PDA

View Full Version : The revelations are not for us, it seems... [ending spoilers]



ace3001
11-27-2011, 08:53 AM
... but rather for Desmond.

Frankly, what is actually revealed to the player? I'm a bit disappointed, actually. Alex Amancio said in an interview that "we don't call this Revelations for nothing" or something along those lines. But it seems it is all revealed only to Desmond, but not the player.

I was hoping for some closure on stuff like why Lucy had to die. I thought it would be like obvious that her death would be explained. But no...

At the end, Desmond says "I know what we have to do", but do we know what he means by that? He sure seems to have everything revealed to him.

Oh, and another problem. Now that he knows what to do, how is Ubisoft going to send him into a new ancestor's memories for AC3? I really see no reason for Desmond to crawl about in ancestral memories anymore.

LightRey
11-27-2011, 09:00 AM
Didn't you pay attention to Jupiter's speech? He basically explained exactly just what the temples are for and who he, Juno and Minerva were.

Assassin_M
11-27-2011, 09:06 AM
Revelations to player: (SPOLIERS*****Obviously)



1-We know what 16 looks like..
2-we get some backstory on Desmond..
3-We find out that Ezio`s and Altair`s apples arent the one and same.
4-We find out what happened to Altair..
5-We finally got to see who Ezio continues his bloodline his bloodline with..
6-We find out what happened to those who came before.
7-we find out the functions of the Vaults.
8-We know that Lucy is dead..
10-we know that daniel cross is a master Templar and is planning an Assassination on William Miles..

albertwesker22
11-27-2011, 09:12 AM
10-we know that daniel cross is a master Templar and is planning an Assassination on William Miles..

What? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

Do you find that out in multiplayer?

Assassin_M
11-27-2011, 09:15 AM
Originally posted by albertwesker22:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">10-we know that daniel cross is a master Templar and is planning an Assassination on William Miles..

What? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

Do you find that out in multiplayer? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Yes http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

LightRey
11-27-2011, 09:15 AM
Originally posted by albertwesker22:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">10-we know that daniel cross is a master Templar and is planning an Assassination on William Miles..

What? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

Do you find that out in multiplayer? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Yes.

EDIT: Crap, too late.

Assassin_M
11-27-2011, 09:17 AM
Originally posted by LightRey:


EDIT: Crap, too late.

xD, im sorry man http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

ace3001
11-27-2011, 09:18 AM
Originally posted by LightRey:
Didn't you pay attention to Jupiter's speech? He basically explained exactly just what the temples are for and who he, Juno and Minerva were. I did not understand that part at all. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif It sounded all too cryptic to me. In terms of the global catastrophe plotline, I'm still where I was when Brotherhood finished.
Each temple has different means of salvation? What does that mean? How does it stop the catastrophe? And what was that about the three of them testing those? And why did Juno have to kill Lucy? So on and so forth.


Originally posted by Assassin_M:
Revelations to player: (SPOLIERS*****Obviously)



1-We know what 16 looks like..
2-we get some backstory on Desmond..
3-We find out that Ezio`s and Altair`s apples arent the one and same.
4-We find out what happened to Altair..
5-We finally got to see who Ezio continues his bloodline his bloodline with..
6-We find out what happened to those who came before.
7-we find out the functions of the Vaults.
8-We know that Lucy is dead..
10-we know that daniel cross is a master Templar and is planning an Assassination on William Miles.. Problem is, most of those just add more mysteries. Like where did the Apple that Rodrigo Borgia's Templars found in Cyprus came from? Now that we know that it isn't Altair's Apple.
We know that Lucy is dead. But why was she killed? That was the revelation I was expecting, not that she is dead, which I was pretty much sure she would be anyway.
Wait... Number 10... WHAT? Daniel Cross? o.O

LightRey
11-27-2011, 09:20 AM
Originally posted by kolitha.kuruppu:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LightRey:
Didn't you pay attention to Jupiter's speech? He basically explained exactly just what the temples are for and who he, Juno and Minerva were. I did not understand that part at all. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif It sounded all too cryptic to me. In terms of the global catastrophe plotline, I'm still where I was when Brotherhood finished.
Each temple has different means of salvation? What does that mean? How does it stop the catastrophe? And what was that about the three of them testing those? And why did Juno have to kill Lucy? So on and so forth.


Originally posted by Assassin_M:
Revelations to player: (SPOLIERS*****Obviously)



1-We know what 16 looks like..
2-we get some backstory on Desmond..
3-We find out that Ezio`s and Altair`s apples arent the one and same.
4-We find out what happened to Altair..
5-We finally got to see who Ezio continues his bloodline his bloodline with..
6-We find out what happened to those who came before.
7-we find out the functions of the Vaults.
8-We know that Lucy is dead..
10-we know that daniel cross is a master Templar and is planning an Assassination on William Miles.. Problem is, most of those just add more mysteries. Like where did the Apple that Rodrigo Borgia's Templars found in Cyprus came from? Now that we know that it isn't Altair's Apple.
We know that Lucy is dead. But why was she killed? That was the revelation I was expecting, not that she is dead, which I was pretty much sure she would be anyway.
Wait... Number 10... WHAT? Daniel Cross? o.O </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
So? Nobody said the revelations wouldn't bring new mysteries.

Assassin_M
11-27-2011, 09:25 AM
Exactly, nobody said that Revelations wont have more Mysteries..
I hate the fact that people thought that revelations is the end of it all and will provide all the answers..
No, revelations was made to close a saga of the story that was left open for 3 games, and set up the finale which is AC III.

AdmiralPerry
11-27-2011, 11:34 AM
Originally posted by kolitha.kuruppu:
Problem is, most of those just add more mysteries. Like where did the Apple that Rodrigo Borgia's Templars found in Cyprus came from? Now that we know that it isn't Altair's Apple.

Well, we know that there are multiples of the same PoEs. I seem to remember either hearing or reading while playing Revelations that the Templars reclaimed their archive on Cyprus. Altair and the Assassins controlled it for awhile, but the Templars reclaimed it some years later. Somewhere along the way, the Templars probably lay claim to another Apple, stored it in Cyprus, then in the late 1400's it was taken to Venice. What I find mysterious is that in AC1, Lucy said that Altair's Apple was destroyed at Denver International. Either that's a continuity error, or she only thought they destroyed Altair's Apple, when it was really another Apple that was destroyed. As far as we know, Altair's Apple is still under Masyaf, where he and Ezio left it. And Desmond and the Assassins have Ezio's Apple... Though I guess it's possible that Abstergo managed to break into Masyaf's vault and take Altair's Apple--they were hunting those Pieces of Eden for quite some time.

zhengyingli
11-27-2011, 11:59 AM
I was hoping for some closure on stuff like why Lucy had to die. I thought it would be like obvious that her death would be explained. But no...

The purpose of Lucy's death was somewhat explained in Brotherhood, and fully in Revelations. Kind of obvious, in my opinion.

SPOILERS

Juno sent Desmond to awaken the Sixth, and awakened the Sixth he did. Desmond killed Lucy so that the former falls into a coma via shock.

END SPOILERS

With that answered (not by me, but the games themselves), if you were expecting a more complicated reason for Lucy's death, disappointment is sure to ensue. To Juno, Lucy's just a mean to an end, nothing more.

Agentbarto
11-27-2011, 12:18 PM
Originally posted by zhengyingli:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">
I was hoping for some closure on stuff like why Lucy had to die. I thought it would be like obvious that her death would be explained. But no...

The purpose of Lucy's death was somewhat explained in Brotherhood, and fully in Revelations. Kind of obvious, in my opinion.

SPOILERS

Juno sent Desmond to awaken the Sixth, and awakened the Sixth he did. Desmond killed Lucy so that the former falls into a coma via shock.

END SPOILERS

With that answered (not by me, but the games themselves), if you were expecting a more complicated reason for Lucy's death, disappointment is sure to ensue. To Juno, Lucy's just a mean to an end, nothing more. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Desmond could have easily fallen into the coma because of Juno controlling him. If she could use the Apple to control his movements, it's not too farfetched to say that she could easily break his mind with the same technique. Killing Lucy alone doesn't hold any ground. Why not kill the whole team?

Assassin_M
11-27-2011, 12:21 PM
Originally posted by Agentbarto:

Desmond could have easily fallen into the coma because of Juno controlling him. If she could use the Apple to control his movements, it's not too farfetched to say that she could easily break his mind with the same technique. Killing Lucy alone doesn't hold any ground. Why not kill the whole team?
Juno hit 2 birds with one stone, she wanted to get rid of lucy and wanted desmond to fall into a coma, so she gets desmond to kill lucy and thus fall into a coma..

monarcasmoreli
11-27-2011, 12:26 PM
They can't add
Everything as they been working on AC 3 for long time now So they can't add things in AC revelation that might been put in AC 3 already

zhengyingli
11-27-2011, 12:35 PM
Originally posted by Agentbarto:

Desmond could have easily fallen into the coma because of Juno controlling him. If she could use the Apple to control his movements, it's not too farfetched to say that she could easily break his mind with the same technique. Killing Lucy alone doesn't hold any ground. Why not kill the whole team?

Turn to AC geek mode:

Desmond falling into a coma by Juno is unlikely. Al Mualim couldn't do more than holding Altair in his place due to latter's resistance to the apple. Rodrigo couldn't do anything more than Al Mualim in terms of holding Ezio. Desmond, a man with one of the highest concentration of first civ DNA, would definitely show some resistance to the apple controlling by Juno. Even killing Lucy wasn't easy, as Juno had to force Desmond to take each and every step towards Lucy.

Assassin_M
11-27-2011, 12:37 PM
Originally posted by zhengyingli:

Turn to AC geek mode:

Desmond falling into a coma by Juno is unlikely. Al Mualim couldn't do more than holding Altair in his place due to latter's resistance to the apple. Rodrigo couldn't do anything more than Al Mualim in terms of holding Ezio. Desmond, a man with one of the highest concentration of first civ DNA, would definitely show some resistance to the apple controlling by Juno. Even killing Lucy wasn't easy, as Juno had to force Desmond to take each and every step towards Lucy.
And another valid point..

LightRey
11-27-2011, 12:44 PM
Originally posted by zhengyingli:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Agentbarto:

Desmond could have easily fallen into the coma because of Juno controlling him. If she could use the Apple to control his movements, it's not too farfetched to say that she could easily break his mind with the same technique. Killing Lucy alone doesn't hold any ground. Why not kill the whole team?

Turn to AC geek mode:

Desmond falling into a coma by Juno is unlikely. Al Mualim couldn't do more than holding Altair in his place due to latter's resistance to the apple. Rodrigo couldn't do anything more than Al Mualim in terms of holding Ezio. Desmond, a man with one of the highest concentration of first civ DNA, would definitely show some resistance to the apple controlling by Juno. Even killing Lucy wasn't easy, as Juno had to force Desmond to take each and every step towards Lucy. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
It has been confirmed though that forcing Desmond to kill Lucy was what tipped Desmond over the edge and caused him to fall into his coma, but that the main cause was the bleeding effect.

zhengyingli
11-27-2011, 01:03 PM
Originally posted by LightRey:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by zhengyingli:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Agentbarto:

Desmond could have easily fallen into the coma because of Juno controlling him. If she could use the Apple to control his movements, it's not too farfetched to say that she could easily break his mind with the same technique. Killing Lucy alone doesn't hold any ground. Why not kill the whole team?

Turn to AC geek mode:

Desmond falling into a coma by Juno is unlikely. Al Mualim couldn't do more than holding Altair in his place due to latter's resistance to the apple. Rodrigo couldn't do anything more than Al Mualim in terms of holding Ezio. Desmond, a man with one of the highest concentration of first civ DNA, would definitely show some resistance to the apple controlling by Juno. Even killing Lucy wasn't easy, as Juno had to force Desmond to take each and every step towards Lucy. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
It has been confirmed though that forcing Desmond to kill Lucy was what tipped Desmond over the edge and caused him to fall into his coma, but that the main cause was the bleeding effect. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, I kind of got that from 16's "your mind is hash" line.

twenty_glyphs
11-27-2011, 02:41 PM
I agree that there were hardly any revelations for the player. What makes that even worse for me was there wasn't really much that happened that introduced new mysteries and debate like Brotherhood did. So now I just kind of have this empty feeling with the story and don't have much excitement for next year's story because they didn't create any new mysteries. There's just not much new to sit around and speculate about after this game, just the same old mysteries.

Getting to see what Subject 16 looks like is not a revelation, it's just a small detail. Finding out what Subject 16 has been trying to tell Desmond all this time would have been a revelation, but the story completely ignored that. Finding out who Ezio settled down with was nice, but not a major story point that needed to be answered. Besides, you didn't even have to play the game to find that out — they told us all the way back in May who it would be. We also already knew what happened to the First Civilization without them needing to show a video of the catastrophe that had no meaningful new information.

About the only new information of value was that Ezio's Apple was not the same as Altaïr's, that the Apple facilitated a message from Jupiter to Desmond, and that message revealed that Jupiter, Juno and Minerva were responsible for working on a solution to prevent the Catastrophe and the accompanying information about the vaults and the Grand Temple. Some decent information, but a lot of it was just confirmation of some story points more than actual new "revelations".

What annoys me the most was all the stuff from Brotherhood that was completely ignored. Why did they even bring up the whole "memory inside a memory" stuff and talk about Subject 15? How did that relate to why they couldn't access Sequence 9 and why the memory was all glitchy when Desmond finally did access it? Why did Rebecca say Ezio hid his Apple in 1507 when we see it was hidden by 1506, and why did the memory of that event only focus after Desmond relived the final Cesare memory? What was up with the artifacts Desmond found in Monterrigioni, which surely weren't just sitting there after 500 years? Why build up intrigue about some cool Assassin hideout where Desmond was going to go after finding the Apple and then ignore it? Why did William Miles ask Desmond not to talk about Ezio's 1506 memories to anyone other than Rebecca? And most importantly, nothing about the mystery of Lucy's death was actually answered. The only thing revealed was that she actually is dead. Anything else is almost pure conjecture at this point, because there was nothing close to a real answer given about why she had to die within the game's story itself.

It's enough to make me seriously doubt the storytelling of this franchise. If you're going to bring up all the mysteries I listed above, it's poor storytelling to just ignore it in the next installment of the story. At least mention some of this stuff and give a few obscure clues about it. Ignoring it makes me think it was just thrown in there for the sake of creating intrigue in Brotherhood and it had no real meaning behind it, which is incredibly disappointing.

Agentbarto
11-27-2011, 04:19 PM
Originally posted by LightRey:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by zhengyingli:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Agentbarto:

Desmond could have easily fallen into the coma because of Juno controlling him. If she could use the Apple to control his movements, it's not too farfetched to say that she could easily break his mind with the same technique. Killing Lucy alone doesn't hold any ground. Why not kill the whole team?

Turn to AC geek mode:

Desmond falling into a coma by Juno is unlikely. Al Mualim couldn't do more than holding Altair in his place due to latter's resistance to the apple. Rodrigo couldn't do anything more than Al Mualim in terms of holding Ezio. Desmond, a man with one of the highest concentration of first civ DNA, would definitely show some resistance to the apple controlling by Juno. Even killing Lucy wasn't easy, as Juno had to force Desmond to take each and every step towards Lucy. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
It has been confirmed though that forcing Desmond to kill Lucy was what tipped Desmond over the edge and caused him to fall into his coma, but that the main cause was the bleeding effect. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Again that alone doesn't hold much meaning. That particular event may have caused the shock, but why did it have to be Lucy, killing anyone else would have sufficed if Desmond's consciousness was really that vulnerable, wouldn't it? Because he cared about her? That still doesn't make much sense. It's 2012, if Desmond needed to get together with Eve then I'm sure his relationship with Lucy could take one for the team.

LightRey
11-27-2011, 04:36 PM
Originally posted by Agentbarto:
Again that alone doesn't hold much meaning. That particular event may have caused the shock, but why did it have to be Lucy, killing anyone else would have sufficed if Desmond's consciousness was really that vulnerable, wouldn't it? Because he cared about her? That still doesn't make much sense. It's 2012, if Desmond needed to get together with Eve then I'm sure his relationship with Lucy could take one for the team.
I know, but it's worth noting.

ace3001
11-27-2011, 08:05 PM
I guess you guys are right. I was probably just expecting too much out of this. **sigh**

But at the same time, some of you seem to be going on assumptions. The reason Lucy was killed was never explained. The whole "Juno wanted Lucy out of the way to stop them falling in love" and "Juno wanted to induce a coma" is still pure speculation.

1. Rebecca says that "except for the occasional misty eyed moment" (which doesn't mean much, really), there wasn't any "more than friends" stuff. So, well, in that case why would Juno want Lucy out?

2. I also thought that might have been to induce the coma, but that was until I played Revelations. In Revelations, Sixteen explains the coma as a result of the bleeding effect. "Your brain is hash. Too many ghosts, too many voices, so how do we fix that?" Even his solution of finding the synch-nexus is based on his assumption that the coma is a result of the bleeding effect, and that solution works, doesn't it?

And another big gripe I have here. In Brotherhood, Sixteen was rambling away about "your son" and "she is not who you think she is" and blah blah blah. Why the hell didn't he explain it to Desmond when they met?? Now we'll never know cause Sixteen was deleted.

And talking about that, what was that whole "scheduled for deletion" thing? Rebecca knows that Desmond's conciousness is in the Animus, so why would she schedule such a thing? It just felt like a forced plot point to get rid of Sixteen.

Agentbarto
11-27-2011, 10:53 PM
Originally posted by LightRey:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Agentbarto:
Again that alone doesn't hold much meaning. That particular event may have caused the shock, but why did it have to be Lucy, killing anyone else would have sufficed if Desmond's consciousness was really that vulnerable, wouldn't it? Because he cared about her? That still doesn't make much sense. It's 2012, if Desmond needed to get together with Eve then I'm sure his relationship with Lucy could take one for the team.
I know, but it's worth noting. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

True I just feel people are jumping the gun by assuming the official answer has already been given.



Originally posted by kolitha.kuruppu:
And talking about that, what was that whole "scheduled for deletion" thing? Rebecca knows that Desmond's conciousness is in the Animus, so why would she schedule such a thing? It just felt like a forced plot point to get rid of Sixteen.


I think that was just a side-effect of Desmond's consciousness reintegrating. Keep in mind the Rebecca said the Black-Room might not be able to replicate an entire consciousness by itself. When Desmond's mind was defragmented and fully recompiled the Animus probably had to free up some storage capacity given that it could now interact with a fully conscious mind. Realistically we should be placed back in the White-Room after the credits, but that would have required a complete scrapping of the Black interface which pervades the entire game, a lot of work to do. ((Hint this is probably why we saw 16 as a ghost in Brotherhood; it was the only way he could survive. While in Revelations, 16 was reintegrated and Desmond would have appeared as a ghost to anyone using the White interface.) Again all of this was only temporary until Desmond recovered from the coma.)

Schmagelborfer
11-28-2011, 11:23 AM
it seems like the writers are running out of good story ideas or the real revelations will come from DLC so they can make more money. it's all about money at the end of the day http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Assassin_M
11-28-2011, 11:27 AM
Originally posted by Schmagelborfer:
it seems like the writers are running out of good story ideas or the real revelations will come from DLC so they can make more money. it's all about money at the end of the day http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif
Well, they`r not exactly doing it for charity..
and you should blame the higher ups of Ubi,not the Assassins Creed Team..

Schmagelborfer
11-28-2011, 11:40 AM
Originally posted by Assassin_M:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Schmagelborfer:
it seems like the writers are running out of good story ideas or the real revelations will come from DLC so they can make more money. it's all about money at the end of the day http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif
Well, they`r not exactly doing it for charity..
and you should blame the higher ups of Ubi,not the Assassins Creed Team.. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>i do blame the higher-ups, but the devs/writers welcome that type of crap anyway so they can keep getting paid. that's why they purposely don't fully fill the discs because they wouldn't make more money from the game at all after initial sales. an xbox 360 disc holds about 10GB i think give or take, most games are around 6-6.5GB, then they have paid DLC which could easily fit on the disc in the first place and they know that

Assassin_M
11-28-2011, 11:53 AM
Originally posted by Schmagelborfer:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Assassin_M:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Schmagelborfer:
it seems like the writers are running out of good story ideas or the real revelations will come from DLC so they can make more money. it's all about money at the end of the day http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif
Well, they`r not exactly doing it for charity..
and you should blame the higher ups of Ubi,not the Assassins Creed Team.. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>i do blame the higher-ups, but the devs/writers welcome that type of crap anyway so they can keep getting paid. that's why they purposely don't fully fill the discs because they wouldn't make more money from the game at all after initial sales. an xbox 360 disc holds about 10GB i think give or take, most games are around 6-6.5GB, then they have paid DLC which could easily fit on the disc in the first place and they know that </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Well Obviously the devs WANT to get paid too you know..

Schmagelborfer
11-28-2011, 12:03 PM
Originally posted by Assassin_M:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Schmagelborfer:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Assassin_M:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Schmagelborfer:
it seems like the writers are running out of good story ideas or the real revelations will come from DLC so they can make more money. it's all about money at the end of the day http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif
Well, they`r not exactly doing it for charity..
and you should blame the higher ups of Ubi,not the Assassins Creed Team.. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>i do blame the higher-ups, but the devs/writers welcome that type of crap anyway so they can keep getting paid. that's why they purposely don't fully fill the discs because they wouldn't make more money from the game at all after initial sales. an xbox 360 disc holds about 10GB i think give or take, most games are around 6-6.5GB, then they have paid DLC which could easily fit on the disc in the first place and they know that </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Well Obviously the devs WANT to get paid too you know.. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>that doesn't justify anything at all about why they do paid DLC when they could have it all on the disc from the get-go

Assassin_M
11-28-2011, 12:06 PM
Originally posted by Schmagelborfer:

that doesn't justify anything at all about why they do paid DLC when they could have it all on the disc from the get-go
These are "Orders" either follow it or out..

Schmagelborfer
11-28-2011, 12:11 PM
Originally posted by Assassin_M:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Schmagelborfer:

that doesn't justify anything at all about why they do paid DLC when they could have it all on the disc from the get-go
These are "Orders" either follow it or out.. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>so you think it's ok? these people along with all game companies nowadays are ripping you off and you seem to like it. i still buy some DLC but i don't like doing it since they could've gave it to me from the beginning

Assassin_M
11-28-2011, 12:15 PM
Originally posted by Schmagelborfer:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Assassin_M:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Schmagelborfer:

that doesn't justify anything at all about why they do paid DLC when they could have it all on the disc from the get-go
These are "Orders" either follow it or out.. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>so you think it's ok? these people along with all game companies nowadays are ripping you off and you seem to like it. i still buy some DLC but i don't like doing it since they could've gave it to me from the beginning </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I dont like it, but im not blaming them either, Im blaming Capitalism, and try putting yourself in someone else`s situation..
If your boss tells you to sell a book, but not all at once, he tells you to take out the last 3 pages off of it and say "If you want to know, buy the rest of the pages".what will you do ?

Schmagelborfer
11-28-2011, 12:20 PM
Originally posted by Assassin_M:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Schmagelborfer:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Assassin_M:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Schmagelborfer:

that doesn't justify anything at all about why they do paid DLC when they could have it all on the disc from the get-go
These are "Orders" either follow it or out.. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>so you think it's ok? these people along with all game companies nowadays are ripping you off and you seem to like it. i still buy some DLC but i don't like doing it since they could've gave it to me from the beginning </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I dont like it, but im not blaming them either, Im blaming Capitalism, and try putting yourself in someone else`s situation..
If your boss tells you to sell a book, but not all at once, he tells you to take out the last 3 pages off of it and say "If you want to know, buy the rest of the pages".what will you do ? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>a book is way different than a video game so i can't even answer that, books don't have DLP

Schmagelborfer
11-28-2011, 12:35 PM
i just realized that the devs blindly do what their bosses tell them w/o thinking if it's wrong or right they just do it for a paycheck, sounds like templars to me lol jk http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

S-EVANS
11-28-2011, 12:42 PM
Arr the explotation of the working classes...

If you buy DLC any type of DLC you made the idea of capitalism work. But the truth is it already exsisted in the first place...

Theres really no point in bringing up capitalism. because its applied to everything sold. DLC works for a much more primary reason..

People buy it...

If people stopped buying we go back a step and games on discs get shorter and the other half is released as game II, then game III theres only one way to fight against it, but since thats illegal i shall not discuss it here!!!

Money is a fake commodity, designed to provide power, and stop those without power ever earning it...

Agentbarto
11-28-2011, 12:57 PM
Why couldn't Ubi sell stuff without screwing over it's fan base? If you make a good solid product you attract constumers, if you make a great product you will attract more thus increasing your net ptofit. So rather than cutting corners and releasing content than is simply unlocked why not release content that serves as a true expansion?

Supply and demand doesn't have to mean screwing over the consumer to make money; that practice is simpy a way of making more money.

S-EVANS
11-28-2011, 01:10 PM
Well whilst i dont agree that M had to bring up Capitalism, his point is now relevant thats how it works...

The man at the top doesnt work, the people at ubisoft work for him. The man at the top just wants more power (money makes him powerful) so he instructs his working class slaves (ubi) to sell you products in a manner that you see as ripping you off.

Some would say you have a right to not buy any games as you dont need them in order to live. but if you do buy them you support Capitalism and therefore cant really moan about it...

LightRey
11-28-2011, 03:02 PM
Originally posted by Agentbarto:
Why couldn't Ubi sell stuff without screwing over it's fan base? If you make a good solid product you attract constumers, if you make a great product you will attract more thus increasing your net ptofit. So rather than cutting corners and releasing content than is simply unlocked why not release content that serves as a true expansion?

Supply and demand doesn't have to mean screwing over the consumer to make money; that practice is simpy a way of making more money.
Oh no, they're offering us extra content we can buy. What a crime. We should sue them.

Agentbarto
11-28-2011, 03:48 PM
Originally posted by LightRey:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Agentbarto:
Why couldn't Ubi sell stuff without screwing over it's fan base? If you make a good solid product you attract constumers, if you make a great product you will attract more thus increasing your net ptofit. So rather than cutting corners and releasing content than is simply unlocked why not release content that serves as a true expansion?

Supply and demand doesn't have to mean screwing over the consumer to make money; that practice is simpy a way of making more money.
Oh no, they're offering us extra content we can buy. What a crime. We should sue them. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

get past this idea that it's extra. It's not an expansion. It's stuff they withheld in order to sell it to us later for a higher price than what to would have originally been which is 0 because it would have been included in the original game.

Dude Nintendo's SS combo pack includes a sountrack that was advertised honestly. A full soundtrack, not a plithy little list of 17/80 songs. All that was included is that was intended to be included.

Wasn't there this same issue with a pc version of one of the recent Ezio titles? The console version got "extra" content while the pc version got it in full?

LightRey
11-28-2011, 04:02 PM
Originally posted by Agentbarto:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LightRey:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Agentbarto:
Why couldn't Ubi sell stuff without screwing over it's fan base? If you make a good solid product you attract constumers, if you make a great product you will attract more thus increasing your net ptofit. So rather than cutting corners and releasing content than is simply unlocked why not release content that serves as a true expansion?

Supply and demand doesn't have to mean screwing over the consumer to make money; that practice is simpy a way of making more money.
Oh no, they're offering us extra content we can buy. What a crime. We should sue them. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

get past this idea that it's extra. It's not an expansion. It's stuff they withheld in order to sell it to us later for a higher price than what to would have originally been which is 0 because it would have been included in the original game.

Dude Nintendo's SS combo pack includes a sountrack that was advertised honestly. A full soundtrack, not a plithy little list of 17/80 songs. All that was included is that was intended to be included.

Wasn't there this same issue with a pc version of one of the recent Ezio titles? The console version got "extra" content while the pc version got it in full? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Seriously? "withheld"? Come on. ACII was a great game, so was ACB and so was ACR. They didn't "withhold" anything. They don't "owe" us anything more than a game worth the price, which most people can agree on they gave us every time.

YHHTQ
11-28-2011, 04:04 PM
Truth be told, Desiléts did admit they "withheld" the Battle of Forli and Bonfire of Vanities so it could be sold LATER as DLC.

His reasoning? Here it is...

http://www.eurogamer.net/artic...ginally-part-of-game (http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/acii-dlc-was-originally-part-of-game)

twenty_glyphs
11-28-2011, 04:06 PM
I imagine not all DLC is content that is finished and then held back to be sold at a later date. An interview with Patrice about AC2 says they had to cut Sequence 12 and 13 in order to make their release date (along with the Full Synch and Memory Replay Mode), but after that the extra time allowed them to finish those sequences and then sell them. I have no problem with that, though it didn't look good because you could see they were already missing in the main game. If not for DLC, none of us would have ever seen those 2 sequences. Look at how buggy Revelations ended up and how it must have already come down to the wire to finish it on time, and tell me you really think they were able to finish the DLC coming later already? It's much more likely a small team is working on finishing that content as we speak.

I imagine the Da Vinci Disappearance DLC was already planned last year but not finished. Why else would they have waited almost 4 months after Brotherhood's release to sell it? They released AC2's Sequence 12 and 13 even earlier than that. I'd bet they were working on it until it was done, so that content would have never been made if it wasn't DLC.

You have to see some of this from a business standpoint. They are already spending tons of money to create a lot of content for these games, so at some point there's going to be a diminishing return as they pack more and more into the game. After that point, it just doesn't make sense to spend the extra money on development costs when the new content probably won't help the product sell significantly more copies. But DLC will bring in extra cash, so it's worth putting resources into that. And then we can choose if we want to spend the money on that or not.

LightRey
11-28-2011, 04:07 PM
Originally posted by YHHTQ:
Truth be told, Desiléts did admit they "withheld" the Battle of Forli and Bonfire of Vanities so it could be sold LATER as DLC.

His reasoning? Here it is...

http://www.eurogamer.net/artic...ginally-part-of-game (http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/acii-dlc-was-originally-part-of-game)
So what? You're saying the game wasn't worth the price without those 2 sequences?

twenty_glyphs
11-28-2011, 04:11 PM
Originally posted by YHHTQ:
Truth be told, Desiléts did admit they "withheld" the Battle of Forli and Bonfire of Vanities so it could be sold LATER as DLC.

His reasoning? Here it is...

http://www.eurogamer.net/artic...ginally-part-of-game (http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/acii-dlc-was-originally-part-of-game)

Read the full source article for that quote -- he doesn't say they "withheld" it just to sell it later. The article says the development for that content was backburnered and then later re-prioritized. This is the article I was referring to above when I said those sequences would likely not have ever been released if not for DLC. Here's the real quote:


http://kotaku.com/5431098/a-20...g-assassins-creed-ii (http://kotaku.com/5431098/a-2009-view-from-the-top-one-mans-year-making-assassins-creed-ii)
The other cut, the one many Assassin's Creed II players have figured out by now, was content for which development would be backburnered and later re-prioritized and issued as the game's forthcoming January and February downloadable content. These would be the game's marked but missing 12th and 13th chapters, more or less. "I felt that, 'Okay, there were too many things to do and to finish.' So we said, 'Ok, let's take a portion of the game that was planned and we'll give it in DLC.' We'll remove some stress to the team while giving more to fans and people who like Assassin's Creed." Desilets liked the idea of giving the game added life and content beyond its initial release, saying it's something that he regrets not offering for Assassin's Creed — "I feel like we left people alone afterwards." —and given how big the game was and how it had gotten bigger during development, he didn't think most players would feel shortchanged. "I think we gave them so much content that they cannot say that we owe them, that we didn't give them a lot for their 60 bucks."

Agentbarto
11-28-2011, 04:22 PM
All I'm saying is that with MMOs you have a rewriting of the game code within each update. For some reason with disk based games the code isn't rewritten to accomodate for new content, room was purposefully left open for the code to be placed in when the content is released, this is why the DNA interface in AC II prior to the content release had a large gap between the last playable sequence and the second to last playable sequence. What's weird is that for some reason ACR multiplayer bugs or gameplay can be fixed with patches (rewriting the code) and yet the extra content isn't integrated in that way.

Good example of this is the old Altair costume. It's is not listed initially as a third option. When you complete the final sequence with 100% synchronization, not only is the costume unlocked but the option to chose it also pops up. Fact remains it was always meant to pop up and it therefore only appears to be extra content.

EzioAssassin51
11-29-2011, 12:16 AM
and so we abandon the topic once more for some off-topic rambiling about something that's been argued about countless times over.

While I sound cold (sorry about that) I must admit, and no doubt you guys have noticed too, that a lot of topics are going off-topic really easily lately

Agentbarto
11-29-2011, 12:38 AM
Originally posted by EzioAssassin51:
and so we abandon the topic once more for some off-topic rambiling about something that's been argued about countless times over.

While I sound cold (sorry about that) I must admit, and no doubt you guys have noticed too, that a lot of topics are going off-topic really easily lately

nothing is true, everything is permitted.

EzioAssassin51
11-29-2011, 09:13 PM
Originally posted by Agentbarto:
nothing is true, everything is permitted.

Forum Rules are the exception http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/5251069024/m/2961017947)

AssassinTrio
11-29-2011, 09:25 PM
I think AC1 had the biggest revelations, even though it was an intro to the series. AC2 came in second.

But here is how it went for me. AC1 gave revelations to the meaning of the order. For instance, Al Mualim's speeches, and the speeches done by the templars you killed.

In AC2, they gave revelations on who came before, what happened, how did the war start, and who started it. They gave info on how everything started.

Agentbarto
11-29-2011, 10:36 PM
Originally posted by EzioAssassin51:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Agentbarto:
nothing is true, everything is permitted.

Forum Rules are the exception http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/5251069024/m/2961017947) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ha! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Mr.Beets
12-04-2011, 04:27 PM
I haven't seen this could be the wrong place for it but has anyone thought maybe the "people who came before" are liars, maybe the temple is one big poe that desmond is the key for and it bring the "ones who came before" back form there brink. in ac 2 it is said that some of the poe's have time control, and it could be like that so when they come there starts the war again, becase they won't want to give up the world that they were on first. when thay said it was a temple for salvation dosen't mean ours. and don't forget they made us for there slave labor, and history show no race once it has slaves wants to give them up. Adam and eve didn't brake out of eden for no reason. The templars are helping them out by collecting all the poe's in one place so they can have there weapons of control again. just a thought, but I have never trusted them call it a gut feeling, and they did say that 3 would end desmond's chapter but ther is alot of story to tell. A war between the races would help push the next set of games. Oh and I think I read somewhere that one of the main guys said that maybe the poe's wasn't use to promote a lie but to distort the truth, I know that sounds the same thats what I said when I read it, but maybe I watch to much lost and I'm trying to think sidways around the couner, what do you people think

CartopBALTO
11-17-2012, 05:26 PM
Lucy was killed because she intended to take the apple to Abstergo. (Operation Siren)

Desmond explores Conner's memories to find the 'key' to the temple.



DON'T READ THE REST ---> SPOILERS BELOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!

--/\
-/ ! \
/__ _\





Desmond dies in the end.