PDA

View Full Version : Independence Trailer battle? (answers might be spoilers)



WinterLight1981
11-13-2012, 02:52 PM
Hi everyone,

I'm mostly finished with Assassins' Creed 3, save for a few letters, collectibles and naval missions, and have really loved the story and experience! Certainly my favourite game this year :) Only one little thing is bothering me, though, and that is that some of the documents and database entries that I have seem to be referring to things which I don't remember even being mentioned in the story, which had points which were a little tenuous for me to follow. I was wondering if there were some things I perhaps missed in the game/main story?

In particular, at 0:50 of the Independence Trailer (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n1OvvLH2w6Q), there is a battle taking place in winter which looks like it would be a large part of the story. Is this theBunker Hill battle with the seasons altered, something that's been cut or something that I missed? I will be playing more to try and play 100% of the game so I can decide how I'd compare it to other AC games, but so far I have loved it and just want to make sure I've seen and done all of this amazing game!

Thanks! :cool:

Kaswa101
11-13-2012, 03:02 PM
I wonder this as well... It's in the reveal trailer too, as well as the CGI TV ad. I was looking so forward to it. :(

WinterLight1981
11-16-2012, 05:10 PM
Yeah, that's true. I'm hoping other forum members might look at this because the more I think about it - the more this ties in with what is the biggest issue with the story for me. The reveal trailer shows General Wahington, of course - so it's safe to assume that sort of event might happen after Continental Congress. What lacks development, for me, is why Connor is such a strong defender of Washington (he seems to be almost on a Mason Weems level of godlike admiration) until the village attack stuff comes up. The advertising suggested Connor's involvement with a lot of events in 1776/77 that didn't appear in the game and I have a few reasons now, that I suspect they were originally around and have been cut:

1: There was an early screenshot of Connor riding alongside Washington and the Continental Army in winter, which appeared alongside a lot of images of Washington in this winter setting which would seem to tie quite well to the late months of 1776. There was another screenshot at that time of Connor in a canoe - the mechanic of which we know was taken out. Thinking of this alongside the promotional image of Washington's Delaware crossing with Connor alongside him (which is also featured in the Washington diary), it seems to me that a scene like this might well employ the same mechanics as the canoeing to ride alongside Washington?

2: We know the Great Fire of New York, Von Steuben and Alexander Hamilton were all cut. While we know the Great Fire was down to AI issues and Von Steuben an issue of translation/occupying a similar role to Lafayette, it seems like a lot of the other settings that were advertised such as the Battle of Trenton would require Hamilton to make sense. I seem to remember the Battles of Princeton and Saratoga were also mentioned which occured at a similar time. In relation to the story making sense, I'll continue to point 3...

3: After the second attack on Connor's village, at the Battle of Monmouth, Connor tells Washington that this will be "the last victory I deliver you"...but with what we've seen in the game, Connor hasn't delivered Washington any other victories, and has only really contributed by saving him from Hickey. There are only 2 interactive conversations with Washington prior to this, and two cutscenes where they speak briefly - it seems barely enough to establish them as close allies.

Connor's stance here is the main reason I think this is so important. In the game as we have played it, Connor's only association with colonial forces was related to his pursuit of William Johnson, after which he was simply caught up in the midnight ride and Bunker Hill. From this, he seems to switch automatically to wanting to trust his father, which seems like a big jump and appears fairly suddenly and surprisingly in the narrative. Imagine if we had seen Connor ride alongside the continental army and reconcile to them, taking a stake in the warring colonial forces, as opposed to solely focusing on the fate of his tribe, and beginning to believe he can trust them - until he goes so far as to think he can work together with Haytham - which of course ends in the scene where he is doubly betrayed which would feel so much more affecting!

A friend of mine loved AC3 as well, but we both agreed that for some reason, the main story felt quite rushed-through. Having played through the side quests (and accepting that Tom Paine was in Philadelphia so wouldn't be meeting Connor :P) the only place where this remains true is here. I understand that things likethe Great Fire were not possible with the technical limitations but if these things were truly features and were cut and won't be emerging in DLC, I would really like to find out why. I can't see how they would detract from the story - on the contrary, I feel they would add so much and feel their absence makes it a little lacking. Anyone else agree?

A-p-o-l-l-y-o-n
11-16-2012, 05:14 PM
One word: DLC. They will probably add more in DLC. They probably made room for Haytham.

WinterLight1981
11-16-2012, 05:22 PM
One word: DLC. They will probably add more in DLC. They probably made room for Haytham.

I would be very happy if that were to happen! I have no problem with paying for DLC to add to a 50+hour game, but I do have a problem when DLC creates a 50-60 hour game and the story still feels rushed ;) I was thinking that all of the DLC was going to be alloted to the Tyranny of King George and multiplayer content...was I wrong about this? Do you think we might see additions to the main story in DLC? :D

Kaswa101
11-16-2012, 06:03 PM
Yeah, that's true. I'm hoping other forum members might look at this because the more I think about it - the more this ties in with what is the biggest issue with the story for me. The reveal trailer shows General Wahington, of course - so it's safe to assume that sort of event might happen after Continental Congress. What lacks development, for me, is why Connor is such a strong defender of Washington (he seems to be almost on a Mason Weems level of godlike admiration) until the village attack stuff comes up. The advertising suggested Connor's involvement with a lot of events in 1776/77 that didn't appear in the game and I have a few reasons now, that I suspect they were originally around and have been cut:

1: There was an early screenshot of Connor riding alongside Washington and the Continental Army in winter, which appeared alongside a lot of images of Washington in this winter setting which would seem to tie quite well to the late months of 1776. There was another screenshot at that time of Connor in a canoe - the mechanic of which we know was taken out. Thinking of this alongside the promotional image of Washington's Delaware crossing with Connor alongside him (which is also featured in the Washington diary), it seems to me that a scene like this might well employ the same mechanics as the canoeing to ride alongside Washington?

2: We know the Great Fire of New York, Von Steuben and Alexander Hamilton were all cut. While we know the Great Fire was down to AI issues and Von Steuben an issue of translation/occupying a similar role to Lafayette, it seems like a lot of the other settings that were advertised such as the Battle of Trenton would require Hamilton to make sense. I seem to remember the Battles of Princeton and Saratoga were also mentioned which occured at a similar time. In relation to the story making sense, I'll continue to point 3...

3: After the second attack on Connor's village, at the Battle of Monmouth, Connor tells Washington that this will be "the last victory I deliver you"...but with what we've seen in the game, Connor hasn't delivered Washington any other victories, and has only really contributed by saving him from Hickey. There are only 2 interactive conversations with Washington prior to this, and two cutscenes where they speak briefly - it seems barely enough to establish them as close allies.

Connor's stance here is the main reason I think this is so important. In the game as we have played it, Connor's only association with colonial forces was related to his pursuit of William Johnson, after which he was simply caught up in the midnight ride and Bunker Hill. From this, he seems to switch automatically to wanting to trust his father, which seems like a big jump and appears fairly suddenly and surprisingly in the narrative. Imagine if we had seen Connor ride alongside the continental army and reconcile to them, taking a stake in the warring colonial forces, as opposed to solely focusing on the fate of his tribe, and beginning to believe he can trust them - until he goes so far as to think he can work together with Haytham - which of course ends in the scene where he is doubly betrayed which would feel so much more affecting!

A friend of mine loved AC3 as well, but we both agreed that for some reason, the main story felt quite rushed-through. Having played through the side quests (and accepting that Tom Paine was in Philadelphia so wouldn't be meeting Connor :P) the only place where this remains true is here. I understand that things likethe Great Fire were not possible with the technical limitations but if these things were truly features and were cut and won't be emerging in DLC, I would really like to find out why. I can't see how they would detract from the story - on the contrary, I feel they would add so much and feel their absence makes it a little lacking. Anyone else agree?

I agree. The battle in the reveal trailer was one of the most anticipated sections of the game. The Great Fire of New York was one I was particularly looking forward to as well. :(

Why Ubisoft? :p