Recent reviews by LaurenXIV

I purchased this game before the release of Assassin's Creed: Odyssey. I had played a few other AC games before, (Rogue on the PS3 and AC1 on the PC before I bought AC2, I think) but they had never managed to immerse me or capture my attention (my playtime for AC1 is 3 hours...), and I wanted to learn more about the series before I jumped into Odyssey. I had heard that everyone loved Assassin's Creed II so I decided to buy it.

Unlike the other AC games I've played (with the exception of Odyssey) I was actually able to finish Assassin's Creed II, so this review is from a complete game experience.

For those that have never tried an AC game, the series is about a war between two groups of people, the Assassins and the Templars. The Assassins are 'the good guys' (well, they kill people, but...) and they also have a creed the series is named after. The creed doesn't make much sense and is pretty obscure, but it seems to work for them. The Templars on the other hand are 'the bad guys' (who also kill people). Both groups want to acquire artifacts from the 'First Civilization', who are an ancient precursor race that left objects with different powers around the world. To find out where they are, they use the Animus, which is a machine that can read genetic memories and let people experience the lives of their ancestors. They basically look into the past so they can find where the artifacts are.

The majority of Assassin's Creed II takes place in Italy during the 15th and 16th centuries. I'm no historian, so I'm just gonna mention that and move on to something else. Other parts of the game take place in the present, with both times having different protagonists. In the present, you play as Desmond Miles. He's a person, who lays down to use the Animus and has no real personality traits I've noticed that I can talk about. I'm actually quite happy that, by Odyssey, the modern day things are almost gone.

In the past, you play as someone called Ezio Auditore da Firenze. He's an assassin, and starts the game as... a bit of a jerk to be honest? The game is "his" story, and his evolution into an assassin. He shows some real personality growth by the end of the game. He isn't the most interesting video game protagonist ever, but he's far from the worst. I'd place him somewhere in the middle. I didn't mind playing as him, but I didn't really become connected to him either.

Assassin's Creed II takes you to a number of locations, including Florence, Forli, Venice, Tuscany and Monteriggioni. They are well-designed environments, and fun to traverse with the game's free running mechanics and horse riding. The game's color palate has a lot to be desired, with most of it just being brown, but the graphics, for 2011, are very good and it never felt like I was playing something that's now 8 years old.

While the free running in the game is good, the combat isn't especially great. It's not the worst, but while playing the game there were many times where blocking didn't seem to work despite pushing the right button and timing it correctly. I also didn't enjoy the broken armor mechanic - item durability makes me crazy in MMO games. AC2 was a little more tolerable, but simple health/health regeneration would have been more fun. There are a few good things to say about the combat, though, including the variety of weapon types you can use and the different gadgets you can unlock. Overall though, the combat could have been better - a little more fluid and interactive, maybe? I was never bored, exactly, but the combat was definitely quite weak, though there were a few fun moments... I mostly used unarmed combat for the final boss in the game, and lots of grabs which was pretty funny.

The story was mostly good. There's a general pattern with my review so far: the game is good, but not great. I can't say that I think it's the masterpiece, the "best of the series" that some people say it is, but it's good and enjoyable for sure. Many of the story missions were very fun and enjoyable, while some were a little dull. One thing I disliked about the story were the time jumps. At various points in the story, mostly after important events, the game would skip ahead and then you would return to Ezio's perspective a little later. For me, the time jumps felt to break apart the story and skipped over some important character growth that could have happened in that time. I understand why they made it that way, probably to have it fit into historical events better I guess, and sometimes time jumps can be good (like in Dragon Age 2) but they felt to be quite frequent in AC2.

In the game worlds, there are quite a few things you can do without playing the story missions. There are: races, where you race against an NPC through the city using free running; courier missions, where you run around the environment delivering things within a specific time limit; assassination contracts (self-explanatory); Assassin Tombs and Templar Hideouts; and strange events where you have to beat people up sometimes. Most of them work really well, especially the assassination contracts. Some, though, can feel a little... wrong. The races and some of the tombs/hideouts don't feel to work so well. During story missions and free roaming, the free running mechanics feel to work well. Sometimes, there are puzzles that rely on perfect timing and precision. Unfortunately, when in high-pressure situations like those, the controls can be a little imprecise and it can cause a lot of frustration. At least, it did for me.

So, in conclusion: Assassin's Creed 2 is an enjoyable game, but isn't 10/10 or the best of the AC series imo. That title, I think, belongs to AC Odyssey. Everything that I like about Assassin's Creed II is better by far in Odyssey, along with the inclusion of character choice, dialogue choices and romance options that make the game great.

I think AC2 is better than AC1 (well, judging by what I've played of AC1) and a good game, but from my non-nostalgic/new player point of view it has quite a lot of flaws. Overall, I'd give it a 5.8/10. I recommend playing it, but I think purchasing the game during a sale is the best idea. If I had a PC that could run AC Odyssey, I would buy that game instead as I personally find it more enjoyable than AC2.

Definitely recommended: 10/10.

(Ive also played the game for longer than Steam has recognized because I was in offline mode for some of the time. Id say Ive played for maybe 6x longer)


Jedi Academy is, in my opinion, what all other Star Wars games should be compared to. When I play KOTOR, KOTOR 2, SWTOR, Battlefront II (2005), Battlefront II (2017), the first thing I think is 'How great would this game be if it had gameplay like Jedi Academy?'

This game has some of the best, and most fun lightsaber combat from any Star Wars game I've ever played. It's fast paced, occasionally chaotic, and has some really nice animations. Unlike some of the more recent SW games, it gives players many options, not just of the type of lightsaber they want to use but has many movement animations and combat styles/moves to choose from. Want to run up a wall to backflip over someone's head? You can, and more. No Star Wars game I've played has given me the feeling of being an actual Jedi like this one.

Both in the singleplayer and multiplayer parts of the game, players can choose their race/gender and have some appearance options to customize their character with. They are given the ability to choose the color, hilt and type of their lightsaber (single, dual-wield or dual-bladed lightsabers). There are also different forms (fast, medium, strong) which can be learned through progressing through the game (or are available in multiplayer immediately), and players can toggle them to adapt to situations, as each form has strengths/weaknesses that can be taken advantage of.

The Force powers are what you can probably expect from a Star Wars game, Force Lightning, Force Grip, Lightsaber Throw, Heal, Sight, Speed. Those are just a few of what are available for characters to use. They are fun, and unlike some games the abilities can be used on the same character and scrolled through, rather than having pre-set or limited choices. In the singleplayer, powers can be upgraded, and in the multiplayer you can choose how many points players can allocate for abilities. You can have games where players only have a few points to spend, so everyone is relatively weak, or you can set the number higher where players can fully upgrade their powers.

Along with the lightsabers and force powers, Jedi Academy can be played as a FPS. I don't particularly like shooters as a general rule, but it gives more variety to the combat and remains a fun aspect of the game - even for me. In the singleplayer, once unlocked the guns can be selected before a mission as a kind of loadout system, whereas they work more as pickups in the multiplayer. There are quite a few options, ranging from bowcasters to E-11 blasters. They are fun to use, but not as much as the lightsabers, I think.

The singleplayer part of the game focuses on Jaden Korr, who, as mentioned before, you have some customization options for. For me, she was a female twi'lek. Jaden is a student at Luke Skywalker's Jedi Academy on Yavin IV, a few years after Return of the Jedi, and he/she is an apprentice of Kyle Katarn. Storytelling is, imo, not the best thing about the game, but the plot covers all the ground it needs to. The level design throughout the game is pretty inconsistent, some missions are amazing, whereas the smaller side-missions can be bland - but the gameplay balances out what would otherwise be one of the more disappointing aspects of the game, and fun will be had no matter what mission you're on. As a note: unlike some Star Wars games, you will be using a lightsaber from the start. It's definitely a positive aspect when compared to something like KOTOR where it takes time and progression through the story to build your own.

Jedi Academy was made in 2003, so this year it will be 15 years old. BUT the game, imo, has aged very well. The engine, graphics and gameplay still hold up by today's standards, it doesn't feel dated. The only time I've felt the age of the game is during the campaign: some of the cutscenes, and occasionally the voice acting will sound like they belong to the older generation of video games, but that's all.

Moving on to the multiplayer, I've only played against the AI, but you can play with other players too. There are multiple game modes, things like Free For All, Team FFA, Duel, Power Duel and Capture the Flag. I've spent more time playing solo multiplayer games than I have in the singleplayer, just because the gameplay is so much fun. The AI isn't the best, enemies will routinely throw themselves down endless chasms to their deaths and occasionally battles between AI enemies will just involve them backing away endlessly or jumping up and down in front of each other. Playing on the hardest difficulty would be my recommendation (as someone who nearly always plays video games on the easiest difficulty...), but you will have lots of fun. You can choose the models the bots use, kill limits, number of ability points that can be assigned, and customize your own character like you can in the SP part of the game. Force powers can be disabled completely, and you can disable non-lightsaber weapons. Between the different game modes and game settings you can change, even just playing against the AI like me will give you hours of fun.

Overall: 10/10, a must-have. Jedi Academy is one of the best Steam purchases I've ever made, and among my favorite games of all time. There are one or two flaws, but the game overcomes them and delivers an exciting Star Wars experience that I compare favorably with even the most recent games.

My actual feelings about the game would be 'mixed', if it was an option.

I feel quite bad posting a review where I don't recommend the game, because it's something I've had a lot of fun playing. It was a difficult choice to reach the conclusion, but I think it's the right one.



Things I like

The game gives you a lot of freedom. You can play however you want. You start with basically nothing and have the potential to be the ruler of your own kingdom. You can play as a bandit, stealing cattle and harassing farmers, declare your loyalty to a lord and be given land, or become a king or queen. There are lots of possibilities, lots of different things to do, and it definitely makes the game replayable.

I also like the combat. It's quite simple, but you have a lot of control over your attacks. I like using the mouse to give an attack/block direction (it takes a while to get used to, but fun once you do). You can choose what weapons you carry into battle, giving lots of different combinations to try, and can equip a horse for mounted combat.

Around you, the game world is always changing. People are declaring war and making peace on each other. There are some opportunities for you to cause conflict on a border to start a war between two kingdoms, or help friendly nobles in battles. Lands are invaded and castles besieged, so everything is evolving as you play. Your relationships with the lords (and, to some extent, ladies) are always progressing depending on your actions. Basically, the other lords and kings are like other players in the world with you, always winning/losing battles and looking to accomplish things. It means you can spend a loooonnngggg time playing as a single character, and means that the environments surrounding you are in a constant state of flux.


Things I dont like so much

This is where my decision to say that I don't recommend the game is explained.

Firstly, the game has some really bad pacing issues. As a point of reference, I play with most settings making the game as easy as possible (right now it's at a difficulty level of around 22% ). When I first started playing, even defeating one guard protecting a prison so I could free a lord was impossible. The combat was one of the most difficult things I've ever encountered in a video game. The enemies don't level with you at all (which, imo, they should do).

To fix the issue with the combat, I activated a few of the game's cheats to increase my level to a point where the game was playable. It fixed the issue, but as a recommendation: You will have a lot more fun using the cheats to increase your level instead of playing the game without them. I'm very happy the cheats exist, but without them you will probably be facing hours and hours of almost impossible combat instead of having fun (which is, after all, the reason to play video games :P )

Moving on from the pacing issues, I personally don't like the way the mods are installed for this game. Having different modules is a good idea, but not if you want to combine different mods which affect different things. But, having some mods available which offer complete overhauls for things is a very nice thing to have, so Ill say my thoughts are mixed for that aspect of the game.

Another thing I dislike about the game is the way women are treated. I am a woman, so I play as a woman, and from what I understand Warband is more challenging to play as a female. I understand that the game world is representative of the medieval period, but it's a completely fictional universe, with fictional kingdoms, fictional lords, and fictional kings. I can't really see any excuse to make the game more challenging for female players.

Not only is the game more challenging, but the lords/people will also make some pretty overtly sexist comments towards you. This is... wow. Again, I understand it's a medieval world BUT it's a fictional universe. No excuse to have it included in the game, and I really found it demoralizing. I think choosing a male or female character should only be an aesthetic choice, and have no impact on gameplay other than whether people use he/she. This isn't true for Warband, and it's one of the worst aspects of the game. There are no female lords, no females leading armies, and the only way to even have any female soldiers is to recruit a peasant woman and upgrade her. Meanwhile, the women that do exist in the game, the ladies who are wives/daughters etc of Lords, behave like property. In a game which gives the players so much freedom, a game which has so much potential, the attitudes towards women expressed in the game are really quite terrible, and really stick out.

On a similar topic, while you can get married in the game, you can't marry someone of the same gender. Again, fictional universe. In a game which you are supposed to be able to play in any way you want, you well... can't. Unless you download a mod like I have (which is awesome, btw). But still, it should have been included in the base game. It is a relatively minor change, but like the issue with sexism it would have made the game better, given more options to the player and expanded potential audiences. Or at least, the audience's experience with the game world. Again, I'd just like to point out that the game exists in a FICTIONAL setting. It doesn't have to be as awful as an actual medieval world, and the game would be better if that wasn't the case.


Overall

My view is: A fun game, with lots of potential, but deeply flawed. If the issues were corrected, it would be among my favorite games. :)