I’ve finally completed the story of Assassin’s Creed, even though I’ve had the game since Christmas. However, I can tell you that it is not easy trying to complete a game when you only return home about once a month, and have studies to attend to. I only completed Uncharted: Drake’s Fortune itself about a week ago.
Yet what I want to explore is the issue of using walkthroughs, and to what degree. In recent memory, I have only used walkthroughs very rarely. Generally I’ll only turn to a walkthrough to get past a bit in a game which has actually stopped me progressing any further. After I get past a tricky bit, I’ll then discard the walkthrough and continue to enjoy the game at my own pace, and deal with the challenges ahead myself. I’m sure that most people would agree with me in this respect.
However, a much more controversial use of the walkthrough in my opinion is finding all certain extras in order to complete the game “100%”. In Uncharted, there’s 60 treasures to find and I admit that I have used a walkthrough to find a few after completing the main game the first time round. The way I view Uncharted is that the levels are linear, and that entails being able to enjoy the story and gameplay once more, whilst being able to grab the extra treasures. If you’ve missed a treasure in Uncharted you’ll have to start that particular chapter again. However Assassin’s Creed is more of an open, free-roaming world in which you can go back to any city and look around for flags or Templars for as long as you want. I am therefore more reluctant to use a walkthrough in this case. I find a particular thrill in finding a Templar, hidden in a remote place and adding him to my tally.
That brings me to the case in point, as I see it: such items, be they flags, treasures, coins etc- are put there by the developers for the skilled or explorative gamer. Not for a lazy gamer to simply collect by reading a walkthrough, else why bother? I’m intrigued to hear any other voices or viewpoints on this matter.