PDA

View Full Version : ACII was ruined with Brotherhood?



karixening
09-28-2011, 01:59 AM
The whole premise of the second game is Ezio was seeking to avenge his family's death. He killed everyone associated with their deaths and at the end is faced with mastermind behind the killings, Rodrigo Borgia. But instead of killing him Ezio let him go, hinting that Ezio felt his family's death was avenged and he maybe had some remorse for all the killing he'd done in his past. I thought it would have been an interesting direction to take the series if Ezio, feeling actually gravity behind his actions, only killed when he needed to. For example, if fighting a large group of guards, instead of killing every last one of them, he only did lethal stuns and take downs such as breaking arms and cutting Achilles tendons. This also would have given the assassination missions more weight, because it would have added a thrill of, I'm actually about to jam my blade into someone's throat. Then brotherhood started and right after telling Mario his reasoning for not killing the man who ruined his life, he proceeded to kill a mass group of guards. And throughout the game, if there was a guard within 50ft of Ezio, you can guarantee a bolt in his back or a blade in his neck. Does anyone else feel Ezio had a lot of potential and could have been made into a much deeper character? If you disagree, please explain.

Animuses
09-28-2011, 02:15 AM
You are over thinking it.

bveUSbve
09-28-2011, 03:21 AM
It would have been logical if Ezio had killed Rodrigo Borgia in AC2. The sole reason he didn't do it is that UBISOFT wanted to remain true to the real historic events of when and how Borgia died, I think.

With regard to your other point of view: In my opinion the gameplay could and should allow "somewhat" more stealth and non-lethal dealing with enemies (especially the minor ones). But the AC-series from the start was NOT designed to be consequently a stealth-game. It wants to appeal to as many people as possible to maximize profit. Apparently most people not only don't mind all the (needless) killing, they actually WANT their "Assassin" to be an unstoppable "badass" killing-machine. Sadly.

Dralight
09-28-2011, 03:25 AM
Technically Ezio didn't kill every single guard he came across, it's us as the player that are choosing to do that.
For example, some memories full sync requirements are "Do not kill anyone" or something similar. This is how Ezio actually did the memory and if we choose to instead massacre every guard in sight, it doesn't mean that's what actually happenned.

CRUDFACE
09-28-2011, 03:50 AM
Originally posted by bveUSbve:
It would have been logical if Ezio had killed Rodrigo Borgia in AC2. The sole reason he didn't do it is that UBISOFT wanted to remain true to the real historic events of when and how Borgia died, I think.

With regard to your other point of view: In my opinion the gameplay could and should allow "somewhat" more stealth and non-lethal dealing with enemies (especially the minor ones). But the AC-series from the start was NOT designed to be consequently a stealth-game. It wants to appeal to as many people as possible to maximize profit. Apparently most people not only don't mind all the (needless) killing, they actually WANT their "Assassin" to be an unstoppable "badass" killing-machine. Sadly.

True about Rodrigo, but seriously, they could have thought of a better way to let him go. Ezio lets the leader of the Templars go because he's made peace with himself? Okay, good for him, but Rodrigo was still hurting people and the leader of the organization the Assassins directly oppose. A little sloppy.

And yeah, AC was meant to be a multiple branch thing. But the 100% synch ruins that mindset. Hate that you're right about people just wanting him to be cool rather than focusing on other qualities.

Bruno_Berg
09-28-2011, 06:07 AM
The slaugthering of every single guard in the game is not the canon story, simple as that.

dxsxhxcx
09-28-2011, 06:25 AM
he let Rodrigo live because Ezio doesn't understand the true meaning of being an Assassin, he was thrown in the middle of this situation after the death of part of his family, but it seems he'll learn one thing or two with Altair now on ACR, better late than never, right?! :P

albertwesker22
09-28-2011, 06:46 AM
Originally posted by dxsxhxcx:
he let Rodrigo live because Ezio doesn't understand the true meaning of being an Assassin, he was thrown in the middle of this situation after the death of part of his family, but it seems he'll learn one thing or two with Altair now on ACR, better late than never, right?! :P

Thats a big assumption there. He says in Brotherhood that killing Rodrigo would have meant nothing. The Borgia family were so powerful, another Templar would have become Pope.

Once you take down all his backers in Rome, Ezio goes to kill both Rodrigo and Cesare. Only Cesare killed Rodrigo before Ezio could do it.

InfectedNation
09-28-2011, 06:47 AM
You all have a point, but definitely I agree with OP.
Hopefully in ACR, the hookblade might offer a counter attack that does not kill guards, just neutralize them (eg: some of the clips we saw in the Gamescom trailer).

But when I play, I like to think that Ezio only killed guards who he saw as "evil" or cruel hearted, or those who greatly threatened his own life/safety.

dxsxhxcx
09-28-2011, 06:55 AM
Originally posted by albertwesker22:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by dxsxhxcx:
he let Rodrigo live because Ezio doesn't understand the true meaning of being an Assassin, he was thrown in the middle of this situation after the death of part of his family, but it seems he'll learn one thing or two with Altair now on ACR, better late than never, right?! :P

Thats a big assumption there. He says in Brotherhood that killing Rodrigo would have meant nothing. The Borgia family were so powerful, another Templar would have become Pope.

Once you take down all his backers in Rome, Ezio goes to kill both Rodrigo and Cesare. Only Cesare killed Rodrigo before Ezio could do it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


so why are the Assassins fighting the Templars if they are so powerful that kill one would mean nothing?!

Ezio once again in ACB was thrown in the middle of another situation (the Villa attack and Mario's death) and that's probably the reason why he did what he did in ACB, if he was smart he would have killed Rodrigo when he had the chance in AC2 and probably avoid all the ACB situation (or part of it like Mario's death for example)...

LightRey
09-28-2011, 11:01 AM
Originally posted by dxsxhxcx:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by albertwesker22:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by dxsxhxcx:
he let Rodrigo live because Ezio doesn't understand the true meaning of being an Assassin, he was thrown in the middle of this situation after the death of part of his family, but it seems he'll learn one thing or two with Altair now on ACR, better late than never, right?! :P

Thats a big assumption there. He says in Brotherhood that killing Rodrigo would have meant nothing. The Borgia family were so powerful, another Templar would have become Pope.

Once you take down all his backers in Rome, Ezio goes to kill both Rodrigo and Cesare. Only Cesare killed Rodrigo before Ezio could do it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


so why are the Assassins fighting the Templars if they are so powerful that kill one would mean nothing?!

Ezio once again in ACB was thrown in the middle of another situation (the Villa attack and Mario's death) and that's probably the reason why he did what he did in ACB, if he was smart he would have killed Rodrigo when he had the chance in AC2 and probably avoid all the ACB situation (or part of it like Mario's death for example)... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
because killing one templar in power accomplishes little, killing several of them and/or ruining their plans accomplishes so much more.

karixening
09-28-2011, 12:35 PM
Originally posted by InfectedNation:
You all have a point, but definitely I agree with OP.
Hopefully in ACR, the hookblade might offer a counter attack that does not kill guards, just neutralize them (eg: some of the clips we saw in the Gamescom trailer).

But when I play, I like to think that Ezio only killed guards who he saw as "evil" or cruel hearted, or those who greatly threatened his own life/safety.

Yeah, that's also the way I see him. The way he always gets girls and takes care of his mother and sister does not seem like the qualities of a mass murderer. I wouldn't want to them to take out the ability to kill, but having the option not to would be nice.

Animuses
09-28-2011, 02:47 PM
If Ezio would've killed Rodrigo, Cesare would still have attacked the villa and the events of Brotherhood would still be exactly the same.

Serrachio
09-28-2011, 02:54 PM
Originally posted by Animuses:
If Ezio would've killed Rodrigo, Cesare would still have attacked the villa and the events of Brotherhood would still be exactly the same.

If you think about it, that may not be true to an extent.

After all, with Rodrigo as the Pope, it gave Cesare control over the Papal Army, so if there was a new Pope on Rodrigo's demise, he may have ended up with no forces at all.

AltairsFinger
09-28-2011, 02:58 PM
so why are the Assassins fighting the Templars if they are so powerful that kill one would mean nothing?!

Ezio once again in ACB was thrown in the middle of another situation (the Villa attack and Mario's death) and that's probably the reason why he did what he did in ACB, if he was smart he would have killed Rodrigo when he had the chance in AC2 and probably avoid all the ACB situation (or part of it like Mario's death for example)...

I think Ezio just hit a stage where he thought "what's the point?" Ive killed all these people my family are still dead, and if he dies, what does that mean for the world? I think Ezio had serious doubts about killing Rodrigo, and what it would accomplish so just let him go. Not to mention he was no doubt confused as hell by what he saw inside the Vault and probably just wanted to get away from it all.

So then the events of Brotherhood happen and he is thrust back into a fight he realises he should never have given up.

Voltige2011
09-28-2011, 03:34 PM
Ezio said somewhere in Project Legacy that killing the wouldn't accomplish that much. I'll edit this post after I find it.
Edit:
Rome
Francesco Vecellio
Toxicity
Body Swap
"I ask Ezio why we cannot send an arrow into Cesare's heart as he steps onto the balcony." "We are dealing with the Church's army and it will not crumble with the death of one man."

SteelCity999
09-28-2011, 03:35 PM
Ubi actually used a little bit of actual history by Ezio not killing Rodrigo....the real-life assassins felt that killing the templar grandmaster was of no point because they were so large another would take his place and so on and so on. They preferred to take out people in power that mattered - although its not like the Pope didn't matter. I would have to add that I'm not sure Ezio new of the gravity of the situation and about Cesare in general. Cesare did what he did in a very short time period.

dxsxhxcx
09-28-2011, 03:42 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 dxsxhxcx:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by albertwesker22:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by dxsxhxcx:
he let Rodrigo live because Ezio doesn't understand the true meaning of being an Assassin, he was thrown in the middle of this situation after the death of part of his family, but it seems he'll learn one thing or two with Altair now on ACR, better late than never, right?! :P

Thats a big assumption there. He says in Brotherhood that killing Rodrigo would have meant nothing. The Borgia family were so powerful, another Templar would have become Pope.

Once you take down all his backers in Rome, Ezio goes to kill both Rodrigo and Cesare. Only Cesare killed Rodrigo before Ezio could do it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


so why are the Assassins fighting the Templars if they are so powerful that kill one would mean nothing?!

Ezio once again in ACB was thrown in the middle of another situation (the Villa attack and Mario's death) and that's probably the reason why he did what he did in ACB, if he was smart he would have killed Rodrigo when he had the chance in AC2 and probably avoid all the ACB situation (or part of it like Mario's death for example)... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
because killing one templar in power accomplishes little, killing several of them and/or ruining their plans accomplishes so much more. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

he wasn't "just" one Templar, he was the Grand Master of the Templar Order and like if this wasn't enough, he also was the Pope, kill him during AC2 would probably make things a lot easier for the Assasins for a good time...



Originally posted by Serrachio:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Animuses:
If Ezio would've killed Rodrigo, Cesare would still have attacked the villa and the events of Brotherhood would still be exactly the same.

If you think about it, that may not be true to an extent.

After all, with Rodrigo as the Pope, it gave Cesare control over the Papal Army, so if there was a new Pope on Rodrigo's demise, he may have ended up with no forces at all. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

true, and don't forget Cesare attacked the Villa because of what he heard from Rodrigo about Ezio, it wasn't a random event...

Animuses
09-28-2011, 03:44 PM
Cesare would've attacked regardless and Rodrigo WAS defeated.

LightRey
09-28-2011, 04:09 PM
Originally posted by Serrachio:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Animuses:
If Ezio would've killed Rodrigo, Cesare would still have attacked the villa and the events of Brotherhood would still be exactly the same.

If you think about it, that may not be true to an extent.

After all, with Rodrigo as the Pope, it gave Cesare control over the Papal Army, so if there was a new Pope on Rodrigo's demise, he may have ended up with no forces at all. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
He'd still be in control for at least a few weeks, if not months, and he attacked almost immediately after Ezio came back from Rome, which couldn't have been more than a few days after going to Rome. Not to mention that with his control of Rome at the time Cesare'd have had a lackey of his appointed pope and he'd still be in control of the papal army.

Calvarok
09-28-2011, 06:45 PM
Ezio didn't kill Rodrigo because he had what he wanted and didn't need to kill him. Most of the time, Ezio doesn't get that chance, like with other guards. And then we meet Cesare, who by all accounts deserves to die more than even Rodrigo. At least Rodrigo truly believed in the Templar ideals of peace at a high price.

chizzy12
09-28-2011, 06:49 PM
Don't you remember what Ezio said?

"Killing you won't bring my family back. I'm done..."

Then again, I never understood why he said Rest In Peace to him though...

dxsxhxcx
09-28-2011, 07:21 PM
Originally posted by Calvarok:
Ezio didn't kill Rodrigo because he had what he wanted and didn't need to kill him. Most of the time, Ezio doesn't get that chance, like with other guards. And then we meet Cesare, who by all accounts deserves to die more than even Rodrigo. At least Rodrigo truly believed in the Templar ideals of peace at a high price.

that's the point, he (Ezio) had what HE wanted, but Ezio also IS an Assassin, and let a Templar (not only a simple Templar, but the Grand Master of the Templar Order) live is not good for their (Assassin) cause, that's why I said Ezio doesn't understand the true meaning of being an Assassin, decide to spare Rodrigo's life was something that he (Ezio) did for himself and not for the Assassin Order...

LightRey
09-29-2011, 12:04 AM
Originally posted by dxsxhxcx:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Calvarok:
Ezio didn't kill Rodrigo because he had what he wanted and didn't need to kill him. Most of the time, Ezio doesn't get that chance, like with other guards. And then we meet Cesare, who by all accounts deserves to die more than even Rodrigo. At least Rodrigo truly believed in the Templar ideals of peace at a high price.

that's the point, he (Ezio) had what HE wanted, but Ezio also IS an Assassin, and let a Templar (not only a simple Templar, but the Grand Master of the Templar Order) live is not good for their (Assassin) cause, that's why I said Ezio doesn't understand the true meaning of being an Assassin, decide to spare Rodrigo's life was something that he (Ezio) did for himself and not for the Assassin Order... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Was it? Rodrigo didn't do anything afterwards. In fact, had Ezio not gone, the Mentor of the Assassins at the time would still have been alive and one of their main bases would not have been taken, which all would still have happened if he had killed Rodrigo.

Bruno_Berg
09-29-2011, 05:43 AM
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 dxsxhxcx:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Calvarok:
Ezio didn't kill Rodrigo because he had what he wanted and didn't need to kill him. Most of the time, Ezio doesn't get that chance, like with other guards. And then we meet Cesare, who by all accounts deserves to die more than even Rodrigo. At least Rodrigo truly believed in the Templar ideals of peace at a high price.

that's the point, he (Ezio) had what HE wanted, but Ezio also IS an Assassin, and let a Templar (not only a simple Templar, but the Grand Master of the Templar Order) live is not good for their (Assassin) cause, that's why I said Ezio doesn't understand the true meaning of being an Assassin, decide to spare Rodrigo's life was something that he (Ezio) did for himself and not for the Assassin Order... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Was it? Rodrigo didn't do anything afterwards. In fact, had Ezio not gone, the Mentor of the Assassins at the time would still have been alive and one of their main bases would not have been taken, which all would still have happened if he had killed Rodrigo. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Doesn't Rodrigo say something to Cesare towards the end of brotherhood that attacking monteriggioni was a bad idea or something?

Blind2Society
09-29-2011, 06:23 AM
Yeah, that was part of the conversation that lead to Cesare killing him. He was saying that it was not his decision to attack but Cesare's and he would have to account for his failures or something like that.

AGRawr
09-29-2011, 06:51 AM
Originally posted by InfectedNation:
You all have a point, but definitely I agree with OP.
Hopefully in ACR, the hookblade might offer a counter attack that does not kill guards, just neutralize them (eg: some of the clips we saw in the Gamescom trailer).

But when I play, I like to think that Ezio only killed guards who he saw as "evil" or cruel hearted, or those who greatly threatened his own life/safety.

You guys are forgetting that it's not a movie. Ezio didn't decide to kill all the guards, you did. There are parts where if you want 100% synch it says to not kill anyone but your target, do not be noticed, etc. And when the guards are attacking him, they all are a threat to his life and safety, you are free to run and hide if you want, or stay and fight.

Also, you guys have to realize that they try to keep alot of the game in line with history. At the end of AC:2 he lets Rodrigo live because in history that is not when he died, Ubisoft gave their own spin to make it fit into the story, but it's there cause that was not his date of death.

If anything AC:B just made the serise more accurate and all around better. But if you don't want to kill a few hundred guards, you don't have to. Don't get noticed, if you do rip down the posters and pay off people, bring it back down again and your good, only time you HAVE to kill is for missions, and even then you can pick and choose your targets.

And Karixening, look at soldiers in US military, they kill to keep the world stable, to protect those that can't protect themselves, and yet they can take care of their family and get laid. The home life and the battlefield are two very different places and require different actions, Ezio, like many soldiers might take very good care of their family to reassuer their family everything is okay. And you do have an option to not kill. You run and hide. It's already in the game.

dxsxhxcx
09-29-2011, 07:41 AM
Originally posted by AGRawr:

Also, you guys have to realize that they try to keep alot of the game in line with history. At the end of AC:2 he lets Rodrigo live because in history that is not when he died, Ubisoft gave their own spin to make it fit into the story, but it's there cause that was not his date of death.

I know that Ubisoft did that to make things happen like they did in real life, I'm not saying that what Ubisoft did was wrong, I'm trying to analize this situation from an in game perspective where I believe that spare Rodrigo's live in AC2 was a mistake (made by Ezio)...

LightRey
09-29-2011, 10:29 AM
Originally posted by Bruno_Berg:
<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 dxsxhxcx:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Calvarok:
Ezio didn't kill Rodrigo because he had what he wanted and didn't need to kill him. Most of the time, Ezio doesn't get that chance, like with other guards. And then we meet Cesare, who by all accounts deserves to die more than even Rodrigo. At least Rodrigo truly believed in the Templar ideals of peace at a high price.

that's the point, he (Ezio) had what HE wanted, but Ezio also IS an Assassin, and let a Templar (not only a simple Templar, but the Grand Master of the Templar Order) live is not good for their (Assassin) cause, that's why I said Ezio doesn't understand the true meaning of being an Assassin, decide to spare Rodrigo's life was something that he (Ezio) did for himself and not for the Assassin Order... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Was it? Rodrigo didn't do anything afterwards. In fact, had Ezio not gone, the Mentor of the Assassins at the time would still have been alive and one of their main bases would not have been taken, which all would still have happened if he had killed Rodrigo. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Doesn't Rodrigo say something to Cesare towards the end of brotherhood that attacking monteriggioni was a bad idea or something? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
That's true, which means that what Ezio did almost prevented the attack from happening.