PDA

View Full Version : I don't think Ubisoft will ever reboot Assassin's Creed



M4ke_Off
05-19-2017, 01:22 AM
I mean they been building a universe for about 10 years now, I don't ever see them just abandoning everything and starting fresh

I expect Origins will be a "soft reboot"...they will always maintain the lore though, I just never see them doing a full reboot


and I don't want them to ever to be honest

Weirdazoid
05-19-2017, 06:55 AM
There's no way they would just drop all of that lore and storytelling that they had been building since 2007. The backlash they would receive for doing that would be insane.

dxsxhxcx
05-19-2017, 04:04 PM
They don't need to, they just need to move away from Desmond's timeline.

M4ke_Off
05-19-2017, 07:40 PM
by the way, speaking of lore

do you think we'll ever see a 4th edition to the Encyclopedia

i think the last one came out in 2013 (3rd edition) hasn't been a new one since

Helforsite
05-20-2017, 11:44 AM
by the way, speaking of lore

do you think we'll ever see a 4th edition to the Encyclopedia

i think the last one came out in 2013 (3rd edition) hasn't been a new one since
I would absolutely love a new and updated Encyclopedia especially if it can be bought as a standalone.

phoenix-force411
05-21-2017, 01:52 AM
Doesn't need a reboot. A reboot is a quick fix that would do no justice to what has been already established. They finally introduced Galina in Syndicate and that was something the series really needed, because aside from Desmond, she is the only other character who has a very interesting background already established since AC Initiates was in BETA. If the Modern Day needs a character to center around, at least, it should be her.

Also, is Origins really in Ancient Egypt? I don't know if I am really interested in such an era as that.

Megas_Doux
05-21-2017, 01:55 AM
Also, is Origins really in Ancient Egypt? I don't know if I am really interested in such an era as that.


Greek/roman Egypt, but nobody knows for sure.

SpiritOfNevaeh
05-21-2017, 03:31 PM
Nah, they can't do a reboot this late in the series.

They just need to give new and refreshing content to keep the gamers guessing and wanting more.

M4ke_Off
05-22-2017, 01:27 AM
Nah, they can't do a reboot this late in the series.

They just need to give new and refreshing content to keep the gamers guessing and wanting more.

this

plus a full reboot would cause alot on anger among the fan community

Helforsite
05-22-2017, 01:44 PM
this

plus a full reboot would cause alot on anger among the fan community

A full reboot in form of a properly done reimaging of the existing story and lore of the AC universe would probably be really well received by most fans, even hardcore fans, in my opinion.

M4ke_Off
05-22-2017, 07:11 PM
A full reboot in form of a properly done reimaging of the existing story and lore of the AC universe would probably be really well received by most fans, even hardcore fans, in my opinion.

No it wouldn't......

people have been dedicated to the lore for 10 years now, a full reboot would cause much anger

cawatrooper9
05-22-2017, 08:53 PM
Yeah, I'm with M4ke on this one. AC has told some great stories, but I really don't think we need to reboot and rehash them. We literally just got an Ezio remaster, anyway. Enjoy the past for what it is, but look to the future.

Farlander1991
05-23-2017, 01:03 PM
Just rebooting would be a disaster, but as long as all plotlines are wrapped up, a reboot is absolutely fine I think. And even healthy for the series. I feel like because at the beginning the series didn't plan for just how big the franchise would become, they added tons of random lore elements for all the different time periods that now can block creativity of storylines told.

cawatrooper9
05-23-2017, 02:21 PM
Just rebooting would be a disaster, but as long as all plotlines are wrapped up, a reboot is absolutely fine I think. And even healthy for the series. I feel like because at the beginning the series didn't plan for just how big the franchise would become, they added tons of random lore elements for all the different time periods that now can block creativity of storylines told.

To clarify- by "reboot", do you mean that they would finish the current plotlines, then reboot and possibly rehash those plotlines in what may be a more focused way of delivering content?

Or simply that they'd finish all plotlines, then move on to something entirely different in MD? Because that's more what I'd see as a "soft reboot".

poptartz20
05-23-2017, 04:05 PM
I honestly wish, there was something like a DBZ Kai for assassins creed. because, between the comics, games and other spin offs it's become super hard to follow.

Farlander1991
05-23-2017, 05:03 PM
To clarify- by "reboot", do you mean that they would finish the current plotlines, then reboot and possibly rehash those plotlines in what may be a more focused way of delivering content?

Or simply that they'd finish all plotlines, then move on to something entirely different in MD? Because that's more what I'd see as a "soft reboot".

The first one. End plotlines, have an ending, and do a full reboot where they would not be constrained by the previous continuity (but draw inspiration if they'd want to).

I don't think soft reboot is going to be helpful for AC. Both MD and historical lore are quite frankly a mess. MD is a mess because of its sudden and kinda unplanned (at least it feels like it) expansion into multiple games and then trans-media, historical lore is a mess because a lot of stuff in the lore was added in the early games without any thoughts of how it will affect the far future (Jeffrey Yohalem said himself in one of the interviews that stuff in glyphs that he was working on was added essentially because it was cool), as AC was expected to be a trilogy (or at the least, didn't seem like it would expand this fast). But now that AC is so big, all those things actually block a lot of potential storylines, or force particular story beats on certain characters (like who needs to have PoEs, for example).

And while soft reboot and MD might fit together, I feel like we need a hard reboot for the historical part - but that means a hard reboot for the whole series.

Xangr8
05-23-2017, 06:19 PM
The first one. End plotlines, have an ending, and do a full reboot where they would not be constrained by the previous continuity (but draw inspiration if they'd want to).


I don't think soft reboot is going to be helpful for AC. Both MD and historical lore are quite frankly a mess. MD is a mess because of its sudden and kinda unplanned (at least it feels like it) expansion into multiple games and then trans-media, historical lore is a mess because a lot of stuff in the lore was added in the early games without any thoughts of how it will affect the far future (Jeffrey Yohalem said himself in one of the interviews that stuff in glyphs that he was working on was added essentially because it was cool), as AC was expected to be a trilogy (or at the least, didn't seem like it would expand this fast). But now that AC is so big, all those things actually block a lot of potential storylines, or force particular story beats on certain characters (like who needs to have PoEs, for example).


And while soft reboot and MD might fit together, I feel like we need a hard reboot for the historical part - but that means a hard reboot for the whole series.


I'm totally against a hard reboot and I feel that I'm not the only one holding this opinion. Just abandoning a decade of lore would be a kick in the guts for many die-hard fans who've invested their time in the series.


AC has a convoluted story which wasn't well thought-out, yes. But, it isn't really hard fixing it up as it seems at first glance. The MD still has the potential to tie up all the loopholes that they've created over the years ("Eve will guide us", "The sun. Your son") and I can really see them tying up all the loose ends in the upcoming comics/games. Similarly, for the established historical lore, they can hinder the story but not if they're complemented with effective execution. For example, Winston Churchill was originally said to be a Templar during the second World War in one of the gylphs, but in Syndicate he's seen aiding the Assassins. But, that is it, this apparent mess can be cleared up and can in fact act as a rather compelling storyline involving Churchill's defection to the Templars if executed correctly.


All this 'convoluted mess' might seem intimidating to people who're new to the series but if all the media and lore is consumed in the proper order, it can turn out to be a highly rewarding experience.


This is why I don't think the franchise needs a hard reboot. All they need is proper storylines which can easily tie-into the already established lore.

M4ke_Off
05-23-2017, 07:16 PM
Yeah I'm against a Hard Reboot as well

I feel like the people that want the Hard Reboot for AC are fans that don't care about the TWCB/Isu elements and Modern Day plot lines and just want the historical stuff

but their are many fans that do love all those elements, a hard reboot would be a disaster like Xangr8 said

Farlander1991
05-23-2017, 07:25 PM
I'm totally against a hard reboot and I feel that I'm not the only one holding this opinion. Just abandoning a decade of lore would be a kick in the guts for many die-hard fans who've invested their time in the series.

Except I specified two times that hard reboot has to be done AFTER wrapping everything up (which doesn't have necessarily to be just one game or something, take the time that's needed), so it would have properly wrapped up everything, and then reboot. That's not a kick anywhere, and doesn't disrespect fans' investment, as nothing will remove that version of the universe they were invested in.


All this 'convoluted mess' might seem intimidating to people who're new to the series but if all the media and lore is consumed in the proper order, it can turn out to be a highly rewarding experience.

'Highly rewarding experience' is quite debatable, and I'm saying that as a person regularly and consistently consuming AC media since the release of the first game.

Where to even begin...
- The wonderful metaphorical end of the world storyline that was set up in AC1 with the satellite plot was pushed aside in AC2 with introduction of actual end of the world, and was resolved with an e-mail.
- And the solar flare storyline that replaced the satellite one as the main plot was haphazardly ended.
- And a very intriguing character from the comics, Daniel Cross, had a very bad treatment in AC3.
- And then we have things that should be mentioned in the main games but are relegated to transmedia, like why Haytham had such a sudden change of character in the timeline gap - no reason was mentioned in the game.
- But then we also have transmedia that absolutely misses the points of the games, like the awful ACIV novel that absolutely misses the point of ACIV by making Edward an unknowning participant of the conflict with Templars from a much earlier part of his life, and not just that.
- And then we have big continuity errors, like finding the Apple in ACB that was supposed to be destroyed, that had to be fixed with a big retcon in ACR (i.e. oh the Apple is not actually on Cyprus, it's just a rumor!), that then had to be fixed with ANOTHER retcon in a mobile game to not have a very ridiculous case of 'Templars went searching for an Apple on Cyprus that wasn't there but found one anyway'.
- Squandering of characters with lots of potential like Lucy and Subject 16 (and while 16 has one of my most favorite lines in ACR, the way he was set up he was squandered in the end)
- A full game focused on a narrative of an Assassin turned Templar that does it in a very cheap way, and has got much, much, MUCH less depth than a small side storyline of an Assassin turned Templar from ACR.

And, honestly, I can go on. There's brilliance in AC, both in historical and modern day parts. That's why I'm such a big fan of the series. But that brilliance is surrounded by tons of more than questionable decisions and choices. This is why AC as we know it has to wrap up, I think. There's a lot of great stuff, but also a lot of mistakes to learn from, but this is a blessing in disguise in a sense that knowing these mistakes can help create a version of AC universe that's got even more great things in it.


All they need is proper storylines which can easily tie-into the already established lore.

That's much harder than you think when lore is filled with tons of undetailed tidbits that are vague but at the same time important enough that they have to be big parts of the driving force of a plotline.

M4ke_Off
05-23-2017, 07:29 PM
Except I specified two times that hard reboot has to be done AFTER wrapping everything up (which doesn't have necessarily to be just one game or something, take the time that's needed), so it would have properly wrapped up everything, and then reboot. That's not a kick anywhere, and doesn't disrespect fans' investment, as nothing will remove that version of the universe they were invested in.



'Highly rewarding experience' is quite debatable, and I'm saying that as a person regularly and consistently consuming AC media since the release of the first game.

Where to even begin...
- The wonderful metaphorical end of the world storyline that was set up in AC1 with the satellite plot was pushed aside in AC2 with introduction of actual end of the world, and was resolved with an e-mail.
- And the solar flare storyline that replaced the satellite one as the main plot was haphazardly ended.
- And a very intriguing character from the comics, Daniel Cross, had a very bad treatment in AC3.
- And then we have things that should be mentioned in the main games but are relegated to transmedia, like why Haytham had such a sudden change of character in the timeline gap - no reason was mentioned in the game.
- But then we also have transmedia that absolutely misses the points of the games, like the awful ACIV novel that absolutely misses the point of ACIV by making Edward an unknowning participant of the conflict with Templars from a much earlier part of his life, and not just that.
- And then we have big continuity errors, like finding the Apple in ACB that was supposed to be destroyed, that had to be fixed with a big retcon in ACR (i.e. oh the Apple is not actually on Cyprus, it's just a rumor!), that then had to be fixed with ANOTHER retcon in a mobile game to not have a very ridiculous case of 'Templars went searching for an Apple on Cyprus that wasn't there but found one anyway'.
- Squandering of characters with lots of potential like Lucy and Subject 16 (and while 16 has one of my most favorite lines in ACR, the way he was set up he was squandered in the end)
- A full game focused on a narrative of an Assassin turned Templar that does it in a very cheap way, and has got much, much, MUCH less depth than a small side storyline of an Assassin turned Templar from ACR.

And, honestly, I can go on. There's brilliance in AC, both in historical and modern day parts. That's why I'm such a big fan of the series. But that brilliance is surrounded by tons of more than questionable decisions and choices. This is why AC as we know it has to wrap up, I think. There's a lot of great stuff, but also a lot of mistakes to learn from, but this is a blessing in disguise in a sense that knowing these mistakes can help create a version of AC universe that's got even more great things in it.



That's much harder than you think when lore is filled with tons of undetailed tidbits that are vague but at the same time important enough that they have to be big parts of the driving force of a plotline.

again I don't think a full reboot will happen for many reasons:

1. as mentioned earlier, Ubisoft has been building up lore for 10 years
2. Many die hard fans care about the lore
3. They are releasing a comic book that continues the Phoenix Project, if they were aiming for a hard reboot, why even bother with it

Farlander1991
05-23-2017, 08:17 PM
again I don't think a full reboot will happen for many reasons:

1. as mentioned earlier, Ubisoft has been building up lore for 10 years
2. Many die hard fans care about the lore
3. They are releasing a comic book that continues the Phoenix Project, if they were aiming for a hard reboot, why even bother with it

You didn't have to quote my whole huge post to talk about a point I didn't even mention :p Never said anything about whether a reboot will happen or not, just about whether it should. And I think it should. Though, as I said, not abruptly, and one point I didn't mention is that I think with the amount of AC media coming out, the lore still has got good 5-7ish or so years before it gets REALLY hard to actually create something new and coherent in the midst of everything and the need for a reboot will become more apparent than ever.

Reboots happen a lot, many reboots are done with less media released than AC has. It's not an inherently bad thing.

cawatrooper9
05-23-2017, 08:21 PM
Yeah, as I mentioned earlier, AC has had some great moments, but I really don't think we need a hard reboot to relive them.

The series has so much potential, far more than I think most do. We literally have all of history as our canvas, with more including the Isu and more fantastical stuff.

Wrapping up all plotlines and starting again pretty fresh? Sure. But I really don't think we need to reboot and live through the satellite launch/ Apple Hunt/ Ezio Era again, or any other thing that was well received in the past. I think that would be derivative and lazy, whereas there is potential for such greatness.

M4ke_Off
05-23-2017, 10:02 PM
like i mentioned earlier

the people that want a Hard Reboot, seem to also be the ones that want the TWCB/Isu stuff and Modern day stuff to be written out

they just purely want the historical

Farlander1991
05-23-2017, 11:11 PM
Yeah, as I mentioned earlier, AC has had some great moments, but I really don't think we need a hard reboot to relive them.

The series has so much potential, far more than I think most do. We literally have all of history as our canvas, with more including the Isu and more fantastical stuff.

Wrapping up all plotlines and starting again pretty fresh? Sure. But I really don't think we need to reboot and live through the satellite launch/ Apple Hunt/ Ezio Era again, or any other thing that was well received in the past. I think that would be derivative and lazy, whereas there is potential for such greatness.

Why do you equate a reboot with telling the same stories? One does not mean the other.

At any rate, historical part as a canvas is precisely why a reboot will be needed at some point.

If we continue the 'history as our canvas' analogy, and let's say each historical era is a blank canvas, what the AC series did in it's first ten years is put a bunch of random blobs on a lot of them that have to be used as a base now or the image will have a blob on it.

A very good example is the situation with Churchill. He was identified as a Templar in one of the game's lore just because it was something cool and edgy. Developers in Syndicate decided to use him as an assassin ally in WWI, but because of that blob that was placed 5 years before, if one is to use Churchill in a WWII era or close to it, there HAS to be an arc of him becoming aligned with the Templars for one reason or another. That HAS to be a plotline now.

Genghis Khan and Attila the Hun? They've GOT to have the Sword of Eden now. Torquemada? Even though he survived encounters with both Ezio and Aguilar, we know he dies by Assassins' hands. If we ever go to Spain in 1498, it's now expected to kill him. Brutus? He's an Assassin (or, well, part of the group that later called themselves Assassins), we know that, so he's got to be one now, he also has got to have that bulky armor that Ezio will get in the future. Oh and Caesar was a Templar puppet. He can't be a neutral affiliate now like Savonarola was, or something more interesting done with him.

And so on. There's a LOT of blobs like this now for periods with potentially interesting settings and historical personalities, and a lot of them were put with the thinking 'this is a cool blob' rather than 'hey, what purpose this blob might serve in the future'.

These are the problems I'm talking about. A lot of people really want to visit Ancient Rome in the era of Caesar, but now if there's to be a game set in Ancient Rome, the developers have to be sure that the game is made in a way that all the important story beats, and some not so important as well, take into account and are built within the constraints of some random trivia or cool things that somebody has created before, and that doesn't necessarily lead to the best narrative.

And, take a look at which games are usually among favorites or considered the best. AC1, AC2, AC4. One of the things they all have in common is that there were no pre-existing notions of what has to be there in terms of context, it was all free reign for devs. Now let's take Rogue, a game that happens in-between 2 sections of AC3. Yes, it's narrative is 'eh' overall, but the fact that Haytham is expected to be there, broadly, so he's put there but really not for a whole lot of purpose... well, it doesn't make it better. Well, and Assassins have to be eradicated. And we need to know what happened to Achiless. And so on. Then there's these weird things with the Apple in Unity because we know Napoleon has got to have it (and he gets it right under Arno's nose in that office, making it look kinda really silly).

VestigialLlama4
05-24-2017, 12:00 AM
A very good example is the situation with Churchill. He was identified as a Templar in one of the game's lore just because it was something cool and edgy. Developers in Syndicate decided to use him as an assassin ally in WWI, but because of that blob that was placed 5 years before, if one is to use Churchill in a WWII era or close to it, there HAS to be an arc of him becoming aligned with the Templars for one reason or another. That HAS to be a plotline now.

Well they can simply airbrush it away. Subject 16 was crazy and couldn't tell real stuff apart from fictional. The Templars put misinformation all the time to confuse people tracking them...yada yada yada...and that's it. The number of people who played AC2 and skipped those puzzles is a small number after all.


And so on. There's a LOT of blobs like this now for periods with potentially interesting settings and historical personalities, and a lot of them were put with the thinking 'this is a cool blob' rather than 'hey, what purpose this blob might serve in the future'.

Well sometimes those blobs contradict each other blatantly. Like the Eseosa's Letters transmedia from the AC Initiates Website made Robespierre a hero and Napoleon a bad guy. UNITY blatantly disregarded it because Napoleon is "popular" in the English speaking world and Robespierre isn't. So let's leave inconvenient facts out of the way and disguise the fact that Arno is blatantly a fascist in UNITY.


And, take a look at which games are usually among favorites or considered the best. AC1, AC2, AC4. One of the things they all have in common is that there were no pre-existing notions of what has to be there in terms of context, it was all free reign for devs. Now let's take Rogue, a game that happens in-between 2 sections of AC3. Yes, it's narrative is 'eh' overall, but the fact that Haytham is expected to be there, broadly, so he's put there but really not for a whole lot of purpose... well, it doesn't make it better. Well, and Assassins have to be eradicated. And we need to know what happened to Achiless. And so on. Then there's these weird things with the Apple in Unity because we know Napoleon has got to have it (and he gets it right under Arno's nose in that office, making it look kinda really silly).

I think Ubisoft as a whole should focus on developing the historical part of the setting more than the Lore. If I were to suggest an AC Reboot here's how I would go:

1) Nix the whole Animus unearths the actual historical past. Make it subjective, filled with biases and stuff. That adds a layer of ambiguity as to whether we should see the Assassins or Templars as total good guys or we should wholly accept the Narrative they tell. At the end of AC1, when Altair tells Al Mualim that he'll destroy the Apple and then says he can't do it, there was a hint that he could go mad/corrupt and so on. But AC2 contradicted that, and Altair didn't face too many side-effects with it. By making the Animus recreate the actual past, Ubisoft trap themselves in a strong continuity with little legroom.

2) I would also ditch the Templars as bad guys. Just make it about a single secret society, the Assassins playing different factions in historical settings against each other. The point about AC1 was that the Assassins attacked both the Crusaders and the Saracens and they aren't supposed to be on anyone's side. But AC2-ACB-ACR-AC3-Unity-Syndicate makes the respective Assassins the b--tches of Lorenzo de'Medici, Caterina Sforza, Suleiman the Magnificent, George Washington, Napoleon, Queen Victoria. So much for being "rebellious". Make the bad guys renegade or opposing factions within the Assassins, more Abbas Sofian, Pierre Bellec and Al Mualim than others.

These two changes would reinforce each other. 1) Makes us question the Assassins themselves, but 2) allows us to trust the Assassins because they are "chaotic neutral" and against other factions.

3) Make the First Civilization artifacts, locations, and individuals truly vague and mysterious. I mean for a race whose technology was obliterated there sure are a lot of lost temples, artifacts and objects of different kinds flourishing around. It kind of ruins the spell and ambiguity and it ties everything to the Ancient Astronauts stuff which was always a racist theory about crediting aliens and higher beings about the achievements of pyramids rather than the people who made them.

Basically, they should arrange it in such a way that any new game or writer has freedom to make their own take and not contradict earlier lore, where any time they want to make additions or corrections they can do it without fear of contradiction (either A was lying then or he simply forgot, or B is lying now about knowing A now). And the continuity is left to fans to sort out for their own benefit.

Megas_Doux
05-24-2017, 12:44 AM
2) I would also ditch the Templars as bad guys. Just make it about a single secret society, the Assassins playing different factions in historical settings against each other. The point about AC1 was that the Assassins attacked both the Crusaders and the Saracens and they aren't supposed to be on anyone's side. But AC2-ACB-ACR-AC3-Unity-Syndicate makes the respective Assassins the b--tches of Lorenzo de'Medici, Caterina Sforza, Suleiman the Magnificent, George Washington, Napoleon, Queen Victoria. So much for being "rebellious". Make the bad guys renegade or opposing factions within the Assassins, more Abbas Sofian, Pierre Bellec and Al Mualim than others.



That is a very, very, very, VERY VERY good idea....






3) Make the First Civilization artifacts, locations, and individuals truly vague and mysterious. I mean for a race whose technology was obliterated there sure are a lot of lost temples, artifacts and objects of different kinds flourishing around. It kind of ruins the spell and ambiguity and it ties everything to the Ancient Astronauts stuff which was always a racist theory about crediting aliens and higher beings about the achievements of pyramids rather than the people who made them.



I do agree, the condition should be not go annual again so that the shock/mystery factor doesn't go away.

VestigialLlama4
05-24-2017, 02:10 AM
That is a very, very, very, VERY VERY good idea....

Thanks. Bear in mind, even AC1 doesn't have the Attack-All-Sides ethos. Altair is buddy buddy with Richard the Lionheart for no reason beyond Richard I is a famous historical figure known to the public and the real Richard I apparently did hire an Assassiyun to whack one of his enemies. It doesn't quite get at the heart of the myth.

Now of course historically, even the Assasiyun did take sides in conflict, and the whole idea they attacked everyone is a myth, but the game series should at least set up a legend before taking it apart. And they never really do. The only game that really had that was BLACK FLAG and later Freedom Cry. Edward Kenway fights Assassins, Templars, British, Spanish, Portuguese, other pirates, First Civilization. It's the most "Assassin-game" at least until the last two sequences, when Edward gets drunk and crawls around that beach. That for me is the real "end" of the game. After that, the series/franchise plot takes over.

But generally, the Templars are pretty lousy and boring as bad guys. They aren't really too interesting. There are exceptions like Starrick and Haytham but most of them are bland. Even in AC1, Robert de Sable is cool in a James Bond Henchman sort of way, but Al Mualim is a much better bad guy. Savonarola is a better villain in his One DLC than Rodrigo, Cesare and Prince Ahmet in the other Ezio games.

And Black Bart is the greatest villain of the games and he isn't a Templar either. And King Washington is also not far in my view.


I do agree, the condition should be not go annual again so that the shock/mystery factor doesn't go away.

Well, annualization exists only because of success. If the Reboot is successful...then there probably will be annualization and depending on how games are in the future it could work as a TOKW/Blood Dragon-like DLC because my Reboot idea would allow room for that crazy stuff.

Annualization in the Ezio Model i.e. AC2 and Brotherhood-Revelations is doable because the latter two are really giant Story DLC rather than full games. It's the Episodes from Liberty City to GTA4. But if you are using annualization to put out full games like Unity-Syndicate than the product suffers and shows its seams.

And sometimes annualization works and gives us Black Flag which really would never have been a full game and only came into being because the previews of Ubi Singapore's sailing mechanic got such good advance notices and turned many heads.

Megas_Doux
05-24-2017, 03:01 AM
Thanks. Bear in mind, even AC1 doesn't have the Attack-All-Sides ethos. Altair is buddy buddy with Richard the Lionheart for no reason beyond Richard I is a famous historical figure known to the public and the real Richard I apparently did hire an Assassiyun to whack one of his enemies. It doesn't quite get at the heart of the myth.

.

I do disagree there.

See, Richard and Altair interaction cannot be compare in terms of quantity and closeness to that of Ezio/Lorenzo, Ezio/Suleiman, Connor/Washington and Arno/Napoleon. I mean, he sees him just twice and that's it. In the First one from afar near Acre's citadel and the second one during the Battle of Arsuf in which Altair explained to him that he was not his target and then some of his ideology, nothing more.

That's nothing in comparison of being Lorenzo's personal Hitman or Napoleon's pimp haha.






Well, annualization exists only because of success. If the Reboot is successful...then there probably will be annualization and depending on how games are in the future it could work as a TOKW/Blood Dragon-like DLC because my Reboot idea would allow room for that crazy stuff.



Well and yes no!

See, GTA and RDR take loooooong breaks between games despite its MASSIVE sales. The Witcher 3 is the last game of the franchise, for now.....






And sometimes annualization works and gives us Black Flag which really would never have been a full game and only came into being because the previews of Ubi Singapore's sailing mechanic got such good advance notices and turned many heads

.


AC IV was a miracle, indeed.

M4ke_Off
05-24-2017, 04:10 AM
I just don't see a full reboot working

people will not want to be dedicated to brand new lore, after they been dedicated for 10 years on existing lore

pirate1802
05-24-2017, 06:59 AM
It's not as if older games haven't been rebooted, and successfully. Tomb Raider was rebooted after what.. 17 years? And they rewrote everything and it's selling better than ever. And I'm pretty sure others can find even older reboots.

Also, most of the lore nowadays is actually present in the transmedia stuff which, imo, is detrimental to the actual video games. I agree with the others who have said that the overbearing lore is getting too bulky and contradictory. And they've shown themselves over and over again to be incapable of handling the volume of it, partly because they never anticipated how big it'll grow. Time to finish all threads, take a break and reboot it. I also love the idea of the Assassins being a single global entity without rivals but with different splinter groups and all of them playing other groups against each other. It would certainly make a more interesting story than the "you are a good guy assassin, this is a templar bad guy, kill him."

VestigialLlama4
05-24-2017, 07:02 AM
I do disagree there.

See, Richard and Altair interaction cannot be compare in terms of quantity and closeness to that of Ezio/Lorenzo, Ezio/Suleiman, Connor/Washington and Arno/Napoleon. I mean, he sees him just twice and that's it. In the First one from afar near Acre's citadel and the second one during the Battle of Arsuf in which Altair explained to him that he was not his target and then some of his ideology, nothing more.

That's nothing in comparison of being Lorenzo's personal Hitman or Napoleon's pimp haha.

Point taken. But what I mean is that compared to Black Flag, Altair doesn't fully go "Against All Sides" Chaotic Neutral.



I just don't see a full reboot working

people will not want to be dedicated to brand new lore, after they been dedicated for 10 years on existing lore

People aren't terribly invested in the lore as it is now. Most of the people buy the games for the setting and the gameplay...nobody buys the game for Desmond Miles and Subject 16. All that stuff is nonsense people ignore and it's only a small part who get involved in that, here on the forums and elsewhere. But they aren't the ones who protect Ubisoft from Vivendi. Besides the Lore is internally contradictory and makes no sense. It sort-of did until Black Flag, but even then there were gaps, and the stuff after that got looser and looser. We know that the AC mythos changed conception from AC1 to AC2. Stuff like Brotherhood and Revelations wasn't planned from the outset it only exists because AC2 was so successful. And that meant more threads to spin until AC3 gets in, and that meant inventing Juno. Assassin's Creed Revelations was such an afterthought that it was made in less than a year, which is incredible if you think about it.

BLACK FLAG was a game that was largely successful and popular among non-AC fans, it was popular among sandbox buffs who loved the pirate fantasy and the Lore in that game is optional and largely not on the nose for most of the game. In its own way, Black Flag was a "soft reboot" albeit one that Unity ruined and threw away.

A reboot could work and catch people so long as it is not promoted as a reboot. Advertise a new setting and time, and say you have refined the gameplay and let people learn by surprise that it's a reboot. Heck ASSASSIN'S CREED is the easiest franchise to reboot since unlike other brands it's not tied to one character or set of characters or even one kind of gameplay. Rebooting Uncharted is next to impossible, rebooting Thief is a waste in a marketplace where Dishonored exists.

cawatrooper9
05-24-2017, 04:57 PM
Why do you equate a reboot with telling the same stories? One does not mean the other.



I guess I don't really see much reason for a full reboot if we aren't just looking to rehash old stories. Sure, there are some continuity issues, like you mention with Churchill... but in a series specifically designed around conspiracy the fallibility of recorded history, I think some of those items fall right at home. I think you and I both agree that the series really needs to dig in and find a new home, as it's been floundering for a few years now. But I think there's still plenty of room in the franchise for this to happen without hitting the big reset button.

Locopells
05-24-2017, 06:22 PM
A very good example is the situation with Churchill. He was identified as a Templar in one of the game's lore just because it was something cool and edgy. Developers in Syndicate decided to use him as an Assassin ally in WWI, but because of that blob that was placed 5 years before, if one is to use Churchill in a WWII era or close to it, there HAS to be an arc of him becoming aligned with the Templars for one reason or another. That HAS to be a plotline now.

Well Churchill has turned out to be far more shady than people realised...





http://i.imgur.com/8kKFfrZ.jpg (https://support.ubi.com)
Thanks to strigoi1958 for the sig!

VestigialLlama4
05-24-2017, 06:53 PM
Well Churchill has turned out to be far more shady than people realised...

The point is the game makes Churchill a bad guy during World War II and the theory put forth in the AC2 glyphs i.e. that the war was a lie, that Churchill/FDR/Stalin/Hitler were all Templars and that it was an inter-Templar war is 1) Pure Tinfoil 2) Offensive and Disgusting.

It's more or less saying that Churchill FDR and Stalin were all collaborators and participants of the Holocaust. That was acceptable as a quick and spooky AC2 Glyph because it's just stated casually and dropped and its a side mission of a game set in Renaissance Italy so in terms of context, you aren't invited to think deeply about it.

But it's impossible to accept as a plot for a full game. Politically Ubisoft will be tarred and feathered and deservedly so, and people will bring up its French origins and accuse it for projecting its own history of collaboration and occupation by making the real leaders of the Allies to be "just-as-bad" as the Nazis. Furthermore in today's political context, in the time of Alt-Right and all that, the game will be popular precisely among that crowd of gamer-gaters, neo-nazi bumpkins. Now of course Ubisoft might get away by saying that Stalin was also a Templar and equate him with Hitler but that's going to be offensive to not only to the Russians and other Eastern Europeans whose ancestors counted the single largest group of casualties among all Allied Forces but it's dangerous politically because there are people in Eastern Europe who white-wash their own history of collaboration by saying that all the people who fought alongside the Soviets were just-as-bad as the Nazis, and that includes Jews and Holocaust survivors, who are now called "war criminals" in Lithuania. Now of course, Ubisoft can avoid this altogether by never making a game set during World War II. Which I recommend, because World War II is not an AC setting. It's full of destroyed buildings, and the whole idea of "never-kill-an-innocent" is meaningless when you are set in say Nazi Germany, where none of the civilians can be considered truly innocent. And you know telling a superhero story in a time when millions died in the camps is kind of nauseating and disgusting. That Captain America Movie ran into the same problems.


The most important thing however is the Tinfoil aspect. It's just rotten storytelling and cheapens the setting. In all the AC games, the Templars try to manipulate settings from behind the scenes but they never have full and total control and their plans face a hitch and so on. Like in AC3, sure Haytham does make moves for the American Revolution but Benjamin Franklin is independent and not a Templar, they aren't fans of Washington, and the entire American Revolution, both the good and the bad parts, can't be written off as solely "the Templars did it".

Then you go to a game like UNITY...that was a game that made the entire French Revolution the plot of a boring dude in a hood. It's saying that the people of France were misled and mistaken to revolt against their corrupt King (who the plot of the game says is innocent when even the people who voted against executon said he was guilty of sin for fomenting a civil war against his own people). This by the way is more or less a fascist plot. I say that literally, all conspiracy theories originate from the fringe rightwing of the 1790s who blamed the French Revolution on "intellectuals" in the shadows. Second it's just bad storytelling.

UNITY is a game that tried to substitute real history with AC Lore and that game is a rotten cesspool.

Helforsite
05-24-2017, 08:47 PM
No offense, but overall your whole post has to be up there in the ranks of most idiotic and offensive posts ever.


The point is the game makes Churchill a bad guy during World War II and the theory put forth in the AC2 glyphs i.e. that the war was a lie, that Churchill/FDR/Stalin/Hitler were all Templars and that it was an inter-Templar war is 1) Pure Tinfoil 2) Offensive and Disgusting.

In the AC universe, World War II was orchestrated by the Templars, among their puppets being FDR, Churchill, Stalin and Hitler, but the sense I got was that the Holocaust was Hitler on his own. It is now consensus that all 4 were not Templars themselves, but were being heavily manipulated and influenced by Templars. Is it pure tinfoil? Yes. Is it offensive and disgusting? Not really, its a work of fiction, its not suggesting that thats how it happened in real life, just in the Universe of AC.


It's more or less saying that Churchill FDR and Stalin were all collaborators and participants of the Holocaust. That was acceptable as a quick and spooky AC2 Glyph because it's just stated casually and dropped and its a side mission of a game set in Renaissance Italy so in terms of context, you aren't invited to think deeply about it.
No, its not saying that at all! Its not even really implying that. In fact, it is never even said what role the Templars played in the Holocaust, if any.
Also, I would disagree that it was casually mentioned and not meant to be thought about. These puzzles are somewhat off a break in the game flow and through that and their impactfulness and cryptic nature actually invite deep thought.


But it's impossible to accept as a plot for a full game. Politically Ubisoft will be tarred and feathered and deservedly so, and people will bring up its French origins and accuse it for projecting its own history of collaboration and occupation by making the real leaders of the Allies to be "just-as-bad" as the Nazis.

Deservedly? Since when does fiction have to be a parrot to what people think and how reality is? Certain kinds of people will always try ad hominem arguments to attack people for what they think, even if it is, like in this case, not even their opinion, but fiction.


Furthermore in today's political context, in the time of Alt-Right and all that, the game will be popular precisely among that crowd of gamer-gaters, neo-nazi bumpkins.

So something is ****ty or somehow worse, because it has ****ty people as fans? Guess things cant be good or liked anymore by me, because some religious nutjob or racist also likes, even if it is for a completely different reason.


Now of course Ubisoft might get away by saying that Stalin was also a Templar and equate him with Hitler but that's going to be offensive to not only to the Russians and other Eastern Europeans whose ancestors counted the single largest group of casualties among all Allied Forces but it's dangerous politically because there are people in Eastern Europe who white-wash their own history of collaboration by saying that all the people who fought alongside the Soviets were just-as-bad as the Nazis, and that includes Jews and Holocaust survivors, who are now called "war criminals" in Lithuania.

Ubisoft are not a political entity and should not let themselves or their behaviour be dictated by what some idiots have decided is the newest fact they can twist into fitting their narrative.


Now of course, Ubisoft can avoid this altogether by never making a game set during World War II. Which I recommend, because World War II is not an AC setting.

I agree that they should avoid WW2 as a setting, not only because of the potential controversy, but more importantly because it is an unsuitable setting for an AC.


It's full of destroyed buildings, and the whole idea of "never-kill-an-innocent" is meaningless when you are set in say Nazi Germany, where none of the civilians can be considered truly innocent.

What the actual f@ck? This statement is super offensive, not only because it is a sweeping generalization and assumes many unproven facts to do so, but also because it completely ignores the thousands of Germans that were killed by the government, because they opposed the regime and what they were doing. Shame on you!


And you know telling a superhero story in a time when millions died in the camps is kind of nauseating and disgusting. That Captain America Movie ran into the same problems.

AC is not a superhero story. While there are still problems with dealing with the camps in an AC story, they are almost completely different from a superhero story's problem set in the same time.


The most important thing however is the Tinfoil aspect. It's just rotten storytelling and cheapens the setting.

The whole franchise is basically build on the Tinfoil aspect, so if you dont like it, your problem is with the franchise itself.


In all the AC games, the Templars try to manipulate settings from behind the scenes but they never have full and total control and their plans face a hitch and so on.

Of course they never have "full and total" control, if they had wouldnt need to do anything anymore and it would also be extremely unrealistic. And the hitch in their plans you speak of is most of the time Assassins releated.


Then you go to a game like UNITY...that was a game that made the entire French Revolution the plot of a boring dude in a hood. It's saying that the people of France were misled and mistaken to revolt against their corrupt King (who the plot of the game says is innocent when even the people who voted against executon said he was guilty of sin for fomenting a civil war against his own people). This by the way is more or less a fascist plot. I say that literally, all conspiracy theories originate from the fringe rightwing of the 1790s who blamed the French Revolution on "intellectuals" in the shadows. Second it's just bad storytelling.

Again you are apparently reading between lines I cant seem to find. In the game they make it clear that the Templars only give the final push to a populace already on their last nerve regarding the nobles, because of their prior behaviour. The game only states that the king is innoncent of the last infraction which pushes the people over the brink.
What you somehow fail to mention is how the game doesnt show the execution fails to show the murder and execution of thousands of innocent women and children... or were they not innocent enough for you?


UNITY is a game that tried to substitute real history with AC Lore and that game is a rotten cesspool.

Every AC substitues real history with AC Lore to some extent which in itself is not necessarily a bad thing. That said, I do think it wasnt particularly well done in Unity.

cawatrooper9
05-24-2017, 09:42 PM
Alright man, no need to get worked up.

I think VL4 is just trying to state that:

1. WWII and the Holocaust are pretty intrinsically linked.

2. Assassins Creed takes some creative liberties with history and fact

3. The Holocaust is still a pretty sensitive issue for many people.

4. Unlike some games (like Call of Duty) or movies (like Captain America), Assassins Creed generally doesn't use history as a backdrop for violence, but more fully immerses itself in that history (though still, with plenty of violence).

With these items in mind, it's not hard to see why VL4 thinks Ubisoft should be a little cautious with this issue.

So, though you claim, Ubisoft is not "a political entity", you can't really blame them by playing it a little bit safe. They are at least a "public entity" after all. Could they make a WWII game without controversy? Maybe. But perhaps they've just deemed it not worth the risk (and, as you say, it wouldn't lend itself well to the franchise anyway).

And no, I don't 100% agree with VL4. But there's no reason to get so worked up, either.

Megas_Doux
05-25-2017, 12:12 AM
WWII and AC should NOT mix, period.

VestigialLlama4
05-25-2017, 12:47 AM
No offense, but overall your whole post has to be up there in the ranks of most idiotic and offensive posts ever.

Kind of defeats the whole point of "No offense"....


Not really, its a work of fiction, its not suggesting that thats how it happened in real life, just in the Universe of AC.

Well then who should care about the AC Universe aside from AC fans? What is possibly interesting to people who might be interested in a sandbox game about World War II or who want to see an interesting portrayal of Churchill which is not too far from his historical role and function?


No, its not saying that at all! Its not even really implying that. In fact, it is never even said what role the Templars played in the Holocaust, if any.

It's stated in the Lore that the Templars knew about it and Let it happen.

http://assassinscreed.wikia.com/wiki/Glyphs Check out Glyph 12 here.
https://vignette4.wikia.nocookie.net/assassinscreed/images/4/4a/Glyph_12_6.png/revision/latest?cb=20131107211603

"Let him have his fun (Lord knows, that kind of purge will be good for Europe)"


Also, I would disagree that it was casually mentioned and not meant to be thought about. These puzzles are somewhat off a break in the game flow and through that and their impactfulness and cryptic nature actually invite deep thought.

Well that might be true for how you play the game but it's not true for everyone. Most people simply unlock the Glyphs first and do the puzzles later, after they finished the game or after seeing it online. These are optional content so there's no one way for anyone to explore it. And some of the puzzles are more silly and weird. Also, unlike the main content of the game with the databases and information clearly laid out to explain the Renaissance people and locations to you, the glyphs puzzles don't make too much sense for people not immersed in conspiracy and internet phobia. Not everyone knows Nikola Tesla and his rivalry with Edison and so on.


Deservedly? Since when does fiction have to be a parrot to what people think and how reality is? Certain kinds of people will always try ad hominem arguments to attack people for what they think, even if it is, like in this case, not even their opinion, but fiction.

Tell that to Mr. David Wark Griffith whose film The Birth of a Nation led to the Ku Klux Klan rising again and killing people by the hundreds. Tell that to Leni Reifenstahl. There are limits to everything and points where stuff actually does become genuinely offensive.


Ubisoft are not a political entity and should not let themselves or their behaviour be dictated by what some idiots have decided is the newest fact they can twist into fitting their narrative.

Ubisoft is a corporation and by definition is a political entity. Heck the only reason ubisoft and AC exist was because it got subsidies and tax breaks from the Canadian Government and the city of Montreal. And Assassin's Creed as games are political.


AC is not a superhero story. While there are still problems with dealing with the camps in an AC story, they are almost completely different from a superhero story's problem set in the same time.

AC is about exceptional indivisuals who have First Century DNA that gives them Parkour abilities and Eagle Vision and whose actions change the world and so on...that's a superhero story.

Locopells
05-25-2017, 08:05 AM
ANY-whoo, I think we're getting off topic here...





http://i.imgur.com/8kKFfrZ.jpg (https://support.ubi.com)
Thanks to strigoi1958 for the sig!

joshoolhorst
05-25-2017, 10:29 AM
I don't understand why people want a WW2 AC game I already hate it by just thinking about it and if they want to go so far into the future just give me a modern day game we know it's gonna sell it's Assassin's Creed just put some marketing out.

But okay if they have to do WW2 just think about all the gameplay changes they have to make and probably all of those assets and animations when they go back to I don't know 1259 or so.

I can already see the plot of WW2 in my head:
''In the present day a Arabic ancient cult named the Assassin's are fighting the Present Day Templars and both groups use the Animus... They go back 60 years or so and meet Hitler''

''Hitler is getting help from a science company named Abstergo and uses a magical Apple from the bible named the Apple of Eden which can control minds but Hitler is just a puppet by the company, see here history unravel with the Assassin's using freaking AK-47's and you meet Stalin to and find about the jews concetration camps because they are secretly trying to look for a Temple:)'' - Fox News

Yeah I am not gonna take that serious at all... Also remember the hole AC Unity party with the ex-president candidate from France hating how they portrayed history I think Ubi is kinda afraid to do that right now.

Helforsite
05-25-2017, 12:11 PM
Its pretty ironic how you find so much offensive and appaling, when you apparently think that it is ok to state that the German people as a whole were guilty of the Holocaust by association.


Well then who should care about the AC Universe aside from AC fans? What is possibly interesting to people who might be interested in a sandbox game about World War II or who want to see an interesting portrayal of Churchill which is not too far from his historical role and function?
I guess I didnt realize documentaries were so popular... oh wait, they are not! People are fans of fiction precisely because it doesnt mirror reality. I get having a certain level of historical accuracy in AC games, but it shouldnt be 100%. Hell, as far as we know Htiler for example could have been a pedophile in secret, same goes for Churchill etc, because we dont have 100% documentation about everything they did. Is it probable? No. Is it entirely possible? Yes.



It's stated in the Lore that the Templars knew about it and Let it happen.

http://assassinscreed.wikia.com/wiki/Glyphs Check out Glyph 12 here.
https://vignette4.wikia.nocookie.net/assassinscreed/images/4/4a/Glyph_12_6.png/revision/latest?cb=20131107211603

"Let him have his fun (Lord knows, that kind of purge will be good for Europe)"
"Let him have his fun (Lord knows, that kind of purge will be good for Europe) and then end it with a bang, as planned. Out of the chaos of war a new order will emerge!"

If you actually see the quote in its context, its sounds like the purge they are speaking of is not the Holocaust, but the war itself, being started by Hitler.



Well that might be true for how you play the game but it's not true for everyone. Most people simply unlock the Glyphs first and do the puzzles later, after they finished the game or after seeing it online. These are optional content so there's no one way for anyone to explore it. And some of the puzzles are more silly and weird. Also, unlike the main content of the game with the databases and information clearly laid out to explain the Renaissance people and locations to you, the glyphs puzzles don't make too much sense for people not immersed in conspiracy and internet phobia. Not everyone knows Nikola Tesla and his rivalry with Edison and so on.
The gylphs actually deal with things that are considered history/common knowledge in most countries and I dont want Ubisoft to dumb AC down. They should encourage you to gain more knowledge, not less.


Tell that to Mr. David Wark Griffith whose film The Birth of a Nation led to the Ku Klux Klan rising again and killing people by the hundreds. Tell that to Leni Reifenstahl. There are limits to everything and points where stuff actually does become genuinely offensive.
I dont even know how you can play most of modern video games, with them heavily advertising the use of violence as a viable means of conflict resolution and the like. ****ty people will do ****ty things and that is a result of a lot more than one film or movie. Racists and religios extemists/radicals are disgusting, but they dont become who they are overnight.


Ubisoft is a corporation and by definition is a political entity. Heck the only reason ubisoft and AC exist was because it got subsidies and tax breaks from the Canadian Government and the city of Montreal. And Assassin's Creed as games are political.
Nowhere in the definition of corporations is it stated or implied that they are political entities. Ubisoft was created in France, so you probably mean the Ubisoft Montreal studio and again you are wrong. Ubisoft had plans to expand to North America and the governments of Montreal and Canada wanted their buisness(taxes etc.) so they agreed to subsidize and tax breaks for that studio. Thats how buisness works, Ubisoft could have also opened their studio somewhere else, but from a financial standpoint it made sense to do it in Montreal.



AC is about exceptional indivisuals who have First Century DNA that gives them Parkour abilities and Eagle Vision and whose actions change the world and so on...that's a superhero story.
Agree to disagree.


On-topic: For me a good reboot of this franchise would be keeping the core concepts (Isu, Animus, Assassins, Templars etc.) and tell new stories, with the old stories not entirely forgotten, but retconned so that they wont really get in the way of what they have planned for the new stories.
But as cawatrooper said, you dont have to reboot the franchise, if you are really good and careful with your retconning.

cawatrooper9
05-25-2017, 04:37 PM
But as cawatrooper said, you dont have to reboot the franchise, if you are really good and careful with your retconning.

Yeah, I like to think of it as just putting stuff on the backburner.

Do we not have a reason for Juno to be in the next game? Don't bring her.
Do we not have a reason for Dr. Grammatica's experiment in the game? Forget about it for now.
Do we not want to check up on Sean, Rebecca, and friends? Find someone new.

But then stick to it. Sean, Rebecca, Juno, Grammatica... they're not necessarily going anywhere (Juno especially).
If, at some point in the future, we want to bring them back in a coherent fashion, we can do so, when they're needed and would make sense.

Of course, if the story could move forward well with them, by all means- or if other things need to be put on the backburner, that's fine too. My point is simply that we do not need a hard reboot to get on a fresh page. In fact, Assassins Creed has done several soft reboots before- they just haven't stuck to their guns very well yet (and that may be partially to blame on fans, who so far seem a bit impatient when reestablishing the setting).

pirate1802
05-27-2017, 05:49 AM
Wasn't Unity supposed to be a soft reboot?

joshoolhorst
05-27-2017, 12:44 PM
Wasn't Unity supposed to be a soft reboot?

Yes it was and well we know how that turned out on release...