PDA

View Full Version : A late feedback on UNITY. After your "sorry" video.



Gabrihel
05-13-2015, 11:47 AM
To Ubisoft:
The french revolution was your biggest opportunity, in every possible sense, for an assassin's creed setting, since AC2, and forever.
The "love" screenplay instead of an all out Revolution (Assassins) Vs Ancien Régime (Templars) was shocking for me.

Unity 5 W ??? In the end it's all justified with "i love that (stupid) girl".

Your partisan approach to history, so soiled by a vision of the "political correct" that today is only possible due to events which were not politically correct then but necessary, failed to explain THE turning point of all modern history.
All the achievements on civil rights, on the principle of equality, in positive law, democracy start at that point in time.
Who is your target? Eight years childrens?
Life is complex. A hero can be both a monster. Some people change the course of history forever and for all. And those people must be explained and remembered properly. Everyone must understand the debt we all have with those people.
So instead of TRYING of explaining why constitutional right is a fundamental for every human being, let's show how Robespierre had his jaw broken in your fictional history!
So instead of showing the fear of the ruling class for those equality ideals, wich led to Congress of Vienna and 150 more years of repression both ideological and physical of everyone who tried to defend those ideas, let's have a romantic baloon escape over Paris! Who cares about history, we are in love!

Hypocrisy. Ignorance. Clueless franchise milking.

"Nothing is True... Everything is Permited" is really your motto.

I can add things about the totally missing meta-story, the funny animus time travel (nazi in paris of course), and the quick appearance of Napoleon, wich was your second greatest wasted opportunity.
I suspect you will be not interested.

I would love to talk with the guys who decide the games screenplay.
Of course, i am a dreamer.
Surely there is a lot of work behind those games, but when the final product comes in your hand, all you could say is "what where they thinking?"

strigoi1958
05-13-2015, 12:45 PM
You are aware it is just a game aren't you ? Are you going to complain to Bethesda that there were no zombies during the war so Wolfenstein should be removed from sale ? sniper elite 2 Hitler assassination ?... I read a few books and none mention hitler being assassinated.

This is just a game... it can be based on bits and pieces of history or it can be set in the future, it's called poetic licence it allows people to alter things to their own way... and NO you cannot wait until we reach the date the future game is set and complain to the game company they predicted the future wrongly...

Turn off your pc and step outside... ;) only come back once you realise that in ALL games Nothing is true and Everything is permitted

spy4u
05-13-2015, 02:12 PM
Strigoi you didn't get Gabrihels point.

I fully agree with him.

AC Unity was nice, never experienced such a great virtual city.
But there were so many missed opportunities in the storyline, it could have been an epic game.

Gabrihel
05-13-2015, 02:42 PM
Strigoi you didn't get Gabrihels point.



Thank you, i was already casting a fire spell to kill the troll.

Hey ubisoft, where are you from?
It should be france or canada, but i bet the people behind this games are from the english culture area.

The only western culture in the world who doesn't recognise the importance of the french revolution is anglosaxon.
It's the same culture who keep telling us world war 2 was won by England and United States.
And now you want to tell the story of the industrial working class?

strigoi1958
05-13-2015, 11:05 PM
If you want history go to the documentary channel... I hope you didn't waste too much time making up that spy4u bogus account just to try to validate your point ;) Trolls are people who come to forums to try to argue irrelevant points ... such as games not being historically correct.. and bringing up world war 2... there is a theory that works out how long it takes for forum trolls to get to any WW2 reference and you have already beaten that. But now you have started to flame me... this pointless thread can be locked. :D

Gabrihel
05-14-2015, 12:17 AM
But yes, the point is the missed opportunity.

Hundreds of hours of work and a huge budget to recreate 1789 Paris, and not taking time to explain why THAT place in THAT moment is the MOST important moment in our ( of everyone) history.

Never before you had a setting like this. Palestine, Italy, Turkey and America were picturesque but irrelevant.

Since you are already developing AC 2016 e AC 2017, do you think you will have a similar chance in the future?

Where, in the world and time, the concept of freedom and order will collide in this way?

You also have lost the opportunity to develop what would have happened under Napoleon, where the heralds of freedom (the assassins) become the new oppressors and this time would be up to the Templars plotting in the shadows to destroy the world order of Napoleon.

The assassin's elites would have been tearead apart by his self-incoronation just like Beethoven when withdrew his dedication of the third symphony to Napoleon, meanwhile the regualr assassin's would finally found as veterans of the Napoleonic army, social recognition, power and all its consequences.

And what about a nation that "exports with war" ideals, even if right, to other peoples?
How the assassins of those countries would react?

There was so much wonderful material to work with and everything shuts down in a story of love between two people with emotional and communication disorders.

The question is: why spend time, money and work on so many details, if the product is intended for an audience of (mentally) children or teenagers?

strigoi1958
05-14-2015, 01:22 AM
It is only a missed opportunity if they were aiming at historical accuracy... the idea is to make a game and put in some references and links and well known characters... just to make it more interesting. The characters and settings, along with the plot bring something extra to the game but... the game is about Assassins in that time and is focused on the assassins not the period.

It is an interesting time and although I am English, my ancestry goes back to a small town in the Dijon district (the town has my surname) and AC games interest me because as I am a freemason (I guess that makes me a Templar) the subtle hints are great.

The audience or gamers do not have the mentality of children in fact I'm often quite stunned how knowledgeable they are on this forum... not just a wealth of assassin creed history from games and books but many are technically astute.

You should really go to the console section... there are some good people there who would agree or discuss historical points with you... but please don't insult them with remarks about mentality

TheDank_Zone
05-14-2015, 04:31 AM
To Ubisoft:
The french revolution was your biggest opportunity, in every possible sense, for an assassin's creed setting, since AC2, and forever.
The "love" screenplay instead of an all out Revolution (Assassins) Vs Ancien Régime (Templars) was shocking for me.

Unity 5 W ??? In the end it's all justified with "i love that (stupid) girl".

Your partisan approach to history, so soiled by a vision of the "political correct" that today is only possible due to events which were not politically correct then but necessary, failed to explain THE turning point of all modern history.
All the achievements on civil rights, on the principle of equality, in positive law, democracy start at that point in time.
Who is your target? Eight years childrens?
Life is complex. A hero can be both a monster. Some people change the course of history forever and for all. And those people must be explained and remembered properly. Everyone must understand the debt we all have with those people.
So instead of TRYING of explaining why constitutional right is a fundamental for every human being, let's show how Robespierre had his jaw broken in your fictional history!
So instead of showing the fear of the ruling class for those equality ideals, wich led to Congress of Vienna and 150 more years of repression both ideological and physical of everyone who tried to defend those ideas, let's have a romantic baloon escape over Paris! Who cares about history, we are in love!

Hypocrisy. Ignorance. Clueless franchise milking.

"Nothing is True... Everything is Permited" is really your motto.

I can add things about the totally missing meta-story, the funny animus time travel (nazi in paris of course), and the quick appearance of Napoleon, wich was your second greatest wasted opportunity.
I suspect you will be not interested.

I would love to talk with the guys who decide the games screenplay.
Of course, i am a dreamer.
Surely there is a lot of work behind those games, but when the final product comes in your hand, all you could say is "what where they thinking?"

Alright, now this is an interesting post! I must study some more on exactly what was going on during the French Revolution - I see here by this post I am missing some things!

mercuryspooning
05-14-2015, 07:48 AM
Strigoi, I don't think you're being entirely fair to the original post, and rather, you're letting your own opinions get in the way of providing a reflective response to what is a valid criticism - a criticism of the story line.

Let me start by saying that I love Unity. I'm playing it again for the second time round and I am absolutely enamored with the world Ubisoft have created. It is unique, immersive, visually stunning, and to a large extent, it is historically accurate. That is perhaps one of the things I love the most about this game - the authenticity of the world I get to explore. Importantly, this isn't new with Unity, and indeed, all of the AC titles have gone to enormous lengths to study the various periods and represent them as accurately as possible - artistic license notwithstanding. For Unity, in fact, "Ubisoft announced that they had enlisted the help of academic historians such as Laurent Turcot, professor at Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières for daily life of 18th-century Paris and Jean Clement Martin professor at the Sorbonne, to revise the script" (http://www.fastcocreate.com/3037212/the-fun-violent-history-lesson-inside-assassins-creed-unity).

That should be very obvious to a student of history such as yourself. Ubi include more than just a few 'references and links to well known characters'. One of AC greatest strengths is that it places the player at the centre of a pivotal moment in history and cleverly allows them to play a central role in historical events. Before ACIV, I knew very little about pirates. But, intrigued by the setting, I threw myself into the history and to my surprise, I found that Ubi's depiction of Hornigold, Thatch, Bonny, and Vane were all strikingly in accordance with what we know of these figures.

When I heard that Unity would be set in the French revolution, I could hardly contain myself.
It is worth mentioning that I am a political scientist. A large part of political science (depending on specialty) is understanding political philosophy, political economy, geopolitics, sociology, and history.

As the OP started, the French revolution was the crucible in which our modern ideas of egality, liberty, and democracy were born. (Arno even articulates the catch-call of the revolution "Liberté, égalité, fraternité", as if Ubi is saying 'we are aware of the importance of this concept but let's get back to this uninspired love story'). This moment in history represents a fundamental shift not just in the economy but in the collective psychology of Western civilisation. Prior to this, the vast majority of people actually believed in the ascendancy of the aristocracy. They genuinely believed that they were not entitled to inalienable basic human rights. The Declaration of the Rights of the Man and of the Citizen is perhaps the most fundamental document in the development of human rights - it is the document that all subsequent constitutions and bill of rights are predicated on, including the US and the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights. It was unprecedented and it was only possible with the French revolution - A period that lasted little more than ten years.

The magnitude of such a momentous point in time cannot be understated but evidently, it was.

My biggest criticism of Unity, in fact, my only criticism, is the story line. A cliche of love and revenge is not owing to artistic license, it is owing to banal story-telling. The revolution was barely a backdrop to the far more trivial interactions of these star-crossed lovers. King Louis XVI barely makes an appearance. If I recall correctly, Marie Antoinette makes no appearance. The political machinations leading to their beheading were profound and would have provided an exceptional opportunity for story telling.

I can even imagine that a love story would have worked wonderfully if it had even a little bit to do with the overthrow of the aristocracy. Perhaps Elise could have supported the Crown, perhaps she could have been Austrian and more interested in an imperial conquest. If Arno's motivations toward the revolution had been more about a genuine belief in the freedom of the people, in democracy, I can imagine that would have made for one hell of a love story if it turned out the Elise's interests were contrary to his, that in the end, Arno has to ensure her execution via the guillotine. Again, perhaps instead of the 'they killed my father' nonsense, Arno was forced to kill his own father to prevent the aristocracy from regaining their control. The possibilities are endless.

But alas, as the OP said, the opportunities were completely wasted.
Interestingly, one of the developers, Durand I think, made a comment that very much supports the view of the OP that Ubi wanted to remain as neutral as possible. That seems like a stupid decision in this case. They (quite rightly) didn't feel the need to remain non-partisan when developing the anti-slavery story line of Freedom Cry. Unity should have been no different. This is just as much about basic human rights. I don't think the OP was trying to suggest that the people that play this game are children. Quite the opposite - the OP appears to be saying that the people that play these games are adults and are capable of understanding that history has shades of grey and if we can handle being anti-slavery, we can probably handle being pro-republic (if not pro-republic, then at least pro-human rights)

"If you want history, go to the documentary channel" is a complete non-sequitur. I want history combined with an enchanting story, and thus, I read Charles ****ens, I watch the (admittedly, not so great) Tudors, I enjoy countless movies about historical figures in historical settings, including ones like Marie Antoinette, that take a huge artistic license to give us a charming tale of a disinterested girl caught up in events beyond her control, and yes, I play Assassin's Creed.

Please do not dismiss this type of criticism as not constructive, as not valid because it does not reinforce your own opinions about the game. Criticism of the story line in this way is very much within the bounds of legitimate feedback. I fail to see how it could be anything but. If the OP or myself criticised the game because it didn't have zombie, or vampires, or magic, then I would be forced to agree that you have a point. But highlighting that Unity was a wasted opportunity for a truly moving story, is right on the money.

Finally, the Helix rifts thing does feel a little out of place but I understand it is included within the context of this being a simulation of a genetic memory. From the very first game, I never much enjoyed this aspect of the series but hey, it's there and it's not that bad. Any criticism of this has to take into account the history of this series. If you don't enjoy the whole 'genetic memory' aspect, then that is fair enough I feel (perhaps I'm biased). But I don't think it is reasonable to expect to be gone entirely. It is, after all, a key feature of the story line from the very beginning.

Please don't take any of this as an attack on you Strigoi - I read your posts and you seem like a nice guy. For the most part, I agree with most of the things you post but I was a little surprised to find your response to this to be so close minded, and dare I say it, objectively wrong. Moreover, this is an aspect about Unity that I've been meaning to do a post about for some time - this thread was just the catalyst to provide some input.

mercuryspooning
05-14-2015, 08:17 AM
Oh and I feel I should remind everyone of this beautiful but slightly misleading cinematic trailer that absolutely screams of a focus on the brutal injustices of the aristocracy and the liberation of the common people. Even the title 'Unity' suggests a focus on Liberté, égalité, fraternité:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=208&v=hkliyBSGGXE

strigoi1958
05-14-2015, 01:03 PM
I have no problem with anything you say and your points are all valid (which is why I suggested he/she goes to the console section as there are more discussions there).

I do object to his incendiary words such as "Hypocrisy. Ignorance. Clueless franchise milking." and inferring AC fans have a childish mentality. Those are the words of someone acting up because they have not got their own way.

Films often have advisers but it doesn't mean they are limited entirely to fact.

The game makers simply made a game, albeit a love story in that period and as such it does not have to follow history to the letter.... that may irk a few historians but it is... as I said before just a game and aimed at the average gamer not the average history fan.

The game has great settings, the extremes between opulence and poverty is vast and the historical characters and buildings add enormously to the game but for me... as enhancing as the references make the game... it was enough without it starting to become more than just a game.

Gabrihel
05-14-2015, 04:21 PM
I have no problem with anything you say and your points are all valid (which is why I suggested he/she goes to the console section as there are more discussions there).

I do object to his incendiary words such as "Hypocrisy. Ignorance. Clueless franchise milking." and inferring AC fans have a childish mentality. Those are the words of someone acting up because they have not got their own way.

Films often have advisers but it doesn't mean they are limited entirely to fact.

The game makers simply made a game, albeit a love story in that period and as such it does not have to follow history to the letter.... that may irk a few historians but it is... as I said before just a game and aimed at the average gamer not the average history fan.

The game has great settings, the extremes between opulence and poverty is vast and the historical characters and buildings add enormously to the game but for me... as enhancing as the references make the game... it was enough without it starting to become more than just a game.


First thing is, thanks mercuryspooning for your post. Really.


Strigoi, let me explain myself better.
I'm sorry if my english is wonky but every sentence must be reduced from the size of a house to one of a box to fit this language and during the process much is lost. When i was a teenager i though this to be a superior language due to the small size of its grammar. Now I see the tradeoff.

First of all: i am a HUGE Assassin's Creed Fan. Even if i had a crush on Templar Knights when i was young, i fell in love with AC 2 and AC:Brotherhood in a way few games did.
I still find the real (historical) Templars and their vision very charming, but their virtual enemies (assassin's) are just too amazing.

The following games where just more and more boring.
But they continued to insist over the concept of freedom.

Ordinary (ignorant?) people when use this word conceives exactly the opposite of its true meaning. The point of freedom is NOT what you, based on your skill can do, but what you decide YOU CAN'T do in order to live peacefully along other people. To be more clear, a man alone in a desert is not FREE, he's just alone.

We live under the USA propaganda everday, where this word is used to justify everything, so a deeper reflection on the matter, as the AC series seemed to offer was very welcome.
This and hidden baldes, and my brain and wallet was gone. :D

I am a PC gamer, so since there was not a general discussion area i come here in the PC forum section.
Long live the glorious master race! Disperse and tremble filthy console peasant! :p

Now to the topic. Games is just another form of media. Just like a book, a song or movie.
Personally i find games to be the DEFINITVE form of media, but it's still in it's early ages.

But if you reach the budget, the workforce and the audience of the AC series you can bring much more to people than just the fun of stabbing someone over, and over, and over.

This game is always deeply embedded in a historical context, and this is a great strength for the series. Even if based on a fictional story, this game could bring people to reflect on the meaning of their past, on the reality of their present, and on the possibilities about their future both as individual and as a society.

Before telling me i am seeing too much in a game, may i rememeber you that AC2 and AC:B made you kill a POPE? In my stupid country (Italy here btw) a game like this could have made the church gone mad, if they weren't so digital divided as, thank's to god :p:p:p , they still are. Surely the audience for that games were not chatholic childern.

Just think what could mean going in the middle east and tell muslism masses that their religiuos leaders do not really speak to god at night, but are social climbers hungry for power and money.

But debating about the role of religion over society is just old and surpassed. Even if the problem is and will remain actual for years to come, everything about the matter was said. Problem solved.
Here a fast guide: http://theoatmeal.com/comics/religion

INSTEAD the ideals and ideas of the french revolution are totally actual. They are still very present in everyone life today, and discussion on the matter is far by being closed.
We need everyone to understand and partecipate to the debate. The anglosaxon culture still fears part of those ideas and branded the french revolution with stigma like tyrrany and terror.
The point is that real freedom can't exist without substantial equality. I don't know if this is the right english term. The concept is that a real democratic society can't permit to someone to be far more rich or powerful than someone else. In the western world this the opposite case. The rest of the planet is in much worse condition so they can't help the debate.

I can expand this area this if you want.


Now as for the creation of every media, you must decide the target level of your audience.

This page may help a bit.
http://www.oclc.org/research/activities/audience.html?urlm=159729

Basically, more you lower your audience score, more pepole can enjoy the product, and more you sell. But as you lower your audience score you will lower the tone and level things you can say. This is why half or more of the total media production is about love.

Hollywood action and love movies usually are targeted to an audience of an 8 years child. Or the chinese market in other words. I am not kiddind nor being ironic here.

Let alone than in games usually we can cut our enemy head in two, but we can't see two adults making love (just ask yourself what is more sick), tell me what do you think AC: Unity target audience was?

strigoi1958
05-14-2015, 11:34 PM
Salve ! Sorry but my Italian is limited to what Latin I learned 40 years ago.

Italiano ? well that explains your enjoyment of the Ezio trilogy.... Using that as an example... The settings and cities, the buildings were incredible and really gave the games a feeling of immersion. The buildings were so good it was like I had visited Italy but there was no real history in the games but... they were all fantastic (even AC2 which made me fuori di testa).

Those games, like Unity, are designed to maximise profit and target the widest market possible... which means targeting young people and people even older than me ( I'm cinquantasei).

Trying to find a balance is very difficult... it needs to be enjoyable and fun with a good setting and story but keeping too close to history may lose a big part of the audience... games for me are a way to escape real life and too much reference might make it seem more like education than entertainment.

At my age and with over 30 years of gaming I do not consider myself an average gamer....although there are many of us gamers in the Autunno of life... I see the average gamer between 13 and 33 and many with university degrees (I have played Unity co-op with a lot of very intelligent people from all over the world.. from Aviation engineers, Electronic engineers, MA of Art, Historians, people with degrees in politics, philosophy and economics) but perhaps they too see games as an enjoyable escape and not an opportunity to relive history. I do not know.

So regardless of how the game has its tone set (or lowered if you prefer) the average gamer to my knowledge is a highly intelligent person and I might add a lot are female (who are better assassins than I am ;)).

Remember laboris gloria Ludi not vice versa


scusate il mio povero italiano

similarly
05-15-2015, 02:32 AM
I believe that one of the reasons they DIDN'T try for more historical accuracy is that many people still romanticize the French revolution. They forget how murderous the mob was, how murderous the tribunal was. Unity touched on these aspects, but probably didn't go deeper because many people would rather believe the myth than history.

mercuryspooning
05-15-2015, 02:45 AM
I think there's a bit of a pseudo debate going on here, where we're arguing past one another.
I wonder if we can clarify and come to an agreement on a few things.

1. A large part of AC is based on history.
2. AC is not 100% historically accurate, especially given that the main character and his story line is mostly fictional.
3. AC likely has a lot of mature, educated fans that are entertained not just by the game play but also by the atmosphere and historical setting

I think these first three points are uncontroversial and can broadly be said to be correct.
Now, if we can take that to be true, then perhaps we can resolve this debate.

I feel that given the somewhat powerful message of freedom and egalitarianism of the previous games, that playing it safe with AC Unity was not only unnecessary but also out of kilter with the rest of the series.
In my opinion (and evidently a lot of other peoples' opinion too), the love story is uninspired and generic. The revenge story, too, is stale and has been done to death in so many series, including this one. Arno's motivations and disinterest in the revolution make him seem shallow, or distracted at best.

That being said, I concede that you might be right, Strigoi, in arguing that if the story reflected history too closely, then some of the audience might switch off. I think it's hard to say, really, but perhaps you're right that it might just end up feeling like a history lesson.

However, I feel that you have misinterpreted both Gabrihel and myself: I am all for a love story that utilises the setting, rather than ignores it. I am all for a fictional tale that takes an unexpected and interesting twist on history. I agree with you that if this game was just one historical event after another, then it would be little more than a history lesson and would be something more akin to age of empires. But that's not what I hoped for this game and not what I'm arguing for. I think Gabrihel is in the same boat on this one. Gabrihel has repeatedly stressed the importance of this period and more importantly, highlighted that the core themes of the French revolution are completely in tune with the themes that have underpinned the AC series to-date.

None of the AC games have been a history lesson, though they have all heavily featured somewhat accurate historical figures and events. They all did what I pointed out above - telling a tale with a fictional twist on historical events that places the player at the centre.

I feel that this is indisputable - in terms of story line, this is what has driven the series: The war between the Templars and the Assassin's and their hidden role in a secret history that has been hidden only to be revealed by the animus.

So, I ask you then, where was that in Unity? It was absent. Instead we received a character with shallow motivations that cares very little for the enormity of the history he is taking part in. Even the antagonist at the end points this out, deriding Arno for his shortsightedness.

So, let me reiterate the argument:

1. The AC series has been a journey through history to-date.
2. This journey has had a fictional twist that places the Templar/Assassin war and the player at the centre.
3. Unity did not adhere to this formula.
4. Unlike previous games, the French revolution in Unity presented an unprecedented opportunity to tell an epic tale (of Templar v Assassins) with consequences that echo throughout history.
5. Unity did not seize this opportunity

From my understanding (through reading interviews), the developers didn't seize this opportunity because they wanted to remain as non-partisan as possible and decided to play it safe. But, as I think I have made clear, these good intentions were misplaced given that they have not remained non-partisan on the very same themes of liberty and egalitarianism in almost every other AC game before unity. If they think that the French revolution was about nothing more than monarchy v democracy, then they are sorely mistaken.

So, can we agree on this? I'm not saying that Unity should have been a history lesson. I'm not even saying that the love story should have been removed. I'm simply saying that Ubi should have stuck to its roots with AC and utilised the exceptional opportunity of the French Revolution to tell a tale that they have more or less been telling since the first AC.

Ubi does indeed need to maximise profit and target a wide audience. Critical acclaim comes with depth, it comes with insight into the human condition. Not banal plots.

mercuryspooning
05-15-2015, 02:59 AM
I believe that one of the reasons they DIDN'T try for more historical accuracy is that many people still romanticize the French revolution. They forget how murderous the mob was, how murderous the tribunal was. Unity touched on these aspects, but probably didn't go deeper because many people would rather believe the myth than history.

We shouldn't conflate historical accuracy with historical fiction. They're not mutually exclusive. You can have a very historically accurate fictional tale.
Unity is very historically accurate but is ultimately a tale of fiction.

I also doubt that people prefer an acquiescent revolution to the bloody reality. People love violence, people love drama. I doubt that the players of AC are adverse to violence and drama.

strigoi1958
05-15-2015, 04:00 AM
I cannot disagree with your 5 points you have summarised AC completely... but It might become a little political or controversial to get too close to certain parts of history and it is just a game.

As for the love story well... I would have prefered an unexpected twist and maybe cameo roles in a future game. To be honest, it's hard to beat the moment in AC3 when Haytham is revealed for what he is.... :D

playlisting
05-15-2015, 05:31 AM
After reading the OP, I just thought I'd chime in and say: threads like these are a waste of time. Just because one person makes a complaint on the forums does not mean that anything will change. I've seen plenty of this kind of thread, complaining about decisions made or problems with the story or writing, and absolutely nothing has come of it. This thread in particular, what was the point of it? What were you hoping to achieve by writing this thread and criticising Ubisoft on their not taking advantage of the time period properly? Your complaints will not influence anything or anyone and will go absolutely no where. I'd be surprised if this made it's way up to a forum admin seeing it. The forums should be used for conversations between fans about the game. This thread seems aimed at the writers and Ubisoft themselves, but the thing is, no one there will see it. A more apt title would be: Did Anyone Else Feel Ubisoft Wasted the French Revolution? Something directed at the people who will actually see it, and talk to them and get their opinions, rather than try to criticise people who will never read it.

Remember that the words of us forum users carry absolutely no weight, so don't waste any breath complaining about things, because it will make no difference at all.

This post made me sound like a complete ****, and I don't mean to talk down to you or anything, I'm just being honest. I've posted threads like these before and it's all been wasted breath just like every single other thread like this. Spend less time complaining and spend more time just enjoying games. If you find something you don't like, ignore it and move on. If you can't ignore it and move on and that thing is ruining the experience, ignore the game and play something else you enjoy. Gaming becomes a lot more fun that way :)

The_D0lph1n
05-17-2015, 02:52 AM
I think the story in AC Unity could have been done a lot better, but I do understand why Ubisoft went with what they did.

Back in AC3, there were a lot of complaints by players that Connor was too involved in history; Ubisoft just went and rammed Connor into every major event in the American Revolution like Paul Revere's Ride, the Battle of Lexington and Concord, signing of the Declaration of Independence, etc. So in Unity (which should have gone into production around when AC3 was released), the writers went the other way, by making the characters not so involved in history. I think they went a bit too far and thus the Revolution felt a bit too distant from the main plot of the game.

On the other hand, I think the Unity plot should not have been Assassin's supporting the Revolution and Templars supporting the Ancien Regime. Part of the plot was that the Templars were using the Revolution to establish control over France by breaking the power of the king and the aristocracy. I think this was the right choice; remember that in AC 3, Templars were on both sides of the American Revolution because Templars simply want control and they will take whichever side will give them that.

What I think would have worked is to have the Revolution start, then the Templars and Assassins under De la Serre and Mirabeau make a truce and attempt to cooperate to ensure that the Revolution remains peaceful and to pressure the King to make concessions. De la Serre could be assassinated by Templar radicals who want to hijack the Revolution to further Templar aims. Then radicals among the Assassins (Bellec) could assassinate Mirabeau and try to steer the Revolution to wipe out the Templars. Then we could have Elise trying to rein in the radical Templars and Arno trying to stop the radical Assassins who are driving the Revolution into the Reign of Terror. The end result is that we could still have a love story but with both Elise and Arno torn between their loyalties to their orders and their love for each other. This would be a better story in terms of historical relevance (Assassins and Templars both scheming to control the Revolution), a better love story (both characters are more developed and have multiple conflicting loyalties) and a more nuanced view of the Assassin-Templar conflict (it won't be Templars = bad, Assassins = good any longer since both factions will have moderate and radical components). It's unfortunate that this route wasn't taken.

I find the biggest problem with Unity is that the Assassins as far as the main plot is concerned didn't really do anything. It was just a Templar hunt for the most part. The Assassins should have had a bigger role.

Oh yeah, and Napoleon should have had a much bigger role. He was in my opinion the best character in the game (I really like his dialogue and his voice actor did a great job in the delivery) and it's a shame he was only seen in a scarce few sequences and a few side missions. It was implied that Arno and Napoleon were friends since at the very end Napoleon is with Arno when re-entering the Temple, but it should have been fleshed out a lot more. Perhaps they should have had the radical Templars attempt to sway Napoleon to join them and Arno dissuade him from doing so then defending him from assassination attempts by the Templars along with Napoleon helping out Arno in a few sequences so that the relationship between them is more detailed.

Sdwakias
05-20-2015, 01:51 PM
But yes, the point is [SIZE=3][COLOR="#FF0000"]Hundreds of hours of work and a huge budget to recreate 1789 Paris, and not taking time to explain why THAT place in THAT moment is the MOST important moment in our ( of everyone) history

The French Revolution is an important part of the history, but not the most important (or one of the most important ones). There were far more important parts of history, ones that show what people can do together when THEY choose to do something for their OWN good. The French Revolution was merely ignited by the riches due to their anger from being restricted by the aristocrats. People didn't fight for freedom, people fought for a future where riches get more rich without consequences or drawbacks.

Gabrihel
05-20-2015, 03:25 PM
The French Revolution is an important part of the history, but not the most important (or one of the most important ones). There were far more important parts of history, ones that show what people can do together when THEY choose to do something for their OWN good. The French Revolution was merely ignited by the riches due to their anger from being restricted by the aristocrats. People didn't fight for freedom, people fought for a future where riches get more rich without consequences or drawbacks.

Can you name 5 more important or equivalent moments in global history? I am curious.


Surely the bourgeoisie was the engine behind the revolution, and it is true that at the end of the revolutionary process had merely replaced the aristocracy forgetting those ideas of equality (even social) that they used to reorganize the social structure.
Yet again those ideas were and are actual.

Frag_Maniac
05-22-2015, 10:38 AM
I always thought AC is more of a reimagined history than a telling of actual history. How else do you make sense of plot devices that elevate assassins and templars to the center of the story? It's a hodge podge of caricatural, cultural, and architectural realities mixed with Ubi's fiction. It's not meant to be a history lesson, but more of a what if adventure through history.


If they focused too much on accurate portrayals of people and their accomplishments in history, it would be more of an historic sim than fantasy adventure. Then you'd have even more people complaining they told them what they already knew, instead of taking them on a fictional thrill ride. Ergo in works of fiction, the creativity is more important than the facts.