PDA

View Full Version : Jack The Ripper Plot discussion and analysis(Spoilers Duh)



RA503
12-16-2015, 04:45 AM
I create this tread for people post their personal opinions about the DLC and discuss the plot

I found the DLC a bit disapointing,the conclusion is meh and we don't have any Piece of Eden in the plot (but with some observations I will tell in the end)

The cool parts is that I really surprised that we can play as Jack I very curious to see the opinions of the other fans on this forum,is really ground breaking, is like GTA,Postal or Hatred is very fun and power fantasy,I feel back in my Teenager times whem I watch South Park hiding from my mom.

the bad is that someone will feel disapointed with Jack's back story,but still a bether option tham be Jacob.

the Huge surprise is that we have Helix Glyph again and more Assassin Intel,put they is a little disapointing and trown hints to Japan,India,China is a Obvious atempt to Tease the fans with multiples possibilities like in Black Flag E-mails...

We don't have a Piece of Eden in the plot put the Fear mechanics was created by Indian Assassins and we have hints that maybe the Goddess Kali is connected to that, I hope we see more about that in The last M and India...

VestigialLlama4
12-16-2015, 05:21 AM
I actually think that Ubisoft, in terms of plot and who the Ripper was, did a pretty good job. I thought it was quite cunning that Jack the Ripper really is...just Jack the Ripper.

It's a really sad story, incredibly bleak tone.

The real problem is the absolute lack of any details. It's the spin-your-wheels approach we see in Ubisoft these days. But then you know, once Jeffrey Yohalem admitted that they don't really care about the additional details when they make games these days, I kind of had catharsis about that and try not to invest myself too much into the lore.

ImaginaryRuins
12-16-2015, 05:58 AM
I actually think that Ubisoft, in terms of plot and who the Ripper was, did a pretty good job. I thought it was quite cunning that Jack the Ripper really is...just Jack the Ripper.

It's a really sad story, incredibly bleak tone.

The real problem is the absolute lack of any details. It's the spin-your-wheels approach we see in Ubisoft these days. But then you know, once Jeffrey Yohalem admitted that they don't really care about the additional details when they make games these days, I kind of had catharsis about that and try not to invest myself too much into the lore.

The identify of Jack is already hinted rather early, which is a disappointment to me. The final fight is also not very interesting. Fear is the theme, and with Jack's background, why Ubisoft not take a step forward and e.g. make the final fight room darker as the enemy lurk in the dark ready to strike from any direction any time to induce fear to players? They should have made this fight a little bit more like survival horror section instead of the usual open conflict.

Eddo36
12-16-2015, 06:15 AM
But it was okay for Altair, Ezio, and others to kill town guards back in their days?

RVSage
12-16-2015, 06:58 AM
I guess the story was good. For once a really dark story. This is what Rogue could have been, a story about a maniac, with assassin training, rather than Shay's dull story. In a way I am glad they did not mix jack the ripper with AC lore (but of course they made him an assassin). This was a pure story based DLC, of a real historical event, they actually maintained the anonymity of his appearance, which I thought was very neat.

Regarding the final fight, A normal fight is much better than, the forced fight we had in the main campaign.

D.I.D.
12-16-2015, 07:32 AM
Different characters, hundreds of years apart, in different countries.

Besides, they can make a rule change for whatever reason. I haven't played the DLC yet, but it's obviously something they did this time in order to make the game a little harder and thereby more fun.

It sounds better to me both for gameplay and thematic reasons. I've always felt uncomfortable killing police and guards. In Ezio's time the guards are very thuggish and bully people so it didn't feel quite so bad, but when you have guards, soldiers and police who are programmed to behave decently then it feels a bit wrong to be allowed to kill them. It might have been more interesting if we were forced to flee them if they moved to attack us, or if we'd had a desync limit like we do with civilians.

ImaginaryRuins
12-16-2015, 07:44 AM
In Syndicate I tried my best not to attack policemen (except when going to Perks and achievements), but when policemen attacked me first I would kill them.

I-Like-Pie45
12-16-2015, 08:04 AM
they knew what they were getting themselves into when they signed up for the guard job, so they have no one to blame but themselves when the assassin popped out and stabbed them

HDinHB
12-16-2015, 08:39 AM
The guards Alta´r and Ezio killed glowed red in eagle vision. The police in Unity and Syndicate glow blue. Like Imaginary, I tried to avoid killing cops except in self-defense. I didn't go out of my way to kill red guards in the older games either (unless they shot me while on a rooftop), but like Pie says, they knew what they were getting into.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iQdDRrcAOjA

LoyalACFan
12-16-2015, 09:07 AM
Honestly, this is something that should have been in the games quite a while ago if we're sticking rigidly true to the "stay thy blade from the flesh of innocents" thing. Hostile soldiers and hired Medici thugs can be kinda justified, but it always felt a bit strange massacring beat cops in Revelations/Unity/Syndicate. That said, this DLC was a stupid place to introduce it, since Syndicate proper actually gives you a trophy for killing cops and jacking their carriages.

VestigialLlama4
12-16-2015, 09:10 AM
The fact is boss-fights suck in the AC games. The only good boss fights are the Legendary Ship battles. Aside from that you have setpiece fights like Ezio vs Rodrigo at the Vatican, Connor vs King Washington atop the Pyramid that are cool to see but not great from gameplay.

The one part of the game that I thought was cool was the one where Jack unleashes hallucinogens on Evie and makes her fight twins. That was before the final boss but man I wish they took that further.

eagleforlife1
12-16-2015, 01:18 PM
I liked the DLC on the whole. But I was really disappointed that Jacob wasn't killed off. We have never seen an assassin slain by his enemy, okay, Adewale was, but we only played as him in DLC.

I jut felt, as we have multiple protagonists, that this was the perfect opportunity to do so.

I mean, this is Jack the Ripper. What better way to get his own back on the Assassin's then to kill his arch nemesis and let his sister find him dead? Really weak choice in my opinion.

VestigialLlama4
12-16-2015, 01:44 PM
I liked the DLC on the whole. But I was really disappointed that Jacob wasn't killed off. We have never seen an assassin slain by his enemy, okay, Adewale was, but we only played as him in DLC.

I jut felt, as we have multiple protagonists, that this was the perfect opportunity to do so.

I mean, this is Jack the Ripper. What better way to get his own back on the Assassin's then to kill his arch nemesis and let his sister find him dead? Really weak choice in my opinion.

If Jack the Ripper was a main game villain that would happen, but he's a DLC character so, no dice.

SixKeys
12-16-2015, 02:29 PM
I avoid killing cops whenever possible since they're just doing their job, unless they attack me first. It's weird that the DLC would change something so drastically from the main game. Makes sense though, wish they'd keep the rule for future games.

Nickyhaswifi
12-16-2015, 02:31 PM
I posted this in another thread but I'm not sure how I feel about the dark, depressing tone. Both Evie and Jacob seem incredibly sad and guilt ridden. Because Syndicate was so light hearted it felt a bit like crossing porn with Disney - just wrong.

It upset me to watch that vile man spit in Evie's face and try to grab her privates.

I adore Jacob in this though. He's changed a lot, he's actually more like Evie now. He's a proper Assassin now with his little initiates - he is much more patient, a planner and more compassionate (the way he treated Nelly and Jack despite everything the latter had done)... and he's still very handsome. His hair is better.


The DLC is very buggy on PS4. Had to restart missions quite a lot and as for the missions themselves... the stealth is bad in some places. The prostitute liberation missions seems like the devs just spammed guards everywhere just so you can use your fear gas. And the kidnapping mechanic is overused - and without the skill that stops the target running away.

VestigialLlama4
12-16-2015, 02:50 PM
I posted this in another thread but I'm not sure how I feel about the dark, depressing tone. Both Evie and Jacob seem incredibly sad and guilt ridden. Because Syndicate was so light hearted it felt a bit like crossing porn with Disney - just wrong.

Well to some of us, it was Syndicate's light-hearted tone that felt off...it's the first AC game where there are no major character deaths. Even Unity you had Pierre Bellec and Mirabeau dead at the half-way mark to say nothing of Elise. The fact is our main characters are Assassins, they kill people and live knowing that they will continue to do that. Something like that being Disneyfied as Syndicate's main plot was, strikes me as being weird. Even Black Flag and AC2, both of them are lighter and more adventurous stories but they still had dark moments and you did have death.

In any case, a Jack the Ripper story that ends on a light, cheery note strikes me as distinctly unappealing. If you want something light and cheery, don't do Jack the Ripper.


It upset me to watch that vile man spit in Evie's face and try to grab her privates.

Yeah, that was odd but then again when you are dealing with low-down Whitechapel thugs this should be expected. The Ripper is a nasty misogynist and he would attract those kinds of people.

cawatrooper9
12-16-2015, 03:31 PM
they knew what they were getting themselves into when they signed up for the guard job, so they have no one to blame but themselves when the assassin popped out and stabbed them

Not really though, the Assassins and Templars are secret orders that guards wouldn't necessarily know about.

Maybe a guard legitimately just wants to help protect the people?

That's why I like how recent games (also ACR) portray both regular city guards and specifically Templar guards- I even appreciate games like ACIII, where guards may not be specifically Templar but they are troops, so therefore not necessarily innocent.

cawatrooper9
12-16-2015, 03:34 PM
I mean, I did tell you guys there would be a huge tonal shift...

:rolleyes:

ShadoeKat
12-16-2015, 03:40 PM
I just started the game and I'm happy about the following...
1. Jacob without a hat, finally.
2. More mature and not two young assassin's running around.
3. Love how they did Jack "mind".
4. And my big thing seems to have changed... I can now jump how ever I want without being stopped at the edge of a building. It's now back to my choice to jump, climb down, or grappling hook. One of the good things from Unity. THANK YOU!

Nickyhaswifi
12-16-2015, 04:06 PM
Well to some of us, it was Syndicate's light-hearted tone that felt off...it's the first AC game where there are no major character deaths. Even Unity you had Pierre Bellec and Mirabeau dead at the half-way mark to say nothing of Elise. The fact is our main characters are Assassins, they kill people and live knowing that they will continue to do that. Something like that being Disneyfied as Syndicate's main plot was, strikes me as being weird. Even Black Flag and AC2, both of them are lighter and more adventurous stories but they still had dark moments and you did have death.

In any case, a Jack the Ripper story that ends on a light, cheery note strikes me as distinctly unappealing. If you want something light and cheery, don't do Jack the Ripper.



Yeah, that was odd but then again when you are dealing with low-down Whitechapel thugs this should be expected. The Ripper is a nasty misogynist and he would attract those kinds of people.

Syndicate's light tone was a welcome change and suited the almost adolescent nature of the twins' personalities well.

Because they kept fridging characters left and right it became rather predictable and Unity's fridging was cheesy as hell. I literally rolled my eyes at what happened to Elise. The story never earned any of its dark moments because it was so rushed. Dark for the sake of dark is worse than a story that bends the rules of reality for a lighter tone.

I agree that the ACII series and Black Flag had a good balance in terms of tone although Black Flag's ending practically begs for your tears. All the ghost friends made me lol

I actually want another dlc with Jacob and Evie perhaps in WW1.

RA503
12-16-2015, 04:19 PM
I will be a bit hasty and say that the DLC foreshadow a little bit that if they made a new game with Evie and Jacob will be in they adventure time in India,I know that they like local Assassin better and is because that Connor is not the main of Unity but they can do a Revelations again....

Nobody comment the last Assassin Intel,Willian is mentioned for the first time since AC 3 and he and Bishop cut all contact with the initiates (Us) she even says that we don't will be contact in a long time but we will hear about her someday,that maybe is a meta way for Ubsoft tell us that 2016 don't will have a AC game...

VestigialLlama4
12-16-2015, 04:34 PM
I will be a bit hasty and say that the DLC foreshadow a little bit that if they made a new game with Evie and Jacob will be in they adventure time in India,I know that they like local Assassin better and is because that Connor is not the main of Unity but they can do a Revelations again....

Nobody comment the last Assassin Intel,Willian is mentioned for the first time since AC 3 and he and Bishop cut all contact with the initiates (Us) she even says that we don't will be contact in a long time but we will hear about her someday,that maybe is a meta way for Ubsoft tell us that 2016 don't will have a AC game...

I see it more as "Till next year folks".

ze_topazio
12-16-2015, 04:36 PM
I'm more positive and look at it as way of them saying that next year we get a playable modern day character.

RA503
12-16-2015, 04:43 PM
One Intel said that the guy in Abstergo Montreal was Killed,but he is not supposed to be me ? if I Killed how I play this game ? I have work to collect the Helix Glyph only to unlock a Intel about a Japanese guy talking about food this is so pointless and dispointing.... and I know that DLC don't is suppose to move the plot since this will pissed some people, in the end DLC is just like the Comics and Novels,little Add ons to calm down fans before the main release don't comes...(whem makes a extra cash for UBI)

Eddo36
12-16-2015, 04:49 PM
I posted this in another thread but I'm not sure how I feel about the dark, depressing tone. Both Evie and Jacob seem incredibly sad and guilt ridden. Because Syndicate was so light hearted it felt a bit like crossing porn with Disney - just wrong.
What's light hearted about AC games? It's just about killing, killing and more varieties of killing. Now nothing wrong with killing, it is fun hence the reason we play this. But let's not pretend killing can be taken as light hearted.

eagleforlife1
12-16-2015, 06:04 PM
Also, as we play as Jack, does that mean he's an ancestor?

Farlander1991
12-16-2015, 06:28 PM
I think the story in general is fine, there is however a gripe I have with Jack. I liked his representation until the moment we learn his primary motivation. And if he wasn't raised and trained as an Assassin, I think I would've been fine with it... but he was, and it's just... it's enough for blame and revenge, but for getting crazy like that and so cruel and sadistic? I don't buy it.

In ACR, we had an Assassin turned Templar, because they killed, while not one of the nicest guys (though, to be fair, a lot of the stories we know about Vlad Dracula were written by enemies, so, you know... perspective), he made his country free from Ottoman's rule, improved economic situation, removed crime, in general raised the quality of life (Vlad's a national hero in Romania for a reason). And then the Assassins helped the Ottomans, killed Vlad, and everything went to **** and Vali couldn't protect nor his family, nor his people. So he joined the Templars. Which, btw, this is a much better Assassin turned Templar story than Rogue had, but that's not the point. I'm mentioning this because Vali asked a question, what good is a Creed if it can't protect your family? Pretty much the same thing Jack asks. Only Vali didn't transform into a crazy murderer, even though his losses were far greater than Jack's.

I mean, Assassins, they kill people. They have closed ones die. It's just... I don't know. Even without comparison to Vali, how his mother's death has affected him is very unbelievable based on the background that we have available in the game. And, really, the only background we have is that Jack was raised by Jacob to become an Assassin, and with just that, it's not believable to me that his mother's death would affect him so.

But even if we take that to face value, there's another thing that's kinda weird, and that's Jack's insistence that he's the solution, that he has the better way of the Creed. Only, London went to **** with gangs and non-Ripper related crime raising because of him. So this by extension proves him wrong and paints him crazy. That and the fact that he mostly deals with Assassins for revenge rather than with London's ****.

What would be a much more effective thing in my opinion is if it was, in fact, the opposite. That Jack's hideous murders (of Templars and gang leaders and what not, rather than Assassins or assassin allies) were so effective that the city would be less of a mess in terms of criminal and underworld activity because everyone was just too damn afraid. Then it would be even more creepy and disturbing, because you'd hear Jack saying that his way works... and the scary thing would be that it does. That he did what Assassins could not. That kind of thing.

But instead we have a cruel killer who's on a blaming revenge spree and doesn't prove his point. It's kinda a bit disappointing in that regard.


Also, as we play as Jack, does that mean he's an ancestor?

You don't need to be an ancestor or have somebody descended to view your memories, somebody just needs access to your DNA, like a body for example. I doubt Jack impregnated somebody between his last playable section and the ending of the DLC. :p :D What must happen for him to be an ancestor of somebody and have his memories viewed.

VestigialLlama4
12-16-2015, 06:45 PM
I think the story in general is fine, there is however a gripe I have with Jack. I liked his representation until the moment we learn his primary motivation. And if he wasn't raised and trained as an Assassin, I think I would've been fine with it... but he was, and it's just... it's enough for blame and revenge, but for getting crazy like that and so cruel and sadistic? I don't buy it.
...
I mean, Assassins, they kill people. They have closed ones die. It's just... I don't know. Even without comparison to Vali, how his mother's death has affected him is very unbelievable based on the background that we have available in the game. And, really, the only background we have is that Jack was raised by Jacob to become an Assassin, and with just that, it's not believable to me that his mother's death would affect him so.

Well it's a combination of factors. Him being orphaned, his mother dying expecting Assassins to save her but nobody came. Then he was sent to Lambeth Asylum (under John Elliotson at the time) where poor treatment made an already traumatized kid into someone worse. And then Jacob and Evie Frye teaching this disturbed kid fighting abilities and skills and the whole thing about them "Killing for a higher purpose".

The Ripper is the reverse of the Syndicate's main mechanic. There Jacob killing Templars made things worse until Evie fixed things is, Jack is the case of Jacob and Evie saving someone only for that to blow up in their faces. I like the basic concept that The Ripper is the equivalent of one of those random recruits Ezio picked up in Brotherhood, or one of those orphans you liberated in Syndicate, or one of your Rooks (who Jack converts into his gang in the DLC) and he copies and absorbs your abilities and becomes your self-made worst enemy.

As a story it's not very complex I'll admit, it's a very gamey approach and it's basically flat and without details, but purely in terms of how these crimes affect and implicate Jacob and Evie, it's a compelling story. In terms of gameplay it's not much yes.


You don't need to be an ancestor or have somebody descended to view your memories, somebody just needs access to your DNA, like a body for example. I doubt Jack impregnated somebody between his last playable section and the ending of the DLC. :p :D What must happen for him to be an ancestor of somebody and have his memories viewed.

I would have said that a year back before Unity/Rogue, but now I'm jaded. The truth is Ubisoft is lazy and no longer cares about justifying or explaining these details...

dimbismp
12-16-2015, 06:46 PM
So how long is it?Answer without spoilers please

VestigialLlama4
12-16-2015, 06:47 PM
I think the story in general is fine, there is however a gripe I have with Jack. I liked his representation until the moment we learn his primary motivation. And if he wasn't raised and trained as an Assassin, I think I would've been fine with it... but he was, and it's just... it's enough for blame and revenge, but for getting crazy like that and so cruel and sadistic? I don't buy it.
...
I mean, Assassins, they kill people. They have closed ones die. It's just... I don't know. Even without comparison to Vali, how his mother's death has affected him is very unbelievable based on the background that we have available in the game. And, really, the only background we have is that Jack was raised by Jacob to become an Assassin, and with just that, it's not believable to me that his mother's death would affect him so.

Well it's a combination of factors. Him being orphaned, his mother dying expecting Assassins to save her but nobody came. Then he was sent to Lambeth Asylum (under John Elliotson at the time) where poor treatment made an already traumatized kid into someone worse. And then Jacob and Evie Frye teaching this disturbed kid fighting abilities and skills and the whole thing about them "Killing for a higher purpose".

The Ripper is the reverse of the Syndicate's main mechanic. There Jacob killing Templars made things worse until Evie fixed things is, Jack is the case of Jacob and Evie saving someone only for that to blow up in their faces. I like the basic concept that The Ripper is the equivalent of one of those random recruits Ezio picked up in Brotherhood, or one of those orphans you liberated in Syndicate, or one of your Rooks (who Jack converts into his gang in the DLC) and he copies and absorbs your abilities and becomes your self-made worst enemy.

As a story it's not very complex I'll admit, it's a very gamey approach and it's basically flat and without details, but purely in terms of how these crimes affect and implicate Jacob and Evie, it's a compelling story. In terms of gameplay it's not much yes.


You don't need to be an ancestor or have somebody descended to view your memories, somebody just needs access to your DNA, like a body for example. I doubt Jack impregnated somebody between his last playable section and the ending of the DLC. :p :D What must happen for him to be an ancestor of somebody and have his memories viewed.

I would have said that a year back before Unity/Rogue, but now I'm jaded. The truth is Ubisoft is lazy and no longer cares about justifying or explaining these details...

RVSage
12-16-2015, 06:51 PM
Well it's a combination of factors. Him being orphaned, his mother dying expecting Assassins to save her but nobody came. Then he was sent to Lambeth Asylum (under John Elliotson at the time) where poor treatment made an already traumatized kid into someone worse. And then Jacob and Evie Frye teaching this disturbed kid fighting abilities and skills and the whole thing about them "Killing for a higher purpose".

The Ripper is the reverse of the Syndicate's main mechanic. There Jacob killing Templars made things worse until Evie fixed things is, Jack is the case of Jacob and Evie saving someone only for that to blow up in their faces. I like the basic concept that The Ripper is the equivalent of one of those random recruits Ezio picked up in Brotherhood, or one of those orphans you liberated in Syndicate, or one of your Rooks (who Jack converts into his gang in the DLC) and he copies and absorbs your abilities and becomes your self-made worst enemy.

As a story it's not very complex I'll admit, it's a very gamey approach and it's basically flat and without details, but purely in terms of how these crimes affect and implicate Jacob and Evie, it's a compelling story. In terms of gameplay it's not much yes.



I would have said that a year back before Unity/Rogue, but now I'm jaded. The truth is Ubisoft is lazy and no longer cares about justifying or explaining these details...

Agree on the ripper part.And on living memories. Ubi said last year, that helix, can access anyone's memories. That is the difference between Helix and Animus. But I wonder how Jack the Ripper had kids? and how we grabbed his genetic data.

Farlander1991
12-16-2015, 06:54 PM
Well it's a combination of factors. Him being orphaned, his mother dying expecting Assassins to save her but nobody came. Then he was sent to Lambeth Asylum (under John Elliotson at the time) where poor treatment made an already traumatized kid into someone worse.

Well, that makes more sense, but I was under the impression that the whole backstory with his mother and Lambeth happened after the events of Syndicate with the Starrick's men that killed her being remnants of the organization rather than during the events of everything. Maybe that's because didn't actually play the DLC yet (PC player, so waiting for it, just watched the story on YouTube). Also I'm n ot really sure how the chronology works here exactly, because Lambeth was the first thing we do in London so it doesn't seem like there's enough time.

I don't really like that kind of retroactive backstory, though. It might work for sprawling 20-30 year stories like Ezio's or Connor's, but we're speaking about a very tight span in less than a year, and during that time Jacob got to know Jack's mother and fail to protect her and we know nothing of this? I mean, yeah, random Rook and random child, but it's also a child they go with to India, that's not just any child.

VestigialLlama4
12-16-2015, 06:59 PM
Well, that makes more sense, but I was under the impression that the whole backstory with his mother and Lambeth happened after the events of Syndicate with the Starrick's men that killed her being remnants of the organization rather than during the events of everything. Maybe that's because didn't actually play the DLC yet (PC player, so waiting for it, just watched the story on YouTube).

No this was pre-Syndicate. Jack the Assassin Initiate joined Jacob after 1868. In the 1870s, Jacob took his recruits on a class field trip to India.


I don't really like that kind of retroactive backstory, though. It might work for sprawling 20-30 year stories like Ezio's or Connor's, but we're speaking about a very tight span in less than a year, and during that time Jacob got to know Jack's mother and fail to protect her and we know nothing of this?

I agree. I think the Ripper should have been part of the main game. So that we get that tragedy of this young guy we knew eventually becoming this evil man.

But since this is DLC, they decided to basically tell their story and hope nobody notices too much while playing it.

RA503
12-16-2015, 07:10 PM
did you think that Jacob and Jack was very close ? I saying like was emplied with Roth ? you know what I talk about ...:rolleyes:

VestigialLlama4
12-16-2015, 07:12 PM
did you think that Jacob and Jack was very close ? I saying like was emplied with Roth ? you know what I talk about ...:rolleyes:

We'll leave that to Mr. Yohalem and his podcast interviews. At this point, my feeling is if it's not in the game, not a cutscene we see or hear, it's mot really there.

Farlander1991
12-16-2015, 07:16 PM
No this was pre-Syndicate. Jack the Assassin Initiate joined Jacob after 1868. In the 1870s, Jacob took his recruits on a class field trip to India.

But there was this whole bit with his mother telling Jack that Jacob would protect him so he should run to Jacob... How does that add up chronologically? I mean, Lambeth was like one of the first things Jacob did, and in that time Jacob came to knew Ripper's mother, enough for her to trust him to tell him run to Jacob, and after the death of his mother he was put into Asylum after which he was pretty much immediately liberated? And that's even before Jack was initiated or knew about the Creed so why does he feel Jacob and the Creed betrayed him if he knew nothing of it then as he was initiated later?

VestigialLlama4
12-16-2015, 07:20 PM
But there was this whole bit with his mother telling Jack that Jacob would protect him so he should run to Jacob... How does that add up chronologically? I mean, Lambeth was like one of the first things Jacob did, and in that time Jacob came to knew Ripper's mother, enough for her to trust him to tell him run to Jacob, and after the death of his mother he was put into Asylum after which he was pretty much immediately liberated? And that's even before Jack was initiated or knew about the Creed so why does he feel Jacob and the Creed betrayed him if he knew nothing of it then as he was initiated later?

I'd chalk that up to Ubisoft incompetence.

The story makes it clear that he was released after 1868 when Jacob came to save him. The whole "Jacob save me" part might be something that Jack projects back in the past since for him the Assassins = Jacob Frye.

RVSage
12-16-2015, 07:26 PM
this is actually the intel RA053 was talking about
http://i.imgur.com/mIMVmx7.jpg

The way I see it, probability of getting a modern day protagonist just increased

cawatrooper9
12-16-2015, 08:04 PM
the Huge surprise is that we have Helix Glyph again

[/SPOILER]

Could someone provide more detail on this?

Nickyhaswifi
12-16-2015, 08:11 PM
So how long is it?Answer without spoilers please

I believe i already told you how long the last time you asked...

Nickyhaswifi
12-16-2015, 08:14 PM
Also, as we play as Jack, does that mean he's an ancestor?

*shudders* probably raped a few women in his time.

eagleforlife1
12-16-2015, 08:17 PM
You don't need to be an ancestor or have somebody descended to view your memories, somebody just needs access to your DNA, like a body for example. I doubt Jack impregnated somebody between his last playable section and the ending of the DLC. :p :D What must happen for him to be an ancestor of somebody and have his memories viewed.

I know that :p I meant, we keep switching between Evie and Jack, which suggests, they are from the same bloodline.

Farlander1991
12-16-2015, 08:24 PM
I know that :p I meant, we keep switching between Evie and Jack, which suggests, they are from the same bloodline.

Nope. Ever since ACB they were experimenting with mixing different bloodlines together in a simulation, and this culminates in Helix where you don't need to follow a particular ancestor or bloodline. This is how it works in ACS that you can play both as Evie and Jacob (who weren't particularly interested in incest so they're two different bloodlines) and how you can also watch memories of Starrick (as Evie and Jacob were nowhere around, those parts of the game were from Starrick's DNA). Similarly with Jack, it's his own memoires not related to Evie or her bloodline.

VestigialLlama4
12-16-2015, 08:31 PM
Nope. Ever since ACB they were experimenting with mixing different bloodlines together in a simulation, and this culminates in Helix where you don't need to follow a particular ancestor or bloodline. This is how it works in ACS that you can play both as Evie and Jacob (who weren't particularly interested in incest so they're two different bloodlines) and how you can also watch memories of Starrick (as Evie and Jacob were nowhere around, those parts of the game were from Starrick's DNA). Similarly with Jack, it's his own memoires not related to Evie or her bloodline.

In Syndicate, we see a cutscene with Starrick right before the Royal Ball...so I guess its similar. It's unlikely that Starrick had sex in his carriage on the way to the ball, passed his DNA along and then died.

Patrice Desilets joked about this DNA issue from the start, noting that eventually to build suspense he's going to have kill someone after a moment of intimacy.

The thing is Ubisoft wants to keep things ambiguous by not specifying where the blood comes from for no reason at all...it's all Wizard of Oz "Pay no attention..." stuff because I think their main audience are people who haven't played the Old Gen games from AC1 onwards. I think they want gamers to approach the Animus as merely a time machine or past simulation and the like.

Assassin_M
12-16-2015, 09:02 PM
Huh....so when they said dark this time, it didn't just mean dimmer saturation and underground crypts. Nice.

AdrianJacek
12-16-2015, 10:28 PM
Huh....so when they said dark this time, it didn't just mean dimmer saturation and underground crypts. Nice.

Ah, yes.

It's our darkest DLC to date... again!

pacmanate
12-16-2015, 10:40 PM
I liked it. The story was good, I liked the Animus glitching out when you played as Jack. The only thing I didn't like about the story was the abrupt ending. I REALLY wanted Jacob to turn insane and lose his mind and I wanted it to get me in the feels.

Also what is with the performance in the DLC?! You get 2 boroughs only but if you even go near to full acceleration in a carriage the game freezes for 3-5 seconds. The "boost" button might as well be called the 0FPS button as well.

RVSage
12-16-2015, 11:10 PM
Could someone provide more detail on this?

I posted it in the previous page .

pacmanate
12-17-2015, 12:37 AM
Also, as we play as Jack, does that mean he's an ancestor?

For sure, he's definitely someone's ancestor. Remember we are playing in the Helix. Playing as Jack only means he had a kid or 20.

Nickyhaswifi
12-17-2015, 01:46 AM
Interesting that the game doesn't allow you to send prostitutes to seduce the female gang members. "Not possible" flashes above their heads if you do.
I suppose the devs didn't want to give an impression of a stereotypical butch, violent lesbian.


Also, I've got some collectibles to clear in Owers Manor, Lambeth Asylum etc but I can't see anywhere on the map to travel to those locations.
Would I have to replay the missions just to get those collectibles? Because that would be stupid.

DumbGamerTag94
12-17-2015, 01:57 AM
I have mixed feelings about Jack the Ripper DLC. Mods feel free to add spoiler tags to this post if i let anything slip but i dont think i will.

The Good:
- Dark tone much more suited to Assassin's Creed instead of the Disney Movie that was the main game.
- Fear mechanics were fun and a nice addition.
- Aging of Evie and Abberline was a nice touch.
- Abberline's conflicted feelings on his ties to the Assassins added for an interesting dynamic and tension between him and Evie.
- Ubisoft actually took the interesting controversial route of letting you play as Jack.
- The east end of London has clearly declined economically from 1868's map, the already poorer areas of White Chapel and the eastern part of City of London are made even worse with tearing wall paper, more disrepaired facades, and more poor looking npcs
- The assassination mission for Lady O seems to be made in a way where the optional objectives are more "either-or" rather than a checklist that creates an obvious path, like those in the main game. This makes it more interesting to replay and you wonder if you made the right choice.

The Bad:
- Jacob Frye seems to have barely aged in comparison to Evie and Freddie Abberline.
- Vague and disappointing plot. While really interesting and suspenseful you do not finish the campaign knowing anything more than you did in the first 15 minutes of the DLC.
- Some stupid side missions like "walk of shame" where you take a random guy and publicly shame him for prostitution by walking through crowds in areas that are inexplicably restricted and crawling with enemies.
- Wayyyyy too many enemies and they are far too aggressive. They attack you within the first second of sighting you and they arrive in hoards. This was probably done so that you actually use the fear mechanics but it is just too much when all you are trying to do is travel from point a to b, and during assassination missions. It's annoying and a rather obvious attempt to force you to use fear tools.

The Ugly:
- Recycled NPCs are featured prominently in the campaign. This is excruciatingly obvious and a poor decision on Ubisoft's part. These aren't even just random NPCs you pass on the street that are used as MAIN CHARACTERS or at least prominently displayed in the Ripper DLC but recycled main characters from the original game. For example Arthur Weaversbrook uses the same character model as Benjamin Disraeli, his son featured in one mission is Alexander Graham Bell, and at one point Evie accidentally harasses a man that is the young version of Frederick Abberline. I don't know if this was originally done as place holders but they really should have fixed that before releasing it. Its very annoying playing the DLC immediately after finishing the main campaign.

-Blood remains at crime scenes from days and even weeks ago, despite an almost constant snowfall.

-Targets have almost no build up or back story whatsoever. You literally meet them almost moments before killing them.

- This last one is a bit spoilery They try to make you emotionally involved in Evie and Jacob's guilt about Jack but never really elaborate at all on their history together besides the basic relationship he had with them. Almost no detail or context is given to the feelings or actions of the major players. They talk about Jack having his own creed, but just what that is never is really elaborated upon. The motivations behind Jack's rise to power and subsequent crime spree is not really clear either. What drove him mad isn't explained whatsoever, although his time at Lambeth Asylum is expalined somewhat, just what happened to him while there and makes him hate the staff so much is never explained. It would have been very nice to have these aspects of Jack's backstory explained a little more and to understand exactly when he spiraled into madness and what fueled his split from Jacob.

Overall I felt it was a really intense story that pulled you in, but it just missed the mark and left me feeling like I gained nothing from it. There really isn't anything to spoil aside from how the story progresses there are no serious revelations that shock the player or make you connect with the characters. Its almost all atmosphere that makes this DLC great, gameplay wise and story wise it was rather hit or miss.

I give it a 7/10.

Nickyhaswifi
12-17-2015, 02:33 AM
- This last one is a bit spoilery [SPOILER]They try to make you emotionally involved in Evie and Jacob's guilt about Jack but never really elaborate at all on their history together besides the basic relationship he had with them. Almost no detail or context is given to the feelings or actions of the major players.

I don't think it needed it. The boy was troubled, Jacob took him in as a Brother and treated him like a son. Naturally, Jacob and Evie feel responsible for him because clearly Jack was not stable enough to be an Assassin in the first place. They actually made him worse - they armed a nutter with all their secrets and tools and didn't consider the consequences of what their creed would have on a fragile child's mind. Their failure is being paraded around White Chapel in a series of gruesome murders. Jack disgraced everything they stood for so that has to sting.


They talk about Jack having his own creed, but just what that is never is really elaborated upon. The motivations behind Jack's rise to power and subsequent crime spree is not really clear either.

Yeah, never got that. Just seemed like he was punishing the Assassins for failing to save his mother from the templars.


What drove him mad isn't explained whatsoever, although his time at Lambeth Asylum is expalined somewhat, just what happened to him while there and makes him hate the staff so much is never explained.

I'm not sure if his mother's death acted as the main catalyst for his self destruction or if Starrick had him locked away to hide the truth about the Templars killing his mother. Also, they didn't treat mentally sick people like humans back then (they don't even now) so it was understandable.

Assassin_M
12-17-2015, 03:22 AM
Just finished it. This tone, this dark controversial portrayal of murder and what the Assassins do. THIS is what AC should be about. This type of story is what Assassins Creed should NOT shy away from. Yeah, there's the forced political correctness where they portray the women murdered as complete helpless victims when they were ACTUALLY Assassins and how Evie suddenly became a pacifist who doesn't murder anyone, but who cares? I would gladly overlook political correctness when the story tackles complex subjects. Honestly? I liked this story better than the main game's. I only say this because this DLC should have either been longer or have the backstory of it be explored in the main game. As it is, it's missing a lot of meat: More depth to Jack's upbringing, the incident, his relationship with the Assassins, the overarching theme of murder...etc. I actually liked Evie here. She's not a bland Mary Sue with nothing to her but arbitrary aesthetics. She's ashamed, she's guilt-ridden, she's worried, she doubts, it was great. We see the human Evie, The Evie who clashes with an old friend in Abberline. Jeez, who didn't like Abberline? Loved the dynamic between him and Evie.

Although, I must say....playing this, I am realizing now that this might be the start of me maybe dropping the franchise once and for all. I stopped playing Fallout to play this and all throughout, I wanted to go back to Fallout. I think I only finished this out of dedication, not because it was genuinely enjoyable. A lot of Ubisoft's recent trends in designing their games rear their ugly heads here. Did anyone feel anything for the Rooks? I mean, this was supposed to be your gang, right? And now you're fighting them. When Monterriggioni was attacked, every cannon ball was like a proverbial knife to my heart. Taking out the Rooks? I felt nothing. I think I should have, though. I think I should have felt some sort of sadness or something, but nope. They're just blighters in purple.

Some characters? They're reused models from the main game. This wouldn't be a problem if they weren't friggin MAIN characters. Weathersbrook is actually Disraeli, his son is Graham Bell, Lady O's husband is Twopenny. What is this? This never happened before and I hope it doesnt ever again, it was really weird.

I did none of the side quests.

RVSage
12-17-2015, 05:40 AM
Just finished it. This tone, this dark controversial portrayal of murder and what the Assassins do. THIS is what AC should be about. This type of story is what Assassins Creed should NOT shy away from. Yeah, there's the forced political correctness where they portray the women murdered as complete helpless victims when they were ACTUALLY Assassins and how Evie suddenly became a pacifist who doesn't murder anyone, but who cares? I would gladly overlook political correctness when the story tackles complex subjects. Honestly? I liked this story better than the main game's. I only say this because this DLC should have either been longer or have the backstory of it be explored in the main game. As it is, it's missing a lot of meat: More depth to Jack's upbringing, the incident, his relationship with the Assassins, the overarching theme of murder...etc. I actually liked Evie here. She's not a bland Mary Sue with nothing to her but arbitrary aesthetics. She's ashamed, she's guilt-ridden, she's worried, she doubts, it was great. We see the human Evie, The Evie who clashes with an old friend in Abberline. Jeez, who didn't like Abberline? Loved the dynamic between him and Evie.

Although, I must say....playing this, I am realizing now that this might be the start of me maybe dropping the franchise once and for all. I stopped playing Fallout to play this and all throughout, I wanted to go back to Fallout. I think I only finished this out of dedication, not because it was genuinely enjoyable. A lot of Ubisoft's recent trends in designing their games rear their ugly heads here. Did anyone feel anything for the Rooks? I mean, this was supposed to be your gang, right? And now you're fighting them. When Monterriggioni was attacked, every cannon ball was like a proverbial knife to my heart. Taking out the Rooks? I felt nothing. I think I should have, though. I think I should have felt some sort of sadness or something, but nope. They're just blighters in purple.

Some characters? They're reused models from the main game. This wouldn't be a problem if they weren't friggin MAIN characters. Weathersbrook is actually Disraeli, his son is Graham Bell, Lady O's husband is Twopenny. What is this? This never happened before and I hope it doesnt ever again, it was really weird.

I did none of the side quests.

I never felt anything for the rooks too, and I guess it has something to do with the NPCs being so repetitive. you get so bored of seeing them. You stop caring for them.I have sacrificed them so many times with no feeling for it. black flag, i would not let one soldier, touch my pirates. I would rush in to save them.

ze_topazio
12-17-2015, 12:39 PM
You know this franchise is dying when Assassin_M of all people is losing interest.

pacmanate
12-17-2015, 01:23 PM
Snip

Honestly, This is what I said during playing Syndicate. Yeah the game is a cool ride and all, but this isn't the AC I fell in love with. I did enjoy Syndicate and I did enjoy the DLC, they were really fun games. But the open world formula and lack of any mechanic progression in the games over the years really makes me feel like reskins.

I play AC now "casually" and I have since Black Flag.

VestigialLlama4
12-17-2015, 01:55 PM
I think I am losing interest because I am not really disappointed by Jack the Ripper's wasted potential. I am impressed that they still went into dark places and put some kind of effort into the story but I am not really expecting something memorable and earth changing or rich and textured storytelling on the level we had been accustomed to getting until Black Flag.

Nickyhaswifi
12-17-2015, 02:44 PM
I actually liked Evie here. She's not a bland Mary Sue with nothing to her but arbitrary aesthetics. She's ashamed, she's guilt-ridden, she's worried, she doubts, it was great. We see the human Evie, The Evie who clashes with an old friend in Abberline. Jeez, who didn't like Abberline? Loved the dynamic between him and Evie.

It's interesting that it takes her feeling ashamed and doubting herself for you to like her and yet these are qualities you don't long for in her male counterpart... and conveniently you like Abberline who is the only male to put her in her place...

Evie is not a Mary Sue at all in Syndicate. If you read her diary she is actually quite calculating and cunning, admitting that she made friends with historical figures only to further her goals. She's also ill tempered and can can be quite spiteful (see Robert Topping) . The only reason why other characters like her is because she is good at charming people. Jacob who knows her better calls her out on her BS when necessary. And the game clearly demonstrates that because she over analyses things beforehand it means she's slow to action and misses opportunities. That same flaw of over planning is carried over here and is compounded by her guilt.

THE_JOKE_KING33
12-17-2015, 03:56 PM
But even if we take that to face value, there's another thing that's kinda weird, and that's Jack's insistence that he's the solution, that he has the better way of the Creed. Only, London went to **** with gangs and non-Ripper related crime raising because of him. So this by extension proves him wrong and paints him crazy. That and the fact that he mostly deals with Assassins for revenge rather than with London's ****.

What would be a much more effective thing in my opinion is if it was, in fact, the opposite. That Jack's hideous murders (of Templars and gang leaders and what not, rather than Assassins or assassin allies) were so effective that the city would be less of a mess in terms of criminal and underworld activity because everyone was just too damn afraid. Then it would be even more creepy and disturbing, because you'd hear Jack saying that his way works... and the scary thing would be that it does. That he did what Assassins could not. That kind of thing.

But instead we have a cruel killer who's on a blaming revenge spree and doesn't prove his point. It's kinda a bit disappointing in that regard.

That's kinda how I felt about the story as well.

cawatrooper9
12-17-2015, 04:10 PM
That's kinda how I felt about the story as well.

I think that's why we play as Evie, though. There's some ambiguity as to whether London's current state is due to Jack's taking over of the Rooks, or Jacob's tenure with the gang. Evie definitely struggles with this in the DLC.

whatr_those
12-17-2015, 05:02 PM
DLC was abysmal and still a far cry better than the main game.

Assassin_M
12-17-2015, 05:21 PM
It's interesting that it takes her feeling ashamed and doubting herself for you to like her and yet these are qualities you don't long for in her male counterpart... and conveniently you like Abberline who is the only male to put her in her place...

Evie is not a Mary Sue at all in Syndicate. If you read her diary she is actually quite calculating and cunning, admitting that she made friends with historical figures only to further her goals. She's also ill tempered and can can be quite spiteful (see Robert Topping) . The only reason why other characters like her is because she is good at charming people. Jacob who knows her better calls her out on her BS when necessary. And the game clearly demonstrates that because she over analyses things beforehand it means she's slow to action and misses opportunities. That same flaw of over planning is carried over here and is compounded by her guilt.
Yes, Empty, I likes females who feel shame and guilt, it's kinky.

Assassin_M
12-17-2015, 05:25 PM
But the open world formula and lack of any mechanic progression in the games.
Yup. That's how I feel too. This'll probably be the last time I purchase a season pass. From now on, it'll be main games only.

Nickyhaswifi
12-17-2015, 05:39 PM
Yes, Empty, I likes females who feel shame and guilt, it's kinky.

It's Islam. :)

ze_topazio
12-17-2015, 05:39 PM
You should never have bought any season passes to begin with, don't support such ****ty practices.

Assassin_M
12-17-2015, 05:45 PM
You should never have bought any season passes to begin with, don't support such ****ty practices.
You're totally right and I honestly regret it.

Nickyhaswifi
12-17-2015, 05:56 PM
You should never have bought any season passes to begin with, don't support such ****ty practices.

Tbf you can't honestly say Jack the Ripper could be fitted into the main game, it would be tonally jarring.

raytrek79
12-17-2015, 06:03 PM
Also, as we play as Jack, does that mean he's an ancestor?

Well yeah, all you need is someones DNA and you can access their memory and the memory of their ancestry. In 4 we are an Initiate working at Abstergo under cover for the Assassin's, we play as Edward, who is an ancestor of Desmond, not you. Theoretically you would only need Jack's blood, as Evie and Jacob generally swab their victims with a kerchief, reminiscent of Altair with the feather. If you could find the cache of kerchiefs you would have the DNA of all the victims.

Currently Abstergo is searching for the remains of Sages, due to their high concentration of first civilization DNA, and triple helix. It is something like 25/1 in a Sage.

ze_topazio
12-17-2015, 06:18 PM
Tbf you can't honestly say Jack the Ripper could be fitted into the main game, it would be tonally jarring.

You can buy DLC separately.

raytrek79
12-17-2015, 06:38 PM
I don't know how others feel about Penny Dreadfuls and solving crimes, as mainly introduced in Unity, but we have seen Eagle Vision used way back to find clues invisible to the common eye, but I'm a fan of murder mystery and love that side mission extra. The thing is, once you solve a crime there is no replay value to it, so I could see how people may not be a fan of it.

I am also a huge amateur Ripperologist, and was in my glory to have a game to indulge in around the subject. Knowing a fair bit about the case I could see a lot of familiar references, notably the Slow Carriage escapes are actual suspects, John Pizer aka Leather Apron for example. I remember on Brotherhood there was a back alley abortionist killing courtesans, and Ezio had to track him down, basically who Leather Apron was.

RA503
12-17-2015, 07:59 PM
Evie is not a Mary Sue at all in Syndicate. If you read her diary she is actually quite calculating and cunning, admitting that she made friends with historical figures only to further her goals. She's also ill tempered and can can be quite spiteful (see Robert Topping) . The only reason why other characters like her is because she is good at charming people. Jacob who knows her better calls her out on her BS when necessary. And the game clearly demonstrates that because she over analyses things beforehand it means she's slow to action and misses opportunities. That same flaw of over planning is carried over here and is compounded by her guilt.

And exist a certain definition of ''Mary Sue'' ?

Mary Sue is a pejorative way to refer to a female protagonist that people don't like,only that...

cawatrooper9
12-17-2015, 08:12 PM
And exist a certain definition of ''Mary Sue'' ?

Mary Sue is a pejorative way to refer to a female protagonist that people don't like,only that...

I mean, I guess it can kind of be subjective, but there's more to it than that. It refers to a female protagonist who is basically a "goody-two-shoes"- basically the female version of a "Gary Stu".

Eddo36
12-18-2015, 02:13 AM
Different characters, hundreds of years apart, in different countries.

Besides, they can make a rule change for whatever reason. I haven't played the DLC yet, but it's obviously something they did this time in order to make the game a little harder and thereby more fun.

It sounds better to me both for gameplay and thematic reasons. I've always felt uncomfortable killing police and guards. In Ezio's time the guards are very thuggish and bully people so it didn't feel quite so bad, but when you have guards, soldiers and police who are programmed to behave decently then it feels a bit wrong to be allowed to kill them. It might have been more interesting if we were forced to flee them if they moved to attack us, or if we'd had a desync limit like we do with civilians.

If you were a town guard who joined to keep the peace and you see some hooded figure running on top of roofs and pushing people aside with weapons, and suddenly there was a string of murders happening, I'm pretty sure you'd act "thuggish" to that said hooded suspect as well. Also there are bad apples in all police forces, as well as good apples. Does being in a different country or different time make one's life any less precious for a police?

Nickyhaswifi
12-18-2015, 02:17 AM
You can kill them after you beat the main mission...

Sesheenku
12-18-2015, 03:19 AM
I just stab everything that looks at me funny or has the potential to detect me.

D.I.D.
12-18-2015, 04:30 AM
If you were a town guard who joined to keep the peace and you see some hooded figure running on top of roofs and pushing people aside with weapons, and suddenly there was a string of murders happening, I'm pretty sure you'd act "thuggish" to that said hooded suspect as well. Also there are bad apples in all police forces, as well as good apples. Does being in a different country or different time make one's life any less precious for a police?

I'm not talking about how they treat the assassin.


In Ezio's time the guards are very thuggish and bully people so it didn't feel quite so badI also said


In Ezio's time the guards are very thuggish and bully people so it didn't feel quite so bad"Quite" being the operative word. Borgia guards were routinely harassing people, attacking people, killing people. They stole, they took bribes. They had no commitment to the job of protecting the people, and I can prove it: literally every one of them would leave his post to go off with a sex worker - I rest my case! The games made them complicit with the enemy, so it was easier to see them that way. We were told those areas were run down because the Borgia guards were bleeding the businesses dry, and after you removed the Borgia those districts blossomed and became prosperous again. The Crusaders were similar: corrupt foreigners there on a cash-grab spree, exploiting the populace, abusing and killing them - being in control of Altair made them seem like more natural enemies.

But yes, there were plenty where you didn't know for sure that they were bad, and it did feel weird killing them. As for how they react to my assassin, yes, they should try and wreck my ****, but they don't necessarily deserve to die for it either. The Istanbul Janissaries shouldn't have been acceptable targets. We were the troublemaking foreigner, they were overwhelmingly upstanding guards in protection of their city. ACIII felt strange as hell, working with George Washington and killing his boys. Unity's Parisian soldiers sometimes attacked us, but only when they saw us committing crimes and we should have had more limits about hurting them. By the time you get to Syndicate, it's completely nuts: you are actually working for the police and the Queen, but it's alright to kill any number of them in almost all circumstances. You could assume the police would shed no tears about a nest of murderers getting wiped out but you could destroy the entire Royal Guard at Buckingham Palace, and it would obviously have been your work but nobody would give a monkey's. The characters even comment on other killings as having the signature violence of the assassin order, so it's not as if they're not supposed to realise what you do.

I'm not always a fan of expecting games and reality to work alongside each other and rules must be bent, but here there's a discrepancy where the restriction could actually serve gameplay. Many of the best missions are ones where you cannot kill and have to do something difficult: getting in and out of Scotland Yard with a kidnapped officer without killing anyone, for example. Everyone plays their first AC assuming that you'll be a selective killer moving like a ghost because that's what assassins do, and every player has to go through that adjustment: discovering that you can kill indiscriminately, and becoming accustomed to that instead. Maybe we shouldn't.

Eddo36
12-18-2015, 07:49 AM
I'm not talking about how they treat the assassin.

I also said

"Quite" being the operative word. Borgia guards were routinely harassing people, attacking people, killing people. They stole, they took bribes. They had no commitment to the job of protecting the people, and I can prove it: literally every one of them would leave his post to go off with a sex worker - I rest my case! The games made them complicit with the enemy, so it was easier to see them that way. We were told those areas were run down because the Borgia guards were bleeding the businesses dry, and after you removed the Borgia those districts blossomed and became prosperous again. The Crusaders were similar: corrupt foreigners there on a cash-grab spree, exploiting the populace, abusing and killing them - being in control of Altair made them seem like more natural enemies.

But yes, there were plenty where you didn't know for sure that they were bad, and it did feel weird killing them. As for how they react to my assassin, yes, they should try and wreck my ****, but they don't necessarily deserve to die for it either. The Istanbul Janissaries shouldn't have been acceptable targets. We were the troublemaking foreigner, they were overwhelmingly upstanding guards in protection of their city. ACIII felt strange as hell, working with George Washington and killing his boys. Unity's Parisian soldiers sometimes attacked us, but only when they saw us committing crimes and we should have had more limits about hurting them. By the time you get to Syndicate, it's completely nuts: you are actually working for the police and the Queen, but it's alright to kill any number of them in almost all circumstances. You could assume the police would shed no tears about a nest of murderers getting wiped out but you could destroy the entire Royal Guard at Buckingham Palace, and it would obviously have been your work but nobody would give a monkey's. The characters even comment on other killings as having the signature violence of the assassin order, so it's not as if they're not supposed to realise what you do.

I'm not always a fan of expecting games and reality to work alongside each other and rules must be bent, but here there's a discrepancy where the restriction could actually serve gameplay. Many of the best missions are ones where you cannot kill and have to do something difficult: getting in and out of Scotland Yard with a kidnapped officer without killing anyone, for example. Everyone plays their first AC assuming that you'll be a selective killer moving like a ghost because that's what assassins do, and every player has to go through that adjustment: discovering that you can kill indiscriminately, and becoming accustomed to that instead. Maybe we shouldn't.

Fair enough. Don't forget Black Flag where you were a pirate the whole game before being an Assassin and plundering the HMS ships and killing the British sailors there who were the police of that game trying to stop you because you were a thieving, murdering pirate.

But if you play Jack the Ripper DLC, you'll notice that ALL of Evie's melee attacks are non-lethal.

Civona
12-18-2015, 08:02 AM
standards and practices change over time and based on context and the individual who has the standards. (That last part is key, don't take any one ancestor's opinions on what an Assassin should be as something that every other Assassin agrees with)

Eddo36
12-18-2015, 10:10 AM
standards and practices change over time and based on context and the individual who has the standards. (That last part is key, don't take any one ancestor's opinions on what an Assassin should be as something that every other Assassin agrees with)

In Jack the Ripper DLC if you kill a constable then it gave a message like "Assassins don't kill police" or something similar but I was thinking of all the police they killed historically.

Sorrosyss
12-18-2015, 10:33 AM
Well, finally finished it. Wasn't overly keen on it honestly.

I think my biggest issue was with the writing. The tone felt off to me compared to the main game. Evie felt completely different to the point it was almost like a new character. Her strange comments about not turning into a monster when she was happily going around assassinating was bizarre to me. Compared to Jacob and Abberline who barely changed, they really overdid her aging too in my opinion.

Jack was worse though. We literally learned next to nothing about him. He was supposed to be an initiate of Jacob, yet despite supposedly being a good decade or two younger than Jacob he sounded a decade or so older. Weird voice casting aside, his motivations for turning against the creed all just sounded a bit random - something about his mother dying? It was all very vague to me. His visible madness on the screen was literally a rip off (ho ho) of the Harley Quinn DLC for Arkham Knight. Given how much has been borrowed from the Batman games, this should not surprise anyone.

Honestly, the fan theories on this very forum were far more interesting than what we ended up with. If it had been Jacob, and some form of Piece of Eden. Or the mask was the Shroud! They could have done so much more with Jack, in the end it just left me underwhelmed - the boring final battle didn't help either. (The battle with his clones was far more interesting - so much they could have done with the fear, like Scarecrow from Batman. Oh wait, there's that inspiration again...)

It's kind of a sad thing that this DLC provided no greater connection to the wider story. Freedom Cry showed us what happened to Ezio's box. Dead Kings had an Apple. Here... there really was nothing. Why were we even there? OK, you had the Modern Day Intel that appeared to suggest that they have abandoned the Initiates programme. I took that to suggest that the era of playing as us has ended - but then they drop in the 'we may contact you again at some point'. Bleh.

Mechanics. The fear skills were interesting. Was kind of fun to clear enemies this way, but they took far too long to disperse - often just running round on the spot. It needs speeding up.

I really wasn't keen on the Indian dye/powder that kept appearing during the brutal takedowns and spike usage. It reminded me of anime or something where they try to spruce up the attacks with little explosions. Ugh.

There's a really nasty glitch where if you ride on most carriages, the game starts micro freezing. It's awful. How did this go past QA? I ended up staying on the rooftops as a result.

On the plus side, I think the DLC offers good value for money. Even rushed this lasts a fair few hours. The side activities were kind of dull though. I left most of them sadly. But I'll get round to 100% syncing it soon.

All in all, as with the last two games DLCs, this story felt self contained and I honestly could have managed fine without playing it. The focus of this DLC was to get Jack The Ripper involved - because Victorian London. They got their name drop in, but in their efforts to do so they kind of sidestepped the point in doing so. I hope the next game's offering has something more interesting. (Modern Day! *nudge* :p)

jellejackhammer
12-18-2015, 11:58 AM
So with the assassins Intel being rather focused On killing alvaro,do you think it's actually a synopsis of the next ac game's MD? And i am the only one who noticed that Evi didn't kill anyone but just knocked people out?

Nickyhaswifi
12-18-2015, 12:17 PM
His visible madness on the screen was literally a rip off (ho ho) of the Harley Quinn DLC for Arkham Knight. Given how much has been borrowed from the Batman games, this should not surprise anyone.

Yeah, I noticed that too. Ubisoft has been trying to copy the Arkham games for years now but not quite understanding what makes those games so great.

As for your comments regarding Evie seeming like a different character - much like you, I feared that due to the different lead writer that it would be inconsistent with Syndicate... but then it is 20 years later after all. What will be interesting is seeing how Evie got to that place in her life.

And are Henry and Evie still together? The game seems to deliberately leave that up to you to decide.

cawatrooper9
12-18-2015, 03:38 PM
This is the first time we play as an actual figure from history...
Well, sort of. Jack's real life identity is up for debate I guess (though I'd imagine someone here would love to point out that they apparently know who it was- they're wrong, by the way), but we play as at least the idea of the Ripper, who was a real life person or persons.

I guess that's kinda like Ezio being the inspiration for The Prince, though.

Whatever, let me have my moment.

VestigialLlama4
12-18-2015, 04:09 PM
This is the first time we play as an actual figure from history...
Well, sort of. Jack's real life identity is up for debate I guess (though I'd imagine someone here would love to point out that they apparently know who it was- they're wrong, by the way), but we play as at least the idea of the Ripper, who was a real life person or persons.

Ripper is more precisely a legendary figure rather than historical figure. We call him Jack the Ripper for convenience but the fact it's never been established that those murders were committed by a single person, he's never been half-way profiled and we know nothing. But he's connected to actual crimes so that gives him some weight but in the strict definition he is not a historical figure. Historical figures are people for whom definite records exist. Blackbeard is historical, Al Capone is historical, Julius Caesar and Napoleon are historical figures, even if all four of these gentlemen exist in popular memory as legendary figures.

Some of the Assassin characters we play do have some historical basis. Edward Kenway for instance is based on Edward Low the pirate, who disappeared at the same time Black Flag ends. There's an even an allusion to Ned Low in the game.

Likewise Connor and Haytham is inspired by the personal tragedies of the historical Charles Lee (as opposed to the game version Charles Lee) and Benjamin Franklin.

cawatrooper9
12-18-2015, 04:18 PM
Ripper is more precisely a legendary figure rather than historical figure. We call him Jack the Ripper for convenience but the fact it's never been established that those murders were committed by a single person, he's never been half-way profiled and we know nothing. But he's connected to actual crimes so that gives him some weight but in the strict definition he is not a historical figure. Historical figures are people for whom definite records exist. Blackbeard is historical, Al Capone is historical, Julius Caesar and Napoleon are historical figures, even if all four of these gentlemen exist in popular memory as legendary figures.

Some of the Assassin characters we play do have some historical basis. Edward Kenway for instance is based on Edward Low the pirate, who disappeared at the same time Black Flag ends. There's an even an allusion to Ned Low in the game.

Likewise Connor and Haytham is inspired by the personal tragedies of the historical Charles Lee (as opposed to the game version Charles Lee) and Benjamin Franklin.

Right, and I acknowledged that.

I knew about Haytham and Connor, but I hadn't heard about Edward Low before. I'll have to look into that.

Regardless, I still found it surprising (in a good way) that he's playable, even though he may not necessarily have been a real single person. It's certainly more blatant than the Edward/Connor/Haytham stuff. Kinda makes me wonder if the series will do more stuff like that in the future.

VestigialLlama4
12-18-2015, 04:43 PM
Regardless, I still found it surprising (in a good way) that he's playable, even though he may not necessarily have been a real single person. It's certainly more blatant than the Edward/Connor/Haytham stuff. Kinda makes me wonder if the series will do more stuff like that in the future.

They had initially planned on doing a Mary Read DLC for Black Flag before they did Freedom Cry, so I am quite sure that if they see a chance it will work. With Mary Read, we have more evidence that she exists than we do about the Ripper but her early life is totally shrouded and we don't quite know what she gets up to in Black Flag, when Edward is not around.

So I think certain historical figures if Ubisoft can get away with, they will make them playable.

But it's hard because the number of historical figures you can plausibly make into a player character with the Assassin abilities is a small number. So it works best with those who are a little mysterious and unknown. Patrice Desilets mentioned this when he did AC2, he said that they could plausibly picture Machiavelli holding a sword, since he worked as a military organizer for Florence and was also a general and in that time these posts meant he would need to have some martial skill. But they drew the line at Da Vinci, because they didn't think he fit the type.

So basically some historical figures who are little known. Like Shakespeare for instance, we know he existed, but we know nothing about his early life or his personal thoughts. Maybe he was an Assassin, one thing is for sure, Christopher Marlowe definitely was.

cawatrooper9
12-18-2015, 05:16 PM
They had initially planned on doing a Mary Read DLC for Black Flag before they did Freedom Cry, so I am quite sure that if they see a chance it will work. With Mary Read, we have more evidence that she exists than we do about the Ripper but her early life is totally shrouded and we don't quite know what she gets up to in Black Flag, when Edward is not around.

So I think certain historical figures if Ubisoft can get away with, they will make them playable.

But it's hard because the number of historical figures you can plausibly make into a player character with the Assassin abilities is a small number. So it works best with those who are a little mysterious and unknown. Patrice Desilets mentioned this when he did AC2, he said that they could plausibly picture Machiavelli holding a sword, since he worked as a military organizer for Florence and was also a general and in that time these posts meant he would need to have some martial skill. But they drew the line at Da Vinci, because they didn't think he fit the type.

So basically some historical figures who are little known. Like Shakespeare for instance, we know he existed, but we know nothing about his early life or his personal thoughts. Maybe he was an Assassin, one thing is for sure, Christopher Marlowe definitely was.

Personally, I wouldn't mind being a little underpowered to play as a historical Assassin.

And yeah, I wouldn't really want at all to be someone that was relatively high profile (either in their own era or our history texts). For instance, it would be silly to play as George Washington the Assassin- but Patrick Henry might have some merit as one.

So yeah, personally I think Shakespeare would be a little too well known to be an Assassin (even though there are some blanks to fill in in his life) but I could totally see Marlowe as one.

RA503
12-18-2015, 08:06 PM
I created this tread exclusively to discuss this theory that I have about the DLC I think that that it deserves is own tread :

Jack is Jacob's dark side !!! ,the scene that Jack fights Jacob is all a internal fight like in the Fight Club movie,in the ending, the low level of the Asylum actually symbolises the depth of Jacob's subconscience,his reptilian brain https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triune_brain, Evie only kills his Dark side that was Jack,this is why we can play as jack, is all a animus thing since don't exist diference between a memory and a tough,the abstergo employe handbook of Unity even emplies that the Animus can show mental elements in a diferent way tham really happened ex Arno's pocket watch...



what you think about that ?

cawatrooper9
12-18-2015, 10:03 PM
I created this tread exclusively to discuss this theory that I have about the DLC I think that that it deserves is own tread :

Jack is Jacob's dark side !!! ,the scene that Jack fights Jacob is all a internal fight like in the Fight Club movie,in the ending, the low level of the Asylum actually symbolises the depth of Jacob's subconscience,his reptilian brain https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triune_brain, Evie only kills his Dark side that was Jack,this is why we can play as jack, is all a animus thing since don't exist diference between a memory and a tough,the abstergo employe handbook of Unity even emplies that the Animus can show mental elements in a diferent way tham really happened ex Arno's pocket watch...



what you think about that ?

A week ago I would've at least considered this (and it is an interesting theory), but I think the DLC is pretty clear that this is not the case. Again, cool theory though.

crusader_prophet
12-19-2015, 04:09 AM
I'll be honest at the end of 1st cinematic I thought Jack was Jacob's double personality. May be Jacob had acquired a dual personality disorder specially when he said ' We can fix you' And Ripper said "Fix me? I'm the solution". Those together sounded like New Jacob mature personality in conflict with younger Jacob personality. I thought may be over the years Jacob trying to match up to his father and sister, contributed to his disease. But oh well, the safe route it is. It would have also kinda given a twist to Evie's character and the course of Assassin history, and Evie trying to convince Abberline to keep it a secret at any cost because it was her own brother who had assisted Abberline in the past. A little bit of Dexter twist would have been unconventional I think.

RA503
12-19-2015, 12:36 PM
I'll be honest at the end of 1st cinematic I thought Jack was Jacob's double personality. May be Jacob had acquired a dual personality disorder specially when he said ' We can fix you' And Ripper said "Fix me? I'm the solution". Those together sounded like New Jacob mature personality in conflict with younger Jacob personality. I thought may be over the years Jacob trying to match up to his father and sister, contributed to his disease. But oh well, the safe route it is. It would have also kinda given a twist to Evie's character and the course of Assassin history, and Evie trying to convince Abberline to keep it a secret at any cost because it was her own brother who had assisted Abberline in the past. A little bit of Dexter twist would have been unconventional I think.

is what I state here : http://forums.ubi.com/showthread.php/1356925-Theory-about-Jack-the-ripper-dlc-(spoilers)

Sounds more plausible tham I tought,the only contradiction is Evie finding a Photo of Jacob with Jack in his hideout,but maybe Jack dies and Jacob assume his persona.

I know that the game don't supply this put remember that : http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DeathOfTheAuthor

The main game don't give us any hint that Jacob is Bi anyway,the Roth thing is only a harassment,but the author comes and say that...

Sorrosyss
12-19-2015, 02:46 PM
I'll be honest at the end of 1st cinematic I thought Jack was Jacob's double personality. May be Jacob had acquired a dual personality disorder specially when he said ' We can fix you' And Ripper said "Fix me? I'm the solution". Those together sounded like New Jacob mature personality in conflict with younger Jacob personality. I thought may be over the years Jacob trying to match up to his father and sister, contributed to his disease. But oh well, the safe route it is. It would have also kinda given a twist to Evie's character and the course of Assassin history, and Evie trying to convince Abberline to keep it a secret at any cost because it was her own brother who had assisted Abberline in the past. A little bit of Dexter twist would have been unconventional I think.

I thought this too at the start. But alas, I think we got too optimistic of the writers. As I said earlier, the fan theories on this very forum were far more interesting than what we ended up with for Jack.

Megas_Doux
12-19-2015, 02:50 PM
Although, I must say....playing this, I am realizing now that this might be the start of me maybe dropping the franchise once and for all. I stopped playing Fallout to play this and all throughout, I wanted to go back to Fallout. I think I only finished this out of dedication, not because it was genuinely enjoyable. A lot of Ubisoft's recent trends in designing their games rear their ugly heads here. Did anyone feel anything for the Rooks? I mean, this was supposed to be your gang, right? And now you're fighting them. When Monterriggioni was attacked, every cannon ball was like a proverbial knife to my heart. Taking out the Rooks? I felt nothing. I think I should have, though. I think I should have felt some sort of sadness or something, but nope. They're just blighters in purple.

.

The saddest part about about this whole thing is that, up to this day, NO AC game reached its full potential, ever......The games first had its "oh, GTA on historical times, how exciting" shocking value that faded away because of saturation and fatigue. However, if one thinks about it, with the core mechanics being poor aside from pakour/navigation. Now there's somewhat of a decent mechanics, but with everybody feeling either tired or just "ok" about the games.



You know this franchise is dying when Assassin_M of all people is losing interest.


Annualization and its effects through and through.


Honestly, This is what I said during playing Syndicate. Yeah the game is a cool ride and all, but this isn't the AC I fell in love with. I did enjoy Syndicate and I did enjoy the DLC, they were really fun games. But the open world formula and lack of any mechanic progression in the games over the years really makes me feel like reskins.

I play AC now "casually" and I have since Black Flag.

I've never been that much of a 'story/plot' guy, but the main consecuence of annualization is how unengaging the stories have become. The main reason successful hollywood movies/video games never even had a sequel is how difficult it would be to write a proper plot.

Granted!!! Comparisons are annoying but surely necessary: GTA has had almost the SAME core of higher ups for more than a decade and its stories have been SUPER solid, that along with an immense attention to details, have carried a franchise that doesn't have that much of spectacular mechancis to begin with.

I feel the same about Syndicate, London is a masterpiece!!!! The most alive city I've ever played, the Thamesis/Southwark area never ceases to amaze me. I mean; the ships, factories and train stations are beautifully crafted, but in the end becase all reasons above, I just can't get over that "just OK" feeling.....


PD Vestiglia!!!! I've never though about Edward Low = Edward Kenway, mostly because I was super disappointed about the Low's absence haha. However that is pretty interesting thought.

VestigialLlama4
12-19-2015, 05:30 PM
PD Vestiglia!!!! I've never though about Edward Low = Edward Kenway, mostly because I was super disappointed about the Low's absence haha. However that is pretty interesting thought.

That line which Edward Kenway says to Torres when he captures the Fort: "Or maybe I'll cut your lips and stuff it down your throat." The REAL Edward Low really did do that.

Edward Low disappeared from the record books in 1724...two years after Black Flag supposedly ends. And here's the wikipedia page entry about Low's personal life: On 12 August 1714, he married Eliza Marble at the First Church of Boston.[9] They had a son, who died when he was an infant, and then a daughter named Elizabeth, born in the winter of 1719.[7]
Eliza died in childbirth, leaving Low with his daughter.[5] The loss of his wife had a profound effect on Low: in his later career of piracy, he would often express regret for the daughter he left behind, and refused to press-gang married men into joining his crews.[7] He would also allow women to return to port safely.[10]

So there are differences in that Low became a pirate a bit later and wasn't active in Nassau. The real Ned Low was a good deal more violent and sociopathic than Kenway but you can probably chalk that up to propaganda, which the pirates were subjected to. The Real Blackbeard never killed anybody as we know from history today yet he's this legendary criminal.

By nature of the fact that the Assassins participate in historical events, they will be based on real figures or myths that were in the air of the time. Like Connor and Haytham is based on the real-life feud between Benjamin Franklin and his son William. Corey May said that he was amazed by the fact that Ben Franklin's son ended up fighting for the British against his father and from that he got the idea of fathers and sons on opposite sides. Likewise, the Real!Charles Lee is divided into Haytham and the Templar!Charles Lee. The real Charles Lee married a Mohawk woman and had children with her, so in the game, Haytham takes over that part while Templar Lee takes over the rivalry with Washington stuff.

That extra historical texture adds to what made the pre-Unity games grea. The sense in AC games at the best was never it didn't happen this way, but something quite like it really did happen.

Unity is also based on some real stuff which happened. And the Assassination of Le Peletier was a real incident that happened. The person who killed Le Peletier was never caught but he was a royalist fanatic as per witnesses, so that pretty much clues us into who Arno Dorian is. As does all the other legends spun into the game.

Megas_Doux
12-19-2015, 06:32 PM
Solid points, solid points....

During the course of 2013, I dreamed about the possibility of Low being Edward's sort of Arch enemy based of his legends/facts. The thing is I never thought the idea of Edward having some similarities with him.

VernalBreak
12-19-2015, 06:42 PM
I am angry at how pacifistic they turned evie into. I am okay with her skills being non-lethal but what I am talking about is the walk of shame missions. If you do not get to the "client" in the 18 seconds he murders the prostitute yet you are still not allowed to kill him? Crowed event kill the criminals are very often less violent and you still kill them. I guess ubisoft decided that life does not matter if you are a prostitute. I guess this could have been simply something they did not look into but it is awful that all that guy gets is shamed. I mean I know you get desynced when the prostitute dies but he was actively murdering her and somehow you are not supposed to kill him? I don't know about everyone else but getting publicly disgraced is not a fit for trying to strangle to death a prostitute.


So change it ubisoft. Make it so you can deliver his corpse to nellie rather than just shaming him. Keeping him alive could just be an optional objective.

EDIT: I am very sorry if this came out angry but this part of the game that desperately needs changing.

VestigialLlama4
12-19-2015, 07:16 PM
Solid points, solid points....

During the course of 2013, I dreamed about the possibility of Low being Edward's sort of Arch enemy based of his legends/facts. The thing is I never thought the idea of Edward having some similarities with him.

There were a bunch of pirates they could have tackled, a lot of colourful personalities that they didn't include. Some of them are mentioned and are involved in the Mobile Game PIRATES. You have Olivier "La buse" Levasseur and Samuel Bellamy who aren't there. They could have also included Henry Avery, the man who robbed the Mughal Emperor Aurangzeb and then disappeared off the face of the earth but apparently stopped on Nassau before going north.

Ultimately Black Bart played the Archnemesis for Edward Kenway, which makes sense since he was the most successful of all pirates and his death marked the end of that era. Edward Low was not as successful.

My pet theory before Black Flag was released was that Edward Kenway would eventually be Captain Charles Johnson, otherwise known as the supposed author of A General History of Pirates(aka the Book of Pirates). Nobody knows who Captain Charles Johnson was, but that book is the main record we have of pirate life (it's where Black Bart's famous "muddy waters" speech originates). I thought that Edward in his retirement would eventually write that book in secrecy. But they didn't go there...which goes to show how rich that era was in possibilities.

whatr_those
12-19-2015, 07:18 PM
My friend, Ubisoft won't be changing anything.

VernalBreak
12-19-2015, 07:22 PM
I can at least try to change their terrible mission. The jack the ripper dlc was great because evie was cleaning whitechapel... until this mission.

Megas_Doux
12-19-2015, 07:37 PM
My pet theory before Black Flag was released was that Edward Kenway would eventually be Captain Charles Johnson, otherwise known as the supposed author of A General History of Pirates(aka the Book of Pirates). Nobody knows who Captain Charles Johnson was, but that book is the main record we have of pirate life (it's where Black Bart's famous "muddy waters" speech originates). I thought that Edward in his retirement would eventually write that book in secrecy. But they didn't go there...which goes to show how rich that era was in possibilities.

I wrote the same back in day! A wasted opportunity, for sure.

VestigialLlama4
12-19-2015, 07:58 PM
I wrote the same back in day! A wasted opportunity, for sure.

I would say that normally but considering how much they got right, I can forgive. The thing is there will always be something you leave in any historical adaptation. This is true of even the very best novels and movies because history is far more richer than the ability to portray it so you kind of have to put across a point of view and provided you do it with conviction, it would be valid.

Like for me, AC2 and Brotherhood, I mean it's a very cliche look at the Renaissance, and to me it's mired in outdated views on the Borgia, and it doesn't deal with anti-semitism at that time. But it's made with conviction and love and the fact that it manages to immerse you in that open world Renaissance makes it valid. Revelations gave you a rare positive look at the Ottoman Empire, which is otherwise universally demonized. AC3 would have greatly benefitted if it had Aaron Burr in the game, because he was someone who could have theoretically been an Assassin and AC3 was a game where you didn't have any historical figure be an Assassin and that kind of made Connor feel separate from the conflict.

These games I can forgive because they tried to expand the references at least from before, but I can't forgive Unity which is hopelessly struck in regurgitating 19th Century cliches.

Farlander1991
12-19-2015, 11:57 PM
I actually like that Edward wasn't Captain Johnson. I don't know why exactly, just... if he'd be one, I think I'd cringe. It's just whenever there's mysteries or unknowns it usually gets tied to Assassins or Templars, and sometimes it can be just too much.

I also like that AC4 didn't do the whole cast of pirates it could've done. It kept things focused. Every character, even miniature ones like Burgess and Cockram, have their set-up, progression and resolution. Even though, in case of those two it's miniature as well, but it's there, unlike most other AC games where characters tend to just appear or disappear or get forgotten about and it's kinda a mess. The only real flaw is that AC4 didn't utilize its cast in the open-world content, as while everything's great if you look at it as a linear story, when you do other things as well, it gets diluted.

halperia369
12-20-2015, 01:11 AM
I truly hope that someone out there agrees with me on this subject. This dlc was absolutely awful,plain and simple. Three hours of my life were wasted on this and I am outraged.
The fact that ubisoft has the balls to make a $15 dlc like this truly shows how far gaming has degenerated.

The plot was so simplistic it might as well have been a children's story. You find out who Jack the Ripper is in the second mission. THE SECOND MISSION. I stayed hopeful. For three straight hours, as I was forced to play Evie with one weapon, I hoped that maybe just MAYBE Ubisoft would show some ingenuity and do something unique. I thought perhaps Jacob has gone insane and has begun killing other assassins (which by the way, assassin prostitutes? really? thats the best you could come up with.) But no. No they had to cop out and take the easy route, they created their own character and gave him the cliche 'revenge' plot against the assassins. Didn't Ezio have that motivation in assassins creed two? Then what was this whole nonsense about Evie having THE EXACT SAME WEAPONS AS JACK. Why on Earth would Evie suddenly start using fear weapons that apparently have just been lying around or better yet, why would she just bring them from India. Its even said Jack was in India once, fifteen years before the dlc.

The only redeeming factor of this game was playing as Jack. It was so great that Ubisoft strayed outside of the norm for three, count them THREE, whole missions. Its too bad that they were only about ten minutes long apiece.

Oh sorry, my favorite part of the game was where I got one trophy (on ps4) for this, and that was for completing the dlc. I know its a dlc and i shouldn't expect much but surely someone who spent the money on this trash deserves more than a pat on the back? Nope. All the faithful players who bought this get is a pat on the back, NO new armors, NO new weapons, NO new gauntlets. What you DO get is a laggy White Chapel (that has to render every 20 feet in a carriage), restriction from the rest of the map, dlc exclusive knuckles, three new dlc exclusive gauntlets, three new dlc exclusive weapons (pistols), literally pointless side missions that truly don't matter and are there as filler, and a new (you guessed it) dlc exclusive Evie (at least the one outfit you can wear has plenty of bland colors). Oh and where is Jacob you might ask? He's out of commision so Ubisoft can show off their female protagonist, you know like how they did that when you wasted two or three hours getting the secrets of London for the Eden armor and they only gave it to Evie? Yeah, me too. I'm willing to bet that they're going to do this again with their next dlc (if they even have another), Jacob will be off doing something else and the player will be forced to play as Evie AGAIN. I'd even be willing to bet that whatever the next dlc will be will be Evie-centric.

This dlc added nothing to the game, you don't get any new weapons for the main game, outfits, gauntlets, pistols, skills, nothing you literally get a three hour waste of time and less space on your hard drive. Think Im wrong? Prove it. How was this dlc worth $15?

VernalBreak
12-20-2015, 01:34 AM
What I find absurd is that in the FIRST LOADING SCREEN you actually play as jacob but can never play as him again. I mean come on, if they bothered animating him in the loading screen let you free roam as him. Also, the dlc is bigoted against prostitutes read my other thread.

whatr_those
12-20-2015, 02:42 AM
Ubisoft is garbage, I agree. DLC was sub-par and I can't believe they had the balls to price it at $15 either.

All under Ubisoft's employ should be sentenced to life in prison.

VernalBreak
12-20-2015, 03:09 AM
Life in prison is obviously harsh and i don't at all think ubisoft is garbage but the dlc was absolutely sub-par.

What I liked: The fear system is fun

What I didn't like: Ubisoft decided that prostitute life is worthless or something as you would kill anyone who tries to kill a normal person but somehow you can't kill the guy who is trangling a prostitute. You can not play as jacob even though they animated him in first loading screen. All evies attacks are non-lethal for some reason and just knock them out. A lot of her knock out attacks should even knock them out because doing the same thing with your fist rather than a blade makes it waay weaker realistically; I mean come on, evie punches them in the back and they are unconcious? Evie can no longer use any weapon but knuckles. They restrict your free roam massively only allowing you to be in the city of london and whitechapel even though they already obviously created more areas in syndicate original release. Evie lost a lot of her skills and outfits; either evie loses everything or forgot how to be an assassin.

crusader_prophet
12-20-2015, 03:50 AM
I actually liked Evie here. She's not a bland Mary Sue with nothing to her but arbitrary aesthetics. She's ashamed, she's guilt-ridden, she's worried, she doubts, it was great. We see the human Evie, The Evie who clashes with an old friend in Abberline. Jeez, who didn't like Abberline? Loved the dynamic between him and Evie.

Although, I must say....playing this, I am realizing now that this might be the start of me maybe dropping the franchise once and for all. I stopped playing Fallout to play this and all throughout, I wanted to go back to Fallout. I think I only finished this out of dedication, not because it was genuinely enjoyable. A lot of Ubisoft's recent trends in designing their games rear their ugly heads here. Did anyone feel anything for the Rooks? I mean, this was supposed to be your gang, right? And now you're fighting them. When Monterriggioni was attacked, every cannon ball was like a proverbial knife to my heart. Taking out the Rooks? I felt nothing. I think I should have, though. I think I should have felt some sort of sadness or something, but nope. They're just blighters in purple.

Some characters? They're reused models from the main game. This wouldn't be a problem if they weren't friggin MAIN characters. Weathersbrook is actually Disraeli, his son is Graham Bell, Lady O's husband is Twopenny. What is this? This never happened before and I hope it doesnt ever again, it was really weird.

Finally we are on the same page about everything you just said. You feel my pain, anger and hopelessness.

halperia369
12-20-2015, 03:54 AM
The part that just gets me is I can understand what they did to Evie because it was just a short string of missions but the fact that its all a waste of time is horrible

All of it. They could have easily added the brand new weapons to the main game, given Evie her older outfit and Jacob a Ripper coat but they didn't. That was nothing but a mini-game they used to have a spin off simply for the use of Jack the Ripper and even then they couldn't of just battled Jack the Ripper no no no they have to make sure Evie is in the spotlight while Jacob plays the damsel in distress. I don't mean to sound sexist but I feel like this whole game is centered around Evie. The Eden armor for starters (I'm still sore over that). The first costume dlc, Jacob gets a nifty new outfit, Evie gets an exact replica a few days later. A few weeks later Evie gets this badass looking outfit and Jacob literally gets a pile of rags. I don't care if you make a female main character but my problem comes from when you are forced to be said character when one of the selling points is TWO main characters. If I wanted a game where I played an agile woman who uses parkour I'd play Mirror Edge

And as for sending them all to prison, I dont think that they are that bad I just think that they need to hire an actual writer once and a while. All the programmers, designers, voice actors, and translators in the world can never make up for a single writer. Every Ubisoft game are all bland, especially Assassins Creed games. Enter a city, kill Templars, kill final Templar, receive pat on the back. Hell I could write a better story than Ubisoft could and I wouldn't need a whole staff to do it.

VernalBreak
12-20-2015, 04:03 AM
Adding to your point I thought that it was ridiculous to make Jacob the damsel in distress. JACOB WAS BETTER AT COMBAT THAN EVIE. Why does jack kill Jacob in 2 seconds where evie can somehow beat jack. I would go as far to say that ubisoft got so into women-power that they became sexist the other way around making Jacob practically pathetic. If they want to prove that maybe he just lost that one fight then make us free roam as him but of course no. Jacob pretty much does nothing else with his life again apparently. I hope ubisoft discredits the jack the ripper story to the official assassin's creed canon because they utterly ruined there main character. I still enjoy free roam as evie spiking people but there are soooo many issues.

halperia369
12-20-2015, 04:11 AM
Evie even has a story thats told in the game. She marries the indian assassin and Jacob literally gets nothing. THe whole game is Evie and Jacob or just Evie.

They completely ruined this game for me, I lost all interest in the game now. I would have played it until the disk was scratched from over use if I could have free roamed as the Ripper, but I suppose that would have required like 4 extra line of code or something. Ubisoft has gotten lazy and this dlc shows it

VernalBreak
12-20-2015, 04:33 AM
The ripper's abilities were way more fun than evie's. I feel like you should have been able to roam as jacob and jacob would have the same abilities as the ripper. The scream, actually killing people when you kill them, the knife, and the actually scary spikes and brutal takedowns. Right now evies abilities really aren't scary with all the non-lethal stuff. I agree with you that if ubisoft is going to charge an extra 15$ for a dlc they should allow us at least some more free roam options.

How this game can be fixed if ubisoft could take the not much time to do it


1 Give us the ability to free roam as jacob who would have the abilities of the ripper but less evil

2 Make the "walk of shame" missions seem less like all the guy deserves for attempted strangling is a little disgrace.

3 Make evie's assassinations lethal

4 Make evie's fear abilities lethal

5 give us the ability to kill constables

I can't think of a way to specifically make Jacob less like a damsel specifically in story but giving him free roam with the abilities of the ripper is a nice clear statement that Jacob isn't pathetic.

The 1-5 is in that order 1 being the most important and 5 being the least. If ubisoft just added the first few which would not take them long the dlc would be incredible! Maybe even the best assassin's creed thing ever as the dlc had so much potential but the pursuit was just very very flawed.

Also to ubisoft, the dlc was not terrible and I am not attempting to terribly bash you there were just some definite issues that needed pointing out and hopefully changing

halperia369
12-20-2015, 04:46 AM
As I stated before, I felt that Jacob should have had some kind of accident and gone crazy. He has all the makings of the Ripper. When Jack's mother died Jacob could have been forced to go to the asylum by the police and it could have broke him so he developed the Ripper personality. A lot can happen in twenty years. If Jacob was the Ripper he could, instead of pulling up his hood, put on the mask and becomes a killing machine. They spoiled an amazing opportunity to do something unique. Which would be more memorable: A random assassin wanting revenge for the death of his mother? or A legendary assassin cracking under pressure and going insane, only to be killed by his twin?

VernalBreak
12-20-2015, 04:48 AM
As unique as that would be I really liked Jacob and wouldn't want him crazy. What do you think of my fixing the dlc list?

halperia369
12-20-2015, 04:52 AM
See I agree with your #2 but you also have to rememeber, back in those times your appearance and status were everything. If you were a man, who is well off enough to purchase a prostitute you have respect. The amount of shame you would receive from everyone would be crushing, you would lose everything. I do understand how killing them would be justified but ruining someones name ruins their life.

I did find it odd that Evie did not kill anyone but I am also the kind of person that I often didnt kill unless I had to.

My idea for Jacob being crazy is after Evie nearly kills him and removes his mask she gets Jacob help allowing him to control the Ripper so that he only becomes the Ripper in the mask, do you follow? Sort of like a Jekyll and Hyde but instead of a potion its a mask. Or Rorschach from Watchmen, the Ripper would only be a mask.

VernalBreak
12-20-2015, 05:02 AM
That actually could be kinda cool. He could be driven mad by something specific too; a peice of eden or a drug or something. The prostitute thing I am not budging on though. The guy is literally strangling her and stabbing her with a knife yet somehow all he gets is shame. In crowed events the kill the criminals was way less terrible than this guy and you kill them. Until ubisoft does something at all to do with the walk of shame mission I will keep posting feedback. On the story though ubisoft can't completely change it so work with me here on what they should change about gameplay to fix the game.

halperia369
12-20-2015, 05:12 AM
I know Im just a little bitter..

I should say that everything from the dlc should be put in the main game just so the whole experience isnt lost on the player.

As for in the dlc i believe that Jacob should be playable with the Ripper side of things. He gets the shout, the knife and the executions. Perhaps to counter this since Evie is non-lethal there should be some kind of change for doing it with Jacob or Evie. Like Evie gets more money because the man is alive but Jacob would get more EXP. They don't even need to do any of that (the money/exp situation) Jacob just needs to be a playable character. The map as it is makes my game lag enough, I would hate to see what the entire map being open would do but having everything spread out would be ideal, theres too much crammed into such a tiny area

VernalBreak
12-20-2015, 05:21 AM
I don't care if evie even has an advantage in missions. I just want Jacob playable. Ubisoft already went through the time of animating him in the first load sequence so let us play as him. They would not have to add anything at all new. Jacob would be already animated and give him the abilities of the ripper. Done. I think a poll needs created to make Jacob playable.

halperia369
12-20-2015, 05:23 AM
Well I wish you luck, hopefully someone up at Ubisoft will notice

VernalBreak
12-20-2015, 05:25 AM
I want ubisoft to make Jacob a playable character in the dlc. He was already animated in the first animus load sequence because you ran around as him so no problem there. They could give him the abilities or at least close to jack the ripper which they obviously already made so no problem there either. Because ubisoft already essentially made him all we need is a "switch character" button which I believe they could do relatively quick

VernalBreak
12-20-2015, 05:27 AM
You can help by voting on my poll.;)

Beschikbaar
12-20-2015, 12:09 PM
You do know that they only have the animations for that little "Catch me" run right? And I don't think you want a female voice for Jacob(Because there are new lines)

MikeFNY
12-20-2015, 01:45 PM
Adding to your point I thought that it was ridiculous to make Jacob the damsel in distress. JACOB WAS BETTER AT COMBAT THAN EVIE. Why does jack kill Jacob in 2 seconds where evie can somehow beat jack. I would go as far to say that ubisoft got so into women-power that they became sexist the other way around making Jacob practically pathetic. If they want to prove that maybe he just lost that one fight then make us free roam as him but of course no. Jacob pretty much does nothing else with his life again apparently. I hope ubisoft discredits the jack the ripper story to the official assassin's creed canon because they utterly ruined there main character. I still enjoy free roam as evie spiking people but there are soooo many issues.

This is actually something that crossed my mind as well.

I'm no good in history so it could be that all I'm about to write is nonsense but considering the fact that Jack The Ripper killed prostitutes, wouldn't it have made more sense for him to catch Evie and for Jacob to be the one going after him?

We all know what happened in the world of videogames lately in respect to female characters, sexism and what not and you could be right there, with Ubisoft trying to be all politically correct. Incidentally I wonder what people would have said had they opted for the other way round: Evie being the immature and annoying one with Jacob, on the other hand, being the mature and professional assassin on a mission to get hold of the Shroud of Eden.

In a way I feel for poor Jacob, in the DLC he is clearly more mature yet he's gone before I could blink, which is sad.

Having said all this, I wouldn't label the DLC "horrible", it had its moments, especially the boss missions taking place in separate areas of the city.

BlackSassyWolf
12-20-2015, 02:13 PM
Hey all.
While I enjoyed the story missions, and thought Ubi did a good job of not glorifying the Ripper. Over all it's a bit of a disgrace. The plot is predictable, Jacob being kidnapped is plain stupid and we can't kill those Men who attempt to kill those poor Prostitutes? As has been pointed out already, Ubi are basically saying these Women's lives don't matter, simply because they had no choice but to turn to Prostitution. Very few things bother me in the world of gaming, but as a Woman, that does.
Also, what kind of an Assassin doesn't kill? The job description is right there in the name.
Anyway, that's just my two pence worth. :(

VernalBreak
12-20-2015, 04:57 PM
@MikeFNY, I actually liked Jacob even in the main game better than evie but they are both close. I agree with you that when you finally see master assassin Jacob and he is gone in 2 minutes it gets a little discouraging. I wouldn't label the DLC "horrible" either but it definitely had A LOT of issues. I do enjoy the fear system and with it free roaming around whitechapel is fun.

@BlackSassyWolf, I agree with you that the plot was pretty predictable and that they did a good job of not glorifying the ripper. I also hate that evie in 20 years suddenly does not kill anyone. She is an assassin for crying out loud. Like I said before though the two biggest issues with the game are when you can not play as Jacob so they made him pathetic and they treat the life of a prostitute like its worthless. I am not a women but it in no way changes my views. That prostitute is human and they treat the mission like all he did was steal or something.


Also in my games I like it to be a little more realistic. I mean Evie punches someone in the back and they are unconscious? No amount of strength would allow you to knock someone out by punching them in the back

STDlyMcStudpants
12-20-2015, 11:24 PM
Here is my spoiler free review of Jack The Ripper DLC
There are slight spoilers if you don't want to know the characters you play as
Other than that I'm pretty vague on plot point and everything else.
Enjoy!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2_0FlRkuwsE

D.I.D.
12-23-2015, 10:35 AM
Loved it. (Played on PC, so none of the reported problems with frame rates or carriages.)

Every time the discussion of a Jack The Ripper AC has come up over the years, I've been dead against it. I refused to believe that it could be done in any decent manner, and the idea of "Jack" being playable in any way was abhorrent to me. I'm very happy to say Ubisoft has proved me wrong.

The DLC has proved to be the perfect size to handle a Ripper story, and the way everything tied back to Lambeth made it round off nicely for me. I see the OP is upset that there was no PoE; well, I didn't even notice. This is the perfect illustration for me that if the contemporary story is strong, you don't need PoEs or anything of the First Civ.

The major blackboxes were excellent, and it was a good decision to create some locations outside of the Syndicate map so that they could be what they needed to be for the mission. Some of the Unity and Syndicate interiors have felt a bit uncomfortable, but there was a good amount of space this time.

My brain still can't connect 45-year-old Evie to 25-year-old Evie and they just look and feel like different people to me, but I like middle-aged Evie very much. Jack was really good as well, and well done for not unmasking him. I'll even forgive Ubi for having Jack say "We're not so different you and I" AND "We're the same, you and I" in the same damned location, so they must have done something right.

D.I.D.
12-23-2015, 10:43 AM
@MikeFNY, I actually liked Jacob even in the main game better than evie but they are both close. I agree with you that when you finally see master assassin Jacob and he is gone in 2 minutes it gets a little discouraging. I wouldn't label the DLC "horrible" either but it definitely had A LOT of issues. I do enjoy the fear system and with it free roaming around whitechapel is fun.

@BlackSassyWolf, I agree with you that the plot was pretty predictable and that they did a good job of not glorifying the ripper. I also hate that evie in 20 years suddenly does not kill anyone. She is an assassin for crying out loud. Like I said before though the two biggest issues with the game are when you can not play as Jacob so they made him pathetic and they treat the life of a prostitute like its worthless. I am not a women but it in no way changes my views. That prostitute is human and they treat the mission like all he did was steal or something.


Also in my games I like it to be a little more realistic. I mean Evie punches someone in the back and they are unconscious? No amount of strength would allow you to knock someone out by punching them in the back

I haven't read the books, but she has been in India and the database and story mention that her new techniques and weapons were picked up there. I got the impression that perhaps, like many Westerners, she'd absorbed some of the principles of Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism, Sikhism and so on. There has to be a reason for her new approach and the objectives, so that seems likely.

It seems Jacob never learned the Fear techniques, so he's not equipped to deal with Jack. Jack learned his stuff in India like Evie did. I guess Jacob was lazy, which would suit his character!

However, it's not true that she doesn't kill. She shoots guns, uses knives, and if you strike an incapacitated foe on the ground then he/she will be assassinated by hidden blade. You can fail some of the missions by failing to stick to the non-violent approaches if that's what the circumstances require.

RegeRoka
12-23-2015, 03:00 PM
I agree with D.I.D.
I believe they "killed of" Jacob in the beginning to show how overpowered the ripper was. They could not defeat him headstrong, only with stealth. That's why Jacob lost.

VernalBreak
12-23-2015, 08:42 PM
Evie even says in one of the first sequences that she learned fear tools with JACOB and jack the lad. In the pole I am only wanting jacob playable not changing Evie.
I still stand by that they made Jacob so so pathetic that they got sexist. Jack can attack jacob in ways he couldn't on Evie which is immensely stupid since Jacob was better at combat.

crusader_prophet
12-23-2015, 08:48 PM
Evie even says in one of the first sequences that she learned fear tools with JACOB and jack the lad. In the pole I am only wanting jacob playable not changing Evie.
I still stand by that they made Jacob so so pathetic that they got sexist. Jack can attack jacob in ways he couldn't on Evie which is immensely stupid since Jacob was better at combat.

Jacob IS Jack...at least in my opinion. This is UbiSoft pulling Bioware's indoctrination theory stunt. Hence Jack knows the fear tools as well because he mastered it with Evie.

D.I.D.
12-24-2015, 06:10 AM
Evie even says in one of the first sequences that she learned fear tools with JACOB and jack the lad. In the pole I am only wanting jacob playable not changing Evie.
I still stand by that they made Jacob so so pathetic that they got sexist. Jack can attack jacob in ways he couldn't on Evie which is immensely stupid since Jacob was better at combat.

Jacob's not pathetic. He fights honourably, but his mistake is his empathy for his old pupil. Jacob loses because he's trying to appeal to a better nature that Jack doesn't have, and he doesn't want to harm Jack. Evie has no such restrictions, and is resolute about stopping him.

Evie doesn't say Jacob learned the fear techniques with her, only that the three all trained in India. We don't see Jacob employing fear techniques, therefore we can assume her never learned them.

MikeFNY
12-24-2015, 09:16 AM
In a way I understand what VernalBreak is trying to say.

I mean let's face it, the game was advertised as Jacob = combat and Evie = stealth but we all know that this failed since both can combat and both can infiltrate in stealth mode. But if we are to stick to this, had you asked me who of the two should make use of "scare tactics", which let's be honest, are anything but stealthy, I would have said Jacob.

Granted, one might say Evie uses them so she can easily stealth inside an area but I wouldn't call high-sound bombs leaving dozens running around like crazymen as stealth.

Seriously, Jacob would have eaten such skills for breakfast because knowing the two characters, it's more in Jacob's style to learn "scare tactics" than Evie's.

They wanted the female protagonist to be the only protagonist of the DLC and it backfired, it backfired because it's not in her style to make so much noise, it backfired because it's hard to believe that a woman who can kill in a heartbeat opts for a "walk of shame" when she sees the way other women are treated and it backfired because it's hard to imagine a woman cleaning fight clubs alone, it's also hard to imagine a man doing it, let alone a 40-year-old woman.

I don't want to go off-topic, really, but when a female protagonist was announced this is exactly what I feared and it's not nice to see that it did happen after all.

D.I.D.
12-24-2015, 09:43 AM
In a way I understand what VernalBreak is trying to say.

I mean let's face it, the game was advertised as Jacob = combat and Evie = stealth but we all know that this failed since both can combat and both can infiltrate in stealth mode. But if we are to stick to this, had you asked me who of the two should make use of "scare tactics", which let's be honest, are anything but stealthy, I would have said Jacob.

Granted, one might say Evie uses them so she can easily stealth inside an area but I wouldn't call high-sound bombs leaving dozens running around like crazymen as stealth.

Seriously, Jacob would have eaten such skills for breakfast because knowing the two characters, it's more in Jacob's style to learn "scare tactics" than Evie's.

They wanted the female protagonist to be the only protagonist of the DLC and it backfired, it backfired because it's not in her style to make so much noise, it backfired because it's hard to believe that a woman who can kill in a heartbeat opts for a "walk of shame" when she sees the way other women are treated and it backfired because it's hard to imagine a woman cleaning fight clubs alone, it's also hard to imagine a man doing it, let alone a 40-year-old woman.

I don't want to go off-topic, really, but when a female protagonist was announced this is exactly what I feared and it's not nice to see that it did happen after all.

If we're going to talk about expectations from marketing, Syndicate purported to be a two-protag game. It absolutely wasn't, and the concerns many of us had before the game about the proportion of major missions turned out to be worse than we feared. Evie got nothing but the game's worst blackbox, or possibly second-to-worst depending on how you feel about Jacob's station assassination.

Yeah, the shame missions are crap, but they wouldn't be missions at all without the shaming activity - you'd just walk in and kill a guy for threatening a woman. If it had been Jacob's game, that's still what you would have been doing. They're just recycling the Kidnap missions to stretch them out with a cosmetic change. It's not great, but it's not totally mindboggling or off-character either. Arguably, we kill far too much in these games as it is. I'm not against letting more people live. I was worried that Evie was going to simply leave those [spolier] Templars to rot in the Deptford cages[/spoiler] which felt truly wrong for her or any other Assassin we've ever seen so I was glad to see that she didn't do it and let them go. The Shame missions are just some weak filler in an AC game: not the first, won't be the last.

That we had to pay extra money to actually see Evie do anything significant is a big deal. Thankfully the DLC is good. And yet we hear this **** about how unfair it is to Jacob. Come on.

MikeFNY
12-24-2015, 10:32 AM
Just to clarify, I was not saying that the DLC is "unfair to Jacob", I simply said that for what it is, it would have made more sense to play as him. In all fairness both characters just didn't do it for me and I preferred Evie's missions in the main game since I was more interested in the shroud rather than Jacob's crazy missions to "liberate" London.

VoXngola
12-24-2015, 03:51 PM
Is there any way to read up on the new Assassin Intel from the JTR DLC? I really don't want to collect the Helix glitches and there's nothing in the wiki..
Edit: NVM I'm dumb stuff's on youtube already.

VernalBreak
12-24-2015, 04:11 PM
The dlc was far more than "unfair" to Jacob they made him utterly pathetic. You could tell that whoever developed the Jacob character hated him.
Also, Jacob learned the fear tactics with Evie that is what "learned" implies. Also, Jacob was never lazy at all he did tons more than Evie in the main game. I can tell you dislike Jacob.

Whether that is the case or not why would you vote against adding him? I am not saying that Evie should be changed in any way; I am simply saying to add Jacob for those who would enjoy that more. All not adding him does is lose progress as I DON'T WANT TO change Evie; I simply want to play as Jacob who they utterly ruined in story.

Farlander1991
12-24-2015, 09:19 PM
So I'm playing the game now (it was released on PC later so playing later, though I probably will not finish it until after Christmas/New Year brake). Is the Rooks joining Jack (and turning against Jacob respectively, though I presume not all did, just the ones that didn't - die) somehow mentioned in the game at all? Like, I actually didn't realize the main enemy gang were Rooks until I saw 'entering Rooks territory'. They say nothing to Evie, Evie says nothing about it, I mean.... that's just strange. I mean, it makes sense to play with Assassins getting a taste of their own medicine, just like they turned half of the Blighters against the Templars and eventually gain control, so somebody would turn half of the Rooks against the Assassins and eventually gain control. But nobody says anything. Not even 'I warned Jacob gangs were a bad idea' from Evie or something. It's not a huge deal ultimately I guess, but it baffles me.

Unless I've missed something, of course, or didn't get to some part.

HDinHB
12-24-2015, 10:37 PM
When I first saw the "now entering Rooks territory," I actually left and came back to make sure I read it correctly. Yup, Rooks. It does mention later that Jack took over the Rooks from Jacob, but not a lot is said about it.


I didn't like the DLC as much as the main game, but I do like it more than I did 1/2 way through it. The side missions were okay, except for the walks of shame which were awful and the slow-speed chases which were just dull.

I do wish Jacob had gotten a final line after Evie rescued him, even if he'd just said "Evie..." or "Sister..." or "Thanks..." or "About bloody time..." Something.

crusader_prophet
12-25-2015, 01:12 AM
Is it me or people are just fighting over a mundane topic of Evie v/s Jacob? The game is designed the way developers felt was right. Also, the fact that Jack IS Jacob, makes the debate more useless because you do play as Jacob when you are playing Jacob. UbiSoft is not obligated to feed into our demands, they made a DLC that best served their narrative intention. They don't have to specifically divert from their plans to make both Jacob and Evie playable and satisfy the crowd. Get over it. Stop with the gender discrimination conspiracy theories and discuss something interesting about the plot.

VernalBreak
12-25-2015, 03:03 AM
It is not a conspiracy, they trashed their male protagonist and gave all his skills to their female. Simple as that.

RVSage
12-28-2015, 02:55 PM
When Evie did not get too many missions in the main game, people do not complain, Jacob is cut short from a "2 hour " dlc, people loose their minds, The whole thing was little longer than a single sequence in the main game, When you consider, this is absolutely fair. and makes the narrative even.

Jacob was not himself against Jack, a kid he treated as his son. That is why Jack beats him. Evie on the other hand did not share the same bonding with Jack, thus beat him eventually. No one trashed their male protagonist, they just showed he too valued relationships, and had good qualities, even if he is brash, hasty, his heart was in the right place, that to me is a strong character development, they did not make him super human.

D.I.D.
12-29-2015, 04:31 AM
The dlc was far more than "unfair" to Jacob they made him utterly pathetic. You could tell that whoever developed the Jacob character hated him.
Also, Jacob learned the fear tactics with Evie that is what "learned" implies. Also, Jacob was never lazy at all he did tons more than Evie in the main game. I can tell you dislike Jacob.

Conjecture, toys out of pram, etc


Whether that is the case or not why would you vote against adding him? I am not saying that Evie should be changed in any way; I am simply saying to add Jacob for those who would enjoy that more. All not adding him does is lose progress as I DON'T WANT TO change Evie; I simply want to play as Jacob who they utterly ruined in story.

It's not his story. I've lived with Syndicate sidelining Evie, but suddenly female protagonists can only be optional once they're given top billing? That IS changing her. This is the story in which we finally see Evie growing into her mastery and doing the important work, and you want it to be open to headcanon.

VernalBreak
12-29-2015, 04:49 AM
I am not saying change Evie at all! What don't you get? Also, Evie was more focused on than Jacob by far in the main game. So you get so obsessed with a female protagonist you don't like men any more?

D.I.D.
12-29-2015, 10:42 AM
I am not saying change Evie at all! What don't you get? Also, Evie was more focused on than Jacob by far in the main game. So you get so obsessed with a female protagonist you don't like men any more?

Look at the main missions in your tracker, and the summaries. All of them are Jacob's except one very weak blackbox at the Tower of London. Evie gets a smaller proportion of missions overall too. To say I'm obsessed with a character, given your stance and inability to judge hard facts, is deeply ironic. If you look at my post history, I'm favourably disposed towards Evie but I'm kind of lukewarm on her. She's decent enough, but I mainly like her clothes. I prefer her to Jacob by a large margin, so I played as her as much as I could.

Of all the wrong-headed opinions that gets repeated on these forums, the one where the staff "hate [Assassin X]" is the most comical of them all. YOU get obsessed with a character and then get personal about them to that extent. Clearly these creations have some power to be able to do that, but to think that a character is hated by the studio that created him is absolutely ridiculous. He doesn't exist independently of the project. I could see how a creator might grow to hate his/her creation over time and many iterations of a story, but this is Game One and it's not a single creator but a whole team you're pointing your finger at here.

There is something deeply fishy about how much pressure it took to get a female protag into this series only to have her passed off to a minor handheld device. Then we get another female protagonist and she's in a spin-off 2D game. Then we finally get a woman in the main series, and it's not even her game, not even shared, and her brother gets all the major story missions until the end bar one. This isn't about Evie at this point; it's about how the AC project handles women. So we get this one light in that situation, this interesting bit of DLC, and you want to snuff it out. That's offensive, and apart from anything else your option isn't really appropriate to the story. There are enough games where the hunky man goes Death Wish to protect the defenceless ladies, and the power balance there is ****ed up. If there must be an avenger, and you have a female hero available to do it, it ought to be her run.

What you are suggesting does change Evie because this is a series which is building up a fictional history. You're asking for the opportunity to wipe her position out as the assassin who took down Jack The Ripper because she's inconvenient to your personal feelings about playing this male character versus that female character. You don't get to have your head-canon muddy up the lore.