PDA

View Full Version : Hypothesis: No AC Main Entry Game in 2016



crusader_prophet
10-27-2015, 09:58 PM
This is just a notion, but I was thinking of the release timeline of the AC movie which is December 2016, the holidays. Considering if a game releases during the typical month of October, it will be just about 2 months for two main doses of AC to fans. Do you think they will take the time and opportunity of 2016 and use it to perfect the main entry game for 2017? Because there will be quite a lot audience who might become interested in the franchise games after watching the movie.

cawatrooper9
10-27-2015, 10:09 PM
Maybe- inversely, I think they might make the game and the film actually promote each other. From a marketing standpoint it could be risky but it's also genius- from a production standpoint... well, I'm sure the film studio is wholly different than the game studio, and even though some of the developers are creative consultants for the film, I don't think the production of the game and movie will really hinder each other.

VestigialLlama4
10-27-2015, 10:20 PM
This is just a notion, but I was thinking of the release timeline of the AC movie which is December 2016, the holidays. Considering if a game releases during the typical month of October, it will be just about 2 months for two main doses of AC to fans. Do you think they will take the time and opportunity of 2016 and use it to perfect the main entry game for 2017? Because there will be quite a lot audience who might become interested in the franchise games after watching the movie.

Well movies and games have totally different audiences. The audience who sees a movie will always be bigger than the gaming audience and a movie based on a game is not the same as one based on books or comics. If you see Harry Potter you can buy the book if you are interested, but to get into AC games after seeing the movie you have to find the right PC/Console first and then buy the games...there is that wall between the total newcomer and the adapted medium that's there in games but not with other mediums.

So I don't think there's any reason for Ubisoft to skip an annual year. Besides, if the AC movie tanks and it most likely will (since video game movies suck as a rule), then they would have one more year of internet scapegoating to put up with. And thanks to a movie having a wider audience, that's a bigger field of ridicule than before.

harsab
10-27-2015, 10:33 PM
Funnily enough i actually thought this will actually happen months ago but i think they will release one next year but it could happen.

If the next game is set in Japan, an extra year to work on the game might make it something groundbreaking.

crusader_prophet
10-27-2015, 10:35 PM
Well movies and games have totally different audiences. The audience who sees a movie will always be bigger than the gaming audience and a movie based on a game is not the same as one based on books or comics. If you see Harry Potter you can buy the book if you are interested, but to get into AC games after seeing the movie you have to find the right PC/Console first and then buy the games...there is that wall between the total newcomer and the adapted medium that's there in games but not with other mediums.

So I don't think there's any reason for Ubisoft to skip an annual year. Besides, if the AC movie tanks and it most likely will (since video game movies suck as a rule), then they would have one more year of internet scapegoating to put up with. And thanks to a movie having a wider audience, that's a bigger field of ridicule than before.

True, I was just lying to myself that may be they will take the year off and make the next game something....sigh I'll stop rambling. Thanks for the responses.

phoenix-force411
10-27-2015, 10:43 PM
The next game may be one of the more ambitious titles. It's after 2-3 games before they revamp the entire mechanics again. But honestly, I have no idea where we're headed, and I would hate for the setting to be in Japan. I really like settings with skyscrapers. Unity and Syndicate brought that back.

TO_M
10-28-2015, 01:25 AM
Ubi's definitely not going to pass up the opportunity to release another AC, that would mean passing up on another cash-grab opportunity. If need be they'll just pump out another 100% filler game like Rogue.

LoyalACFan
10-28-2015, 03:28 AM
There'll be one, and you can bet your bums that there'll be some form of cross-promotion. I'm expecting an in-game Aguilar skin at the very least.

True_Assassin92
10-28-2015, 01:44 PM
They might pull a Far cry and release the game in february or march. It gives them extra time to work on it, whilst the movie fills the gap?

Sushiglutton
10-28-2015, 01:50 PM
I agree with what others have said. It would make no sense to not release an AC game the same year as the movie.



They might pull a Far cry and release the game in february or march. It gives them extra time to work on it, whilst the movie fills the gap?

They want the kids to drag their parents directly from the cinema to Gamestop to pick up the latest game :p. They can't wait to february. Well that's my theory anyway, who knows.

dxsxhxcx
10-28-2015, 02:01 PM
the movie will raise awareness to the franchise and, assuming the next entry will take place in Japan (?) like that image they found in AC4 seems to imply, all those newcomers will wet their pants with the setting, because, ninjas!


Ubisoft won't lose this opportunity to make more money, I wouldn't even be surprised if the events of the movie and the next year's entry end up connected somehow...

Journey93
10-28-2015, 02:33 PM
Sadly there will be one. I wish they would take next year off though

ze_topazio
10-28-2015, 02:40 PM
Maybe a glorified dlc style game with Aguillar.

Locopells
10-28-2015, 03:28 PM
Given the cheap crappy games that get cranked out with every blockbuster, would you be surprised if a professional game company took the chance to do a decent one?! :cool:

cawatrooper9
10-28-2015, 03:38 PM
Given the cheap crappy games that get cranked out with every blockbuster, would you be surprised if a professional game company took the chance to do a decent one?! :cool:

That's why I'm interested to see where this goes. We so often get the rushed game adaptation of a film (though those seem much less frequent now). I feel that in this case, the roles may be switched, or at least reexamined.

Shahkulu101
10-28-2015, 03:41 PM
I think it would be hilarious if it was a movie tie-in and they outsourced development to some other studio. Imagine the outrage, it would be more entertaining than playing an AC game!

cawatrooper9
10-28-2015, 03:46 PM
I think it would be hilarious if it was a movie tie-in and they outsourced development to some other studio. Imagine the outrage, it would be more entertaining than playing an AC game!

Let's let EA do it.

Or maybe Tell Tale Games' "Tales from the Animus".

VestigialLlama4
10-28-2015, 05:25 PM
Having a game adaptation of a movie is not how transmedia is supposed to work. It's about doing things that you don't do in games.

Personally, I would tell film-makers and writers to adapt AC willy-nilly and see where it lands. Don't make an expanded universe thing. A movie is not the same as a game. Ezio Auditore in games is a decent character, in movies he'd be a huge cliche and be laughed out of town. I can maybe see Altair, Connor, Edward and Adewale making decent movie protagonists since that era they're part of is a good deal more realistic than the games before and after, Connor especially would be an interesting character for film-makers, since a Native American boy with an Oedipus complex is a rare character.

I always think that Black Flag would make an awesome movie. Just remove the AvT and Sage stuff, and you would have a kickass Pirates of the Caribbean done right kind of story and setting. It's a very Hollywood pitch, "two prisoners, one white, one black, escape the Spanish treasure fleet of an hurricane and convert their getaway brig into a pirate ship...together they shank ships."

cawatrooper9
10-28-2015, 06:52 PM
Having a game adaptation of a movie is not how transmedia is supposed to work. It's about doing things that you don't do in games.

Personally, I would tell film-makers and writers to adapt AC willy-nilly and see where it lands. Don't make an expanded universe thing. A movie is not the same as a game. Ezio Auditore in games is a decent character, in movies he'd be a huge cliche and be laughed out of town. I can maybe see Altair, Connor, Edward and Adewale making decent movie protagonists since that era they're part of is a good deal more realistic than the games before and after, Connor especially would be an interesting character for film-makers, since a Native American boy with an Oedipus complex is a rare character.

I always think that Black Flag would make an awesome movie. Just remove the AvT and Sage stuff, and you would have a kickass Pirates of the Caribbean done right kind of story and setting. It's a very Hollywood pitch, "two prisoners, one white, one black, escape the Spanish treasure fleet of an hurricane and convert their getaway brig into a pirate ship...together they shank ships."

Right, but we already know that's not what they're doing. This is a new Assassin in a new time period... so why not make it part of the game's canon as well?
The ties don't have to be that strong- I don't expect to see Ezio on film- I wouldn't even necessarily want Sean or Rebecca in the MD parts of the movie. But it would be cool if in the AC 2016 game someone at least mentions Aguilar, or if the film pays homage to some of the past Assassins.

VestigialLlama4
10-28-2015, 07:15 PM
Right, but we already know that's not what they're doing. This is a new Assassin in a new time period... so why not make it part of the game's canon as well?
The ties don't have to be that strong- I don't expect to see Ezio on film- I wouldn't even necessarily want Sean or Rebecca in the MD parts of the movie. But it would be cool if in the AC 2016 game someone at least mentions Aguilar, or if the film pays homage to some of the past Assassins.

I think that will be there. We're definitely going to be seeing some familiar faces which Ubisoft promised. There were rumors that they wanted Robert Downey Jr to play Leonardo.

It's funny because this kind of goes into what makes AC so unique. A lot of people think that AC's historical reconstructions is cinematic but actually it's something unique to games as a medium. In the movies, you rarely get that total sense of the environment because it's always Prague standing in for Victorian London (as in From Hell or Guy Ritchie's Sherlock Holmes), it's never really the past in any historical movie. They build sets and use CGI and they cast actors to interpret the past, so you don't have Michelangelo you have Charlton Heston playing Michelangelo. The problem is that the actors, even good ones, are too contemporary. So if Robert Downey Jr plays Leonardo or Ezio we will look and say, "Whoa it's Iron Man...obviously the guy he's playing is the coolest Evah...I want a movie with Iron Man in Renaissance Italy" or if they cast say, Tom Hiddleston as Haytham, "Wow British Loki...". There are exceptions. Daniel Day-Lewis in Spielberg's Lincoln really feels like Lincoln but then you're never going to get him to appear in an AC movie.

In games because it's all animated paradoxically there's that equality. The fact is Florence in AC2 is closer to Renaissance Florence than making a movie shot in real Florence today using the real buildings. Because of changes over time and other degradation and all kinds of reconstruction, a lot of these monuments aren't truly authentic to the original design. San Marco's Campanile in Venice is reconstructed after it collapsed in the early 20th Century. So reconstructing that Campanile using Render in AC2 is, from a strict aesthetic pespective, just as authentic as the present structure that exists. The wooden Rialto bridge we see in AC2 is more authentic to Renaissance Venice than the current much grander structure we see there.

In games the only designations between characters is Player, Unique Modelled NPCs and Random crowd NPCs and enemy archetypes. In movies, when you cast a major actor in a minor role, that minor role becomes important even if it's a lowly guard or soldier. Like Lucius Fox in Batman is played by Morgan Freeman and he's kind of cool, in the Arkham games he's not there a lot.

cawatrooper9
10-28-2015, 08:50 PM
I think that will be there. We're definitely going to be seeing some familiar faces which Ubisoft promised. There were rumors that they wanted Robert Downey Jr to play Leonardo.


*throws up in mouth*



It's funny because this kind of goes into what makes AC so unique. A lot of people think that AC's historical reconstructions is cinematic but actually it's something unique to games as a medium. In the movies, you rarely get that total sense of the environment because it's always Prague standing in for Victorian London (as in From Hell or Guy Ritchie's Sherlock Holmes), it's never really the past in any historical movie. They build sets and use CGI and they cast actors to interpret the past, so you don't have Michelangelo you have Charlton Heston playing Michelangelo. The problem is that the actors, even good ones, are too contemporary. So if Robert Downey Jr plays Leonardo or Ezio we will look and say, "Whoa it's Iron Man...obviously the guy he's playing is the coolest Evah...I want a movie with Iron Man in Renaissance Italy" or if they cast say, Tom Hiddleston as Haytham, "Wow British Loki...". There are exceptions. Daniel Day-Lewis in Spielberg's Lincoln really feels like Lincoln but then you're never going to get him to appear in an AC movie.

In games because it's all animated paradoxically there's that equality. The fact is Florence in AC2 is closer to Renaissance Florence than making a movie shot in real Florence today using the real buildings. Because of changes over time and other degradation and all kinds of reconstruction, a lot of these monuments aren't truly authentic to the original design. San Marco's Campanile in Venice is reconstructed after it collapsed in the early 20th Century. So reconstructing that Campanile using Render in AC2 is, from a strict aesthetic pespective, just as authentic as the present structure that exists. The wooden Rialto bridge we see in AC2 is more authentic to Renaissance Venice than the current much grander structure we see there.

In games the only designations between characters is Player, Unique Modelled NPCs and Random crowd NPCs and enemy archetypes. In movies, when you cast a major actor in a minor role, that minor role becomes important even if it's a lowly guard or soldier. Like Lucius Fox in Batman is played by Morgan Freeman and he's kind of cool, in the Arkham games he's not there a lot.



Right, so casting is an issue- but that's something the casting directors will have to deal with. I'd much prefer to have relatively unknowns playing the majority of parts (but I get that we need a star like Fassbender to draw crowds).

VestigialLlama4
10-28-2015, 09:04 PM
Right, so casting is an issue- but that's something the casting directors will have to deal with. I'd much prefer to have relatively unknowns playing the majority of parts (but I get that we need a star like Fassbender to draw crowds).

It's weird but Fassbender strikes me as the wrong kind of actor for Assassin's Creed. He basically plays cold, menacing types like Magneto or Steve Jobs or Carl Jung in "A Dangerous Method", he'd make a good Templar, like Haytham. But he doesn't really have that sense of caring about people, that idealism that you need to be a heroic figure.

That's the other issue with AC...diversity. It's weird but consider AC1, most of the major characters are Arab (Altair, Malik, Al Mualim, Damascus and Acre Rafiqs, Five of the Nine Templars). That automatically makes it pretty much unadaptable for a mainstream movie. It's one case where a game is actually teaching Hollywood lessons. In America it's still a big deal to have a movie with largely African-American or Latino American casts, leave alone Arab characters or a Crusades-based movie with Arab heroes, which has basically never happened, there's not one example. It's always about the Noble Christian Crusaders who come to "heathen" lands.

AC1 is still the most diverse game since even AC3 you had Achilles and Connor but most of the rest of the cast (and the Homestead and other Assassins) were white. After that you have Freedom Cry and Liberation and those two games are worth doing without AvT stuff, since it's fascinating era of history that's never been explored...ever.

STDlyMcStudpants
10-28-2015, 09:09 PM
Im REALLY hoping for a Desmond Collection next year (AC1,AC2 ACB,ACR,AC3 with all DLC - MAYBE the handhelds thrown in there too), give them time to create something really great for the 10 year anniversary in 2017

cawatrooper9
10-28-2015, 09:18 PM
It's weird but Fassbender strikes me as the wrong kind of actor for Assassin's Creed. He basically plays cold, menacing types like Magneto or Steve Jobs or Carl Jung in "A Dangerous Method", he'd make a good Templar, like Haytham. But he doesn't really have that sense of caring about people, that idealism that you need to be a heroic figure.

I think he can do alright. His Magneto/Jung are both more cold as you mentioned, but I think he has the acting chops to be more versatile for this role.


That's the other issue with AC...diversity. It's weird but consider AC1, most of the major characters are Arab (Altair, Malik, Al Mualim, Damascus and Acre Rafiqs, Five of the Nine Templars). That automatically makes it pretty much unadaptable for a mainstream movie. It's one case where a game is actually teaching Hollywood lessons. In America it's still a big deal to have a movie with largely African-American or Latino American casts, leave alone Arab characters or a Crusades-based movie with Arab heroes, which has basically never happened, there's not one example. It's always about the Noble Christian Crusaders who come to "heathen" lands.

AC1 is still the most diverse game since even AC3 you had Achilles and Connor but most of the rest of the cast (and the Homestead and other Assassins) were white. After that you have Freedom Cry and Liberation and those two games are worth doing without AvT stuff, since it's fascinating era of history that's never been explored...ever.
AC1 is definitely one of the most diverse (perhaps other than Revelations). It would be cool to see a setting like that in the future, but ONLY if they do it right. I'd hate to see a setting like that wasted with a whitewashed cast- the most recent egregious error like this is Exodus Gods and Kings (but that movie already had a lot going against it without considering casting).

VestigialLlama4
10-28-2015, 09:28 PM
I think he can do alright. His Magneto/Jung are both more cold as you mentioned, but I think he has the acting chops to be more versatile for this role.

True, and he has the intellectual air to him, which is needed.


AC1 is definitely one of the most diverse (perhaps other than Revelations). It would be cool to see a setting like that in the future, but ONLY if they do it right. I'd hate to see a setting like that wasted with a whitewashed cast- the most recent egregious error like this is Exodus Gods and Kings (but that movie already had a lot going against it without considering casting).

It's funny but you almost never have Jewish actors playing Jewish prophets in American movies. Like that movie that came out Noah, you had Russell Crowe, Austrialian prophet. For this movie above you have Batman. There hasn't been a single Jesus movie where he's been played by someone who is Jewish...and if that should ever happen, I can imagine it would not go down well with some people, even if it's actually correct.

cawatrooper9
10-28-2015, 09:41 PM
It's funny but you almost never have Jewish actors playing Jewish prophets in American movies. Like that movie that came out Noah, you had Russell Crowe, Austrialian prophet. For this movie above you have Batman. There hasn't been a single Jesus movie where he's been played by someone who is Jewish...and if that should ever happen, I can imagine it would not go down well with some people, even if it's actually correct.
Well, this is hardly the place for social critiques (of which I think we'd almost absolutely agree on) but it's generally stereotyped that religion and conservativism go hand in hand- so I'm not surprised that biblical stories don't necessarily portray their characters as demographically authentic, regardless of the moral or historical issues raised by doing so.
However, I would think that other movies should be able to do this by now, and audiences should be willing to see it. Studios always pander to the masses, but I think they understand what the masses want. AC has steered away from making a AAA game with a sole woman protagonist, presumably because they don't think the market will accept. However, I think the public's response to Evie shows that we DO want that.

VestigialLlama4
10-28-2015, 09:54 PM
Well, this is hardly the place for social critiques (of which I think we'd almost absolutely agree on) but it's generally stereotyped that religion and conservativism go hand in hand- so I'm not surprised that biblical stories don't necessarily portray their characters as demographically authentic, regardless of the moral or historical issues raised by doing so.
However, I would think that other movies should be able to do this by now, and audiences should be willing to see it. Studios always pander to the masses, but I think they understand what the masses want. AC has steered away from making a AAA game with a sole woman protagonist, presumably because they don't think the market will accept. However, I think the public's response to Evie shows that we DO want that.


The public is usually ahead of the studios and companies. It's just that from their perspective they can only hear the vocal minorities. It's like with AC3, everyone says Connor is divisive, but the only opinions that have an effect in that divide is the people who disliked Connor, the ones who actually like the guy don't get heard or have their feelings respected. It's sad that a company doesn't respect the loyalty of its consumers in that respect. The people who paid money for AC3 and liked the game and character, get stereotyped as people who say stuff on Tumblr, some reference I don't usually get but I remember reading it at Kotaku. So that leads to ROGUE where every loose end from AC3, from Connor's supporting cast to Connor's ship gets rounded up, except Connor himself. And then Syndicate set probably a few decades after Connor's death doesn't mention him but focuses on a guy who died 130 years and whose English career is pretty boring and uninspiring.

The thing about this hypocrisy is that people like Freedom Cry or Liberation and you'll have them say this should be a full game and the like. I am pretty sure that they would have liked Connor if he was DLC and then they would say he should get his full game too.

So with Syndicate, Ubisoft will keep saying, "Oh sure they liked Evie but that's because she doesn't actually do the really main assassinations and she's basically optional" but if they had made her the star of a full game she would not have gotten much favor I think. So it becomes this self-fulfilling thing.