PDA

View Full Version : Haytham's Part Was What Made AC3 Less Than It Could Have Been...



TrueAssassin77
11-16-2012, 05:01 PM
Haytham was the worst part of AC3. if his part was 2 hrs or less, those other 3 to 4 hours could have been spent fleshing out Connor's character, connecting events in a more seamless fashion, actually having Connor training instead of "6 months later"

Haytham's part shorten the main storyline far to much. we could have had The Battle of Saratoga, and alot of other stuff that was promised to us in demos. but Haythem's overly long section literally condensed the game....

all that stuff that got taken out? imagine if Connor had gotten ideally 3-4 hrs more of showtime...

they should have made a short film for haytham... that's what they did for ezios dad....

i didn't buy the game to play as haytham... i bought the game to play as Connor The Native American Assassin.


people complained about the connectivity of the events... 5 more hours of Connor would have solved that.
people complained about No training(player progression as Connor ex). Connor training under Achilles)... 5 more hours as Connor would have solved that
people complained about battles and events that were left out... 5 more hours as Connor would have solved that
people complained about No missions the delve into Connors culture... 5 more hours as Connor would have solved that
people complained about the main storyline being to short... 5 more hours of connor would have solved that(no haythams part really doesn't count. you are not the main protagonist thus you are not doing the main storyline.

jamgamerforever
11-16-2012, 05:07 PM
Playing as a Master Templar is one of my favourite parts of this game. I propose that removing that section would have made this game's plot far less interesting.

TrueAssassin77
11-16-2012, 05:09 PM
Playing as a Master Templar is one of my favourite parts of this game. I propose that removing that section would have made this game's plot far less interesting.

i propose that removing that part to add stuff to the main part of the game, would have made the Whole game more interesting...

the main plot would have been augmented.

i didn't say take the part out, im saying what that part did to the game...

A-p-o-l-l-y-o-n
11-16-2012, 05:10 PM
Disagree. I'd rather they have cut out some of the Desmond stuff, and cut out some of the unskippable naval missions. I say they made a good decision adding in Haytham's part. It's about time the series stopped being so black and white. If anything, they should have cut out Haytham's whole Journey on the ship to America sequence. That was unnecessary, but everything from his arrival in Boston to his inducting Charles Lee was good, at least in my opinion.

jamgamerforever
11-16-2012, 05:55 PM
I think we needed MORE Desmond, and MORE of Connor's backstory. Honestly, I do not believe Ubisoft started this straight after AC2 as they claim. There are quite a few bugs, some obviously rushed side missions ("You have my everlasting gratitude, sir!"), and a fair few rushed story points.

Perhaps they started work on the engine after AC2, but I don't think they started making the game until, at the earliest, after Brotherhood.

Kaschra
11-16-2012, 07:45 PM
How about no?
I absolutely love the Haytham parts, even more after that nice plot twist.

RatonhnhakeFan
11-16-2012, 07:55 PM
Recruting Lee, Johnson, Church, Hickey & Pitcairn was great because it introduced the villains/targets and we didn't need any introductions later on, hence why all five were very memorable targets, much more than the ones in previous games. But the Haytham ship section was completly pointless and did nothing but drag his gameplay too long. And Ratonhnhaké:ton's introduction and childhood indeed feels way too rushed after detailing every tiniest thing Haytham did. Not to mention the abrupt transition from Haytham and Kaniehti:io kissing in the cave to pregnancy and immediate break up that not explained enough at all (not even talking about showing any of it). Along with Kaniehti:io going to Achilles for help, depicting what Achilles told her, who exactly told Ratonhnhaké:ton about Haytham and all the Kaniehti:io stuff that was relegated to the Database (how she lost her chance to become a Clan Mother after it was discovered that she got involved with a Templar). Frankly, there should be at least one Kaniehti:io mission, or less pointless Haytham ship stuff and replaced with events that happen after the cave kiss.

psf22
11-16-2012, 08:16 PM
... And Ratonhnhaké:ton's introduction and childhood indeed feels way too rushed after detailing every tiniest thing Haytham did. Not to mention the abrupt transition from Haytham and Kaniehti:io kissing in the cave to pregnancy and immediate break up that not explained enough at all (not even talking about showing any of it). Along with Kaniehti:io going to Achilles for help, depicting what Achilles told her, who exactly told Ratonhnhaké:ton about Haytham and all the Kaniehti:io stuff that was relegated to the Database (how she lost her chance to become a Clan Mother after it was discovered that she got involved with a Templar). Frankly, there should be at least one Kaniehti:io mission, or less pointless Haytham ship stuff and replaced with events that happen after the cave kiss.

I read that too in the Database and i found it quite interesting, too bad it wasn't shown on screen. But i think it was partially done for the mystique. Because when you switch to Connor it's never really explained what happened between Haytham and Kaniehti:io. Just that, well he's gone, so it's kind of left in the middle on purpose. If you know what i mean.

But they should've made his mother have a more pronounced mission at least. I really enjoyed the way they introduced her.

xboxauditore
11-16-2012, 08:19 PM
Haytham was.....Meh, His story was pretty cool, but it did steal a whole load of time from Connor, Time that could of fleshed out and developed connor, where the story that they left in made him look arrogant and foolish, he could of had more time to show a wiser side if they cut Haythams basically un-needed story.

Apirka
11-16-2012, 08:25 PM
Rather than cut out any of Haytham's parts (I still think they're the most interesting and fun parts of the whole game), I think they should have cut some of the side missions and stuff. The main story -- of which Haytham was a part of -- obviously needed to be polished more. Well. A lot more. Both the Connor and Desmond parts (of which the game needed far more, imho). Having lots of side missions is nice and all, but some less (pointless) side content would have hurt the game far less than the unpolished main story has.

TrueAssassin77
11-16-2012, 08:29 PM
in no way was haythams part needed.

They used database cutscense to describe bad guys in AC2.

Skippable cutscences

I'm sorry but haytham did take to much away from connor
This game didn't evwn need a prologue.
AC2 didn't have a 5 hr prologue... it had an awesome short film

RatonhnhakeFan
11-16-2012, 08:40 PM
I read that too in the Database and i found it quite interesting, too bad it wasn't shown on screen. But i think it was partially done for the mystique. Because when you switch to Connor it's never really explained what happened between Haytham and Kaniehti:io. Just that, well he's gone, so it's kind of left in the middle on purpose. If you know what i mean.

But they should've made his mother have a more pronounced mission at least. I really enjoyed the way they introduced her.There's a point where mystique works and where it just turns into a plothole. In this case, it's the latter IMO. It almost feels like they cut stuff from between Sequence 3 & 4 and turned it into 5-seconds long Kaniehti:io narrating what happened during a loading screen instead. It's nowhere near enough, especially considering how important aspect to the story it is.

Apirka
11-16-2012, 08:46 PM
A short film would have been good as well.

And the fact that AC2 did it differently doesn't mean that it did it better. I can barely ever remember who the targets in AC2 were (particularly the ones in Venice). I very much remember the targets in AC3. AC1 wasn't all that bad at introducing the bad guys either -- Robert and Al Mualim you know for the whole game, with the others you have the whole mission to learn about -- and even then, the only one who really stuck was Sibrand. AC:B? I remember Cesare. And killing some banker dude. And I think Cesare's right hand man. Was there anyone else? AC:R? Um, Ahmed? Some old guy whose name escapes me right now? That Janissary guy? was there anyone else? Honestly, the only villains I really cared about one way or another (be it liking them or hating them), were Uberto for killing my family, Rodrigo (a little), Cesare, Ahmed, Sibrand and Al Mualim. ...and all of the AC3 ones. Honestly, maybe the Haytham missions weren't necessary, but the introduction to your tragets and how the Templar - Assassin conflict was portrayed (when the Templars weren't randomly ****s to some kid) was one of the stronger points of Connor's story.

RatonhnhakeFan
11-16-2012, 08:48 PM
I think the introduction of the targets was great and I wouldn't cut it at all ideally. But they devoted so much resources to it that other, even more important parts suffered :(

Apirka
11-16-2012, 08:55 PM
Indeed. I think the main story is better for having that introduction, but I also thought that Connor's part felt terribly unpolished, which is why I would have rather they cut side content instead.

Calamityx51
11-16-2012, 09:01 PM
There were quite a few things I felt the opening did do right (the setup for the reveal being the main one), much like others though I felt it went on a little too long. I like Connor a lot but agree that we could have used more time seeing him develop (that's why I'm hoping for another game with him). I was also hoping for a bit more with his culture, village and definitely a bit more with his mom (frustrated about the bugged database updating way before it should that kind of ruined two plot points for me...). I mean yes, good on them for keeping the two protagonists secret for as long as they did but for me Haytham's portion definitely went on a little bit longer than it should and hurt Connor's portion in the process.

Em-Man
11-16-2012, 09:03 PM
If less Haytham means more Desmond, I agree.
But Connor didn't really need more screentime imo.

RatonhnhakeFan
11-16-2012, 09:04 PM
There were quite a few things I felt the opening did do right (the setup for the reveal being the main one), much like others though I felt it went on a little too long. I like Connor a lot but agree that we could have used more time seeing him develop (that's why I'm hoping for another game with him). I was also hoping for a bit more with his culture, village and definitely a bit more with his mom (frustrated about the bugged database updating way before it should that kind of ruined two plot points for me...). I mean yes, good on them for keeping the two protagonists secret for as long as they did but for me Haytham's portion definitely went on a little bit longer than it should and hurt Connor's portion in the process.Like I said, the ship part from Haytham's gameplay was completly pointless. It adds nothing to the story and could've just been replaced with 10-seconds long "Haytham arrives in America" cutscene. This way Haytham section wouldn't drag so much.

Em-Man
11-16-2012, 09:10 PM
Like I said, the ship part from Haytham's gameplay was completly pointless. It adds nothing to the story and could've just been replaced with 10-seconds long "Haytham arrives in America" cutscene..
Maybe it didn't give anything to the story, but the long iconic trip to the new world was a big deal at the time. It's all about immersion.
Not completely pointless, but sure a bit too long.

TrueAssassin77
11-16-2012, 09:10 PM
If you really think they should cut out side missions you are a ido-...er nevermind...

Calamityx51
11-16-2012, 09:11 PM
I'm going to have to agree with you completely on that. By around the third time they told me to return to my quarters to the end the night, I was really starting to feel like the boat section was dragging something fierce.

RatonhnhakeFan
11-16-2012, 09:14 PM
Maybe it didn't give anything to the story, but the long iconic trip to the new world was a big deal at the time. It's all about immersion.
Not completely pointless, but sure a bit too long.Good point, but in the grand scheme of things and how vast this story was, we really didn't need this. A nice "welcome to America" cutscene with wide camera angle of the new world would be enough. Ultimately, it just unnecessarily prolongs Haytham's gameplay which would be already long enough even without it.

zerocooll21
11-16-2012, 09:18 PM
Recruting Lee, Johnson, Church, Hickey & Pitcairn was great because it introduced the villains/targets and we didn't need any introductions later on, hence why all five were very memorable targets, much more than the ones in previous games. But the Haytham ship section was completly pointless and did nothing but drag his gameplay too long. And Ratonhnhaké:ton's introduction and childhood indeed feels way too rushed after detailing every tiniest thing Haytham did. Not to mention the abrupt transition from Haytham and Kaniehti:io kissing in the cave to pregnancy and immediate break up that not explained enough at all (not even talking about showing any of it). Along with Kaniehti:io going to Achilles for help, depicting what Achilles told her, who exactly told Ratonhnhaké:ton about Haytham and all the Kaniehti:io stuff that was relegated to the Database (how she lost her chance to become a Clan Mother after it was discovered that she got involved with a Templar). Frankly, there should be at least one Kaniehti:io mission, or less pointless Haytham ship stuff and replaced with events that happen after the cave kiss.


+1

Apirka
11-16-2012, 09:23 PM
If you really think they should cut out side missions you are a ido-...er nevermind...

Why am I not surprised? And honestly, I'd rather have some pointless courier missions less and a better polished story as a whole. Can't say I ever cared about the side missions much. (In fact, I eventually just stopped doing them because they bored me.)

TrueAssassin77
11-16-2012, 09:42 PM
Why am I not surprised? And honestly, I'd rather have some pointless courier missions less and a better polished story as a whole. Can't say I ever cared about the side missions much. (In fact, I eventually just stopped doing them because they bored me.)

I only hinted something like that because....

The don't include side missions in main story hours
.
Cutting them out would literally
o?nothing

Apirka
11-16-2012, 10:54 PM
They do take up resources and time, don't they? Admittedly, I'm no expert on these things, but since the side missions are at least partly story related (like the Homestead missions), cutting some of those and allocating said resources to the main story might help?

TrueAssassin77
11-16-2012, 11:29 PM
no because they create gameplay depth in the story.

haytham's part actually doesn't contribute anything that couldn't have been explained in a short film or a series of flashbacks. i didn't say it needed to to be cut from the script... but trust me when i say this. they cut out alot of good things just so they can keep that 5 hour prolouge.

they needed to condense it

People complain about, connor never actually learning anything from achillies from a player standpoint. connor never has a training session similar to ezios training session.
washington crossing the delaware? trust me, that could have been put in there. hell there was concept art for that epic event in american history. There is noting in haythams part that could be carried to connors. its like starting the game over for the second time when you finally play as connor. AC2 isn't my favorite AC. Brotherhood and AC3 are. but the cutscenes in AC2 were awesome, the fact that it started slow was a minor annoyance. like 2-3 hours? less? but at least you were ezio during that. this game takes slow starts to a whole nother level man. and you are not even the main hero! All those plot drops that riddle the main story line? If haythams part had been a reasonable hour or two, the other 3 hours could have been spent actually polishing the main story. iconic events have literally been cut out of the story, just so haytham can recruit fellow templars? and kill a former templar? only needed part of haythams story was, him meeting connors mon(arguable), finding the necklace(kinda), him and charles lee interactions(these could have been condensed to), and the revelation that he was an templar.

zerocooll21
11-16-2012, 11:34 PM
I don't like how long it was but I did like the way Ubi told the story, as far as that part goes. They always want to make the line between Assassins/templars a blur. By making you live / walk around thinking you're an assassin you will be more apt to accept the actions as "good". With the plot twist they knock you back and make you second guess all the work you just did. You get to know your enemy before blinding going out hunting. I'm not great at explaining so if doesn't make sense just ask :p

TrueAssassin77
11-16-2012, 11:40 PM
I don't like how long it was but I did like the way Ubi told the story, as far as that part goes. They always want to make the line between Assassins/templars a blur. By making you live / walk around thinking you're an assassin you will be more apt to accept the actions as "good". With the plot twist they knock you back and make you second guess all the work you just did. You get to know your enemy before blinding going out hunting. I'm not great at explaining so if doesn't make sense just ask :p

i actually understand... but there is still stuff that could be condensed in that prolouge.

im making this thread so the devs know: DO NOT MAKE A PROLOUGE THAT LONG IN FUTURE GAMES! EVEN MORE SO IF THE PROLOUGE DOESN"T EVEN FEATURE THE MAIN CHARACTER

zerocooll21
11-16-2012, 11:48 PM
I would add that after beating the game once, it would be cool if we could skip the prolog and start the story from connors side.

RatonhnhakeFan
11-16-2012, 11:58 PM
I would add that after beating the game once, it would be cool if we could skip the prolog and start the story from connors side.

Yeah, I'm kinda not looking forward to playing as Haytham again. It worked for the first time, before I saw how immoral he trully is

Mega8BitPanda
11-16-2012, 11:59 PM
Connor didn't have a tutorial because Haytham served that purpose... to have another one at Sequence 5/6 would have been ridiculous and too much of a rehash of Ezio and Mario, in my opinion.

However, I do have a gripe with Haytham's prologue. It could have easily been 2 or 3 sequences. We didn't done the hood until Sequence 6; as developers if you see that you don't don your trademark costume until 6 out of 12 sequences, half of your game's story, something is seriously wrong there. Also, whereas Haytham's Sequences should have been 2 or 3 missions, they were nearing six and fives while most of Connor's are 2 and 3. It just seems like too much attention was put onto Haytham's mission structure.

I think they did a great job of establishing who Connor was as him knowing about his father was hinted at through him reading his mother's journal before hiding it when she comes to see him in his first scene. The rest established the hunting mechanics and rather than have Achilles explain all the lore of Assassin's which we know, and to keep it a jumping on point, they went over it quickly. I appreciated that. Yet I think they most certainly should have expanded on Connor as a whole and Desmond, Desmond was brisk as it was he didn't need even more cutting as some have suggested.

Playing Haytham was a brilliant dramatic theme and dared to be bold, something that really needs to happen more when done with such care as the prologue and not like brisk ending. However, it is kind of ironic that the prologue was ridiculously long and the ending so short. Since it was something rather new, to the series at least, I can let it slide with the idea that they'll do better with it next should they ever pull it again.

The ship most certainly could have been cut, it didn't even show us naval combat or the like but was a rather long tutorial about the Eagle Vision that we barely used and a quick 101 on brawling. Also, I would rather the build up to each villain to be within each sequence as it is a rather large game and thus I actually completely forgot who was who when I was simply given a name and told to go find them up until I shared a cutscene with them once more, with little memory of their characterisation. They seemed to fall off the face of the Earth since the prologue until their assassination sequence, bar Lee.

A-p-o-l-l-y-o-n
11-17-2012, 02:02 AM
The biggest part of Haytham's prologue that should have been cut is the boat part where he is traveling to America. That was unnecessary. That was like the majority of Sequence 1.

TrueAssassin77
11-17-2012, 02:07 AM
game has 12 sequences.prolouge takes up 5(or was it 6?)

that is nearly half the game. at that point, it starts taking away from connors screentime. and cutting stuff that could have been used to enhance the main story

Slifer2880
11-17-2012, 04:46 AM
Ok 1. Haytham was a tutorial, to help u get used to the new stuff, along with desmond at the beginning, and 2. Did u want the game set by a ****ing deadline, or did u want it to take like a whole other year and have some other year-made game in its place? and Btw, haytham actually IS apart of the main plot, because he's connor's father, and had the grand temple key, look at the big picture there.

Slifer2880
11-17-2012, 04:48 AM
Connor didn't have a tutorial because Haytham served that purpose... to have another one at Sequence 5/6 would have been ridiculous and too much of a rehash of Ezio and Mario, in my opinion.

However, I do have a gripe with Haytham's prologue. It could have easily been 2 or 3 sequences. We didn't done the hood until Sequence 6; as developers if you see that you don't don your trademark costume until 6 out of 12 sequences, half of your game's story, something is seriously wrong there. Also, whereas Haytham's Sequences should have been 2 or 3 missions, they were nearing six and fives while most of Connor's are 2 and 3. It just seems like too much attention was put onto Haytham's mission structure.

I think they did a great job of establishing who Connor was as him knowing about his father was hinted at through him reading his mother's journal before hiding it when she comes to see him in his first scene. The rest established the hunting mechanics and rather than have Achilles explain all the lore of Assassin's which we know, and to keep it a jumping on point, they went over it quickly. I appreciated that. Yet I think they most certainly should have expanded on Connor as a whole and Desmond, Desmond was brisk as it was he didn't need even more cutting as some have suggested.

Playing Haytham was a brilliant dramatic theme and dared to be bold, something that really needs to happen more when done with such care as the prologue and not like brisk ending. However, it is kind of ironic that the prologue was ridiculously long and the ending so short. Since it was something rather new, to the series at least, I can let it slide with the idea that they'll do better with it next should they ever pull it again.

The ship most certainly could have been cut, it didn't even show us naval combat or the like but was a rather long tutorial about the Eagle Vision that we barely used and a quick 101 on brawling. Also, I would rather the build up to each villain to be within each sequence as it is a rather large game and thus I actually completely forgot who was who when I was simply given a name and told to go find them up until I shared a cutscene with them once more, with little memory of their characterisation. They seemed to fall off the face of the Earth since the prologue until their assassination sequence, bar Lee.

Considering the fact that haytham was made as a tutorial and plot character, as was connor's childhood.

TrueAssassin77
11-17-2012, 05:16 AM
Ok 1. Haytham was a tutorial, to help u get used to the new stuff, along with desmond at the beginning, and 2. Did u want the game set by a ****ing deadline, or did u want it to take like a whole other year and have some other year-made game in its place? and Btw, haytham actually IS apart of the main plot, because he's connor's father, and had the grand temple key, look at the big picture there.

what you said makes no sense to me man...

haytham is the tutorial? i can see that... accept it took almost half the game and lasted over 5 hours..... because most tutorials last that long right?

Haytham is not the main story, hes the prolouge. theres a diffrernce. look it up

all your other points i can't understand at all

RatonhnhakeFan
11-17-2012, 05:28 AM
Ok 1. Haytham was a tutorial, to help u get used to the new stuff, along with desmond at the beginning, and 2. Did u want the game set by a ****ing deadline, or did u want it to take like a whole other year and have some other year-made game in its place? and Btw, haytham actually IS apart of the main plot, because he's connor's father, and had the grand temple key, look at the big picture there.

Few people argue that Haytham's section should be completely cut out of the game. However, they devoted way too much resources to it, to the point of detailing stuff that really didn't matter (ship mission), while the actual main protagonist's introductory section (Ratonhnhaké:ton's) feels chopped and rushed in comparison.

Apirka
11-17-2012, 10:08 AM
game has 12 sequences.prolouge takes up 5(or was it 6?)

that is nearly half the game. at that point, it starts taking away from connors screentime. and cutting stuff that could have been used to enhance the main story

Haytham's part is the first 3 sequences, with the first mission of sequence 1 actually being a Animus tutorial with Desmond with the ending cutscene going over into Haytham's opera mission. sequence 4 is already child!Connor, and is therefore part of his screen time


And yeah, the ship part wasn't really that necessary -- we could have gone without it (though I like it a lot). Or have that be the introduction to naval battles, Connor's wouldn't have that odd "Wait, he's just learning how to even steer the ship and now he already goes around winning battles?" thing going on. Generally, I think what really dragged on was Connor's early missions. Take convincing Achilles -- basically, all you is run from A to B to C, back to B, back to C and then some enemies show up and we can finally go on with the plot. It didn't really do much to establish Connor's character while dragging on and being really kind of boring. (In fact, I find most of young!Connor's missions boring.) Even the Boston massacre feels more like an extended tutorial than anything else. I've no problem with tutorials -- Haytham's part pretty much was one, as said before, but they didn't really make it feel interesting, at least to me. Even before considering to cut anything, I think what screen time we do have of Connor should have been a lot more polished. And if they then needed more screentime for him, other things could have been cut.

Rithrius
11-17-2012, 11:00 AM
Ubisoft promised us Assassin's Creed 3 with the main character being Connor. Were the Haytham sequences advertised or even mentioned before the game's release? It should have been, imo.

I didn't mind Haytham's sequences actually. I liked how they introduced each Templar Connor had to kill. You actually got a feel for who they were and why they had to die. Yes, Connor's part should have been longer and more detailed, but Haytham's part was just as necessary. They wanted the player to see the story from two different perspectives.

TrueAssassin77
11-17-2012, 04:45 PM
Haytham's part is the first 3 sequences, with the first mission of sequence 1 actually being a Animus tutorial with Desmond with the ending cutscene going over into Haytham's opera mission. sequence 4 is already child!Connor, and is therefore part of his screen time


And yeah, the ship part wasn't really that necessary -- we could have gone without it (though I like it a lot). Or have that be the introduction to naval battles, Connor's wouldn't have that odd "Wait, he's just learning how to even steer the ship and now he already goes around winning battles?" thing going on. Generally, I think what really dragged on was Connor's early missions. Take convincing Achilles -- basically, all you is run from A to B to C, back to B, back to C and then some enemies show up and we can finally go on with the plot. It didn't really do much to establish Connor's character while dragging on and being really kind of boring. (In fact, I find most of young!Connor's missions boring.) Even the Boston massacre feels more like an extended tutorial than anything else. I've no problem with tutorials -- Haytham's part pretty much was one, as said before, but they didn't really make it feel interesting, at least to me. Even before considering to cut anything, I think what screen time we do have of Connor should have been a lot more polished. And if they then needed more screentime for him, other things could have been cut.\

Haythams is a prolouge more than anything, and a five hour one at that. and cutting anything else would limit connors screentime... do you underdtsnd that? if you want a game without sidemissions than this is not the game for you

Apirka
11-17-2012, 05:08 PM
I didn't even talk about the side missions there? And it's not that I don't want side missions, I just think the main story is more important; besides, I've done just fine with every other AC before, and my gripes with this one don't really lie with the side missions as much as the unpolished main story.

What I actually talked about in that post is that the pacing of connor's part, particularly the early part was off in general. Rather than develop his character, there's a lot of "run from A to B and back", which, much as I like free running, does get boring if that's what a mission practically consist of. (Like what leads up to Connor being trained by Achilles -- apart from a short fight with some mooks, it's just a bit of running with cutscenes in between. By the time Achilles took me in, I was just kind of bored.) I don't even think they should have cut that, but make the screen time Connor already has more interesting, *then* start cutting things -- be that Haytham's ship mission, side quests, what have you -- in order to give Connor the screen time they need.

I still wouldn't want to lose the Haytham sequences, because I think what they did with the villains there was actually quite wonderful -- and a well done villain is, imho, just as good as a well done hero. I think AC3 handled that best compared to other ACs, it's a shame they kind of dropped the ball when they switched to Connor's POV.

Besides, are you sure Haytham's sequences are five hours long? I know I got to at least sequence six the same day I started the game and I distinctly remember that I didn't play for much more than five hours.

TrueAssassin77
11-17-2012, 05:23 PM
its projected to be 5 hours by the devolpers.

good gamers can get it done in 3.

still in the end, its a prolouge that could have been much much more condensed. i'd be shocked if they actually took some parts out of it already, because it seems they cared more about that story(prolouge) more than connors devolpment and desmonds ending....

psf22
11-17-2012, 05:27 PM
its projected to be 5 hours by the devolpers.

good gamers can get it done in 3.

still in the end, its a prolouge that could have been much much more condensed. i'd be shocked if they actually took some parts out of it already, because it seems they cared more about that story(prolouge) more than connors devolpment and desmonds ending....

Seems like they even changed up the missions and targets. Might not mean anything but look https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gZrklEy9ohQ and watch http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6c10bW1S7Tc

I actually prefer the demo. Beta or not they sure changed things last minute, because it's a complete 180.
The whole scenario looks completely different than it is in the fullgame: Look at the surrounding when Connor sells the meat, or during the hunting being able to dodge the wolf, snow looks better on the ground etc. Why did they remove these things, or was it due to system restraints? Doesn't bother me if the visuals are a bit low res or anything but it's like completely different.

I'm actually kind of backtracking on Haytham's part.. thinking it was extended or added later on, thus negating Connors part.

Apirka
11-17-2012, 05:40 PM
its projected to be 5 hours by the devolpers.

good gamers can get it done in 3.

still in the end, its a prolouge that could have been much much more condensed. i'd be shocked if they actually took some parts out of it already, because it seems they cared more about that story(prolouge) more than connors devolpment and desmonds ending....

I see. I was wondering why everyone said it was so long...

And AC3's story telling in general isn't all that great. What's odd is that such care is put into the villains' development in that prologue and when we switch to Connor they fall to the wayside as well.

TrueAssassin77
11-18-2012, 03:18 AM
im really trying to look at this in a non-emotional way.

haythams prolouge was to long. that is pretty much the general statement by most. there is story parts of connors story that really could have been great for connor, but haytham steals the show.... the ending was 5 minutes... while the prolouge was 5 hours.

theres a series imbalance imo. and the rest of the game sufferered because of it

Iamsosobad
11-18-2012, 03:36 AM
Haytham's part was fine. Bad writing and boring gameplay were what made this game less than it could have been.

TrueAssassin77
11-18-2012, 06:09 AM
as soon as you said "boring gameplay" i discredited your opinion. sorry.

oh, and the fact you are in support of a 5 hour prolouge

Godforbid12
11-18-2012, 08:13 AM
The prologue is fine and really adds something to the story. Killing Pican, Hickey, Johnson, lee, church were actually memorable for me and was worth the effort even if connor wasn't as nearly as interesting has the guys i killed were.

Lets look at everyones big gripe the boat.
I understand, its long, its boring, you just want to hit America already. But think about it, in real life these guys sailed for months on end with nothing to do but work and look at the sea, men, the sea, men, the sea, oh and did i say men? In this case in point if you keep an open mind about it its unusual long time on this can be presented as the time spent on the boat its long and boring. While neat the first time around it grows dull over time no?

The plot twist to this was a nice touch, a bit before this time(also before you brand them as 'enemy') you can talk to them, they open up to you tell you a bit about themselves and actually get to learn about the character and feel for them(same cannot be said for connor) Haythan was more of a interesting character than Connor is, IMO as a side note i'd actually like to see his side of the story like why did he start the boston massacre? Or what did he do while Connor was pickpocketing people for loose change to buy a new pistol? I'd like to see this as it opens the world slightly further and expand on the characters we got to know within the first 5 hours of the game.

As with Connor there isn't much to learn about him at all as he is stotic, distance, rude, and cold. There is no personality to speak of, though disregarding the bond he has with Achellies is something else alltogether. A bit more 'face time' will not flesh out anything he is your stereotypical vengeful character that will stop at nothing to get his vengeance, some area of his past can probably be expanded upon but if you read the animus entries some of that will be explained, meaning even if they didn't put it into a cutscene its still in the game in some way or form. Another thing to remember is DLC they can use this chance to expand on him further if they so choose to desire so never forget to dismiss that.

All in all keep an open mind about things and you'll see it in a different light. While i agree the ship sequence was long, but it adds to that immersion.

TrueAssassin77
11-18-2012, 08:59 PM
the prolouge is 5 hours...

there is not real defense for why it should be that long

the ending was 5 minutes.... that speaks volumes

A-p-o-l-l-y-o-n
11-19-2012, 12:40 AM
the prolouge is 5 hours...

there is not real defense for why it should be that long

the ending was 5 minutes.... that speaks volumes

How many times are you going to spam the same **** thing?

@Godforbid12 I understand, the boat part represents months of travel, but it was the part that was most unconnected and unnecessary to the story. That part would have cut nearly an hour off of Haytham's part. It's not about wanting to get to America faster. It's about what's unessential to the plot, and the boat part was pretty unessential. The rest of the prologue, though, I would want to stay. Why? Because it's essential to understanding the Templars, who they are, and what their motivations are. You don't get the time to see this in Connor's part, the main part, of the story. And Ubisoft wanted to explore things from the Templar side, and this was a great way to do it. Cutting out the boat part would have opened up more time to explore Connor, or the ending, or a little of both.

BATISTABUS
11-19-2012, 03:18 AM
I liked Haytham and I like that he was playable, but his section was far too long and had a lot of dull parts. Still, the first few missions were probably the most impressive (aesthetically) of the entire game.

zhengyingli
11-19-2012, 03:46 AM
I took someone's advice to finish the prologue first, and it only took me just a bit under two hours, which in a 50+ hours game is not long at all. I've only started to play it AC style (getting viewpoints, side quests before missions) only after I suited up.

RatonhnhakeFan
11-19-2012, 04:08 AM
I took someone's advice to finish the prologue first, and it only took me just a bit under two hours, which in a 50+ hours game is not long at all. I've only started to play it AC style (getting viewpoints, side quests before missions) only after I suited up.
The main story is not 50+ hours, not even half (or even third). Haytham's gameplay takes a huge chunk of the main story


Another thing to remember is DLC they can use this chance to expand on him further if they so choose to desire so never forget to dismiss that.
AT the moment, it seems that all DLC is already planned and will be about Washington turning into evil King blah blah. I don't see any potential for more character study of Ratonhnhaké:ton in that. Mehhhh this kind of DLC is not what this game needs, it needs DLC that fills plotholes, adds in areas that are lacking instead of some quasi-alternate history non-canon stuff

Jexx21
11-19-2012, 04:18 AM
length means little in the grand scheme of things.

BATISTABUS
11-19-2012, 04:52 AM
AT the moment, it seems that all DLC is already planned and will be about Washington turning into evil King blah blah. I don't see any potential for more character study of Ratonhnhaké:ton in that. Mehhhh this kind of DLC is not what this game needs, it needs DLC that fills plotholes, adds in areas that are lacking instead of some quasi-alternate history non-canon stuff
Just because the story is non-canon, that doesn't mean Connor won't still behave in-character. It'll probably be a dream or something...either way, if Connor says or does something, we can assume he'd say or do the same thing in a similar situation outside of the DLC.

LilyasAvalon
11-19-2012, 05:34 AM
Shut your mouth, I loved Haytham. D:

zhengyingli
11-19-2012, 07:42 AM
The main story is not 50+ hours, not even half (or even third). Haytham's gameplay takes a huge chunk of the main story



That's not what I meant at all. The full story may not be as long, but spending 5 hours during Haytham sessions when things weren't fully opened up just seemed unnecessary.

TrueAssassin77
11-19-2012, 09:18 AM
That's not what I meant at all. The full story may not be as long, but spending 5 hours during Haytham sessions when things weren't fully opened up just seemed unnecessary.

Bro... you are either doing 3things...

You are lying about the time you spent on the prologue.
You have horrible time management skills, and couldn't gauge how long you were playing
You are the best AC gamer to ever live

Bro the prologue without doing any side stuff is projected to be 5 hours. Good AC gamers can get it down in a little over 3. But 2 hours is freaking un heard of...
Not even trying to be mean.

zhengyingli
11-19-2012, 09:40 AM
Bro... you are either doing 3things...

You are lying about the time you spent on the prologue.
You have horrible time management skills, and couldn't gauge how long you were playing
You are the best AC gamer to ever live

Bro the prologue without doing any side stuff is projected to be 5 hours. Good AC gamers can get it down in a little over 3. But 2 hours is freaking un heard of...
Not even trying to be mean.
Try it yourself. I clocked in at 2 hours and 7 minutes at the time Desmond got out of the Animus after the Templar reveal. Without skipping cutscenes, mind you. Also didn't do the interactive conversations for some reason. Played the missions straight through.

By no means am I the best AC player.

Jexx21
11-19-2012, 12:58 PM
When I get my copy of the game I'm gonna time myself playing the Haytham missions, including the interact-able cutscenes, and the Ben Franklin side mission that has you chasing after the different pages of his Almanac, and I'm fairly sure I won't clock in 5 hours.

A-p-o-l-l-y-o-n
11-19-2012, 02:26 PM
Bro... you are either doing 3things...

You are lying about the time you spent on the prologue.
You have horrible time management skills, and couldn't gauge how long you were playing
You are the best AC gamer to ever live

Bro the prologue without doing any side stuff is projected to be 5 hours. Good AC gamers can get it down in a little over 3. But 2 hours is freaking un heard of...
Not even trying to be mean.

You are in no position to be calling people liars on this forum. Do you even know the meaning of "projection"? It's nothing more than an educated GUESS. 2 hours is only unheard of because not many people here have even TALKED about how long it took them to play through a certain section of the game. Hell, most people don't play the game just to say they finished it in a certain amount of time. If you are seriously getting offended because there are people here who were actually fine with the Haytham sections of the game, then take a break from the forums and come back when you're cooled off. At the end of the day it's just a game, and there will be people who disagree with you. It's called LIFE.

I bet you DIDN'T time yourself, and only took the word of the devs who PROJECTED the Haytham part to take 5 hours. I'm also betting that the 5 hours includes ALL of the stuff you can do as Haytham. Ultimately, get over it and petition Ubisoft for some REAL DLC that further explores Connor's life instead of this alternate story crap we're getting.

Gil_217
11-19-2012, 02:40 PM
Completely disagree with the OP.

Haytham's part was actually one of the highlights of this game for me, it was that good, and I wouldn't mind if he was the main character for the rest of the entire game, just because of how awesome he was. He had the presence, the charisma, the speaking ability, an epic voice and the confidence and authority he displayed were just off the charts. Best character in the whole game by far who deserved a full game for himself, but obviously it will never happen.

Thank you Ubisoft for creating this memorable character!

A-p-o-l-l-y-o-n
11-19-2012, 02:46 PM
Completely disagree with the OP.

Haytham's part was actually one of the highlights of this game for me, it was that good, and I wouldn't mind if he was the main character for the rest of the entire game, just because of how awesome he was. He had the presence, the charisma, the speaking ability, an epic voice and the confidence and authority he displayed were just off the charts. Best character in the whole game by far who deserved a full game for himself, but obviously it will never happen.

Thank you Ubisoft for creating this memorable character!

This is what draws me to Haytham. Not that he's a deeper, more developed, more complex, more real character than Connor. But just because the way he carried himself, he'd be someone I'd want to be associated with. Connor as a character is as real as they get, but he's not someone I'd want to hang around, just the way he carries himself, so that's why I like Haytham better. And he was all what you mentioned without being the playboy that Ezio was. Very much a Bond without the women.

Apirka
11-19-2012, 03:26 PM
Just to chime in on the prologue length again -- as I said before, I think I took about three hours, maybe a bit more for it. Didn't rush myself (I think at least half an hour of that was spent chasing that Almanac page) and far from the best AC player -- I don't even know how many attempts I needed to free all the prisoners in Sila's fort without being seen, or to destroy the cannons after eavesdropping on Washington (and I eventually gave up trying that since it was just an optional achievement anyway.) I'm not quite sure why the devs projected five hours for it, anyway.

TrueAssassin77
11-19-2012, 04:38 PM
UF
You are in no position to be calling people liars on this forum. Do you even know the meaning of "projection"? It's nothing more than an educated GUESS. 2 hours is only unheard of because not many people here have even TALKED about how long it took them to play through a certain section of the game. Hell, most people don't play the game just to say they finished it in a certain amount of time. If you are seriously getting offended because there are people here who were actually fine with the Haytham sections of the game, then take a break from the forums and come back when you're cooled off. At the end of the day it's just a game, and there will be people who disagree with you. It's called LIFE.
I bet you DIDN'T time yourself, and only took the word of the devs who PROJECTED the Haytham part to ke 5 hours. I'mm also betting that the 5 hours includels ALL of the stuff you can do as Haytham. Ultimately, get over it and etition Ubisoft for some REAL DLC that further explores Connor's life instead of this alternate story crap we're getting.

First time it took me 4 to 5 hours. 2nd time a little more than 3.
Everyone is thinking emotionally about this. I'm thinking from a development standpoint.

That prologue took resources out of connors story. The main story is 15 hours... yet people complain that it felt short and disconnected.
The ending lasted A whopping 5 minutes. And the number of times we had " 6 months later" is astounding.
It is obvious they condensed connors part. Very

TrueAssassin77
11-19-2012, 04:46 PM
HBut there is so much useless bantar in haythams.

Remember the carriage ride with connors mom? The literally could and should have been a cut scene
remember all 5 of haythams return to the inn?There were so many conversations that could condense d . While they cut stuff from the game,
Haythams prologue seems completely untouched.

TrueAssassin77
11-19-2012, 04:56 PM
I want another connor gane because it is obvious connor didn't get his own stage. The mere fact people want more haytham reinforces this. Some are even speculating that haytham was suppose to be the original main hero, but they changed plans. Connor gets to have 3/4 of his own game. They said they were going to make a minority assassin. But:it seem like they kinda tried. Here's the white guy we actually give a **** about.

A-p-o-l-l-y-o-n
11-19-2012, 07:46 PM
I want another connor gane because it is obvious connor didn't get his own stage. The mere fact people want more haytham reinforces this. Some are even speculating that haytham was suppose to be the original main hero, but they changed plans. Connor gets to have 3/4 of his own game. They said they were going to make a minority assassin. But:it seem like they kinda tried. Here's the white guy we actually give a **** about.

So now this is a racism issue? I'm a minority. I'm an African-American, a minority in the US. I'd LOVE to have a minority assassin have his own full game. But I still liked Haytham as a character more than Connor. About the length. How long was AC2? Wasn't it around 15 to 20 hours? If your biggest gripe is that Connor shared a game with another playable character besides Desmond, then get over that. That's relatively insignificant. If your gripe is that Connor didn't have enough story, as in his story wasn't fleshed out enough, then first take a look at what Connor's story focused on. Plot holes were ridden through the story, yes, but was it really an issue of time that is the reason there were plot holes? IF they really had a full story for Connor, and time was the only thing that limited them in the game, or disc space, they could have shaved off several things and had "time" to focus on Connor's story. They could have cut Haytham's Journey to America mission, Ben Franklin mission, eavesdrop for Church mission, bar fight/search for letter mission, and could have just had Haytham's missions where he meets his fellow Templars, kills Silas, and Kills Braddock. For Connor, for one they could have replaced the whole Hide and Seek child gameplay for a longer mission that actually explores Connor's backstory, then had a cutscene where he encounters Charles Lee. The finding his mother part could have been just a cutscene. The climbing through trees with his friend could have been shorter. They could have removed non-essential Homestead missions to make room for more of Connor's story. They could have shortened the naval tutorial mission. They could have removed several rather insignificant parts of the story and replaced them with more pertinent missions IF they wanted too. The problem with Connor having plotholes is a writing issue, not a gameplay length issue.

TrueAssassin77
11-19-2012, 09:14 PM
So now this is a racism issue? I'm a minority. I'm an African-American, a minority in the US. I'd LOVE to have a minority assassin have his own full game. But I still liked Haytham as a character more than Connor. About the length. How long was AC2? Wasn't it around 15 to 20 hours? If your biggest gripe is that Connor shared a game with another playable character besides Desmond, then get over that. That's relatively insignificant. If your gripe is that Connor didn't have enough story, as in his story wasn't fleshed out enough, then first take a look at what Connor's story focused on. Plot holes were ridden through the story, yes, but was it really an issue of time that is the reason there were plot holes? IF they really had a full story for Connor, and time was the only thing that limited them in the game, or disc space, they could have shaved off several things and had "time" to focus on Connor's story. They could have cut Haytham's Journey to America mission, Ben Franklin mission, eavesdrop for Church mission, bar fight/search for letter mission, and could have just had Haytham's missions where he meets his fellow Templars, kills Silas, and Kills Braddock. For Connor, for one they could have replaced the whole Hide and Seek child gameplay for a longer mission that actually explores Connor's backstory, then had a cutscene where he encounters Charles Lee. The finding his mother part could have been just a cutscene. The climbing through trees with his friend could have been shorter. They could have removed non-essential Homestead missions to make room for more of Connor's story. They could have shortened the naval tutorial mission. They could have removed several rather insignificant parts of the story and replaced them with more pertinent missions IF they wanted too. The problem with Connor having plotholes is a writing issue, not a gameplay length issue.

cool story bro. im black too. i have every right to have a gripe about connor not getting his own game. insignificance is an opinion, you have no right to state it as fact nor do you have the right to tell me to "get over it". minus all of haythams part, do you really honestly think that there would be that many plot holes? it is entierly possible that they had to compromise and felt haythams was more important than connor. i didn't buy this game to play as a templar. thats what multiplayer is for. i bought this game to play as connor. end of story. homestead mission are where you see connors character, removing them would only deepen the problem.
why did ezio get his own game? why did altair? Ezio has a film as a prolouge( a **** good one too). not sure if altari got one but at least he wasn't sharing the stage with his daddy. im sorry but i actually do have a problem, with connor the first minority assassin not getting a full game. People have noticed that the story writing in haythams part is better than connors. is there any plotholes in haythams prolouge?
Heres what i think about your thought process: If haytham had been a horrible character, you would have agreed with me about the prolouge. but since you happen to like him because hes "fun to hang with" you think the prolouge was needed. thats called thinking with your emotions. i like haytham as well, but i also realize that the devs actually ********** cared about him. it is apparent that they didn't feel the same about connor, who's prolouge lasted all of 45 min. the mere fact they "might" make a another connor game is absurd. We didn't get to delve into connor's culture, but we sure as hell got to see his daddy ride on a ship, and solve a meaningless mystery that added absolutely nothing to the story. we sure as hell got to see him write in his journal about something meaningless as well. yet you see nothing wrong with this because you like haytham as a character?

Connor was not done justice in this game. Ezio gets 3 console games. and 1 handheld. Altari gets 1 console game. a spirtual sequel in ACR. and a handheld. connor gets 3/4 of what was suppose to be his game. but i guess thats ok because his dad was such a good character.....

i'm not sure whether you are deliberatly, not understanding why i have a problem. or your're really honestly don't see it.

A-p-o-l-l-y-o-n
11-19-2012, 09:35 PM
cool story bro. im black too. i have every right to have a gripe about connor not getting his own game. insignificance is an opinion, you have no right to state it as fact nor do you have the right to tell me to "get over it". minus all of haythams part, do you really honestly think that there would be that many plot holes? it is entierly possible that they had to compromise and felt haythams was more important than connor. i didn't buy this game to play as a templar. thats what multiplayer is for. i bought this game to play as connor. end of story. homestead mission are where you see connors character, removing them would only deepen the problem.
why did ezio get his own game? why did altair? Ezio has a film as a prolouge( a **** good one too). not sure if altari got one but at least he wasn't sharing the stage with his daddy. im sorry but i actually do have a problem, with connor the first minority assassin not getting a full game. People have noticed that the story writing in haythams part is better than connors. is there any plotholes in haythams prolouge?
Heres what i think about your thought process: If haytham had been a horrible character, you would have agreed with me about the prolouge. but since you happen to like him because hes "fun to hang with" you think the prolouge was needed. thats called thinking with your emotions. i like haytham as well, but i also realize that the devs actually ********** cared about him. it is apparent that they didn't feel the same about connor, who's prolouge lasted all of 45 min. the mere fact they "might" make a another connor game is absurd. We didn't get to delve into connor's culture, but we sure as hell got to see his daddy ride on a ship, and solve a meaningless mystery that added absolutely nothing to the story. we sure as hell got to see him write in his journal about something meaningless as well. yet you see nothing wrong with this because you like haytham as a character?

Connor was not done justice in this game. Ezio gets 3 console games. and 1 handheld. Altari gets 1 console game. a spirtual sequel in ACR. and a handheld. connor gets 3/4 of what was suppose to be his game. but i guess thats ok because his dad was such a good character.....

i'm not sure whether you are deliberatly, not understanding why i have a problem. or your're really honestly don't see it.

Well then the REAL issue isn't that there's more thought put into Haytham. The REAL problem is that the Devs actually cared MORE for Haytham than Connor, if what you say is true. I understand your problem. But the time spent playing Haytham of itself isn't the end all be all. It's the result of the devs not caring enough about Connor's story. Which, is kinda what I said. IF the devs had actually cared about fleshing out Connor's story, as in developing him more, then his story would make more sense, regardless of the time spent playing as him. The root issue isn't a shortened Connor segment/lengthened Haytham segment, which means the solution isn't a lengthened Connor segment/shortened Haytham segment. IF the writers cared about Connor, then they'd have been able to put more effort and care into Connor REGARDLESS of how long his segment is. Haytham having a long segment is simply a representation, a manifestation of that lack of care for Connor. In other words, it's not the length of gameplay that determined the plot holes. It's the lack of care and thought put into Connor, which is something I've been saying. And, yeah, Connor should definitely get another game. Oh, and I've also said that they should have cut the ship part out of Haytham's segment, because, as you said, it adds absolutely NO value, and is a pretty long mission. I agree Haytham's segment should have been shortened. I'm just saying that shortening that alone doesn't make Connor better or fix the plotholes. That's my only point. IF the devs cared about Connor, it would have all worked out.

Just a side note: I don't think Haytham was tacked on. We knew very LITTLE about Connor's story before the game was released. We now know that Haytham is a pretty integral part of Connor's story. They kept it a secret because, one, it was a secret, two, they wanted to surprise the players that they spent a substantial amount of time unknowingly playing as a Templar, three, they were unsure of the reaction Haytham would get. Still, YES, Haytham's part was too long. I think the missions where Haytham meets the other Templars, and the mission where he saves the Mohawk slaves, are the most crucial to Haytham's prologue. All other missions could have been cut out, EVEN the last one where Haytham kills Braddock. That wouldn't have been too long, yet it would have been enough to understand Haytham and the other Templars.

TrueAssassin77
11-19-2012, 09:41 PM
oh.
i guess i didn't quite understand what we were arguing about. sorry

Torvaldesq
11-20-2012, 01:51 AM
This is an absurd thread. The problems with Connor are not about him not having enough TIME. He's a badly done character. His dialogue, his actions, his motivations - they are all weak. They had more than enough time, more than enough cutscenes, more than enough voice acting in the game to make a character that was very good. They blew it. Pointing to a character they did better and saying, "Aha! There's the problem! Too much time spent on that character!" is not what anyone should be doing.

The funny thing is - what makes Haytham a better character? In terms of development, we really do not learn a great deal about him. He is mysterious even at the end. How did someone who was the son of an Assassin get indoctrinated over to the Templar side and become one of their leaders? We have a database entry telling us it happened, but we don't have a strong grasp about his past. That's fine though, his character may not be highly fleshed out, but his temperament is enjoyable to watch and as an antagonist he shows more passion and thought in what he does than Connor. The final confrontation with him, and Haytham's dialogue as you fight him, were really fun. Some of the best dialogue in the game (all from Haytham's side, of course).

Connor wasn't done well. And the decisions that made him a poor character were - as I said - tied into foundational elements of the character. The developers wanted a game where people would get to be in the American Revolution and fight for George Washington. Great. A colonial ancestor would have made a huge amount of sense. Instead, they said, "Let's have a half-native American ancestor who is raised among an Iroquois Confederacy tribe." Okay, I'm cool with that. Kind of a different approach to the history. But they squander that. It's like all the thought process about that culture went into getting the language parts right and the database entries detailed, and none of it went into making a good character. Connor never really struggles with the question of whether he should be aiding the British because the Colonials have interests that conflict with the tribes. (A few mentions of doubt in some monologues that never really seeps into his character interactions, and one optional conversation with his friend in the tribal area has his friend mention it, but it really goes nowhere beyond a very short conversation that ends with, "Wait for now.")

Most of the tribes sided with the British. Yet here's Connor, running errands for the Colonials, talking about how they fight for liberty and that's why he's on their side. Now, I love the American Revolution, but the Assassin / Templar conflict has always been built up as being about deeper notions of liberty than whether a parliament should be taxing distant colonies without legislative representation. The Templars fight to control people at a deeper level than taxes. They've got a fixation on technology that will allow them to actually remove free will (something they've known about and pursued since the time of Altair at least). But Connor treats the colonials like their fight is essentially the same as the Assassin's fight. It isn't close. Heck, the Templars are doing more to aid the revolution and take control of it than they are to squelch it. Connor makes avoiding the elephant in the room into an art.

Sometimes he says that fighting for the colonists is the best way to protect his people? Really? From what do you draw that conclusion Connor? His own people weren't that naive about it, yet Connor - who has the benefit of a very sophisticated education under Achilles (at least, that's implied) - never even struggles with it. Why? Because the developers never struggled with the idea that you'd be playing on the side of George Washington in this game. The problem was that they based the game around a character who SHOULD have struggled with that. A character that SHOULD have had divided loyalties. If Juno had told him in his crazy vision that he needed to stop the British from taking control, that might have made sense. But it's the Templars she gives him a picture of, not the British, and the Templars are closer to the side of American independence than British control.

Instead of saying the missions that were there weren't enough, the real problem is that the missions that ARE there for Connor paint the picture of a naive fool with a very dull personality. A man of few words can be interesting if the few words he says have impact and seem wise. Connor's lines neither have impact nor seem particularly wise.

Another criticism: The manner in which his one big trauma was handled. He lost his mother when his village was set on fire. Terrible. Formative. It should be at least for anyone. He blames the Templars for it from a child until he's an adult. Then he learns that the Templars didn't do it - it was George Washington. And what's his reaction? Practically nothing. Connor has to kill his best friend, and he immediately goes from that to aiding the colonials - AGAIN - at the Battle of Monmouth. He knows his father didn't burn his village, but barely acknowledges that his accusations against him were false. He continues to treat Charles Lee like he's the end-all be-all of villains (Charles' crime now downgraded to having told his friend he was corrupted by the colonials, though Charles Lee's comments wouldn't have had much weight if not for Washington sending a raid). And Connor never even brings up what Washington did in the Seven Years War to Washington after he learns of it - instead the script has Connor warning Washington about Lee again, and when Washington says he won't execute the man on the spot, Connor in disgust says it's the last victory he'll be bringing Washington. Not even a word about the raid on his village.

Connor was not a good character. More sequences wouldn't save him. More games wouldn't save him. They had enough time with the voice actor and enough cutscenes to make an extremely good character. What Connor needed was a better script and divided loyalties. You could fix this stuff by changing his dialogue, not adding to it. Most of the hours of gameplay centers around running and fighting and climbing and jumping, accomplishing optional objectives and upgrading stuff.

I'd add that some missions for Connor were just awkward in plot. There's no reason for Connor to be doing things like giving orders to troops at Concord or taking control of Artillery at Monmouth. The colonials just throwing him in an officer's position, or Paul Revere telling you to ride his horse while he gives directions - that stuff made Connor just look weirder. If we're hypothetically fixing Connor, the first thing to do is cut out the stuff that doesn't fit in well with an Assassin or someone with Connor's heritage before you go chopping the stuff that works well for another character. Bunker Hill was a great mission. Going behind enemy lines to kill their commander. That's the kind of stuff Connor should be doing.

Don't get me wrong, there's a lot I love about Assassin's Creed 3. Really, I quite enjoyed the game. Connor's character doesn't ruin it for me, and a few missions that seemed lame don't ruin it. But I really hope they never go back to Connor for a future game. It's one thing to have a character that's not developed - like Altair at the end of AC 1 - and say that he should see more development. But Connor isn't undeveloped, he's just awkwardly developed.

arkadashim619
11-20-2012, 04:56 AM
I felt Connor was more vengeful than Ezio.

Assassin_M
11-20-2012, 04:59 AM
I can think of A LOT more things that made AC III less than what it could`v been...

johnnyferris
11-21-2012, 08:02 AM
I agree and disagree at the same time. Although I loved the Haytham's story and what it brought to the series (actually playing as a Templar/getting to know the targets), but it could have been shorter. It really bummed me out when you just skipped over Connor's training as the youth and training of Ezio in AC2 was one of my favorite parts of the game. The rushed storyline in the beginning of the game is really my one complaint about the plot. They missed a couple aspects that AC2 thrived on.

zhengyingli
11-21-2012, 10:23 AM
I can think of A LOT more things that made AC III less than what it could`v been...
Like the person playing the game. Oh snap! Had to do it, I'm sorry.

TrueAssassin77
11-26-2012, 12:43 AM
i still believe it should have been condensed

pirate1802
11-26-2012, 06:42 AM
Like the person playing the game. Oh snap! Had to do it, I'm sorry.

Ouch. LOL

@Trueassassin77.. I loved Haytham and his storyline to the core, so can't agree there. Reducing Haytham sections won't automatically mean increase in Connor/Desmond sections anyway. the resources may be spent elsewhere. If something is to be blamed, it is the lack of planning.

lightlamp
11-27-2012, 01:06 AM
Haytham was the best character of this game

cmrggamer
11-27-2012, 01:27 AM
I agree and disagree at the same time. Although I loved the Haytham's story and what it brought to the series (actually playing as a Templar/getting to know the targets), but it could have been shorter. It really bummed me out when you just skipped over Connor's training as the youth and training of Ezio in AC2 was one of my favorite parts of the game. The rushed storyline in the beginning of the game is really my one complaint about the plot. They missed a couple aspects that AC2 thrived on.

This. I struggled to put my finger on why the game hadn't really met my expectations, and I think I've realized that it is because I really like Connor, but I don't love him. I felt like he had a lot of potential but they didn't really develop his character. Something felt like it was missing.
I think the boat section with Haytham could have been cut, otherwise though I really enjoyed the Haytham section. I also would have liked a little more of his village, as a child, with his people and especially with his mother.

agentpoop
11-27-2012, 04:18 AM
Disagree. I'd rather they have cut out some of the Desmond stuff, and cut out some of the unskippable naval missions. I say they made a good decision adding in Haytham's part. It's about time the series stopped being so black and white. If anything, they should have cut out Haytham's whole Journey on the ship to America sequence. That was unnecessary, but everything from his arrival in Boston to his inducting Charles Lee was good, at least in my opinion.


LOL what Desmond would we cut out? The 15 minutes of him we get? And why cut Naval missions arguably the best part of the game?

agentpoop
11-27-2012, 04:21 AM
A short film would have been good as well.

And the fact that AC2 did it differently doesn't mean that it did it better.

But it did. The short film was way better than any 5 hr prologue followed by 2 hours of training

TrueAssassin77
11-27-2012, 04:33 AM
that film was amazing btw. i was like " why can't ezio fight like his dad?!" lol

Assassin_M
11-27-2012, 05:25 AM
And why cut Naval missions arguably the best part of the game?
Isn't that subjective ?

Assassin_M
11-27-2012, 05:26 AM
But it did. The short film was way better than any 5 hr prologue followed by 2 hours of training
Again, Isn't that Subjective ?

Oxford_of_Dale
11-27-2012, 05:28 AM
The game really only good started half way through. There was more time spent as Haytham than as Desmond which is ridiculous. The game needed less time as haytham and more as Connor and Desmond. These two characters - the main ones - felt rushed.

TrueAssassin77
11-27-2012, 05:31 AM
every part of the story BUT haytham's felt rushed.... to me, thats a problem

pirate1802
11-27-2012, 05:33 AM
Dunno, I enjoyed Haytham's parts. Some of my most favourite moments are from there. And about a short film, it would not have sufficed. The makers wanted YOU to be in a Templar's boots. In a movie you take no part in the action, you're a passive audience. the difference is the same as watching a movie on Ezio, and actually playing as Ezio.

zhengyingli
11-27-2012, 05:48 AM
Dunno, I enjoyed Haytham's parts. Some of my most favourite moments are from there. And about a short film, it would not have sufficed. The makers wanted YOU to be in a Templar's boots. In a movie you take no part in the action, you're a passive audience. the difference is the same as watching a movie on Ezio, and actually playing as Ezio.
Playable Lineage and Embers would've been awesome. If you thought Haytham was a ****ing boss, I can only imagine how fulfilling it might feel to control Giovanni and a white-haired Ezio.

LilyasAvalon
11-27-2012, 12:07 PM
playable lineage and embers would've been awesome. If you thought haytham was a ****ing boss, i can only imagine how fulfilling it might feel to control giovanni and a white-haired ezio.

shut up and take my money.

pirate1802
11-27-2012, 02:46 PM
shut up and take my money.

I'm throwing my money at the screen but nothing's happening :(

TrueAssassin77
11-27-2012, 04:54 PM
i've rethought me statement.

it is not haythams part's fault that the rest of the game took a hit... its the devolpers fault for obviously caring more on that segment of the game. than the others....

connor and desmond weren't done justice in this game... but we can all agree that haytham certainly got great attention, despite his arch-type build

Apirka
11-28-2012, 12:08 AM
Again, Isn't that Subjective ?

Indeed. And besides, I did say that a short film would have been good (though I also agree that playing a Templar may have had more impact than a short fil would have had), but... Lineage doesn't really set up the villains. Well, it sort of sets up Rodrigo and Uberto, but AC2 had a lot more main targets than those two. And that's one of the things I like the most about Haytham's section, narrative-wise -- that it sets up the villains and helps with a more grey portrayal of them.

GoldyTart
01-03-2013, 07:13 AM
let me start by saying that I loved Haytham's prologue and Haytham himself. Let me also state that I loved the interaction between Haytham and Connor when nearing to the end of the game. Let me (for the third time) also say that Connor is an amazing character that AC needed after having protagonists with different personalities. Now that I have made myself clear I want to tell you guys that Connor motivations and ambitions were to protect the village and it's people. The addition of Juno telling Connor to become an Assassin was built on the idea that if he does become one, he will be able to have a positive outcome and his village and it's people will not be destroyed. That is the main motivation for Connor. People above me complain that Connor is dumb/bland because of the choices he makes that often doesn't make sense to us. One poster specifically mentions that despite knowing that GW was responsible for the village burning and Charles Lee was not, Connor still supports the patriots and still hunts down Charles Lee. My interpretations to why Connor acted like that:

1. Connor stopped trusting GW but he still believed in the revolution and stopping the Templars. That's why he still helped the patriots one more time.

2. Even if Charles Lee didn't burn the village, he is still a Templar and with Haytham dead, would have likely become a Grand Templar. Connor is an Assassin, and as Achillies said, he must kill all Templars before they have enough traction to change the tide of the war. As an Assassin, Connor's duty is to stop the Templars, no matter what. And so Charles Lee became the next target.

Regarding Haytham, I believe that people like him because Haytham is clearly Ezio as a Templar (nuff said). So when Connor comes into the mix, and you as a player know Haytham is bad, you kinda go against Connor and route for the Templars.

Th3Aw3som3On31
01-04-2013, 05:50 AM
Haytham was the worst part of AC3. if his part was 2 hrs or less, those other 3 to 4 hours could have been spent fleshing out Connor's character, connecting events in a more seamless fashion, actually having Connor training instead of "6 months later"

Haytham's part shorten the main storyline far to much. we could have had The Battle of Saratoga, and alot of other stuff that was promised to us in demos. but Haythem's overly long section literally condensed the game....

all that stuff that got taken out? imagine if Connor had gotten ideally 3-4 hrs more of showtime...

they should have made a short film for haytham... that's what they did for ezios dad....

i didn't buy the game to play as haytham... i bought the game to play as Connor The Native American Assassin.


people complained about the connectivity of the events... 5 more hours of Connor would have solved that.
people complained about No training(player progression as Connor ex). Connor training under Achilles)... 5 more hours as Connor would have solved that
people complained about battles and events that were left out... 5 more hours as Connor would have solved that
people complained about No missions the delve into Connors culture... 5 more hours as Connor would have solved that
people complained about the main storyline being to short... 5 more hours of connor would have solved that(no haythams part really doesn't count. you are not the main protagonist thus you are not doing the main storyline.


I'll have to respectfully disagree. For me I enjoyed playing Haytham, "The Master Templar", and it made you feel a connection between Connor and Haytham. It showed that Connor not only had his Native American side, but a ruthless Templar in his genes. You could see he inherited Haythams abilities to succeed and be a powerful Assassin. Without that it would seem all of this was learned and not apart of him.

wrogers331
01-05-2013, 01:54 AM
Can anyone tell me how to skip mission? I am new at this. The mission I am talking about is when Hatham is in the fort and has to disale 2 canons and eavesdrop.

GoldyTart
01-05-2013, 02:08 AM
Can anyone tell me how to skip mission? I am new at this. The mission I am talking about is when Hatham is in the fort and has to disale 2 canons and eavesdrop.

You can't skip missions when you are playing in sequence and not replaying them. That level is pretty easy but you can skip the optional missions if you don't care about the 100% synch. Check some walkthroughs on youtube for help.

Assassin_Banana
01-29-2013, 07:03 PM
This is an absurd thread. The problems with Connor are not about him not having enough TIME. He's a badly done character. His dialogue, his actions, his motivations - they are all weak. They had more than enough time, more than enough cutscenes, more than enough voice acting in the game to make a character that was very good. They blew it. Pointing to a character they did better and saying, "Aha! There's the problem! Too much time spent on that character!" is not what anyone should be doing.

The funny thing is - what makes Haytham a better character? In terms of development, we really do not learn a great deal about him. He is mysterious even at the end. How did someone who was the son of an Assassin get indoctrinated over to the Templar side and become one of their leaders? We have a database entry telling us it happened, but we don't have a strong grasp about his past. That's fine though, his character may not be highly fleshed out, but his temperament is enjoyable to watch and as an antagonist he shows more passion and thought in what he does than Connor. The final confrontation with him, and Haytham's dialogue as you fight him, were really fun. Some of the best dialogue in the game (all from Haytham's side, of course).

Connor wasn't done well. And the decisions that made him a poor character were - as I said - tied into foundational elements of the character. The developers wanted a game where people would get to be in the American Revolution and fight for George Washington. Great. A colonial ancestor would have made a huge amount of sense. Instead, they said, "Let's have a half-native American ancestor who is raised among an Iroquois Confederacy tribe." Okay, I'm cool with that. Kind of a different approach to the history. But they squander that. It's like all the thought process about that culture went into getting the language parts right and the database entries detailed, and none of it went into making a good character. Connor never really struggles with the question of whether he should be aiding the British because the Colonials have interests that conflict with the tribes. (A few mentions of doubt in some monologues that never really seeps into his character interactions, and one optional conversation with his friend in the tribal area has his friend mention it, but it really goes nowhere beyond a very short conversation that ends with, "Wait for now.")

Most of the tribes sided with the British. Yet here's Connor, running errands for the Colonials, talking about how they fight for liberty and that's why he's on their side. Now, I love the American Revolution, but the Assassin / Templar conflict has always been built up as being about deeper notions of liberty than whether a parliament should be taxing distant colonies without legislative representation. The Templars fight to control people at a deeper level than taxes. They've got a fixation on technology that will allow them to actually remove free will (something they've known about and pursued since the time of Altair at least). But Connor treats the colonials like their fight is essentially the same as the Assassin's fight. It isn't close. Heck, the Templars are doing more to aid the revolution and take control of it than they are to squelch it. Connor makes avoiding the elephant in the room into an art.

Sometimes he says that fighting for the colonists is the best way to protect his people? Really? From what do you draw that conclusion Connor? His own people weren't that naive about it, yet Connor - who has the benefit of a very sophisticated education under Achilles (at least, that's implied) - never even struggles with it. Why? Because the developers never struggled with the idea that you'd be playing on the side of George Washington in this game. The problem was that they based the game around a character who SHOULD have struggled with that. A character that SHOULD have had divided loyalties. If Juno had told him in his crazy vision that he needed to stop the British from taking control, that might have made sense. But it's the Templars she gives him a picture of, not the British, and the Templars are closer to the side of American independence than British control.

Instead of saying the missions that were there weren't enough, the real problem is that the missions that ARE there for Connor paint the picture of a naive fool with a very dull personality. A man of few words can be interesting if the few words he says have impact and seem wise. Connor's lines neither have impact nor seem particularly wise.

Another criticism: The manner in which his one big trauma was handled. He lost his mother when his village was set on fire. Terrible. Formative. It should be at least for anyone. He blames the Templars for it from a child until he's an adult. Then he learns that the Templars didn't do it - it was George Washington. And what's his reaction? Practically nothing. Connor has to kill his best friend, and he immediately goes from that to aiding the colonials - AGAIN - at the Battle of Monmouth. He knows his father didn't burn his village, but barely acknowledges that his accusations against him were false. He continues to treat Charles Lee like he's the end-all be-all of villains (Charles' crime now downgraded to having told his friend he was corrupted by the colonials, though Charles Lee's comments wouldn't have had much weight if not for Washington sending a raid). And Connor never even brings up what Washington did in the Seven Years War to Washington after he learns of it - instead the script has Connor warning Washington about Lee again, and when Washington says he won't execute the man on the spot, Connor in disgust says it's the last victory he'll be bringing Washington. Not even a word about the raid on his village.

Connor was not a good character. More sequences wouldn't save him. More games wouldn't save him. They had enough time with the voice actor and enough cutscenes to make an extremely good character. What Connor needed was a better script and divided loyalties. You could fix this stuff by changing his dialogue, not adding to it. Most of the hours of gameplay centers around running and fighting and climbing and jumping, accomplishing optional objectives and upgrading stuff.

I'd add that some missions for Connor were just awkward in plot. There's no reason for Connor to be doing things like giving orders to troops at Concord or taking control of Artillery at Monmouth. The colonials just throwing him in an officer's position, or Paul Revere telling you to ride his horse while he gives directions - that stuff made Connor just look weirder. If we're hypothetically fixing Connor, the first thing to do is cut out the stuff that doesn't fit in well with an Assassin or someone with Connor's heritage before you go chopping the stuff that works well for another character. Bunker Hill was a great mission. Going behind enemy lines to kill their commander. That's the kind of stuff Connor should be doing.

Don't get me wrong, there's a lot I love about Assassin's Creed 3. Really, I quite enjoyed the game. Connor's character doesn't ruin it for me, and a few missions that seemed lame don't ruin it. But I really hope they never go back to Connor for a future game. It's one thing to have a character that's not developed - like Altair at the end of AC 1 - and say that he should see more development. But Connor isn't undeveloped, he's just awkwardly developed.

I agree with most of this, Connor wasn't a bad character, he was poorly developed. People also complain about Altair being a dull character without personality and that's because he is an introvert like Connor. Ezio is the cliché character that we are all used to play with and see in movies. Haytham was a very good character James Bond type cliché as well, but this was in part because the voice actor did a really good job. He was also very interesting mostly because was the contrary of Connor personality, so their paring added a lot of fun to the game. Haytham being arrogant and playful and Connor super-serious and reserved made their scenes together the ONLY PLOT with SENSE in the whole game. I think that Connor parts were much better before someone at Ubisoft decided to cut them. Do you guys remember the first trailer gameplays were we saw Connor killing Silas instead of Haytham?. This, was part of a sequence that was cut. In that trailer we see Connor talking with a patriot soldier saying something like "leave patriotism to the patriots, im here for the templar". In Forsaken book, there is a lot of dialogue cut from the game were you can see Connor with more emotion at the end. Haytham sequences are the ONLYONES that are carefully written and carefully added in the WHOLE game including the sequences he share with his son. You get to see Connor with more emotion in the company of his dad, but they wasted their ONLY good character, Haytham Kenway, and decided to kill him at the end. After reading Forsaken, i really wish that Ubi had decided to leave the original ending of Connor history instead the crappy epilogue they given us :(.
I also think that, originally the character of Connor was going to be much more developed, but as Ubi said, they had political dificulties with Connor being Native American so, the idea of him was a really good one but they couldn't make it right. I feel that this time, they lacked the imagination to make him a good character. Connor sould have been a little more agressive in his personality i think, more passionate when deciding something that is just, more Mr. Right with Haytham mocking him XD. We sould have seen teen Connor arguing with his fellow Natives about doing something against the invaders of their lands just like his mother did. Connor lacked passion in his motives, being someone who is supossed to be torn between what is just and right and what is easy, you expect someone with more dreamy-like, but firmly decided mind, someone who dosen't give up, who inspires you and that fights against tyranny. I think this, was the original intention of his character but it sucked. He was everyone lapdog and it made him look stupid. An idealistic person, has alot of emotion in his/her actions, so we should have seen Connor doing this, and the only miserable part we get to see his idealism is when he argues with Achilles and Haytham. The only passionate act we see of his idealism is in the cinematic trailer, were he fights againts a whole army just to kill his target. You see him inspiring the other soldiers to fight too. But again, who knows what the hell meant having a Native American inspiring the Revolution of the Colonies and who knows what political isuess Ubisfot had with that ideas. Maybe the decision in making Connor a dull character was more political than unimaginative. Or maybe they hired bad writters. Connor was supposed to be a spark of inspiration to the revolution, a misterious Assassin with a lot of passion for freedom and justice, someone that becomes almost like some sort of legend and myth, like his trailers suggested. Instead, we got a foolish Indian without real emotions who becomes the idiot that is supposed to have helped in the Revolution, but did nothing really significant at the end, and that bothered me, it almost felt discriminatory for Native Americans. Connor character was not about him being Indian, it was about having strong will and a decided mind in doing the right thing at all costs. Connor was supposed to mirror that emotion the revolutionaries had in real life but in his Assassin form. Freedom is for all humans and the Assassins fight for it and Templars want control so, in the trailer Connor kills his Templar target, he is not fighting for America he is fighting for freedom and the revolutionaries got inspired by him in battle in this fantasy world. So, again maybe it was a fantasy to insulting for the American way. And that's really dissapointing because that is the real reason behind Art: Expresion, new ways to aproach our reality, and having this Native American as the real hero behind the Revolution is a way to express that artistic view. So, is too sad that in this greedy world, companies and everything else only cares about making money.

My 2 cents ;)

ZerOtodona
01-29-2013, 08:55 PM
I found Haytham to be a fun person to get to know. While yes his section of the game took up a lot of Conner's time, it was needed to explain some of Conner's back story. Now if they had put all of Haytham's story into Forsaken like they more or less did then maybe we would have even gotten more father and son time in the game. Heck, Ubisoft should turn Conner's story into a book to in order to fill in the large time jumps in the game.

zerocooll21
01-29-2013, 11:37 PM
Just replayed the game again and had a change of heart. I wasn't looking forward to Haythams part an planned on skipping all the cut scenes but I played thru. I actually have taking a real liking to him and enjoyed his entire section.

VibrantJarl57
02-03-2013, 04:23 AM
I played the game all the way through although I have to tell you that I felt like quitting very strongly when Connor first came into it. I resented Connor from the start. He never came close to Haytham K in any way. The game only became fun again when Haytham returned, although I would certainly NEVER have killed him off. That was a huge mistake. But done now. The artist that drew Haytham's face deserves high praise. As a woman gamer, I can tell you that playing with a hot dude is double pleasure for us. I thought Ezio was hot, but Haytham K gets into my dreams, DARN HIM!! And Adrian Hough is no doubt at least half responsible for Haytham's appeal in the same way that Roger Craig Smith made Ezio so charming. In character creation teamwork seems to work well. Please keep that up Ubisoft. And if you really want to keep the women gamers coming back, find a way to get us another Haytham game. How about delving into his past to discover what drove him from the Assassin fold into the Templars. The 18th century was done well (except for women's clothes and hair - what was up with that???) and I would love to see a game set in England, maybe with side trips to Russia, France, or India.. As far as I am concerned, Haytham can leave a little trail of bastards all across the planet if he likes - you will keep the women gamers coming back for that.

Assassin_M
02-03-2013, 07:55 AM
I played the game all the way through although I have to tell you that I felt like quitting very strongly when Connor first came into it. I resented Connor from the start. He never came close to Haytham K in any way. The game only became fun again when Haytham returned, although I would certainly NEVER have killed him off. That was a huge mistake. But done now. The artist that drew Haytham's face deserves high praise. As a woman gamer, I can tell you that playing with a hot dude is double pleasure for us. I thought Ezio was hot, but Haytham K gets into my dreams, DARN HIM!! And Adrian Hough is no doubt at least half responsible for Haytham's appeal in the same way that Roger Craig Smith made Ezio so charming. In character creation teamwork seems to work well. Please keep that up Ubisoft. And if you really want to keep the women gamers coming back, find a way to get us another Haytham game. How about delving into his past to discover what drove him from the Assassin fold into the Templars. The 18th century was done well (except for women's clothes and hair - what was up with that???) and I would love to see a game set in England, maybe with side trips to Russia, France, or India.. As far as I am concerned, Haytham can leave a little trail of bastards all across the planet if he likes - you will keep the women gamers coming back for that.
Well......That was.....disturbing..

Anyways, Video Games are not supposed to be a fetish for men OR Women, as far as i`m concerned. This type of stupid sexism is what`s making half assed games sell awesome, simply because the protagonist has boobs or is a hot male...

Also, Females adore Connor....just go to tumblr....No attacks to your disturbing fantasie- I mean preference

SixKeys
02-03-2013, 03:42 PM
Yeah, how dare female players talk about their fantasies here the same way you've talked about your Caterina/Lucrezia fantasies! :rolleyes:

Assassin_M
02-03-2013, 04:29 PM
Yeah, how dare female players talk about their fantasies here the same way you've talked about your Caterina/Lucrezia fantasies! :rolleyes:
I`v never done that, in fact, I`v made fun of people on both sides...

I-Like-Pie45
02-03-2013, 06:16 PM
Quiet down kids. I'm working on my AC fantasy fanfics right here and your chitchat is making it hard to "concentrate" with my um, "writing" hand.

xboxauditore
02-03-2013, 09:03 PM
Quiet down kids. I'm working on my AC fantasy fanfics right here and your chitchat is making it hard to "concentrate" with my um, "writing" hand.

I dread to think what those Fanfics are about.

VibrantJarl57
02-04-2013, 04:30 AM
None of the women I know think Connor is hot. He is a bore. Sorry of you are not into sex at all - that is not why we women enjoy the AC line, but tell me, did you guys enjoy the tomb raider series and hate that Lara Croft was drawn to entice?? Sex appeal is always extra fun - hope you can get into it one day.

Assassin_M
02-04-2013, 06:42 AM
None of the women I know think Connor is hot. He is a bore. Sorry of you are not into sex at all - that is not why we women enjoy the AC line, but tell me, did you guys enjoy the tomb raider series and hate that Lara Croft was drawn to entice?? Sex appeal is always extra fun - hope you can get into it one day.
Connor is not hot, even his fans don't think he`s hot. He was never made to be hot...That`s the risk Ubisoft took, in a generation where sex appeal is mandatory for extra entertainment enjoyment....They succeeded. Most people here like Connor, he has a pretty decent fan girl base on tumblr and everyone I know likes him...

No, I enjoyed Tomb raider for the game that it is, not because Lara had implants. Sex appeal is not "fun" It`s something producers use to gain leverage for a product and everyone falls for it silly. Sex tools and symbols are pathetic.

No Thanks. I`ll leave sex appeal to something else other than Video Games.....Sex Appeal ****ed Movies up already...

FirestarLuva
02-04-2013, 10:00 PM
I'm a girl and I don't think Connor is ugly.He may not be handsome in the traditional way but he in no way he fits the word 'ugly'. You seem to not know what real uglyness is. No one is ugly, it's all a matter of taste. Someone who you'd find ugly is beautiful to someone else.
I'm glad Ubisoft took the risk with Connor, and tried something new and different in both protagonist and story. They even said themselves that they had in mind a character like Connor even before starting the production on AC3 or even creating the story. All the devs have said they love him in many of their interviews and the writers even said they would like to write about Connor more. The difference between Connor and Ezio is that, they didn't create Connor with the fans, or should I say, fangirls/boys in mind. Ezio's creation at one point felt like a chore for the devs. The main thing about him was to be likeable, they wanted him to be so likeable (they succeeded in it) they failed to add any real depth into him. He was nothing more than an italian stereotype, he's character wasn't anything new or special in the media world. There were at least three movies I saw the last summer that were both revenge stories and set in Italy and there was even a soap opera in Italy which was about revenge, and the character in all those movies was just like Ezio.
Ezio may have the biggest, but also the worst fanbase as well. 80% of his fanbase are probably nothing but fanboys who only like him because; he's sexy, he's italian, his accent, he flirts with women and that equals sex scenes. Trust me, I have an Ezio fanboy in my class, these were his reasons for liking him and when I asked him to give me a real reason why he likes him, the only thing he said was; "he's awesome." "Why?" "Because he sleeps with women. " - _- ' Trust me, if someone asked me to tell him why I like Connor I can go on and rant all day about his character and story, enough to write and essay, and not stop. Ever since release, I've seen countless blog posts about Connor's character, in-depth discussions about his actions, how he's complex, how his story inspired them, etc. That's not the same with some Ezio fans, I believe. They say he's interesting, he had the best story but with no real reasons to back it up. BUT, there are also very few Ezio fans who have a real reason to like him, and that's not because he's hot or anything, and I give my respect to those guys. For me, those are true Ezio fans.
I love Connor. He's my favourite AC character and probably one of my over all favourites, but never even once his character has interested me because he's attractive or anything. (though even if Ezio has the looks, Connor has got the body and muscle to back it up; tall, bulky, etc) I never judge people on the outside. I know some fans who call him Kratos in a hood and Conan with a tomahawk, but come on, if Connor is a big, tall guy that doesn't mean he's aggressive or we'll break your bones or yell at you if you talk to him. Some people butcher him up pretty badly. He may look like a brute, but in the homestead missions you see a whole different side of him, the real side of him. Connor may not be thehandsome, italian, charismatic playboy, but he's humble, friendly, to his enemies he is fierce and cold, to his friends he is caring and friendly. He's had a hard life, but he doesn't let his emotions hurt other people. He chokes his pain inside of him because he is unselfish and doesn't want to be the little dark cloud that rains on everybody. He's goal was never a personal one. He could've chosen to stop fighting, he could've avoided all those beatings, insults and stayed in his village and become clan chief. But he doesn't. He always puts his people and friends first, not himself. He's happy for others, but not himself. How can you hate a man like that? If looks are what justify someone for you, then I feel sorry for you.
Also, if we're talking about who has the most fangirls, Connor or Ezio, that'd be Connor. Just go on tumblr. Ezio would be hurt if he saw all that, lol. But I've noticed the majority of them actually find him cute rather than hot. I'd agree on that, I do too. If I ever met Connor in real life, I don't see myself wanting to bed the guy. I would just want to hug him cause he needs some love after all the things he's been through. :3 The majority of the fangirls call him a giant teddy bear actually.
And to add up, yes Ezio is such the handsome, attractive guy everyone wants to be, that half of the boys in my school shaved their heads as mohawks before and after AC3 was released, and my friends even started to go to the gym to become bulky just like Connor. This is so true, it's not even funny. XD

Assassin_Banana
02-05-2013, 02:02 AM
People find Connor ugly because they had been brainwashed into loving the sterotyped cliché hero-white guy. So a Native American face can't be atractive. 80% of American continent is Amerindian decendent and... well i better don't say. All movies and games focus on clichés. And Ezio is not atractive, he is imposed as being atractive :P (just my personal opinion, don't lisent to me) i never liked him anyway, im so glad he is finally gone! ( yes, im trolling you Ezio fans)

Assassin_M
02-05-2013, 03:07 AM
People find Connor ugly because they had been brainwashed into loving the sterotyped cliché hero-white guy. So a Native American face can't be atractive. 80% of American continent is Amerindian decendent and... well i better don't say. All movies and games focus on clichés. And Ezio is not atractive, he is imposed as being atractive :P (just my personal opinion, don't lisent to me) i never liked him anyway, im so glad he is finally gone! ( yes, im trolling you Ezio fans)
I actually never thought Connor was ugly. I thought he was pretty decent looking.....His features were convincingly Native...He`s a handsome Native, but since looks are not part of my criteria of a well written character, I did not really focus on it too much, because I thought Ezio and Desmond were handsome as well, and I never liked Ezio....

I believe the reason some guys like Ezio more than Connor is because that`s who they want to be. Video games are the fantasy of every player, it pushes the idea of what the gamer WANTS to be in real life. It gives them a mirror of what they`re not in real life...A Badass, Charismatic Assassin who gets all the girls all the time....

Connor is a gloomy, serious individual...Who wants to be him ?? No one probably..

Will_Lucky
02-05-2013, 04:39 AM
Would have improved if they, just removed Connor and focused on Haytham.

Assassin_Banana
02-05-2013, 04:56 AM
I actually never thought Connor was ugly. I thought he was pretty decent looking.....His features were convincingly Native...He`s a handsome Native, but since looks are not part of my criteria of a well written character, I did not really focus on it too much, because I thought Ezio and Desmond were handsome as well, and I never liked Ezio....

I believe the reason some guys like Ezio more than Connor is because that`s who they want to be. Video games are the fantasy of every player, it pushes the idea of what the gamer WANTS to be in real life. It gives them a mirror of what they`re not in real life...A Badass, Charismatic Assassin who gets all the girls all the time....

Connor is a gloomy, serious individual...Who wants to be him ?? No one probably..

Yes that's so sad, but the kind of characters people "want to be" are personalities imposed by media and propaganda in order to sell. Is like the gender roles that were imposed in the 50's or 60's for woman. They ment to be only the mothers and virgin girlfriends everyone accepted. And so, men ment to be the leaders and saviors and the man of the house. Now, womans are supposed to be *****es and an aversion of what sexual revolution actually ment, and men are supposed to be rude and agressive or they are not men. So, im glad to see a character in a video game that brakes from the imposed and tiring cliché equal to Ezio or Haytham, who are male conterparts of the cliché female heroines like Lara Croft.
I agree on what you said that video games are a way of people to pretend to be someone else, but is also a way for greedy companies to impose "what" you are supposed to like.
Connor is the first Native American hero i have seen, who has his own game. And im sure it was not an easy decision for the game developers. And now, people complain for stupid things like: he is so ugly, he has no personality, his hair at the end is horrible, and so on. And that's because people is no used to this kind of characters. Companies know this, and they don't want to waste their resources on something the mayority of people won't buy.

This is why i like Ubisoft games in part, they took their time to actually want to make Connor realistic as possible, even hiring Native Americans and history experts to create the world for Connor. Is AC3 perfect? No, but they made good decisions and took care of the political impications, i suppose. I don't really know. People is superficial, they critic on someone else's hard work, but im sure that the mistakes they did with this game will help them to make their next one better. :)
I hope that people critisim of Connor won't mean Ubisoft is going to leave this kind of unique characters behind for the sterotyped cliché and tiredsome white hero again. They made Aveline and Connor stand up for being different and even if there is ALOT of people that don't appreciate that, there are those who actually do. ;)

Assassin_M
02-05-2013, 05:04 AM
Yes that's so sad, but the kind of characters people "want to be" are personalities imposed by media and propaganda in order to sell. Is like the gender roles that were imposed in the 50's or 60's for woman. They ment to be only the mothers and virgin girlfriends everyone accepted. And so, men ment to be the leaders and saviors and the man of the house. Now, womans are supposed to be *****es and an aversion of what sexual revolution actually ment, and men are supposed to be rude and agressive or they are not men. So, im glad to see a character in a video game that brakes from the imposed and tiring cliché equal to Ezio or Haytham, who are male conterparts of the cliché female heroines like Lara Croft.
I agree on what you said that video games are a way of people to pretend to be someone else, but is also a way for greedy companies to impose "what" you are supposed to like.
Connor is the first Native American hero i have seen, who has his own game. And im sure it was not an easy decision for the game developers. And now, people complain for stupid things like: he is so ugly, he has no personality, his hair at the end is horrible, and so on. And that's because people is no used to this kind of characters. Companies know this, and they don't want to risk their resources wasted on something the mayority of people won't buy.
This is why i like Ubisoft games in part, they took their time to actually want to make Connor realistic as possible, even hiring Native Americans and history experts to create the world for Connor. Is AC3 perfect? No, but they made good decisions and took care of the political impications, i suppose. I don't really know. People is superficial, they critic on someone else's hard work, but im sure that the mistakes they did with this game will help them to make their next one better. :)
I hope that people critisim of Connor won't mean Ubisoft is going to leave this kind of unique characters behind for the sterotyped cliché and tiredsome white hero again. They made Aveline and Connor stand up for being different and even if there is ALOT of people that don't appreciate that, there are those who actually do. ;)
Indeed...Agreed on everything. It`s nice to see like minded people speak out...

Assassin_Banana
02-05-2013, 05:21 AM
Indeed...Agreed on everything. It`s nice to see like minded people speak out...

There always are ;)

I-Like-Pie45
02-05-2013, 03:42 PM
I dread to think what those Fanfics are about.

Let's just say it's a 1000-page length novel that makes American Psycho look like Winnie the Pooh.

I'm currently on the fifth chapter, should be the Commander x Redcoat section according to my outline. My Haytham or Connor fantasies don't come into play 'till much later.

xboxauditore
02-05-2013, 09:45 PM
Let's just say it's a 1000-page length novel that makes American Psycho look like Winnie the Pooh.

I'm currently on the fifth chapter, should be the Commander x Redcoat section according to my outline. My Haytham or Connor fantasies don't come into play 'till much later.

.............What the h- *Head Explosion*

Carmiel
02-09-2013, 12:01 PM
I'll give Haytham props on one thing: he was the first Templar that I actually sympathized for. You got to see their side of the story. But he just never knows what the hell he's doing! First of all his original mission was a failure, because he couldn't open the vault. Than rather than searching elsewhere for the apple he just sits his fat *** in America. Why is he still there? What does he care what happens to America its not even his country! His leaders told him not to return until his mission succeeded yes, but he wasn't trying to complete it anymore and im sure all of his superiors are wondering what the hell he is doing. And another thing when did Haytham find out that Connor was his son? In fact how did he even recognize Haytham as his father? And then Haytham considers himself a good guy yet he's constantly trying to kill everyone including his own son.http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20130103031822/assassinscreed/images/thumb/6/69/Missing_Supplies_2.png/800px-Missing_Supplies_2.png

Than while Connor is running around mowing down Templars, Haytham and friends are just running around like chickens with their heads cut off. It's as if they don't even realize Connor is there. They keep constantly underestimating him. Than when Haytham is paired with Connor he gets his *** captured by some random dudes. Not to mention when he was on the ship he was also totally oblivious and didn't realize a ship was being lured towards them until the next morning. Haytham acts like some badass but his actions make him look like an idiot. From the first time I saw Haytham I expected him to have al of his **** together but than he comes I and half-*** does stuff.

"Haytham and friends are just running around like chickens with their heads cut off".http://gamingbolt.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/assassins-creed-3-haytham-kenway.jpg
"Where'd she go?"

But despite all of that, that's not why Im irritated with Haytham. What irritates me about him is that for the character he was, he took up waay too much of the game. Not to say he isn't interesting or that his role in the story wasn't a vital one. But did we seriously need to play as him for four sequences to get the point across? And in that time you don't have access to sidequests, recruits, or all the weapons, making that whole of the story feeling like an awkward intro to the game which wouldn't have been so awkward if it didn't last so long, it just felt like when do I get to play as this guy on the box? After Haytham lands arrives in America they could have just made the rest of his story into flashback sequences through the course of the game. But to shove it all at you at once is too much. They might as well put Haytham on the box


http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_me4ogszWdM1rqdbyuo3_250.jpg
Haytham doesn't wear a condom and he catches an STD named Connor and passes the symptoms onto his friends

Assassin_Banana
02-09-2013, 07:45 PM
lol

Rakdarr
02-16-2013, 10:14 PM
Haytham is the best character of the whole game. I'd gladly trade him for Connor anytime.

Inayaeza
03-02-2013, 03:34 PM
Eh, it's a pretty interesting topic ! I can't do a real construct answer, because is... hm, well, bad. Really. But some words.

I really love Haytham AND Connor. And I really, really love the team-sequence. I think they have a relationship with a good potential. It's sad that is not more developed. (But Connor isn't developed as he can be. Didn't finish the game, don't know. Just read Forsaken. ) Maybe in a DLC "What can be happen" ? Or "More stuff in America with Natives" ?
I never thinking about Connor as "a minority". It's... A strange way to think, for me. I suppose it's the Usa ? He alway be a Mohawk, and it's ok. I'm happy to discover a culture I didn't really know (Thank you Animus) and the work who has be done with. And it's interesting too to hear them talk in the langage-I-don't-remember-the-name-in-english. But I never think "He have or he didn't have the game/the time/developement BECAUSE he was from a minority." (I don't really believe Native as a minority, in fact.)

So yeah... Didn't cut the Haytham part (Like it's said, pleasure to work with Templar and can say "Tu m'as beaucoup déçue Haytham... J'attendais beaucoup mieux de ta part !".) but make more stuff about Native, about Connor and about his parents !

Sometimes, we... forget a little the Amerindiens part of the game.