the game throws plenty of enemies and different kinds that require different things that the game becomes quick on your feet reflex thinking. None of that is any AC game I played. I do now remember enemies with different weapons in two, but again all that means is I press the counter button at a different time. I don't need to move around, get at the dudes back, there's no real urgency here, and so on. It dosen't really mean crap.
Plus this is even ignoring the stealth stalk system Batman has which is a whole mind game on it's own.
Fact: the Arkham series doesn't exist today as is if Assassin's Creed isn't around.
So that's how out of arguments we are now. We gotta argue that the series is good because it influenced other series? Ok. That dosen't mean its good. These other series have far eclipsed it.
If it's such a garbage series, why do so many games use it's blueprint for 70% of the game?
I sure hope you don't go around hating on CoD since you're using this type of argument. Yeah the entire parkour open world game thing is from AC. You're point? The series had some good ideas with the first game that instead of actually fixing it just became another open world game with shitty combat. I'm happy it brought those ideas out, but you know what? It's not that insane to think someone else wouldn't have figured out how to make an open world game where you jump around instead of drive around. I mean jesus there's Spiderman 2 on the PS2.
I mean this is a step above saying "oh it's good because it's popular" or "it's sells well so it must be good". None of this changes that it may or may not suck.
I guess it's because it's popular and accessible, therefore it's bad.
You're going to pull this crap on people defending Batman? Come on! The Batman games are not some hardcore Japanese mechanics driven Combo game crap. They are just as super accessible and popular as AC. We're hating on AC because it sucks, not because it's popular. Don't give me that crap.
God forbid something be functional and fluid, and appeal to a lot of people.
Man you must be out of it. No one said anything like this crap. Hell, I said the reason Batman is awesome is because it's functional and fluid. AC isn't fluid. It's wonky and boring. Thats why it sucks when it comes to combat. This has nothing to do with with being popular. I don't know if you know this, but were talking about two AAA western games here. Not a fucking game from Platinum or something.
That's the worst, right? Like nerd kryptonite.
No the worst is AC and arguments that make complete strawmans out of nothing.
