PDA

View Full Version : Proper Assassinations in AC3?



DiamondBlade_R
09-08-2012, 11:33 AM
The number of assassination targets has gone down with each AC game since the first one, or at least in the past 2 games. ACB featured nearly no assassination targets, and ACR featured EFFING TWO, one of which, Leandros, was not even an actual "target" in the sense we're used to, as he basically just stood there and waited for Ezio to stab him without a fight. For God's sake, people, the game is called Assassin's Creed. Not "Warrior's Creed" or "old, Italian, bearded Nathan Drake gets a hidden blade". In the words of Shaun, "basically, it means we assassinate people". So is there any word on whether AC3 will feature proper assassination missions?

lothario-da-be
09-08-2012, 11:37 AM
I hope it will be more like ac1 but with the variation from its sequels.

D.I.D.
09-08-2012, 12:44 PM
Hard to say, but the Vita game shows the player using disguises to infiltrate a party in at least one mission. Perhaps that's a sign that both games will return some of that tension rather than beserk mass murder.

POP1Fan
09-08-2012, 12:50 PM
Okay, I hate the Nathan Drake paralel. At least Ezio is likeable and isn't a character that has been done in everything ever. Else, I agree. We should get to assassinate too more that run in carriages or flying machines. Since the American Revolution is a HUGE event and the game is huge itself, I think that we might get a nice balance between actual assassinating and action.

Slayer_WTF
09-08-2012, 12:54 PM
I read about missions where Connor must infiltrate in the camps and kill its target, going behind enemy lines that were stationed in a dense forest.

TheHumanTowel
09-08-2012, 12:59 PM
Agree with this 100%. The focus definitely needs to come back on assassinations. It's the whole point of the series that you're an assassin and you should be actually assassinating people. The complete lack of targets in ACR was one reason why I found the story disappointing.

tarrero
09-08-2012, 01:00 PM
I have not played nor designed the game so...........I do not know up to this point.

And btw, The Banker mission in ACB is one of the most "Assassinsh" ones yet.

Legendz54
09-08-2012, 01:02 PM
I agree less KILLING and more ASSASSINATING.

Slayer_WTF
09-08-2012, 01:02 PM
The objectives to assassinate return. There is a beautiful black list of the names of important people during the revolution.

Watch the E3 demo, for example. Connor must infiltrate a fort: where can get? There are three entrances. Use the rear. Infiltrates, creates a diversion and BOOM. Target deleted.

This is Assassin's Creed 3.

WolfTemplar94
09-08-2012, 01:08 PM
Hopefully there's a few miny mission arks where we need to do a few things in order to be able to kill our target. I always like those kinds of things in games. Like mentioned before, the missions to do with "The Banker" are pretty assassin-ish.

ProletariatPleb
09-08-2012, 01:14 PM
Agreed, I've always seen Ezio as a warrior not an assassin since AC:B, the only true assassination I can remember in AC:B is Juan Borgia.

Slayer_WTF
09-08-2012, 01:14 PM
Agree with this 100%. The focus definitely needs to come back on assassinations. It's the whole point of the series that you're an assassin and you should be actually assassinating people. The complete lack of targets in ACR was one reason why I found the story disappointing.

Revelations was based on other objectives, such as the search for the keys.

DiamondBlade_R
09-08-2012, 01:35 PM
Revelations was based on other objectives, such as the search for the keys.
That doesn't change the fact that they could've at least squeeze in some assassination missions, if only for the sake of justifying the "Assassin" in the title... ACR was all about political conflicts anyway, it's not like they couldn't have used that as a reason for Ezio to assassinate people, say, by making some of the people involved in said conflict Templars.

ProletariatPleb
09-08-2012, 01:36 PM
Revelations was based on other objectives, such as the search for the keys.
Keysearcher's Creed.

DiamondBlade_R
09-08-2012, 01:39 PM
Keysearcher's Creed.
^Exactly.

Slayer_WTF
09-08-2012, 01:39 PM
That doesn't change the fact that they could've at least squeeze in some assassination missions, if only for the sake of justifying the "Assassin" in the title

Since the title has something to do with the missions or gameplay? O_O

The title "Assassin's Creed" is very different from the final product. The game does not speak of the Creed.

Assassin_M
09-08-2012, 01:41 PM
Since the title has something to do with the missions or gameplay? O_O

The title "Assassin's Creed" is very different from the final product. The game does not speak of the Creed.
It doesnt ??

I WANT MY MONEY BACK !!

Slayer_WTF
09-08-2012, 01:45 PM
Before someone offends me, I want to explain myself better: the game is not the Creed his main argument, that's all.

For example Mass Effect does not seem to talk about the mass effect of the planets..

ProletariatPleb
09-08-2012, 01:47 PM
Before someone offends me, I want to explain myself better: the game is not the Creed his main argument, that's all.

For example Mass Effect does not seem to talk about the mass effect of the planets..
.....WHAT?!?!
Mass Effect refers to the effect of our actions and the events in the story perfectly.

DiamondBlade_R
09-08-2012, 01:49 PM
Since the title has something to do with the missions or gameplay? O_O

The title "Assassin's Creed" is very different from the final product. The game does not speak of the Creed.
...And that makes it okay? That just means they've drifted too far away from the series roots and what it was all about in the first place. Also, as for my quote, please quote me fully. Maybe I shouldn't have used the term "squeeze in" to express my point, but that doesn't mean that was what I meant. What I meant, as I said, is that the Creed should be one of the main focuses of the series in terms of story - hence the name of the series, "Assassin's EFFing Creed, not just "Assassin's."

ProletariatPleb
09-08-2012, 01:51 PM
Or let's change the name.
Assassin's Greed, Assassin's Keys, Warrior's KillEmAll.

DiamondBlade_R
09-08-2012, 01:54 PM
Or let's change the name.
Assassin's Greed, Assassin's Keys, Warrior's KillEmAll.
Those two made me ROFL!

Slayer_WTF
09-08-2012, 02:01 PM
American's Creed.

Washington Creed.

Red Coat's Creed.

:p

Umbra_Blade
09-08-2012, 02:04 PM
I would also like the return of more assassination targets. I loved any mission in the AC series where you had to infiltrate a heavily defended area, and use all your stealth skills to get to your target, instead of just turning into Rambo, and taking on every guard and then killing a target that is just standing there for you to kill.

Plus I liked how in AC1 when you killed a target the whole city guard was after your head, meaning that it became a proper manhunt, whereas in the other ac's it was pretty much just run a few yards ahead of your pursuers and you can get off scot-free, with every other guard forgetting your face. That I felt took away the tension of "I just killed a man (or woman), it's time to haul *** to my hideout!"

DiamondBlade_R
09-08-2012, 02:08 PM
American's Creed.

Washington Creed.

Red Coat's Creed.
:p

Awesome's Creed. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xc8JwTfDtA4)

Assassin's Weed. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1PbAXX5_Iy4)

ProletariatPleb
09-08-2012, 02:09 PM
Awesome's Creed. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xc8JwTfDtA4)

Assassin's Weed. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1PbAXX5_Iy4)
Ahh the good old days of Egoraptor.

Azula2005
09-08-2012, 02:13 PM
How could someone murder many men and then go to sleep peacefully...

ProletariatPleb
09-08-2012, 02:15 PM
How could someone murder many men and then go to sleep peacefully...
Are we going off topic?

EzioAssassin51
09-08-2012, 02:37 PM
Ok, I just have to say, if you don't mind, ACR had quite a few assassinations and both were very assassiny, those being Tarik and Shahkulu (spelling?). While we had to fight Shahkulu at the end, we still had to sneak up on him and air assassinate him (at least that's what I did) :p

Anyway, yes, yes there will be many more assassinations!

kudos17
09-08-2012, 02:50 PM
For some reason, OP's Nathan Drake comment made me think... In Uncharted, Nathan is seen as a really down-to-earth, laid back every-day guy. But if you think about it, he's a friggin' mass murderer...

Sorry, just popped into my head :p

Anyway, Assassin's Creed makes me think of one thing: "Nothing is true, everything is permitted." As long as they follow that theme and use the basic mechanics known to the AC series, I have no problem. Assassinations are fun, but let's be honest - as we get closer to the current era, there's less and less to work with in terms of well-known stuff. Since it's all documented, we know how it happened. The only way for Ubi to play outside that is to bend the rules and say "oh, those documents are fake, don't believe everything you read".

Like how Ratohnhake will help out Washington the whole revolution but refuses to have his presence noted in any sort of historical document. Ubi has to figure out how to make this work.

POP1Fan
09-08-2012, 02:51 PM
Ok, I just have to say, if you don't mind, ACR had quite a few assassinations and both were very assassiny, those being Tarik and Shahkulu (spelling?). While we had to fight Shahkulu at the end, we still had to sneak up on him and air assassinate him (at least that's what I did) :p

Anyway, yes, yes there will be many more assassinations!

Then there are the Master Assassin Missions.

HisSpiritLives
09-08-2012, 03:31 PM
The number of assassination targets has gone down with each AC game since the first one, or at least in the past 2 games. ACB featured nearly no assassination targets, and ACR featured EFFING TWO, one of which, Leandros, was not even an actual "target" in the sense we're used to, as he basically just stood there and waited for Ezio to stab him without a fight. For God's sake, people, the game is called Assassin's Creed. Not "Warrior's Creed" or "old, Italian, bearded Nathan Drake gets a hidden blade". In the words of Shaun, "basically, it means we assassinate people". So is there any word on whether AC3 will feature proper assassination missions?

It will be a lot of assassination targets in AC3 that is for sure.

AdrianJacek
09-08-2012, 03:36 PM
What are you babbling about? AC2 had 17 targets, ACB had 15 and ACR had 12. How did you came up with 2 targets in ACR?

goldiron
09-08-2012, 07:00 PM
I played ACR and I didn't get to properly assassinate anyone except minor characters

DiamondBlade_R
09-08-2012, 07:11 PM
What are you babbling about? AC2 had 17 targets, ACB had 15 and ACR had 12. How did you came up with 2 targets in ACR?


I played ACR and I didn't get to properly assassinate anyone except minor characters
^That. @AdrianJacek, what are YOU babbling about? :S

Assassin_M
09-08-2012, 07:15 PM
I believe the Complaint is not about lack of "Assassinations" Because there is... A lot...

The Complaint is that there should be more "STORY" Assassinations.... In which case I agree..

POP1Fan
09-08-2012, 07:16 PM
I believe the Complaint is not about lack of "Assassinations" Because there is... A lot...

The Complaint is that there should be more "STORY" Assassinations.... In which case I agree..

Do you want them to assassinate the story? NOOOOOO!!!!!

Assassin_M
09-08-2012, 07:21 PM
Do you want them to assassinate the story? NOOOOOO!!!!!
Oh come on, man..

I was trying to sound Intelligent :(

POP1Fan
09-08-2012, 07:39 PM
Oh come on, man..

I was trying to sound Intelligent :(

I'm sorry... I'm wasn't trying to make you feel bad :(
Perhaps I am the only one xD

Assassin_M
09-08-2012, 07:41 PM
I own you all

I'm sorry... I'm wasn't trying to make you feel bad :(
Perhaps I am the only one xD
:(

DiamondBlade_R
09-08-2012, 07:45 PM
I believe the Complaint is not about lack of "Assassinations" Because there is... A lot...

The Complaint is that there should be more "STORY" Assassinations.... In which case I agree..

Of course that's what I meant. Perhaps I should have made that clear earlier, I thought that was obvious.


Do you want them to assassinate the story? NOOOOOO!!!!!
LOL

AdrianJacek
09-08-2012, 07:49 PM
Story - shmory. Too hard to look for side missions?

Assassin_M
09-08-2012, 07:54 PM
Story - shmory. Too hard to look for side missions?
What`s with you ??

DiamondBlade_R
09-08-2012, 07:58 PM
Story - shmory. Too hard to look for side missions?
Y-yeah... I'm just gonna...
http://robinbrown.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/double-facepalm1.jpg

ProletariatPleb
09-08-2012, 08:00 PM
Story - shmory. Too hard to look for side missions?
http://i.imgur.com/Y3C67.jpg

WarriorPaint
09-08-2012, 08:38 PM
In the overview of AC3 a brief description of Connor includes this:


Your predatory instincts, honed by years of hunting through unforgiving wilderness, allow you to stalk and eliminate your targets in utter silence. When open combat beckons, you will unleash a staggering array of new weapons including tomahawks, rope darts, firearms, and more. Centuries before the term “black ops” is defined, you will pioneer this new kind of warfare.

Going by this, I would imagine we will have plenty of opportunities to execute traditional assassinations. The Boston demo demonstrated the option of calling in the Brotherhood to help get past enemy guards, which is a lot like blending in AC1 but (in my opinion) implemented in a more practical/believable manner. Connor is also being portrayed as a pioneer of Black Ops which are known to rely heavily on stealth and deception. And they've added the stalking zone and more detailed forms of blending; an example would be Connor having the ability to assassinate a target while leaning against a table between two ordinary guys in the market (also in the Boston demo).

andreja110s
09-08-2012, 09:44 PM
"old, Italian, bearded Nathan Drake gets a hidden blade".

Hahahahahahahaha! :D

But yeah, you got a point :S There should be more assassinations, but not like those when first you chase your target and at the you just press X or the left mouse button and the target is dead just like that. It was pretty annoying :S

I agree the banker thingy was the most assassinsh. Hiding, doing everyithing fast and silently and most of all, no possibility of aeral kills. Don“t get me wrong, I dont mind an aeral kill here or there but it is so easy assassinating people from rooftops that it is not a challenge any more.

SixKeys
09-08-2012, 10:53 PM
Hahahahahahahaha! :D

But yeah, you got a point :S There should be more assassinations, but not like those when first you chase your target and at the you just press X or the left mouse button and the target is dead just like that. It was pretty annoying :S

I agree the banker thingy was the most assassinsh. Hiding, doing everyithing fast and silently and most of all, no possibility of aeral kills. Don“t get me wrong, I dont mind an aeral kill here or there but it is so easy assassinating people from rooftops that it is not a challenge any more.

The Banker mission also offered more than one way to take down your target. You could use the courtesans to distract the guards or blend in with them, or you could sneak closer to do a bench assassination. You could poison all the guards one by one and when there are none left, you're free to do a high-profile assassination. It may have even been possible to pull off an air assassination if you managed to kill one or two of the roof guards. In this mission they made air assassination harder than usual, so doing it that way would have been challenging.

HisSpiritLives
09-08-2012, 11:29 PM
http://i.imgur.com/Y3C67.jpg

:D Mentor slap lol

AdrianJacek
09-09-2012, 07:52 AM
Facepalm - when it's better to insult people than look for side missions. Yeah, sure. Why not.

Aphex_Tim
09-09-2012, 09:04 AM
Facepalm - when it's better to insult people than look for side missions. Yeah, sure. Why not.

ACR was almost completely devoid of side missions. The Master Assassin mission took ages to unlock which kinda took the fun out of them.
Also, we're talking about story related assassinations here, you know, what the games should be all about. In ACR the only story related assassinations that come to mind are Leandros and Shakhulu, both of which felt like they just needed to die because they were in the way, not because they were involved in some massive conspiracy or something.

pacmanate
09-09-2012, 09:13 AM
Well all I am saying is that I am glad that they have worked on social stealth in this game. I remember an article saying the Devs wanted to make this game more assassinatey and stealthy. Hopefully it is. Stuff like Bunker Hill would require stealth otherwise you would be impaled with bullets! I think in Revelations there were hardly any Assassinations as Ezio was doing things for his won personal reasons aka they keys, it wasn't focused really on Templars other than the fact they stole one and were looking for them too.


The objectives to assassinate return. There is a beautiful black list of the names of important people during the revolution.

Watch the E3 demo, for example. Connor must infiltrate a fort: where can get? There are three entrances. Use the rear. Infiltrates, creates a diversion and BOOM. Target deleted.

This is Assassin's Creed 3.

Okay then :P


Since the title has something to do with the missions or gameplay? O_O

The title "Assassin's Creed" is very different from the final product. The game does not speak of the Creed.

The game always speaks of the Creed!? And the title isn't different from the product at all.


Before someone offends me, I want to explain myself better: the game is not the Creed his main argument, that's all.

For example Mass Effect does not seem to talk about the mass effect of the planets..

What...


Story - shmory. Too hard to look for side missions?

It is too hard to look for side missions, especially when there are hardly any! I look at you Revelations.

DiamondBlade_R
09-09-2012, 10:45 AM
Facepalm - when it's better to insult people than look for side missions. Yeah, sure. Why not.
Seriously, drop the act. Unless you're somehow different than the rest of us as a gamer - different from us and the vast majority of the gaming community, which, somehow, I highly doubt - you know full well that's not what it's about. When you're bothered because something is not how you would like it to be - in this case, ACR's lack of assassination missions - going and finding what you want on a smaller scale (in this case, the ACR side missions) is no solution. That's like dissing someone for being upset because they had their cake burned in the oven, arguing that "they could have a cookie instead and so they have nothing to be upset about."
Assassin's's Creed is more about its story than it is about anything else, especially side missions, which a thing you do on the side. For that reason, side-missions cannot redeem the game in that aspect., seeing how not only are those assassination missions you're referring to a "side" thing, they're also much smaller in scope that what actual story-related assassinations would have been, were they included in the game.

connor_bg
09-09-2012, 10:51 AM
Speaking of assassinations and the number of main targets appearances in the series, something else bothered me about the assassination animations. Am i the only one who noticed the high profile kills are made by realistic physical contact between the actual stab and the assassinated person, that contact was lost in Brotherhood and Revelations as i can clearly see Ezio stabs someone and his hands go through the target's body, the target's head sticks out of ezio back and all that crazy stuff?

andreja110s
09-09-2012, 01:05 PM
The Banker mission also offered more than one way to take down your target. You could use the courtesans to distract the guards or blend in with them, or you could sneak closer to do a bench assassination. You could poison all the guards one by one and when there are none left, you're free to do a high-profile assassination. It may have even been possible to pull off an air assassination if you managed to kill one or two of the roof guards. In this mission they made air assassination harder than usual, so doing it that way would have been challenging.

This is what AC needs

DiamondBlade_R
09-09-2012, 01:12 PM
Speaking of assassinations and the number of main targets appearances in the series, something else bothered me about the assassination animations. Am i the only one who noticed the high profile kills are made by realistic physical contact between the actual stab and the assassinated person, that contact was lost in Brotherhood and Revelations as i can clearly see Ezio stabs someone and his hands go through the target's body, the target's head sticks out of ezio back and all that crazy stuff?


This is what AC needs
Exactly. That was what AC1 was all about, and what the entire series was all about in the first place.

ProletariatPleb
09-10-2012, 07:39 AM
Exactly. That was what AC1 was all about, and what the entire series was all about in the first place.
And moral greyness, don't forget that, not portraying that the Assassins are always right and not making cliched enemies.

DiamondBlade_R
09-10-2012, 08:31 AM
And moral greyness, don't forget that, not portraying that the Assassins are always right and not making cliched enemies.I believe there was an interview with Corey May a while ago where he assured that the ambiguous morality of the series would return in AC3. Unfortunately, you can't reallyt be sure with the series nowadays. It seems to me that the more the series progresses, the less effort the writers make in terms of staying true to the series' roots. I've just gone back to AC1 about a week ago, and it's amazing how many subtle inconsistencies have been created over the years as a result of the writers' not staying true to facts laid down in AC1. Trust me on this, there are lots of them. It's subtle, mind you, and not anything game breaking, but it's there.

Just a few of them off the top of my head:

Altair's surname, Ibn La-ahad, translates to "son of no one" in Arabic, which was meant to give his character a sense of mystery and make his background vague. That being the case, why the hell did they ruin it by having him declare in Revelations that he is the "son of Umar?" Altair son of no one, son of Umar? D'oh!
At the end of the first game, during his conversation with Al Mualim, during their fight and even in the aftermath of it (as can be seen in the very last "memory log" of Mem. Block 7), Altair is clearly resentful of his Master's deeds, accusing him of lying to him about his goals, losing all respect for him (addressing him during the fight as "Al Mualim" instead of the usual "master": "my blade sees for me, Al Mualim. It cuts through the darkness"). Yet in Revelations, Altair seems to have no resentment towards his master whatsoever, simply deducing that his change was heart was a result of his exposure to the Apple.
3. In regards to "The Mentor's Keeper":
A) Whenever was young Altair such a dedicated believer in the Creed, that he would use it in an argument with the crusader to point out the good in humanity?
B) Whenever was young Altair such a noble, moral person, that he would preach to the crusader about "having been living a lie" and being "doubly wretched" for it?
C) During their fight in AC1, Al Mualim tells Altair that he has fought over a thousand men, all of them superior to him, and all of them dead by his hand. Are you telling me he did all of that Neo-esque superhuman-like stuff but couldn't free himself from the two or 3 men who were holding him hostage?

ProletariatPleb
09-10-2012, 11:30 AM
I believe there was an interview with Corey May a while ago where he assured that the ambiguous morality of the series would return in AC3. Unfortunately, you can't reallyt be sure with the series nowadays. It seems to me that the more the series progresses, the less effort the writers make in terms of staying true to the series' roots. I've just gone back to AC1 about a week ago, and it's amazing how many subtle inconsistencies have been created over the years as a result of the writers' not staying true to facts laid down in AC1. Trust me on this, there are lots of them. It's subtle, mind you, and not anything game breaking, but it's there.

Just a few of them off the top of my head:
Altair's surname, Ibn La-ahad, translates to "son of no one" in Arabic, which was meant to give his character a sense of mystery and make his background vague. That being the case, why the hell did they ruin it by having him declare in Revelations that he is the "son of Umar?" Altair son of no one, son of Umar? D'oh!
At the end of the first game, during his conversation with Al Mualim, during their fight and even in the aftermath of it (as can be seen in the very last "memory log" of Mem. Block 7), Altair is clearly resentful of his Master's deeds, accusing him of lying to him about his goals, losing all respect for him (addressing him during the fight as "Al Mualim" instead of the usual "master": "my blade sees for me, Al Mualim. It cuts through the darkness"). Yet in Revelations, Altair seems to have no resentment towards his master whatsoever, simply deducing that his change was heart was a result of his exposure to the Apple.
3. In regards to "The Mentor's Keeper":
A) Whenever was young Altair such a dedicated believer in the Creed, that he would use it in an argument with the crusader to point out the good in humanity?
B) Whenever was young Altair such a noble, moral person, that he would preach to the crusader about "having been living a lie" and being "doubly wretched" for it?
C) During their fight in AC1, Al Mualim tells Altair that he has fought over a thousand men, all of them superior to him, and all of them dead by his hand. Are you telling me he did all of that Neo-esque superhuman-like stuff but couldn't free himself from the two or 3 men who were holding him hostage?
1. Yeah I remember that part "Son of none"
2.Woah, never noticed that one.
3.
A)They said the memory was before Altaļr became the arrogant guy he was.
B)Same as above, so probably when he wasn't a master assassin.
C)Didn't get this part? 2-3 people holding hostage?

DiamondBlade_R
09-10-2012, 11:47 AM
1. Yeah I remember that part "Son of none"
2.Woah, never noticed that one.
3.
A)They said the memory was before Altaļr became the arrogant guy he was.
B)Same as above, so probably when he wasn't a master assassin.
C)Didn't get this part? 2-3 people holding hostage?
A+B) Perhaps, but even then, in the beginning of AC1, Altair was a MAJOR ******. You don't become that arrogant just by gaining a rank. His elevation to Master Assassin could've been a boosting factor to his arrogance, sure, but it doesn't make sense that up until that point he apparently was this saint, super noble guy. If you're that much of a saint, you don't become a ****** on that level. To become that, you have to be arrogant, at least to an extent, by nature.
C) Replay The Mentor's Keeper or watch it online and you'll see wht I mean. During that memory, Al Mualim was being held hostage by the crusader's men, which is why Altair had to save him.

ProletariatPleb
09-10-2012, 11:51 AM
A+B) Perhaps, but even than, in the beginning of AC1, Altair was a MAJOR ******. You don't become that arrogant just by gaining a rank. His elevation to Master Assassin could've been a boosting factor to his arrogance, sure, but it doesn't make sense that up until that point he apparently was this saint, super noble guy. If you're that much of a saint, you don't become a ****** on that level. To become that, you have to be arrogant, at least to an extent, by nature.
C) Replay The Mentor's Keeper or watch it online and you'll see wht I mean. During that memory, Al Mualim was being held hostage by the crusader's men, which is why Altair had to save him.

Well I believe there is a difference of several years between those events.

Oh that, I get it. You can also consider that Al Mualim was in the fight when he said that, so maybe he was just trying to lower the morale of Altaļr and boasted. Just guessing.