PDA

View Full Version : Assassin's Creed III - What would you be explained



Slayer_WTF
08-11-2012, 10:59 AM
As we approach the end, it is clear that many of the questions will be answered in this Assassin's Creed, so i was wondering what the user expects in terms of "revelations", and what do you think will NOT be explained.

Locopells
08-11-2012, 11:17 AM
I think we can expect them to tie off pretty much everything, with possibly one or two loose threads for future continuation.

Slayer_WTF
08-11-2012, 11:26 AM
I seem to recall that in a podcast one of the writers (Yohalem or some such name) has said that not everything will be explained in AC3. Something about the those who came before.

Legendz54
08-11-2012, 11:30 AM
I remember in an interview Alex said that lucy and subject 16 will be elaborated more on in AC3

LoyalACFan
08-11-2012, 12:23 PM
I remember in an interview Alex said that lucy and subject 16 will be elaborated more on in AC3

They better F'n be. Relegating the only real "revelation" of AC:R to a DLC was total bullcrap.

Aphex_Tim
08-11-2012, 12:42 PM
I'm hoping for no Uncharted 3 style plot holes.

Slayer_WTF
08-11-2012, 12:54 PM
I'm hoping for no Uncharted 3 style plot holes.

In a game like AC where the plot is first of all I doubt that such a thing happen. :)

Stroonzje
08-11-2012, 01:35 PM
i just want some ****ing closure on lucy thats all i need. all i need to be sane again

pacmanate
08-11-2012, 02:41 PM
Well they better mention Lucy's involvement properly. This is how I see it. Only WE know about Lucy because we played as Clay in the Animus. And only people that bought the Lost Archive will even know. So I hope that the team and Desmond in the game find out that Lucy was a templar too. I also would like closure on Those Who Came Before. I doubt there won't be seeing as we are actually at the temple of salvation.

AnthonyA85
08-11-2012, 03:19 PM
I want the whole babbling speech Clay gave to Desmond in Brotherhood to be explained, i was so pissed when Desmond didn't even bring it up in Revelations, not even a "Hey 16, about what you were saying before when i found you, what the hell were you on about?", but was that addressed in ACR? Nope.

So it BETTER BE addressed in AC3.

Aphex_Tim
08-11-2012, 03:19 PM
Well they better mention Lucy's involvement properly. This is how I see it. Only WE know about Lucy because we played as Clay in the Animus. And only people that bought the Lost Archive will even know. So I hope that the team and Desmond in the game find out that Lucy was a templar too.

I just realized if that would happen it would mean that in a way, Ubisoft already spoiled quite a large revelation themselves. :p

RatonhnhakeFan
08-11-2012, 03:56 PM
I kinda feel like AC3 is the next prime candidate for "ending ****storm" similar to ME3 if Ubisoft decides to deliberately left tons of questions unanswered

Slayer_WTF
08-11-2012, 04:03 PM
I kinda feel like AC3 is the next prime candidate for "ending ****storm" similar to ME3 if Ubisoft decides to deliberately left tons of questions unanswered

After finishing ME3 I just thought Ubisoft and AC3..

infamous_ezio
08-11-2012, 05:12 PM
The ACB Truth video, all this stuff about eve, adam and stuff. Oh and i'm keen to see how they explain lucy's and clays story. Jeff mentioned that we were playing as Clay in TLA, so, no one really knows. AC3 has alot of potential, but if they don't do it right, then they really can f it up.

SaintPerkele
08-11-2012, 06:03 PM
What I really, really wish they'd explain are the plotholes from Project Legacy.

What is the Golem? Who is Frater V.O.V., why does he live after his death? is he actually Consus? Speaking of which, who or what exactly is Consus? He's supposed to be one of TWCB but can somehow control people and still exists? Does Abstergo possess the Shroud by now? Who contacted Giovanni with the Crystal Skull and what catastrophe was he talking about? What is with the whole alchemy thing, the Philosopher's Stone, Crowley's Formula? What did Abstergo want on the Mars and why is Charles Darwin so important for the company? Did General Monck have the Staff? What about Hermes and his Staff? And which importance has Pythagoras to the overall story as well as the Hermeticists, a topic only slightly touched in the Da Vinci Disappearance?

I want answers to these questions, as I enjoyed Project Legacy more than some of the main games, at least its story ;)

naran6142
08-11-2012, 06:12 PM
I would like to see more of "the truth", I was hoping to get that in ACR but you know...

SixKeys
08-11-2012, 06:23 PM
I want the whole babbling speech Clay gave to Desmond in Brotherhood to be explained, i was so pissed when Desmond didn't even bring it up in Revelations, not even a "Hey 16, about what you were saying before when i found you, what the hell were you on about?", but was that addressed in ACR? Nope.

So it BETTER BE addressed in AC3.

^ This. They also really need to properly address the Lucy situation as not everyone bought the DLC.

It's fine to leave some mysteries about TWCB and Abstergo for future games to explore, but everything that specifically relates to Desmond (like Subject 16's messages to him, Lucy, the Truth videos, the mysterious e-mails etc.) needs proper closure.

Steww-
08-11-2012, 06:28 PM
I would expect there will be more information on Lucy in AC3, since this will have been a planned game (part of a trilogy).

They couldn't do major spoilers in Revelations because it would have interfered with the plot for AC3.

kudos17
08-11-2012, 07:19 PM
I kinda feel like AC3 is the next prime candidate for "ending ****storm" similar to ME3 if Ubisoft decides to deliberately left tons of questions unanswered

It is and it will be, if they're not careful.

This is a little off-track, but it's relevant in the big picture - The problem with ME3's endings weren't the plot-holes. It was the lack of closure, and the fact that the endings weren't thematically consistent. The whole series was about using diversity and uniting different people together for a common goal, and the ending was all about either killing diversity, controlling diversity, or getting rid of diversity entirely.

Assassin's Creed has always been about fighting for freedom, but graying the lines while doing so. Unraveling conspiracies. Trying to uncover some truths; leaving some others unanswered.

All of these themes, including more, leave an ending that's hard to pull off. The thing about it, is that you CAN'T have total closure. There's always mystery in a universe built like Assassin's Creed. But the conflict here is you also need some closure to satisfy fans. We want to know what happens to Conner, to Desmond, to the world.

So I'd say they'll be fine if they do that. Show us what happens to Desmond and the team. Show us how Connor's story ends. Show us what happened to 16 and Lucy.

What they don't have to show us is how the war will end. Maybe a good idea of where it's going, but not where it will end. They don't have to show us everything about TWCB, either. The mystery is there charm. To use another Mass Effect example for those who played it, the Reapers were frightening when they didn't give you a reason for trying to destroy you. They simply were. But then, in ME3, their secret was given. It was a clumsy reason, and it betrayed the essence of what the Reapers were. It painted them in a totally different color.

So, TL;DR: Ubisoft should give closure to all the characters. We've bonded with them; we want to see them. They can leave some things about the future in the open, but big points like the end of the world, the satellite launch, etc. are important, and need to be explained. Also, TWCB's intentions and purposes should not be revealed if it's too hard to get across. A mystery is infinitely better than a clumsy reveal.

SaintPerkele
08-11-2012, 07:34 PM
It is and it will be, if they're not careful.

This is a little off-track, but it's relevant in the big picture - The problem with ME3's endings weren't the plot-holes. It was the lack of closure, and the fact that the endings weren't thematically consistent. The whole series was about using diversity and uniting different people together for a common goal, and the ending was all about either killing diversity, controlling diversity, or getting rid of diversity entirely.

Assassin's Creed has always been about fighting for freedom, but graying the lines while doing so. Unraveling conspiracies. Trying to uncover some truths; leaving some others unanswered.

All of these themes, including more, leave an ending that's hard to pull off. The thing about it, is that you CAN'T have total closure. There's always mystery in a universe built like Assassin's Creed. But the conflict here is you also need some closure to satisfy fans. We want to know what happens to Conner, to Desmond, to the world.

So I'd say they'll be fine if they do that. Show us what happens to Desmond and the team. Show us how Connor's story ends. Show us what happened to 16 and Lucy.

What they don't have to show us is how the war will end. Maybe a good idea of where it's going, but not where it will end. They don't have to show us everything about TWCB, either. The mystery is there charm. To use another Mass Effect example for those who played it, the Reapers were frightening when they didn't give you a reason for trying to destroy you. They simply were. But then, in ME3, their secret was given. It was a clumsy reason, and it betrayed the essence of what the Reapers were. It painted them in a totally different color.

So, TL;DR: Ubisoft should give closure to all the characters. We've bonded with them; we want to see them. They can leave some things about the future in the open, but big points like the end of the world, the satellite launch, etc. are important, and need to be explained. Also, TWCB's intentions and purposes should not be revealed if it's too hard to get across. A mystery is infinitely better than a clumsy reveal.
As a LOST-fan, I have to agree here :D

LoyalACFan
08-11-2012, 09:39 PM
It is and it will be, if they're not careful.

This is a little off-track, but it's relevant in the big picture - The problem with ME3's endings weren't the plot-holes. It was the lack of closure, and the fact that the endings weren't thematically consistent. The whole series was about using diversity and uniting different people together for a common goal, and the ending was all about either killing diversity, controlling diversity, or getting rid of diversity entirely.

Assassin's Creed has always been about fighting for freedom, but graying the lines while doing so. Unraveling conspiracies. Trying to uncover some truths; leaving some others unanswered.

All of these themes, including more, leave an ending that's hard to pull off. The thing about it, is that you CAN'T have total closure. There's always mystery in a universe built like Assassin's Creed. But the conflict here is you also need some closure to satisfy fans. We want to know what happens to Conner, to Desmond, to the world.

So I'd say they'll be fine if they do that. Show us what happens to Desmond and the team. Show us how Connor's story ends. Show us what happened to 16 and Lucy.

What they don't have to show us is how the war will end. Maybe a good idea of where it's going, but not where it will end. They don't have to show us everything about TWCB, either. The mystery is there charm. To use another Mass Effect example for those who played it, the Reapers were frightening when they didn't give you a reason for trying to destroy you. They simply were. But then, in ME3, their secret was given. It was a clumsy reason, and it betrayed the essence of what the Reapers were. It painted them in a totally different color.

So, TL;DR: Ubisoft should give closure to all the characters. We've bonded with them; we want to see them. They can leave some things about the future in the open, but big points like the end of the world, the satellite launch, etc. are important, and need to be explained. Also, TWCB's intentions and purposes should not be revealed if it's too hard to get across. A mystery is infinitely better than a clumsy reveal.

Even if the ending of AC3 disappoints, it won't be as crushing as the ME3 ending. In Mass Effect, by the time you got to the end of the third one, you had spent literally dozens of hours with Shepard and the crew, and you craved a proper ending for them. But with Assassin's Creed, the Desmond story (despite him technically being the main hero of the series) took a backseat to the historical stories. Sure, people want his story to end well, but it's not going to be as powerful as seeing the character you designed, customized, and forged a path for for over five years failing to provide you with proper closure. If they keep the historical story good, and I have faith that they will, the ending won't come under such heavy criticism even if it totally sucks.

InfamousQ1987
08-12-2012, 06:37 AM
EVERYTHING ABOUT DESMOND'S STORY ARC.
They should leave a couple loops open, like TWCB. I just really want to know Desmond's Eve is...It will be weird introducing a new character this late into the series. For crying out loud it is Desmond's last game!!! I always thought Lucy was Eve's, and her blood ("the key her DNA") was the key to allow Desmond into the blackroom to awaken his sixth sense. I guess she was just a stepping stone towards Desmond's main objective.

brefcourte
08-12-2012, 02:03 PM
According to the statements of the devs, it seems to be pretty shure, that the Desmond-Trilogy will end like LOST!

LoyalACFan
08-12-2012, 02:18 PM
According to the statements of the devs, it seems to be pretty shure, that the Desmond-Trilogy will end like LOST!

How so?

infamous_ezio
08-12-2012, 05:38 PM
One thing that doesn't leave my mind is when 16 said "your SON"

pacmanate
08-12-2012, 06:29 PM
I want to know, how the apple and staff combined in AC2 opened the vault, then Ezio went inside, and pulled out the apple from his pouch. EXPLAIN THAT UBISOFT!

Locopells
08-12-2012, 07:56 PM
Guess he removed it off screen after the door opened.