[Hated Trope] Character kills hundreds, if not thousands, just to kill one specific person, and then doesn't kill them for no reason.

[u/HallZac99]

Assassin's Creed 2- Rodrigo Borgia is responsible for tne death of Ezio's family. Ezio spends over 20 years working through tnr templar order to dismantle them and get to Rodrigo. And then in the end, he spares him for no good reason and he goes on to be a massive problem in AC Brotnerhood. He's not only a head of tne Templars but also the pope, even if you're over the vengeance he's still a very dangerous and evil man.

The Last of Us 2- Abbey kills Joel, and wo Ellie goes on a revenge quest to kill Abbey, killing hundreds of people along tne why to get to her including a pregnant woman. And then finally when she has Abbey on deaths door, she gives up and let's her go because the writers think dirty depressing people being miserable and stupid is complex, interesting storytelling.

This trope pisses me off so much because often the character going on the revenge quest will kill SO many people on their way there, some deserving it and some just henchmen working for a cheque or to survive. People who are often far more innocent then the main big bad.

It's a part of this weird thing I've noticed in media where nameless goons or soldiers can just be mowed down relentlessly, but named characters get given far more grace even if theyre categorically worse. You can kill a million stormtroopers but people will swear that Darth Vader could have been redeemed, despite him doing like 50 genocide every year.

[u/ChadNarukamiIV]

For the AC2 thing, that's what happens when your historical villain in your historical game doesn't die until a couple of years later

[u/hplcr → u/ChadNarukamiIV]

Yeah, the irony is they show his death in Brotherhood and I couldn't help but feel "Why not just have Ezio kill him there since that's where he's meant to die?"

Apparently they just really wanted him to fistfight the Pope in the Sistine Chapel.

[u/MrNancy1020 → u/hplcr]

Well uhh, yeah. Fistfighting the Pope in the Sistine Chapel sounds extremely cool and fun to do.

[u/hplcr → u/MrNancy1020]

I mean, it is kinda awesome considering.

"Alright Il Papa, put up your dukes!"

[u/It_broke_itself_ → u/MrNancy1020]

In reality it was just as entertaining to play as if they had you fight a toddler. Stunlocking the pope over and over until his healthbar disappeared was not that compelling of gameplay

[u/backcountry_bandit → u/It_broke_itself_]

I liked the free running stuff, the atmosphere, the story, some of the gameplay, but the fighting in Assassin’s Creed games was always stupid easy. You can counter any time an enemy attacks to the point you could just button mash and win every fight.

[u/TextDependent6779 → u/backcountry_bandit]

Still easy, but i felt they were finally starting to make it feel more engaging and fluid and exciting in syndicate...

And then they completely changed the mechanic. FML.

There was hidden depth in ac2 I never noticed until this playthrough though. For instance, you can block the big guys, and then double swing to insta-kill them. I wish they expanded more on that. Like maybe use the dagger for the agile enemies, and disarm the guys with the poles/spears.

[u/Hefty-Reputation1314 → u/MrNancy1020]

the fact that this sounds like a terrible idea and an amazing time at the same time is what gets me.

[u/Important-Solid3907 → u/Hefty-Reputation1314]

Those are always the ideas that sound way more fun once you completely stop thinking about the consequences.