Assassin's Creed 2 - Better on a computer or a console?

Online now: No visible users
Post Reply
AC2 is on sale on Steam right now for a pretty good price. Does anyone know how it is, control-wise, on a computer? Did you prefer it on a console, or with a console controller?
Alexander Supertramp this was uncalled for.
User avatar
I haven't played on a computer, but the controls work incredibly well on a console controller. AC2s console version is probably really inexpensive now as well.
user Stupid cockwomble
User avatar
I used to be a big fan of computer game playing, but after a lot of time on my 360, I find myself wishing there was a console port of STALKER.
arkayn Aaarrrggghhhh
User avatar
Too late now, back up to only 33% off.

I thought about it yesterday, but decided finances are too tight.
NightCougar of the Dawn +9650 postcount
User avatar
I picked it up. Aside from everyone complaining about the DRM it should have native 360 controller support. I'll get around to playing it one of these days, heh :D. Got console AS1 but when PC versions got announced it stopped me from buying another console one. Rather have full visuals than console limited ones. Not enough of a fan of the series to be diehard about it either.
mmaverick my steady systematic decline
User avatar
I got super wasted off with that game when I found out you couldn't actually complete the game without buying expansions. The add-on packs were for sequences in the middle of the game that you would just skip over if you didnt buy them.
Alexander Supertramp this was uncalled for.
User avatar
mmaverick wrote:
I got super wasted off with that game when I found out you couldn't actually complete the game without buying expansions. The add-on packs were for sequences in the middle of the game that you would just skip over if you didnt buy them.


They certainly aren't required to understand the story. If you don't have them they just try to access those memories and say something about how they're corrupted before jumping forward a few more years. It's really not an issue. I completed the game before any of the DLC came out and didn't think twice about it.
mmaverick my steady systematic decline
User avatar
Alexander Supertramp wrote:
mmaverick wrote:
I got super wasted off with that game when I found out you couldn't actually complete the game without buying expansions. The add-on packs were for sequences in the middle of the game that you would just skip over if you didnt buy them.


They certainly aren't required to understand the story. If you don't have them they just try to access those memories and say something about how they're corrupted before jumping forward a few more years. It's really not an issue. I completed the game before any of the DLC came out and didn't think twice about it.


I think it's a cheap and dirty way to try an get a couple extra bucks out of people.
Alexander Supertramp this was uncalled for.
User avatar
On some level sure, but it definitely isn't presented like there are missing pieces and to access them you should go get the DLC. I didn't even know until the DLC was released, and then I remembered the missing memories.

I'm not that mad because without the DLC there's 40+ hours of content. It's a huge game.

I think about price versus hours of enjoyment in video games quite a bit, and I've definitely been unhappy with some experiences, but not this one. It's a wonderful game, and it'd be a shame to miss it because of the DLC thing.
mmaverick my steady systematic decline
User avatar
Alexander Supertramp wrote:
On some level sure, but it definitely isn't presented like there are missing pieces and to access them you should go get the DLC. I didn't even know until the DLC was released, and then I remembered the missing memories.

I'm not that mad because without the DLC there's 40+ hours of content. It's a huge game.

I think about price versus hours of enjoyment in video games quite a bit, and I've definitely been unhappy with some experiences, but not this one. It's a wonderful game, and it'd be a shame to miss it because of the DLC thing.


I understand what your saying, but if I were to get the game I'd be backing down on my principles and that's all you really have in the world. There are enough games out there that don't do this that I think I'll be just fine.

To slightly underail the thread away from my little rant, I prefer to sit in my recliner and use a controller than to sit at my computer desk hunched over, so my vote it for console.
Alexander Supertramp this was uncalled for.
User avatar
mmaverick my steady systematic decline
User avatar
Sush you, I don't have a real keyboard. Be thankful I didn't type tiy'ew :p
mmaverick my steady systematic decline
User avatar
Also, I now feel shame.
Alexander Supertramp this was uncalled for.
User avatar
And I feel like you pooped in my thread! Both of you! ;)
mmaverick my steady systematic decline
User avatar
Hey now, I tried to rerail us!
Alexander Supertramp this was uncalled for.
User avatar
I'm going to go ahead and keep derailing.
mmaverick my steady systematic decline
User avatar
Rukh 330417291599
User avatar
mmaverick wrote:
There are enough games out there that don't do this that I think I'll be just fine.



honestly, i didn't get the dlc till i had finished the game, but i kinda dug that they found a way to add single player campaign content that didn't make it an alternate ending or epilogue.

that said, the game within a game nature of the series really allows for flexibility in timeline for storytelling.

as for attempting to reply to the OP, i played on a console, and i think the game really plays like a console game wherein dual analog sticks makes sense.
Subsequent topic  /  Preceding topic
Post Reply

Assassin's Creed 2 - Better on a computer or a console?