Sometimes it takes a developer a not-quite-failed game before they're able to realize the vision that they originally had - and that they managed to successfully convey to the marketing team, who successfully conveyed it to the rest of us. Fable wasn't bad, per se, it just wasn't the world we were being sold, nor the world that one feels like Molyneux and company were seeing in their heads. Hey, I know the feeling. At any given point in my life, whenever I sat down to draw something, the end product did not match the vision that was still there and quite clear in my mind. I could explain what I intended to draw to people, but I just couldn't manage it.

Assassin's Creed 2 is, as has been said by plenty, the game that its predecessor wanted to be, and the game that everyone expected when they purchased AC1. It is very nearly flawless, though that certainly does not correlate - in general, or in this specific case - to pegging 10 on the Fun O Meter. It is improved in virtually every regard, and for once, for once, thank you Ubisoft, it feels like the developers actually listened to the complaints of all the people who played AC1. There were many such people, and the complaints were numerous, but they've addressed nearly all of them.

So let's start with what they didn't address: combat. It is virtually unchanged. You have many more ways to assassinate people, which is awesome, and which are awesome, but actual combat is no better than it was. You have more weapons, yes, and you have more killing animations, yes, and you can disarm now, yes, but combat is still boring as fuck. You have two choices: A) smash the attack button until you kill the enemy, which could take ages, since they will likely block and counter you (ineffectively, at that), or B) stand around waiting for them to attack, at which point you counter or disarm them, and kill them. Either option is long-winded and painful as well as lacking in skill and fun and most of the other earmarks of video games. I understand that this is Assassin's Creed, not Warrior's Creed, or what have you, and you don't really want to encourage combat in the streets. But that can be done without making it as boring as sitting in a rooftop canopy, waiting for guards to stop caring about you.

While that is the main flaw that remains from the first game, the second does have a few oddities. My favorite is the absolutely nonsensical placement of posters. Killing guards and causing mayhem increases your notoriety, which you can thankfully now decrease by bribing criers who talk about you and tearing posters of your face off of the walls. Funnily enough, all of these posters are slapped up in the most ridiculous places. Places, one might say, that you and only you can reach. On second and third floor balconies, often with no door leading out onto them. Atop piles of brick and marble near walls. Not on main thoroughfares, not in squares, but, you know, places that the general populace will never, ever see. It's really more comical than frustrating. Look, guys, I know that you want lowering notoriety to involve some gameplay of sorts, but really, it's a small thing. Sometimes it's better to be a little bit boring than completely ridiculous.

AC2 also introduces "The Truth" mini-game, which is basically a conspiracy theory sort of thing that places clues in famous paintings and photographs, and trots out correspondence that implicates some of history's most famous figures as being Templars who derived their power from the artifact you spend the game hunting for. I thought it was great, really, and worked well within the game and with the game's plot. That said, trying to solve some of the later puzzles was more frustrating than fun, and hunting around on a picture with a magnifying glass, trying to find some tiny image is less than enjoyable. There were a few puzzles that I solved simply by brute force, clicking on every possible place on the picture, going through all practical painting combinations, and even when I had the solution, I didn't understand why it was the solution. It made no sense.

But those issues aside, Assassin's Creed 2 really is a lot of fun. The missions are far, far more varied with regards to the main plot. You have some escorts, some chases, some combat oriented missions, some assassinations, and even a few in which you make use of vehicles. The whole "arrive at a city, do three of the exact same quests, and then assassinate a guy" approach of the first game is completely gone, and I do not think anyone will miss it. Optional quests are also blessedly different. The design team had the wisdom to keep tasks that are, by their nature, repetitive - like beat-up and race missions - rare. There are one, maybe two per city, and there'll be hours of gaming between them. The optional missions that come in greater supply, namely assassinations, are thankfully almost as varied as the main missions. Some require tailing your targets until they reveal a larger group. Some require chases. Some require not being detected.

The characters and writing are also a solid step up in Assassin's Creed 2. The hero of the first game, Altair, was something of a mystery man whose only defining characteristic was that he was a raging asshole. Ezio, on the other hand, is a bit more sympathetic, and has far, far more personality. So do all of the characters in the game, really - and the supporting cast is markedly larger. So is the out-of-Animus cast, too. Shaun is a thoroughly convincing asshole, and Vidic does a good job of being a bad guy, even if it's all but absent from the title. The plot is a wee bit over the top, in ways, but if you let yourself buy into it, it's fairly intriguing.

The real reason you play the game, however, is for the cities, and for the way you interact with them: parkour free-climbing and free-running, and those aspects of the game are incredible. The controls for climbing, running, and jumping are smooth, easy, and intuitive, and the game is responsive. Granted, there were a number of moments - usually at the worst of times, such as when I was closing in on who I was pursuing - when the controls went wonky, and decided to make me jump left instead of up, or right of my target, sending me plunging to my death. For the most part, however, I felt like I was entirely in command of Ezio.

The cities - the two of note being Florence and Venice - are incredibly well rendered. Each feels unique and exactly as I would expect them to in the time period. Il Duomo towers above the tile roofs of Florence, as does Palazzo Vecchio. Canals wind their way through Venice, graced by gondolas. The Piazzo San Marco is present, and contains the clock tower, the basilica, and the Doge's palace. Venice is nearly half the game, if I had to guess, and I would also estimate that it has as much square footage as the real Venice does. It is huge, and despite this, never feels like it's full of copied-and-pasted buildings. I'm sure there is plenty of that going on behind the scenes, but Assassin's Creed 2 somehow makes it feel like every street is unique. It's almost worth buying for the cities alone.

Assassin's Creed 2 is a major, major improvement over the first. If there's as much of an improvement in the third title, I suspect it'll be the game of the year. AC2 still isn't even the greatest game of '09, but is a very good game that is entirely worth playing. If nothing else, I can tell you that it's the only platinum PS3 trophy I have besides the one for Resident Evil 5, which means it's in very good company indeed.