Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Euld]

Those are my choices... both fairly recent action games, but I can only choose one to buy myself for Christmas.  I really can't decide 

Any suggestions?  Both games have their complaints, like I worry there's not enough stabbyness in either game because Ass Creed has more mini games than before (so I heard) and Dishonored effectively punishes you for using the varied killing implements they give you.  Just not sure which one would end up being an expensive let down.

[Lectorog]

Dishonored is fun killing things. Run around and stab things and cut heads off and throw grenades and shoot people and slow time and teleport and stab people. Plot-wise things turn out worse, but it's really not that bad; I don't like the good ending much anyway. It's more like you're rewarded for having a childish sense of honor.

I've not played AC3, but all considered I'd go with Dishonored. It has actual assassination and planning and good combat, vs. AC's two options: run across rooftops and kill archers/gunmen, or run on the ground and kill footsoldiers/cavalry. And while I certainly wouldn't call Dishonored's combat system deep, it's better than the general Assassin's Creed strategy of blocking until you can counter. And Dishonored has no minigames; though it also has no multiplayer, if you're into that sort of thing.

[stabbymcstabstab]

AC 3 Is pretty fun I had for a week now, There are a lot of mini games but your not forced to do any except once but it never goes pass mid game. weapons are a little buggy after Main missions but that is  easily fixed. prequels a little long but fun, and combat is a little awkward fora while but it gets a lot more fluid then AC2 once you get use to it. also there is no just slaughtering guards anymore a group larger the five militia is very freaking dangerous if you don have back up.

[Gamerboy4life]

I actually really liked Dishonored.

Assassin's Creed III is good, but buggy, and I feel they ruined many things that didn't need fixing from previous games, and added a bunch of worthless stuff. It's akin to removing the spokes from a bike's tire, and adding a bunch of pink tassels on the handlebars, it doesn't matter how pretty the game is, the core mechanic is missing, imho.

Dishonored is a nice little gem, you can try doing the pacifist route, but that's tough without playing it through at least once. It doesn't "Punish" for the more violent actions either, it just makes more plague victims appear, and a general darker looking city.

I suggest Dishonored, and I've played both.

[Facekillz058]

I'll throw my support, and my 'support' behind Dishonored.
For pretty much everyone else's reasons.

[Lectorog]

Dishonored is a nice little gem, you can try doing the pacifist route, but that's tough without playing it through at least once. It doesn't "Punish" for the more violent actions either, it just makes more plague victims appear, and a general darker looking city.

Pacifist is almost easier than combat if you're knocking people out. Full stealth is the hard route (though perhaps that's what you mean by pacifist).
"Chaos level" as they call it leads to more plague victims, more rats, and slightly more unpleasant levels. The only things it significantly changes are the last level and its end.

[Baijiu]

I dunno. I'm more into open-world games, and not really into stealth so I liked AC3 better (the stealth parts of AC3 are actually the worst part of the game). Dishonoured's combat is fluid, the storyline is great, but in the end each mission takes place on a level with a few set routes and I feel trapped.

[hemmingjay]

Dishonored was a better game but AC3 is longer.

I would probably go with Dishonored 7 out of 10 times.

[nenjin]

I' 've heard the intro for AC3 is insultingly long. I like the games but that is reason enough for me to wait for it to go on sale. Of course I am waiting for Dishonored to do the same. But of the two, I would likely try Dishonored first.

[Rakonas]

I' 've heard the intro for AC3 is insultingly long. I like the games but that is reason enough for me to wait for it to go on sale. Of course I am waiting for Dishonored to do the same. But of the two, I would likely try Dishonored first.

The intro is actually quite good, it's just a bit confusing at first since you're not playing the character you heard the game was supposed to be about, but when you roll with it it's quite fun.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

I' 've heard the intro for AC3 is insultingly long. I like the games but that is reason enough for me to wait for it to go on sale. Of course I am waiting for Dishonored to do the same. But of the two, I would likely try Dishonored first.

Spoiler: Serious Spoiler (click to show/hide)

It's three out of twelve sequences before you're the main character. Three more before he's fully grown and assassinating. I don't mind it, though. The last six sequences are all extremely long and there are a myriad of side missions to partake.

And the ship missions are everything Sid Mier's Pirates should have been and more.

Also, the story is really good. Connor is as different from Ezio as Ezio was from Altair. They really manage to convey how all the playable characters are from different eras and cultures but also all follow the doctrine of the Assassins.

I'd go with AC3.

[0x517A5D]

For me, it was no contest.  One, the teasers for Dishonored got me interested in the world they built, and two, I prefer not to give money to Ubisoft.

[Ivefan]

Dishonoured.
I liked and played the previous AC games but AC3 just came short somehow and i lost interest halfway through.

[Virtz]

also there is no just slaughtering guards anymore a group larger the five militia is very freaking dangerous if you don have back up.

I went into the centre of Boston and slaughtered over 50 infinitely respawning soldiers single-handedly. The combat in AC3 is easy mode.

I'd go with Dishonoured. While the story and length leave much to be desired, at least you get good gameplay with Thief vibes, and the setting is pretty original and interesting. And there's supposed to be DLC coming that'll expand upon the story.

AC3 to me was really boring. Connor is a total cretin. He doesn't know what he's doing and he ends up getting caught in obvious traps gameplay suggests he should be able to easily escape like twice. The story is just not interesting. The cinematics are drawn out and boring, and there's a lot of them. And there's these awful sequences where you leave a cutscene only to walk a few paces with some dialogue going on just to go into another cutscene (including parts where you're following a fucking old guy with a cane). Like Jesus Christ, these are parts a movie or even a (decent) book would abstract out, because they're uneventful and most often nothing new is learned. It just feels like horrible filler. Oddly enough, in this part, it's Desmond's story parts that hold any interest. The fact that this time that wooden rod is more interesting than the historical ancestor really says something.

I guess there's the factor of whether you want an action or stealth game more. AC3 definitely feels more like action to me, although it's got quite a few sections where detection is instant game over for whatever reason. I guess when it's not force-feeding you the writing it's overly proud of, it can be an action-packed, albeit easy game. Dishonoured you have to stealth through to get the good ending. I guess you don't have to get the good ending, but I never played it that way. I sort of suspect the game gets even shorter then. So I'd say Dishonoured is the better game, just not sure if it's what you're looking for.

[Viken]

Having played and beat both of them, three times for Dishonored; I'd still say the coin is up in the air.  I personally would really enjoy real DLC for Dishonored, just to make it longer; but there is no real reason not to love it for how it is, especially sense it got patched. 

AC3 is still rather new, and still rather buggy, even with the newest updates.  Its even a bit worse on the PC, if you're using keyboard and mouse controls.  Playable, but alot harder than the previous games, and combat is actually a challenge for once, as is the stealth elements.  I mainly played AC3 for the storyline, but I greatly enjoyed the naval combat, although there's not much story there besides meta-game mechanics that get unlocked.  It isn't overly realistic, sadly, and some of the mini-games are bloody annoying.

My personal opinion though is to get both, if you can.  There's really no way to compare the two, as not e veryone has the same preferences. Good luck!