PDA

View Full Version : Nolan North reveals original AC plan and how he found Desmond got boring



pacmanate
06-30-2015, 02:26 PM
Skip to 34 minutes.

He reveals the original concept was to be 6 games and how he found Desmond became boring. He also reveals how he hated doing the AC4 voice messages just for the sake of it and hated how Desmond became a whiny *****.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5_kbIon1G98&feature=youtu.be

Edit: Nolans info on 6 games is apparently false

http://i.imgur.com/BL334Nr.jpg

pineal_gland
06-30-2015, 03:13 PM
Thanks for posting.

I totally agree with him.

ModernWaffle
06-30-2015, 03:20 PM
Good find :D

The six game concept actually sounded like it had a lot of potential and if Ubisoft stuck with that route, I wonder if they still would have used Paris and London as settings or whether Black Flag would have been released or not.

Desmond actually learning to master the abilities of six prominent assassins would have also made him seem much more special in comparison to the fate he has by the end of AC3, which is a real shame IMO since it did not give him a satisfying ending.

Shahkulu101
06-30-2015, 03:22 PM
Nolan's awesome, love listening to him. Honest too, really appreciate that.

And Desmond being the ultimate Assassin would have been amazing, it was always the idea I had in my head.

Sorrosyss
06-30-2015, 03:45 PM
Can't see Mr North returning to voice Desmond again from the sounds of this. Suppose it's best to leave Mr Miles to his afterlife, as recasting is always horrible. :p

THE_JOKE_KING33
06-30-2015, 04:06 PM
I really wish they stuck to that original 6 game formula, would've been amazing having traveling through time and stuff.

I also agree 100% with him on Desmond.

I-Like-Pie45
06-30-2015, 04:20 PM
remember

you and yves ruined everything that could've been

pacmanate
06-30-2015, 04:44 PM
Good find :D

The six game concept actually sounded like it had a lot of potential and if Ubisoft stuck with that route, I wonder if they still would have used Paris and London as settings or whether Black Flag would have been released or not.

Desmond actually learning to master the abilities of six prominent assassins would have also made him seem much more special in comparison to the fate he has by the end of AC3, which is a real shame IMO since it did not give him a satisfying ending.

Exactly, the original concept sounded so much better. It's interesting how he noticed Desmond becoming more pushed to the side and more whiny. For him to have 6 ancestors and become an ultimate Assassin sounds way better than what we got.

I also thought it was interesting how he seems to hate that he had to do voice messages in AC4 for the sake of tying up loose ends.

PRWarrior1986
06-30-2015, 05:27 PM
That moment when you know that Ubisoft took a once great series and ruined it. After Desmond's death, the series isnt Assassin's Creed anymore.

Farlander1991
06-30-2015, 05:44 PM
Exactly, the original concept sounded so much better. It's interesting how he noticed Desmond becoming more pushed to the side and more whiny.

Honestly, it's not that unexpected that Desmond got pushed to the side.

AC1 reaction to Desmond: "Booooooooo, why we get out of the Animus so many times, just let us back in?"
AC2 reaction to Desmond: "Yaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay, there's almost no Desmond in the game at all!"

So after that we kinda got stuck with Desmond because we had to, the message that Ubi got from the general populace (sure, this forum is very pro-modern day, but the general, much bigger, audience isn't) is "We don't want Desmond". Yay for AC2, the best game in the series :p That instead of fixing what didn't work in the original game just scrapped it all to make something more sure-fire, and then the series kinda went on with it.

The only reason (well, in my opinion) why we got some better Desmond parts after was because there were a couple of people who thought that he could be salvaged somehow (and because in terms of games like ACB that wouldn't be that expensive due to reuse of assets), but the damage was already done, the general reaction was still 'Ugh, Desmond'.

pacmanate
06-30-2015, 05:58 PM
I really dont think the solution to him being boring was making him a burden for us by making him more boring. They should have continued with the original idea and made him more interesting.

GunnerGalactico
06-30-2015, 06:15 PM
And Desmond being the ultimate Assassin would have been amazing, it was always the idea I had in my head.

Ever since I played AC1 (before AC2 was even in the pipeline), that's how I thought the Desmond saga was initially gonna play out. If only they could've stuck to the original bloody formula, the MD wouldn't have been anywhere near the catastrophe we got today.


I really dont think the solution to him being boring was making him a burden for us by making him more boring. They should have continued with the original idea and made him more interesting.

^ 100% This!

Farlander1991
06-30-2015, 06:59 PM
I really dont think the solution to him being boring was making him a burden for us by making him more boring. They should have continued with the original idea and made him more interesting.

Original idea wouldn't have made him more interesting. Problem lies not with Desmond, problem lies with the narrative structure.

I had a thread about this somewhere. The thing is,Desmond is not worse than Frodo, Harry Potter or Luke Skywalker. Problem lies not even with the fact that modern day is only a fraction of the experience. The problem is the lack of thematic connection,which is the reason to care.

In AC1 we're on a quest of redemption trying to understand the Creed,while in modern day we just learn about facts around us.

In AC2 we're consumed by revenge and how to oovercome it,and in modern day we're training.

Six games from the original concept wouldn't have been any better if their narrative structure wouldve been the same: the modern day ripping the player out of tue experience rather than extending it.

ACR connected thematically the best: three assassins influencing eachother in trying to figure out what to do with their assassin heritage and making a decision. But it was too little too late.

SixKeys
06-30-2015, 07:15 PM
The six games thing is a surprise, I was sure they originally only planned three. Either way, I think it would have been way cooler than what the series has become. When I first played AC1 and AC2, I got the feeling that they were going for exactly what he describes: Desmond gaining various abilities from a new ancestor in each game to become the ultimate assassin. I don't really know what he means by "going back in time" (maybe something to do with TWCB?) but I always wanted to see something crazy with the bleeding effect in the Animus. Like ancestors' timelines start blurring together as Desmond slips further away from himself. Gah, the potential. It could have been absolutely amazing.

Also, lol at Corey May (assuming he's talking about Corey) not knowing where the story was going after the end of AC1. It seems pretty obvious in retrospect, they just dropped a ton of hints and teases to get people speculating and decide later where they wanted to go.

I must disagree with Nolan about the voice messages in AC4 though. Yes, they were cheap, but they were still a better sendoff than what we got in AC3. Darby wrote some genuinely touching character moments for Desmond that were missing from the entirety of the rest of his saga. For the first time, Desmond felt like there was more going on in his head than being constantly confused and irritable. I appreciate Darby for giving fans some measure of closure with the voice messages. I think he really understood how important that was to fans.

VestigialLlama4
06-30-2015, 07:36 PM
The six games thing is a surprise, I was sure they originally only planned three. Either way, I think it would have been way cooler than what the series has become. When I first played AC1 and AC2, I got the feeling that they were going for exactly what he describes: Desmond gaining various abilities from a new ancestor in each game to become the ultimate assassin. I don't really know what he means by "going back in time" (maybe something to do with TWCB?) but I always wanted to see something crazy with the bleeding effect in the Animus. Like ancestors' timelines start blurring together as Desmond slips further away from himself. Gah, the potential. It could have been absolutely amazing.

When I played AC1-AC2 and Brotherhood, my feeling was that there would be no Animus in the later games, and you would have Desmond moving in multiple eras as multiple protagonists. That was the logic of those stories, the whole warning about separating past and present, that's where it was going, the whole integration of MD with history and I think that went south when they decided to give Ezio a sequel for Brotherhood and PD left in the middle of that.

And that part didn't work out. I have a feeling that North was involved with PD's 1666 since he spoke about it.


Also, lol at Corey May (assuming he's talking about Corey) not knowing where the story was going after the end of AC1. It seems pretty obvious in retrospect, they just dropped a ton of hints and teases to get people speculating and decide later where they wanted to go.

In his defense, nobody knew AC would be this great IP.


I must disagree with Nolan about the voice messages in AC4 though. Yes, they were cheap, but they were still a better sendoff than what we got in AC3. Darby wrote some genuinely touching character moments for Desmond that were missing from the entirety of the rest of his saga. For the first time, Desmond felt like there was more going on in his head than being constantly confused and irritable. I appreciate Darby for giving fans some measure of closure with the voice messages. I think he really understood how important that was to fans.

Well he's speaking from an actor's point of view, he would obviously prefer if all this was front and center of the game rather than something there for only superfans to go out of their way and seek out. He's not badmouthing the material.

Xstantin
06-30-2015, 08:45 PM
Like ancestors' timelines start blurring together as Desmond slips further away from himself. Gah, the potential. It could have been absolutely amazing.


Too bad that never happened. Subject 16 was pretty popular afterall.

Mr.Black24
06-30-2015, 11:19 PM
The six games thing is a surprise, I was sure they originally only planned three. Either way, I think it would have been way cooler than what the series has become. When I first played AC1 and AC2, I got the feeling that they were going for exactly what he describes: Desmond gaining various abilities from a new ancestor in each game to become the ultimate assassin. I don't really know what he means by "going back in time" (maybe something to do with TWCB?) but I always wanted to see something crazy with the bleeding effect in the Animus. Like ancestors' timelines start blurring together as Desmond slips further away from himself. Gah, the potential. It could have been absolutely amazing. At least now I know where Revelations had gotten the idea for Desmond's Black Room segments. I mean the entire point of the game was Desmond was on the verge of a mental breakdown? And him not only trying to fix himself, but also reflect on his past, his mistakes, and his newly fond determination to follow his ancestor's footsteps? Like how in AC2, he kept seeing the blurred timelines of Altair and Ezio's period. I thought Revelations conveyed that pretty well, not as good as I wanted, but it did hit it though.




I must disagree with Nolan about the voice messages in AC4 though. Yes, they were cheap, but they were still a better sendoff than what we got in AC3. Darby wrote some genuinely touching character moments for Desmond that were missing from the entirety of the rest of his saga. For the first time, Desmond felt like there was more going on in his head than being constantly confused and irritable. I appreciate Darby for giving fans some measure of closure with the voice messages. I think he really understood how important that was to fans. I think what he means that is he wanted the players to see Desmond himself say all these things, actually witnessing him grow up into the character we hear him as in the voice messages. I mean no lie, other than the core fans, not many realize the existence of Desmond's messages. Kind of like how many skipped the Homestead missions, not realizing that Connor's other half is shined in those missions, or even his speech that shows his development, the same that many others skipped on hacking the computers and missing out on Desmond's final words. I mean many complained about Desmond as much as Connor, so its really easy, at least for me, to see many people miss out on not hacking the computers to see this. For this, I think Nolan realizes this too and it sadden him to know that many others will never fully realize what Desmond truly is, other then the "whiny" and "*****y" descriptions of him.


On a side note, someone beat me to the punch in delivering the news to Tumblr, and now the entire AC fandom on tumblr is writhing in pain. I feel ya guys and girls....I feel ya. AC Reddit too, is feeling some burns.

D.I.D.
06-30-2015, 11:59 PM
The thing is,Desmond is not worse than Frodo, Harry Potter or Luke Skywalker.

See, that's why I think the problem lies with Desmond. That's exactly Desmond's problem. He's a sci-fi/fantasy Messiah, and these characters are often a sign of a bad story. He's a bit of a rube and seems to not know what he's doing, but unbeknownst to him he's the Chosen One! He never asked for this! And so on.

The only way to make them worse, for me at least, is to make them into middle-of-the-road modern man and that's what Desmond is. What movies would Desmond like? Anything, but probably Transformers and superhero franchises. What music would he like? Maroon 5 and the Dave Matthews Band. Clothes? Mixture of Gap and Abercrombie & Fitch. What books would he like? Desmond wouldn't like reading. What does he think about politics? He doesn't. How does he feel about the world? He hadn't really thought about it until recently, was just bumbling through life. They tried to make an everyman, and he came out basic as ****.

If you're going to put a Keanu in a game, then his surroundings need to be absolutely immense and crazy to get away with it, which is why it wasn't too much of a problem for The Matrix. Keanu might have been limp and puppy-ish, but that didn't matter because it was a giant action film with other characters who could carry it. AC's Keanu was sat in a much smaller situation where the stakes were ostensibly high, but we didn't really see any kind of momentum for a long time.

SpiritOfNevaeh
07-01-2015, 03:42 AM
I saw this earlier today and Nolan North speaks the truth

After hearing what the original concept was, including how many games they were going for and the time traveling parts, I REALLY wished they had stuck with it.

I kinda curious to know if they ever regret any steps/"experiments" they have taken to this point in time and wish they had implement the original concept.

But they could still implement it, just not with Assassin's Creed, which probably would be weird because I can't imagine that concept being implement in other franchise.

Hans684
07-01-2015, 04:48 AM
Desmond is in the Gray with Juno, Clay and possible countless other. Since Abstergo is always a few steps ahead in technology then can clone him and then he can return for his ultimate Assassin role. So it can still be fixed, unless they're able to ruin that too.

I-Like-Pie45
07-01-2015, 04:55 AM
as long as it makes money they don't regret anything

VestigialLlama4
07-01-2015, 11:42 AM
http://kotaku.com/assassins-creed-creator-plans-a-most-ambitious-comeback-1714942873

Stephen Totilo (Resident AC Expert at Kotaku) spoke at our lord and master Patrice Desilets. He's discussing his new game at Panache Studios but he does offer this gem :


He walked past the Ubisoft booth at E3, he told me, but says he didn’t really look. “I never thought of doing a Victorian Assassin’s Creed, so this is a stranger Assassin’s Creed.” He’s left at least that baby of his behind.


In the Comments Section, Stephen added an extra piece of information:




STEPHEN TOTILO

He [Patrice Desilets] is a big history buff and wanted to tell a story with AC that connected a historical adventure to a modern character. He was going to wrap up the series with an ACIII, though not the one we played. He didn’t want to talk about it much at E3, but he was telling me that it was going to be set in America, but not the way they did it. He was creative director for AC and AC II, and I believe he was done with all the story stuff and major design in AC Brotherhood before he left Ubi the first time.

I’ve heard other stories about how AC was going to go. Nolan North, who voiced the modern-day protagonist, Desmond Miles, just gave a talk over the weekend where he was talking about an old AC plan for six games that would eventually see Desmond learning from all his ancestors and becoming a kick-*** assassin. That seems a bit bigger than when Patrice was telling me earlier this month, but it does square with the idea that the games were really a tight story about Desmond and his past and not what we have now, which is a sprawl of assassin protagonists who don’t seem to all be related to each other.

pacmanate
07-01-2015, 02:19 PM
I must disagree with Nolan about the voice messages in AC4 though. Yes, they were cheap, but they were still a better sendoff than what we got in AC3. Darby wrote some genuinely touching character moments for Desmond that were missing from the entirety of the rest of his saga. For the first time, Desmond felt like there was more going on in his head than being constantly confused and irritable. I appreciate Darby for giving fans some measure of closure with the voice messages. I think he really understood how important that was to fans.

He heavily hints that these should have been in the game and he should have spoken these thoughts, he didn't say he didn't like the content, just the way it was portrayed.

SixKeys
07-01-2015, 03:01 PM
http://kotaku.com/assassins-creed-creator-plans-a-most-ambitious-comeback-1714942873

In the Comments Section, Stephen added an extra piece of information:

I could be wrong, but I always assumed AC3 was meant to be mostly modern day, with Desmond taking on the lead role. Then the marketing research at Ubi found out people didn't like Desmond so that idea was scrapped.



He heavily hints that these should have been in the game and he should have spoken these thoughts, he didn't say he didn't like the content, just the way it was portrayed.

I get that, but the alternative would have been not to have them at all. That's what I meant with "they were cheap, but at least they were there". Do I wish we could have seen that side of Desmond when he was still alive? Of course, but it never happened and it's clear Ubi intends him to stay dead. So Darby was doing the fans a kindness by writing some closure for the character in a way that's cost-effective. It was certainly better than what we ever got with Lucy. The letters that we collected in The Lost Archive weren't even voiced by Kristen Bell (or anyone). It would have been BS if they hadn't gotten Nolan back to record those final messages.

ACfan443
07-01-2015, 05:43 PM
http://kotaku.com/assassins-creed-creator-plans-a-most-ambitious-comeback-1714942873

Stephen Totilo (Resident AC Expert at Kotaku) spoke at our lord and master Patrice Desilets. He's discussing his new game at Panache Studios but he does offer this gem :




In the Comments Section, Stephen added an extra piece of information:

Strange. I was convinced that under Patrice's leadership AC3 would be set in the French Revolution because Shaun's analysis of the symbols at the end of Brotherhood implied as such. "Phrygian Cap, Masonic Eye, these two come together only in one place."

Perhaps Patrice was referring to modern day America and Desmond's originally planned full role as Sixkeys suggested, Da Vinci's disappearance even provided co-ordinates for the Grand Temple so we knew long before AC3 was announced that America was involved in some way. He did end up there, but everything he was seemingly planned to do was scaled back as the historical portion took precedence.

On a different note, Lucy's words during the Colosseum sequence still play on my mind, "We need to find the lost Temples", why did they never do this in AC3? Surely it was central to the plot? I mean, it's not like her dialogue was tucked away in some dispensable side mission only to be retconned as a "calculation" - it was explicitly stated during a crucial moment in the main campaign.

AC's handling of the present day story beyond Brotherhood is incompetently messy.

SixKeys
07-01-2015, 06:00 PM
Strange. I was convinced that under Patrice's leadership AC3 would be set in the French Revolution because Shaun's analysis of the symbols at the end of Brotherhood implied as such. "Phrygian Cap, Masonic Eye, these two come together only in one place."


Patrice left during ACB's development, so he may not have been involved with the writing until the very end. I'm guessing the Da Vinci Disappearance hints were just added as a tease for a potential future location, just like all the stuff at the end of AC1. We still don't know what Yona Guni and Quetzalcoatl had to do with anything, for example.

misterB2001
07-01-2015, 08:24 PM
this full thread genuinely saddens me. A few year ago you could come on this forum and there would be a whole host of theories about Subject 16, the sun, your sun, Juno etc. The mysterious storyline inspired people, made people come back for more.

Unfortunately, rather than tell their own story, they tried to pander to the masses to try and make a game/games that EVERYBODY wanted to play. They diluted the gameplay and made it auto-win, took away the mystery and sterilised the entire back story. Now they try to make each game loads different to the last one to try and stop franchise fatigue, but it's too late.

My favourite game series ever is nothing but an empty shell, a remnant. Still a half decent "game" but the magic has long gone.

VestigialLlama4
07-02-2015, 04:59 AM
this full thread genuinely saddens me. A few year ago you could come on this forum and there would be a whole host of theories about Subject 16, the sun, your sun, Juno etc. The mysterious storyline inspired people, made people come back for more.

Unfortunately, rather than tell their own story, they tried to pander to the masses to try and make a game/games that EVERYBODY wanted to play. They diluted the gameplay and made it auto-win, took away the mystery and sterilised the entire back story. Now they try to make each game loads different to the last one to try and stop franchise fatigue, but it's too late.

My favourite game series ever is nothing but an empty shell, a remnant. Still a half decent "game" but the magic has long gone.

The magic went with UNITY-ROGUE. It was still there upto Black Flag. But this kind of decay happens with every franchise. And now Ubisoft have decided to make it into a movie...well that way lies madness.

SixKeys
07-02-2015, 08:53 AM
this full thread genuinely saddens me. A few year ago you could come on this forum and there would be a whole host of theories about Subject 16, the sun, your sun, Juno etc. The mysterious storyline inspired people, made people come back for more.

Unfortunately, rather than tell their own story, they tried to pander to the masses to try and make a game/games that EVERYBODY wanted to play. They diluted the gameplay and made it auto-win, took away the mystery and sterilised the entire back story. Now they try to make each game loads different to the last one to try and stop franchise fatigue, but it's too late.

My favourite game series ever is nothing but an empty shell, a remnant. Still a half decent "game" but the magic has long gone.

To be fair, AC2 was the one that introduced "auto-win". It had the easiest combat in the whole series.

ACZanius
07-02-2015, 10:04 AM
I agree, after reading from page 1 to now, i quite literally feel sad and down, i feel like i was physic back in the day, holy **** i literally always thought (me in 2010) this will be it, Desmond becoming the ultimate assassin. I'm also happy that truth about how AC was supposed to be if Lord Patrice would be with it still, almost makes want to hate every Creative Director after Patrice and all the games they did but i'm better than that. I will always love AC lore but once definitely greatest franchise of all time for me is now not bad or horrible or people that just hate blindly but shadow of it's former self. The damage that has been done with AC3 and it's ending will never be undone. Or how lame modern day became later, as much as i enjoyed Black Flag and i guess playing Rogue and Unity they all felt irrelevant and fillers.

D.I.D.
07-02-2015, 05:40 PM
I agree, after reading from page 1 to now, i quite literally feel sad and down, i feel like i was physic back in the day, holy **** i literally always thought (me in 2010) this will be it, Desmond becoming the ultimate assassin. I'm also happy that truth about how AC was supposed to be if Lord Patrice would be with it still, almost makes want to hate every Creative Director after Patrice and all the games they did but i'm better than that. I will always love AC lore but once definitely greatest franchise of all time for me is now not bad or horrible or people that just hate blindly but shadow of it's former self. The damage that has been done with AC3 and it's ending will never be undone. Or how lame modern day became later, as much as i enjoyed Black Flag and i guess playing Rogue and Unity they all felt irrelevant and fillers.

1) There would be no reason to hate the post-Désilets creative directors in any case. They could not decide to call a halt to the series on their own account. All they could do was make the individual project for which they had been appointed, and leave the ending open for the next person to come in.

2) Patrice Désilets's intention might have been to close the series in six games, but after the massive success of ACII there is no way even he would have been allowed to stick to that plan either. Ubisoft would have stepped in and said, "No, the series must continue", and he would have to find a way to work in concert with the wishes of the owners of the brand.

dxsxhxcx
07-02-2015, 06:10 PM
2) Patrice Désilets's intention might have been to close the series in six games, but after the massive success of ACII there is no way even he would have been allowed to stick to that plan either. Ubisoft would have stepped in and said, "No, the series must continue", and he would have to find a way to work in concert with the wishes of the owners of the brand.

they could have let him finish the story he wanted to tell and ask him to come up with something to allow the franchise to go on after that, but Ubisoft saw an opportunity to make money with GodEzio after seeing how well received he was and grabbed it...

D.I.D.
07-02-2015, 06:30 PM
they could have let him finish the story he wanted to tell and ask him to come up with something to allow the franchise to go on after that, but Ubisoft saw and opportunity to make money with GodEzio and grabbed it...

Well, yes, at least if they'd honoured his position and treated the continuation as a negotiation of opinions, he could have made a six-game Desmond saga that closed on a high note rather than with the shrug of ACIII, but that might not have been enough.

I still think he partly ruined it for himself by making Desmond such a wet character. To carry six games, Desmond needed to be something distinct. I get that he was making a relatively featureless character in the hope that every player could project something of themselves onto Desmond somehow, but I think he got it wrong. Desmond was so blank, so clean, that he was virtually reflective. The writing was on the wall for Desmond after the first game, and becoming ever stronger after ACII - this was a guy that not enough people liked, and not enough people would ever like him. Ezio was clearly a bigger and better character. I don't think you, if you were in charge of the budgets, could have made a different decision. As a customer, sure you would. As a CEO, I think you would feel a lot of responsibility for the jobs of your employees, as well as the pressure for snowballing success from the investors.

From Revelations onward, Ubisoft was in panic mode with this guy - trying too late to give him an interesting backstory, trying to adjust the way he looked, rejigging all kinds of aspects of the other characters and the series lore. It's easy from where we stand now to think it would have been different with Désilets's games, and I'm tempted to think that way too because he's one of my favourite games designers, but my heart tells me otherwise. It's unfortunate, really. It's easy to forget now how little we expected of games characters when AC1 was released, and it's in a large part due to the good work done with the best parts of the AC series that we demand so much more today from our games. AC had to grow alongside its tendency to quietly raise the bar for the games industry in general. A lot of people will scoff at me for saying that, but if they do then I think they are being dishonest. AC might disappoint, it might not be head-and-shoulders above its competition anymore, but it continues to set new precedents that affect the way hundreds of other games are made.

rob.davies2014
07-02-2015, 07:07 PM
The writing was on the wall for Desmond after the first game.

lol

D.I.D.
07-02-2015, 07:09 PM
lol

Oops :D

misterB2001
07-02-2015, 07:40 PM
To be fair, AC2 was the one that introduced "auto-win". It had the easiest combat in the whole series.

It certainly took away a lot of the challenge, however I found Brotherhood was the easiest. ACII was steeped in mystery, all through the game was the talk of a Prophet, we had Tombs, the Glyphs, the Codex pages. It all felt that there was something bigger, more important about to happen, it was gaining momentum.

As for Brotherhood, whilst the historical story was a let down (personally speaking) the modern day story line was reaching a crescendo. The introduction of Juno, subject 16's stuff, THAT ending, it was just amazing to experience, it was THAT ending that brought me to these forums to speak with like minded people and to try and figure out what on earth was going on.

Even ACIII to an extent, although they messed up with the gameplay (IMO), Corey May's superb writing in the historical parts saved it and kept it interesting.

The second we lost a genuine, important reason to investigate the past (to save the future of mankind) the series nosedived. It lost its soul.

Black flag was technically a very good game, I thoroughly enjoyed it, as was Unity in some ways with the main Assassinations, but ultimately I don't see the point when the Assassin is just some generic dude who we are playing as for no real reason.

As much as Desmond/ was disliked by many, his story was the glue that held it all together.

Going slightly further off topic (sorry) there is a dialogue in The Matrix reloaded between The Merovingian, Neo & Morpheus that kind of applies to my point. It goes...

Merovingian: The question is, do you know *why* you are here?
Morpheus: We are looking for the Keymaker.
Merovingian: Oh, yes. It is true. The Keymaker. Of course. But this is not a reason. This is not a "why". The Keymaker himself - his very nature is a means. It is not an end. And so to look for him is to be looking for a means to do... what?



Without Desmond (or a proper modern day Protag) there is no *why*.

Anyhow, apologies for blabbering.

EmptyCrustacean
07-03-2015, 02:04 AM
I'm sorry but time travel would have ruined AC. All the potential continuity errors, cop outs and retcons hurts my brain just thinking about it.

Shahkulu101
07-03-2015, 02:35 AM
I'm sorry but time travel would have ruined AC. All the potential continuity errors, cop outs and retcons hurts my brain just thinking about it.

I don't think it would have been literal time travel, but rather full control of the bleeding effect so that he could access the memories of his ancestor any time he needed, anywhere. I'm sure they wouldn't make it so that he could go back in time and change history because that would contradict what they were trying to do with these games in terms of representing history properly (nowadays they probably wouldn't care). I think maybe Nolan used the phrase time travel erroneously.

Or not, that's just my guess.

LoyalACFan
07-03-2015, 09:22 AM
I don't think it would have been literal time travel, but rather full control of the bleeding effect so that he could access the memories of his ancestor any time he needed, anywhere. I'm sure they wouldn't make it so that he could go back in time and change history because that would contradict what they were trying to do with these games in terms of representing history properly (nowadays they probably wouldn't care). I think maybe Nolan used the phrase time travel erroneously.

Or not, that's just my guess.

I'm picturing an awesome Desmond stealth sequence where during his kill animations, the world and enemies around him briefly flash and turn into one of his ancestors before snapping back to the present. I'm sure you've seen the Altair/Ezio fan videos to that effect.

But on-topic, this really makes me sad. Because this just confirms what we've all been thinking for a while; that they never really had a clear plan of where the hell they were going with the Desmond story, they were just throwing stuff out there as they went. All the "clues" they dropped for us fans to speculate over were just complete BS the whole time.

More than any other series on the market today, AC needs a hard reboot. Sure, COD is milked just as hard, but they've at least got a winning formula that they're sticking with. I mean for God's sake, ELEVEN games after AC1 and they're still fumbling around trying to get a grip on the main pillars, which totally change every game or two. And it's a damn shame, because for my money, it has the coolest, most original concept in AAA gaming. I'm just incredibly frustrated that Ubi can't get their act together and release a truly excellent game. We know their devs have the capacity and the talent. It's just a matter of getting that all together into a cohesive artistic vision backed (and not exploited) by the company, and ending the expectation of a game a year.

Rant over.

Well not quite.

It's not the gamers' fault that Desmond got axed. Yeah, his role probably dwindled because of negative fan feedback, but it was totally justified for their piss-poor handling of him in the first game. You can't make a game about a badass 12th-century parkouring Assassin and expect people to react positively to being pulled away from him to walk around a white prison cell for a bit as some random derp in a hoodie. Maybe if they had put the Abstergo escape at the end of AC1 and made Desmond get his bleeding effect skills earlier so he could kick a little bit more *** (instead of just being there to say "durrr wow ur good" while Lucy wrecks everyone) people would have reacted more positively. But as it was, Desmond was just a mundane, annoying distraction from an otherwise awesome first foray into next-gen (at the time) open-world gaming.

Hans684
07-03-2015, 10:23 AM
More than any other series on the market today, AC needs a hard reboot.

We have alternate realities(calculations), so a reboot would just be another calculation.

I-Like-Pie45
07-03-2015, 03:17 PM
poor assassin's creed

just like mega man legends the fanbase killed him :(

SixKeys
07-03-2015, 04:16 PM
It's not the gamers' fault that Desmond got axed. Yeah, his role probably dwindled because of negative fan feedback, but it was totally justified for their piss-poor handling of him in the first game. You can't make a game about a badass 12th-century parkouring Assassin and expect people to react positively to being pulled away from him to walk around a white prison cell for a bit as some random derp in a hoodie. Maybe if they had put the Abstergo escape at the end of AC1 and made Desmond get his bleeding effect skills earlier so he could kick a little bit more *** (instead of just being there to say "durrr wow ur good" while Lucy wrecks everyone) people would have reacted more positively. But as it was, Desmond was just a mundane, annoying distraction from an otherwise awesome first foray into next-gen (at the time) open-world gaming.

Frankly I never understood this reasoning. Being yanked from the Animus at the end of each sequence made sense and kept me on the edge, wanting to keep playing to find out what the hell was going on. It was like a cliffhanger at the end of a TV episode. You always learned just a little bit more. You start off not having a clue, then you read mysterious e-mails that hint at an employee being killed because she knew too much. Then Vidic tells you about "gifts" that came from Those Who Came Before. Then Lucy turns out to be on your side. etc. They were great bookends for each sequence IMO.

In AC2 I felt the contrast was bigger because you kept getting yanked out for no real reason. One time it was the Animus breaking down so you had no choice but to wander around the room and talk to your companions for a while. Then Lucy takes you out to climb over some boxes and push buttons. Then you have a weird dream about Altaďr because....who the hell knows. Desmond never mentions it to anyone and nobody ever asks why he passed out in the hallway (not even Shaun!). Those scenes felt more out of place because we weren't actually progressing Desmond's story, even though on the surface it may have seemed like that.

ACB found a good balance IMO (still not perfect, but the best we ever got), but after that everything went downhill.

rob1990312
07-03-2015, 05:18 PM
about 3 or 4 years back if not longer, a guy posted on these forums that he had insider knowledge of the modern day story , he stated that desmond would at the end of the serious be able to sync with all of his ancestors at one and be able to go back and forward in time.
looks like he was probably telling the truth

LoyalACFan
07-03-2015, 05:18 PM
Frankly I never understood this reasoning. Being yanked from the Animus at the end of each sequence made sense and kept me on the edge, wanting to keep playing to find out what the hell was going on. It was like a cliffhanger at the end of a TV episode. You always learned just a little bit more. You start off not having a clue, then you read mysterious e-mails that hint at an employee being killed because she knew too much. Then Vidic tells you about "gifts" that came from Those Who Came Before. Then Lucy turns out to be on your side. etc. They were great bookends for each sequence IMO.

But none of it meant anything. The MD plot went nowhere for the entirety of the first game; Desmond achieves nothing, the status quo doesn't change, you just learn more lore that ultimately doesn't connect to the gameplay whatsoever. You play through the life of Altair, and then take random breaks to read some emails talking about a doomsday scenario that you don't actually get to see. You begin the game as an average Joe being held captive, then experience the character transformation of a Crusader-era Syrian Assassin, then end as the same average Joe still being held captive. There really wasn't much of a narrative for Desmond, just teasing and breadcrumb trails promising more to come, which is a pretty poor and lazy way to tell a story (especially since they didn't even have a ******* plan, as it turns out).


In AC2 I felt the contrast was bigger because you kept getting yanked out for no real reason. One time it was the Animus breaking down so you had no choice but to wander around the room and talk to your companions for a while. Then Lucy takes you out to climb over some boxes and push buttons. Then you have a weird dream about Altaďr because....who the hell knows. Desmond never mentions it to anyone and nobody ever asks why he passed out in the hallway (not even Shaun!). Those scenes felt more out of place because we weren't actually progressing Desmond's story, even though on the surface it may have seemed like that.

I actually liked the Altair flashback a lot, I thought it was a good intro to the concept (and dangers) of the Bleeding Effect. But yeah, it was stupid that no mention was ever made of it afterward by any of the team, and by and large AC2's modern day was crap.


ACB found a good balance IMO (still not perfect, but the best we ever got), but after that everything went downhill.

Agreed, ACB marked the pinnacle of my enthusiasm for the modern stuff, although it was the Colosseum sections moreso than the Villa Auditore ones that got me interested. IMO the first scene with Lucy where you're trying to get into the Sanctuary via the basement was one of the most irritating and pace-killing parts of MD in general, especially since they cut to it right after something huge happened in Ezio's life. Being able to exit the Animus at will was a great addition though.

D.I.D.
07-03-2015, 09:54 PM
about 3 or 4 years back if not longer, a guy posted on these forums that he had insider knowledge of the modern day story , he stated that desmond would at the end of the serious be able to sync with all of his ancestors at one and be able to go back and forward in time.
looks like he was probably telling the truth

Lots of people guessed this was the story because it was an obvious conclusion to draw. This particular incident is no more believable now that we've had it confirmed than it ever was.


Agreed, ACB marked the pinnacle of my enthusiasm for the modern stuff, although it was the Colosseum sections moreso than the Villa Auditore ones that got me interested. IMO the first scene with Lucy where you're trying to get into the Sanctuary via the basement was one of the most irritating and pace-killing parts of MD in general, especially since they cut to it right after something huge happened in Ezio's life. Being able to exit the Animus at will was a great addition though.

The decision to swap the terrified, twitchy Clay for the surly bro Clay is one of the saddest things about the series after ACB. I was so much looking forward to meeting him.

SixKeys
07-04-2015, 12:22 AM
But none of it meant anything. The MD plot went nowhere for the entirety of the first game; Desmond achieves nothing, the status quo doesn't change, you just learn more lore that ultimately doesn't connect to the gameplay whatsoever. You play through the life of Altair, and then take random breaks to read some emails talking about a doomsday scenario that you don't actually get to see. You begin the game as an average Joe being held captive, then experience the character transformation of a Crusader-era Syrian Assassin, then end as the same average Joe still being held captive. There really wasn't much of a narrative for Desmond, just teasing and breadcrumb trails promising more to come, which is a pretty poor and lazy way to tell a story (especially since they didn't even have a ******* plan, as it turns out).

I disagree that it didn't go anywhere. I already mentioned the e-mails about Leila Marino, which seemed like a clear set-up for a subplot that unfortunately the sequels never followed up on. Desmond started off seeming like he didn't care about the assassins and they didn't care about him, and then at one point a group of assassins stormed Abstergo and all were slaughtered. That raised the stakes: oh ****, the cavalry arrived but now they're dead. Who was this group sent to save Desmond? Were they working for William? Did he know where his son was being held? Or what if there never was a rescue group and the whole intercom scene was staged by Vidic to make Desmond despair? At the end we find out about the Apple's mysterious sci-fi powers through Altaďr and HOLY ****! Alien technology in ancient Middle East? What the hell is going on?! And Vidic is saying they just found where it's located? And Abstergo is planning to launch a satellite using the Apple's powers to enslave mankind? Suddenly a group of men in black show up telling Vidic Desmond is no longer needed and should be disposed of. After Lucy talks them out of it, the final kicker is Desmond's Eagle powers activating all of a sudden and seeing all of Clay's creepy writings. I'd say that's a hell of a lot more than AC2 did to advance the MD plot.


I actually liked the Altair flashback a lot, I thought it was a good intro to the concept (and dangers) of the Bleeding Effect. But yeah, it was stupid that no mention was ever made of it afterward by any of the team, and by and large AC2's modern day was crap.

I like it too, don't get me wrong, but that doesn't change the fact that it came right the **** out of nowhere and after it was over, everyone just kind of shrugged and went "oh well". I get that they used it as a way to introduce the Bleeding Effect, but having the characters not react to it at all was just weird. That made it seem more like pointless fan service than a genuine part of the plot.


Agreed, ACB marked the pinnacle of my enthusiasm for the modern stuff, although it was the Colosseum sections moreso than the Villa Auditore ones that got me interested. IMO the first scene with Lucy where you're trying to get into the Sanctuary via the basement was one of the most irritating and pace-killing parts of MD in general, especially since they cut to it right after something huge happened in Ezio's life. Being able to exit the Animus at will was a great addition though.

The beginning is a bit slow on replays, though it's never particularly bothered me. Another reason I like ACB's MD is because we get to spend more time with the characters and get to bond with them. I could never stand Shaun in AC2, still can't. ACB is the only game where he's actually tolerable, even likable at times. He still sneers at Desmond now and then, but you get the feeling it's more light-hearted poking than childish jealousy and bitterness like in AC2. The whole team seems to have become closer since we last saw them, which is nice. It never felt the same after William entered the picture and the focus shifted to Desmond's daddy issues.

ACfan443
07-05-2015, 02:59 AM
I don't know why the middle tweet disappeared, but this clears up the 6 games confusion.

http://i.imgur.com/BL334Nr.jpg

Edit: Worth adding to the OP to prevent misinformation spreading to new readers.

SpiritOfNevaeh
07-05-2015, 06:10 AM
You can always count on Darby to clear up any misunderstandings in a timely matter.

He's so awesome :)

pacmanate
07-05-2015, 12:35 PM
6 games or 3, the rest of the info could still stand. AC2's Modern Day was as lackluster as AC1's, I really don't see how by AC3 (Patrice's version, if it stayed a trilogy and he stayed) could make Desmond a master.

I think if it was a trilogy and they wanted him to be a master assassin, which to be honest SHOULD have been what happened instead of him just being a thing to use the animus for the sake of the animus, Desmond would have had to shown some kind of transformation at the end of AC1, even just a tease. AC2 should have not been confined to a little warehouse.

dxsxhxcx
07-05-2015, 02:26 PM
6 games or 3, the rest of the info could still stand. AC2's Modern Day was as lackluster as AC1's, I really don't see how by AC3 (Patrice's version, if it stayed a trilogy and he stayed) could make Desmond a master.

I think if it was a trilogy and they wanted him to be a master assassin, which to be honest SHOULD have been what happened instead of him just being a thing to use the animus for the sake of the animus, Desmond would have had to shown some kind of transformation at the end of AC1, even just a tease. AC2 should have not been confined to a little warehouse.


I believe this "transformation" would've happened at the beginning of AC3 (like it did), because the whole reason for Desmond to relive Ezio's memories was to absorb Ezio' skills via Bleeding Effect. So it would've made sense for Desmond to become a skilled Assassin out of the blue because of it.

Really curious about how the MD in AC3 would've been if they had sticked with the original plan. If they wanted to prolong the franchise's life, I think they could've easily added that Juno post-credit scene (https://youtu.be/CkBCOXNxgzk?t=41m28s) at the end of AC3 (without the whole argument between Minerva and Juno before Desmond' sacrifice, of course, Juno would've been kept in secret until the end), people certainly would've jumped off their chairs with that ending, asking themselves who the hell that woman was...


then the next years of waiting before the new title would've all been about speculation and people looking for hidden clues (inside S16's messages) about her, but no, Ubisoft had to get greedy and ruin the franchise' story...

SixKeys
07-05-2015, 03:07 PM
6 games or 3, the rest of the info could still stand. AC2's Modern Day was as lackluster as AC1's, I really don't see how by AC3 (Patrice's version, if it stayed a trilogy and he stayed) could make Desmond a master.

I think if it was a trilogy and they wanted him to be a master assassin, which to be honest SHOULD have been what happened instead of him just being a thing to use the animus for the sake of the animus, Desmond would have had to shown some kind of transformation at the end of AC1, even just a tease. AC2 should have not been confined to a little warehouse.

There was a transformation at the end of AC1: Desmond unlocking Eagle Vision in RL. As for not having enough time to turn Desmond into a master assassin by AC3, I believe they could have done it. It basically could/should have been like a mixture of ACB and AC3's (the one we ultimately got) modern day: Desmond starts losing his own identity due to the bleeding effect, seeing ghosts everywhere and falling into dreamlike states where he thinks he's in the Animus, like the Altaďr dream. These dreams could all take place in different historical eras and different assassins. One moment Desmond thinks he's an assassin in ancient Egypt, absorbs a new skill from that guy, the next moment he's in revolutionary France, following Arno or whoever, absorbs another skill, etc. These would all be short sequences, like the Altaďr memories in ACR. At some point Desmond would have to consciously make a choice to separate his own identity from that of his ancestors and choose to live in the present, OR alternatively, to recognize that there's no stopping the Bleeding Effect, that it's too late to save him, and the only thing left to do is to use the skills he has to save the world and sacrifice himself, like what happened at the end of AC3. The final Abstergo infiltration and stopping the satellite launch would be similar to the music videos we've all seen, with Desmond alternating between different ancestors and timelines as his reality crumbles around him.

I could be wrong, of course, but this is roughly what I always imagined Patrice had in mind. When Ubi decided to stretch the series, they basically just took elements from what would have been an incredibly ambitious final game and used those ideas in several individual titles.

ze_topazio
07-05-2015, 03:29 PM
I'm more curious about how AC3 itself would have been under Patrice, from the little we know it was going to be set in America but we don't know if it was going to be the American Revolution or something else.

VoXngola
07-05-2015, 03:39 PM
I'm more curious about how AC3 itself would have been under Patrice, from the little we know it was going to be set in America but we don't know if it was going to be the American Revolution or something else.

America? Where did you read that? :eek:

ze_topazio
07-05-2015, 03:47 PM
America? Where did you read that? :eek:

Here


http://kotaku.com/assassins-creed-creator-plans-a-most-ambitious-comeback-1714942873?utm_campaign=Socialflow_Kotaku_Facebook&utm_source=Kotaku_Facebook&utm_medium=Socialflow

Kotaku's boss (I think) Stephen Totilo comment in the comments section.


He is a big history buff and wanted to tell a story with AC that connected a historical adventure to a modern character. He was going to wrap up the series with an ACIII, though not the one we played. He didn’t want to talk about it much at E3, but he was telling me that it was going to be set in America, but not the way they did it. He was creative director for AC and AC II, and I believe he was done with all the story stuff and major design in AC Brotherhood before he left Ubi the first time.

I’ve heard other stories about how AC was going to go. Nolan North, who voiced the modern-day protagonist, Desmond Miles, just gave a talk over the weekend where he was talking about an old AC plan for six games that would eventually see Desmond learning from all his ancestors and becoming a kick-*** assassin. That seems a bit bigger than when Patrice was telling me earlier this month, but it does square with the idea that the games were really a tight story about Desmond and his past and not what we have now, which is a sprawl of assassin protagonists who don’t seem to all be related to each other.

VoXngola
07-05-2015, 03:51 PM
Oh wow, thanks. That's interesting!

VestigialLlama4
07-05-2015, 03:58 PM
I'm more curious about how AC3 itself would have been under Patrice, from the little we know it was going to be set in America but we don't know if it was going to be the American Revolution or something else.

I think it would be a Desmond game and a full MD AC. It would have Desmond interact with Ezio and Altair's memories and use those techniques to do Assassinations in present day New York City. There would be no Animus anymore and it would be entirely Bleeding Effect.

Based on recent information and purely on the basis of timeline (he was working on Brotherhood when he quit), I don't think Patrice Desilets had anything to do with the Kenways. I think he was involved with Altair and Ezio but nobody else. Based on that snarky comment about how he never considered doing a game in Victorian London, I think he's someone who thinks deeply about the history and setting and I don't think a game set in the American Revolution was something that interested him. He said in later interviews about 1666, set in Amsterdam in the age of Rembrandt, that some settings and historical periods can't really work around an Assassin-simulation game.

After PD, the whole focus on the team was less about story and how it fit the lore and theme, and more about find a cool historica period and setting. That's not inherently bad provided they use the Assassins as a metaphor. In AC3, much as I love the game, the historical part is there like a textbook since none of the Founders are really Assassins or really involved with the A versus T plot. There the Assassins are dead and they don't even mention the Creed to convey the sense of loss and decayed traditions. Then in Black Flag they still use the historical period but have the Assassins as this kind of Mayan Masyaf which is there solely to provide continuity rather than put you in another time and place. Then there's the poisonous mess that is Unity-Rogue where they decide to rely on cornball series lore over the historical element and the games lose their legitimacy.

Assassin_M
07-05-2015, 11:32 PM
With everything AC II introduced, I hardly think Patrice could have promptly wrapped up EVERYTHING by AC III. Something would have fallen apart. Something would have been rushed. There's the bleeding effect, there's subject 16, there's the other temples, there's the map of POEs that Abstergo found, there's the solar flare, there's the satellite, there's the Desmond-Lucy relationship, there's a WHOLE arc of Desmond finally accepting who he is (Which AC II supposedly wrapped up in one scene "Alright, i'm in, whddaya need?"). For better or worse, 3 more games to end Desmond yielded a better result. The mess started right when the decision was made to introduced ANOTHER conflict against time AND gave the modern day only 30 minutes of screen time. When was this? Oh, AC II

I-Like-Pie45
07-05-2015, 11:54 PM
With everything AC II introduced, I hardly think Patrice could have promptly wrapped up EVERYTHING by AC III. Something would have fallen apart. Something would have been rushed. There's the bleeding effect, there's subject 16, there's the other temples, there's the map of POEs that Abstergo found, there's the solar flare, there's the satellite, there's the Desmond-Lucy relationship, there's a WHOLE arc of Desmond finally accepting who he is (Which AC II supposedly wrapped up in one scene "Alright, i'm in, whddaya need?"). For better or worse, 3 more games to end Desmond yielded a better result. The mess started right when the decision was made to introduced ANOTHER conflict against time AND gave the modern day only 30 minutes of screen time. When was this? Oh, AC II
not if the game was 200 hours long

VestigialLlama4
07-06-2015, 04:37 AM
With everything AC II introduced, I hardly think Patrice could have promptly wrapped up EVERYTHING by AC III. Something would have fallen apart. Something would have been rushed. There's the bleeding effect, there's subject 16, there's the other temples, there's the map of POEs that Abstergo found, there's the solar flare, there's the satellite, there's the Desmond-Lucy relationship, there's a WHOLE arc of Desmond finally accepting who he is (Which AC II supposedly wrapped up in one scene "Alright, i'm in, whddaya need?"). For better or worse, 3 more games to end Desmond yielded a better result. The mess started right when the decision was made to introduced ANOTHER conflict against time AND gave the modern day only 30 minutes of screen time. When was this? Oh, AC II

If AC3 was going to be a Modern Day game with small portions only for Altair and Ezio via bleeding effect, then Patrice could have wrapped all that up in a single game.

The MD only seems more complicated because it gets short screen time.

Assassin_M
07-06-2015, 05:08 AM
The MD only seems more complicated because it gets short screen time.
Yes and i'm not saying it would have gotten a short screen time under Patrice. I'm saying it's a mess BECAUSE it ALREADY got short screen time AND introduced all these grand conflicts, arcs and plot lines.

That said, I didnt mention anything about JUST wrapping up. I said promptly wrap up. AC III wrapped it all up. Oh, satellite? Plllfffff, it farted and died. Lucy? Templar. And etc. A wrap up is totally different from a prompt wrap up.

VestigialLlama4
07-06-2015, 05:56 AM
Yes and i'm not saying it would have gotten a short screen time under Patrice. I'm saying it's a mess BECAUSE it ALREADY got short screen time AND introduced all these grand conflicts, arcs and plot lines.

That said, I didnt mention anything about JUST wrapping up. I said promptly wrap up. AC III wrapped it all up. Oh, satellite? Plllfffff, it farted and died. Lucy? Templar. And etc. A wrap up is totally different from a prompt wrap up.

I think PD would have dealt with that effectively. Darby McDevitt did say that AC2 was originally going to be half MD and Half historical. He probably decided that he'll do a full Modern Day game for the last game when they realized all the new assets they made for Italy didn't give enough to the MD.

The story in AC1 and AC2, even Brotherhood, was that Desmond is going crazy and losing his mind in interacting with the past. The Bleeding Effect was the big thing, bigger than the Satellite launch and the solar flare. The Bleeding Effect appeared at the end of AC1, and gives the Altair flashback in AC2 and then provides the modern-day past linkage in Brotherhood and then...gone. In Revelations, they basically neutered that, and once they did that, Desmond's story and Patrice Desilets story went bye-bye.

The logic of the games was that Desmond would follow in the path of Subject 16 and find it difficult to separate past from present, his own personality with that of his ancestors.

ACZanius
07-06-2015, 09:24 AM
Very interesting talk going on, that being said, all this being revealed how AC was originally supposed to be, brings a lot of pain as hardcore fan of the franchise. What's done is done, no hate i guess but the "what could have been" question bugs the living hell out of me, i still can't believe that Desmond story got ruined and ****ted all over and making modern day lame. I guess it's time to move on, only excitement for Syndicate and main reason i'm having my hope up is Jeffrey Yohalem nothing else. Sad about re-used Arno animations, cartoonish animations, clunky combat and being confined in one location. Instead of multiple locations across whole England. I "hope" (sigh every year the "hope") that this game advances the plot a lot and big things start to happen, stakes are high, and action in modern day.

rob.davies2014
07-06-2015, 12:52 PM
It would be awesome if one day they rebooted the franchise and told the original story...

ProdiGurl
07-06-2015, 01:17 PM
When I was an AC noob & just started my first game, Brotherhood, I didn't care about Desmond even then... and to this day I haven't played any of the seprate Desmond stories/sequences in previous games. I would have loved the series without him.
I don't think he was a charismatic enough character to warrent all the detail into his life in the first place, but that's just me.

ACfan443
07-06-2015, 02:08 PM
With everything AC II introduced, I hardly think Patrice could have promptly wrapped up EVERYTHING by AC III. Something would have fallen apart. Something would have been rushed. There's the bleeding effect, there's subject 16, there's the other temples, there's the map of POEs that Abstergo found, there's the solar flare, there's the satellite, there's the Desmond-Lucy relationship, there's a WHOLE arc of Desmond finally accepting who he is (Which AC II supposedly wrapped up in one scene "Alright, i'm in, whddaya need?"). For better or worse, 3 more games to end Desmond yielded a better result. The mess started right when the decision was made to introduced ANOTHER conflict against time AND gave the modern day only 30 minutes of screen time. When was this? Oh, AC II

AC2 enriched the lore in a way that was manageable for a fully fledged Desmond game to wrap up the overarching story, we had the solar flare, the bleeding effect, and the satellite launch. It was only until Brotherhood where Yohalem went wildly off on a tangent and the story was laden with frivolous arcs for the sake of mystery and suspense, we had Desmond's son, finding Eve, Eden, Juno, Lucy's unexplained death, the temples, the symbols, and God knows what else.

Brotherhood's the real culprit, though AC2's MD isn't without its faults.

LoyalACFan
07-07-2015, 12:06 AM
AC2 enriched the lore in a way that was manageable for a fully fledged Desmond game to wrap up the overarching story, we had the solar flare, the bleeding effect, and the satellite launch. It was only until Brotherhood where Yohalem went wildly off on a tangent and the story was laden with frivolous arcs for the sake of mystery and suspense, we had Desmond's son, finding Eve, Eden, Juno, Lucy's unexplained death, the temples, the symbols, and God knows what else.

Brotherhood's the real culprit, though AC2's MD isn't without its faults.

Gotta agree here. While Brotherhood's MD content was vastly better than AC2's in terms of gameplay, it was also where the lore seemed to get majorly derailed in retrospect. Let's not forget that they canned basically everything new that ACB introduced ("she lies not within our sight", "the sun; your son", "awaken the sixth", etc) probably because it was becoming an impossible jumble of plot threads that they couldn't possibly tie up in one game (because I'm pretty sure they weren't planning to make Revelations at that point, so AC3 would've been the direct follow-up to Brotherhood as well as the Desmond finale).

The solar flare plot was arguably unnecessary when they already had the satellite launch, but it opened up an interesting springboard for the Assassins and Templars to work together. That plotline didn't come to fruition, of course, but it at least had a clear direction to head in, instead of Brotherhood's "hey let's throw in 223143 new ideas and see which ones stick" approach.

Assassin_M
07-07-2015, 12:25 AM
Gotta agree here. While Brotherhood's MD content was vastly better than AC2's in terms of gameplay, it was also where the lore seemed to get majorly derailed in retrospect. Let's not forget that they canned basically everything new that ACB introduced ("she lies not within our sight", "the sun; your son", "awaken the sixth", etc) probably because it was becoming an impossible jumble of plot threads that they couldn't possibly tie up in one game (because I'm pretty sure they weren't planning to make Revelations at that point, so AC3 would've been the direct follow-up to Brotherhood as well as the Desmond finale).

The solar flare plot was arguably unnecessary when they already had the satellite launch, but it opened up an interesting springboard for the Assassins and Templars to work together. That plotline didn't come to fruition, of course, but it at least had a clear direction to head in, instead of Brotherhood's "hey let's throw in 223143 new ideas and see which ones stick" approach.


AC2 enriched the lore in a way that was manageable for a fully fledged Desmond game to wrap up the overarching story, we had the solar flare, the bleeding effect, and the satellite launch. It was only until Brotherhood where Yohalem went wildly off on a tangent and the story was laden with frivolous arcs for the sake of mystery and suspense, we had Desmond's son, finding Eve, Eden, Juno, Lucy's unexplained death, the temples, the symbols, and God knows what else.

Brotherhood's the real culprit, though AC2's MD isn't without its faults.

You guys are picking at lines of dialogue. AC II had those too. Minerva's mentioning of Juno and Jupiter, the other temples, what happened with Adam and Eve and so many other stuff. ACB didnt introduce all of that, AC II did.


I think PD would have dealt with that effectively. Darby McDevitt did say that AC2 was originally going to be half MD and Half historical. He probably decided that he'll do a full Modern Day game for the last game when they realized all the new assets they made for Italy didn't give enough to the MD.

The story in AC1 and AC2, even Brotherhood, was that Desmond is going crazy and losing his mind in interacting with the past. The Bleeding Effect was the big thing, bigger than the Satellite launch and the solar flare. The Bleeding Effect appeared at the end of AC1, and gives the Altair flashback in AC2 and then provides the modern-day past linkage in Brotherhood and then...gone. In Revelations, they basically neutered that, and once they did that, Desmond's story and Patrice Desilets story went bye-bye.

The logic of the games was that Desmond would follow in the path of Subject 16 and find it difficult to separate past from present, his own personality with that of his ancestors.
Well, that's the thing. AC II went from being half to half to 99.8% to 0.02% I still don't see how they'd have done it in one 15-20 hour game with JUST modern day.

LoyalACFan
07-07-2015, 04:28 AM
You guys are picking at lines of dialogue. AC II had those too. Minerva's mentioning of Juno and Jupiter, the other temples, what happened with Adam and Eve and so many other stuff. ACB didnt introduce all of that, AC II did.

Well, dialogue is pretty damned important :p And those things you said about AC2 actually got resolved one way or another. Desmond DID meet Juno and Jupiter. He DID find other temples. And we DID find out what happened with Adam and Eve, they led the revolt. We don't know every detail of their life story, sure, but we know enough for the plot to be closed; they started the war that distracted the First Civ from being able to prevent the first solar flare. There's no glaring loose ends anywhere like the ones ACB introduced.

Assassin_M
07-07-2015, 05:21 AM
Well, dialogue is pretty damned important :p And those things you said about AC2 actually got resolved one way or another. Desmond DID meet Juno and Jupiter. He DID find other temples. And we DID find out what happened with Adam and Eve, they led the revolt. We don't know every detail of their life story, sure, but we know enough for the plot to be closed; they started the war that distracted the First Civ from being able to prevent the first solar flare. There's no glaring loose ends anywhere like the ones ACB introduced.
This wasn't about what got resolved and what didn't, though. This was about whether or not ONE game could resolve ALL of those things and besides, most people don't like how most of these issues got tied up in the end, so. I think you yourself hate how some things got resolved.

VestigialLlama4
07-07-2015, 05:38 AM
This wasn't about what got resolved and what didn't, though. This was about whether or not ONE game could resolve ALL of those things and besides, most people don't like how most of these issues got tied up in the end, so. I think you yourself hate how some things got resolved.

The one thing we have to understand is that until AC: Brotherhood, the MD actually had a much simpler plot. The major complications came only with Brotherhood MD.

Everyone says AC1 had a Sattelite and that AC2 introduced the Solar Flare and the Grand Temples, but that's actually two separate elements and its not too hard to make that work in a single MD game at all.

Brotherhood introduced Desmond having to find an Apple of Eden in MD (a goal not mentioned at all in AC2, it was about Desmond acquiring Ezio's skills and learning some information). Then it introduced Juno as this Big Bad First Civ Member and then finally it had Desmond killing Lucy. This made things only more complicated and the biggest copout in the entire franchise and one I am sure Patrice Desilets never considered was Juno being the main villain. Juno wasn't there in AC1 and AC2 and appeared at the end of Brotherhood and then comes in AC3 in a big-way as the villain of the entire franchise. Structurally they built up Juno's role specifically to keep the MD rolling after the Solar Flare is averted.

Assassin_M
07-07-2015, 06:54 AM
The one thing we have to understand is that until AC: Brotherhood, the MD actually had a much simpler plot. The major complications came only with Brotherhood MD.
I disagree. My major gripe with AC III was how the satellite was handled. It was an important plot point and it really wasn't one dimensional at all. With the satellite, came the piece of eden, the end of the world scenario, Leila Morino, the map to OTHER pieces of eden.


Everyone says AC1 had a Sattelite and that AC2 introduced the Solar Flare and the Grand Temples, but that's actually two separate elements and its not too hard to make that work in a single MD game at all.
We're saying that because the satellite was the main conflict. Adding another main conflict is never a good thing.


Brotherhood introduced Desmond having to find an Apple of Eden in MD (a goal not mentioned at all in AC2, it was about Desmond acquiring Ezio's skills and learning some information).
Finding pieces of eden was actually a goal since AC I.


Then it introduced Juno as this Big Bad First Civ Member and then finally it had Desmond killing Lucy.
Killing Lucy was also part of Patrice's plan according to Jeffery and Darby


This made things only more complicated and the biggest copout in the entire franchise and one I am sure Patrice Desilets never considered was Juno being the main villain. Juno wasn't there in AC1 and AC2 and appeared at the end of Brotherhood and then comes in AC3 in a big-way as the villain of the entire franchise. Structurally they built up Juno's role specifically to keep the MD rolling after the Solar Flare is averted.
It would have made more sense if Minerva was the villain but I don't think it muddled things too much. Just swap Juno with Minerva and you have the whole plot of Minerva being big baddy. ACB just repeated it for some odd reason.

Sorrosyss
07-07-2015, 08:25 AM
Listening to these comments, I recall thinking that at the time that the modern day was building to the point that we would play Desmond in the modern day exclusively. It did seem pretty obvious that was where it was going.

Kinda makes the ending to ACIII even more sad. Such wasted potential. I do think the series needs to stop killing off characters for dramatic effect. It's so over used now, we kind of expect it each title. If they do bring us a new modern day protagonist, they best not kill them off too. There is this thing called emotional investment dearest Ubisoft. :p

VestigialLlama4
07-07-2015, 08:59 AM
Listening to these comments, I recall thinking that at the time that the modern day was building to the point that we would play Desmond in the modern day exclusively. It did seem pretty obvious that was where it was going.

Kinda makes the ending to ACIII even more sad. Such wasted potential. I do think the series needs to stop killing off characters for dramatic effect. It's so over used now, we kind of expect it each title. If they do bring us a new modern day protagonist, they best not kill them off too. There is this thing called emotional investment dearest Ubisoft. :p

Wasted potential is pretty much what everyone feels about AC these days. It just wastes more and more with each new game to the point that with Syndicate its totally hollowed out of ideas and inspiration. In fact I think that's what people will remember about Assassin's Creed as a legacy, the road of missed opportunities and failed potential.

pacmanate
07-07-2015, 09:34 AM
Wasted potential is pretty much what everyone feels about AC these days. It just wastes more and more with each new game to the point that with Syndicate its totally hollowed out of ideas and inspiration. In fact I think that's what people will remember about Assassin's Creed as a legacy, the road of missed opportunities and failed potential.

unfortunately i agree, which is a shame. AC is basically Call of Duty, idc what anyone says.

New year = New Map, New Protag, A few new gadgets

It sums up Call of Duty and AC perfectly now. I guess the difference BEFORE AC4 was that AC games actually had a contained story about Desmond and his Journey. Now its all over the place.

We had AC4 which showed Juno not being at "full strength", AC Unity which used Modern Day as a Vector for us even being able to play Unity, nothing happened to Juno, and then we have AC Rogue which doesn't show any progression of Juno at all.

Thats 3 games since Desmond's death where the next Modern Day threat (juno) has had little to no progression at all.

D.I.D.
07-07-2015, 10:33 AM
unfortunately i agree, which is a shame. AC is basically Call of Duty, idc what anyone says.

New year = New Map, New Protag, A few new gadgets

It sums up Call of Duty and AC perfectly now. I guess the difference BEFORE AC4 was that AC games actually had a contained story about Desmond and his Journey. Now its all over the place.

We had AC4 which showed Juno not being at "full strength", AC Unity which used Modern Day as a Vector for us even being able to play Unity, nothing happened to Juno, and then we have AC Rogue which doesn't show any progression of Juno at all.

Thats 3 games since Desmond's death where the next Modern Day threat (juno) has had little to no progression at all.

Constant progression in a story that is intentionally delaying its own conclusion has a monotony all of its own. Plot lines have to be left fallow from time to time, especially on games which are not treated as essential to the series. Rogue couldn't have had anything vital in it because it was not accessible to enough of the players, given that many XBO/PS4 owners sold their old machines and games to buy the latest gen instead.

This series desperately needs to learn how to open and close loops in its story in the way that superhero comics do (a process I've mentioned many times which is known in the industry as the Levitz Paradigm) but it's hard when your "issues" come out only once a year (or maybe twice!). It's harder to get a sense of that "bricks in a wall" thing where plots can resolve while others are rising to their peaks, but then again I don't feel like this series is even trying to do that.

pacmanate
07-07-2015, 11:47 AM
Constant progression in a story that is intentionally delaying its own conclusion has a monotony all of its own. Plot lines have to be left fallow from time to time, especially on games which are not treated as essential to the series. Rogue couldn't have had anything vital in it because it was not accessible to enough of the players, given that many XBO/PS4 owners sold their old machines and games to buy the latest gen instead.

This series desperately needs to learn how to open and close loops in its story in the way that superhero comics do (a process I've mentioned many times which is known in the industry as the Levitz Paradigm) but it's hard when your "issues" come out only once a year (or maybe twice!). It's harder to get a sense of that "bricks in a wall" thing where plots can resolve while others are rising to their peaks, but then again I don't feel like this series is even trying to do that.

Well barring AC Rogue you still had AC4 and AC Unity

dxsxhxcx
07-07-2015, 12:21 PM
Wasted potential is pretty much what everyone feels about AC these days. It just wastes more and more with each new game to the point that with Syndicate its totally hollowed out of ideas and inspiration. In fact I think that's what people will remember about Assassin's Creed as a legacy, the road of missed opportunities and failed potential.

good name for an AC game, Assassin's Creed: Wasted Potential...

Shahkulu101
07-07-2015, 03:42 PM
good name for an AC game, Assassin's Creed: Wasted Potential...

That's what they should call the remastering...

Fatal-Feit
07-07-2015, 08:48 PM
Meanwhile, I'm rejoicing the fact all of that never happened. :p

Shahkulu101
07-07-2015, 08:51 PM
Meanwhile, I'm rejoicing the fact all of that never happened. :p

Apprehend this madman!

Namikaze_17
07-07-2015, 09:00 PM
Time travel sounds more generic honestly...

I don't see the "wasted potential".

That's not to say what we got was anything spectacular.

LoyalACFan
07-08-2015, 02:59 PM
Time travel sounds more generic honestly...

I don't see the "wasted potential".

That's not to say what we got was anything spectacular.

I don't think it was ever going to be literal time travel, more like Desmond being able to enter genetic memories without the use of an Animus. Like the Bleeding Effect, except completely controlled. Plus I think they actually did tease this in AC2 when they first explain the Bleeding Effect, when Shaun says "one day you may be able to visit your ancestors without the Animus, which wouldn't be bad if you could control it, but up until now, nobody has." Or something to that effect. At the very least, it brings up the possibility.

Unless they were going to throw out some SERIOUS sci-fi mumbo-jumbo in the next four games, there was nothing in the lore to suggest that a time machine was even possible.

Hans684
07-08-2015, 03:14 PM
Unless they were going to throw out some SERIOUS sci-fi mumbo-jumbo in the next four games, there was nothing in the lore to suggest that a time machine was even possible.

Actually there is something of the sort, Abstergo tested it and it worked but they want to avoid things like paradoxes so they have hidden it. That's all we know of it.

ace3001
07-08-2015, 03:20 PM
Instead they tossed out plot points that longtime players wanted to see resolved, kicked Patrice out, and ground the series to dirt. Amazing.

SixKeys
07-08-2015, 04:05 PM
Plus I think they actually did tease this in AC2 when they first explain the Bleeding Effect, when Shaun says "one day you may be able to visit your ancestors without the Animus, which wouldn't be bad if you could control it, but up until now, nobody has." Or something to that effect. At the very least, it brings up the possibility.

I forgot all about that line. That makes me even sadder. It pretty much confirms they were teasing things to come in the final Desmond game and it never happened.

http://i.imgur.com/4uvnWYE.gif

I-Like-Pie45
07-08-2015, 04:13 PM
imagine playing a schizophrenic bleeding effect victim in modern day whose reliving 200 ancestors lives simultaneously

ze_topazio
07-08-2015, 06:28 PM
Imagine a Samurai parkouring in the streets of ancient Rome while being chased by Spanish conquistadors and Soviet helicopters, passing by medieval French peasants selling iPhones while the pyramids can be seen in the background in the middle of the Amazonian forest where a battle between the armies of the Achaemenid Empire and Zulu Kingdom is happening.

Xstantin
07-08-2015, 08:50 PM
Imagine a Samurai parkouring in the streets of ancient Rome while being chased by Spanish conquistadors and Soviet helicopters, passing by medieval French peasants selling iPhones while the pyramids can be seen in the background in the middle of the Amazonian forest where a battle between the armies of the Achaemenid Empire and Zulu Kingdom is happening.

That might shake things up a bit actually. Like Unity's red violin thing was interesting imo.

LoyalACFan
07-08-2015, 09:24 PM
Actually there is something of the sort, Abstergo tested it and it worked but they want to avoid things like paradoxes so they have hidden it. That's all we know of it.

Holy crap, you're right, I forgot about that. It was a Piece of Eden they found, I think. But then again most everything from those emails got retconned; they also said 99% of the population of Africa had died from mysterious ailments. Although I'm kind of glad that part got retconned, it was pretty dumb.

Hans684
07-08-2015, 09:44 PM
Holy crap, you're right, I forgot about that. It was a Piece of Eden they found, I think. But then again most everything from those emails got retconned; they also said 99% of the population of Africa had died from mysterious ailments. Although I'm kind of glad that part got retconned, it was pretty dumb.

Well this time travel thing hasn't been retconned, still exist. It just hasn't been expanded on.