PDA

View Full Version : Do you think AC needs to move away from Muskets and gunpowder?



Legendz54
07-15-2013, 01:37 PM
I have had this on my mind for a while and I have lately been wondering what an AC would feel like if we went away from muskets and gunpowder and went back to Armour, swords and shields. Personally I would like them to go way back to Ancient Greece and show large scale close combat gritty sword battles. I am kind of tired of colourful cities I would like Ubisoft to capture the grittiness of the cities like in AC1.

So what do you think.. Should we move away from this era?

EDIT: I would like to see what an upgraded AnvilNext can do with this in AC5
http://www.findingdulcinea.com/docroot/dulcinea/fd_images/news/on-this-day/September-October-08/On-this-Day--Athens-Defeats-Persian-Army-at-the-Battle-of-Marathon/news/0/image.jpg

ProletariatPleb
07-15-2013, 01:44 PM
I think it's fine upto the current level, but any further and just no...no no no no no noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

x___Luffy___x
07-15-2013, 01:49 PM
sure i would like them to go back in time from guns but i really hate armor . dont want it.
personally i would like them to go near the AC1 era , i loved that setting and how awesome it would look and feel on the anvilnext .

TheDanteEX
07-15-2013, 01:49 PM
To be fair, it's not like their medieval combat was ever impressive. I do miss the pacing and believable animations of AC1, though, but it would be even better if they added the ground finishes from the later games. Swiping at air is a bit silly. And shields in an AC game is an interesting concept.

ProletariatPleb
07-15-2013, 01:51 PM
To be fair, it's not like their medieval combat was ever impressive. I do miss the pacing and believable animations of AC1, though, but it would be even better if they added the ground finishes from the later games. Swiping at air is a bit silly. And shields in an AC game is an interesting concept.
Well the 'gun combat' isn't better, lol and yes I miss when AC used to be about authenticity and not 50 hours long flashy animations.

Spider_Sith9
07-15-2013, 01:52 PM
I personally think they need automatic firearms. It fine to take risks as well as it'd allow more room to explore more time periods.

Ancient Greece would be amazing. Phalanx. :)

Speaking of Ground Finishes, I would love to see some MP concepts in main game.

x___Luffy___x
07-15-2013, 01:57 PM
I personally think they need automatic firearms



then you are asking for a shooter AC. well i hope it never comes to that.

generallsj
07-15-2013, 01:58 PM
If they show enough reality and fun about it I do not care how their era will go, AC3 failed at that.

Legendz54
07-15-2013, 02:02 PM
It would be pretty interesting to see what the Anvil next engine can do with close combat scale battles in the Persian wars time period. I can just imagine hundreds of npcs charging at each other with arrows and catapults everywhere and everyone engaging in close combat sword and shield fighting, it would be a nice change.

ProletariatPleb
07-15-2013, 02:09 PM
It would be pretty interesting to see what the Anvil next engine can do with close combat scale battles in the Persian wars time period. I can just imagine hundreds of npcs charging at each other with arrows and catapults everywhere and everyone engaging in close combat sword and shield fighting, it would be a nice change.
We don't really know if AnvilNext is capable of that, we've seen it in action where multiple NPCs were using the same animations, but not when different things are being done...

Last I remember they said they couldn't put the Great Fire in the game because they were not able to make NPCs behave properly.

Ureh
07-15-2013, 02:13 PM
Oh yeah definitely. They just started all this flintlock and naval stuff, but eventually they will have to move out of this comfort zone.

Spider_Sith9
07-15-2013, 02:22 PM
then you are asking for a shooter AC. well i hope it never comes to that. I mean as a weapon. NOT as a shooter. What's up with AC fans and gamers who think guns in AC = shooter?

ProletariatPleb
07-15-2013, 02:28 PM
I mean as a weapon. NOT as a shooter. What's up with AC fans and gamers who think guns in AC = shooter?
Well you want to use guns as a blunt weapon then? causes last I heard that was a few hours ago so it might not be correct now, that guns are used for shooting.

Legendz54
07-15-2013, 02:30 PM
We don't really know if AnvilNext is capable of that, we've seen it in action where multiple NPCs were using the same animations, but not when different things are being done...Last I remember they said they couldn't put the Great Fire in the game because they were not able to make NPCs behave properly.If it can't handle battles like that ( assuming they may go way back to that time) then after AC4 hopefully they upgrade their engine for AC5 on the PS4 "AnvilNext 2" or something like that.

ProletariatPleb
07-15-2013, 02:33 PM
If it can't handle battles like that ( assuming they may go way back to that time) then after AC4 hopefully they upgrade their engine for AC5 on the PS4 "AnvilNext 2" or something like that.
AnvilNext2Next

Legendz54
07-15-2013, 02:38 PM
AnvilNext2Next

I hope AnvilNext2Next can display something like this in an AC game... One can dream..


http://www.findingdulcinea.com/docroot/dulcinea/fd_images/news/on-this-day/September-October-08/On-this-Day--Athens-Defeats-Persian-Army-at-the-Battle-of-Marathon/news/0/image.jpg

ProletariatPleb
07-15-2013, 02:44 PM
I hope AnvilNext2Next can display something like this in an AC game... One can dream..


http://www.findingdulcinea.com/docroot/dulcinea/fd_images/news/on-this-day/September-October-08/On-this-Day--Athens-Defeats-Persian-Army-at-the-Battle-of-Marathon/news/0/image.jpg

You have no idea how much I want to play as a Roman in a giant legion under Caesar maybe, doesn't matter an open-world game about a legionary.

+Points if he's called Titus Pullo >_>

Spider_Sith9
07-15-2013, 02:57 PM
Well you want to use guns as a blunt weapon then? causes last I heard that was a few hours ago so it might not be correct now, that guns are used for shooting.

Both. What's the point of fighting in the Prohibition Era for example when everyone is using knifes and swords and pipes?

ProletariatPleb
07-15-2013, 03:02 PM
Both. What's the point of fighting in the Prohibition Era for example when everyone is using knifes and swords and pipes?
Woah woah woah, Prohibition? You mean you want them to go even further in time?

ACfan443
07-15-2013, 03:18 PM
Last I remember they said they couldn't put the Great Fire in the game because they were not able to make NPCs behave properly.

AnvilNext2Next

MediocreNext

itsamea-mario
07-15-2013, 03:34 PM
We need laser guns and spaceships.

GreySkellig
07-15-2013, 04:03 PM
I'm definitely against going any further forward in time. The guns in AC3/ACIV are okay, but only because of the short range & long reload time. Move more than a few decades forward, however, and that ceases to be the case. By 1842, the breech-loading rifle was sufficiently developed as to be practical for widespread adoption in certain militaries, greatly increasing rate-of-fire, range and accuracy over the muzzle-loading muskets prevalent during the American War of Independence. So unless the game is set sometimes during the half-century after AC3 (and I really hope it's not--the day we see a Connor sequel is the day I check out of Assassin's Creed), firearms will become a big problem.

Personally, I want to see the series head way back in time. I would definitely be in favor of a game set in Imperial Rome, Ancient China, or pagan Europe. A Roman setting would be fantastic, but as I've said before, AC:B (the weakest AC game IMO) kinda makes that unlikely.

ProletariatPleb
07-15-2013, 04:05 PM
We need laser guns and spaceships.
You forgot lightsabers.

itsamea-mario
07-15-2013, 04:09 PM
You forgot lightsabers.

No, there will be no form of melee at all, that's so boring.

ProletariatPleb
07-15-2013, 04:14 PM
No, there will be no form of melee at all, that's so boring.
Who said anything about melee? They are just for...personal use.

itsamea-mario
07-15-2013, 04:15 PM
Who said anything about melee? They are just for...personal use.

ouch.

ze_topazio
07-15-2013, 04:35 PM
Personally I would like them to go way back to Ancient Greece and show large scale close combat gritty sword battles. I am kind of tired of colourful cities I would like Ubisoft to capture the grittiness of the cities like in AC1.

Sorry to disappoint you but, contrary to popular belief, the ancient Greeks painted their houses, temples and statues in all kinds of flamboyant colors.

itsamea-mario
07-15-2013, 04:46 PM
Ancient greek battles would be pretty boring tbh. they were all lines of shields pushing against one another stabbing at eachother, when the line broke usually the people would flee, even their equipment was designed to encourage them to only fight as a shield wall. like most battles throughout history really, until you get to later, more medieval era's or dark ages northern europe.
Most of which were still just lines clashing, though often spiced up with some polearms and skirmish type units, e.g. berserkers and such.
Still, none of these are really the place for an assassin, though an assassin might be sneaking around the chaos of a battle, getting behind the enemy and just running along the back slashing an entire line down, or stealthily climbing a wall on the opposite side to a siege, or finding a secret entrance or w/e.

The battles in AC3 were awful.

Bastiaen
07-15-2013, 05:06 PM
I think that Ubisoft could do any time period well. Some might require drastic gameplay changes though.

Bashilir
07-15-2013, 06:22 PM
I would love an Ancient Greece game. Although, I doubt the engine could handle this. I mean, AC3 did the Bunker Hill battle and from what the devs told us before hand, they made it sound as if AnvilNext could do huge battles and that we could fight them all. (We all know what REALLY happened).


I think it'd be fun to play as an Assassin that is better at long-ranged weapons. Take a different approach at the Assassin. Why does every assassin seem to have to be able to 50 guys down in 5 minutes to be considered an Assassin?

Personally, this is why I think Victorian London should be done. Why? Because everyone seemed to be.. skinny and ties. Did you see any huge buff dudes(AHEM CONNOR AHEM) in suits walking around? They could even add a stamina thing if needed. Like, our skinny, tiny, assassin can't fight forever. He actually has to run(no stamina bar for this, I probably wouldn't play AC if their was a limit for running). Oh and, can we have someone who's main weapon is a dagger?

x___Luffy___x
07-15-2013, 06:45 PM
I mean as a weapon. NOT as a shooter. What's up with AC fans and gamers who think guns in AC = shooter?

so what will you do with a automatic firearm as a weapon ? you know it will fire bullets right ? and how will it be not a shooter.

ze_topazio
07-15-2013, 07:27 PM
Metal Gear Solid series and old school Splinter Cell games have machine guns, i wouldn't call them shooters.

ProletariatPleb
07-15-2013, 07:31 PM
Metal Gear Solid series and old school Splinter Cell games have machine guns, i wouldn't call them shooters.
Yes but they are stealth games, well one isn't anymore...... but AC is 'action-adventure', they'd have to make a purely stealth based game where you can die easily. Think the current 'fans' are gonna enjoy that?

TheDanteEX
07-15-2013, 07:36 PM
Oh and, can we have someone who's main weapon is a dagger?

You mean like a hidden blade?

I do agree with you for the most part, though. Modernized firearms aren't actually a problem when they're used to encourage stealth. Sure you can have the option of using them, but standing in the middle of a room and shooting down everybody should never be possible.

I also find it interesting that people want to go further back in time before there was an official "Assassin brotherhood" that we see in the first game. It seems everyone is complaining about wanting an ASSASSIN'S Creed game, but if you go back to a time before Assassins, in name and organized order of course, existed, then is it not another gimmick? Also huge battles in my opinion should only be scenery. Avoiding conflict and dispatching their target should be the Assassins job unless there's no other option. I'm just not a fan of forced battles.

Spider_Sith9
07-15-2013, 10:02 PM
You mean like a hidden blade?

I do agree with you for the most part, though. Modernized firearms aren't actually a problem when they're used to encourage stealth. Sure you can have the option of using them, but standing in the middle of a room and shooting down everybody should never be possible.

I also find it interesting that people want to go further back in time before there was an official "Assassin brotherhood" that we see in the first game. It seems everyone is complaining about wanting an ASSASSIN'S Creed game, but if you go back to a time before Assassins, in name and organized order of course, existed, then is it not another gimmick? Also huge battles in my opinion should only be scenery. Avoiding conflict and dispatching their target should be the Assassins job unless there's no other option. I'm just not a fan of forced battles.

Yeah that was an issue with AC3 seeing that there WAS no brotherhood. Also, if there were modernized firearms. What if you have a limit and can't pick up every little damn thing? Hell Edward is even reloading his pistols faster than it should! There should've been no explanation how Desmond killed a bunch of guys with modern pistols and Cross suddenly freaks out. Seriously, he'd have to miss a vital organ.

lothario-da-be
07-15-2013, 10:16 PM
I don't know if i will keep enjoying the series as much as i do know if they don't go back in time soon.

Legendz54
07-16-2013, 12:08 AM
I think we need a change, they can only have the same guards AI for so long they will have to change it eventually, The way the guards walk and interact even the way they fight needs reworking and I am getting tired of this semi modern colonial feeling I am getting with AC. I want to go back to tougher times when you actually had to get up close to take out your enemy instead of just shooting from far away.

dxsxhxcx
07-16-2013, 01:29 AM
I think we need a change, they can only have the same guards AI for so long they will have to change it eventually, The way the guards walk and interact even the way they fight needs reworking and I am getting tired of this semi modern colonial feeling I am getting with AC. I want to go back to tougher times when you actually had to get up close to take out your enemy instead of just shooting from far away.

I don't know, let's see what happens in AC4 with all their promises about coming back to the roots, but my hopes aren't high, I doubt we'll see much improvement in this area and I doubt this will be changing anytime soon.

Legendz54
07-16-2013, 03:18 AM
I don't know, let's see what happens in AC4 with all their promises about coming back to the roots, but my hopes aren't high, I doubt we'll see much improvement in this area and I doubt this will be changing anytime soon.

AC4 no doubt seems impressive and I'm sure it will offer some new things but from what I have seen the guards AI and animations looks pretty much the same, I am hoping they will change this with AC5 on the next gem consoles.

Megas_Doux
07-16-2013, 03:42 AM
Huge fan of the classical antiquity -look at my nick- but I would prefer other settings for AC though.....

ladyleonhart
07-16-2013, 12:39 PM
As for your question, I think the muskets and gunpowder are ok in ACIII and ACIV because of re-loading times, etc., but just like sidspyker24 said:


I think it's fine upto the current level, but any further and just no...no no no no no noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

Then we need to go backwards again, and there are already plenty of third-person games that utilise guns. ^^ Not having guns, is what made AC different.

Although, I guess for the modern part of AC we can't rule them out completely. Then I guess it would be okay if enemies had guns e.g. if you are required to infiltrate enemy HQ or something like that, but you still had to use stealth to go undetected. Of course, as an assassin in AC using the "hidden blade" is fundamental, and should remain so IMO ^_~

pacmanate
07-16-2013, 12:47 PM
I've been saying move backwards since AC3. A WHOLE YEAR AGO nearly.

Altair felt more like an actual Assassin to me, more than Ezio or Connor and Edward. It just the time period. I want to revisit something around Altairs time period again to get that atmosphere back.

TheHumanTowel
07-16-2013, 01:12 PM
Yes they definitely need to move back further in time. AC3 is probably the furthest you can stretch melee combat being the primary method of fighting without it looking completely ridiculous. The Desmond Abstergo mission should serve as a grim warning to all to how ridiculous melee combat looks in a more modern setting with efficient guns. Going way back to the 1300s or so would be a good move I think.

dxsxhxcx
07-16-2013, 01:37 PM
I've been saying move backwards since AC3. A WHOLE YEAR AGO nearly.

Altair felt more like an actual Assassin to me, more than Ezio or Connor and Edward. It just the time period. I want to revisit something around Altairs time period again to get that atmosphere back.

I don't think it has to do with the time period, but the fact that during Altair's time, (IMO) we could feel the strenght of the Order, it was organized, we had a hierarchy (even being the most skilled Assassin of that Order we were just another soldier, and we were constantly reminded of it), now we are these god like creatures, the chosen ones that appear in the right place at the right time to save the day, sometimes I ask myself how the Assassins were able to survive all this time because if we remove Ezio, Connor and probably Edward of the equation, we wouldn't have nothing left of their respective Orders, after AC1 all the Orders we got looked weak in comparison with AC1's Order...

pacmanate
07-16-2013, 01:39 PM
I don't think it has to do with the time period, but the fact that during Altair's time, (IMO) we could feel the strenght of the Order, it was organized, we had a hierarchy (even being the most skilled Assassin of that Order we were just another soldier, and we were constantly reminded of it), now we are these god like creatures, the chosen ones that appear in the right place at the right time to save the day, sometimes I ask myself how the Assassins were able to survive all this time because if we remove Ezio, Connor and probably Edward of the equation, we wouldn't have nothing left of their respective Orders, after AC1 all the Orders we got looked weak in comparison with AC1's Order...


Nope. Sorry but it was definitely time period. No guns, atmosphere, architecture. AC1 also had a greater satisfaction for me when I assassinated someone. I didn't feel like a powerhouse in AC1 because there were limited weapons. IMO it had nothing to do with the strength of the order. Altair could have been a lone wolf and it still would have been awesome.

Ureh
07-16-2013, 02:24 PM
Nope. Sorry but it was definitely time period. No guns, atmosphere, architecture. AC1 also had a greater satisfaction for me when I assassinated someone. I didn't feel like a powerhouse in AC1 because there were limited weapons. IMO it had nothing to do with the strength of the order. Altair could have been a lone wolf and it still would have been awesome.

I wonder how much success Altair would have if the Rafiqs hadn't set him on the right path with clues, first. And if he didn't have the support of Malik and the others after Al Mualim's betrayal and his subsequent defeat. It's all about the order.

AvK KiNgKoBrA
07-16-2013, 02:25 PM
Ancient Greece or Rome would be perfect, perfect amount of scenery,action, an plenty of Assassination spots lol........Ubi creating a real plot here would be good as well

Shahkulu101
07-16-2013, 03:59 PM
I think the muskets and flintlocks were fine because really they just acted as any other ranged weapon we had before except they inflicted more damage. I don't want the guns to get any more advanced than that or else it will ultimately become a shooter. So, I don't think they can go much further than AC3 and 4's time periods--so they have to go way back in time eventually to spice things up.

pacmanate
07-16-2013, 04:13 PM
I wonder how much success Altair would have if the Rafiqs hadn't set him on the right path with clues, first. And if he didn't have the support of Malik and the others after Al Mualim's betrayal and his subsequent defeat. It's all about the order.

You are talking about something completely different. Im talking about how the time period made me feel like an Assassin. I dont give a **** about how established the order is present? Are you even reading what I'm saying?

itsamea-mario
07-16-2013, 04:23 PM
You are talking about something completely different. Im talking about how the time period made me feel like an Assassin. I dont give a **** about how established the order is present? Are you even reading what I'm saying?

omg ima slap you.

ze_topazio
07-16-2013, 04:40 PM
It's not the time period that makes you feel like an assassin, it's the story.

itsamea-mario
07-16-2013, 04:42 PM
Unless of course the time period made it impossible to tell a good story about an assassin.

pacmanate
07-16-2013, 04:55 PM
omg ima slap you.

Redeem yourself right now.


Unless of course the time period made it impossible to tell a good story about an assassin.

Redeemed.

Jexx21
07-16-2013, 04:57 PM
nope.

Sushiglutton
07-16-2013, 05:00 PM
I thought that aspect worked fine in AC3. If guns weren't allowed at all there would be too many interesting historical eras/events that would be ignored. I'm not worried about this in AC4 either. This being said I would love a significant jump backwards in time to Egypt/Greece etc.

About the grittiness I feel the opposite. I thought AC3 was too gritty. I think one of Ubi's strength since PoP SoT is to build these beautiful exotic locations. There are sooo many gritty, post-apocalytic games. AC has a different flavour because it's not like that. One of the reasons the world of AC4 excites me.

Jexx21
07-16-2013, 05:45 PM
I think each game had great atmosphere. It all depends on which one you prefer. AC1 made me feel like I was in the 12th century holy lands, AC2-ACR made me feel like I was in Renaissance Italy/Istanbul, AC3 made me feel like I was in the colonies. They all did a great job with their atmospheres, but it all depends on what kind of atmosphere you prefer.

as for guns, I don't care how far they go with them. I would love a Civil War game anyway.

Legendz54
07-16-2013, 06:47 PM
I think each game had great atmosphere. It all depends on which one you prefer. AC1 made me feel like I was in the 12th century holy lands, AC2-ACR made me feel like I was in Renaissance Italy/Istanbul, AC3 made me feel like I was in the colonies. They all did a great job with their atmospheres, but it all depends on what kind of atmosphere you prefer.

as for guns, I don't care how far they go with them. I would love a Civil War game anyway.

If we are talking about Atmosphere then AC1 was my favourite, Even though the order was established and well built in that time traversing the world made me feel wary and kept me wondering what kind of crazy ****ing Templar would try to do to me next, even walking around cities you had to be careful and watching out for some mad man nibbling on his hand in case you get slapped by him if you got close. So to sum it up AC1 made me feel weak which gave you means to use stealth and also capturing a very gritty atmosphere in the Middle East.

Assassin_M
07-16-2013, 06:50 PM
They can go wherever they want backwards AFTER they make a second Connor game :|

ladyleonhart
07-16-2013, 06:52 PM
They can go wherever they want backwards AFTER they make a second Connor game :|

Aww... I think I love you! :D

ProletariatPleb
07-16-2013, 06:54 PM
Aww... I think I love you! :D
I believe this discussion was already done in another thread....

Spider_Sith9
07-16-2013, 07:06 PM
As for your question, I think the muskets and gunpowder are ok in ACIII and ACIV because of re-loading times, etc., but just like sidspyker24 said:



Then we need to go backwards again, and there are already plenty of third-person games that utilise guns. ^^ Not having guns, is what made AC different.

Although, I guess for the modern part of AC we can't rule them out completely. Then I guess it would be okay if enemies had guns e.g. if you are required to infiltrate enemy HQ or something like that, but you still had to use stealth to go undetected. Of course, as an assassin in AC using the "hidden blade" is fundamental, and should remain so IMO ^_~ I do think so too. Maybe throwing knives or a silenced pistol. Ala Chinglish and Desmond.


They can go wherever they want backwards AFTER they make a second Connor game :|


Aww... I think I love you! :D

I LOVE BOTH OF YOU!!! <3

Jexx21
07-16-2013, 07:26 PM
2nd Connor game in the period of the Northwest Indian War.

Ureh
07-16-2013, 08:21 PM
You are talking about something completely different. Im talking about how the time period made me feel like an Assassin. I dont give a **** about how established the order is present? Are you even reading what I'm saying?

I am. I was responding to the last part of your post:


Nope. Sorry but it was definitely time period. No guns, atmosphere, architecture. AC1 also had a greater satisfaction for me when I assassinated someone. I didn't feel like a powerhouse in AC1 because there were limited weapons. IMO it had nothing to do with the strength of the order. Altair could have been a lone wolf and it still would have been awesome.

His "triumphs" turned out the way they did because he relied on the Order. Altair was already a lone wolf but one that found it expedient to work with others. The Order and its Creed are what makes Altair the assassin that he is and why we like playing as him. Take all tose rules and hierarchy stuff away and you'll just get a "mercenary" for hire.

ze_topazio
07-16-2013, 08:40 PM
They can go wherever they want backwards AFTER they make a second Connor game :|

Does that mean the games will only move forward from now on?



http://i.imgur.com/qx1Xot5.png

ladyleonhart
07-16-2013, 08:49 PM
They can go wherever they want backwards AFTER they make a second Connor game :|


Does that mean the games will only move forward from now on?

http://i.imgur.com/qx1Xot5.png

No, it means that we are happy for a second Connor game, which, of course, is going forward after ACIV. After the second Connor game, they should go backwards again :) I hope that explains it! xD

TheHumanTowel
07-16-2013, 08:57 PM
I'm not a fan of postponing going to an earlier time period just so Connor fans can get their unnecessary second game.

Assassin_M
07-16-2013, 09:00 PM
I'm not a fan of postponing going to an earlier time period just so Connor fans can get their unnecessary second game.
I don`t think anyone particularly cares what you`re not a fan of

Jexx21
07-16-2013, 09:07 PM
Actually, a second Connor game is necessary to conclude his story arc (and possibly the story arc of the Kenway family).

TheHumanTowel
07-16-2013, 09:10 PM
I don`t think anyone particularly cares what you`re not a fan of
I just thought I'd randomly talk about another Connor game regardless of the thread like you and all the cool kids seem to be doing here.

I-Like-Pie45
07-16-2013, 09:11 PM
Actually, a second Connor game is necessary to conclude his story arc (and possibly the story arc of the Kenway family).

that is why comics, novels, vita spin-offs, and movies exist

no need for a full blown console game

Assassin_M
07-16-2013, 09:12 PM
I just thought I'd randomly talk about another Connor game regardless of the thread like you and all the cool kids seem to be doing here.
That`s right. we`re cool kids, you`re not...you`re not allowed anything

ladyleonhart
07-16-2013, 09:13 PM
I just thought I'd randomly talk about another Connor game regardless of the thread like you and all the cool kids seem to be doing here.

It is relevant because we are talking about muskets and gunpowder and if AC should move away from that. So please don't be offended. :)

I-Like-Pie45
07-16-2013, 09:19 PM
I think that the new AC protagonist needs to have breast cancer or a homosexually transmitted disease in order for good character development and for us as gamers to care about him.

because that is how good characters are written - breast cancer or hstds

Jexx21
07-16-2013, 09:21 PM
that is why comics, novels, vita spin-offs, and movies exist

no need for a full blown console game
That's only if the story is relatively small.

Connor is still very young and has a lot ahead of him.

Spider_Sith9
07-16-2013, 09:22 PM
It is relevant because we are talking about muskets and gunpowder and if AC should move away from that. So please don't be offended. :)

And I'm just saying there's nothing wrong with having automated firearms in an AC game. We NEVER seen what it looked like. Just constant assumptions. What we seen in AC3 was just a guy storming an office controlled by a Winner or Loser who presses Y and Triangle all day.

TheHumanTowel
07-16-2013, 09:23 PM
that is why comics, novels, vita spin-offs, and movies exist

no need for a full blown console game
Yeah I'd agree. Connor's story works absolutely fine the way it is but follow up comics and embers-like movies would be great.

dxsxhxcx
07-16-2013, 09:26 PM
Actually, a second Connor game is necessary to conclude his story arc (and possibly the story arc of the Kenway family).

since we'll have some missions with Aveline, I wouldn't be surprised if we end up playing as an older Connor at the end of the game doing something that'll connect him with whatever Edward will find in AC4 (assuming he'll find a PoE) to finish his (Connor) role...

Jexx21
07-16-2013, 09:30 PM
I'm pretty convinced that we're getting a second Connor game though.

I-Like-Pie45
07-16-2013, 09:38 PM
i'm pretty convinced that we're getting a second connor game though.

in hell

pacmanate
07-16-2013, 10:18 PM
Screw Desmond

LoyalACFan
07-16-2013, 10:28 PM
that is why comics, novels, vita spin-offs, and movies exist

no need for a full blown console game

I disagree. I was hugely disappointed with AC3, but I still hope Connor gets a sequel. Partly to finish out the Kenway Saga, and partly to redeem the wasted potential of AC3's plot. This is not a story that should be told via a spin-off. Embers only worked for Ezio because he was a 65-year-old man who had already done everything except come to terms with death. Connor is freaking 27, and hasn't even kissed a girl. Desmond had to come from somewhere... Unless Connor went into town, paid for sex, and jumped out a window right after burying the key, he's still got a pretty substantial story left to tell.

Bashilir
07-26-2013, 03:39 AM
You mean like a hidden blade?

I do agree with you for the most part, though. Modernized firearms aren't actually a problem when they're used to encourage stealth. Sure you can have the option of using them, but standing in the middle of a room and shooting down everybody should never be possible.

I also find it interesting that people want to go further back in time before there was an official "Assassin brotherhood" that we see in the first game. It seems everyone is complaining about wanting an ASSASSIN'S Creed game, but if you go back to a time before Assassins, in name and organized order of course, existed, then is it not another gimmick? Also huge battles in my opinion should only be scenery. Avoiding conflict and dispatching their target should be the Assassins job unless there's no other option. I'm just not a fan of forced battles.


No. I hate that stupid "swivel" crap Connor had. I mean like legit DAGGERS.

Jexx21
07-26-2013, 04:09 AM
I LOVED the swivel blade. It was awesome. I'm confused why you would hate it.

ProletariatPleb
07-26-2013, 04:10 AM
I LOVED the swivel blade. It was awesome. I'm confused why you would hate it.
because it was gimmicky and useless.

Jexx21
07-26-2013, 04:16 AM
Mmm, well, all it did was change the design of the animations. But those animations were awesome. I don't understand how it's a gimmick, and yea, technically it's useless since you don't really use it in a gameplay sense. It's just part of the animations. But I love the animations more because of it.

Still don't see the issue here. They had to make new animations regardless.

ProletariatPleb
07-26-2013, 04:20 AM
Well that's the thing, it was useless. If you play as Connor before he becomes an assassin and try combat he magically spawns a dagger and has the same animations.

Jexx21
07-26-2013, 04:29 AM
Yea, I know. It's cause they didn't make animations for without the swivel blade.

But it still looks cool.

ProletariatPleb
07-26-2013, 04:30 AM
Yea, I know. It's cause they didn't make animations for without the swivel blade.

But it still looks cool.
Substance over flash for me :p

Jexx21
07-26-2013, 04:41 AM
Both for me.

pirate1802
07-26-2013, 04:47 AM
I think early to mid 1850's should be the absolute cut-off point for historical ACs. Start moving backwards already. The Abstergo mission showed us how ridiculous melee combat looks in moden times, so nope. Regarding ancient times, I'd gladly part with one of my kidneys to see us playing in the ancient Roman/Greek/Persian/Babylonian/Egyptian times.

Jexx21
07-26-2013, 04:49 AM
It's easier for them to do stories on periods where there is a lot of recorded history.

That's one of the main factors that goes into choosing a setting methinks.

ProletariatPleb
07-26-2013, 04:51 AM
It's easier for them to do stories on periods where there is a lot of recorded history.

That's one of the main factors that goes into choosing a setting methinks.
Easier? More like harder, AC uses "how it actually happened" that requires leeway to creatively create your own story in between.

I thought it was very stupid when Hutchinson said, we chose America and then says not many important people died during the revolution and so it was hard to come up with assassinations..............then why chose the setting in the first place?

Jexx21
07-26-2013, 05:37 AM
I thought it showed dedication. :/

LoyalACFan
07-26-2013, 06:31 AM
I thought it showed dedication. :/

Either way, regardless of how much recorded history they have available to them, they need to focus on fiction over fact. Sure, I'd love to see a connection between our Assassin's actions and the historical record, but AC3 followed the history books so slavishly it was nauseating. Maybe it's just because I'm an American, but I was already intimately familiar with every major event we saw in AC3 and it wound up feeling more like AC: Forrest Gump than anything else. Yes, Altair and Ezio were at the center of major events like the Battle of Arsuf and the Pazzi Conspiracy, but Connor was shoehorned into every damn thing that happened between 1770 and the end of the war.

Jexx21
07-26-2013, 06:36 AM
Maybe that was the fault of Corey May.

Still, I'm not rejecting the idea of going back to Ancient settings, I would love an Incan or Aztec setting, but do we know enough about their history to do that?

Ureh
07-26-2013, 07:30 AM
Maybe that was the fault of Corey May.

Still, I'm not rejecting the idea of going back to Ancient settings, I would love an Incan or Aztec setting, but do we know enough about their history to do that?

Yeah I think we know enough. Wouldn't mind an AC set in the Conquistador era. Some of the Aztec's enemy tribes even worked with the Spanish too.
But one problem iirc is Cortes only brought around 500 men I think... Or 1000. That's not enough guards for me to kill.

Jexx21
07-26-2013, 07:33 AM
It's all in the Animus my friend. It can keep respawning them. I doubt that any of the Assassins would have killed anywhere near the amount of guards that we do while playing these games.Especially Connor.

Zrvan
07-26-2013, 01:56 PM
::LOSING BATTLE WITH KNOWLEDGE OF HISTORY::

Grrrrr...nga...ah, it burns...

::BATTLE LOST::

Guns are not the 'easy-button murder' everyone seems to think they are, thanks to Hollywood. Like any weapon, using a gun competently requires a significant amount of training. Professional soldiers are often trained in their use, but in times like Connor/Edward's, the rank-and-file soldier wasn't all that great a shot. Actually, they mostly sucked. That's why their commanders have them all fire at once, in the hopes that at least some of the balls will hit.

Regardless of the sometimes patent ridiculousness of what Assassins can do, if their training is comparable to those of actual soldiers whose specific job it is to make the enemy die (you know, lower-case A assassins), then one assassin vs. five guys armed with guns is going to turn out like how it does in the games, regardless of the hilariously long amount of time Abstergo security takes to line up a shot.

Something a lot of people don't understand is all of the other crap that goes with actually using a firearm. Too much COD gets them used to the idea that guns are these magical death wands that they have to hold at a funny angle. Modern ballistics, even with all its engineering and fancy-pants computer simulation velocity arcs and other stuff, is still fully aware that the best gun in the world is a paper weight if the guy holding it is a boob. And truthfully, most militaries in the world, even up until the modern day, don't train their soldiers in the full, precise, ultimate use of their rifles/whatever. Because doing so is cost prohibitive, and ultimately, unnecessary. Will a soldier be called upon to shoot someone? Yes. Absolutely. But not getting shot is actually a lot easier than you'd think.

Someone trained as intensely as the Assassins are would probably have the skills necessary to minimize/avoid injury by firearm, almost without regard to the situation (screaming and running full tilt at a guy with an assault rifle in a huge empty room is going to get you shot, sure, but the idea is to not give your opponent enough time to pick you out of a crowd and take aim).

Why did I tell you all of that? So I can tell you this:

Screw that noise. I'll take an AC game any time, any place. I require no suspension of disbelief to believe that Assassins are BA enough to know how to avoid gunfire effectively, and I would be delighted to play a game set in 1920s Chicago or 1790s France.

itsamea-mario
07-26-2013, 04:10 PM
Too much recorded history is bad, because there's one thing i know, history is boring. Nothing ever happens, centuries pass between anything significant, events that seem fast paced and exciting when you read about them, turn out to have been very dull affairs that took many years to play out in which many of the events were incredibly exaggerated,. But you may say interesting and exciting stuff happened, but lot's of things happened, less than 1% may as well be none.
AC plays in the gaps of history, if there are no gaps we get boring stuff, like watching some paper be signed or going on a romantic midnight ride with some chubby bloke.

ProletariatPleb
07-26-2013, 04:12 PM
going on a romantic midnight ride with some chubby bloke.
On 1 horse while he tells you directions like a ******.

roostersrule2
07-26-2013, 04:13 PM
On 1 horse while he tells you directions like a ******.Like a compass?

ProletariatPleb
07-26-2013, 04:15 PM
Like a compass?
A broken and ****ty one.

Rugterwyper32
07-26-2013, 04:41 PM
A broken and ****ty one.

More like an 18th century version of a broken GPS

Admittedly, they could have made it work. I had a mental image of a MUCH cooler version of the midnight ride where you didn't have to go on that ridiculous ride but dealing with avoiding the ride getting sabotaged by Templars and saving Revere when he was kidnapped causing the first shot that would cause the battle to break out nearby. Then again I imagined we'd have a stealth mission related to the Fortification of Dorchester Heights and retaking Boston or a lot more going on with New York, so that went all out of the window. Even events that are well documented can be twisted around. It all goes back to what Vidic said in AC1, really. They just stuck too close to how it really was in AC3 and honestly, that doesn't work out.

itsamea-mario
07-26-2013, 04:44 PM
What if we had connor sneaking into the red coat army and firing the first shot at the rebels.

ProletariatPleb
07-26-2013, 04:47 PM
What if we had connor sneaking into the red coat army and firing the first shot at the rebels.
Then the already stupid scene of Connor crying about Haytham killing 3 redcoats would look even stupider.

itsamea-mario
07-26-2013, 04:49 PM
What if connor was actually a templar?

STDlyMcStudpants
07-26-2013, 05:28 PM
YES
I also hate armor, but they can do a mix of ACR and AC3/AC1 regenerating health but armor that doesnt break, just protects from damage
I just hope we never see a vehicle in AC lol

Sigv4rd
08-08-2013, 03:02 AM
What if connor was actually a templar?

http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u9/DebrisStorm/random/what-a-twist.jpg

pirate1802
08-08-2013, 03:30 AM
What if connor was actually a templar?

Then the fangirl rage would block out the sun.

Jexx21
08-08-2013, 03:31 AM
What is Templars were actually Connor?

pirate1802
08-08-2013, 03:37 AM
What is Templars were actually Connor?

Then Sid's rage would block out the ubi forums..

Mizuno_zoom
08-08-2013, 03:44 AM
i think they should use colt revolvers

Jexx21
08-08-2013, 03:46 AM
Then Sid's rage would block out the ubi forums..
what about sith's rage?

pirate1802
08-08-2013, 03:47 AM
what about sith's rage?

sith would rage if Connor tuns out to be a templar. :D

adventurewomen
08-08-2013, 04:01 AM
Muskets and gunpowder, are important to the current AC time period setting. :)

Mizuno_zoom
08-08-2013, 04:06 AM
true but slingshot would be good

Spider_Sith9
08-08-2013, 01:47 PM
what about sith's rage?


sith would rage if Connor tuns out to be a templar. :D

And then when I calm down, I'd quit the series. :D

kingwasabi24
08-08-2013, 01:55 PM
Then Sid's rage would block out the ubi forums..

who's Sid?

kingwasabi24
08-08-2013, 01:55 PM
true but slingshot would be good

Like Zelda?

roostersrule2
08-08-2013, 02:15 PM
I wouldn't want to stand close, I suggest AC moves away in case they explode.

ze_topazio
08-08-2013, 05:54 PM
sith would rage if Connor tuns out to be a templar. :D

i think it would pretty cool to follow an Assassin that in end is converted to the Templar cause, would be a nice twist.

superkootje
08-08-2013, 06:01 PM
I would love to play in ancient Greece, with the bright sunny cities, maybe even the olympics and gladiator fights.
As for gunpowder, I prefer it being gone, Swords and sh*t only :)

ProletariatPleb
08-08-2013, 06:01 PM
I wouldn't want to stand close, I suggest AC moves away in case they explode.
LOL


i think it would pretty cool to follow an Assassin that in end is converted to the Templar cause, would be a nice twist.
How I wish we didn't know Edward's fate already, would've been cool to suspect him of turning to a Templar.

Sigv4rd
08-08-2013, 11:40 PM
LOL


How I wish we didn't know Edward's fate already, would've been cool to suspect him of turning to a Templar.

I don't see his character following rules...