PDA

View Full Version : Altair's Voice



DreamerM
11-29-2007, 02:51 PM
This is a topic about Altair's voice, provided (according to GameFAQs) by http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1717255/ Philip Shahbaz.

Call me crazy and I know I'm in the minority here, but I actually think his voice fit him. It has a musical, almost elegant quality that still manages to be a rough around the edges and unpredictably volitle. It's a mass of contradictions, which makes it interesting.

Some have called his tone of voice flat and wooden, but as I've played through the game that isn't the vibe I got. Understated and reserved, but not flat. You just have to pay a little more attention to get the emotions he's repressing, rather then flaunting.

Again, call me nuts but that character wouldn't be the same Altair we know and love with any other voice.

Tela
11-29-2007, 03:00 PM
You describe it perfectly. I love his voice. Especially at the end. All that emotion when he's talking to Al Mualim!

MammothWaffle
11-29-2007, 03:01 PM
I never thought it was flat either. I don't get why people say such things... he's an assassin hes not supposed to show a lot of emotion, at leas thats how i looked at it. Meh who knows I enjoyed the voice acting

blarson11
11-29-2007, 03:03 PM
i just wrote a post complaining about his voice, and now i am convinced i was wrong. i saw non-emotion as a negative, but i guess that was the point thx. (note, this is not a sarcastic post)

Kaxen6
11-29-2007, 03:05 PM
At first I thought the voice was totally weird, but as I played I really liked it.

Though something about the way he says whoa when stopping the horse reminds me of people who aren't very familiar with riding horses. @_@ though even with several years riding I'm still not sure why we stop horses with "whoa" rather than "stop"

DreamerM
11-29-2007, 03:19 PM
Originally posted by blarson11:
i just wrote a post complaining about his voice, and now i am convinced i was wrong. i saw non-emotion as a negative.

Horray! Go me! Thanks!

Anyway, the emotion is there, it's just under the surface. It's subtle, and I guess some gamers were just too busy to listen for it.

It's risky including an understated performance in a video game like this, since in video games everyone expects things to be straightforwards, given that the characters and story are just excuses for visceral carnage anyway. The amount of negative press Altair's voice has generated might lead one to the conclusion that subtlety is wasted in this medium. Still, I applaud Ubisoft for going out on a limb on the performance, just like they did in Altair's areal, atypical design, again disregarding what the gamer expects in favor of the character they are trying to create.

I appreciate Philip Shahbaz and what he brought to the character. And I'm Glad to see I'm not alone in the universe. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/inlove.gif Thanks guys.

wepeel
11-29-2007, 03:29 PM
I think he did a good job too, and is taking an undue amount of flak for it.

DreamerM
11-30-2007, 01:38 PM
Originally posted by wepeel:
I think he did a good job too, and is taking an undue amount of flak for it.

Why though? Because his performance is understated? Because it's not the gruff smoker's voice or velvety tones we're used to hearing from video game heros?

Tela
11-30-2007, 01:43 PM
His voiceis...real? I can't think of a better way of explaining it. It has just the right amount of emotion for someone in his position, age, so on and so forth.

...And, again, listen to the emotion at the end. VERY nice job on such! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/inlove.gif

Lazybeans
11-30-2007, 01:52 PM
I don't even have the game, and just from the parts I've heard, like from trailers and stuff...
"Have you any questions?"
"Only where I need begin."

I LOVE his voice! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/inlove.gif

Tela
11-30-2007, 01:58 PM
Have you played the online "experience" yet? All the lines in there are also in the game.

"I would see your eyes before you die...." http://media.ubi.com/us/forum_images/gf-glomp.gif

DreamerM
11-30-2007, 02:13 PM
"I would see your eyes before you die...." http://media.ubi.com/us/forum_images/gf-glomp.gif

He does get some bad ones. I for one cringed at "I felt death's dark embrace." But that's not the poor actor's fault, and he sold it as well as he could.

He does get some good lines though, I like his exchanges with the Assassin's Burrou leaders. They get so snippy! It's cute.

Tela
11-30-2007, 02:27 PM
I loved Malik(spelling?). Especially towards the end ****SPOILER****When he talks to Altair abut forgiveness***END SPOILER******

DreamerM
11-30-2007, 03:56 PM
Originally posted by Tela:
I loved Malik(spelling?). Especially towards the end ****SPOILER****When he talks to Altair abut forgiveness***END SPOILER******


Malik was one of the most touching, emotional characters in the game. Very well performed and realized.

Tela
11-30-2007, 03:59 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/agreepost.gif

I got so sad during their talk. Thinking about him and his brother. I had an odd soft spot for him, that kinda grew to a "liking" of the character at the talk, and especially what happens after.

dirtybird21
11-30-2007, 04:04 PM
Idk i liked his voice... The thing is, He got some bad lines for his voice, Like the lines they gave him didn't fit right... I hated the "come down and we shall settle this with HONOR!" his voice was bad for that but it sorta fit him...

Tela
11-30-2007, 04:10 PM
Originally posted by dirtybird21:
Idk i liked his voice... The thing is, He got some bad lines for his voice, Like the lines they gave him didn't fit right... I hated the "come down and we shall settle this with HONOR!" his voice was bad for that but it sorta fit him...

Yeah, that one was kind of wierd. "Honor" cam out too...breathy?
The only line I really disliked, in how he said it, was "It's just a piece of silver."

DreamerM
11-30-2007, 04:15 PM
Yeah, that one was kind of wierd. "Honor" cam out too...breathy?

I liked that line. He was pissed and stressed. Besides he didn't mean it: he's an assassin. They don't care about fair fights. Their job is to kill you before you even know you've been IN a fight.

dirtybird21
11-30-2007, 04:20 PM
Originally posted by DreamerM:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">
Yeah, that one was kind of wierd. "Honor" cam out too...breathy?

I liked that line. He was pissed and stressed. Besides he didn't mean it: he's an assassin. They don't care about fair fights. Their job is to kill you before you even know you've been IN a fight. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

They're more honorable than THAT though, That's why they only assassinate their targets w/ a blade/dagger (the real assassins, Altair uses his hidden blade) instead of poisen.

Tela
11-30-2007, 04:26 PM
Poisen wouldn't have been obvious enough. The point of the assassination was that people SAW and KNEW what had happened. So Altair has to get up close and personal, stab em in the neck, and the crowd sees, and screams.

DreamerM
11-30-2007, 06:34 PM
Originally posted by Tela:
Poisen wouldn't have been obvious enough. The point of the assassination was that people SAW and KNEW what had happened. So Altair has to get up close and personal, stab em in the neck, and the crowd sees, and screams.

Exactly. What happened next is the big historical inaccuracy: Real Assassins did not typically get away. Usually they were slain by guards seconds after the killing took place.

A lot of the mystery surrounding their order comes from the fact that none were ever captured alive, and none ever defected.

Tela
11-30-2007, 06:36 PM
That may be a reason why Altair is considered Al Mualim's best: he gets away.

DreamerM
12-01-2007, 02:55 AM
Originally posted by Tela:
That may be a reason why Altair is considered Al Mualim's best: he gets away.

It also might be that we wouldn't have much of a game if the main character died after the first mission. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif

wepeel
12-01-2007, 04:47 AM
Originally posted by DreamerM:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by wepeel:
I think he did a good job too, and is taking an undue amount of flak for it.

Why though? Because his performance is understated? Because it's not the gruff smoker's voice or velvety tones we're used to hearing from video game heros? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Indeed. It's pretty easy to go the Master Chief way and get a super-masculine sound to it, so maybe that's what people've come to expect. Altair is supposed to be in his early 20s or so though, so a voice like that wouldn't have suited him

stix489
12-01-2007, 05:40 AM
I liked his voice alot...well during the Australian delay, many people gave me the impression that it would be horrible...very horrible...unbearably horrible! But when I got my hands on the game...My mind changed as soon as I heard his first few words.

The game's epic, and the voice acting is just as good! Even Malik's voice was awesome!

Royal.Mist
12-01-2007, 08:14 AM
Ubisoft could have casted a brain dead mongoloid as Altair and everyone here would still be singing praises to the voice actor http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

He was okay. Only okay. Nothing more, nothing less.

Pr0metheus 1962
12-01-2007, 08:31 AM
I hate the voice. I don't think the actor (Philip Shahbaz) did a good job at all. Sure, the lines were bad - many made me cringe, but the acting is bad too - daytime soap bad.

Part of the problem, I think, is that Altair is the only character in the 12th Century part of the game with a modern American accent. I realise that there are some arguable reasons for this, but I don't buy the idea that Altair's memory could be accessed by Desmond and Desmond's voice (or an Americanized version of Altair's voice - it is, after all, a different actor who plays Altair) would be what Desmond hears. It just brings me out of the game when I hear a modern US accent in a genetic memory that was recorded in a time period before the US existed and in a country in the Middle East.

Maybe part of the problem is that I'm an Englishman living in the US. So I hear that foreign accent and it doesn't sound natural to me. Of course if the game had an English accent I probably would have the same problem because what I'm expecting from the character is not English or American, but a Middle Eastern accent.

But somehow I get the feeling that the real problem is that originally he was hired to play Altair with a Middle Eastern accent (due to his numerous TV roles as a Middle Eastern guy) and either he couldn't pull it off or the players testing the game couldn't handle a Middle Eastern accent for Altair. So the actor ended up doing a sort of hybrid with an American accent combined with a script meant to be read with a Middle Eastern accent. You can tell this because at certain times he says "It is" or "That is" when "It's" or "That's" would sound more natural for an Ameican accent.

Whatever the issue is, there definitely needed to be something done about that voice. It just sounds 'off'. Either they ran out of time or they just couldn't find a good solution, or they got caught up in some residual post-9/11 anti-Moslem/Arab sentiment (i.e. "It's okay to have a hero who's a Middle Eastern terrorist as long as he doesn't speak with a Middle Eastern accent"). The result of whatever the problem was is not quite up to the rest of the game's standards.

I just keep thinking, "Oh if only they'd hired the guy who plays Malik as Altair". Malik somehow sounds more real and his voice carries and projects the emotions he feels in a way that Altair's does not. Heck, Malik has the worst-written character arc in the entire game (Altair kills his brother but then he becomes Altair's friend - yeah, like that could happen) but the actor somehow pulls it off. Actually, I even think Desmond's voice would have been better. He has a bit of a whiny quality, but at least when he's pissed off or emotional I believe it. That isn't the case with Altair.

DreamerM
12-01-2007, 01:42 PM
If they'd wanted the guy who plays Malik to play Altair, they could have done it. If Altair sounds different, it must be because they wanted him to.

I'll admit it never occured to me that Altair had an american accent. Perhaps it's just because I hear it every day and don't think about it, maybe it's because his proper pronunciation of the arabic names and the archaic language was enough to throw me off the scent. Also that he does have an accent, or at least, he speaks a strange rolling dialect of american I've never heard before. Either way it was removed enough from what I hear everyday that I didn't question how it fit into the world.


You can tell this because at certain times he says "It is" or "That is" when "It's" or "That's" would sound more natural for an Ameican accent.

I've often wondered how the American accent sounds to non-americans. I guess I know now. Proper language sounds alien in our mouths. Dang. That is rather disheartening. I'm not so sure that the script was "meant for a middle-eastern accent." I think that's a stereotype.

A script that'd contained "That's" and "It's" would have proved distracting for me. Those kind of common conjunctions would have been out of place in the 3rd Crusade, and not even I would have missed them. As it is, I'll forgive it given that Desmond is American and it's his conciousness that's being projected back in time into Altair.

Also because I still like the quality of Altair's voice: it's strange rough-edged elegance and understated performance. Maybe that's just a personal preference, but I think it brought a lot to the character.

DreamerM
12-03-2007, 01:59 AM
Originally posted by Royal.Mist:
Ubisoft could have casted a brain dead mongoloid as Altair and everyone here would still be singing praises to the voice actor.

Well, clearly "everyone here" isn't. He's gotten a lot of bad press for what was, I think, an elegant, understated performance.

I've been trying to determine where the disatisfaction with him comes from: he does have an accent even though it's a lot less strong then the others. Is subtlety lost on gamers? Or am I simply hoodwinked?

Pr0metheus 1962
12-03-2007, 09:53 AM
Originally posted by Royal.Mist:
Ubisoft could have casted a brain dead mongoloid as Altair and everyone here would still be singing praises to the voice actor...

I get that feeling too.

Tela
12-03-2007, 09:58 AM
Originally posted by Beeryus:
I hate the voice. I don't think the actor (Philip Shahbaz) did a good job at all. Sure, the lines were bad - many made me cringe, but the acting is bad too - daytime soap bad.



.....You know, a lot of people on soap operas are actually WONDERFUL actors, and the lines, for them, sound emotional, and believable. (....yes, I watch soap operas sometimes. Considering my position, sometimes you have nothing else to do while you eat lunch. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/shady.gif )

Pr0metheus 1962
12-03-2007, 10:13 AM
I'm not criticising soap opera actors. Some great actors have come out of soaps, but the soaps were not the point where they were at the top of their game. The reason being that soap opera scheduling is brutal to say the least. When an actor doesn't have time to rehearse, when he may not even have seen the script before the day of shooting and when they have a minimal number of takes - perhaps only one, it's not a good environment for him to excel at his craft.

All I'm saying is that Philip Shahbaz's performance was at that level. Now maybe he was brought in at the last minute and was constrained by similar difficulties as soap opera actors are presented with. Whatever the reason, his voice acting was sub-par compared to just about every other voice in the game.

AirRon_2K7
12-03-2007, 10:18 AM
Exactly. What happened next is the big historical inaccuracy: Real Assassins did not typically get away. Usually they were slain by guards seconds after the killing took place.

Yeah, but heres the bit where we mix fact with fun. You get the fact of public assassination... but the fun of not dying.

DreamerM
12-03-2007, 11:36 PM
You get the fact of public assassination... but the fun of not dying.

Plus the chase sequences are heart-pumping. Weeee! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif

ACfanboy12
12-03-2007, 11:45 PM
Every idiot can use emotion in their words... I think UBI wanted shabaz or w/e NOT to use emotion... because that fits Altair well.

And maybe there is a whole plot twist envolving why Altair sounds like that, we dont know!!!!

Dont judge what you dont know!!!!!

stix489
12-03-2007, 11:49 PM
He's a cold hearted killer...He is emotionless.

You have to be that way if you want to be an assassin...with all the blood and the bodies...and the feathers and Al-Mualim...

DreamerM
12-03-2007, 11:56 PM
Originally posted by stix489:
He's a cold hearted killer...He is emotionless.



His many angry snappy outbursts might beg to differ. Last time I checked anger was an emotion.

His emotions are there, he's just kind of shut himself down. He doesn't value life or fear death, he feels strong because he kills and justified in doing so. And the one emotion he does give free-reign to, Pride in being the best, leads to some very bad choices on his part.

"What happens when you repress something?"
"It goes away?"
"It comes back all crazy and pissed off!"

Altair might be a very emotional man, but he's had to shut it down to live the life he has and value what he's been taught to value. With his life-view shattered at the end of the game, it'll be interesting to see what he makes of himself as he does some rearranging in the wake of recent events.

stix489
12-04-2007, 12:00 AM
That's pretty much what I meant...He tries to control his emotions more than others!

Plus I have this bad feeling that Altair might not come back! But it would be cool if he did...and with that Apple of Eden at his disposal!

ACfanboy12
12-04-2007, 12:04 AM
I dont think hes coming back either

DreamerM
12-04-2007, 12:08 AM
Originally posted by ACfanboy12:
I dont think hes coming back either

La la la la, I can't hear you! LA LA LA LA LA LA.

stix489
12-04-2007, 01:56 AM
I don't want a ninja to replace our Alty... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

Alty could kick any ninja's a$$!! http://img419.imageshack.us/img419/1012/dwarf2mg.gif

Pr0metheus 1962
12-04-2007, 09:22 AM
Originally posted by ACfanboy12:
Every idiot can use emotion in their words... I think UBI wanted shabaz or w/e NOT to use emotion... because that fits Altair well.

Well, a good actor would portray that and make the character seem believable. That's not the case here. Altair, far from seeming like an emotionless killer, seems merely dull.

Pr0metheus 1962
12-04-2007, 09:24 AM
Originally posted by ACfanboy12:
I dont think hes coming back either

I hope he's not coming back. I'd prefer the game to go to another equally interesting setting.

MaNaSpade
12-04-2007, 04:47 PM
his voice fits him pretty well. i think he sounds like anakin skywalker from the movie when he goes "yes, master" and stuff

DreamerM
12-04-2007, 04:55 PM
Originally posted by Beeryus:

I hope he's not coming back. I'd prefer the game to go to another equally interesting setting.

Not again...

Guys, what sequels are supposed to do is improve on and expand on the potential of the original. The only time a sequel should re-invent the entire game world is when, as was the case in the RE series, they've run the old formula so much that there is nothing else to get out of it.

The Crusades are an incredibly rich cache of source material, material that games have completely ignored until now. The amount of complaining people do on this board is indicative that the full potential of AC has yet to be realized.

Lets perfect our wheel before we reinvent it.

Pr0metheus 1962
12-05-2007, 11:41 AM
Originally posted by DreamerM:
Guys, what sequels are supposed to do is improve on and expand on the potential of the original...

Yeah, but there's no rule that sequels have to take place in the same time period or with the same characters. CoD4 didn't use the same characters or the same era and it's a huge success. I think it would be a HUGE mistake for the AC developers to sit on their laurels and just make AC2 the same as AC1 - I mean I'd be asking myself why I should buy another Assassin game set in the Crusades when AC1 does it perfectly well.

The last thing I'd buy would be an AC2 with Altair rehashing the exact same story in the same era but set in three superficially different towns. The potential of AC is not in its characters or its setting - it's in the action and the unique storyline. I want the same sort of action with another unique storyline but in a very different environment. A rehash of AC1 just won't cut it.

Pr0metheus 1962
12-05-2007, 11:47 AM
Originally posted by MaNaSpade:
his voice fits him pretty well. i think he sounds like anakin skywalker from the movie when he goes "yes, master" and stuff

I agree that he sounds like Anakin Skywalker. I'm just not sure that Hayden Christiansen in Star Wars 3 is an example of good (or even average) acting.

DreamerM
12-05-2007, 11:50 AM
I'd be asking myself why I should buy another Assassin game set in the Crusades when AC1 does it perfectly well.


Because there is more stuff to do during the Crusades.

AC1 is great, but all you do is run around rooftops, wander cities, and occasionally stab people and run away from crusaders.

There's more to life during those days then that. It can be expanded on big time. The game's great, but it's a step below it's own artistry, thus there is room to grow.

They'd be idiots to abandon the living breathing world they put such care into researching and re-creating.

AirRon_2K7
12-05-2007, 12:01 PM
Originally posted by DreamerM:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> I'd be asking myself why I should buy another Assassin game set in the Crusades when AC1 does it perfectly well.


Because there is more stuff to do during the Crusades.

AC1 is great, but all you do is run around rooftops, wander cities, and occasionally stab people and run away from crusaders.

There's more to life during those days then that. It can be expanded on big time. The game's great, but it's a step below it's own artistry, thus there is room to grow.

They'd be idiots to abandon the living breathing world they put such care into researching and re-creating. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

No they wouldn't be idiots. Move on. AC1 is the crusades, if you want more of the crusades, play AC1 again. Meanwhile, the rest of us will enjoy the prospect that our 50 will go to a new game. Not a re used one. There isn't HALF as much potential in the crusades as you make out.

Pr0metheus 1962
12-05-2007, 12:05 PM
Originally posted by DreamerM:
Because there is more stuff to do during the Crusades.

Like what? If we're stuck with the same character in the same setting what 'more stuff' can the sequel feature that AC1 didn't already give us?


AC1 is great, but all you do is run around rooftops, wander cities, and occasionally stab people and run away from crusaders...

Well brace yourself for disappointment then, because if anything about AC is certain, it's that the above features are fairly certain to be prominent features of any sequel. AC is built on four main things:

1. Climbing on buildings.

2. Death by social stealth and stabbing.

3. Beautiful cities.

4. Using genetic memories to access lives long past.

Unless the franchise's producers lose their minds the sequel will feature all those things and the action will take place in a setting that's unique and different enough to draw in new players and to get AC1 players to buy AC2. In my view that means no crusades because the setting is just too close to AC1 and people will not be drawn in by a setting that's been done before.

Cerus
12-05-2007, 12:17 PM
Well, I have to admit I'd be very disappointed if Altair just... vanished. To me, the game is partly about him, about Desmond's ancestor and it all started with Altair...

As for his voice, I got suprised how emotional he got at some points (in the end), really made me go "woah".

DreamerM
12-05-2007, 12:32 PM
There isn't HALF as much potential in the crusades as you make out.

How much do you really know about the Crusades? They were kind of a huge event in earth's history, involving combatants on all consievable sides of the ethnic religious conflict and forever shaping how history would play out.

Saying that one game has turned these events into a "been there, done that" sort of deal is like saying that because you've played "The Outfit," there is no reason to ever play another World War II game ever again.

Any sequels placed in China or Japan would nessesarily include material covered by the numerous other games that have been set in those countries. There are other outlets for people who want to play as a Chinese warlord or (heaven forbid) another NINJA.

There is currently only one game in existance that lets you play as an original Assassin in the Holy Lands during the 3rd Crusade.

And as for saying "just go play AC1 again" I have to say AC1 is flawed. I will love it forever for the sheer artistry of it's realization, but it doesn't live up to the promise of it's original and extremely promising source material. Little things, like being able to skip cutscenes and select what part of the missions I want to replay, not to mention re-playing assasinations with all my gear, would have done loads for the replayability of this game. A few unlockables wouldn't have hurt either.

Please tell me that the people who were brilliant enough to say "let's set a game in the 3rd Crusades and play as an ORIGINAL ASSASSIN!" are brilliant enough to perfect their own formula, follow up on the promise of their own originality and unleash something truly amazing and unique on the world.

ACfanboy12
12-05-2007, 12:44 PM
Originally posted by DreamerM:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">There isn't HALF as much potential in the crusades as you make out.

How much do you really know about the Crusades? They were kind of a huge event in earth's history, involving combatants on all consievable sides of the ethnic religious conflict and forever shaping how history would play out.

Saying that one game has turned these events into a "been there, done that" sort of deal is like saying that because you've played "The Outfit," there is no reason to ever play another World War II game ever again.

Any sequels placed in China or Japan would nessesarily include material covered by the numerous other games that have been set in those countries. There are other outlets for people who want to play as a Chinese warlord or (heaven forbid) another NINJA.

There is currently only one game in existance that lets you play as an original Assassin in the Holy Lands during the 3rd Crusade.

And as for saying "just go play AC1 again" I have to say AC1 is flawed. I will love it forever for the sheer artistry of it's realization, but it doesn't live up to the promise of it's original and extremely promising source material. Little things, like being able to skip cutscenes and select what part of the missions I want to replay, not to mention re-playing assasinations with all my gear, would have done loads for the replayability of this game. A few unlockables wouldn't have hurt either.

Please tell me that the people who were brilliant enough to say "let's set a game in the 3rd Crusades and play as an ORIGINAL ASSASSIN!" are brilliant enough to perfect their own formula, follow up on the promise of their own originality and unleash something truly amazing and unique on the world. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


I AGREE COMPLETELY!!!

Firstly... some features they can include (besides making the gameplay, graphics, and animations better)

1) Let me go inside buildings and talk
2) Give me more people on screen, and people that actually DO things... and talk, and I can talk to them, and hear them, and do stuff with them.
3) Horse on Horse combat, huge battles on horses, caravans and camels that I can assist etc.
4) Random assassins through out the cities, that I can interact with, and ask for help, with help in return.
5) Make the cities more realistic, I know Jerusalem is a much bigger city then they portray it to be ... the outside had gardens, lakes, and palm trees.
6) Let me swim, and go to see
7) Bring more people into the part... the 3ed crusade had more religions then just those main 3 that they had.
8) Make the map bigger, and more realistic, so it would take longer to travel (like in real life).


Just SOME ideas... I got way more...

Come one guys... we all have been waiting for these games... 3ed crusade is a GREAT time period...

DreamerM
12-05-2007, 01:00 PM
2) Give me more people on screen, and people that actually DO things... and talk, and I can talk to them, and hear them, and do stuff with them.
What could an Assassin possibly do with common people? Get mini-missions? Altair isn't link: he won't drop everything to help someone just because that person asked nicely.

That said, definately there should be more individual interactivity with citizens, definately.


3) Horse on Horse combat, huge battles on horses, caravans and camels that I can assist etc.
He's not Link, and he's not a warrior. Altair and his people could do the CHAAAARGE thing when they had to, but he's not Conan. His ideal fight is one that's not a fight at all, but a knife in the back and then an evaporation into the shadows. I think Horse on Horse combat would be a bit out of place.

That said, if we ever get to play as a Guard or a Knight, we should DEFINATELY be able to fight on horseback, complete with the massive warhorses that can walk sideways and will kick to defend you if you fall.


4) Random assassins through out the cities, that I can interact with, and ask for help, with help in return.

Assassins didn't work together, and Altair is very unpopular with his own people (because he's a jerk.) Teamwork should never be a part of AC. Solo killing is where it's at.


5) Make the cities more realistic, I know Jerusalem is a much bigger city then they portray it to be ... the outside had gardens, lakes, and palm trees.[/QUOTE]

Agreed: bigger cities, more places to go, and more rewards for doing so are a must for any sequel.


6) Let me swim, and go to see

The artbook includes an interview with the creative director where he states that they did have swimming, but cut it because they couldn't work it together with the damage system. You became invincible while swimming. I don't really know what it would add to the game play, and would it be realistic for someone to swim while carrying all that metal?


8) Make the map bigger, and more realistic, so it would take longer to travel (like in real life).

Because we really don't spend enough time traveling in this game.



Just SOME ideas... I got way more...
Translation: Ubi, hurry and hire me!

Wow, AC Fanboy Agrees with me! Will wonders never stop??

AirRon_2K7
12-05-2007, 01:01 PM
2) Give me more people on screen, and people that actually DO things... and talk, and I can talk to them, and hear them, and do stuff with them.

That's impossible, they were proud enough giving us semi-intelligent amounts of people, yet you want MORE and SMARTER?

But really, what you guys are talking about (perfecting the formula?) is AC 1.5 ... and don't kid yourselves otherwise. A true sequel would follow the STORY of the game, lest it collapse on itself and look just about as interesting as watching DreamerM's umpteenth post on his love for AC, but how AC is flawed and AC 2 should be the same as AC but better.

ACfanboy12
12-05-2007, 01:08 PM
DreamerM you want to be a ******?

How about umm go suck some **** then...



**** all of you no life *****es on this thread lmao.

Pr0metheus 1962
12-05-2007, 01:13 PM
Originally posted by AirRon_2K7:
[QUOTE]There isn't HALF as much potential in the crusades as you make out.

AirRon is 100% correct. There's just not that much material to draw from. Sure, the Crusades were as interesting as any period of conflict, but the developers have painted themselves into a corner by setting the game in 1191 (at the end of the Third Crusade) and tying Altair to the Hashshashin. I just don't think that Altair has much more to contribute - certainly not a sequel's worth, and after the Third Crusade Altair is going to be living during a period of peace unless he goes to Constantinople. The 4th Crusade was basically an exercise in futility and a sort of sick joke that ended in the sack of Constantinople. Now maybe a game could be made of Altair's participation in intrigues in Constantinople, but I just think it would be too small in scope and close in theme to AC1. Basically it would be AC1 all over again in a single slightly different and bigger city - yawn!

As for how much I know about the Crusades, I've read a lot about them, both from the European/Christian perspective and from that of the Arabs/Muslims. I have four books on the Crusades on my bedside cabinet alone: God's War by Christopher Tyermsn; Madden's New Concise History of the Crusades; The Oxford Illustrated History of the Crusades edited by Jonathan Riley-Smith; The Crusades through Arab Eyes by Amin Maalouf. I also have many books on Medieval life and customs and a couple on the historical Knights Templar.

ACfanboy12
12-05-2007, 01:14 PM
DreamerM... hey buddy grow a ****? You want me to dissagree with your crappy ****? About improving on the third crusade... your idea is ****, and you should go kill yourself with the fake dagger you made because you have no life...

Btw... its my name... Should I say that you are a ****** because your name is dreamer?

Oh and ummm suck **** maybe?



Also... on your **** **** response to my post... Ok.. he doesnt swim... let me go to see at least... or let me ****ing swim out of the water then.

You dont spend enough time travelling in this game... make it more fun to travel then UBi... or make a caraven system thing, you join this caraven to go to the city, with people and all.

How the **** did you know that assassins didnt work together? Were you an assassin? I doubt it, considering you cant even climb over a fence.

Thats B.S how you relate **** to link... pay some coin for a guard to help you with with an assassination ,,, OMG OMG HES LINK NOW!!!! OMG HES LINK!

Horse on horse combat out of place... so you dont think its weird how you are the only ****** in the Holy land who can ride a horse... ****ing dumb ****.

And you know what.. you can just stick your responce back in your *** where you got it from.

My name means nothing...

ACfanboy12
12-05-2007, 01:16 PM
Fine Dreamer... you want me not to agree with your crappy **** idea? fine... you suck balls happy...

My Name doesn't mean ****

DreamerM
12-05-2007, 01:26 PM
guys are talking about (perfecting the formula?) is AC 1.5 ... and don't kid yourselves otherwise. A true sequel would follow the STORY of the game, lest it collapse on itself and look just about as interesting as watching DreamerM's umpteenth post on his love for AC, but how AC is flawed and AC 2 should be the same as AC but better.

The story is the story. It's to support the game, not the other way around, and the natural next step depends entirely on whatever plot is made up around what the next kind of game they want to make is.

By the way, my posts might be more interesting if you read them instead of watching them. It's not like they move.

And I never said it should be JUST like the original. It should be bigger, shinier, more beautiful, and much better. The fact that I want to keep the wonderful Crusade setting and go deeper into that neglected corner of historical wealth does not imply that I want the same game over again. You're oversimplifying my views.

Pr0metheus 1962
12-05-2007, 01:28 PM
DreamerM and ACfanboy12, you're both talking about game features when what we need to be talking about is the sequel's strategy. You can't build an entire sequel on minor changes in features.

Plus, the thing I think you guys don't understand is that at the end of AC1 the Third Crusade is basically over - there's a bit more fighting over Jaffa and a couple of Altair's enemies who were killed in AC1 would have to be explained away (because they actually died later). There would be nothing for Altair to do there. A few years later the Fourth Crusade gets as far as Constantinople and the Holy Land isn't even a Crusade destination until 36 years later. Now I'm all for following characters if following them makes sense, but Altair would be 63 years old at the time the Crusaders get back to Jerusalem. How exciting could it be to follow a geriatric ex-Assassin as he limps his way about Jerusalem in 1229?

ACfanboy12
12-05-2007, 01:31 PM
Well where else can the sequel take place then... I would not like it if it was in china... I don't even think that would make sense.

Yay... somehow I went from a Assassin to a Samurai.

DreamerM
12-05-2007, 01:35 PM
AirRon is 100% correct. There's just not that much material to draw from. Sure, the Crusades were as interesting as any period of conflict, but the developers have painted themselves into a corner by setting the game in 1192 (at the end of the Third Crusade) and tying Altair to the Hashshashin. I just don't think that Altair has much more to contribute - certainly not a sequel's worth, and after the Third Crusade Altair is going to be living during a period of peace unless he goes to Constantinople. The 4th Crusade was basically an exercise in futility and a sort of sick joke that ended in the sack of Constantinople. Now maybe a game could be made of Altair's participation in intrigues in Constantinople, but I just think it would be too small in scope and close in theme to AC1. Basically it would be AC1 all over again in a single slightly different and bigger city - yawn!

As for how much I know about the Crusades, I've read a lot about them, both from the European/Christian perspective and from that of the Arabs/Muslims. I have four books on the Crusades on my bedside cabinet alone: God's War by Christopher Tyermsn; Madden's New Concise History of the Crusades; The Oxford Illustrated History of the Crusades edited by Jonathan Riley-Smith; The Crusades through Arab Eyes by Amin Maalouf. I also have many books on Medieval life and customs and a couple on the historical Knights Templar.

You do realize you are blaming history for your own lack of imagination, right? Assuming that because you can't think of any other role for Altair to play, then Ubisoft's people won't be able to either.

There's a reason why they are paid to think about these things for a living and you are not.

I'm impressed at your historical reading. However I don't see what it proves: beyond that you seem to feel it gives your assumptions a factual leg to stand on, which is an iffy assumption.

DreamerM
12-05-2007, 01:37 PM
Originally posted by ACfanboy12:
Fine Dreamer... you want me not to agree with your crappy **** idea? fine... you suck balls happy...

How elegantly put.



My Name doesn't mean ****

Obviously.

Pr0metheus 1962
12-05-2007, 01:39 PM
Originally posted by ACfanboy12:
Well where else can the sequel take place then... I would not like it if it was in china... I don't even think that would make sense..

Hmm. Why do I get the distinct idea that you're the kind of guy who would have ridiculed the idea of a game set in the Crusades?

The developers had enough talent to make AC1 exciting and interesting. I think they can probably do the same for AC2 no matter if it takes place in Medieval Japan, China, Tibet, Port Royal in 17th Century Jamaica or Victorian London. Any place would make sense because Desmond Miles probably has ancestors from all over the world. All it takes is a bit of imagination.

ACfanboy12
12-05-2007, 01:39 PM
The devs are going for historical accuracy, so you can put your idea away there buddy


goes for both of you... dreamer and the other dude..

DreamerM
12-05-2007, 01:42 PM
Originally posted by Beeryus:
DreamerM and ACfanboy12, you're both talking about game features when what we need to be talking about is the sequel's strategy. You can't build an entire sequel on minor changes in features.

On the contrary: the Resident Evil series built several sequels and a few spin-offs on NO changes in features and made billions of dollars doing it.

Not saying it's the right thing to do or even that it's wise, but it CAN and HAS been done.


Plus, the thing I think you guys don't understand is that at the end of AC1 the Third Crusade is basically over - there's a bit more fighting over Jaffa and a couple of Altair's enemies who were killed in AC1 would have to be explained away (because they actually died later). There would be nothing for Altair to do there. A few years later the Fourth Crusade gets as far as Constantinople and the Holy Land isn't even a Crusade destination until 36 years later. Now I'm all for following characters if following them makes sense, but Altair would be 63 years old at the time the Crusaders get back to Jerusalem. How exciting could it be to follow a geriatric ex-Assassin as he limps his way about Jerusalem in 1229?

Never let the truth get in the way of a good story, as my grandmother always said.

The plot of AC includes alien relics and fake science. "Fake Science" means "anything is possible." Which is why Sci-fi is great.

DreamerM
12-05-2007, 01:44 PM
Originally posted by ACfanboy12:
The devs are going for historical accuracy, so you can put your idea away there buddy

Historical accuracy in terms of the people and the places, which help the world come to life. But I'm pretty sure there's no historical evidence that supports the idea that Al Mualim wielded a brain-washing sci-fi fruit-pod.

As far as the story within the world, anything is possible.

ACfanboy12
12-05-2007, 01:48 PM
Ok there buddy, you win... congratz the sequel will be about monkey ninjas trying to assassinate bannas, while freerunning up buildings, and investigating plants. this all happens durring the 3ed crusade.

That is sci fi, and im sure it will sell... happy?

AirRon_2K7
12-05-2007, 01:52 PM
Originally posted by ACfanboy12:
Ok there buddy, you win... congratz the sequel will be about monkey ninjas trying to assassinate bannas, while freerunning up buildings, and investigating plants. this all happens durring the 3ed crusade.

That is sci fi, and im sure it will sell... happy?

Just... stop posting. You're not bringing anything new to this discussion, just go watch some more Jet Li and stop trying to be humourous.

Assassin's Creed is a Sci-Fi game, ie. It has extremely blatant sci fi elements to it. And to be honest, whether you like it or not (dreamerM) it is extrememly unlikely that either Altair or the crusades will feature in AC2. . . you'd understand why if you were paying attention to the last half hour of Assassin's' story.

"Anything is possible"

Is exactly what I've been trying to get at, why stop at the 3rd Crusades when there is literally all of time and history that the Developers can explore?

Pr0metheus 1962
12-05-2007, 01:53 PM
Originally posted by ACfanboy12:
Ok there buddy, you win... congratz the sequel will be about monkey ninjas trying to assassinate bannas, while freerunning up buildings, and investigating plants.

You're a nutcase.

Tela
12-05-2007, 01:57 PM
....Now when(and how) did this turn into another "AC2" thread?

ACfanboy12
12-05-2007, 02:02 PM
Look at airRon stepping up... maybe I will watch some jet li, and then come to your house and fight you.

w/e I quite you guys are all gay

AirRon_2K7
12-05-2007, 02:14 PM
Originally posted by ACfanboy12:
Look at airRon stepping up... maybe I will watch some jet li, and then come to your house and fight you.

w/e I quite you guys are all gay

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif Yes bruv, I'm steppin' up blud.

DreamerM
12-05-2007, 08:14 PM
why stop at the 3rd Crusades when there is literally all of time and history that the Developers can explore?

Because this is not a Doctor Who game. It's not about time travel.

It's about the unique, beautiful world they created. It's about boldly going where no game has gone before. It's about an Assassin and his Creed.

It won't be much of an Assassin's Creed without that. The modern-day assassins just don't quite cut it...

AirRon_2K7
12-05-2007, 11:48 PM
Because this is not a Doctor Who game. It's about the unique, beautiful world they created. It's about boldly going where no game has gone before. It's about an Assassin and his Creed.

No. It's about conspiracy, and the Modern Assassin's role in stopping the Modern Templar's plot.

Morbinator
12-07-2007, 02:01 PM
Exactly, the fact that AC1 revolves around the struggles between the Assassins and the Templars in the 12thC and in the (slightly post)modern day suggests that AC2 could easily be struggles between the 2 factions at any point in the intervening 800 or so years.

So there is plenty of scope if the developers have the imagination.

ACfanboy12
12-07-2007, 02:06 PM
Next game will be in Desmonds time, for sure.

Morbinator
12-07-2007, 02:24 PM
Though the assassins may be trying to find the holy grail, which I would have thought would involve using an Animus to re-live memories of previous assassins to dermine its location.

DreamerM
12-07-2007, 10:56 PM
Originally posted by ACfanboy12:
Next game will be in Desmonds time, for sure.

Boo! Hiss! BOOO!!!

Don't rise to the bait don't rise to the bait don't rise to the bait don't rise to the bait don't rise to the bait don't rise to the bait...

ThereareenoughvideogamesinwhichIfightinadystopicfu tureifIwantedthatsettingI'dplayhalf-lifepleasefuturegameshavesobeendonepleasepleaseple asesayitain'tso....

.............

Damnit! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_mad.gif

ACfanboy12
12-07-2007, 10:59 PM
Yes, by saying those things to me, you have stopped the development of AC2 in Desmonds time. Good Job.

DreamerM
12-07-2007, 11:10 PM
Originally posted by ACfanboy12:
Yes, by saying those things to me, you have stopped the development of AC2 in Desmonds time. Good Job.

By having such a witty comeback, you have made my statement untrue. Congratulations.

I highly doubt they are developing anything right now. Miss Raymond's interview made it pretty clear that right now all they're developing is vacation plans: they're going to wait and see what the fan reaction is before they start planning sequels.

ACfanboy12
12-08-2007, 12:06 AM
Yes, the fan reaction... MY REACTION ... I hate the game,,,... quite life UBI...

Morbinator
12-10-2007, 02:48 PM
Do you really have to be so contradictory when giving your opinion?! Will make people take you far less seriously.

Moron

AirRon_2K7
12-10-2007, 02:57 PM
Originally posted by DreamerM:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ACfanboy12:
Next game will be in Desmonds time, for sure.

Boo! Hiss! BOOO!!!

Don't rise to the bait don't rise to the bait don't rise to the bait don't rise to the bait don't rise to the bait don't rise to the bait...

ThereareenoughvideogamesinwhichIfightinadystopicfu tureifIwantedthatsettingI'dplayhalf-lifepleasefuturegameshavesobeendonepleasepleaseple asesayitain'tso....

.............

Damnit! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_mad.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Even if you put aside the weird (borderline childish) way that ACfanboy talks, there is no denying that even if you don't like it, it IS probably going to happen.

No amount of "dystopic game" hating from yourself will change whether AC will have a sequel, or (judging by your posts) a remake with AC 2 slapped on. Jade made it clear her plans were whether or not to make a sequel, not whether or not to make the sequel in Dezzy's time.

Skaevola
12-10-2007, 08:12 PM
Don't you hate it when you get to know someone, and like them, then you realize that that person is stupid? That happened with my big brother recently. I'm getting a little of that here.

I can't believe you people are saying that the next game can't be set in the Crusades because "It's all used up". Do you know what World War II was? Six years of sitting in a bunker eating frozen green eggs and watching your friends die. Six... years. Let's count some World War II games that, admit it, you know you've played.

Call of Duty
Call of Duty 2
Call of Duty 3
Battlefield 1942
A Huge Medal of Honor series
Day of Defeat
Freakin' COUNTLESS RTS's

And you know what one of the first World War II games ever was? Castle Wolfenstein. They had to add zombies to make it interesting, because the story was used up before it started. These games have HUGE fanbases, but they're all practically the same game. Now think about every cowboy movie ever made. There are a ton, right? But the "Age of Cowboys" was a single decade where the law hadn't made it all the way to California in full force. That's ten years, and we've had Cowboy movies made regularly for the last hundred. THAT is a used up setting, by far.

Now, how many games have been set in the Crusades? One. Some RTS's have glanced over it, such as Age of Empires II. But Assassin's Creed is THE ONLY game to be set entirely in the Third Crusade (Unless you count Knights of the Temple, but that game wasn't fun for me, or historically accurate).

You see? There hasn't been a new setting for anything in ten years. You got modern, future, swords-and-sorcery fantasy, and... you guessed it... feudal Japan. Those four are the basis of all video games. When we finally get a new setting, you immediately return to one of the dried out, overused, cliche settings, because our brand-new, untouched setting was "all used up" in one game. You guys play Tenchu Z and Medal of Honor... I'll be enjoying the heck out of killing Templars and climbing buildings.

Also, @ACfanboy: You're making us AC fanboys look bad. If you can't say something intelligent, please, say nothing at all.

Pr0metheus 1962
12-10-2007, 08:43 PM
Originally posted by Wingf00t:
I can't believe you people are saying that the next game can't be set in the Crusades because "It's all used up". Do you know what World War II was? Six years of sitting in a bunker eating frozen green eggs and watching your friends die. Six... years. Let's count some World War II games that, admit it, you know you've played.

Call of Duty
Call of Duty 2
Call of Duty 3
Battlefield 1942
A Huge Medal of Honor series
Day of Defeat
Freakin' COUNTLESS RTS's

Yeah. and guess what, after the first game with really great graphics came along they're all the same. I don't think WW2 games are a good example when you're trying to prove that more than one good game ISN'T enough. It's more than enough!

Wanting variety is not a sign of stupidity. In my view, wanting to pay another $60 for the exact same experience again is kinda stupid. I mean who wouldn't want to see what other great environments the dev team can come up with? Why use the same graphics twice? Heck, if you want AC2 to be AC1, why not just play AC1?

Skaevola
12-10-2007, 09:47 PM
Thank you. That was EXACTLY my point.
They're all the same game, but they still have huge fanbases. It's not variety people are looking for. So why are they so worried about AC's variety? There's still so, so much left to be had in the Crusades, why would you drag away from that before you've gotten the best parts out of it? For instance, Masyaf was attacked directly by Saladin in the 1180's. That wasn't even touched upon! If we were dragged away from the Crusades now, we wouldn't get to see all it has to offer! It's like ordering a gigantic, delicious steak from the best steakhouse in town, then leaving after a few bites!

DreamerM
12-10-2007, 10:28 PM
Originally posted by Beeryus:
Yeah. and guess what, after the first game with really great graphics came along they're all the same. I don't think WW2 games are a good example when you're trying to prove that more than one good game ISN'T enough.


That's not what Wingfoot was trying to prove. Why do people keep developing and selling WWII games? Because people keep buying them.

Saying that one game is enough is a completely erronius conclusion: gamers don't seem to get tired of some settings. I for one think AC's completly unique setting is what makes it what it is. A sequel set in such tired out locals as futuristic cities and feudal japanese manors, will be destined for the big Pan-o-doom and lamenting over the death of originality.

I mean, here comes a game that does something NEW. And so what happens? They ditch the new part at the earliest possible oppertunity and give us yet another Ninja game. Even if it's not a bad game it's destinined to be a huge disappointment to those of us who applaud the first one for going out on a limb and doing something no one had done before.

Skaevola
12-10-2007, 10:56 PM
Yup.
See? He gets it.
*thumbs up* I might as well pretend I'm cool.

DreamerM
12-10-2007, 11:01 PM
Originally posted by Wingf00t:
Yup.
See? He gets it.
*thumbs up* I might as well pretend I'm cool.

You ARE cool. Thank you so much, Wingf00t for comming along. I was beginning to think I was the only sane person here.

I'm willing to fight forever to protect originality, but I am but one person. Thanks for joining me on the front-lines.

Skaevola
12-12-2007, 11:35 PM
*snaps a salute*

AldirTheKnight
12-13-2007, 01:19 AM
peter whatshisname sucks

DreamerM
12-13-2007, 01:53 AM
Originally posted by Wingf00t:
*snaps a salute*

*returns it* Carry on, soldier!

Cerus
12-14-2007, 06:38 AM
I'm definitly agreeing with you, Wingf00t. It'd be a shame to see AC change so much that it'd be set in the future or something. Let's keep the crusades I say.

Pr0metheus 1962
12-14-2007, 09:19 AM
The game is already set in the future - it's 2012 for goodness sake!

I seriously doubt that the next game will have the animus sending Desmond back to Altair during the Crusades. There are so many more places the animus could take Desmond. Who knows what other ancestors he has? Who knows what cities they might live in? There's a whole world and all of history to explore. Why limit the game to the Crusades when there are beautiful historic cities and interesting eras to be discovered throughout the world and throughout history.

With all that potential, I just don't see them merely rehashing AC1.

AirRon_2K7
12-14-2007, 09:24 AM
Call of Duty
Call of Duty 2
Call of Duty 3
Battlefield 1942
A Huge Medal of Honor series
Day of Defeat
Freakin' COUNTLESS RTS's

None of those games did anything new, by Call of Duty 3, I'd decided to buy it, but call it Call of Duty 1.2, cos it was. Unless you want to kill the whole debate, I suggest using a better example http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/shady.gif

DreamerM
12-14-2007, 12:30 PM
None of those games did anything new, by Call of Duty 3, I'd decided to buy it, but call it Call of Duty 1.2, cos it was. Unless you want to kill the whole debate, I suggest using a better example http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/shady.gif

Doesn't matter weither or not they did anything new. You CAN'T do anything new in a WWII shooter, it's against the rules or something. Yet, each one has gotten more and more detailed and good, so people still bought them.

The point Wingf00t is trying to make is that saying no one's gonna want to play a game in the same setting as a grand total of ONE other game, another game in the same SERIES no less, is completely idiotic.

DreamerM
12-14-2007, 12:39 PM
Originally posted by Beeryus:
There are so many more places the animus could take Desmond. Who knows what other ancestors he has?

You willing to wait four years for the next game? That's how long it took to make this one. And again, WHY would this franchise, which is making waves for doing something new, want to re-trod ground other games have already covered?

If I'm playing "Assassins Creed" I want to be playing AS AN ASSASSIN and following a CREED. And no, playing as Desmond (a former/never assassin who follows no creed) who is reliving the life of some ninja or french soldier or whoever is NOT going to count.

I don't want to see Desmond's role get more action-oriented, I actually like that for once a video game is telling us a tale that we're not an active part of. I like the second-hand info we get from everywhere and how we have to put together the story from clues like discarded towels, hijacked e-mails, and overheard conversations. Makes me work for it, which keeps me intrigued: I'm too used to games that spell everything out for you in the very first cutscene.

Desmond does not fullfill the CREED part of Assassin's Creed. And without that creed, Assassins Creed, we got something else.

AirRon_2K7
12-14-2007, 02:40 PM
*MOD MODE ACTIVATED*


If I'm playing "Assassins Creed" I want to be playing AS AN ASSASSIN and following a CREED. And no, playing as Desmond (a former/never assassin who follows no creed) who is reliving the life of some ninja or french soldier or whoever is NOT going to count.


Theres a game just like that, it's called "Assassin's Creed". AC 2 should do something different, because the stuff that you've listed as a possible for 3rd Crusade AC2... is just crappy. I wouldn't pay 50 ($100) for Assassin's Creed: Shivering Isles, and I doubt many other people would. Look at your suggestions, they follow a Halo 2 format. "Wow, Altair, good thing you remembered that you can pick up other peoples' weaponry, too bad you forgot that earlier, eh?"

sephris67
12-14-2007, 05:39 PM
Originally posted by Tela:
Poisen wouldn't have been obvious enough. The point of the assassination was that people SAW and KNEW what had happened. So Altair has to get up close and personal, stab em in the neck, and the crowd sees, and screams.

Assassins don't like to use weapons that could allow their target to get away. Thus leading to stabbing them in the face with a mechanical dagger.

Tela
12-14-2007, 06:13 PM
Originally posted by sephris67:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Tela:
Poisen wouldn't have been obvious enough. The point of the assassination was that people SAW and KNEW what had happened. So Altair has to get up close and personal, stab em in the neck, and the crowd sees, and screams.

Assassins don't like to use weapons that could allow their target to get away. Thus leading to stabbing them in the face with a mechanical dagger. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's what I had just said. Except I had "in the neck" which is what you do in the game.

Mashed-Potatoes
12-16-2007, 10:47 AM
I think it's awful. They should have given him a slight arabic accent to top him off. Or at least British, an American accent in a historical setting like that doesn't fit.

xELITEGUNNERx
12-16-2007, 12:01 PM
Originally posted by DreamerM:
This is a topic about Altair's voice, provided (according to GameFAQs) by http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1717255/ Philip Shahbaz.

Call me crazy and I know I'm in the minority here, but I actually think his voice fit him. It has a musical, almost elegant quality that still manages to be a rough around the edges and unpredictably volitle. It's a mass of contradictions, which makes it interesting.

Some have called his tone of voice flat and wooden, but as I've played through the game that isn't the vibe I got. Understated and reserved, but not flat. You just have to pay a little more attention to get the emotions he's repressing, rather then flaunting.

Again, call me nuts but that character wouldn't be the same Altair we know and love with any other voice.

its american

aged_assass1993
10-08-2008, 08:51 PM
Wow, british? that would be ******ed! and plus. the reason his voice wal so american is because he is european and arabic, plus the Animus made it that way. his voice was great
Originally posted by Mashed-Potatoes:
I think it's awful. They should have given him a slight arabic accent to top him off. Or at least British, an American accent in a historical setting like that doesn't fit.

EchoSixSpy
10-08-2008, 10:07 PM
Boy... You're on a role.


Is there anyone else you'd like to insult?

Pr0metheus 1962
10-09-2008, 07:00 AM
Aged-assass1993 wrote:
"Wow, british? that would be ******ed!"

Yeah, sure, British would be "******ed", but an American accent coming out of a twelfth century Middle-Eastern guy makes all the sense in the world. What are you, eight?

EchoSixSpy
10-09-2008, 11:10 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

I was gonna' offer that possiblity myself, but I didn't want to insult any other 8 year olds here, that have more manners than that. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Vendetta11
10-09-2008, 03:10 PM
Originally posted by Beeryus:
Aged-assass1993 wrote:
"Wow, british? that would be ******ed!"

Yeah, sure, British would be "******ed", but an American accent coming out of a twelfth century Middle-Eastern guy makes all the sense in the world. What are you, eight?

Umm. You suck at life?

Pr0metheus 1962
10-09-2008, 03:20 PM
Wow! I'm guessing the pre-teens have all banded together to try their hand at verbal abuse.

BTOG46
10-09-2008, 03:27 PM
Well then, in that case, us old bearded guys will just have to slap them down.

Now if I could just remember where I put my hammer...... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

Tela
10-09-2008, 03:28 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

Well THIS thread has pretty much been driven straight to off-topic hell. -_-

Anyone wanna just drop all offtopic discussion and start completely over? -_-

BTOG46
10-09-2008, 03:30 PM
oh no! an angry Tela! even mods are scared of an angry Tela http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

*runs into the shadows* http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/shady.gif

Vendetta11
10-09-2008, 03:50 PM
Originally posted by Beeryus:
Wow! I'm guessing the pre-teens have all banded together to try their hand at verbal abuse.

I am pretty sure I can find you a doctor to help with your anger problems.

Tela
10-09-2008, 03:57 PM
Originally posted by Vendetta11:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Beeryus:
Wow! I'm guessing the pre-teens have all banded together to try their hand at verbal abuse.

I am pretty sure I can find you a doctor to help with your anger problems. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif
requoteage:


http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif
Well THIS thread has pretty much been driven straight to off-topic hell. -_-

Anyone wanna just drop all offtopic discussion and start completely over? -_-

-_-'

blakus939
10-10-2008, 10:38 PM
It's perfect for him, its arrogant and almost apathetic in nature, suits him to the ground. the last thing we needed would be some loud yelling rambo voice

Kaxen6
10-10-2008, 10:53 PM
Originally posted by blakus939:
It's perfect for him, its arrogant and almost apathetic in nature, suits him to the ground. the last thing we needed would be some loud yelling rambo voice

Imagining Altair sounding like Rambo made me giggle... xD

Glenak
12-24-2008, 02:50 AM
Simple fact: the voice acting was terrible. Altair sounded out of place, like an American living in the 12th century and working as an assassin. I swear, at one point I kept expecting the plot to tell me that Altair really was an American. But America did not exist at the time, did it?

I'm confused. Maybe Ubi didn't have enough money to spend on a proper voice actor, because I sincerely doubt the actor's terrible performance has anything to do with his lineage. The actors who voiced the Prince in Sands of Time, Warrior Within, The Two Thrones, Prince of Persia (Next Gen), and Uncharted are all Americans and each did a fantastic job at bringing the characters to life.

With Altair it was like someone in Ubi stole the game and dubbed his voice over the real actor.

Terrible. Anyone who actually thinks this dude did a good job ... well, God help you.

caswallawn_2k7
12-24-2008, 02:58 AM
did you fail to hear the bit were they explained that the animus translates. so by the fact it is tapping into desmond it makes sens that it would use his voice for altir while translating to make it easier for the patient to accept what they are experiancing.

Grandmaster_Z
12-24-2008, 07:00 AM
the whole animus thing was just an excuse for ubisoft to make the lead character more "american" and not an ARAB, which the hashashins really were. i mean who would really want to play a game where the lead character is an arab, right? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

BTOG46
12-24-2008, 07:48 AM
Originally posted by Grandmaster_Z:
the whole animus thing was just an excuse for ubisoft to make the lead character more "american" and not an ARAB, which the hashashins really were. i mean who would really want to play a game where the lead character is an arab, right? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

A rather feeble attempt at controversy, I think I'll just leave you in the hands of our Arab forum members to decide your fate for such pathetic trolling skills. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

xxxthatcherxxx
12-24-2008, 08:43 AM
Originally posted by BTOG46:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Grandmaster_Z:
the whole animus thing was just an excuse for ubisoft to make the lead character more "american" and not an ARAB, which the hashashins really were. i mean who would really want to play a game where the lead character is an arab, right? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

A rather feeble attempt at controversy, I think I'll just leave you in the hands of our Arab forum members to decide your fate for such pathetic trolling skills. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
i think u meant to say "what american would want to play a game where the lead character is not american"

Pr0metheus 1962
12-24-2008, 09:14 AM
Originally posted by Glenak:
Simple fact: the voice acting was terrible. Altair sounded out of place, like an American living in the 12th century and working as an assassin.

...Terrible. Anyone who actually thinks this dude did a good job ... well, God help you.

I agree. This was the one thing that, in my view, really detracted from what is in many respects a perfect game. And I've heard all the arguments about the Animus being Desmond's voice, but if that's so, why give all the other characters Middle-eastern, French and German accents? I mean Desmond is used to speaking with Americans, right? So why not make every character speak with an American accent?

More importantly, if the Animus is using Desmond's voice why use a completely different voice actor for Altair? Why not simply use Desmond's voice? Clearly Ubisoft intended Altair to sound different from Desmond - otherwise they wouldn't have hired a different actor to play Altair. So why make him sound American when Altair is clearly Middle-eastern?

If you look at it carefully, the choices Ubisoft made in terms of Altair's voice make no sense.

Pr0metheus 1962
12-24-2008, 09:38 AM
Originally posted by Grandmaster_Z:
the whole animus thing was just an excuse for ubisoft to make the lead character more "american" and not an ARAB, which the hashashins really were. i mean who would really want to play a game where the lead character is an arab, right? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Yeah. It's kinda sad that that racism (or culturalism - whichever way you want to see it) is probably the true reasoning behind the American accent choice that the developers made.

Grandmaster_Z
12-24-2008, 11:35 AM
Originally posted by Beeryus:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Grandmaster_Z:
the whole animus thing was just an excuse for ubisoft to make the lead character more "american" and not an ARAB, which the hashashins really were. i mean who would really want to play a game where the lead character is an arab, right? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Yeah. It's kinda sad that that racism (or culturalism - whichever way you want to see it) is probably the true reasoning behind the American accent choice that the developers made. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Also, in the instruction booklet, it says his dad was muslim and mother was christian. Obviously, you could not have a full muslim lead character even though the Ismaili sect are muslim.
I'm sure it was to make the game more american friendly. I mean, in these times, I'm sure there are lots of parents that would object to a real Arab lead character in a game that they are buying for there kids..

Pr0metheus 1962
12-24-2008, 01:59 PM
Originally posted by Grandmaster_Z:
I'm sure there are lots of parents that would object to a real Arab lead character in a game that they are buying for there kids..

Well it's a mature rated game. Technically it's aimed at adults, so I don't really buy the argument that people would object to an arab lead in a game they're buying for themselves or another adult. Anyway, even if it was a case of a parent buying for a kid, the attitude that kids shouldn't be exposed to arab lead characters seems outright racist to me.

Grandmaster_Z
12-25-2008, 06:35 PM
don't get me wrong, this is the best game ever and i love ubisoft, but i'm just pointing out the compromises they had to make for this game to appeal to everyone

Rorylavelle
12-25-2008, 08:54 PM
Beeryus you're totally right, the voice is not only awfully acted, but also the fact that it was American really bugged me too. And if you're gonna change Altair's voice to American, you must also change the other voices.

Unless you want to look like a bunch of idiots.