PDA

View Full Version : Revolution or Disappointment?



HazemYossri
11-28-2012, 12:41 AM
First of all I must say that I worship this franchise. I loved every single moment of every single installment of Assassin's Creed games. I had to say that to clarify that what I'm gonna say isn't about "haters gonna hate" thing. So here is what i think about AC 3 :

The Good:

1-Every thing related to the whole new engine, Graphics are amazing.. Killing animations are fantastic.. the new controlling system is a revolutionary step forward..
2- naval battles are enjoyable
3- Voice acting is impressive
4- The homestead part was good.

The Bad:

In my opinion what makes Assassin's Creed "ASSASSIN'S CREED" are the Story, the Scenery and the amazing detailed world with secrets, puzzles and mystery.

- the Story: the story here isn't that bad, actually it's not bad at all, but it's the weakest. maybe it's me who is not interested in the American Revolution history and this affects my whole experience, but the story -for me- wasn't epic as all AC installments.

- the Scenery:
"People on the internet suggest the most boring settings. The three most wanted are WWII, feudal Japan and Egypt. They're kind of the three worst settings for an AC game."

said Alex Hutchinson.

I understand that the developers must love what they are working on to deliver the utmost entertaining experience to us , and they did in all the previous releases, but here the scenery was the worst and the most boring. maybe it was meant to be a new experience after the great architectural work we saw before, but to be honest it wasn't the best experience.

so the great advice here that works like charm " Listen to the People".

- the mysterious world of secrets,puzzles and tombs:

Frankly speaking, I'm shocked that this amazing and essential component of Assassin's Creed universe was ripped! I can't imagine an Assassin's Creed game without this secrets and details!.

finally i really like the old style of the shops, armors and weapons ,although the replenish-able health part was very cool.


To sum up:

Assassin's Creed III is a very good game on its own but there is a thin line between taking a revolutionary step and making a whole new game!

xx-pyro
11-28-2012, 01:13 AM
I found Connor's story to be the strongest of the three, not sure if I'm in the minority on that one. The scenery was by far the best (not sure whether or not you entered the frontier), however I did find the cities rather bland, which although expected was kind of a let down. Not much they could do though since that's how the cities looked. Also, if they don't think they could create a good game during WWII, Ancient Egypt, or Feudal Japan, why would you want a game there? They obviously don't have confidence on pushing out a quality product in those areas, I'd rather do it somewhere they are comfortable with and can use to it's full potential.

TrueAssassin77
11-28-2012, 01:17 AM
Connors story is strongest indeed.

i want next game in london... climbing the "big ben"... nuff said

zhengyingli
11-28-2012, 02:08 AM
Rather than "Revolution or Disappointment," I would ask "Revolution or Evolution" for a more interesting discussion.

Torvaldesq
11-28-2012, 02:21 AM
They seriously biffed the story. Connor is the weakest assassin we've had as a character (Altair might be as weak in terms of detail in his first game, but Connor squandered a lot of potential and his actions and words fit poorly with his situation, which makes him a weaker character overall and not one I would want to see made use of again). Connor having a weaker story also, of course, rubs off on the time period. The American Revolution had a lot more potential than what we got through the lens of Connor.

I'm not sure I agree with the suggestions of Egypt, WW 2, or Feudal Japan. AC's plots are strengthened the more they can play on historical fiction. And historical fiction plays better as a genre when directed at an audience that is more familiar with that history. AC games are, more or less, most marketed among a western audience. The Crusades had a strong connection to a western audience. Renaissance Italy as well (I particularly liked that Machiavelli was an assassin). The American Revolution did for obvious reasons.

Would a game entirely set in Egypt have that effect? I don't know. People know a few major architectural landmarks (I get the feeling that's most of what fueled those suggestions), but the personalities of Egypt's history aren't as readily known by a western audience. I'm not saying it couldn't be good, just that I don't think it would be less gripping. Feudal Japan suffers from the same problem.

WW 2 is well known among western audiences. The problem with that isn't the time period or architecture, it's more that it may feel awkward and out of place for the gameplay AC relies on. The assassin style of combat feels well put in a time period where guns are either non-existent or primitive (a musket taking a long amount of time to reload after a shot). If they set the game in WW 2, I would very much expect that they overhaul much of the combat system so that it showed the assassins evolving with the times. The old "jump down, kill a guard or two when starting combat, and take out the rest by hitting them or countering at the right moment" will feel very out of place in a time period with advanced weaponry that should just kill you with a single shot, and people can unload lots of bullets in a short period of time. I think the game would have to rely much more heavily on avoiding combat, stealth, and almost unnoticeable kills. (Actually, funny enough, that's what multiplayer often feels like, so maybe what they need is just to make the single-player (at least during main-line missions) feel more like multiplayer does now and just greatly improve on NPC AI).

Elegana
11-28-2012, 02:37 AM
GOD, NO. I hate WW2. I hear enough about Nazis all the freaking time. Egypt? What's there besides small towns? People were complaining that the houses in Boston were too small as compared to the structures in AC2, ACB, and ACR. Yeah, you get to a climb a pyramid, but that's boring. Feudal Japan? No thanks; we have plenty of Ninja games. I really dislike Ninjas as well and the whole feudal Japan scenery. Yes, its pretty, but I just really hate it. Plus, I believe one of the devs said they had problems with the architecture. Alex also said that we're not going past Civil War.

Is it just me, or can I actually understand Connor? People keep saying that "Connor has an emotional range of a X" or "Connor is boring" and even "Ezio had a harder life". I fail to see that. He's the complete opposite of Ezio. He shows plenty of emotions, you just have to watch his face. Actions speak louder than words. If you have subtitles on, turn them off and re-watch the cutscenes and actually looks at his face. He'll show disgust, anger, sadness, happiness, contentment, contemplation, and even realization. Yes, he sounds angry, wooden, etc. But that's the way he's suppose to sound. English is not his first language and it's going to sound odd. Do the Homestead missions to see his emotions. He had a worse life than Ezio (I really hate comparing the two, but I need to clear this up). Ezio's life was filled with women, adventure, family, and luxury. Yeah, his dad, uncle, his (ex) lover, and brothers died. But Connor's only family, his mother, died in a fire at the age of 4. He saw it happen. He tried to save her, but failed. He grew up resenting Charles Lee and hated the men who threatened him and his village. Throughout his adulthood, he tries so hard to prevent his land from being taken, only to have the ones who he thought were friends to betray him, forced to kill his best friend, had to kill his father, and ended up with his village gone. He was successful in Juno's goals and defeating the templars, but he lost his village. He is the strongest out of the three. Hell, even Altair had it easy. His fighting style is brutal and he has raw strength.

I'm all for the puzzles and the tombs, but not for the settings of WW2, Egypt, and Feudal Japan. I loved the Frontier; just running in the forest with animals running away was thrilling. Boston and New York were fun with the alleyways, but I hated the underground system. I spent 2 hours in each city just trying to find all the underground fast points. They REALLY need to fix the horses though. The horses messed me up quite a few times on missions that were in the Frontier because even a pebble stopped the **** horse.

TrueAssassin77
11-28-2012, 02:41 AM
@elegana

yay! someone who has good character analysis skills! unlike some....

pirate1802
11-28-2012, 03:25 AM
Connors story is strongest indeed.

i want next game in london... climbing the "big ben"... nuff said

+1

montagemik
11-28-2012, 03:47 AM
Connors character , personality & personal story were great in my opinion. And i've nothing but respect for his plight & actions.

Civil War would've been my preferance over Revolution/ independance . Templars playing both sides off for their own purposes.

Puzzles played less part in AC3 , & rightfully so - The mystery element was never connors to solve - Only to protect the land that contained it.
& being less educated than ezio - He'd have little reason to know of such things.

They could create a GREAT game set in Japan (last samurai period ) & they know it - But in their own words ""they've always preffered to use settings that have never been done before or not very often""
So only Japans overuse in Movie & games media rules it out - which is a shame for an Assassin series.really

Not biased but London should be next (i'd prefer to skip the whole concept of france - we've had revolution already thanks)

On the whole i enjoyed AC3 a lot - but seems like only half the game so far.

TrueAssassin77
11-28-2012, 03:57 AM
Connors character , personality & personal story were great in my opinion. And i've nothing but respect for his plight & actions.

Civil War would've been my preferance over Revolution/ independance . Templars playing both sides off for their own purposes.

Puzzles played less part in AC3 , & rightfully so - The mystery element was never connors to solve - Only to protect the land that contained it.
& being less educated than ezio - He'd have little reason to know of such things.

They could create a GREAT game set in Japan (last samurai period ) & they know it - But in their own words ""they've always preffered to use settings that have never been done before or not very often""
So only Japans overuse in Movie & games media rules it out - which is a shame for an Assassin series.really

Not biased but London should be next (i'd prefer to skip the whole concept of france - we've had revolution already thanks)

On the whole i enjoyed AC3 a lot - but seems like only half the game so far.

I want the civil war... as a black assassin.
i want london... big ben ftw
i want france... connor ftw
i want japan... because the devs have no idea what they are talking about... "overused?" ha!

montagemik
11-28-2012, 04:36 AM
I want the civil war... as a black assassin.
i want london... big ben ftw
i want france... connor ftw
i want japan... because the devs have no idea what they are talking about... "overused?" ha!

Sorry - Do you have a point in quoting my post or just an attitude ?

TrueAssassin77
11-28-2012, 04:39 AM
Sorry - Do you have a point in quoting my post or just an attitude ?

huh?
i thought i was agreeing with you lol

unless i missed the point of your post?

montagemik
11-28-2012, 04:42 AM
huh?
i thought i was agreeing with you lol

unless i missed the point of your post?

That's not how your response reads - sorry

TrueAssassin77
11-28-2012, 04:47 AM
maybe i misunderstood your post?

montagemik
11-28-2012, 04:54 AM
maybe i misunderstood your post?

Well i want nothing to do with France - but the other 3 options you put i'm fine with - popular or not.
(and that IS the reason the devs won't use japan - stated in several interviews)

Torvaldesq
11-28-2012, 07:24 AM
Is it just me, or can I actually understand Connor? People keep saying that "Connor has an emotional range of a X" or "Connor is boring" and even "Ezio had a harder life". I fail to see that. He's the complete opposite of Ezio. He shows plenty of emotions, you just have to watch his face. Actions speak louder than words. If you have subtitles on, turn them off and re-watch the cutscenes and actually looks at his face. He'll show disgust, anger, sadness, happiness, contentment, contemplation, and even realization. Yes, he sounds angry, wooden, etc. But that's the way he's suppose to sound. English is not his first language and it's going to sound odd. Do the Homestead missions to see his emotions. He had a worse life than Ezio (I really hate comparing the two, but I need to clear this up). Ezio's life was filled with women, adventure, family, and luxury. Yeah, his dad, uncle, his (ex) lover, and brothers died. But Connor's only family, his mother, died in a fire at the age of 4. He saw it happen. He tried to save her, but failed. He grew up resenting Charles Lee and hated the men who threatened him and his village. Throughout his adulthood, he tries so hard to prevent his land from being taken, only to have the ones who he thought were friends to betray him, forced to kill his best friend, had to kill his father, and ended up with his village gone. He was successful in Juno's goals and defeating the templars, but he lost his village. He is the strongest out of the three. Hell, even Altair had it easy. His fighting style is brutal and he has raw strength.

Connor has the emotional range of a door knob. Wait, I take that back. He has the emotion range of a door knob that has had a calm face drawn on one side and an angry face drawn on the other. I agree actions can speak louder than words. Too bad his actions show someone who really fails to act in accordance with the history he's given. The point is not that Connor should be Ezio. It's just that Ezio actually acted in accordance with his situation. Connor naively meanders from one revolutionary event to the next, doing errands for the Patriots and amazingly, ridiculously not reacting to the obvious situations of his people in relation to the colonials. You raise the point that he had his mother die in a fire as a child. Great. That can be a very formative event. It's traumatic. Let's see what amazing place that goes when he learns that Washington ordered the raids and the Templars did not..... oh wait, it goes nowhere. Connor goes from killing his best friend (with barely any reaction) to helping the Colonials at Monmouth, because you know, it's a game. And there's a battle. And the player needs to take control of some cannons. Oh, and Connor needs to go warn Washington of Charles Lee again at the end of it. Connor was given a good starting point with his childhood. But that's all he got. A good starting point. They never took it anywhere.

On paper, whether in dialogue or in action, Connor is a shallow, poor character. I like the new game engine. Better graphics are always nicer. More ability to add a facial animation is nice. But they're not a substitute for actual development of the character. Facial animations more often than not supplement tone of voice with good voice acting rather than getting used as a substitute for "depth." And the comment about language, with English not being his first language. No. Just no. As hard as it is to believe, Connor is even less expressive in his native tongue. The voice actor sounds like he's reading off a script while not in character and seeing the sentences for the first time. He's got a tad bit more range in English. Too bad most of that range is only seen through naval missions, where there's no real plot in terms of his character (but hey, yelling with passion to hoist the sails and fire the cannons is a nice change of pace).

TrueAssassin77
11-28-2012, 04:41 PM
opinion...thats your opinion. please stop stating it as fact

HazemYossri
11-28-2012, 05:49 PM
GOD, NO. I hate WW2. I hear enough about Nazis all the freaking time. Egypt? What's there besides small towns? People were complaining that the houses in Boston were too small as compared to the structures in AC2, ACB, and ACR. Yeah, you get to a climb a pyramid, but that's boring. Feudal Japan? No thanks; we have plenty of Ninja games. I really dislike Ninjas as well and the whole feudal Japan scenery. Yes, its pretty, but I just really hate it. Plus, I believe one of the devs said they had problems with the architecture. Alex also said that we're not going past Civil War.


Well, I don't know what AC has to do with WW2, We love the franchise because of its unique style, if it was set in WW2 with the machine guns, the tanks and those modern weapons then it has nothing to do with AC. Feudal Japan: we have a large set of games which suffice this era.

But Egypt? I think it has an immense potential. It's not just the Pyramids.there are Temples, obelisks, the mysterious world full of secrets. you said that we complained that the houses in Boston were too small and that's true, so if a game is to be set in Egypt how we overcome this?

I have two ideas:

1- What about a game in the Ptolemaic, Roman or even the Arab Egypt. the beauty of this setting(the Arab one) is that we can experience all of this tremendous eras as their monuments were still represented in the Arab period, the ancient Egypt with the pyramids and temples, Ptolemaic one with the advance in the architecture of the houses and the buildings in general specially the Lighthouse of Alexandria( one of the seven wonders of the ancient world) and the Ancient Library of Alexandria. Roman period with Alexandria Roman theatre and the Arab Egypt with the further advance in the architecture. furthermore this era was full of conspiracies and conflict which absolutely will serve AC world.

2- this is not my idea but i found it pretty interesting.

First Civilization Earth
by David Hilton :

“people on the internet suggest the most boring settings. The three most wanted are WWII, feudal Japan and Egypt. They’re kind of the three worst settings for an AC game“.

"Perhaps with Ancient Egypt he is referring to the wide open expanses between temples and pyramids. These would make poor parkour-based locations.
But what if the spaces between these sorts of monuments we know today could be ‘filled in’ with other buildings and made into the perfect free-running playground?
What if you could have cities based on monuments in Ancient Egypt, the Angkor Civilization, Ancient Persia, Ancient Greece, or even the Mayans, without having to explain the travel between vast distances or the mix of architecture? "

Maybe it's just me who like to see my favorite game set in my country but I see in Egypt a huge potential that can make an amazing Assassin's Creed game.


About Connor, maybe he isn't my favorite, but I couldn't deny he is the strongest out of the three. but it's not about Connor. I see the story here is short and has fewer details than any previous installment. the American Revolution(despite it's not my favorite setting) has much more potential than the game represented.

SteelCity999
11-28-2012, 05:49 PM
The new engine is a revolution on the right hardware. Unfortunately, we only got to see a little bit of what it can probably do. Other than that, this idea the devs were peddling of a re-invention of the series or good enough for a new IP, is not warranted and I think they failed miserably in living up to what they marketed.

The Frontier is probably the only thing that I would say is cutting edge and revolutionary - it would probably be even better on next gen hardware. Correction, maybe two. Naval gameplay is as well but that is so small a part of the game that it probably took more resources than it was really worth - resources that may have been better served in other parts of the game.

Connor was poorly written and poorly executed. He could have been a great character but there was so much left out of his story that could have been put in. He is nothing but a robot: Connor your purpose is this, do this and only this, nothing else, except be so tunnel visioned that he is used by everyone and everything and have no idea - how did he ever have an offpsring? His childhood was just horribly done - we lost so many years we could have grown closer to him and seen him grow as a person and an assassin.

TrueAssassin77
11-28-2012, 05:56 PM
The new engine is a revolution on the right hardware. Unfortunately, we only got to see a little bit of what it can probably do. Other than that, this idea the devs were peddling of a re-invention of the series or good enough for a new IP, is not warranted and I think they failed miserably in living up to what they marketed.

The Frontier is probably the only thing that I would say is cutting edge and revolutionary - it would probably be even better on next gen hardware. Correction, maybe two. Naval gameplay is as well but that is so small a part of the game that it probably took more resources than it was really worth - resources that may have been better served in other parts of the game.

Connor was poorly written and poorly executed. He could have been a great character but there was so much left out of his story that could have been put in. He is nothing but a robot: Connor your purpose is this, do this and only this, nothing else, except be so tunnel visioned that he is used by everyone and everything and have no idea - how did he ever have an offpsring? His childhood was just horribly done - we lost so many years we could have grown closer to him and seen him grow as a person and an assassin.

he still a great character despite the devs horrible bias against him... they cared more about haytham than connor, and it is apparent

SteelCity999
11-28-2012, 06:00 PM
he still a great character despite the devs horrible bias against him... they cared more about haytham than connor, and it is apparent

I agree with you on Haytham. I actually wouldn't mind a game with him and how he came to be a Templar.

TrueAssassin77
11-28-2012, 06:07 PM
screw haytham. he already ruined connors story. he already gets his own book. he already died. he already stole resourse from what was suppose to be connors game.

most people that love ezio, love haytham... why? because while ezio is the italian james bond... haytham is the evil james bond.

Torvaldesq
11-28-2012, 09:11 PM
screw haytham. he already ruined connors story. he already gets his own book. he already died. he already stole resourse from what was suppose to be connors game.

most people that love ezio, love haytham... why? because while ezio is the italian james bond... haytham is the evil james bond.

Haytham didn't ruin Connor's story. Other games have had better developed characters than Connor with LESS screen time. Connor just wasn't done well.


I would have loved to like Connor. I was looking forward to Connor. I wanted to really give him a chance. People aren't disappointed in Connor because he's not Ezio (though they will - OF COURSE - compare Connor to Ezio in terms of character development because Ezio was the last protagonist in this game series). Connor didn't need to be suave to be liked. I would have enjoyed Connor quite a bit more if he had shown much more internal division over whether he should be aiding the Patriots or the British (you know - the way MOST of the tribes did in actual history at the time). I would have enjoyed Connor quite a bit more if the revelation that Washington burned his village had led to him considering whether the British were the side he should be aiding. I would have enjoyed Connor more if he actually took some time to show intellectual curiosity in what Haytham and the Templars were seeking to accomplish vs. what the Assassins were seeking to accomplish, and whether the level of liberty the Assassins were fighting over could really be equated with a battle over taxation without representation and autonomous rule from Britain (the connection is not really that strong - which is of course even more apparent given that the Templars are happy to be on both sides of the conflict). Accomplishing that would not have required making Connor into a ladies man or "James Bond." The failure to do that makes Connor look pretty shallow. These weren't weird, esoteric issues on the fringes of the plot. They are front and center. Connor meanders through the game and ends up looking like an errand boy for a bunch of big historical figures. That's about as far as he gets.

I have zero problem with Connor being different than Ezio. No one has a problem with him being different. They just wanted him to be at least that developed.

TrueAssassin77
11-28-2012, 11:24 PM
characters who were suppose to get one game, SHOULD Be devolped by the end of that game. Ezio was suppose to have that one game... but they did more as an afterthought.

connor is not devolped because the devs wanted to leave the option open for him to have another game. fan reaction determines 'connors future. if he gets another game. we get a fully devolped connor, if not, then some of what you say may become true in the future.

SaintPerkele
11-29-2012, 02:27 AM
Not biased but London should be next (i'd prefer to skip the whole concept of france - we've had revolution already thanks)
You are not actually comparing these two revolutions, are you?
The American Revolution was basically some small uprisings against another nation, but eventually turned into a war.
The French Revolution came from the people against a king. Getting rid of a nation that forces taxation on you or trying to end monarchy is entirely different.
I'm all for the French Revolution (and have been since AC2) and I sincerely hope that Ubisoft won't mess this perfect AC setting (beautiful cities, interesting historic characters and events, lots and lots of assassinations and death) up by giving it only an "AC3.5" if you want. Connor wouldn't fit this setting anyway (I liked Connor, but, just story- and characterwise it makes no sense that he would move to Paris, where, unlike the New World, several Assassin Orders have been established for centuries and fight against a monarchy he has nothing to do with; also, I can't see Connor in a huge city).
Of course I would love London too. Especially with the British Empire and half of the game set in India or something like that. Obviously, a new time period is required for this though.

Both of these setting are fantastic and I hope Ubisoft won't rush development of any of these (if they are actually produced).

TrueAssassin77
11-29-2012, 02:36 AM
You are not actually comparing these two revolutions, are you?
The American Revolution was basically some small uprisings against another nation, but eventually turned into a war.
The French Revolution came from the people against a king. Getting rid of a nation that forces taxation on you or trying to end monarchy is entirely different.
I'm all for the French Revolution (and have been since AC2) and I sincerely hope that Ubisoft won't mess this perfect AC setting (beautiful cities, interesting historic characters and events, lots and lots of assassinations and death) up by giving it only an "AC3.5" if you want. Connor wouldn't fit this setting anyway (I liked Connor, but, just story- and characterwise it makes no sense that he would move to Paris, where, unlike the New World, several Assassin Orders have been established for centuries and fight against a monarchy he has nothing to do with; also, I can't see Connor in a huge city).
Of course I would love London too. Especially with the British Empire and half of the game set in India or something like that. Obviously, a new time period is required for this though.

Both of these setting are fantastic and I hope Ubisoft won't rush development of any of these (if they are actually produced).

no reason for ezio to go to constatinople...

SaintPerkele
11-29-2012, 03:05 AM
no reason for ezio to go to constatinople...
That's why I said I hope they won't pull an AC3.5 with these settings... Ezio's trip to Constantinople felt forced and quite frankly, it wasn't even the most interesting time period of the Ottoman Empire.

TrueAssassin77
11-29-2012, 03:20 AM
That's why I said I hope they won't pull an AC3.5 with these settings... Ezio's trip to Constantinople felt forced and quite frankly, it wasn't even the most interesting time period of the Ottoman Empire.

no reason for ezio go to rome... they MADE a good reason. ACB is the true AC2.5
ACR is the epilouge.

they can MAKE a good reason why connor should go to france

laromu
11-29-2012, 04:54 AM
Haytham didn't ruin Connor's story. Other games have had better developed characters than Connor with LESS screen time. Connor just wasn't done well.


I would have loved to like Connor. I was looking forward to Connor. I wanted to really give him a chance. People aren't disappointed in Connor because he's not Ezio (though they will - OF COURSE - compare Connor to Ezio in terms of character development because Ezio was the last protagonist in this game series). Connor didn't need to be suave to be liked. I would have enjoyed Connor quite a bit more if he had shown much more internal division over whether he should be aiding the Patriots or the British (you know - the way MOST of the tribes did in actual history at the time). I would have enjoyed Connor quite a bit more if the revelation that Washington burned his village had led to him considering whether the British were the side he should be aiding. I would have enjoyed Connor more if he actually took some time to show intellectual curiosity in what Haytham and the Templars were seeking to accomplish vs. what the Assassins were seeking to accomplish, and whether the level of liberty the Assassins were fighting over could really be equated with a battle over taxation without representation and autonomous rule from Britain (the connection is not really that strong - which is of course even more apparent given that the Templars are happy to be on both sides of the conflict). Accomplishing that would not have required making Connor into a ladies man or "James Bond." The failure to do that makes Connor look pretty shallow. These weren't weird, esoteric issues on the fringes of the plot. They are front and center. Connor meanders through the game and ends up looking like an errand boy for a bunch of big historical figures. That's about as far as he gets.

I have zero problem with Connor being different than Ezio. No one has a problem with him being different. They just wanted him to be at least that developed.

Bravo....sir. Bravo. Eventually, Connor is a traitor.

Assassin_M
11-29-2012, 05:01 AM
Bravo....sir. Bravo. Eventually, Connor is a traitor.
That`s Stupid...

TrueAssassin77
11-29-2012, 05:17 AM
extremely

pirate1802
11-29-2012, 06:10 AM
Wow.... I'm speechless.

montagemik
11-29-2012, 09:16 AM
You are not actually comparing these two revolutions, are you?
The American Revolution was basically some small uprisings against another nation, but eventually turned into a war.
The French Revolution came from the people against a king. Getting rid of a nation that forces taxation on you or trying to end monarchy is entirely different.
I'm all for the French Revolution (and have been since AC2) and I sincerely hope that Ubisoft won't mess this perfect AC setting (beautiful cities, interesting historic characters and events, lots and lots of assassinations and death) up by giving it only an "AC3.5" if you want. Connor wouldn't fit this setting anyway (I liked Connor, but, just story- and characterwise it makes no sense that he would move to Paris, where, unlike the New World, several Assassin Orders have been established for centuries and fight against a monarchy he has nothing to do with; also, I can't see Connor in a huge city).
Of course I would love London too. Especially with the British Empire and half of the game set in India or something like that. Obviously, a new time period is required for this though.

Both of these setting are fantastic and I hope Ubisoft won't rush development of any of these (if they are actually produced).




LIKE i said - We've HAD uprising & revolution as the story backdrop - I'd prefer something different . No interest in the French revolution whatsoever .
If we have the french revolution plot - We better be in London mostly - Helping the (Assassin) Scarlet pimpernel liberate a few nobles . LOL

(But no - not france for me ........How annoying ;) )

HazemYossri
11-29-2012, 03:51 PM
An AC game during the French Revolution? this might actually work for me. for several reasons. it's the sort of revolutions I like, mainly it's a people's revolution not political like the american one. Full of conspiracies and conflict, revolution and counter-revolution, executions and Reign of Terror, I think i might fall for this.
But the protagonist is once more Connor?! PLEASE DO NOT. I think the fastest 30 years in the history of gaming that we spent with him is enough. and I hope that the mixed reception he had received will make Ubisoft decide that we had enough of Connor ( Of course this is my opinion and I'm stating it as it is. no more no less).

But another revolution game? I think if it was well written and well executed, there would be no problem. specially like I said it's a different type of revolutions.



LIKE i said - We've HAD uprising & revolution as the story backdrop - I'd prefer something different . No interest in the French revolution whatsoever .


Well, I think that France deserve an AC game and if it wasn't during the revolution when it might be? It's just I can't think of any another period of the french history that might make a fantastic AC game like the revolution one.

Assassin_M
11-29-2012, 11:58 PM
and I hope that the mixed reception he had received

http://forums.ubi.com/showthread.php/726877-Why-don-t-you-guys-like-Connor-spoilers
http://gyazo.com/91f4d1a9abff49c5a7f8740b6222a5d0

HazemYossri
11-30-2012, 01:04 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/showthread.php/726877-Why-don-t-you-guys-like-Connor-spoilers
http://gyazo.com/91f4d1a9abff49c5a7f8740b6222a5d0

Mmmmmmm, Well, honestly I can't see that this poll is fair or let's say " objective" as I could pick "He didn't leave much of an impact on me." , "I liked him, but I much preferred Ezio and Altiar." and "He was alright, but I've had enough of him. Time for another Assassin!" I think a more realistic poll would be : did you like Connor? Yes- No.
But anyway this is not what i'm after. what I meant by "mixed" is represented in the title of the post itself "Why don't you guys like Connor" if there weren't any mixed opinions, a title like that wouldn't exist. and yet another thing if you surfed the internet about what people think about Connor, you would realize that he had a wide range of mixed reception.

TrueAssassin77
11-30-2012, 01:10 AM
what I meant by "mixed" is represented in the title of the post itself "Why don't you guys like Connor" if there weren't any mixed opinions, a title like that wouldn't exist. and yet another thing if you surfed the internet about what people think about Connor, you would realize that he had a wide range of mixed reception.

alot of people have horrible character analysis skills. why should we base fan reaction off the uneducated???

Assassin_M
11-30-2012, 01:22 AM
Mmmmmmm, Well, honestly I can't see that this poll is fair or let's say " objective" as I could pick "He didn't leave much of an impact on me." , "I liked him, but I much preferred Ezio and Altiar." and "He was alright, but I've had enough of him. Time for another Assassin!" I think a more realistic poll would be : did you like Connor? Yes- No.
But anyway this is not what i'm after. what I meant by "mixed" is represented in the title of the post itself "Why don't you guys like Connor" if there weren't any mixed opinions, a title like that wouldn't exist. and yet another thing if you surfed the internet about what people think about Connor, you would realize that he had a wide range of mixed reception.
Fair enough...we`ll divide all the votes then...there`s 10 of them...6 could be put into the "No" field and 5 could be put in the "Yes" field..

NO FIELD

I despised him.


79.33%
He didn't leave much of an impact on me.


68.00%
I liked him, but I much preferred Ezio and Altiar.


79.33%
I liked him more than Altair but less than Ezio.


34.00%
I liked him more than Ezio but less than Altair.


56.67%
He was alright, but I've had enough of him. Time for another Assassin!

56.67%
YES FIELD
I thought he was okay, but I think he has a lot of potential.


1114.67%
I thought he was great but could've been better.


1418.67%
I thought he was a fantastic character.


3445.33%
Favorite video game character.


79.33%


No=33
Yes=66

HazemYossri
11-30-2012, 01:33 AM
alot of people have horrible character analysis skills. why should we base fan reaction off the uneducated???

I don't know, maybe because they are the FANS?!
it's not about the educated and the uneducated. it's about someone liked him and another didn't. and yes it's that simple. who you like and who you don't was never about the psychoanalysis, yet we may discuss the character and it was called a discussion because it's supposed to involve "different opinions"

And you assumed that the uneducated are among the ones who didn't like the character. someone may assume it's the opposite.

HazemYossri
11-30-2012, 01:52 AM
Fair enough...we`ll divide all the votes then...there`s 10 of them...6 could be put into the "No" field and 5 could be put in the "Yes" field..


This makes them 11 :p

Well, I don't say that the majority hate him. I didn't even say it was equal. but what I'm trying to say here. In another words if we compared the reception that Ezio and Connor received, it would become obvious that Connor received mixed opinions. and again goggle it and you will find that many people didn't like him.

Assassin_M
11-30-2012, 01:55 AM
This makes them 11 :p

Well, I don't say that the majority hate him. I didn't even say it was equal. but what I'm trying to say here. In another words if we compared the reception that Ezio and Connor received, it would become obvious that Connor received mixed opinions. and again goggle it and you will find that many people didn't like him.
Why should we compare with Ezio ? (And sorry xD I meant 6 No and 4 Yes) And there are people who hated Ezio at first...

So no..we can safely say that Connor was well received.. (Everyone I know liked him :P)

Just go on Tumblr xD

You`ll find A LOT of fans of Connor there too

HazemYossri
11-30-2012, 02:18 AM
Why should we compare with Ezio ? (And sorry xD I meant 6 No and 4 Yes) And there are people who hated Ezio at first...

So no..we can safely say that Connor was well received.. (Everyone I know liked him :P)

This might last forever

Anyway, we can save years of controversy. In my opinion:

1- Connor is good but not as I anticipated.

2- I might accept another game of him if the devs gave him the space and time to develop but the problem here is that he didn't develop enough in 30 years or more. what's left to be done?

3- I think any game has the name of Assassin's Creed on it I will enjoy even if the protagonist was SATAN himself :p

Assassin_M
11-30-2012, 02:32 AM
2- I might accept another game of him if the devs gave him the space and time to develop but the problem here is that he didn't develop enough in 30 years or more. what's left to be done?


Wait...The game ends with Connor at 24..

We only play 19 years with Connor

montagemik
11-30-2012, 03:31 AM
MMMMMMM What could be left for Connor to do ???? mmmmmm HOW ABOUT Reform the Assassin order back to it's Full strength & Status ............You know , the stuff they gave Ezio 3 games to fully accomplish . :rolleyes:

Just a wild idea huh ? As Haytham said - The templars will keep on coming back - they'll never be completely stopped. (oh look Abstergo's still around in 2012)

laromu
11-30-2012, 07:28 AM
That`s Stupid...

Sorry, my English is poor. I understood him until sequence 6. After that, I don't know his character. Why dosen't he complain his mother's death to George Washington? Side mission is great. But What's the relation to save his people? I know one. He is more important adventure and freedom for all than his people. He disappoints them. But it is not his fault. Devs's mistake.

I think..devs wrote a script around American Revolution, templars. And devs inserted connor, assassin into a plot. In this game, ture main character is American Revolution (and Haytham). Connor is tool for Storytelling. His character change according to historical events. At this rate, he dosen't have personality.

HazemYossri
11-30-2012, 10:24 AM
Wait...The game ends with Connor at 24..

We only play 19 years with Connor

Actually he was born 1756 and the game ends 1783 this makes it 27 years. but whatever. :p


MMMMMMM What could be left for Connor to do ???? mmmmmm HOW ABOUT Reform the Assassin order back to it's Full strength & Status ............You know , the stuff they gave Ezio 3 games to fully accomplish .

It's a good idea but what I meant by " what's left to be done" that he had formed his personality over 27 years with a certain shape and character what's left to change this character which I found dull and has no specific character of his own. and you know, the stuff they gave Ezio 3 games to fully accomplish was the right thing to do because if they didn't gave him these 3 games we would be here complaining how Ezio is a dull and undeveloped character. but to make myself clear about the development of Connor, Look at AC 2 and how developed was Ezio at the end of the game and how developed was Connor.
The problem here guys ,in my opinion, that this game was AC III, if this was AC II, we would have been considered it as a piece of art but AC II had already claimed this, so any installment that comes after has to be better than AC II

Assassin_M
11-30-2012, 10:31 AM
Actually he was born 1756 and the game ends 1783 this makes it 27 years. but whatever. :p


Mate...It`s not when he was born. It`s when we start playing as him..

HazemYossri
11-30-2012, 10:38 AM
Mate...It`s not when he was born. It`s when we start playing as him..

Mate... we are arguing on 3 years here, well it's 24 years, it doesn't make any difference.

Assassin_M
11-30-2012, 10:54 AM
Mate... we are arguing on 3 years here, well it's 24 years, it doesn't make any difference.
3 years ?? We play as Connor when he`s 6

HazemYossri
11-30-2012, 12:42 PM
3 years ?? We play as Connor when he`s 6

This is getting really funny, okay it's 19. I can see what's coming : " we never played as Connor, this was Photoshop*" :p

* only Egyptians will relate :cool:

Assassin_M
11-30-2012, 12:44 PM
This is getting really funny, okay it's 19. I can see what's coming : " we never played as Connor, this was Photoshop*" :p

* only Egyptians will relate :cool:
My Life is a lie xD

FirestarLuva
11-30-2012, 05:55 PM
This makes them 11 :p

Well, I don't say that the majority hate him. I didn't even say it was equal. but what I'm trying to say here. In another words if we compared the reception that Ezio and Connor received, it would become obvious that Connor received mixed opinions. and again goggle it and you will find that many people didn't like him.

Connor had a lot of haters when the game first shipped. People just rushed through the main story and didn't bother with the side stuff that showed a whole new side of Connor. The haters always have the louder voice after every new, long anticipated title is released. There will always be haters, as for Ezio, I wouldn't say he has the brightest fanbase to be honest, when Ubi claimed they made more games with Ezio because people loved Ezio many people disagreed on that.
Something I've noticed, no matter what site it is, be it Youtube, GameFaq's, DeviantArt, Tumblr or other, whenever someone starts hating on Connor there's always someone to defend him. And to add, I think out of all assassins, so far Connor had the best reception before the game was released, I remember fanfics, fanart and cosplays of him ever since march when he was first announced. So, as time goes by, I've seen a big difference, there isn't as much Connor hate as there was when the game first shipped, either people shut up, replayed the game with some sense, or started loving him. But, like I said before, every character had, has and will have haters, so we can't actually say Ezio is more loved, or Desmond is more hated, etc.
Another thing, out of all the sites, I think Connor has the most hate on this forums than other places, but the majority of haters that came when the game shipped were nothing but trolls, so I'm glad they're gone now. I remember the same people creating threads over and over about why do people love Connor, what's so special about him. In about a month I'm sure the forums we'll go back to normal, as they were before AC3 was released. :3 There are still people who dislike the character but at least they give out reasons why they don't like him, and not go all he's boring, he sucks, Ezio was better and I appreciate that.

SteelCity999
11-30-2012, 06:05 PM
Connor had a lot of haters when the game first shipped. People just rushed through the main story and didn't bother with the side stuff that showed a whole new side of Connor. The haters always have the louder voice after every new, long anticipated title is released. There will always be haters, as for Ezio, I wouldn't say he has the brightest fanbase to be honest, when Ubi claimed they made more games with Ezio because people loved Ezio many people disagreed on that.
Something I've noticed, no matter what site it is, be it Youtube, GameFaq's, DeviantArt, Tumblr or other, whenever someone starts hating on Connor there's always someone to defend him. And to add, I think out of all assassins, so far Connor had the best reception before the game was released, I remember fanfics, fanart and cosplays of him ever since march when he was first announced. So, as time goes by, I've seen a big difference, there isn't as much Connor hate as there was when the game first shipped, either people shut up, replayed the game with some sense, or started loving him. But, like I said before, every character had, has and will have haters, so we can't actually say Ezio is more loved, or Desmond is more hated, etc.
Another thing, out of all the sites, I think Connor has the most hate on this forums than other places, but the majority of haters that came when the game shipped were nothing but trolls, so I'm glad they're gone now. I remember the same people creating threads over and over about why do people love Connor, what's so special about him. In about a month I'm sure the forums we'll go back to normal, as they were before AC3 was released. :3 There are still people who dislike the character but at least they give out reasons why they don't like him, and not go all he's boring, he sucks, Ezio was better and I appreciate that.

You shouldn't have to do any of the side missions to develop a character. They are side missions. Good storytelling will tell you all you need to know about the character through his actions and events in the game. Connor has lots of potential but the devs didn't present or develop him the way they should have. For example, Ezio was mostly developed through the main story except for the Christina missions - which helped identify one thing that the main story could not effectively convey. Ubi missed many opportunities to give Connor more depth.

Assassin_M
11-30-2012, 09:36 PM
You shouldn't have to do any of the side missions to develop a character. They are side missions. Good storytelling will tell you all you need to know about the character through his actions and events in the game.
Who the hell even put that rule ?? Game writing is not like writing a Novel or a Movie...

A game is inclusive. It has a lot more than just the main narrative..What you said is false.

montagemik
11-30-2012, 11:37 PM
Actually he was born 1756 and the game ends 1783 this makes it 27 years. but whatever. :p



It's a good idea but what I meant by " what's left to be done" that he had formed his personality over 27 years with a certain shape and character what's left to change this character which I found dull and has no specific character of his own. and you know, the stuff they gave Ezio 3 games to fully accomplish was the right thing to do because if they didn't gave him these 3 games we would be here complaining how Ezio is a dull and undeveloped character. but to make myself clear about the development of Connor, Look at AC 2 and how developed was Ezio at the end of the game and how developed was Connor.
The problem here guys ,in my opinion, that this game was AC III, if this was AC II, we would have been considered it as a piece of art but AC II had already claimed this, so any installment that comes after has to be better than AC II

Then we're down to it being purely your opinion ............Personally as far as character development goes - I Didn't like Ezio until revelations. But we all differ.

HazemYossri
12-04-2012, 07:45 PM
I was surfing the internet and I saw this and I thought this guy says what I want to say and a lot more in detailed organized more comprehensive way.

http://whatculture.com/gaming/10-things-we-loved-about-assassins-creed-2-that-ac-3-ignored.php

TrueAssassin77
12-04-2012, 09:16 PM
I was surfing the internet and I saw this and I thought this guy says what I want to say and a lot more in detailed organized more comprehensive way.

http://whatculture.com/gaming/10-things-we-loved-about-assassins-creed-2-that-ac-3-ignored.php

the author of that thread... is one of the biggest idiots i've seen so far in my short life. He has no idea what he is talking about on some occasions. he only got a few good points. and his analysis on connor??? the stupiest thing i've read yet. im not sure what wrong with that guy, but his opinions should not be taken seriously. the guy simply wants a reskin of AC2... and was apparently to ignorant to undersatnd that, ACB and ACR is exactly what he wants. A *************** RESKIN OF AC2.

i swear that article just ruined my day. what is wrong with people

FirestarLuva
12-04-2012, 10:18 PM
I was surfing the internet and I saw this and I thought this guy says what I want to say and a lot more in detailed organized more comprehensive way.

http://whatculture.com/gaming/10-things-we-loved-about-assassins-creed-2-that-ac-3-ignored.php

"Let’s face it, Connor is a bit of a bore: he’s a one dimensional character. One we’ve seen in hundreds of films before: the stoic do-gooding warrior type with his heart firmly on his sleeve, striding off to right wrongs and uphold justice."

Oh, really?

TrueAssassin77
12-04-2012, 10:39 PM
"Let’s face it, Connor is a bit of a bore: he’s a one dimensional character. One we’ve seen in hundreds of films before: the stoic do-gooding warrior type with his heart firmly on his sleeve, striding off to right wrongs and uphold justice."

Oh, really?

after i read that "analysis" on connor, i knew that guy was an idiot, and literally stopped reading after that

FirestarLuva
12-04-2012, 11:04 PM
after i read that "analysis" on connor, i knew that guy was an idiot, and literally stopped reading after that

I know. That's people's general view on Connor. People don't seem to look beyond what Connor really is. If we're talking about a character that we've seen in hundreds of films, that'd be Ezio. I mean, in every renaissance movie I watched this summer the main protagonist behaved the same way as Ezio. And Ezio's development in AC2, I would rather say Ezio matured, something every person does in their life. And the guy obviously skipped the credits and didn't see the epilogue where you can clearly see Connor didn't behave the same way he did in the beginning.
I've said it times before and I'll say it again, Connor would've fended off better as a book character/movie or a stand-alone game not related to AC, since the AC world has become nothing but Ezio. I don't think it's worth it for Ubi to continue trying so hard to make every future protagonist better and better. The obsession with Ezio will always be there. :( There will be equal hate for every future main character, not only Connor.