My opinions on ACB *SPOILERS*
So... I just finished the game! Took me 45 hours of total gameplay, but then I pretty much did everything but the flags.
I'm going to start at the end. No, I'm not talking about the 2012 part under the colosseum, I'm talking about sequence 8 and 9. I guess sequence 9 was OK, but there were some major flaws in it. It felt so fragmentet, like it was the first cool thing they came up with in the early development of the game, and that they just HAD to put it in there in some way. And why did Ezio have to climb that siege tower half way through? I know it's no biggie but it's just funny how they implemented it. And why couldn't the assassination of Cesare be an actual assassination? I would love to kill Cesare in that old-fasioned AC1 style, not like some hack'n'slash bossfight.
And sequence 8... Holy crap. That sequence had some serious pacing issues. Ezio just spawns all around the map, barging in on Cesares every secret meeting like some fearsome, awesome, divine figure? And another thing; while speaking to Leonardo by the end of the sequence he says that the apple is far too powerful to be kept by man... Is that why he used it to F***** kill tens of guards over the last couple of months? Gameplay wise the apple sucked big time anyway. It should've been alot more powerful. Perhaps it was because my armor was broken and I was low on health, but it took me ages to get all Cesare's guards dead. Why couldn't I use my other equipment, at all? At the end of AC2 Ezio has the apple in a pouch hanging from his belt, but now he HAS to hold it (looking really stupid running with it) ALL the time?
I really thought that the continuation of Ezio Auditore's story in ACB was one of the best written video game narratives up until sequence 8. The dialogue is great throughout the game. It wasn't pretentious, nor childish. Definately on par with AC1, and better than AC2.
What I feel that ACB lacks is, as many others here have pointed out, assassinations. What happened to the concept of the story revolving around the assassination of several historical figures? The assassinations in AC1 were some of the most thrilling experiences I've had in a video game, AC2 lost the thrilling part but still kept the concept of several assassinations in the main story, ACB lost it all completely. I know that it must be extremely hard to create a deep, and involving story line if you have to always stay true to the AC1 formula, but some interesting assassinations would have been nice. I know that there are lots of assassinations in the side objectives, borgia towers etc, but they don't really matter at all to the storyline. Not in the way that Abul Nu'quod, or William of Montferrat did in AC1. The tension you always feel in AC1, and the doubt that begins to grow inside you when you're getting closer to the end, is just not there anymore. Since Ezio seems to house almost unlimited power, given his physical treats and all those nifty gadgets he has, "infiltrating Castel Sant'angelo" feels like a walk in the park. There's just no build up or excitement. Here is were the game difficulty falls flat too. Since Ezio has soooo many tools at his disposal (assassin recruits, courtesans, thieves, crossbow, dual hiddenblades) there is always a tool to use in any given situation. Since the game almost always recommends (or requires) you to use a specific tool in a specific scenario, the player doesn't have to put any thought or planning into their actions, since the gameplay is so linear. Now, I know that the freedom in AC1 wasn't that grand either, but atleast AC1 gave us the freedom to think for ourselves, and use what little means we had in creative ways. The freedom in AC2 and ACB is just whether to call in assassin recruits to take out a guard post, or to just kill them yourself.
Now don't get me wrong, I absolutely loved both AC2 and ACB. I think that ACB improved upon every aspect of AC2, but I just don't know if this is the path I want assassin's creed to go down, even if the outcome is of great quality in it's own right.
Anyway, I'm quite sad that ACB is over. I can't wait to find out what happens next. But I am also quite sad, because of what has been lost since AC1. AC1 was one of the first games I played on a next gen system, and I was, and still am, amazed at how a video game can capture ones imagination and fascination in such a way.
Ubisoft, do not deviate too far from the original concept. AC1 is a masterpiece not to be neglected!
I agree a lot, you should check out my topic drifting away from AC1 if you have the time, you might agree with some of my points as well
AC:B has defnitely not lived up to my expectations, storyline wise. Gameplay wise it has surpassed my expectations.
And how u said taht when ur holding the Apple, you can't use equipment. I thought that was gay to. I'd wrather get an execution streak going wrather than blowing the guards up.
Sorry to be annoying but please try to avoid describing something that annoys you as 'gay'. Personally, it doesn't bother me that much and I know exactly what you mean by it, but it could offend some people. I know I sound really boring and annoying but I just want to prevent any arguments on the site 
Eloquently put, NoFlogging, and I couldn't agree with you more. Your main point is something that I hope Ubisoft read and take action on.
For most of ACI I was creeped out! I spent most of the game feeling like someone was going to leap out at me from behind my sofa. Honestly. ACII didn't retain much of that, alas, but made up for it with superb scripting, and a much more likeable and sympathetic main character. This is, of course, why AC:B feels so familiar, which is a double-edged sword (or blade, if you prefer) and makes it seem like extended DLC.
The dialogue and voice acting are superb (until the end, as you say) and AC remains my favourite game, but there are some real problems with AC:B that have been addressed already. I'll try to avoid repetition, but here are some: random de-synchronisations for no obvious reason; not enough assassinations for a game about an assassin; some terrible camera angles and a thoroughly annoying disorientation every time a building is renovated; the bloody horses are a pain in the arse (no pun intended, having only once, and never again, ridden one of the beasts in real life) - they come running straight past you or knock you flying, they can't move down the slightest incline that even a Shetland Pony in callipers could manage; in fact, the horses are so annoying that I hardly used them unless I had to and much preferred taking in the scenery on foot/rooftop; the map should appear instantly - it could be just me but it seems slower than in previous games.
These are minor niggles, but compound to make me want to throw my controller through the tele. Having said all of that, I thoroughly enjoyed AC:B.
One more point, which might be interesting: in the Piggyback Guide, there are interviews with the creative team of AC:B and it seems that in previous games the story was written prior to the missions. Apparently, 'the mission designers clearly didn't enjoy that approach. They believed it restricted their creativity too much. ACB's mission designers were given more freedom to develop detailed ideas before a detailed story bound them…' My humble opinion? Go back to the old way!
Apologies if this hijacks your thread somewhat, NoFlogging. It seemed silly to start a separate thread on the same vein and just to agree with you!
Oh, and Patrick - I agree about using the word 'gay' to describe something inferior; not so much because it's offensive in any way, just because it's immature and there are a zillion better adjectives to describe something that's balderdash. See what I did there? Arrogance - it is not becoming of a gentlemen of your otherwise impeccable stature and detracts from the great work and videos you create 
A lot of the problems we are having with Assassin's Creed games, seem to stem from choices and decisions on the developers' part, regarding Level Design..