PDA

View Full Version : Am I the only one disappointed that Connor is gone?



BradB97
03-10-2013, 08:27 AM
Assassin's Creed 3 was really well-rated upon release, but with the announcement of Assassin's Creed 4 I have seen so much backlash towards the game and Connor in particular. I really cannot understand the hate though! Am I the only person here who actually liked Connor as a character? It is a big disappointment for me to see that he won't be getting full closure to his story, like Ezio and Altair received. Without spoiling anything, I felt Assassin's Creed 3's ending (the historical ending, nobody cares about the modern day aspect) was really open and left so much for another sequel with Connor. What happened, Ubisoft!?

ProletariatPleb
03-10-2013, 08:38 AM
Yes you're the only person in the whole world who liked Connor.....................of course not, don't be absurd.

Do you remember that Altaïr only got 1 full game and parts in Revelations(and a little level in AC2 but that's irrelevant)? Only Ezio got more than 1 proper game.
Maybe we'll get a game afterwards? Even so, what else can he do in his timeperiod?

AjinkyaParuleka
03-10-2013, 08:42 AM
He can participate in the French Revolutions *cough/Lafayette*cough*.Yeah I too,am disappointed at the absence of Connor.There must be an explanation why they are going back in time into The Golden Age of Piracy instead ahead,the French Revolutions.Abstergo must have some problems or is Erudito interfering?We do not know.I am pretty sure that Connor will have another game,maybe next year.

BradB97
03-10-2013, 08:48 AM
He can participate in the French Revolutions *cough/Lafayette*cough*.Yeah I too,am disappointed at the absence of Connor.There must be an explanation why they are going back in time into The Golden Age of Piracy instead ahead,the French Revolutions.Abstergo must have some problems or is Erudito interfering?We do not know.I am pretty sure that Connor will have another game,maybe next year.

I rather expected him to also participate in the French Revolution, as it takes place only a few years later after the ending of Assassin's Creed 3. It just seems as though it leaves his story really open...

ProletariatPleb
03-10-2013, 08:48 AM
That's the only possibility. But it's also the most..."expected". We could have one more game with Connor but Ubi also stated they will not have a trilogy for Connor like they did for Ezio so I'm not sure if they considered a...duology.

poptartz20
03-10-2013, 08:53 AM
Yeah.. I also feel the same way! There was so much more left to do with Connor. yet at the same time I wonder how the ToKW will end as well. Maybe that will be their "proper end of Connor story"

I feel that Ezio just stayed around way to long. I kinda hate that Connor was received so poorly, but I guess that what you get after you follow up a 3 game act from Ezio.

Sometimes I feel that maybe he was just too complex of a character for people to really understand. ( or maybe they just didn't care)

ProletariatPleb
03-10-2013, 08:55 AM
Yeah.. I also feel the same way! There was so much more left to do with Connor. yet at the same time I wonder how the ToKW will end as well. Maybe that will be their "proper end of Connor story"

I feel that Ezio just stayed around way to long. I kinda hate that Connor was received so poorly, but I guess that what you get after you follow up a 3 game act from Ezio.

Sometimes I feel that maybe he was just too complex of a character for people to really understand. ( or maybe they just didn't care)
Connor was subtle and realistic. Seems people want character development THROWN at their face instead of themselves doing work and looking in-between the lines.

Assassin_M
03-10-2013, 09:06 AM
Connor was subtle and realistic. Seems people want character development THROWN at their face instead of themselves doing work and looking in-between the lines.
:O

You got it right :O :O

BradB97
03-10-2013, 09:06 AM
Connor was subtle and realistic. Seems people want character development THROWN at their face instead of themselves doing work and looking in-between the lines.
Agreed. It seems that people always want really drastic character development, and anything that is subtle is just bad. Ezio was a good character, but the way he progressed was really drastic. Connor was, as you said, more realistic. I liked him, anyway.

poptartz20
03-10-2013, 09:07 AM
Connor was subtle and realistic. Seems people want character development THROWN at their face instead of themselves doing work and looking in-between the lines.

I guess your right! I loved the fact that Connor was so different due to his background. You really see his growth as a character and experience so much with him from his naivete, to his anger, and his confusion in choosing whats right for him and his people. Then at the end seeing everything he worked for discarded, and the betrayal of being used by literally EVERYONE. Seeing so much death from a young age. Killing your own father whom you secretly wanted a relationship with the list goes on. Sadly... not everybody gets the plight in all of this, and doesn't care. : /

"CONNER IZ BORING WERE IZ EZIOS DA BESTEST ASSASSNINO EVARS" is all I ever hear. Oh well.. what can ya do?

Cheers to ubisoft though for daring to try something amazing and new!

AjinkyaParuleka
03-10-2013, 09:43 AM
Connor was subtle and realistic. Seems people want character development THROWN at their face instead of themselves doing work and looking in-between the lines.
^^.
Seriously lol they listened to Ezio fanboys,just because he was what most of the male population wants,charming and getting girls in just one sentence.
No,I prefer Connor over any assassin out there,Edward won't beat him too.I just know it.

UrDeviant1
03-10-2013, 09:52 AM
Assassin's Creed 3 was really well-rated upon release, but with the announcement of Assassin's Creed 4 I have seen so much backlash towards the game and Connor in particular. I really cannot understand the hate though! Am I the only person here who actually liked Connor as a character? It is a big disappointment for me to see that he won't be getting full closure to his story, like Ezio and Altair received. Without spoiling anything, I felt Assassin's Creed 3's ending (the historical ending, nobody cares about the modern day aspect) was really open and left so much for another sequel with Connor. What happened, Ubisoft!?

I stopped caring about what you said after you say that nobody cares about the modern-day aspect.

avk111
03-10-2013, 10:08 AM
I guess your right! I loved the fact that Connor was so different due to his background. You really see his growth as a character and experience so much with him from his naivete, to his anger, and his confusion in choosing whats right for him and his people. Then at the end seeing everything he worked for discarded, and the betrayal of being used by literally EVERYONE. Seeing so much death from a young age. Killing your own father whom you secretly wanted a relationship with the list goes on. Sadly... not everybody gets the plight in all of this, and doesn't care. : /

"CONNER IZ BORING WERE IZ EZIOS DA BESTEST ASSASSNINO EVARS" is all I ever hear. Oh well.. what can ya do?

Cheers to ubisoft though for daring to try something amazing and new!


well that's what most people fail to realize, Connor did win his fight against tyranny and oppression, yeah sure his people left the village UNHARMED but that's how it works for assassins, Ezio lovers fail to realize that he didn't have a separate faction to protect, only his family which was already erased off the agenda.

silvermercy
03-10-2013, 11:47 AM
You're not the only one!

Connor had many things against him:
- being the first new assassin after Ezio (everyone would lose to that, even Edward. Ed is lucky not to come after Ezio, I think...)
- rabid Ezio fans. They have a large established fan-base and their "rabid percentage" can attack anyone who is not Ezio: "Ezio is da best evaarr", "Conner is borrrring".... They can't even spell his name right many times.
- being an introvert vs an extrovert
- sassy Haytham
- Connor having about 6 full adult sequences compared to others for character development. Tiny. (ToKW is a DLC after all.)
- being in a less "exotic" location and historical era compared to previous ones
- the devs having less freedom and time in exploring Connor due to possible cultural insensitivities arising. They had to be very careful not to offend by mistake.
- engine glitches

So yeah... poor Connor had everything against him from the start...

Kirokill
03-10-2013, 12:01 PM
I liked Connor more than Ezio. His story was too sad. He is overshadowed by Haytham. Man give the guy a break. He fought for freedom of people, Ezio just wanted revenge. Then to explore Altair. Altair wanted to get his rank back. But he started to understand the point of being an assassin. Wouldn't somebody get mad if his family was killed? Haters are more of Ezio fans. And racist people complaining he's black. :(

avk111
03-10-2013, 12:42 PM
I don't want to throw any assumptions that audience is racist.

but to display an idea whereby a Native American was the main reason the mighty Dollar USA exists today can ravage a lot of north America's audience with provocative replies.

Your making them question their foundation of belief , but anyway I don't want to go there. We should consider the sample pool of audience playing AC3 title and see their age as I'm sure action thriving players would find it hard to relate to Connors arc as it was not as linear as it was with Ezio.

who-can-i-be
03-10-2013, 12:45 PM
^^.
Seriously lol they listened to Ezio fanboys,just because he was what most of the male population wants,charming and getting girls in just one sentence.
No,I prefer Connor over any assassin out there,Edward won't beat him too.I just know it.

+1

mattduck69
03-10-2013, 01:01 PM
I liked ezio more than conner. thats my opinion.
i like conner but he just sort of had a monotone voice and he when you could tell he was in the wrong he just wouldnt admit it. I feel sorry for the guy because all he wanted to do was free his people and keep his land but IMO after a few sequences it just started to get rediculous and I just felt like he should just spot his whining and think tactical and smart, not just "oh if i kill everyone with little evidence other than them being a templar my peoples land with be free" come on dude do some blinkin research! he was clueless about washington calling the attack on his land!
sure ezio was just built on revenge but he matured and realized he needed to do more alot quicker than connor if you think about it..

silvermercy
03-10-2013, 01:08 PM
I liked ezio more than conner. thats my opinion.
i like conner but he just sort of had a monotone voice and he when you could tell he was in the wrong he just wouldnt admit it. I feel sorry for the guy because all he wanted to do was free his people and keep his land but IMO after a few sequences it just started to get rediculous and I just felt like he should just spot his whining and think tactical and smart, not just "oh if i kill everyone with little evidence other than them being a templar my peoples land with be free" come on dude do some blinkin research! he was clueless about washington calling the attack on his land!
sure ezio was just built on revenge but he matured and realized he needed to do more alot quicker than connor if you think about it..
It's ConnOr. Sorry it's my pet-peeve. lol

Ezio was not mature at the start of the game either, the equivalent of all of Connor's sequences. He, however, had all the time in the world to mature later.

mattduck69
03-10-2013, 01:19 PM
It's ConnOr. Sorry it's my pet-peeve. lol

Ezio was not mature at the start of the game either, the equivalent of all of Connor's sequences. He, however, had all the time in the world to mature later.

oh wow..please forgive..im usually the one getting up people for that haha!
Yeah you may have missunderstood what i said, Yes Ezio was not mature at the start of the game, definetly not mature, but when you think about it, less than 10 years into AC2 he realises hes in the wrong and to not think about the revenge side of things. If my facts are right it took around 12 or so years for Connor and even then we dont exactly know if he realises...i hope that made more sense.

MasterAssasin84
03-10-2013, 01:29 PM
I guess your right! I loved the fact that Connor was so different due to his background. You really see his growth as a character and experience so much with him from his naivete, to his anger, and his confusion in choosing whats right for him and his people. Then at the end seeing everything he worked for discarded, and the betrayal of being used by literally EVERYONE. Seeing so much death from a young age. Killing your own father whom you secretly wanted a relationship with the list goes on. Sadly... not everybody gets the plight in all of this, and doesn't care. : /

"CONNER IZ BORING WERE IZ EZIOS DA BESTEST ASSASSNINO EVARS" is all I ever hear. Oh well.. what can ya do?

Cheers to ubisoft though for daring to try something amazing and new!


Whilst i agree with mostly everything that has been said here, in terms of character development i would like to have seen a degree of progression for Connor for example Altair in AC1 had all of his weapons and abilities taken from him and he had to earn his way back into the brotherhood by respecting the creed and carrying out Assassinations to the point were he would be granted his equipment back in stages as you progressed through the game thats the point here but none the less Connor is an amazing character and i would certainly love to see more of him but this time around more wiser and more attributes added to his skills.

i think its a sense of achievement from the players point of view as ubi made such a point of the mission constraints in AC3 to achieve 100% sync and there was no rewards fro this and sometimes it become quite exasperating keep going back to attempt the mission object to the point of 100% sync and once achieving this not gaining anything.

avk111
03-10-2013, 02:53 PM
oh wow..please forgive..im usually the one getting up people for that haha!
Yeah you may have missunderstood what i said, Yes Ezio was not mature at the start of the game, definetly not mature, but when you think about it, less than 10 years into AC2 he realises hes in the wrong and to not think about the revenge side of things. If my facts are right it took around 12 or so years for Connor and even then we dont exactly know if he realises...i hope that made more sense.

Connor was mature what are you talking about dude... When he realized that Washington turned his back on him was the biggest proof that he is mature enough as an assassin.

ajl992008
03-10-2013, 02:56 PM
they could at least release a downloadable game with connor to keep connor fans happy for the time being, they have the new Orleans map from liberation ready made, why not just edit and improve it and create like 6-8 sequences and release that in the summer, keeps connor fans like myself happy and gives everyone else something to play before the main ac release.

avk111
03-10-2013, 03:00 PM
they could at least release a downloadable game with connor to keep connor fans happy for the time being, they have the new Orleans map from liberation ready made, why not just edit and improve it and create like 6-8 sequences and release that in the summer, keeps connor fans like myself happy and gives everyone else something to play before the main ac release.

I agree Ezio had like three added DLC main story added to him in each title wether brotherhood or the original AC2.

I was disappointed that the only DLC we got for Connor was the Benedict Arnold missions, I didn't personally count the rest because they were naval missions , *shrug* who cars about naval missions

ajl992008
03-10-2013, 03:06 PM
I agree Ezio had like three added DLC main story added to him in each title wether brotherhood or the original AC2.

I was disappointed that the only DLC we got for Connor was the Benedict Arnold missions, I didn't personally count the rest because they were naval missions , *shrug* who cars about naval missions

there are the TOKW dlc packs but i'm waiting for them all to be released before I consider getting them, I just them to start doing expansion packs with new locations, you would think since it is an open world game they would do it, porting over new Orleans seems like a no brainer, saves them money and dev time to just concentrate on the missions. but i want a conclusion to connor, I still think that connor is linked to ac4, why make us play as his grand father if there was no link? they could have just chosen a different assassin if there wasn't a link.

avk111
03-10-2013, 03:15 PM
there are the TOKW dlc packs but i'm waiting for them all to be released before I consider getting them, I just them to start doing expansion packs with new locations, you would think since it is an open world game they would do it, porting over new Orleans seems like a no brainer, saves them money and dev time to just concentrate on the missions. but i want a conclusion to connor, I still think that connor is linked to ac4, why make us play as his grand father if there was no link? they could have just chosen a different assassin if there wasn't a link.

Well lets lay the facts, the TOKW are great however they don't really add anything to the main story YET . Thus their value in my eyes doesn't add much to the Connor Arc. As for example the Bon fire of Vinnities added to Ezios arc.

However this would only mean Connors whole arc was explained in the main story plot which would save us the trouble of deviation and money saving.

I am sensing with the Cult-like followers we connor fans are following (since we are opposing the main orthodox opinion of the general public I.e. Connor sucks) Ubisoft might end uup killing off Connor at the end of TOKW , this would be a logical marketing move from capitalist developers , no offense Ubi

Sushiglutton
03-10-2013, 03:52 PM
As you can see you are far from alone :). I thought Connor was ok, but I won't be too disapointed if he doesn't return. He was a different kind of character, but at the end of the day I just couldn't connect with him. For me his manners are pretty annoying. The way he bursts in and starts screaming at people when normal conversation would have worked just fine. And at other times his voice is so emotionless that it's hard to care when it seems like he deosn't. I'm not saying Connor isn't believable, or that he is a shallow character or anything like that. It's just that, if I'm being completely honest, I don't enjoy spending time with him. I think the voice acting is a big reason why. I understand that Noah chose this approach carefully and delivered on his vision with skill, but for me it doesn't work.

I always loved playing as Ezio. He was charismatic, had a sense of humour, was passionate and overall seemed to enjoy himself. In many ways I think he was a less believable character given the massive amount of people he killed. I mean he's pretty much a psychopath just like Nathan Drake :). But for me the bottom line is that I had a great time in his company and I really don't care that much about character consistency in videogames.

lothario-da-be
03-10-2013, 04:07 PM
We still don't know if he is gone forever, but as long as he hasn't returned we should keep make these threads.

Megas_Doux
03-10-2013, 04:10 PM
No! Connor is my favorite assassin!

Ó:nen ki' wáhi Ratonhnhaké:ton, Niá:wenh ki’ wáhi !

Kaschra
03-10-2013, 05:13 PM
I understand Connor's character and personality - but that still doesn't mean I like him. Because I don't really do.
We don't even know if he's gone forever though.
I don't care if he gets another game or not. If he does, fine, if he doesn't, I'm fine with it, too.

TheHumanTowel
03-10-2013, 05:28 PM
I like Connor but I don't see what else they could do with him. I'm completely against having him taking part in the French Revolution. It would just be the same story as AC3 again and Connor would be ridiculously out of place in France. How could no one notice a Native American having heavy involvement in the French Revolution? Kind of defeats the whole clandestine thing.

poptartz20
03-10-2013, 05:36 PM
Whilst i agree with mostly everything that has been said here, in terms of character development i would like to have seen a degree of progression for Connor for example Altair in AC1 had all of his weapons and abilities taken from him and he had to earn his way back into the brotherhood by respecting the creed and carrying out Assassinations to the point were he would be granted his equipment back in stages as you progressed through the game thats the point here but none the less Connor is an amazing character and i would certainly love to see more of him but this time around more wiser and more attributes added to his skills.

i think its a sense of achievement from the players point of view as ubi made such a point of the mission constraints in AC3 to achieve 100% sync and there was no rewards fro this and sometimes it become quite exasperating keep going back to attempt the mission object to the point of 100% sync and once achieving this not gaining anything.

Ahh! Yes good point! But at the same time I wonder what that might have been! Because by the time Connor came around The Brotherhood was basically dead, consisting of only Achilles and him. As we could all tell though Achilles was a broken and battered soul, and I felt that with as much that was taught there was still so much missing.

This is why I can also appreciate Altair so much! He really was a great assassin!

Enhance89
03-10-2013, 05:39 PM
Yeah.. I also feel the same way! There was so much more left to do with Connor. yet at the same time I wonder how the ToKW will end as well. Maybe that will be their "proper end of Connor story"
I don't think ToKW will add much to the Connor story. The DLC operates under a false reality. And the likely end to the story is Connor will take the Apple back from GW and set the world back to how it was before. In terms of DLC, it's creative, but I don't think it will add anything more to the real Connor story, unless he fixes the situation with GW and then there's another DLC back in the real world.

I don't think Connor is necessarily a boring or undeveloped character, I just think his story was poorly developed. The first 3-4 hours of gameplay are mundane, imho, and the Kenway sequences don't really add a lot to the overall story, except that Kenway had what he thought was the key to the temple, and he's Connor's father. I think both of those things could have been told without forcing us to play through 2 hours of, what I believe to be, bad gameplay. And I didn't think the sequences of events meshed well with one another, either.

I don't find Connor himself boring, just the development of the story surrounding him.

Bullet747
03-10-2013, 05:53 PM
I'm semi optimistic Connor will return for AC-V. For one thing I really want to see more native american culture. Connor's story is nowhere near over. I suspect he'll meet Edward in AC-V.

ajl992008
03-10-2013, 05:56 PM
I'm semi optimistic Connor will return for AC-V. For one thing I really want to see more native american culture. Connor's story is nowhere near over. I suspect he'll meet Edward in AC-V.

while i think he has more coming in the future, how is he going to meet edward? there's like a 60-70 year difference between them and Edward is connors grandfather.

Enhance89
03-10-2013, 05:59 PM
I'm semi optimistic Connor will return for AC-V. For one thing I really want to see more native american culture. Connor's story is nowhere near over. I suspect he'll meet Edward in AC-V.
Edward is Connor's grandfather, so unless there's some freakly time-lapse or alternative reality plot twist, they won't meet.

ProletariatPleb
03-10-2013, 06:04 PM
I'm semi optimistic Connor will return for AC-V. For one thing I really want to see more native american culture. Connor's story is nowhere near over. I suspect he'll meet Edward in AC-V.
Edward dies by the time Haytham is 18.

ajl992008
03-10-2013, 06:05 PM
Edward is Connor's grandfather, so unless there's some freakly time-lapse or alternative reality plot twist, they won't meet.

I guess there is a way if you think about it, maybe they each use a piece of eden to enter the nexus of time? could work if done right but that would be the ending of the game kinda thing.

Megas_Doux
03-10-2013, 06:09 PM
Edward dies by the time Haytham is 18.
10 years in fact!

According to the wikia Edward´s death is in 1735 And Haytham was born in 1725.

ProletariatPleb
03-10-2013, 06:10 PM
10 years in fact!

According to the wikia Edward´s death is in 1735 And Haytham was born in 1725.
I probably confused the dates when he was born and when he learnt of the assassins etc.

Bullet747
03-10-2013, 06:10 PM
Edward dies by the time Haytham is 18. My bad. :p

Megas_Doux
03-10-2013, 06:11 PM
Yep!

Many dates in this series haha.

VitaminsXYZ
03-10-2013, 06:41 PM
I don't think ToKW will add much to the Connor story. The DLC operates under a false reality. And the likely end to the story is Connor will take the Apple back from GW and set the world back to how it was before. In terms of DLC, it's creative, but I don't think it will add anything more to the real Connor story, unless he fixes the situation with GW and then there's another DLC back in the real world.
.

It might, actually. Just because it's an alternate reality doesn't mean it'll have no effect on him whatsoever. The DLC is still canon. So even if all this was inside his head, and he manages to set things right in the end and return to his own timeline, he'll still (hopefully) be able to reflect on the choices he's made and the things he's experienced.

joey-4321_web
03-10-2013, 06:44 PM
10 years in fact!

According to the wikia Edward´s death is in 1735 And Haytham was born in 1725.

And according to Assassins creed forsaken. Though I find it hard to see that book as canon. Especially after I read it.

poptartz20
03-10-2013, 07:33 PM
And according to Assassins creed forsaken. Though I find it hard to see that book as canon. Especially after I read it.

Umm... why not? Just out of curiosity.

AjinkyaParuleka
03-10-2013, 07:38 PM
I probably confused the dates when he was born and when he learnt of the assassins etc.
He learnt about Assassins and Templars after like 3-4 years.But he was 18 or 22 by the time he learned his fathers true aliegiance.

MasterAssasin84
03-10-2013, 07:45 PM
Ahh! Yes good point! But at the same time I wonder what that might have been! Because by the time Connor came around The Brotherhood was basically dead, consisting of only Achilles and him. As we could all tell though Achilles was a broken and battered soul, and I felt that with as much that was taught there was still so much missing.

This is why I can also appreciate Altair so much! He really was a great assassin!

Altair is the godfather of the brotherhood he was awesome and he shaped the brotherhood for many ages to come and i feel Ezio did the same for the Italian brotherhood, i would like to see another game with Connor because i feel that he could be the lead mentor for the Colonial Assassins and as Achilles admited in his last days he failed the order, Connor is a strong viable Assassin who lacks passion for modesty because through his determination to do the right thing for his land people i feel he would make an excellent mentor in a potential future game.

joey-4321_web
03-10-2013, 11:30 PM
Umm... why not? Just out of curiosity.

Differences between book and game( diologue, events)

The book was obviously written around an early draft if the games script, it's even more obvious when it finally gets to the beginning of the game where the writer forgot to write a plot around the diologue haythem has with the beard guy( afterwords even haythem wondered what the guy was talking about.

Also there are severe differences between Ac3 haythem and AcF haythem. Both versions clash with each other when the book gets to his side of Ac3 making him inconsistent.

And it also puts up lame excuses for ir ignores every terrible thing he did in game.( manipulate his son, have Charles **** with Connors people, kill his prisoners even after they gave him the information)

I did Like the parts before all that though, it was just weird see the him go from nice guy to ******* five times within a chapter.

Then again it was framed as haythems journal so maybe he fudged things up to make him appear a good guy, then again the last scene never happened in game.

Like I said I have a hard time believing that the book is cannon

Assassin_M
03-10-2013, 11:33 PM
Differences between book and game( diologue, events)

The book was obviously written around an early draft if the games script, it's even more obvious when it finally gets to the beginning of the game where the writer forgot to write a plot around the diologue haythem has with the beard guy( afterwords even haythem wondered what the guy was talking about.

Also there are severe differences between Ac3 haythem and AcF haythem. Both versions clash with each other when the book gets to his side of Ac3 making him inconsistent.

And it also puts up lame excuses for ir ignores every terrible thing he did in game.( manipulate his son, have Charles **** with Connors people, kill his prisoners even after they gave him the information)

I did Like the parts before all that though, it was just weird see the him go from nice guy to ******* five times within a chapter.

Then again it was framed as haythems journal so maybe he fudged things up to make him appear a good guy, then again the last scene never happened in game.

Like I said I have a hard time believing that the book is cannon
Are you sure you read the same book I read ??

joey-4321_web
03-10-2013, 11:38 PM
Are you sure you read the same book I read ??

I read the entire book yesterday morning and then played the main campaign yesterrday afternoon before making a final opinion

Assassin_M
03-10-2013, 11:47 PM
I read the entire book yesterday morning and then played the main campaign yesterrday afternoon before making a final opinion
But the Novel actually expands on Haytham`s cruelty and it doesn't contradict anything from the game...let me dissect your post.




The book was obviously written around an early draft if the games script, it's even more obvious when it finally gets to the beginning of the game where the writer forgot to write a plot around the diologue haythem has with the beard guy( afterwords even haythem wondered what the guy was talking about.
about 15 percent of the book is centered around events mutual with the game and differences in dialogue and script are very little, in regards to some events (such as Haytham`s and Connor`s fight) that`s what the novels always did. the author usually has additional events during some of the main ones, but they never contradicted the game and can you please elaborate on the beard guy ?

Also there are severe differences between Ac3 haythem and AcF haythem. Both versions clash with each other when the book gets to his side of Ac3 making him inconsistent.
Not at all, it was the same Haytham. it didn't show any contradiction

And it also puts up lame excuses for ir ignores every terrible thing he did in game.( manipulate his son, have Charles **** with Connors people, kill his prisoners even after they gave him the information)
He never had Charles lee **** with Connor`s people (and it doesn't ignore it, it shows how Haytham was absent from templar activity during this period of time. he wasn't even in America) and it does show a lot about Haytham`s change in character and talks about it even more in the novel, he also never manipulated his son...when did that happen ?

AssassinGame1
03-10-2013, 11:53 PM
I hated Connor. he just followed his task that people gave him, he never went beyond the limits.

Assassin_M
03-10-2013, 11:55 PM
I hated Connor. he just followed his task that people gave him, he never went beyond the limits.
And this is a prime example of someone playing AC III.....like a 5 year old

joey-4321_web
03-11-2013, 12:01 AM
But the Novel actually expands on Haytham`s cruelty and it doesn't contradict anything from the game...let me dissect your post.

Wait haythem wasn't in America when connor was forced to kill his best friend? In birth the books and the game he was there.

Also what about the Boston massacre, the book completely ignored that.

ajl992008
03-11-2013, 12:03 AM
I hated Connor. he just followed his task that people gave him, he never went beyond the limits.

the thing that is different about ac3 compared to previous games is that much of connor's character development occured outside the main story, your not going to be spoon fed his character you need to go find it, ezio did the same thing, helped out thieves, mercenaries and courtesans but the end result was to kill templars, likewise connor helped out various factions to kill templars, where is the difference? if you didnt take time to do all the side missions and listen to the interactive conversations then its your fault not the games.

BATISTABUS
03-11-2013, 12:07 AM
I loved Connor, so hopefully there's an AC team (maybe Hutchinson again?) working on his sequel .

Assassin_M
03-11-2013, 12:09 AM
Wait haythem wasn't in America when connor was forced to kill his best friend? In birth the books and the game he was there.

Also what about the Boston massacre, the book completely ignored that.
I didn't realize you were talking about THAT ****ing with Connor`s people, I thought you meant the first incident when Charles and crew roughened Connor up, anyways...

It`s not stated ANYWHERE that Haytham was responsible for what Lee did. the game AND the book always made sure to portray Haytham as a supporter for the natives, So I don't see how the book ignored something that never actually happened..

The book does not ignore the Boston massacre. it mentions it once after Haytham`s return and how it was the Templars` plan to separate the colonies from the crown

joey-4321_web
03-11-2013, 12:15 AM
I didn't realize you were talking about THAT ****ing with Connor`s people, I thought you meant the first incident when Charles and crew roughened Connor up, anyways...

It`s not stated ANYWHERE that Haytham was responsible for what Lee did. the game AND the book always made sure to portray Haytham as a supporter for the natives, So I don't see how the book ignored something that never actually happened..

The book does not ignore the Boston massacre. it mentions it once after Haytham`s return and how it was the Templars` plan to separate the colonies from the crown

- yeah I probably should have been a bit more specific
- so Charles went rogue? Why would he?
-if the author really wanted to make haytham seem sadistic then he probably should have kept that part in, instead he mentions it once.

Assassin_M
03-11-2013, 12:19 AM
- yeah I probably should have been a bit more specific
- so Charles went rogue? Why would he?
-if the author really wanted to make haytham seem sadistic then he probably should have kept that part in, instead he mentions it once.
-Why wouldn't he ? he`s done it before right ? and it`s exactly going "rogue" just trying to do what`s best for the Order...in his own brash way
-He mentioned it many times. He mentioned it first in chapter 4. how Haytham felt he was a different man and it`s mentioned many times afterwards, how Haytham is even sometimes surprised at his own cruelty in front of his son. The change in Haytham`s character has a very prominent presence...I can quote some parts if you`d like

Megas_Doux
03-11-2013, 12:22 AM
I like Connor but I don't see what else they could do with him. I'm completely against having him taking part in the French Revolution. It would just be the same story as AC3 again and Connor would be ridiculously out of place in France. How could no one notice a Native American having heavy involvement in the French Revolution? Kind of defeats the whole clandestine thing.


I agree here!

But If that French Revolution game ever happens, I would be pleased if he appears as a mentor or something.

Assassin_M
03-11-2013, 12:24 AM
I would be pleased if he appears as a mentor or something.
I don't think Connor is the type to accept leadership. Although he is a great and passionate captain, I just don't see him taking the mantle of being mentor..

joey-4321_web
03-11-2013, 12:28 AM
-Why wouldn't he ? he`s done it before right ? and it`s exactly going "rogue" just trying to do what`s best for the Order...in his own brash way
-He mentioned it many times. He mentioned it first in chapter 4. how Haytham felt he was a different man and it`s mentioned many times afterwards, how Haytham is even sometimes surprised at his own cruelty in front of his son. The change in Haytham`s character has a very prominent presence...I can quote some parts if you`d like

To me it just felt that the change was downplayed a bit, for to go from wanting to reconnect with his son to saying " I should have killed you long ago" felt a little drastic.
As for the quotes, yeah sure

Megas_Doux
03-11-2013, 12:29 AM
I don't think Connor is the type to accept leadership. Although he is a great and passionate captain, I just don't see him taking the mantle of being mentor..

True! But Sure he will help if required!

:P

joey-4321_web
03-11-2013, 12:32 AM
I don't think Connor is the type to accept leadership. Although he is a great and passionate captain, I just don't see him taking the mantle of being mentor..

It would be cool to see him being all awkward about it at first before getting used to it.

BATISTABUS
03-11-2013, 12:43 AM
Even if Connor wouldn't become the "front man" of the Brotherhood like Ezio was, I believe he'd work very hard to build it back up working behind the scenes.

I-Like-Pie45
03-11-2013, 12:46 AM
Who knows?

Maybe Connor will help rebuild the Brotherhood fully and leave someone else like Chapeau in charge before retiring to the shadows...

Assassin_M
03-11-2013, 12:51 AM
To me it just felt that the change was downplayed a bit, for to go from wanting to reconnect with his son to saying " I should have killed you long ago" felt a little drastic.
As for the quotes, yeah sure

"I grieved for the man I had been" Chapter IV

"I’m afraid I've never been one for tolerating incompetence: not as a young man, when I suppose it was something I’d inherited from Reginald; and now, having passed my fiftieth birthday, even less so." Chapter IV

"Whatever inside me that might once have been capable of nurturing my child had long since been corrupted or burned away. Years of betrayal and slaughter have seen to that." Chapter IV

"had it not been for the treachery of Reginald Birch. Watching him, Connor, I felt a fierce mixture of emotions; among them regret, bitterness, even envy." Chapter IV

After shooting the supplies wagon driver "I wondered how I appeared to him. Connor, What was I trying to teach him? Did I want him as brittle and worn as I was? Was I trying to show him where the path led?"

"I’d dreamed of one day uniting Assassin and Templar, but I was a younger and more idealistic man then. The world had yet to show me its true face. And its true face was unforgiving, cruel and pitiless, barbaric and brutal. There was no place in it for dreams." Chapter V

after killing the second Redcoat prisoner "As he died, I realized that what I felt was not the righteous fire of one who performs repellent acts in the name of a greater good but a sense of jaded inevitability. Many years ago, my father had taught me about mercy, about clemency. Now I slaughtered prisoners like livestock. This was how corrupt I had become."

joey-4321_web
03-11-2013, 01:07 AM
"I grieved for the man I had been" Chapter IV

"I’m afraid I've never been one for tolerating incompetence: not as a young man, when I suppose it was something I’d inherited from Reginald; and now, having passed my fiftieth birthday, even less so." Chapter IV

"Whatever inside me that might once have been capable of nurturing my child had long since been corrupted or burned away. Years of betrayal and slaughter have seen to that." Chapter IV

"had it not been for the treachery of Reginald Birch. Watching him, Connor, I felt a fierce mixture of emotions; among them regret, bitterness, even envy." Chapter IV

After shooting the supplies wagon driver "I wondered how I appeared to him. Connor, What was I trying to teach him? Did I want him as brittle and worn as I was? Was I trying to show him where the path led?"

"I’d dreamed of one day uniting Assassin and Templar, but I was a younger and more idealistic man then. The world had yet to show me its true face. And its true face was unforgiving, cruel and pitiless, barbaric and brutal. There was no place in it for dreams." Chapter V

after killing the second Redcoat prisoner "As he died, I realized that what I felt was not the righteous fire of one who performs repellent acts in the name of a greater good but a sense of jaded inevitability. Many years ago, my father had taught me about mercy, about clemency. Now I slaughtered prisoners like livestock. This was how corrupt I had become."





Nice
I still would have liked to see his perspective at the Boston massacre but I guess that wouldn't have been as subtle as the author was going for.

Assassin_M
03-11-2013, 01:13 AM
Nice
I still would have liked to see his perspective at the Boston massacre but I guess that wouldn't have been as subtle as the author was going for.
Well...If GW`s assassination plot is anything to go by, Haytham hated the fact that they had to kill GW...he called it a foul scheme...guess that`s the same mindset he had about the massacre ??

Abeonis
03-11-2013, 01:18 AM
Well...If GW`s assassination plot is anything to go by, Haytham hated the fact that they had to kill GW...he called it a foul scheme...guess that`s the same mindset he had about the massacre ??

The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.

In Haytham's eyes the 'needs of the many' (i.e. to ensure Lee's rise to power and a strong head start for the country he had created) outweighed the 'needs of the few' (i.e. his wish to do it honourably, without resorting to underhand schemes of murder or butchery.)

nitres15
03-11-2013, 01:41 AM
what i didn´t like about connor was the very poor voice acting in some of the homestead conversations, i didn´t sound like noah cared for what he was saying sometimes. The fact that the animators got lazy and just made connor and the person he was talking to just stand there, straight as a pole made it even more akward

BATISTABUS
03-11-2013, 01:46 AM
what i didn´t like about connor was the very poor voice acting in some of the homestead conversations, i didn´t sound like noah cared for what he was saying sometimes. The fact that the animators got lazy and just made connor and the person he was talking to just stand there, straight as a pole made it even more akward
Noah is very much a physical actor. More than likely, these lines were just recorded in the booth (hence the characters just standing there). This is probably why the lines weren't as well delivered as the ones from the main cut-scenes, which were recorded along with motion and face-cap. I'd say this is more of a matter of being "out of his element" than not caring. That, and possibly poor vocal direction (which may have resulted in many awkward deliveries in AC's history).

VitaminsXYZ
03-11-2013, 02:22 AM
Noah is very much a physical actor. More than likely, these lines were just recorded in the booth (hence the characters just standing there). This is probably why the lines weren't as well delivered as the ones from the main cut-scenes, which were recorded along with motion and face-cap. I'd say this is more of a matter of being "out of his element" than not caring. That, and possibly poor vocal direction (which may have resulted in many awkward deliveries in AC's history).

This, and I don't know about anyone else, but I also tend to not move around that much when I'm just having a casual conversation with someone...

nitres15
03-11-2013, 02:42 AM
This, and I don't know about anyone else, but I also tend to not move around that much when I'm just having a casual conversation with someone...
no, you probably don´t stand like connor does though. Also, compare how cutscene connor talks to people, to boring streetlight conversation connor


edit-
i´ll post examples later

mattduck69
03-11-2013, 03:09 AM
Connor was mature what are you talking about dude... When he realized that Washington turned his back on him was the biggest proof that he is mature enough as an assassin.

Yeah and it took him how many years to figure that out? and he didnt even find it out for himself, hes father did. he just figured the templars did all the bad stuff that happened and didnt even think to question outside of the templars.

Gi1t
03-11-2013, 04:02 AM
Noah is very much a physical actor. More than likely, these lines were just recorded in the booth (hence the characters just standing there). This is probably why the lines weren't as well delivered as the ones from the main cut-scenes, which were recorded along with motion and face-cap. I'd say this is more of a matter of being "out of his element" than not caring. That, and possibly poor vocal direction (which may have resulted in many awkward deliveries in AC's history).

This.

People always go right to the VAs for complaints about the voice work, but you have to think about it. Someone else, other than the voice actor, had to write that awkward line. Yet another person had to listen to that annoying voice and say 'yeah, that's EXACTLY what I want this person to sound like. Love it.' Directing is important with this sort of thing, and developers aren't necessarily experienced at it. Trying to save money andget it done fast is sure to result in a lot of mistakes, and I think games that make the extra effort when it comes to getting everything right really benefit from it.

Assassin_M
03-11-2013, 04:36 AM
Yeah and it took him how many years to figure that out? and he didnt even find it out for himself, hes father did. he just figured the templars did all the bad stuff that happened and didnt even think to question outside of the templars.
How the hell would he figure it out on his own ?? Why would he even dig into it ?? He had no leads...A spirit told him the Templars are evil bastards, right after he was almost choked to death and beaten up by them...You tell me...Why the hell would he look for any evil bastards outside of the Templars ?? -_-

The mindset of some of the people here makes me feel like NO ONE played the game, or they didn't even bother paying attention to the details..

BATISTABUS
03-11-2013, 04:55 AM
...A spirit told him the Templars are evil bastards
And mind you this isn't just some random mysterious spirit, but someone who Connor likely believed was a god, the creator, or at the very least, the person who told his village their duty was to protect the land (at least, until Achilles explained it to him). Either way, this is an entity very important to his village's history and lineage.

Imagine being christian and having Jesus come up to you asking you to do something. Would you question it?

Assassin_M
03-11-2013, 05:03 AM
And mind you this isn't just some random mysterious spirit, but someone who Connor likely believed was a god, the creator, or at the very least, the person who told his village their duty was to protect the land (at least, until Achilles explained it to him). Either way, this is an entity very important to his village's history and lineage.

Imagine being christian and having Jesus come up to you asking you to do something. Would you question it?
Pfff Bloody hell I wouldn't...

If I was a christian and Jesus came and told me your mom is evil, you can bet anything I`ll believe him...

mattduck69
03-11-2013, 05:31 AM
I understand what your saying, i just wished that ubisoft did a better job..

Assassin_M
03-11-2013, 05:46 AM
I understand what your saying, i just wished that ubisoft did a better job..
better job with what ?

mattduck69
03-11-2013, 06:06 AM
Just with assassins creed 3 story wise..

BATISTABUS
03-11-2013, 06:11 AM
I think AC3's story was probably the strongest in the series (it's close between AC3 and AC1). I really don't understand the complaints about AC3's story being lacking. Hell, storytelling came at the expense of what ended up being an overall linear experience, so complain about that if anything. Please don't tell me your favorite story was AC2...

Assassin_M
03-11-2013, 06:14 AM
Just with assassins creed 3 story wise..
What was wrong with AC III`s story ?

mattduck69
03-11-2013, 06:14 AM
the hell is wrong with ac2??

Assassin_M
03-11-2013, 06:14 AM
the hell is wrong with ac2??
The hell is wrong with AC III ?

VitaminsXYZ
03-11-2013, 06:23 AM
the hell is wrong with ac2??

Nothing, and if you like it more then that's fine. Some of us are just of the opinion that AC3 had a better story.

mattduck69
03-11-2013, 06:38 AM
Okay so the game started off pretty good,but then the next few hours where a bore, but then after that it suddenly became alot more interesting, and then around sequence 6/7 onwards it completely dropped so low it was sadening. I just thought that the bit with connor and his friends playing while a great idea, wasnt fun to play.(tutorial) Then at sequence 7 I just didnt feel as connected with all of the characters rather than in previous games. Conner is one dimensional with little character at all, just constant anger. true, i dont really know why I said constant anger...poor choice of words. The only character I enjoyed was Haytham. pretty relevant. I would have rathered him be the main character.

The ending was awful though. Dont you remember the ending to AC revelations? when ezio is talking to Desmond? that seriously is the best ending. I for one actualy liked the present day and Desmond..i still dont understand the hate! why you take out this bit? The first 5 hours of the game felt like one big tutorial, followed by a series of dull moments that made me feel slightly disappointed for hyping this game so much. I just felt like they made this massive hype for the game that you will be fighting along side george washington and all that and you barely even talked to him and the game made him out to be an arse.

is that better^
P.S sorry, i thought you meant what i thought overall about the game, not just the story...
and can you please tell me whats so wrong about ac2?

Assassin_M
03-11-2013, 06:49 AM
Okay so the game started off pretty good,but then the next few hours where a bore, but then after that it suddenly became alot more interesting, and then around sequence 6/7 onwards it completely dropped so low it was sadening.
So Vague...What exactly dropped ? What was low ? what was boring ?

There really isnt much that I like about this game,
We`re just talking about the story

Conner is one dimensional with little character at all, just constant anger. (False) The e3 trailer that depicted that amazing fight scene is completely non existant in this game! (Nothing to do with story) the amount of broken missions in this game is incredible, the buggys are depressingly horrific, the aiming is broken, (Again, Nothing to do with the story) the narrative wasnt right,(Too vague. what wasnt right ?) Ubisof promised ALOT and didnt deliver, the frontier was awesome but it did feel very absent of things, it was very lucky to find a random event, the towns werent what I like..now i know thats no ones problem because thats what the architecture was like there but it just wasnt my thing. (AGAIN, NOTHING to do with story) The only character I enjoyed was Haytham. (Irrelevant)
The gameplay animations were really the only thing i liked about the game, I really loved them. (Nothing to do with Story) The first 5 hours of the game felt like one big tutorial, (The only tutorial we had was during the ship memories. everything after, barring the Naval system, had NO tutorial what so ever) followed by a series of dull moments that made me feel slightly disappointed for hyping this game so much. (That`s subjective I guess, so I`ll leave it alone)

thats MY opinion, im sorry if you think its stupid okay. but thats what i think.
So...whats wrong with AC 2? (A lot and I would, unlike you, go into GREAT detail)
I respect your opinion of course, but...red

BATISTABUS
03-11-2013, 06:59 AM
So...whats wrong with AC 2?
AC2 doesn't have a BAD story, it's just the weakest out of all the AC games (close to Brotherhood) in my opinion. I'll let M get into that if he wants.

I mostly just threw in that AC2 line because I'm annoyed with this fan base thinking it was the pinnacle of the franchise in every form, when it was actually the weakest in a lot of aspects. At least you didn't say that Kyd is infinitely better than Balfe and that he absolutely needs to come back. I'm pretty sure we all agree that the lack of ambient music was a serious loss.

Also, yeah, most of that isn't related to story or Connor as a character. Besides that, I understand that the game was disappointing. Even though I really liked it, there were a significant number of shortcomings.

mattduck69
03-11-2013, 07:09 AM
(edited post) ^

Assassin_M
03-11-2013, 07:22 AM
I just thought that the bit with connor and his friends playing while a great idea, wasnt fun to play.(tutorial) Then at sequence 7 I just didnt feel as connected with all of the characters rather than in previous games( Fun to play has nothing to do with Story. that`s game design. If you felt more connected with Paula, Teodora, Bartolomeo, Machiavelli, Antonio and Rosa "Who appeared in less than 10 minutes overall each" than with Achilles, Kanentiio, Sam Adams, Stephan and the Homestead people...Then I dunno..considering that the Homestead people had more screen time than even Machiavelli and all had very different personalities and even after all that, it`s still vague...what was in the AC II characters that wasn't in the ones in AC III ?)

true, i dont really know why I said constant anger...poor choice of words. (fair enough)

pretty relevant. I would have rathered him be the main character. (It`s irrelevant because if the story is bad, a "charismatic" character would not make it better)

why you take out this bit? (Because I agree with you xD)

I just felt like they made this massive hype for the game that you will be fighting along side george washington and all that and you barely even talked to him and the game made him out to be an arse. (We agreed that the marketing was screwed. that`s first and how does fighting alongside GW make it a better story ? I didnt see Ezio fighting alongside any one epic leader and yet you still consider AC II a better story, also, i`m pretty sure GW WAS an arse to the natives. it`s not like they lied about him or anything. he WAS an arse and he did all these things. He burned villages, ordered the burning of villages, he was insecure, incompetent and a less than average general...all in the game)

is that better^
P.S sorry, i thought you meant what i thought overall about the game, not just the story...
and can you please tell me whats so wrong about ac2?
Lets just finish with our AC III discussion..

mattduck69
03-11-2013, 07:33 AM
We agreed that the marketing was screwed. thanks for agreeing with that. that`s first and how does fighting alongside GW make it a better story ? its not that it would have made it a better story, its just that the devs didnt deliver with what they said. I didnt see Ezio fighting alongside any one epic leader because the devs never said that he was going to. and yet you still consider AC II a better story, also, i`m pretty GW WAS an arse to the natives. it`s not like they lied about him or anything. he WAS an arse and he did all these things. He burned villages, ordered the burning of villages, he was insecure, incompetent and a less than average general...all in the game) agree with that also.

Assassin_M
03-11-2013, 07:37 AM
thanks for agreeing with that. (No problem)

its not that it would have made it a better story, its just that the devs didnt deliver with what they said. (Well then, AGAIN, that has nothing to with story)

because the devs never said that he was going to. (But they said AC II ends in 1503)

agree with that also. (Alright)
P

VitaminsXYZ
03-11-2013, 07:38 AM
We agreed that the marketing was screwed. thanks for agreeing with that. that`s first and how does fighting alongside GW make it a better story ? its not that it would have made it a better story, its just that the devs didnt deliver with what they said. I didnt see Ezio fighting alongside any one epic leader because the devs never said that he was going to. and yet you still consider AC II a better story, also, i`m pretty GW WAS an arse to the natives. it`s not like they lied about him or anything. he WAS an arse and he did all these things. He burned villages, ordered the burning of villages, he was insecure, incompetent and a less than average general...all in the game) agree with that also.

Did they ever explicitly state we would fight beside GW? Yeah, there was a lot of promotional pictures, ads and trailers of Connor looking like he'd be buddies with him (kinda wish they'd played on that more tbh), but I don't remember ever being promised that that's what we would get.

BATISTABUS
03-11-2013, 07:39 AM
its just that the devs didnt deliver with what they said.
To be fair, they didn't exactly say this. I assume you're referring to the "But I take comfort in knowing that I do not fight alone" line in the Connor Story Trailer [North America] where he is standing next to Washington, but that's hardly a promise. First, in every other version, Connor says "But I will travel down it none the less". Even if he did mean what was said in the N. American version, it doesn't necessarily indicate he is going to fight literally next to Washington...they could just be fighting for the same cause (which they did, to an extent).

Farlander1991
03-11-2013, 07:59 AM
While I do think that AC3 and AC1 have the strongest stories, I don't find AC2 story to be BAD. It's a well constructed and enjoyable story. But extremely archetypal, which is why I also used for my Hero's Journey analysis assignment (https://drivehq.com/file/DFPublishFile.aspx/FileID1329907130/Keyrpcclseg68ro/GD20StasCostiuc_Storytelling_a1.docx)when I was studying at VFS Game Design program. But archetypes aren't inherently bad (after all, that's why we use them everywhere all the time :D ).

(It's funny to read this again, actually... especially considering that I mention the 3DS Lost Legacy game there :D )

RinoTheBouncer
03-11-2013, 08:11 AM
I'm not disappointed nor happy. I think he has potential and I like his personality too but my favorite will remain Ezio and just as some said above that we only saw Teodora, Machiavelli and the rest for about 10 minutes in total, yet I managed to feel more attached to them than any of the tasteless characters of ACIII. Ezio might have been a womanizer but he wasn't the antichrist because of that, LOL. He was a hero, he fought his way through 3 games and was pretty much loved and admired by the majority of the AC fan base.

I don't see them making a video for Connor receiving the VGA award like they did with Ezio. Why? because Ezio was like a Lara Croft and Connor was like Faith from Mirror's Edge. They both were heroic characters but who has the strongest and long-lasting appeal? Lara Croft.

Farlander1991
03-11-2013, 08:18 AM
I don't see them making a video for Connor receiving the VGA award like they did with Ezio.

They actually did make one. :p Connor just didn't win.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dcUwhFYEqro

Although I don't like the VGA awards anyway (and this has nothing to do with Connor not winning, I hated the VGA long before I even knew about Connor)

Spider_Sith9
03-11-2013, 08:21 AM
I'm not disappointed nor happy. I think he has potential and I like his personality too but my favorite will remain Ezio and just as some said above that we only saw Teodora, Machiavelli and the rest for about 10 minutes in total, yet I managed to feel more attached to them than any of the tasteless characters of ACIII. Ezio might have been a womanizer but he wasn't the antichrist because of that, LOL. He was a hero, he fought his way through 3 games and was pretty much loved and admired by the majority of the AC fan base.

I don't see them making a video for Connor receiving the VGA award like they did with Ezio. Why? because Ezio was like a Lara Croft and Connor was like Faith from Mirror's Edge. They both were heroic characters but who has the strongest and long-lasting appeal? Lara Croft.

Ummmmmmmm, I'll have to disagree on you with that...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dcUwhFYEqro

Assassin_M
03-11-2013, 08:30 AM
Ahahahahah HAHAHAHAHA ???HOHOHOHOOHO ??? LOLOLOLOLOLOLMALDKLAKLLPOLOLOL

yeah

Assassin_M
03-11-2013, 08:31 AM
than any of the tasteless characters of ACIII.
No one has yet to explain what they mean by "tasteless" "boring" "lacking"

I just want elaboration D:

BATISTABUS
03-11-2013, 08:53 AM
They actually did make one. :p Connor just didn't win.
Ezio didn't win either...some Call of Duty character did. The videos everyone has seen are for accepting his nomination, and "Best Dressed Assassin" which played during the credits. That video was made incase Ezio did win (like that Connor one), but they showed it anyway and made up an award.

ArabianFrost
03-11-2013, 09:28 AM
Connor is just too risky. I do really like him, but the generic fan base doesn't. Moreover, game site journalists, who have a greater influence than the gamers (god knows why), think that he's of no character and that he's childish. Thing is, many of those people don't even complete the game, consequently, they never saw Connor develop into a more mature man with a darker view of the world. To add to that, Ubisoft gave him an atrocious story to follow, with very few time to be developed, because they had to throw in Ezio V2: British edition, into half of the game. That's why Stupid generic fanbase + Shallow game journalists with great influence + small amount of time for character development + crappy setting= Poor Connor being unfairly valued by the community. Sure everyone here likes him, but remember that we are the hardcore fanbase, that is not as large as the generic one. Should Connor get more time to develop in the French Revolution, then surely both fanbases would be pleased.

Assassin_M
03-11-2013, 09:37 AM
Connor is just too risky. I do really like him, but the generic fan base doesn't. Moreover, game site journalists, who have a greater influence than the gamers (god knows why), think that he's of no character and that he's childish. Thing is, many of those people don't even complete the game, consequently, they never saw Connor develop into a more mature man with a darker view of the world. To add to that, Ubisoft gave him an atrocious story to follow, with very few time to be developed, because they had to throw in Ezio V2: British edition, into half of the game. That's why Stupid generic fanbase + Shallow game journalists with great influence + small amount of time for character development + crappy setting= Poor Connor being unfairly valued by the community. Sure everyone here likes him, but remember that we are the hardcore fanbase, that is not as large as the generic one. Should Connor get more time to develop in the French Revolution, then surely both fanbases would be pleased.
Connor won an award for character of the year where millions of people voted. He beat Max Payne and Commander Shephard...

Also, Connor won 2 Character of the year awards and both were user voted.....Ezio only won one:rolleyes:

He`s liked...:p

ArabianFrost
03-11-2013, 09:41 AM
Really? I thought he only won the IG awards but lost the spike one. Then why do I find people saying he's boring in every comment section of every video and video games site, with journalists constantly ranting about him?
P.S I despise those guys at the IGN reveal podcast. I wanted to cut every single one of them for how shallow and pathetic they are about Connor.

ZeSpecter
03-11-2013, 09:50 AM
Really? I thought he only won the IG awards but lost the spike one. Then why do I find people saying he's boring in every comment section of every video and video games site, with journalists constantly ranting about him?
P.S I despise those guys at the IGN reveal podcast. I wanted to cut every single one of them for how shallow and pathetic they are about Connor.
I really haven't seen that much hate on Connor as a character, and I watch youtube a lot. It's more like either you love him or you hate him, and that kinda causes more focus on him. I thought Connor was a good character and I thought it was awesome that we followed him since he was a child.

Assassin_M
03-11-2013, 09:51 AM
Really? I thought he only won the IG awards but lost the spike one. Then why do I find people saying he's boring in every comment section of every video and video games site, with journalists constantly ranting about him?
P.S I despise those guys at the IGN reveal podcast. I wanted to cut every single one of them for how shallow and pathetic they are about Connor.
The one I`m talking about is called the Virgin Media awards..
http://news.sky.com/story/1051509/connor-from-assassins-creed-wins-gaming-gong

It`s just because haters are more vocal than supporters....Supporters are enjoying Connor in AC III while "Idiotic" haters (Notice my differentiation spend their time doing nothing but hate on anything they hate...hell...they even go on Connor videos and say "Connor sucks, Ezio for life" Go watch Ezio then you bloody Idiot xD

IGN are confirmed Idiots....sometimes at least

ArabianFrost
03-11-2013, 09:53 AM
I really haven't seen that much hate on Connor as a character, and I watch youtube a lot. It's more like either you love him or you hate him, and that kinda causes more focus on him. I thought Connor was a good character and I thought it was awesome that we followed him since he was a child.

Then I really do apologise for my seemingly false statements. Let's hope Ubisoft pays attention to the fans about Connor.

ZeSpecter
03-11-2013, 10:03 AM
Then I really do apologise for my seemingly false statements. Let's hope Ubisoft pays attention to the fans about Connor.
Pretty sure Connor is out of the picture now. Either way, I think people will like Edward Kenway better than Connor.

Escappa
03-11-2013, 10:17 AM
Pretty sure Connor is out of the picture now. Either way, I think people will like Edward Kenway better than Connor.

I also think that people will like Edward more, maybe so much that it's enough for more games with him. But I do not think Connor is out of the picture, maybe out of the "game" picture, but his story was never fully told...we don't even know where and when he died. So I'm hoping for some sort of conclution there (maybe a short film, like Embers?) :D

ArabianFrost
03-11-2013, 10:25 AM
Obviously. I'd probably become more inclined to Connor because of his realistic, human personality and kindness, but this sort of selfish and MOSTLY amoral broken character is really appealing to me ( Connor would have probably evolved to that after the end of AC3). If he's anything like Machiavelli with a touch of Wolverine and House then I'd really like Edward

ArabianFrost
03-11-2013, 10:28 AM
I also think that people will like Edward more, maybe so much that it's enough for more games with him. But I do not think Connor is out of the picture, maybe out of the "game" picture, but his story was never fully told...we don't even know where and when he died. So I'm hoping for some sort of conclution there (maybe a short film, like Embers?) :D

Agreed. Ubisoft likes to conclude the life of every assassin so we'll probably see him in a movie, comic or as character be it NPC or playable in a french revolution setting (remember Ubisoft doesn't want to reuse characters anymore).

RinoTheBouncer
03-11-2013, 10:29 AM
No one has yet to explain what they mean by "tasteless" "boring" "lacking"

I just want elaboration D:

It's subjective, my friend. What isn't interesting to me, might be really interesting to you.

There's this feeling that I get when I see AC2, AC:B and AC:R characters that makes me love them while with ACIII, I didn't get that feeling. I also get the same feeling when I watch movies during American Revolution or in the UK or France in the period between 1600-1950. It's not something linked with AC only but I just don't like the way people look, act or the roles they played during that time. Just my own taste.

Assassin_M
03-11-2013, 10:37 AM
It's subjective, my friend. What isn't interesting to me, might be really interesting to you.

There's this feeling that I get when I see AC2, AC:B and AC:R characters that makes me love them while with ACIII, I didn't get that feeling. I also get the same feeling when I watch movies during American Revolution or in the UK or France in the period between 1600-1950. It's not something linked with AC only but I just don't like the way people look, act or the roles they played during that time. Just my own taste.
You can`t explain your taste ?

Escappa
03-11-2013, 10:42 AM
You can`t explain your taste ?

Of course not :p

Assassin_M
03-11-2013, 10:54 AM
Of course not :p
Why not ? I can

Escappa
03-11-2013, 10:57 AM
Why not ? I can

Explain your taste of music, without naming any specific bands or artists, in such a good way that I'm able to list at least three bands/songs you like. Then...and ony then, I belive you ;)

Assassin_M
03-11-2013, 11:06 AM
Explain your taste of music, without naming any specific bands or artists, in such a good way that I'm able to list at least three bands/songs you like. Then...and ony then, I belive you ;)
I love musical pieces that have violin in them and follow an up-down rhythm...does that make sense ?? I also love the guitar when used Piano, but again, also with a certain rhythm and horn...

does any of this make any sense ???

Escappa
03-11-2013, 11:14 AM
I love musical pieces that have violin in them and follow an up-down rhythm...does that make sense ?? I also love the guitar when used Piano, but again, also with a certain rhythm and horn...

does any of this make any sense ???



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y1hcc1QvM2Q

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1JZoNmDqdys

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tmQZT12pzXc

Prehaps :p

Assassin_M
03-11-2013, 11:17 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y1hcc1QvM2Q

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1JZoNmDqdys

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tmQZT12pzXc

Prehaps :p
don't like the first one...

Loved the second one. it`s perfect..

bastard who made the third one blocked it in my country....racist *****...Oh wait...I`m in the US xD

Escappa
03-11-2013, 11:19 AM
don't like the first one...

Loved the second one. it`s perfect..

bastard who made the third one blocked it in my country....racist *****...Oh wait...I`m in the US xD

Go to Proxtube.com :p

mattduck69
03-11-2013, 11:22 AM
It's subjective, my friend. What isn't interesting to me, might be really interesting to you.

There's this feeling that I get when I see AC2, AC:B and AC:R characters that makes me love them while with ACIII, I didn't get that feeling. I also get the same feeling when I watch movies during American Revolution or in the UK or France in the period between 1600-1950. It's not something linked with AC only but I just don't like the way people look, act or the roles they played during that time. Just my own taste.

exactly how i feel

Assassin_M
03-11-2013, 11:23 AM
exactly how i feel
Hmm...That`s convenient..

ArabianFrost
03-11-2013, 11:47 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y1hcc1QvM2Q

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1JZoNmDqdys

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tmQZT12pzXc

Prehaps :p
I'd be super happy if you send me something with a cello a saxophone, a violin and a piano. Also, check thepianoguys, cause they're awesome.

MasterAssasin84
03-11-2013, 11:49 AM
exactly how i feel

I did find myself more immersed in previous AC games than number 3 admitingly , i am not saying AC3 was a bad game because it was awesome but i find myself more drawn to AC2 because i felt deeply immersed with the Renaisance setting and the scenery like Venice and Florence was just breath taking and i Ezio had that likeability.

Connor was a complete brute and savage which i felt was fitting the era AC3 was set in, though i would like to see Connor return i can understand people when they say the time in history was dull but as dull as it was i found very interesting watching a Native American participate in the liberation of a nation so on that basis AC3 is by far not a bad at all.

Escappa
03-11-2013, 11:55 AM
I'd be super happy if you send me something with a cello a saxophone, a violin and a piano. Also, check thepianoguys, cause they're awesome.

Man, almost impossible ;) Can find two orthree but never four :p


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dkRoK2o2KyM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VkmncrAPILw

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QMKbnNiNiGc

mattduck69
03-11-2013, 12:06 PM
Hmm...That`s convenient..

Hmm..Piss off, seriously mate...cant you just agree to disagree? or am i gonna get a comment off of you everytime i write something?

Escappa
03-11-2013, 12:14 PM
Hmm..Piss off, seriously mate...cant you just agree to disagree? or am i gonna get a comment off of you everytime i write something?

Well...that depends ;)

mattduck69
03-11-2013, 12:20 PM
Well...that depends ;)

https://i.chzbgr.com/maxW500/5193766144/hFCA79AC9/

Escappa
03-11-2013, 12:22 PM
https://i.chzbgr.com/maxW500/5193766144/hFCA79AC9/

haha yes I did ;)

Assassin_M
03-11-2013, 12:34 PM
Hmm..Piss off, seriously mate...cant you just agree to disagree? or am i gonna get a comment off of you everytime i write something?
I sense a nerve being struck...

mattduck69
03-11-2013, 12:39 PM
I sense a nerve being struck...

Yeah.

TheHumanTowel
03-11-2013, 01:16 PM
I sense a nerve being struck...
lul ur such a gud trole M

Spider_Sith9
03-11-2013, 01:25 PM
M? Do you enjoy this? You seem to do it alot. :|

mattduck69
03-11-2013, 01:35 PM
M? Do you enjoy this? You seem to do it alot. :|

Yeah and i'm still waiting to hear his theory on how AC II is such a bad game

ArabianFrost
03-11-2013, 02:31 PM
Man, almost impossible ;) Can find two orthree but never four :p


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dkRoK2o2KyM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VkmncrAPILw

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QMKbnNiNiGc

Man, that's awesome enough for me. Thank you very much :)

roostersrule2
03-11-2013, 02:37 PM
Yeah and i'm still waiting to hear his theory on how AC II is such a bad gameIt really has no logic behind it.

pacmanate
03-11-2013, 02:55 PM
Everyones entitled to their own opinions. I think.... Also OP, you aren't, you are just really late on that matter.

UrDeviant1
03-11-2013, 03:10 PM
Anyone who dislikes Connor can shove their opinion up their arse! :P

MasterAssasin84
03-11-2013, 03:14 PM
It really has no logic behind it.

AC2 is my favorite game in the series !! i absolutely treasure my special white edition with Ezio Figurine :D

roostersrule2
03-11-2013, 03:23 PM
AC2 is my favorite game in the series !! i absolutely treasure my special white edition with Ezio Figurine :DIndeed, it's my 2nd most favourite game.

lothario-da-be
03-11-2013, 04:56 PM
Anyone who dislikes Connor can shove their opinion up their arse! :P
Those people mostly don't have a REAL opinion and just say "HE IS BORING"

Gi1t
03-11-2013, 04:58 PM
Connor is just too risky. I do really like him, but the generic fan base doesn't. Moreover, game site journalists, who have a greater influence than the gamers (god knows why), think that he's of no character and that he's childish. Thing is, many of those people don't even complete the game, consequently, they never saw Connor develop into a more mature man with a darker view of the world. To add to that, Ubisoft gave him an atrocious story to follow, with very few time to be developed, because they had to throw in Ezio V2: British edition, into half of the game. That's why Stupid generic fanbase + Shallow game journalists with great influence + small amount of time for character development + crappy setting= Poor Connor being unfairly valued by the community. Sure everyone here likes him, but remember that we are the hardcore fanbase, that is not as large as the generic one. Should Connor get more time to develop in the French Revolution, then surely both fanbases would be pleased.

I haven't played AC3, but when people say this about Connor, I tend to believe them. :) Characters with subtlety always run the risk of being too low-key for more casual players who tend to focus more on what they want and not on what they're getting. It's also true that the quality of a character isn't really as much about them as it is how they are used. A character who's shallow may not really be that way, but the game simply doesn't elaborate on them enough or present their less obvious qualities in a way that people can relate to. But of course when people argue about this stuff, they always refer directly to the character instead of their development, which inevitably touches nerves because people think they're attacking the base traits of that character that they relate to. (EX: You say 'I hate that character', you imply that you hate every trait attached to that character, even if you don't.) Game developers seem to read too much into this as well. With people reducing their opinions to flat statements, they come to think that that character must be inherently flawed and don't realize that they're simply not presenting them in a way that a lot of people relate to. Really have to read between the lines when people are talking about chracters, but if there's only one line, you can't really do that if you know what I mean. XD People need to elaborate more. After all, if you're confident in your opinion, you shouldn't have any problem discussing the main points of it with someone else.

Kaschra
03-11-2013, 05:03 PM
Those people mostly don't have a REAL opinion and just say "HE IS BORING"

I don't like him much and I have a REAL opinion.
A miracle, isn't it? :rolleyes:


Different people have different opinions and you have to live with that.

leCarrot
03-11-2013, 05:26 PM
What bothers me about Connor is how he never seemed to question his own right to slaughter Loyalists. I mean, the Patriots were (occasionally) shown to be capable of morally ambiguous actions, but were still the good guys. The Loyalists, however, were simply the nasty-pasties who had to be killed without mercy. It was bad enough that at the beginning the Templars apparently sided with them, but then in the end even the baddies wanted to see the Loyalists dead. That's pretty dang negative.

Shaun, however, saved the game once again with his database entries and dialogue :)

MasterAssasin84
03-11-2013, 05:49 PM
I haven't played AC3, but when people say this about Connor, I tend to believe them. :) Characters with subtlety always run the risk of being too low-key for more casual players who tend to focus more on what they want and not on what they're getting. It's also true that the quality of a character isn't really as much about them as it is how they are used. A character who's shallow may not really be that way, but the game simply doesn't elaborate on them enough or present their less obvious qualities in a way that people can relate to. But of course when people argue about this stuff, they always refer directly to the character instead of their development, which inevitably touches nerves because people think they're attacking the base traits of that character that they relate to. (EX: You say 'I hate that character', you imply that you hate every trait attached to that character, even if you don't.) Game developers seem to read too much into this as well. With people reducing their opinions to flat statements, they come to think that that character must be inherently flawed and don't realize that they're simply not presenting them in a way that a lot of people relate to. Really have to read between the lines when people are talking about chracters, but if there's only one line, you can't really do that if you know what I mean. XD People need to elaborate more. After all, if you're confident in your opinion, you shouldn't have any problem discussing the main points of it with someone else.

I am finding that alot players who hate Connor are a means to an end for Ezio, now i am Ezio fan but i Like Connor, granted everyone does tend to favour one Assassin over another but i tend to look past my nose and see that each Assassin is different in their own right and offer the player something unique.

Thats Just My opinion.

Bastiaen
03-11-2013, 06:18 PM
I love all things AC, except the hate. You're right, Connor got ripped apart and totally didn't deserve it. He's just a deeper character than Ezio, which means some people don't get him.

Bastiaen
03-11-2013, 06:19 PM
I am finding that alot players who hate Connor are a means to an end for Ezio, now i am Ezio fan but i Like Connor, granted everyone does tend to favour one Assassin over another but i tend to look past my nose and see that each Assassin is different in their own right and offer the player something unique.

Thats Just My opinion.

You, my friend, are a gentleman and a scholar!

ze_topazio
03-11-2013, 06:21 PM
Connor doesn't need a sequel the same way that Ezio and Altair didn't too.

MasterAssasin84
03-11-2013, 06:23 PM
I love all things AC, except the hate. You're right, Connor got ripped apart and totally didn't deserve it. He's just a deeper character than Ezio, which means some people don't get him.

He did not deserve the reception he received and i am increasingly seeing the same people bashing about crap Connor was on here on a daily basis.

Thank you very much ubi for making these bold creative choices and really taking the time develop something that is completely unique you have my praise please continue the work you are doing.

ze_topazio
03-11-2013, 06:29 PM
What is exctly is unique about Connor? just curious.

MasterAssasin84
03-11-2013, 06:34 PM
What is exctly is unique about Connor? just curious.

Well how would you compare to Ezio Altair then ?

Assassin_M
03-11-2013, 06:38 PM
What is exctly is unique about Connor? just curious.
He`s neither Ezio nor Altair...

MasterAssasin84
03-11-2013, 06:53 PM
You, my friend, are a gentleman and a scholar!


Thank you very very much my Kind sir :)

leCarrot
03-11-2013, 07:09 PM
What bothers me about Connor is how he never seemed to question his own right to slaughter Loyalists. I mean, the Patriots were (occasionally) shown to be capable of morally ambiguous actions, but were still the good guys. The Loyalists, however, were simply the nasty-pasties who had to be killed without mercy. It was bad enough that at the beginning the Templars apparently sided with them, but then in the end even the baddies wanted to see the Loyalists dead. That's pretty dang negative.

Shaun, however, saved the game once again with his database entries and dialogue :)

Shamelessly bumpety-bumping my own post, because I want to know if I'm alone on this :/

TheHumanTowel
03-11-2013, 07:57 PM
Connor doesn't need a sequel the same way that Ezio and Altair didn't too.
This X1000. The Ezio sequels were unnecessary and soured a lot of fans opinions of him because they just got worn out. A Connor sequel would be equally unnecessary.

Assassin_M
03-11-2013, 09:20 PM
Shamelessly bumpety-bumping my own post, because I want to know if I'm alone on this :/

If you think the Patriots were the good guys, you seriously have to replay the game...regarding Connor killing loyalists...Connor killed any who get in the way of his mission...You can go through the entire game killing a very small amount of loyalists. He killed loyalists and Patriots solely because they were in the way...nothing personal..

also, Connor showed great disdain for killing in general. After the battle of Concord, Connor seemed visibly upset by the scene of slaughter in front him which included red coats as well, also, he called the loyalists victims, so that at least ahows that he`s only doing what he has to do....kill Templars and those who stand in his way doing so...whether Patriots or red coats..

from the very beginning, the Templars never sided with the Loyalists. They started the Revolution to extract america from Britain and rule it. They carefully distributed their influence on both sides of the war to ensure victory and a perfect outcome..

Assassin_Banana
03-11-2013, 09:21 PM
Assassin's Creed 3 was really well-rated upon release, but with the announcement of Assassin's Creed 4 I have seen so much backlash towards the game and Connor in particular. I really cannot understand the hate though! Am I the only person here who actually liked Connor as a character? It is a big disappointment for me to see that he won't be getting full closure to his story, like Ezio and Altair received. Without spoiling anything, I felt Assassin's Creed 3's ending (the historical ending, nobody cares about the modern day aspect) was really open and left so much for another sequel with Connor. What happened, Ubisoft!?

Cheer up ;) he will return :P

BATISTABUS
03-11-2013, 10:33 PM
What bothers me about Connor is how he never seemed to question his own right to slaughter Loyalists. I mean, the Patriots were (occasionally) shown to be capable of morally ambiguous actions, but were still the good guys. The Loyalists, however, were simply the nasty-pasties who had to be killed without mercy. It was bad enough that at the beginning the Templars apparently sided with them, but then in the end even the baddies wanted to see the Loyalists dead. That's pretty dang negative.


Yes, he is completely un-phased by the killing of loyalists.

Oh, wait... http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=VUYxGcpxy8U#t=427s

ajl992008
03-11-2013, 11:43 PM
connor DESERVES continuation, I would like another game but I'm not fussed if he doesn't get it, I think it would actually be better if he didn't gives ubisoft opportunity to expand to new time periods and characters but he still needs a continuation and conclusion so I think the best choice would be to give him a DLC game with maybe 7 sequences to end his story, this would keep all fans to some degree happy, those who hate connor or people who want new time periods will get what they want while people who like connor will get his conclusion while still getting a new time period.

it can be like this:

the main map can be new orleans which has been made bigger and more dynamic in line which home consoles, they can create a new frontier which is about the size of boston or new york, maybe a little bigger, they can bring back the homestead and create new homestead characters and create all new homestead missions, have 7 sequences with roughly 7-9 hours of gameplay which a further 7-9 hours in side missions. use the liberation set up in that we look at his memories as an entertainment package and so all dev time can go to making a great conclusion to connor. as they already have the new orleans map and the trees and other assets to make a new frontier they can put more focus on mission design or create another location ( a city). charge $25-35 or £20-25 (i'm from the UK), release it in an august release date so that it doesn't get in the way of the main ac game in November and gives something for ac fans to play in the mean time. This is what i think will be the best decision, however if a new full game is made for connor I won't complain, he is my Favorite assassin,

mattduck69
03-12-2013, 03:58 AM
It really has no logic behind it.
How so?

Assassin_M
03-12-2013, 08:14 AM
How so?
To him, it has no logic what so ever....He`s kind today, though...last time I talked about AC II he called me stupid xD

mattduck69
03-12-2013, 08:15 AM
To him, it has no logic what so ever....He`s kind today, though...last time I talked about AC II he called me stupid xD

say waaaaaaaaaat, thats crazy, i mean i have my amazing and slightly less amazing assassins creeds but ****.

roostersrule2
03-12-2013, 08:17 AM
To him, it has no logic what so ever....He`s kind today, though...last time I talked about AC II he called me stupid xDStruck a nerve? I don't see how though.

Assassin_M
03-12-2013, 08:21 AM
Struck a nerve? I don't see how though.
Nah...not really a nerve...just my sensitive side :p

You don't see how what ?


say waaaaaaaaaat, thats crazy, i mean i have my amazing and slightly less amazing assassins creeds but ****.
I just told him why I thought It wasn't that great...I still love it, though and play it regularly...

roostersrule2
03-12-2013, 08:24 AM
Nah...not really a nerve...just my sensitive side :p

You don't see how what ?

[/COLOR]
I just told him why I thought It wasn't that great...I still love it, though and play it regularly...I was saying I don't know how I struck nerve, the last part contradicts everything you've said about AC2 on numerous times you have said you hated it and it sucked balls.

ProletariatPleb
03-12-2013, 08:27 AM
The last part contradicts everything you've said about AC2 on numerous times you have said you hated it and it sucked balls.
I think he is typically saying it's his least favourite Assassin's Creed game, LEAST but also FAVOURITE.

Regardless, I have to agree with him on Ezio's character.

Assassin_M
03-12-2013, 08:27 AM
I was saying I don't know how I struck nerve, the last part contradicts everything you've said about AC2 on numerous times you have said you hated it and it sucked balls.
Well you know....when I see people like you...calling me stupid for not liking a game as much as he/she did....I just like to nudge them a bit...you know ? See how far you`ll go:rolleyes:

You`d probably gone farther if we weren't on this forum

roostersrule2
03-12-2013, 08:30 AM
Well you know....when I see people like you...calling me stupid for not liking a game as much as he/she did....I just like to nudge them a bit...you know ? See how far you`ll go:rolleyes:

You`d probably gone farther if we weren't on this forumNot really, I too like to piss people off hahaha.

Assassin_M
03-12-2013, 08:31 AM
Not really, I too like to piss people off hahaha.
Ah well that`s good to know I guess...If I ever meet you in real life xD

At least we agree about pissing people off :p

roostersrule2
03-12-2013, 08:33 AM
Ah well that`s good to know I guess...If I ever meet you in real life xD

At least we agree about pissing people off :pHahaha we're only a couple 1000km's apart.

Assassin_M
03-12-2013, 08:34 AM
Hahaha we're only a couple 1000km's apart.
Who knows right ?

roostersrule2
03-12-2013, 08:35 AM
Who knows right ?You can see me right now can't you?

Assassin_M
03-12-2013, 08:38 AM
You can see me right now can't you?
You`re short and brunette..lets not spam again :|

roostersrule2
03-12-2013, 08:39 AM
You`re short and brunette..lets not spam again :|Wrong and wrong, I'll try but I can't make promises.

ProletariatPleb
03-12-2013, 08:43 AM
Guise, you're derailing the thread...

roostersrule2
03-12-2013, 08:47 AM
Guise, you're derailing the thread...Sorry, anywho Connor should be in the French Revoloution. Or maybe not Connor as back before AC2 was announced a guy from Ubisoft said AC2 was in the French Revolution, perhaps that is the next game. It's unlikey and I'm not saying it's true but if it was it would mean it's been in development for like 5 years hahahah.

leCarrot
03-12-2013, 09:34 AM
Yes, he is completely un-phased by the killing of loyalists.

Oh, wait... http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=VUYxGcpxy8U#t=427s

He objected to killing them while they were helpless, and there he saw them more as humans than as part of the enemy. And anyway, how could Connor be so dumb that he didn't realize that Haytham killed every prisoner he took. It's always like "Yea, we'll let you live - what the heck, Dad?!" And that happens three or four times in the game -_-'

My problem is that how Connor doesn't see any redeeming features in the Loyalists, and he doesn't even try to understand their motives. After killing Church he just basically says "Yeah, whatever." At least Altair tried to understand what his targets wanted, and whether they were right or wrong. Connor seems to be happy with seeing them plainly as Templars, who are evil by nature. I was really disappointed how after he killed Pitcairn, Connor just seemed to forget the whole deep dialogue they had. :(

@M
Didn't I say in my post that the Patriots weren't completely "good guys"? It's just that Connor seems to forget the bad things they did, and aids them as if he belonged to them (as in the Benedict Arnold missions). Sometimes I felt like they should have made it clearer that he didn't pick sides in the war. At least having some sort of dialogue with "normal" Loyalists would have helped.

ProletariatPleb
03-12-2013, 09:36 AM
I was really disappointed how after he killed Putnam, Connor just seemed to forget the whole deep dialogue they had.

When did he kill Putnam 0_______________o

leCarrot
03-12-2013, 09:44 AM
When did he kill Putnam 0_______________o

Err, um...
*Edits brainfart away*

where do you see that? :cool:

Assassin_M
03-12-2013, 09:46 AM
@M
Didn't I say in my post that the Patriots weren't completely "good guys"? It's just that Connor seems to forget the bad things they did, and aids them as if he belonged to them (as in the Benedict Arnold missions). Sometimes I felt like they should have made it clearer that he didn't pick sides in the war. At least having some sort of dialogue with "normal" Loyalists would have helped.

And Connor often thinks about that. That the freedom the Patriots speak of is not meant for his kind. He only helps the patriots for the people, not their leaders. Connor`s ONLY concern is for the people. Colonists, Slaves, Natives...EVERYONE. He ends up sacrificing his people`s place in the future of america to ensure the freedom of the colonists at least.

He helps GW during the BA missions ONLY after he said "It`ll cripple the cause" and Connor is completely against crippling the cause of the patriots...which is freedom. having him take a side makes the Patrtios` betrayal have more meaning...If he hadn't believed strongly in the patriot goal and they betrayed him, well...meh...they`re gone right ? but it`s only because he truly believed in GW and the other leaders, did the betrayal really sting...

leCarrot
03-12-2013, 09:54 AM
And Connor often thinks about that. That the freedom the Patriots speak of is not meant for his kind. He only helps the patriots for the people, not their leaders. Connor`s ONLY concern is for the people. Colonists, Slaves, Natives...EVERYONE. He ends up sacrificing his people`s place in the future of america to ensure the freedom of the colonists at least.

He helps GW during the BA missions ONLY after he said "It`ll cripple the cause" and Connor is completely against crippling the cause of the patriots...which is freedom. having him take a side makes the Patrtios` betrayal have more meaning...If he hadn't believed strongly in the patriot goal and they betrayed him, well...meh...they`re gone right ? but it`s only because he truly believed in GW and the other leaders, did the betrayal really sting...

Thanks for refreshing my memory! I still think though that the Loyalists should've been given a voice (other than Shaun :P), especially since the developers assured everyone that the game wouldn't be biased. The game left a slightly sour taste in my mouth, because while the Patriots weren't all that great, they were certainly portrayed as the lesser evil, and the Loyalists were pretty black-and-white evildoers and tax collectors (not only through Connor's eyes).

Assassin_M
03-12-2013, 09:58 AM
Thanks for refreshing my memory! I still think though that the Loyalists should've been given a voice (other than Shaun :P), especially since the developers assured everyone that the game wouldn't be biased. The game left a slightly sour taste in my mouth, because while the Patriots weren't all that great, they were certainly portrayed as the lesser evil, and the Loyalists were pretty black-and-white evildoers and tax collectors (not only through Connor's eyes).[/SIZE]
I agree to an extent and to an extent also they did give the Loyalists a voice in Benjamin Church...Connor DOES generally ignore him, but It`s supposed to make the player ask the questions and doubt...it also makes Connor doubt...if you listen again to the monologues before every sequence...you`ll see Connor`s doubt building up to doubting GW himself...

leCarrot
03-12-2013, 10:02 AM
I agree to an extent and to an extent also they did give the Loyalists a voice in Benjamin Church...Connor DOES generally ignore him, but It`s supposed to make the player ask the questions and doubt...it also makes Connor doubt...if you listen again to the monologues before every sequence...you`ll see Connor`s doubt building up to doubting GW himself...

Church, being a traitor and Templar and all that, still lacks the gravitas to really make the player think about the motives. The fact that Connor ignores and forgets about him doesn't help. I would've liked to see one of the "normal" people as a Loyalist; there were quite a lot of them after all, and we're only shown the rebellious and downtrodden citizens who side with the Patriots.

Assassin_M
03-12-2013, 10:05 AM
Church, being a traitor and Templar and all that, still lacks the gravitas to really make the player think about the motives. The fact that Connor ignores and forgets about him doesn't help. I would've liked to see one of the "normal" people as a Loyalist; there were quite a lot of them after all, and we're only shown the rebellious and downtrodden ones.
Church was a traitor for the Crown and Templar yes, but that doesn't make him a bad person...he`s indeed a despicable human being, but so were the other Templars in AC I and yet what they said made so much sense..

Well....we`v seen Pitcairn...Guy was actually pretty honorable... doesn't help that Connor killed him, though.. :|

Farlander1991
03-12-2013, 10:06 AM
we're only shown the rebellious and downtrodden ones.

Could you please list all the non-Templar loyalists we interact with in the game or on which the 'only shown the rebellious and downtrodden ones' statement is based on?

EDIT: From Connor's time, that is. Braddock and Silas are bastards, but they were there before all the Loyalist/Patriot division and Connor doesn't know or interacted with them.

leCarrot
03-12-2013, 10:08 AM
Could you please list all the non-Templar loyalists we interact with in the game or on which the 'only shown the rebellious and downtrodden ones' statement is based on?

Oops, meant to say "citizens who are rebellious and downtrodden and side with the Patriots".

It would have been nice if Connor at least discussed with Achilles, for example, about his talks with the dying Templars, like in AC1. You get a feeling that their opinions were "wrong" because they were left unhandled in the story.

Farlander1991
03-12-2013, 10:11 AM
Oops, meant to say "citizens who are rebellious and downtrodden and side with the Patriots".

Well, there is that citizen that staged an ambush for Revere and Connor... :rolleyes: Who did his duty to try and prevent a civil war from brewing. :rolleyes:

Assassin_M
03-12-2013, 10:18 AM
It would have been nice if Connor at least discussed with Achilles, for example, about his talks with the dying Templars, like in AC1. You get a feeling that their opinions were "wrong" because they were left unhandled in the story.
That I can agree with...Maybe Connor should`v discussed his thoughts with Achilles....Not just talk to himself about it, but the doubts are definitely there

Farlander1991
03-12-2013, 10:20 AM
It would have been nice if Connor at least discussed with Achilles, for example, about his talks with the dying Templars, like in AC1. You get a feeling that their opinions were "wrong" because they were left unhandled in the story.

Well, here's the thing about Connor, he believes. He doesn't simply dismiss the Templar's death speeches (you can see by the look of his face that he's contemplating on what they're saying, plus that's also evident in inter-sequence monologues), but he BELIEVES in his goal and cause. And that's the thing, Connor has got faith, that he tries to keep unshattered. Achilles even points that out. If it gets to the point that Connor discusses this with somebody else, like Achilles, then it means that his faith has, indeed, failed, that the doubts have gone to the point that he's ready to put that out and discuss with another person. But it didn't. He tries very hard inside himself to keep it whole.

Assassin_M
03-12-2013, 10:26 AM
Well, here's the thing about Connor, he believes. He doesn't simply dismiss the Templar's death speeches (you can see by the look of his face that he's contemplating on what they're saying, plus that's also evident in inter-sequence monologues), but he BELIEVES in his goal and cause. And that's the thing, Connor has got faith, that he tries to keep unshattered. Achilles even points that out. If it gets to the point that Connor discusses this with somebody else, like Achilles, then it means that his faith has, indeed, failed, that the doubts have gone to the point that he's ready to put that out and discuss with another person. But it didn't. He tries very hard inside himself to keep it whole.
I guess we can say that this is what differentiates Connor from Altair...he tries to reason with only himself...he`s more of an "keep it all inside" type of guy..

avk111
03-12-2013, 10:34 AM
Thanks for refreshing my memory! I still think though that the Loyalists should've been given a voice (other than Shaun :P), especially since the developers assured everyone that the game wouldn't be biased. The game left a slightly sour taste in my mouth, because while the Patriots weren't all that great, they were certainly portrayed as the lesser evil, and the Loyalists were pretty black-and-white evildoers and tax collectors (not only through Connor's eyes).[/SIZE]

Sorry for replying late,

however you do realize that both patriots and loyalists are the same faction right ? It's just that one is bullying the other for paying his flat rent and Assassins are there to make sure no body bullies anyone else.

MasterAssasin84
03-12-2013, 11:25 AM
Sorry for replying late,

however you do realize that both patriots and loyalists are the same faction right ? It's just that one is bullying the other for paying his flat rent and Assassins are there to make sure no body bullies anyone else.

@lecarrot

But this was how it happened that is the History of the British Colonised North America and imposed taxation on all its subjects, to say the game is biased is not a valid arguement IMO.

I would very dissapointed if ubi changed the way history was portrayed just because a few people received the game as anti british when its actualy anything but, but thats another arguement but you can see my point right ?.

Call of duty thats what i would call a biased game but lets not digress.

The Patriots and loyalists are the same faction as avk111 has said its just the Loyalist are rubbing salt into the patriots wounds by imposing heavy taxes and unresonable embargos,

leCarrot
03-12-2013, 12:11 PM
however you do realize that both patriots and loyalists are the same faction right ?

Sorry, but how can they be the same faction? They both were British, yes, but they were two different groups who were at war with each other :/

And yes, the game was slightly biased in the sense that it gave the feeling that everyone in the colonies opposed British rule, which was not the case in reality. The reason I'm fussing over this is that Ubi stated very clearly that the game would be unbiased. Instead, they painted a rather shallow picture (though there were hints for the careful players) of the Revolution. I'd expected to see the war from different perspectives without accusing anyone, but instead it mainly concentrated on the happenings of the Patriot side. The fact that the Loyalists have been portrayed as evil already (The Patriot -_-') doesn't help.
Ubi has said that they like challenging accepted views of history, but here they disappointed me.

MasterAssasin84
03-12-2013, 12:20 PM
Sorry, but how can they be the same faction? They both were British, yes, but they were two different groups who were at war with each other :/

And yes, the game was slightly biased in the sense that it gave the feeling that everyone in the colonies opposed British rule, which was not the case in reality. The reason I'm fussing over this is that Ubi stated very clearly that the game would be unbiased. Instead, they painted a rather shallow picture (though there were hints for the careful players) of the Revolution. I'd expected to see the war from different perspectives without accusing anyone, but instead it mainly concentrated on the happenings of the Patriot side.

But you are forgetting that the battle for indepence really started when Connor encountered achilles and he first set foot in Boston, the majority of colonists was sick of being heavily taxed by the british and not being recognised as seperate entitiy, the patriots rose from the loyalists so technicaly they was the same faction. Connor was killing on both sides, but we he have been over this arguement many times before the game is not biased, the fact the Templars backed the british because they saw an opportunity to put forward their ideology, for some parts of the game the patriots was weak but they grew stronger over time through Connors work.

The patriots wanted freedom and to be recognised as seperate state which is as history predated it. so no its not biased.

avk111
03-12-2013, 12:24 PM
Sorry, but how can they be the same faction? They both were British, yes, but they were two different groups who were at war with each other :/

And yes, the game was slightly biased in the sense that it gave the feeling that everyone in the colonies opposed British rule, which was not the case in reality. The reason I'm fussing over this is that Ubi stated very clearly that the game would be unbiased. Instead, they painted a rather shallow picture (though there were hints for the careful players) of the Revolution. I'd expected to see the war from different perspectives without accusing anyone, but instead it mainly concentrated on the happenings of the Patriot side.

Think about it this way, we didn't have AN AMERICAN and a BRITISH , we just had BRITISH people (including minority of Europeans I suppose anyway that's not the point) we didn't have two separate factions as in my above statement we had one sociotype kind of people which are British Colonies. Now the reason your separating them is because your looking at it from your point if view NOW while back in the times it was one unit or faction, when they separated we had a new born brother from the same mother that had enough with his older brother bullying him for whatever reason, and our secret brotherhood defies any sort of bullying thus they supported the new young brother because he wanted to be left alone, nit because he wants a new country no but because he wants to be left alone.

now in terms of Ubi statement is not being biased well if there is anything I learned is that they are correct they didn't favor a certain side , COMING FRM THIER PRESPECTIVE, however for the person with lower PRESPECTIVE he would certainly be supporting your point. I know I myself did to be honest at the beginning till I gained more knowledge.

Hope this helps you see it through a different angle.

MasterAssasin84
03-12-2013, 12:33 PM
Think about it this way, we didn't have AN AMERICAN and a BRITISH , we just had BRITISH people (including minority of Europeans I suppose anyway that's not the point) we didn't have two separate factions as in my above statement we had one sociotype kind of people which are British Colonies. Now the reason your separating them is because your looking at it from your point if view NOW while back in the times it was one unit or faction, when they separated we had a new born brother from the same mother that had enough with his older brother bullying him for whatever reason, and our secret brotherhood defies any sort of bullying thus they supported the new young brother because he wanted to be left alone, nit because he wants a new country no but because he wants to be left alone.

now in terms of Ubi statement is not being biased well if there is anything I learned is that they are correct they didn't favor a certain side , COMING FRM THIER PRESPECTIVE, however for the person with lower PRESPECTIVE he would certainly be supporting your point. I know I myself did to be honest at the beginning till I gained more knowledge.

Hope this helps you see it through a different angle.

When the British landed the true Americans was native Americans ( Now i have to be careful with my words not to offend the PC brigade here ) "indians, there was no such things white Americans because the only white people other than a few Europeans was either English or Irish and a few Scots.

leCarrot
03-12-2013, 12:34 PM
But you are forgetting that the battle for indepence really started when Connor encountered achilles and he first set foot in Boston, the majority of colonists was sick of being heavily taxed by the british and not being recognised as seperate entitiy, the patriots rose from the loyalists so technicaly they was the same faction. Connor was killing on both sides, but we he have been over this arguement many times before the game is not biased, the fact the Templars backed the british because they saw an opportunity to put forward their ideology, for some parts of the game the patriots was weak but they grew stronger over time through Connors work.

The patriots wanted freedom and to be recognised as seperate state which is as history predated it. so no its not biased.

The term 'Loyalist' only would have become necessary when the rebels (the 'Patriots') started doing business. They were, by definition, two different factions, even though it was a civil war.

Of course they got their facts straight, and I'm not asking them to change that. The truth is that history is written by biased people, so it has to be interpreted. Some still (apparently) believe in the American version of the Revolution, where 1. the Patriots were saints and 2. the Loyalists greedy scumbags.
Ubisoft succeeded in shattering the first illusion, but they didn't really do anything about the second, and because Ubi had said they'd give a new, though accurate, take on history, I was disappointed.

*wheezes for breath*

avk111
03-12-2013, 12:37 PM
The term 'Loyalist' only would have become necessary when the rebels (the 'Patriots') started doing business. They were, by definition, two different factions.

Of course they got their facts straight, and I'm not asking them to change that. The truth is that history is written by biased people, so it has to be interpreted. Some still (apparently) believe in the American version of the Revolution, where 1. the Patriots were saints and 2. the Loyalists greedy scumbags.
Ubisoft succeeded in shattering the first illusion, but they didn't really do anything about the second, and because Ubi had said they'd give an unbiased view, I was disappointed.

*wheezes for breath*

ofcourse I see where you coming but then again we didn't see any glimpses of King George or the Parliment reaction on the whole thing because they are all the way back theeeeere , and Desmond's memories are focused on the events here

MasterAssasin84
03-12-2013, 12:39 PM
The term 'Loyalist' only would have become necessary when the rebels (the 'Patriots') started doing business. They were, by definition, two different factions, even though it was a civil war.

Of course they got their facts straight, and I'm not asking them to change that. The truth is that history is written by biased people, so it has to be interpreted. Some still (apparently) believe in the American version of the Revolution, where 1. the Patriots were saints and 2. the Loyalists greedy scumbags.
Ubisoft succeeded in shattering the first illusion, but they didn't really do anything about the second, and because Ubi had said they'd give an unbiased view, I was disappointed.

*wheezes for breath*

The loyalists was loyal to the Crown as during that time North America was under the control of the British thats what they mean by the loyalists because technically whilst the Revolution was going on North America was still under the rule of the crown so the British would have been deemed the loyalists so i still dont see how this is biased and anti british .

leCarrot
03-12-2013, 12:43 PM
The loyalists was loyal to the Crown as during that time North America was under the control of the British thats what they mean by the loyalists because technically whilst the Revolution was going on North America was still under the rule of the crown so the British would have been deemed the loyalists so i still dont see how this is biased and anti british .

My point was that there's no need for a defining term like a 'loyalist' if there isn't an opposing group. I mean, none of us, even though we are all loyal to our respective governments (I think :P), call ourselves loyalists. :)

MasterAssasin84
03-12-2013, 01:26 PM
My point was that there's no need for a defining term like a 'loyalist' if there isn't an opposing group. I mean, none of us, even though we are all loyal to our respective governments (I think :P), call ourselves loyalists. :)

well technicaly the opposing group was born right out of the loyalists so they patriots originated from the loyalists ( ie Red coats loyal to the ruling government ) but this could go on forever lol !!
so we will agree to dissagree :)

kesh_362
03-12-2013, 02:50 PM
I hate them too. Some of them even said they couldn't complete the game. WTF

MasterAssasin84
03-12-2013, 02:51 PM
I hate them too. Some of them even said they couldn't complete the game. WTF

:confused: Huh ?

BATISTABUS
03-13-2013, 03:05 AM
I guess we can say that this is what differentiates Connor from Altair...he tries to reason with only himself...he`s more of an "keep it all inside" type of guy..
This.

Many of the Templars have strong logic behind what they do. We don't need Connor or Achilles to tell us that to realize it. Players should be able to do that thinking for themselves.

zamesthomas5123
03-16-2013, 08:40 AM
That's really disappointed dear.
but you can enjoy your weekend with upcoming latest hollywood movie online
watch upside down movie online (http://upsidedownmovie.tumblr.com)

pirate1802
03-16-2013, 09:48 AM
That's really disappointed dear.
but you can enjoy your weekend with upcoming latest hollywood movie online
watch upside down movie online (http://upsidedownmovie.tumblr.com)

dafuq

ProletariatPleb
03-16-2013, 09:49 AM
dafuq
Exactly, lol.

Assassin_M
03-16-2013, 09:52 AM
That's really disappointed dear.
but you can enjoy your weekend with upcoming latest hollywood movie online
watch upside down movie online (http://upsidedownmovie.tumblr.com)
Are you blonde ? you seem blonde....are you ??

pirate1802
03-16-2013, 10:25 AM
Are you blonde ? you seem blonde....are you ??

Hairist!

Nightmare8767
03-16-2013, 12:44 PM
Spambots that can't even make gramatically correct sentences FTW LOL