PDA

View Full Version : Kristen Bell (SPOILERS)



CanterburyTales
03-22-2012, 09:58 PM
I've heard before in several places on the forums (though I haven't seen anything from an official source) that the reason Lucy was killed was because Kristen Bell left the series. Is this true? If so, where can I read about it for confirmation?

rileypoole1234
03-22-2012, 10:01 PM
No. Lucy's death was for the plot. All will be explained in AC3.

SixKeys
03-22-2012, 10:03 PM
AFAIK no official reason has been given. The most likely theory is that AC was originally planned to be a trilogy and Kristen signed up for three games. Then they decided to stretch out the story and Brotherhood became the third game in a row. Once she had fulfilled her contract, she either had other projects waiting or Ubisoft decided they were too cheap to pay her for two more games.

Calvarok
03-22-2012, 10:14 PM
The modern story was planned out for a long time. I think Ubisoft always intended to kill her off.

pacmanate
03-22-2012, 10:17 PM
Maybe thats why rebeccas voice was lucys in the lost archive trailer? Maybe?

LightRey
03-22-2012, 10:22 PM
AFAIK no official reason has been given. The most likely theory is that AC was originally planned to be a trilogy and Kristen signed up for three games. Then they decided to stretch out the story and Brotherhood became the third game in a row. Once she had fulfilled her contract, she either had other projects waiting or Ubisoft decided they were too cheap to pay her for two more games.
I'm sorry, but this is incorrect. First of all the modern-day story has been thought out since day one. Lucy's betrayal, however cliche, was planned from the very beginning. It's also a fact that Kristen Bell had not even been informed yet that Lucy would die in ACB when the game was released. The entire theory that Lucy died because she quit is utter BS.

kriegerdesgottes
03-22-2012, 10:42 PM
Yeah I was just getting ready to say what Light Rey just said which is that Patrice made a comment once that he was pretty sure Kristen had still not been told that her character had been killed even when the game released. I don't think anyone knows the real reason for sure although I have wondered about her having a falling out with Ubisoft. The theory that they just knew everything from the beginning is also not full proof considering Corey May himself as well as others have said that some things have changed slightly and that the main story has become "deeper" than the original idea. So who knows. I hope someday someone has an interview with her and asks her.

Calvarok
03-22-2012, 10:53 PM
I knew from the moment that she and Desmond started sharing some moments that it wouldn't end well. I think it had to happen.

SixKeys
03-22-2012, 11:20 PM
I know the writers have said the whole modern story has been planned out since the beginning. It may be true for all I know but I have my doubts. I think the main Desmond story arc may have been planned but some alterations took place once the studio execs decided to stretch the story with two more games than originally planned. They needed to end Brotherhood with a twist that would make everyone anxious to play whatever came next. Most people assumed it would be AC3, instead we got Revelations. People bought it because they wanted to find out the reason for Lucy's death. Of course this wasn't actually explained in the game until a DLC that came out several months later. I believe Lucy wasn't originally planned to be a traitor and the writers made her into one once they realized they were going to have to write her out somehow. It may be that she was originally meant to die for story purposes anyway, but more as a catalyst for Desmond to fully embrace his destiny and maybe to look for a way to save her. Now that she's officially confirmed a traitor and buried, Desmond's story will have to end up with him finding Eve who will possibly end up being the love interest Lucy was meant to be.

That's my theory. I could of course be entirely mistaken but I don't believe that just because the writers claim to have had every detail of Desmond's story planned out from the beginning that that's necessarily true. Filmmakers say stuff like that all the time, why not game writers?

True_Assassin92
03-22-2012, 11:53 PM
I know the writers have said the whole modern story has been planned out since the beginning. It may be true for all I know but I have my doubts. I think the main Desmond story arc may have been planned but some alterations took place once the studio execs decided to stretch the story with two more games than originally planned. They needed to end Brotherhood with a twist that would make everyone anxious to play whatever came next. Most people assumed it would be AC3, instead we got Revelations. People bought it because they wanted to find out the reason for Lucy's death. Of course this wasn't actually explained in the game until a DLC that came out several months later. I believe Lucy wasn't originally planned to be a traitor and the writers made her into one once they realized they were going to have to write her out somehow. It may be that she was originally meant to die for story purposes anyway, but more as a catalyst for Desmond to fully embrace his destiny and maybe to look for a way to save her. Now that she's officially confirmed a traitor and buried, Desmond's story will have to end up with him finding Eve who will possibly end up being the love interest Lucy was meant to be.

That's my theory. I could of course be entirely mistaken but I don't believe that just because the writers claim to have had every detail of Desmond's story planned out from the beginning that that's necessarily true. Filmmakers say stuff like that all the time, why not game writers?

You could put a SPOILER warning there. Not everyone, including me, has played the dlc.

EDIT: K nvm they changed the thread title lol.

deskpe
03-22-2012, 11:58 PM
Or she might turn out to be alive still, only one person we know attended the funeral right, might be some shadys tuff going on. lots of people in movies survives that kind of stabbing.


im jsut saying anything could happen, or more like nothing is true.......

D.I.D.
03-23-2012, 12:09 AM
I doubt anybody would have noticed if they'd swapped a different voice actor in for Lucy. If they'd wanted to carry on with that character, they could have done.

SixKeys
03-23-2012, 03:52 AM
I doubt anybody would have noticed if they'd swapped a different voice actor in for Lucy. If they'd wanted to carry on with that character, they could have done.

The problem is that Kristen Bell also allowed them to use her likeness for the character. If they would have picked a different actress for future games whilst retaining the face of Kristen Bell, that could have led to some legal problems. Hence why it was safer to just scrap the character altogether. I don't believe we ever saw her face from the front in the DLC, this could be because they no longer have the rights to using her likeness.

Calvarok
03-23-2012, 04:13 AM
I'd bet they would have killed her quite early on in AC3, if the original plan of just having three games had gone through. I really don't think that any of this affected the story too much.

souNdwAve89
03-23-2012, 04:19 AM
I doubt anybody would have noticed if they'd swapped a different voice actor in for Lucy. If they'd wanted to carry on with that character, they could have done.

I would. The same went with the replacement voice actor for Leonardo in Brotherhood's DLC.

Calvarok
03-23-2012, 04:34 AM
I would. The same went with the replacement voice actor for Leonardo in Brotherhood's DLC.

I thought that was the same VA!

Epsilonyx
03-23-2012, 09:06 AM
No, [SPOILERS] Lucy's death was planned. Abstergo turned her during the seven years that she was away from the Assassins.

GLHS
03-23-2012, 09:13 AM
I would. The same went with the replacement voice actor for Leonardo in Brotherhood's DLC.

Pretty sure that was the same guy.....his voice is very distinct. He also did an Assassin hideout Master in AC1, and I believe he did a character in AC:R as well, just don't remember who.

Calvarok
03-23-2012, 09:33 AM
No, [SPOILERS] Lucy's death was planned. Abstergo turned her during the seven years that she was away from the Assassins.

That seems like a bit of a random spoiler to include, as it has nothing to do with her death, really. It was not abstergo who wanted her dead, but Juno.

D.I.D.
03-23-2012, 10:07 AM
The problem is that Kristen Bell also allowed them to use her likeness for the character. If they would have picked a different actress for future games whilst retaining the face of Kristen Bell, that could have led to some legal problems. Hence why it was safer to just scrap the character altogether. I don't believe we ever saw her face from the front in the DLC, this could be because they no longer have the rights to using her likeness.

Yeah, good point. I don't know if I'd call that a likeness exactly, since they only really have blonde hair in common, but maybe that's it.

It's lucky for Ubisoft that trout don't have better legal representation.

frogger504
03-23-2012, 10:52 AM
Yeah, good point. I don't know if I'd call that a likeness exactly, since they only really have blonde hair in common, but maybe that's it.

It's lucky for Ubisoft that trout don't have better legal representation.

Ubi is smarter than that, I'm smarter than that. I am pretty sure they own the character of Lucy Stillman, they could own her if they wanted. Whether or not she wanted to quit, if Ubi had a contract with her, which I am pretty much certain they did, and that contract lasted until after AC4 she would have to suck it up and work because of said contract. Unless they fired her.

JCearlyyears
03-23-2012, 11:13 AM
http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTNMlHp8SMiSrIuhHPo6yDR-yKMyhs7xZLHNAvoC-A4OBVW56QiRMGSOX5G

LightRey
03-23-2012, 12:41 PM
My god, you people are stubborn. One story twist with a character's death and suddenly it's all because her VA wanted out. Don't be ridiculous.

GLHS
03-23-2012, 04:02 PM
http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTNMlHp8SMiSrIuhHPo6yDR-yKMyhs7xZLHNAvoC-A4OBVW56QiRMGSOX5G

Yes, this is correct. As a reply to a previous poster, they used Kristen Bell as the face model for Lucy before the game was even made, not just as her voice actor. So if there was some sort of a falling out between her and Ubisoft (even if she had known that Lucy would die at some point, she still could've sued and been pissed at them for not telling her about it even after the release of AC:B), that could explain why they are no longer showing her face or using her "likeness" or voice for Lucy. Also, her letters to Clay may have been chosen to be letters instead of flashbacks or something else using her voice for that very same reason. Idk if anything actually did happen, but there is quite a bit of evidence that they are no longer allowed to use her likeness for whatever reason.

SixKeys
03-23-2012, 04:17 PM
Yes, this is correct. As a reply to a previous poster, they used Kristen Bell as the face model for Lucy before the game was even made, not just as her voice actor. So if there was some sort of a falling out between her and Ubisoft (even if she had known that Lucy would die at some point, she still could've sued and been pissed at them for not telling her about it even after the release of AC:B), that could explain why they are no longer showing her face or using her "likeness" or voice for Lucy. Also, her letters to Clay may have been chosen to be letters instead of flashbacks or something else using her voice for that very same reason. Idk if anything actually did happen, but there is quite a bit of evidence that they are no longer allowed to use her likeness for whatever reason.

This. Her sending Clay letters instead of confronting him face to face never made much sense to me. You could argue she was just trying to hide her friendly connection to him by contacting him indirectly, but in AC1 she talked to Desmond about all sorts of sensitive information in front of security cams all the time. If she really wanted to get Clay on her side, it seems like facing him directly and maybe drugging him would be more effective than a letter. I believe the only reason they went down that route was because they couldn't get Kristen Bell to record a few more flashback lines for whatever reason.

frigabond
03-23-2012, 04:36 PM
Just a thought but wouldn't she be entitled to some sort of royalty payment on future sales of 1&2 anyway? Like other 'stars' get sortof.
If it was a one off deal wouldn't ubi have the right to use images ( computer generated ) at the time of her employment in any future game?
Not a lawyer so i'm only guessing of course. Ubi could have used previously shot stuff but with different dialogue to suit any situation then.

telcontar7
03-23-2012, 04:45 PM
Looking at the way they handled Lucy's death and the events related to her afterwards, it doesn't look like they planned it at all.

Razrback16
03-23-2012, 07:11 PM
Looking at the way they handled Lucy's death and the events related to her afterwards, it doesn't look like they planned it at all.

Agree.

LightRey
03-23-2012, 07:30 PM
Agree.
Don't agree.

rileypoole1234
03-23-2012, 08:10 PM
Looking at the way they handled Lucy's death and the events related to her afterwards, it doesn't look like they planned it at all.

Well how the bloody hell else could they have handled it? Desmond was in a coma. It made sense. They've had it planned for a very long time.

CanterburyTales
03-23-2012, 08:15 PM
Looking at the way they handled Lucy's death and the events related to her afterwards, it doesn't look like they planned it at all.

I agree, as it looked like the writers had to cover themselves, what with the whole thing about letting Desmond read their e-mails.

pacmanate
03-23-2012, 08:17 PM
I dont think it matters tbh. Shes dead, deal with it

LightRey
03-23-2012, 08:44 PM
I agree, as it looked like the writers had to cover themselves, what with the whole thing about letting Desmond read their e-mails.
I assume you didn't play The Lost Archive? It's explained in there. Vidic wanted Desmond to trust her, so that if it was ever necessary (if the sessions weren't going well) to fake an escape from Abstergo.

AntiChrist7
03-23-2012, 08:58 PM
I assume you didn't play The Lost Archive? It's explained in there. Vidic wanted Desmond to trust her, so that if it was ever necessary (if the sessions weren't going well) to fake an escape from Abstergo.

Yep, the lost archive explains a lot of things. although one thing that i dont understand is this:

_lucy went over to the templars because william using people just as tool, not caring for them. I understand this (and she is actually right, william basicly drove away his own son). and the plan to let desmond be more cooperative i can understand too. what i dont understand is what should have followed after they got the apple, presumed that she didnt die. Since the assassins want the apple to move to their HQ 'where william miles), i assume the plan was that she would follow and then let abstergo know where they were, so they could break in.

now (long run but finally getting there), my problem is: What would abstergo do when they got into the Assassin HQ with the de facto leader (W Miles) of the brotherhood? probably kill them. and that makes Lucy switching camps out of moral reasons very odd in my view/.

also, they call Daniel cross the second most succesfull sleeper agent. You cant call lucy succesfull: not only is she dead, abstergo doesnt have the apple.

frigabond
03-23-2012, 09:22 PM
I don't recall it actually stating who was the best sleeper. Daniel is the second now, lucy is dead now, sooooo : that means there is still the best sleeper in place...

Dan...dan... daaaaaaah!

LightRey
03-23-2012, 09:29 PM
Yep, the lost archive explains a lot of things. although one thing that i dont understand is this:

_lucy went over to the templars because william using people just as tool, not caring for them. I understand this (and she is actually right, william basicly drove away his own son). and the plan to let desmond be more cooperative i can understand too. what i dont understand is what should have followed after they got the apple, presumed that she didnt die. Since the assassins want the apple to move to their HQ 'where william miles), i assume the plan was that she would follow and then let abstergo know where they were, so they could break in.

now (long run but finally getting there), my problem is: What would abstergo do when they got into the Assassin HQ with the de facto leader (W Miles) of the brotherhood? probably kill them. and that makes Lucy switching camps out of moral reasons very odd in my view/.

also, they call Daniel cross the second most succesfull sleeper agent. You cant call lucy succesfull: not only is she dead, abstergo doesnt have the apple.
I don't think the Templars could foresee what happened to Lucy. Furthermore, they could have had any number of plans and I suspect that the whole plan to assassinate William was a follow-up plan on Lucy's infiltration. At this point we also do not know whether the Templars are aware of Lucy's death, so we can't really say whether she was that best agent or not, though I would not be surprised if it was.

frigabond
03-23-2012, 09:52 PM
Given that vidic says he knows where he is it'd be fair to assume they have seen him and who he is with. So they would know lucy wasn't there for whatever reason. Most likely being death no?

Otherwise he would have said we know where he'll be wouldn't he, and he would be acting on info given by lucy before her end.

Of course I'm speculating but I like the sound of another WTF moment.

Animuses
03-23-2012, 10:48 PM
I don't believe what happened with Lucy was planned. It all seems like it was thrown in once they decided to do Brotherhood.

Epsilonyx
03-24-2012, 02:08 AM
That seems like a bit of a random spoiler to include, as it has nothing to do with her death, really. It was not abstergo who wanted her dead, but Juno.

I didn't say that. It has everything to do with her death: Juno forced Desmond to kill Lucy because Juno knew she was a Templar double-agent. Ubisoft planned her betrayal and death.

twenty_glyphs
03-24-2012, 02:54 AM
I never understood where the rumor that Kristen Bell got mad and wanted out of the series came from. I understand why there would be some speculation on it, but there's been no actual news on the subject. The quote where they said that Patrice didn't even tell her Lucy was killed in Brotherhood doesn't make it sound like she wanted to leave.

There's a recent interview where Kristen Bell was asked about Assassin's Creed, and she didn't say much but she also didn't sound like she had left on her own or wanted to be done with it:

http://tv.ign.com/articles/121/1216952p2.html

As for the writers saying that Desmond's story was all planned out, they never said they had every detail planned from the beginning. They've said they had his overall arc planned and they know where his story is going. That doesn't mean that Lucy's death was always planned. It wasn't even foreshadowed at all until Brotherhood itself, where the event happened.

As for Lucy's voice not appearing in Revelations, it could be as simple as Ubisoft deciding that it wasn't worth paying her for a small role in one game. Besides, her major role might be planned for AC3 if they do intend to bring her back in some way.

frogger504
03-24-2012, 03:11 AM
I don't think the Templars could foresee what happened to Lucy. Furthermore, they could have had any number of plans and I suspect that the whole plan to assassinate William was a follow-up plan on Lucy's infiltration. At this point we also do not know whether the Templars are aware of Lucy's death, so we can't really say whether she was that best agent or not, though I would not be surprised if it was.

Uhm, I don't think Lucy was a Sleeper Agent. Assuming Clay in TLA is correct she was a Triple Agent.

hotgal187
03-24-2012, 05:03 AM
lusy isent rly ded bcoz she is stil vois 4 gosip gerl xo xo

goclo822
03-24-2012, 08:27 AM
I never understood where the rumor that Kristen Bell got mad and wanted out of the series came from. I understand why there would be some speculation on it, but there's been no actual news on the subject. The quote where they said that Patrice didn't even tell her Lucy was killed in Brotherhood doesn't make it sound like she wanted to leave.

There's a recent interview where Kristen Bell was asked about Assassin's Creed, and she didn't say much but she also didn't sound like she had left on her own or wanted to be done with it:

http://tv.ign.com/articles/121/1216952p2.html

As for the writers saying that Desmond's story was all planned out, they never said they had every detail planned from the beginning. They've said they had his overall arc planned and they know where his story is going. That doesn't mean that Lucy's death was always planned. It wasn't even foreshadowed at all until Brotherhood itself, where the event happened.

As for Lucy's voice not appearing in Revelations, it could be as simple as Ubisoft deciding that it wasn't worth paying her for a small role in one game. Besides, her major role might be planned for AC3 if they do intend to bring her back in some way.
Thanks for posting that link. Definitely doesn't sound like she is opposed to coming back which is cool and relieving to hear. While I didn't think she got into an argument with Ubi or anything like that, I did think it was possible that Lucy was killed because of Ubi being unable to get KB back. She is a big name actress so it could have been either because she cost too much, had other obligations or was no longer interested in the role. (However she has stated that she would be open to being a part of a movie if one ever happened so I assumed she enjoyed the role.)

I agree. I believe Ubi when they said they had Desmond's overall arc planned all along but I definitely think that a lot of it was changed and added later, Lucy's death being one of those things. Her death came out of the blue, wasn't foreshadowed and still hasn't been properly explained within the game. The DLC just felt too much like Ubi trying to cover their ****s. If the storyline was planned, I would think they would have put what was in the DLC in the actual game itself. However for all we know, they are saving it for AC3. It would make sense for them to want to save the big reveal, the expensive animated flashbacks and possibly KB for the big game. But if they are planning that, I don't understand why they released the DLC which gave everything away. Couldn't they have saved that for AC3?

LightRey
03-24-2012, 12:35 PM
Uhm, I don't think Lucy was a Sleeper Agent. Assuming Clay in TLA is correct she was a Triple Agent.
What are you talking about? In TLA Lucy makes her motives clear, which are that she is actually working for the Templars. She's literally proven to be a double agent in TLA.

frogger504
03-24-2012, 12:41 PM
What are you talking about? In TLA Lucy makes her motives clear, which are that she is actually working for the Templars. She's literally proven to be a double agent in TLA.

I know. That's what I was saying... My point was that Lucy was acting on her own actions by her own decisions for her own personal reasons, she felt betrayed by the Assassins so became a Templar Triple Agent.
So I don't think she is a Programmed Sleeper Agent but a well aware Triple Agent,

LightRey
03-24-2012, 12:46 PM
I know. That's what I was saying... My point was that Lucy was acting on her own actions by her own decisions for her own personal reasons, she felt betrayed by the Assassins so became a Templar Triple Agent.
So I don't think she is a Programmed Sleeper Agent but a well aware Triple Agent,
I never said she was. I was actually arguing the opposite. Btw, that still makes her a double agent, since she's still working for the Templar's interests. She'd be a triple agent if she'd decide to go against both the Templars and the Assassins. Scratch that, not even then. She wouldn't be an agent then.

GLHS
03-24-2012, 12:57 PM
It wasn't even foreshadowed at all until Brotherhood itself, where the event happened.

As for Lucy's voice not appearing in Revelations, it could be as simple as Ubisoft deciding that it wasn't worth paying her for a small role in one game. Besides, her major role might be planned for AC3 if they do intend to bring her back in some way.

Wait, what? First off, she was killed b/c she was a Templar and an imminent danger to Desmond and the Assassin's, and her betrayal was foreshadowed all the way back to in AC1, and certainly more so with AC2 and so on. Nothing was ever foreshadowed on her actual death, even in Brotherhood until it actually happened, but her being a Templar and dying are too directly related to leave one out, so it's pretty much one in the same. There are many, many clues as to her betrayal.

And also, Vidic had his role, Desmond, Rebecca (who had a small amount of lines), Shaun (who had an even smaller amount). Everybody had lines. And as far as TLA, Clay, Vidic, William, and others had lines as well. There's no reason to think that if one of the biggest points in TLA is revealing that Lucy is a traitor, that she wouldn't have lines as well. So I highly doubt them paying for one of their biggest characters to have any amount of lines (big or small) in either the actual game or the DLC would've bothered them. And, as has been covered before in numerous threads, there is no possible way to bring her back from the dead. Only the Ankh revives, and this is quite temporary. So even if she could talk during revival, there wouldn't be much there. And while the Shroud does reanimate the body, no one knows if the person can speak, which I highly doubt.

Jexx21
03-24-2012, 02:26 PM
A triple agent is someone who is working for an organization(A), sent to infiltrate and spy on another organization(T), but when they return, they're actually working for organization(T) and spying on organization(A).

SixKeys
03-24-2012, 03:58 PM
Wait, what? First off, she was killed b/c she was a Templar and an imminent danger to Desmond and the Assassin's, and her betrayal was foreshadowed all the way back to in AC1, and certainly more so with AC2 and so on. Nothing was ever foreshadowed on her actual death, even in Brotherhood until it actually happened, but her being a Templar and dying are too directly related to leave one out, so it's pretty much one in the same. There are many, many clues as to her betrayal.

Such as? How was her being a Templar foreshadowed in AC1 and AC2?

AntiChrist7
03-24-2012, 05:05 PM
Such as? How was her being a Templar foreshadowed in AC1 and AC2?
yeah i owuld like to know this too. the only thing i can relate to this was the project Legacy screen she had in ACB. i always assumed tht was an easter egg.

she also dissapeared during some sequences in brotherhood, but that could be for a whole lot of reasons

frigabond
03-24-2012, 05:14 PM
I remember being curious about her absense then too. Not suspicious though.
Can't recall any other times though so I'd be interested too.
Hindsight is a wonderful thing.

SixKeys
03-24-2012, 05:57 PM
yeah i owuld like to know this too. the only thing i can relate to this was the project Legacy screen she had in ACB. i always assumed tht was an easter egg.

she also dissapeared during some sequences in brotherhood, but that could be for a whole lot of reasons

In Brotherhood there were plenty of hints as to her questionable loyalty. Not only the fact that she mysteriously disappeared for an entire sequence but Desmond also asked a few pointed questions about how Lucy had managed to smuggle some data from Abstergo without anyone noticing. Lucy and Rebecca gave handwavy answers like "oh, some old passwords still work" which could be legit, but it still cast some suspicion on Lucy.

In AC1 and AC2 though, there was zero foreshadowing.

LightRey
03-24-2012, 06:27 PM
In Brotherhood there were plenty of hints as to her questionable loyalty. Not only the fact that she mysteriously disappeared for an entire sequence but Desmond also asked a few pointed questions about how Lucy had managed to smuggle some data from Abstergo without anyone noticing. Lucy and Rebecca gave handwavy answers like "oh, some old passwords still work" which could be legit, but it still cast some suspicion on Lucy.

In AC1 and AC2 though, there was zero foreshadowing.
Well in ACII (and ACB too) she was unusually depressed regarding the Assassin teams that were being killed. I mean, yes she's an Assassin and as such it should be sad, but Rebecca and Shaun are too and they didn't show any sadness about it at all. I think these were signs of guilt.

SixKeys
03-24-2012, 07:49 PM
Well in ACII (and ACB too) she was unusually depressed regarding the Assassin teams that were being killed. I mean, yes she's an Assassin and as such it should be sad, but Rebecca and Shaun are too and they didn't show any sadness about it at all. I think these were signs of guilt.

That doesn't count as legitimate foreshadowing, just speculation. Her grief was totally justified if you were to believe she was an assassin through and through and not always up-to-date on recent developments with the teams like Shaun and Rebecca were. It seemed to me like she just wasn't quite aware how badly things were going for the assassins in her absence.

LightRey
03-24-2012, 08:04 PM
That doesn't count as legitimate foreshadowing, just speculation. Her grief was totally justified if you were to believe she was an assassin through and through and not always up-to-date on recent developments with the teams like Shaun and Rebecca were. It seemed to me like she just wasn't quite aware how badly things were going for the assassins in her absence.
I never said it was. I'm merely pointing out that it was rather odd and the oddness is easily explained by recent events. Let's also not forget that the ones presenting the theory that it wasn't all planned from the beginning are the ones with the burden of evidence.

smengler
03-24-2012, 10:55 PM
The one part of Assassins Creed that disappointed me was how they handled Lucy's death. I have no problem that she died and that they left it as a cliffhanger at the end of ACB, but they pretty much left her out of ACR, and they only confirm the fact that she's dead in ACR. I will be disappointed if they forget about her in AC3 and not mention her again. You can't kill off one of the major characters from 3 games and give no explanation. I know about TLA DLC, which confirms that she was a Templer, but it should be explained as part of the game, not as extra game content. This is similar to killing off one of the main characters halfway through a movie for no reason, then waiting until after the credits to explain why they died. We still don't really know why she died.

CanterburyTales
03-24-2012, 11:09 PM
The one part of Assassins Creed that disappointed me was how they handled Lucy's death. I have no problem that she died and that they left it as a cliffhanger at the end of ACB, but they pretty much left her out of ACR, and they only confirm the fact that she's dead in ACR. I will be disappointed if they forget about her in AC3 and not mention her again. You can't kill off one of the major characters from 3 games and give no explanation. I know about TLA DLC, which confirms that she was a Templer, but it should be explained as part of the game, not as extra game content. This is similar to killing off one of the main characters halfway through a movie for no reason, then waiting until after the credits to explain why they died. We still don't really know why she died.

I agree, and it really looked like they were trying to cover for themselves when they made her a Templar.

Acrimonious_Nin
03-24-2012, 11:11 PM
she is still alive

LightRey
03-25-2012, 12:24 AM
she is still alive
If by "alive" you mean "dead", then yes.