PDA

View Full Version : AC4..........Weird



adster01
01-11-2014, 01:18 AM
doesn't anyone else find it odd how The Game is called assassins creed and Edward is never a real assassin he just wears the outfit, i dunno just kinda silly

LoyalACFan
01-11-2014, 01:22 AM
Just like Ezio in AC2.

ze_topazio
01-11-2014, 02:00 AM
1/10 would not read again.

Kagurra
01-11-2014, 02:49 AM
Yeah... Ezio wasn't an Assassin until literally the last cutscene of AC2. "Pirate's Creed" people seem to forget that.

But I admit Italian Guys' Creed is a good game.

ziljn
01-11-2014, 03:58 AM
How could people forget? It's the same empty response every time someone opines on this, as if it actually answers the criticism.

I don't see how a game about assassins, where the protagonist was the son of an assassin, being trained by assassins to become an assassin is somehow the same as a pirate who is not an assassin or even interested in them.

But whatever, keep repeating it anyway

LoyalACFan
01-11-2014, 04:16 AM
How could people forget? It's the same empty response every time someone opines on this, as if it actually answers the criticism.

I don't see how a game about assassins, where the protagonist was the son of an assassin, being trained by assassins to become an assassin is somehow the same as a pirate who is not an assassin or even interested in them.

But whatever, keep repeating it anyway

Ezio was trained to fight and freerun, but he didn't even know what an Assassin was until he spoke with Mario (long after he donned the hood and hidden blade and started killing mofos BTW) and he wasn't interested in them at first either. Remember he was going to take his mom and sister to Spain? He only stayed because he felt guilty for bringing the heat down on Mario's guys, and he just got swept up in his revenge quest from there until he matured enough for the Assassins to reveal themselves and offer him a place in the Brotherhood.

It's basically the exact same thing with Edward. He starts off just some upstart with a hood, and remains so until he shows himself to be mature enough to handle life as an Assassin, at which point Ah Tabai accepted him into their fold. The only difference is that Edward's training came from years as a pirate climbing rigging and fighting, while Ezio's came from his dad and brother sort-of training him without telling him why.

Dev_Anj
01-11-2014, 04:22 AM
Don't forget that Ezio could somehow freerun and climb buildings well even when he didn't know about his father being an Assassin and was basically just a sleazy noble. Somehow, few people pay attention to this.

LUR21
01-11-2014, 04:27 AM
How could people forget? It's the same empty response every time someone opines on this, as if it actually answers the criticism.

I don't see how a game about assassins, where the protagonist was the son of an assassin, being trained by assassins to become an assassin is somehow the same as a pirate who is not an assassin or even interested in them.

But whatever, keep repeating it anyway

Thank you, someone finally said it.

Ezio realised after he killed vieri di pazzi that the way he going about it was wrong. Yes it was pure revenge that drove him at first but after getting scolded by Mario it made him think and obviously rethink his motives. That's why when he gets back to monterigionni he says to Mario that he wants to take over his fathers work. All of it.

And it it proves it as the next person he killed was Francesco and he gave him a respectful death as with every one he killed after.

LoyalACFan
01-11-2014, 04:40 AM
Thank you, someone finally said it.

Ezio realised after he killed vieri di pazzi that the way he going about it was wrong. Yes it was pure revenge that drove him at first but after getting scolded by Mario it made him think and obviously rethink his motives. That's why when he gets back to monterigionni he says to Mario that he wants to take over his fathers work. All of it.

And it it proves it as the next person he killed was Francesco and he gave him a respectful death as with every one he killed after.

Lol, so respecting his targets = ZOMG instant Assassin? Yes, he took on Giovanni's enemies and became less of a selfish arse, but that didn't make him part of the Brotherhood. Edward took on assassination contracts from Ah Tabai from the pigeon coops, but that didn't make him an Assassin either, did it? Matter of fact, the Assassins (except Mary) hated his guts at that point...

phoenix-force411
01-11-2014, 04:45 AM
You're about 2 months late. It's obvious that he doesn't become an assassin until the end of the game, but it's not like that really matters. Ezio wasn't an official assassin until the end of Sequence 11. Sometimes, it's not about what you wear that defines you or what cause you're committed to. Edward was a really well developed character, and I don't think the word Assassin really defines him.

LUR21
01-11-2014, 04:56 AM
Ah to each's own. All that matters is the way you perceive the story to be.

There is no point argueing over a different opinion. You see it one way and others will see it another. As is there right.

ziljn
01-11-2014, 05:02 AM
Ezio was trained to fight and freerun, but he didn't even know what an Assassin was until he spoke with Mario (long after he donned the hood and hidden blade and started killing mofos BTW) and he wasn't interested in them at first either. Remember he was going to take his mom and sister to Spain? He only stayed because he felt guilty for bringing the heat down on Mario's guys, and he just got swept up in his revenge quest from there until he matured enough for the Assassins to reveal themselves and offer him a place in the Brotherhood.

It's basically the exact same thing with Edward. He starts off just some upstart with a hood, and remains so until he shows himself to be mature enough to handle life as an Assassin, at which point Ah Tabai accepted him into their fold. The only difference is that Edward's training came from years as a pirate climbing rigging and fighting, while Ezio's came from his dad and brother sort-of training him without telling him why.

The only similarity is that we play a character who becomes an assassin. AC2 was all about becoming the assassin and training to do by interaction with other assassins. Progression through the game is all through his interaction with the assassins. That's what the game is all about.

ACIV was about a pirate who magically has all the skills from the start, who occasionally has interaction with assassins, and spends his time being a pirate. The entire game is about Edward the pirate being a pirate with obligatory assassination side missions. Assassins are secondary in most of the game. Hell, Edward inexplicably has assassination contracts to do right from the start of the game. He doesn't even know who they are yet but he has contracts waiting for him to kill templars... and this is not supposed to feel awkward at all? It's really just the same thing? Not so much.

DinoSteve1
01-11-2014, 05:18 AM
tbf I think Ezio while not a full Assassin till the end of the game was a Assassin recruit, and I think his father was training Ezio without Ezio knowing he was being trained and the same with his Elder brother.

LoyalACFan
01-11-2014, 05:36 AM
The only similarity is that we play a character who becomes an assassin. AC2 was all about becoming the assassin and training to do by interaction with other assassins. Progression through the game is all through his interaction with the assassins. That's what the game is all about.

ACIV was about a pirate who magically has all the skills from the start, who occasionally has interaction with assassins, and spends his time being a pirate. The entire game is about Edward the pirate being a pirate with obligatory assassination side missions. Assassins are secondary in most of the game. Hell, Edward inexplicably has assassination contracts to do right from the start of the game. He doesn't even know who they are yet but he has contracts waiting for him to kill templars... and this is not supposed to feel awkward at all? It's really just the same thing? Not so much.

Christ, "magically..." When will ANYONE understand that Edward could already fight and climb because he had spent years in the navy and and more as a pirate? Those skills are not unique to the Assassins! There isn't some super-duper secret training program you have to take to learn them... He was a naturally gifted human (being descended from TWCB) who spent years honing his athletic and fighting skills. And it's not like switching on a hidden blade is rocket science...

And why is the Assassin content any less "real" than that of AC2? You spend a couple of half-baked training missions with Mario, then the rest of the game you're hanging out with thieves, mercenaries, and courtesans to hunt the guys who killed Giovanni. It has nothing to do with Assassin ideology, and AC2's contracts, while fun, were basically just Ezio being Lorenzo's personal hitman. AC2 is no more about being an Assassin than AC4 was. It doesn't count that those aforementioned thieves, mercenaries, and courtesans happened to say in the final cutscene "oh, BTW, we were Assassins the whole time."

Zafar1981
01-11-2014, 05:39 AM
Just like Ezio in AC2.
What do you mean just like Ezio. He became an assassin under his uncle shadows, thought he had the ceremony in Sequence 10 but he hunts the templer from very beginning. That's why they made ACB and ACR for addressing more of his dedication to his cult. But what about Edward he fights for the treasure and riches and at the end he become an assassin and start living in England. And we all know what happen to him there. I think he had only given 5% of his life to assassin's band while Ezio had given more then 60%. So there is no comparison between Ezio and Edward.

LoyalACFan
01-11-2014, 05:47 AM
What do you mean just like Ezio. He became an assassin under his uncle shadows, thought he had the ceremony in Sequence 10 but he hunts the templer from very beginning. That's why they made ACB and ACR for addressing more of his dedication to his cult. But what about Edward he fights for the treasure and riches and at the end he become an assassin and start living in England. And we all know what happen to him there. I think he had only given 5% of his life to assassin's band while Ezio had given more then 60%. So there is no comparison between Ezio and Edward.

Did you read anything else I posted in here? :nonchalance:

Ezio hunts the Templars in AC2 because they killed his dad. Edward hunts them in AC4 because there's money in it. NEITHER of them hunt them because they have an ideological opposition to them. At least not at first. It's evident in Edward's death speech with Torres that he had finally come to accept an Assassin mindset.

Zafar1981
01-11-2014, 06:04 AM
Did you read anything else I posted in here? :nonchalance:

Ezio hunts the Templars in AC2 because they killed his dad. Edward hunts them in AC4 because there's money in it. NEITHER of them hunt them because they have an ideological opposition to them. At least not at first. It's evident in Edward's death speech with Torres that he had finally come to accept an Assassin mindset.
Nope you can say that Ezio take revenge till he killed Viari but after that he killed them considering as Templar. He had a list of Templar from his father and he starts hunting them. He had no direct conflict or revenge part with Babarigo cousins, not with Orisi brothers and not with Savonarola. He killed them because they were Templar. And still he didn't killed Borgia if he was willing to take a revenge.
That's why Ubisoft make ACB which I think is actually the part of AC 2 but for minting more money they completed the whole game in two versions.

LoyalACFan
01-11-2014, 06:15 AM
Nope you can say that Ezio take revenge till he killed Viari but after that he killed them considering as Templar. He had a list of Templar from his father and he starts hunting them. He had no direct conflict or revenge part with Babarigo cousins, not with Orisi brothers and not with Savonarola. He killed them because they were Templar. And still he didn't killed Borgia if he was willing to take a revenge.
That's why Ubisoft make ACB which I think is actually the part of AC 2 but for minting more money they completed the whole game in two versions.

http://replygif.net/i/919.gif

You know what, I give up, eddard wuz a stinkee pyrut n enzio wuz da bess evahhh

dbzk1999
01-11-2014, 06:17 AM
Nope you can say that Ezio take revenge till he killed Viari but after that he killed them considering as Templar. He had a list of Templar from his father and he starts hunting them. He had no direct conflict or revenge part with Babarigo cousins, not with Orisi brothers and not with Savonarola. He killed them because they were Templar. And still he didn't killed Borgia if he was willing to take a revenge.
That's why Ubisoft make ACB which I think is actually the part of AC 2 but for minting more money they completed the whole game in two versions.
Yes he knew they were Templars but he wouldn't have killed them unless they were part of the conspiracy and remember he hunted rodrigo to Rome after he became an assassin
I'm pretty sure that at first he didn't care whether Templar or assassin if they helped kill his family he will kill them
And no direct conflict with Savonarola it was his actions that led to Christina's death and he took the apple from a wounded ezio

ziljn
01-11-2014, 06:31 AM
Christ, "magically..." When will ANYONE understand that Edward could already fight and climb because he had spent years in the navy and and more as a pirate? Those skills are not unique to the Assassins! There isn't some super-duper secret training program you have to take to learn them... He was a naturally gifted human (being descended from TWCB) who spent years honing his athletic and fighting skills. And it's not like switching on a hidden blade is rocket science...

And why is the Assassin content any less "real" than that of AC2? You spend a couple of half-baked training missions with Mario, then the rest of the game you're hanging out with thieves, mercenaries, and courtesans to hunt the guys who killed Giovanni. It has nothing to do with Assassin ideology, and AC2's contracts, while fun, were basically just Ezio being Lorenzo's personal hitman. AC2 is no more about being an Assassin than AC4 was. It doesn't count that those aforementioned thieves, mercenaries, and courtesans happened to say in the final cutscene "oh, BTW, we were Assassins the whole time."

Yes, magically. I'm not exactly sold on the "anyone who can fight and climb is a fully skilled assassin" argument but if the rationalization works for you, great. Doesn't work for me, especially after two games playing descendants who need to train to become an assassin. It's part of the gameplay in AC2 and it's largely skipped gameplay-wise in AC3 but was certainly a big part of the story. In AC4 he just knows how to do everything... with no explanation.

And directly related to that, which your response doesn't address, is why Edward had assassination contracts to kill templars from the beginning before he knew who either assassins or templars were. Who were they coming from and why? Were we supposed to rationalize Edward was moonlighting as an assassin during his two years as a privateer or before that doing farmwork? Nah, nothing awkward about that at all. And you can't imagine why people found the experience odd?

His skills and the contracts were only because that's the existing game mechanic and content. It's largely what the game is about and they weren't going to change it because the main character was a pirate. It's never explained, just left to the imagination and I think that was a mistake. Doesn't surprise me at all that people were put off by the lack of A's in AC and I don't think the "Ezio wasn't as assassin until the end its the same thing what don't you get my rationalization is a fact!!!!" argument is changing anyone's experience with the game.

SixKeys
01-11-2014, 06:36 AM
Yes, magically. I'm not exactly sold on the "anyone who can fight and climb is a fully skilled assassin" argument but if the rationalization works for you, great. Doesn't work for me, especially after two games playing descendants who need to train to become an assassin. It's part of the gameplay in AC2 and it's largely skipped gameplay-wise in AC3 but was certainly a big part of the story. In AC4 he just knows how to do everything... with no explanation.


That's pretty much exactly how it works, actually. Did you play ACB? Ezio basically picks some hobos off the streets because he thinks they fight well. Then he makes them assassins. The end.

ziljn
01-11-2014, 06:53 AM
http://replygif.net/i/919.gif

You know what, I give up, eddard wuz a stinkee pyrut n enzio wuz da bess evahhh

All too typical a response around here. Heaven forbid someone has a criticism of a game/character you liked. YOU were the one who brought up Ezio. Nobody was comparing the two in this thread until YOU did, then when they don't agree with you they must just be Ezio fanboys. That's just poor cop out man.

I liked Edward. I mostly enjoyed game, and it's a good creed story. I just couldn't reconcile Edward and assassin and wish there was more A in the AC game. If Edward were to get additional titles filling in the assassin experience it could change in this story in retrospect. But as a stand alone it's just an awkward experience for me. Is that so hard to just accept?

LoyalACFan
01-11-2014, 06:56 AM
Yes, magically. I'm not exactly sold on the "anyone who can fight and climb is a fully skilled assassin" argument but if the rationalization works for you, great. Doesn't work for me, especially after two games playing descendants who need to train to become an assassin. It's part of the gameplay in AC2 and it's largely skipped gameplay-wise in AC3 but was certainly a big part of the story. In AC4 he just knows how to do everything... with no explanation.

Read SixKeys' response. It's correct. Being an Assassin does not equal being a supreme godly badass, as evidenced by the easily-killable ACB recruits, Haytham wiping out the entire colonial branch with a tiny Templar force, and the wussy Caribbean Assassins Edward takes out. The Assassins we've played as are just particularly skilled, plus they have the advantage of being the protagonists of very easy video games.


And directly related to that, which your response doesn't address, is why Edward had assassination contracts to kill templars from the beginning before he knew who either assassins or templars were. Who were they coming from and why? Were we supposed to rationalize Edward was moonlighting as an assassin during his two years as a privateer or before that doing farmwork? Nah, nothing awkward about that at all. And you can't imagine why people found the experience odd?

Because it's an oversight? Those missions were available before they should have been. Like in AC2, when you can hunt codex pages in Florence before Ezio even gets his robes or knows what the codex is. Doesn't mean it's supposed to happen at that point. They did eventually explain the contracts in the story in like Sequence 4, and it was only after that point that you should have been able to complete them. It's a mistake that they're available so early, but it's not like there are random contracts strewn about the city that are never given an explanation *coughcoughAC3cough*

LoyalACFan
01-11-2014, 07:00 AM
All too typical a response around here. Heaven forbid someone has a criticism of a game/character you liked. YOU were the one who brought up Ezio. Nobody was comparing the two in this thread until YOU did, then when they don't agree with you they must just be Ezio fanboys. That's just poor cop out man.

I liked Edward. I mostly enjoyed game, and it's a good creed story. I just couldn't reconcile Edward and assassin and wish there was more A in the AC game. If Edward were to get additional titles filling in the assassin experience it could change in this story in retrospect. But as a stand alone it's just an awkward experience for me. Is that so hard to just accept?

Yes, actually, it is. Because your complaints aren't consistent across the board, and apparently apply to ONLY Edward. He looks, fights, climbs, and sneaks like an Assassin, and eventually comes to think like an Assassin. Why is he not an Assassin?

Ezio is still my favorite Assassin BTW, so nice try with your first paragraph there.

That reply was in response to the other guy anyway, who's making a case for Ezio being a true Assassin because he hunted the Templar Savonarola... who wasn't a Templar.

ziljn
01-11-2014, 07:06 AM
That's pretty much exactly how it works, actually. Did you play ACB? Ezio basically picks some hobos off the streets because he thinks they fight well. Then he makes them assassins. The end.

Yeah that was lame. But somehow not filling in the story/experience on some tertiary no name character who exists only for the purpose of a new gameplay element doesn't really help me reconcile the lack of explanation with the main character. It's funny though that something like that is taken literally to be as is, when so much rationalization is made for the main character. I don't expect fully fleshed out story for a tertiary no name dude. I do prefer it for the main character though.

Zafar1981
01-11-2014, 07:30 AM
Savonarola... who wasn't a Templar.
Well he was a Templar according to Ubisoft who also claims that Edward is an Assassin. My main point is that the role of Edward as an assassin is minimum as compare to Ezio. So we can't say that he is just like Ezio who become an assassin in the seek of revenge while Edward become assassin in seek of riches.

LoyalACFan
01-11-2014, 07:39 AM
Well he was a Templar according to Ubisoft who also claims that Edward is an Assassin. My main point is that the role of Edward as an assassin is minimum as compare to Ezio. So we can't say that he is just like Ezio who become an assassin in the seek of revenge while Edward become assassin in seek of riches.

No. He wasn't. He was just some guy who stole the Apple and took over Florence with it, and Ezio killed him because he was an insane tyrant. The Templars hated him, remember the streets being lined with Borgia guards Rodrigo sent to try and kill him?

Edward and Ezio were both non-Assassins until the very end of their respective games. For that matter, Altair was an Assassin only in name for most of AC1, since he spent the better part of the game being a selfish ***** who broke every tenet of the Creed until Al Mualim made him recheck his attitude. Hell, we spent a quarter of AC3 playing as a Templar, and another good chunk of it playing as a Mohawk kid with no Assassin affiliation. I don't know why people have such a problem with Edward not being 100% super-duper Assassin thoroughbred from Sequence 1... The entire game is about him coming to realize that his piratical quest for riches has left him totally alone and will likely kill him if he doesn't learn to change...

ziljn
01-11-2014, 07:45 AM
Yes, actually, it is. Because your complaints aren't consistent across the board, and apparently apply to ONLY Edward. He looks, fights, climbs, and sneaks like an Assassin, and eventually comes to think like an Assassin. Why is he not an Assassin?

Ezio is still my favorite Assassin BTW, so nice try with your first paragraph there.

That reply was in response to the other guy anyway, who's making a case for Ezio being a true Assassin because he hunted the Templar Savonarola... who wasn't a Templar.

Dude, try to make some sense.

First, why would I complain about not understanding how Altair, Ezio, or Connor was an assassin when I know how Altair, Ezio, and Connor were assassins, and I don't understand how Edward was. What kind of logic is that? Yeah, it applies only to EDWARD because it applies only to EDWARD. Welcome to the conversation.

And I don't really care who your favorite is as it's not really relevant. The fact remains that you were the one making the comparison to Ezio. Nobody else was until you did.

He looks, climbs, fights, and sneaks like an assassin because that's the core gameplay mechanic of any Assassin's Creed game. How or why is not explained or even directly implied in the game. He just starts out that way, but as a pirate.

And I can't help but notice that you've opted (twice) to not address the assassination contracts Edward has right from the start of the game. Did that seem odd to you to? Can I now chastise you because that seemed out of place and you can't explain it? Shall I rationalize an answer for it and then give you **** because you don't agree with my rationalization? Or will you speculate your own answer for it now to avoid conceding the point? Just curious.

Anyway, I'm sorry my experience with the game frustrates you so much. Perhaps you should just stop arguing with me about it and save yourself some stress?

LoyalACFan
01-11-2014, 08:08 AM
Dude, try to make some sense.

First, why would I complain about not understanding how Altair, Ezio, or Connor was an assassin when I know how Altair, Ezio, and Connor were assassins, and I don't understand how Edward was. What kind of logic is that? Yeah, it applies only to EDWARD because it applies only to EDWARD. Welcome to the conversation.

Your CRITICISMS seem to only apply to Edward. If you understand how Ezio was an Assassin, you should know how Edward was one. Because it's the exact same thing; they started off as immature boys out for only their own goals, matured over time, and at the very end of the game they became Assassins. That's why I brought up Ezio in the first place, nobody seems to take issue with the fact that he wasn't actually an Assassin until the final sequence, but with Edward, it's a huge deal.


And I don't really care who your favorite is as it's not really relevant. The fact remains that you were the one making the comparison to Ezio. Nobody else was until you did.

It is relevant, because you accused me of calling anyone who disagreed with me an Ezio fanboy. Well, I AM an Ezio fanboy, I just happened to like Edward as well and I think his growth and involvement with the Assassins makes perfect sense. So your accusation doesn't really work.


He looks, climbs, fights, and sneaks like an assassin because that's the core gameplay mechanic of any Assassin's Creed game. How or why is not explained or even directly implied in the game. He just starts out that way, but as a pirate.

He tells Stede in like the second mission of the game that he's excellent at climbing because he was a sailor who spent lots of time climbing rigging. He's a good fighter because he's a pirate and gets in lots of fights. He's stealthy because he sneaks into places and steals stuff. I don't think they need to outright explain that kind of thing to us. It's not like fighting, climbing, or sneaking are skills that only Assassins can have (see: Haytham Kenway, who had barely any Assassin training before Edward died yet is as good at doing Assassin stuff as any actual Assassin).


And I can't help but notice that you've opted (twice) to not address the assassination contracts Edward has right from the start of the game. Did that seem odd to you to? Can I now chastise you because that seemed out of place and you can't explain it? Shall I rationalize an answer for it and then give you **** because you don't agree with my rationalization? Or will you speculate your own answer for it now to avoid conceding the point? Just curious.

Read the post above the one you quoted. I double posted as I hadn't seen your second response. Short story; it was an oversight to have them in the game that early, but it was eventually explained. Just like AC2's codex pages, which were collectible from Sequence 1 but not explained until at least Sequence 3.


Anyway, I'm sorry my experience with the game frustrates you so much. Perhaps you should just stop arguing with me about it and save yourself some stress?

I'm not frustrated with you, just trying to make sense of why you feel the way you do.

Zafar1981
01-11-2014, 08:11 AM
No. He wasn't. He was just some guy who stole the Apple and took over Florence with it, and Ezio killed him because he was an insane tyrant. The Templars hated him, remember the streets being lined with Borgia guards Rodrigo sent to try and kill him?

Edward and Ezio were both non-Assassins until the very end of their respective games. For that matter, Altair was an Assassin only in name for most of AC1, since he spent the better part of the game being a selfish ***** who broke every tenet of the Creed until Al Mualim made him recheck his attitude. Hell, we spent a quarter of AC3 playing as a Templar, and another good chunk of it playing as a Mohawk kid with no Assassin affiliation. I don't know why people have such a problem with Edward not being 100% super-duper Assassin thoroughbred from Sequence 1... The entire game is about him coming to realize that his piratical quest for riches has left him totally alone and will likely kill him if he doesn't learn to change...
Yes there is no doubt that Al-Tair is an original Assassin and it is because at the first game there was a group called Hassashin who were infact drug addicts and also kill people by the command of their leader Hashim aka Al Maluim.
In AC 2 they want to put a story line in the game which was presented in a beautiful way but in AC IV Edward should have become assassin or contacted with them in Sequence 2 or 3.
A true assassin should be like Al-Tair.
And all the Templar are not friend of each other like Al Mulim and Robert de Sable and also Borgia and Savonarola. He steal apple of Eden because his intentions are same like Borgia. He wants his order and rule. So we can say that Borgia & Co are Templar A Team and Savonarola & Co. are Team B.

ziljn
01-11-2014, 08:13 AM
Read SixKeys' response. It's correct. Being an Assassin does not equal being a supreme godly badass, as evidenced by the easily-killable ACB recruits, Haytham wiping out the entire colonial branch with a tiny Templar force, and the wussy Caribbean Assassins Edward takes out. The Assassins we've played as are just particularly skilled, plus they have the advantage of being the protagonists of very easy video games.



Because it's an oversight? Those missions were available before they should have been. Like in AC2, when you can hunt codex pages in Florence before Ezio even gets his robes or knows what the codex is. Doesn't mean it's supposed to happen at that point. They did eventually explain the contracts in the story in like Sequence 4, and it was only after that point that you should have been able to complete them. It's a mistake that they're available so early, but it's not like there are random contracts strewn about the city that are never given an explanation *coughcoughAC3cough*

Sorry, didn't catch this response until now.

You can see response to first part above. It's just plain silly that that's taken literally because they aren't going to give a fleshed out story to minor no names, but people are willing to go to great lengths to fill in the gaps with the main character. Really, it's just funny, in a not really funny way, but whatever. It's cool.

As for the contracts being an oversight... so that was just a mistake they later explained. Ok. Why explain it?

And thanks for the reminder in AC3, forgot about that.

LoyalACFan
01-11-2014, 08:20 AM
Yes there is no doubt that Al-Tair is an original Assassin and it is because at the first game there was a group called Hassashin who were infact drug addicts and also kill people by the command of their leader Hashim aka Al Maluim.
In AC 2 they want to put a story line in the game which was presented in a beautiful way but in AC IV Edward should have become assassin or contacted with them in Sequence 2 or 3.
A true assassin should be like Al-Tair.
And all the Templar are not friend of each other like Al Mulim and Robert de Sable and also Borgia and Savonarola. He steal apple of Eden because his intentions are same like Borgia. He wants his order and rule. So we can say that Borgia & Co are Templar A Team and Savonarola & Co. are Team B.

Savonarola is NOT a Templar, dude. I'm sorry. I'm pretty sure it's in AC2's database if you really want in-game confirmation. But whatever, we're arguing a moot point.

LoyalACFan
01-11-2014, 08:25 AM
You can see response to first part above. It's just plain silly that that's taken literally because they aren't going to give a fleshed out story to minor no names, but people are willing to go to great lengths to fill in the gaps with the main character. Really, it's just funny, in a not really funny way, but whatever. It's cool.

I wouldn't call it "great lengths" to explain why Edward had the skills he did. He climbed in rigging and fought in battles. Simple as that.


As for the contracts being an oversight... so that was just a mistake they later explained. Ok. Why explain it?

No, I mean it was just a mistake that they were available as early as they were. They weren't canonically supposed to unlock until Mary tells Edward where to find them (you're shown a map of all the contract locations after that conversation, including ones you've already done) but somehow they were overlooked and unlocked when you first arrive in Havana.

ziljn
01-11-2014, 08:38 AM
Your CRITICISMS seem to only apply to Edward. If you understand how Ezio was an Assassin, you should know how Edward was one. Because it's the exact same thing; they started off as immature boys out for only their own goals, matured over time, and at the very end of the game they became Assassins. That's why I brought up Ezio in the first place, nobody seems to take issue with the fact that he wasn't actually an Assassin until the final sequence, but with Edward, it's a huge deal.

Not even remotely close to the exact same thing. Let's repeat... Ezio was the son of an assassin being trained by assassins to be an assassin. Edward had all his skills right away as a pirate and no connection to assassins, who were secondary through most of the story. It has nothing to do with when they officially became an assassin. If Ezio was a pirate who just had all the skills of an assassin without ever having met an assassin I'd criticize that too.



He tells Stede in like the second mission of the game that he's excellent at climbing because he was a sailor who spent lots of time climbing rigging. He's a good fighter because he's a pirate and gets in lots of fights. He's stealthy because he sneaks into places and steals stuff. I don't think they need to outright explain that kind of thing to us. It's not like fighting, climbing, or sneaking are skills that only Assassins can have (see: Haytham Kenway, who had barely any Assassin training before Edward died yet is as good at doing Assassin stuff as any actual Assassin).

And in a later sequence Mary tells him how scaling walls or buildings is not like climbing rigging (paraphrasing as I cant quote it exactly). Why bother explicitly pointing out there's a difference if there's not and he's already skilled at everything? And I'm not talking about from a character point of view because we can speculate all day... I'm talking about from a developer point of view. It's inconsistent. Just as playing AC games where everyone trains to be an assassin to just being one but as a pirate seems inconsistent. I'm not sure what doesn't make sense about that.

Fatal-Feit
01-11-2014, 08:45 AM
The story of AC:IV is a light-hearted one. It's the journey of how a selfish pirate, a contradiction of the Creed, becomes involved with Templars & Assassin and soon discovers why the Assassin's Creed is important. The series is called ''Assassin's Creed' and AC:IV deserves to take full credit of the title just as AC:1 does.

We've already had about 4 sequels of hardcore Master Assassins. They've set the story from a different/unique take and innovated on that. I actually really like it and heavily appreciate it.

LoyalACFan
01-11-2014, 08:52 AM
Not even remotely close to the exact same thing. Let's repeat... Ezio was the son of an assassin being trained by assassins to be an assassin. Edward had all his skills right away as a pirate and no connection to assassins, who were secondary through most of the story. It has nothing to do with when they officially became an assassin. If Ezio was a pirate who just had all the skills of an assassin without ever having met an assassin I'd criticize that too.

I think you're hung up on the "trained to be an Assassin" thing. What exactly did Ezio's training entail? Assassin philosophy versus Templar philosophy? No. Hidden blade combat? No. Assassination techniques? No. Swordfighting and freerunning? Yes. The same skills Edward had learned through years of practice as a pirate. You can technically say Ezio received "Assassin training," but he really didn't acquire any Assassin-specific skills or philosophy from it, just the same stuff Edward would have known after having spent years as a pirate/privateer. Plus, remember that scene where Ezio practices assassination techniques while Leonardo crafts his second blade? Ezio was able to pull off the same assassination moves Edward showed off for Woodes Rogers in the hidden blade tutorial without any more training than Edward had. You don't really need to be specifically taught that stuff if you're physically fit and agile, you could pretty much improvise it.


And in a later sequence Mary tells him how scaling walls or buildings is not like climbing rigging (paraphrasing as I cant quote it exactly). Why bother explicitly pointing out there's a difference if there's not and he's already skilled at everything? And I'm not talking about from a character point of view because we can speculate all day... I'm talking about from a developer point of view. It's inconsistent. Just as playing AC games where everyone trains to be an assassin to just being one but as a pirate seems inconsistent. I'm not sure what doesn't make sense about that.

I don't remember that scene. When was it?

LoyalACFan
01-11-2014, 08:53 AM
The story of AC:IV is a light-hearted one. It's the journey of how a selfish pirate, a contradiction of the Creed, becomes involved with Templars & Assassin and soon discovers why the Assassin's Creed is important. The series is called ''Assassin's Creed' and AC:IV deserves to take full credit of the title just as AC:1 does.

We've already had about 4 sequels of hardcore Master Assassins. They've set the story from a different/unique take and innovated on that. I actually really like it and heavily appreciate it.

Same.

ziljn
01-11-2014, 08:57 AM
I wouldn't call it "great lengths" to explain why Edward had the skills he did. He climbed in rigging and fought in battles. Simple as that.



No, I mean it was just a mistake that they were available as early as they were. They weren't canonically supposed to unlock until Mary tells Edward where to find them (you're shown a map of all the contract locations after that conversation, including ones you've already done) but somehow they were overlooked and unlocked when you first arrive in Havana.

As simple as that for you. Not for me. Because I cannot reconcile 2 years as a privateer attacking merchant ships translating into someone skilled in scaling buildings, infil, exil, social stealth, stealth, intelligence gathering, and everything else associated with assassinating high value targets. (the fighting I can accept) You can try try to fill in the gaps with how he may have learned this or that, but you have to rationalize it because its simply not explained at all, and I don't take the very simplified recruiting experience shown in game as literal. I'm willing to fill in the gaps on the little stuff like that because you can't elaborate on everything in the game. But for the main character I'd expect some explanation of how he got there.

As for the contracts, I understood your point. But I still ask, why explain it? Why have Mary explain the contracts and why he's doing them? Why not just leave it like AC3? Because it would have seemed odd or out of place without proper context? See where I'm going?

Fatal-Feit
01-11-2014, 09:12 AM
As simple as that for you. Not for me. Because I cannot reconcile 2 years as a privateer attacking merchant ships translating into someone skilled in scaling buildings, infil, exil, social stealth, stealth, intelligence gathering, and everything else associated with assassinating high value targets. (the fighting I can accept) You can try try to fill in the gaps with how he may have learned this or that, but you have to rationalize it because its simply not explained at all, and I don't take the very simplified recruiting experience shown in game as literal. I'm willing to fill in the gaps on the little stuff like that because you can't elaborate on everything in the game. But for the main character I'd expect some explanation of how he got there.

As for the contracts, I understood your point. But I still ask, why explain it? Why have Mary explain the contracts and why he's doing them? Why not just leave it like AC3? Because it would have seemed odd or out of place without proper context? See where I'm going?

Early contracts and gaps in the game were intentional, not a mistake or a plot-hole. AC:3's mistake was babysitting the veterans throughout the entire game. The developers wanted to allow early freedom for the players and thus, the ability to access features very early. It's something easy to dismiss if you're a fan since the beginning of time.

As for Edward being able to climb and move as he does, it's not a gap that needs to be elaborated on. I haven't read through the entire thread but I'm more than certain people have already repeated that Edward was a privateer.

Edward is special. He's skilled, talented, and unique. That is who he is, that is his character, and that is a role we haven't already played.

ziljn
01-11-2014, 09:16 AM
I think you're hung up on the "trained to be an Assassin" thing. What exactly did Ezio's training entail? Assassin philosophy versus Templar philosophy? No. Hidden blade combat? No. Assassination techniques? No. Swordfighting and freerunning? Yes. The same skills Edward had learned through years of practice as a pirate. You can technically say Ezio received "Assassin training," but he really didn't acquire any Assassin-specific skills or philosophy from it, just the same stuff Edward would have known after having spent years as a pirate/privateer. Plus, remember that scene where Ezio practices assassination techniques while Leonardo crafts his second blade? Ezio was able to pull off the same assassination moves Edward showed off for Woodes Rogers in the hidden blade tutorial without any more training than Edward had. You don't really need to be specifically taught that stuff if you're physically fit and agile, you could pretty much improvise it.



I don't remember that scene. When was it?

Of course I'm hung up on the training as I've yet to play an AC game where an assassin wasn't trained, until now. Whether it was explicitly played through or part of the story, or even implied with tertiary no-names since we already played through it, it's always been there. Altair was already a master assassin so it doesn't take any guesswork as to how he got there.

As for the sequence, I don't remember which one, but he was following her. I don't think it was the Roberts memory or the tailing the slaver guy, but I'm having a hard time remembering the others. I'd have to load it up and check, but it's 3am here so I'm calling it a night.

Good night

ziljn
01-11-2014, 09:42 AM
Yes, yes...Edward was a privateer. Indeed, it has been repeated as if it's just the obvious answer. I'm not sure what people think privateers were but it was basically anyone willing to be a member of a crew that preyed on merchant ships, which rarely fought back, for a cut of the profits. Legal piracy was all it was. They weren't even necessarily militarily trained. (Edward was a farmhand before... surely a very special farmhand though)

The Hollywood version of swashbuckling pirates tends to be fiction. Just saying.

And yeah, obviously Edward was very special. I guess I'll just have to go with "he's a very special boy" and forego any actual background that makes sense.

LoyalACFan
01-11-2014, 11:02 AM
Of course I'm hung up on the training as I've yet to play an AC game where an assassin wasn't trained, until now. Whether it was explicitly played through or part of the story, or even implied with tertiary no-names since we already played through it, it's always been there. Altair was already a master assassin so it doesn't take any guesswork as to how he got there.

What I'm saying is, Ezio and Edward had both received training in the "Assassiny" skills they later displayed before the game started. It's just that Ezio's training happened to be under an actual Assassin. So therefore he was "trained by Assassins" while Edward was not, despite both of them having learned the same skills.

mattduck69
01-11-2014, 12:28 PM
The way I see them truly being an assassin or not is not how they came to don the hood or how they look or their accent, it's their morals. Ezio did start out with revenge in his blood but after the training (mentally more than physically) that Mario gave him he came to realise the true importance of how an assassin should act. Edward on the other hand seems to (I have yet to complete the game) just care about the coin and doesn't care how he gets it. No morals.
I..just hope they bring back the ol' assassin vs Templars as the main storyline, not a subplot.

EmptyCrustacean
01-11-2014, 04:08 PM
But to be fair, that was part of Ezio's journey in the first AC2 - he starts out wanting revenge but then he turns his attention to justice as learns to truly respect the Assassin's Order.

SixKeys
01-11-2014, 04:59 PM
Of course I'm hung up on the training as I've yet to play an AC game where an assassin wasn't trained, until now. Whether it was explicitly played through or part of the story, or even implied with tertiary no-names since we already played through it, it's always been there. Altair was already a master assassin so it doesn't take any guesswork as to how he got there.


Connor wasn't trained in AC3, at least not visibly. He was just magically able to fight and climb well from an early age. People are willing to accept that for some reason, as if the excuse "well, he was born native" is a logical explanation. Kanento:kon had to be taught how to climb trees, Connor just did it naturally. When Connor goes to Achilles' house and is refused, he fights off a bunch of bandits like a pro the very same night, before receiving any formal training. He's given a pass on all these things while Edward, a grown man who spent years fighting and climbing as a privateer before the events of AC4, is not.

Jigga_Kenway
01-11-2014, 06:39 PM
I honestly liked the story to AC4.

The way Edward became embroiled with the Assassins and Templars and how he used both of them for his own gains was a nice story plot in my opinion.

And like most people are saying, Edward spent years as a privateer, and acquired skills that could rival just about any Assassin. My favorite scene of the game was when Edward assassinated Torres and he told him "Die for knowing all our conflict, you helped make a soldier out of a scoundrel" That one line just showed all the growth with Edward's character, how he lost all his friends and showed regret for the life he chose to live, his selfish and greedy nature, and how he evolved into an honorable man, assassin and of course a father.

I definitely think there's more to the game than Edward being a pirate but some people can't look past their ignorance and see that this is an Assassins Creed game, good and true.

ziljn
01-11-2014, 07:34 PM
What I'm saying is, Ezio and Edward had both received training in the "Assassiny" skills they later displayed before the game started. It's just that Ezio's training happened to be under an actual Assassin. So therefore he was "trained by Assassins" while Edward was not, despite both of them having learned the same skills.

Yes, I know what you're saying. Except one explicitly received training, and the other didn't. One is plausible, the other isn't. We can only assume Edward just picked it all up spending 2 years as a privater because it's never actually explained. That's just a fact. You're comfortable with making the assumption, I'm not.

ziljn
01-11-2014, 07:45 PM
Connor wasn't trained in AC3, at least not visibly. He was just magically able to fight and climb well from an early age. People are willing to accept that for some reason, as if the excuse "well, he was born native" is a logical explanation. Kanento:kon had to be taught how to climb trees, Connor just did it naturally. When Connor goes to Achilles' house and is refused, he fights off a bunch of bandits like a pro the very same night, before receiving any formal training. He's given a pass on all these things while Edward, a grown man who spent years fighting and climbing as a privateer before the events of AC4, is not.

Already addressed and I'm growing tired of repeating myself.

But if you want to make the comparison to Connor, it's more like Connor seeing a ship for the first time and Boom!, he's now a captain. Totally contrived, lazy story telling, and implausible. That's more or less how they introduced Edward. Boom.... he's a pirate but also a top notch assassin with no explanation of how he got to be the latter.

Fatal-Feit
01-11-2014, 07:51 PM
Yes, I know what you're saying. Except one explicitly received training, and the other didn't. One is plausible, the other isn't. We can only assume Edward just picked it all up spending 2 years as a privater because it's never actually explained. That's just a fact. You're comfortable with making the assumption, I'm not.

They aren't exactly assumptions.

Edward was a privateer with Ben Hornigold, Edward Thatch, and James Kidd before the game. They have done plenty of plundering and hard work under harsh conditions to shape Nassau to the way it is. Edward would have most likely never caught the attention of Ben and Thatch if he hadn't shaped into a skilled fighter and a promising pirate. And Kidd would have probably never bothered with Edward if she wasn't aware of his talents either. The story couldn't be anymore subtle. And frankly, anymore explanations are unnecessary considering AC:IV was never suppose to shape into a 6 hours tutorial like AC:2 and AC:3.

ziljn
01-11-2014, 08:31 PM
They aren't exactly assumptions.

Edward was a privateer with Ben Hornigold, Edward Thatch, and James Kidd before the game. They have done plenty of plundering and hard work under harsh conditions to shape Nassau to the way it is. Edward would have most likely never caught the attention of Ben and Thatch if he hadn't shaped into a skilled fighter and a promising pirate. And Kidd would have probably never bothered with Edward if she wasn't aware of his talents either. The story couldn't be anymore subtle. And frankly, anymore explanations are unnecessary considering AC:IV was never suppose to shape into a 6 hours tutorial like AC:2 and AC:3.

I'm not sure how I'm supposed to take an argument that says they are not assumptions and then has to use the words "probably" and "most likely" to make the point.

Anyway, those points, which I don't really have a problem with, don't really address the issue. And I'm not talking about tutorial gameplay (there was already plenty of piratey tutorial gameplay), just some decent, fleshed out story telling that doesn't require "probably" and "most likely" to fill in the character blanks. That's all..

RoBg03
01-11-2014, 08:35 PM
They aren't exactly assumptions.

Edward was a privateer with Ben Hornigold, Edward Thatch, and James Kidd before the game. They have done plenty of plundering and hard work under harsh conditions to shape Nassau to the way it is. Edward would have most likely never caught the attention of Ben and Thatch if he hadn't shaped into a skilled fighter and a promising pirate. And Kidd would have probably never bothered with Edward if she wasn't aware of his talents either. The story couldn't be anymore subtle. And frankly, anymore explanations are unnecessary considering AC:IV was never suppose to shape into a 6 hours tutorial like AC:2 and AC:3.

i agree with this one...do we really need to have our intelligence insulted by haveing the game tell us point by point why a privateer would have these skills? The game basically says, edwards been doing this for years, he can fight, he's worldly and smart, simply by his actions in the first few missions with stede bonnet. plus theres always the whole blood of TOWCB thing that gives him hightened abilities from the get go. i'd expect edward to be better than ezio or conner at climing because he's a see dog, whose been climing rigging and mast for years. i thought this game was the story of edward becoming an assassin to advance the core story. not every character needs to be a card holding member of the creed from day one. personally i like my characters to have depth, not be carbon copy assassins.

Shahkulu101
01-11-2014, 08:37 PM
I'm not sure how I'm supposed to take an argument that says they are not assumptions and then has to use the words "probably" and "most likely" to make the point.

Anyway, those points, which I don't really have a problem with, don't really address the issue. And I'm not talking about tutorial gameplay. Just some decent, fleshed out story telling that doesn't require "probably" and "most likely" to fill in the character blanks. That's all..

Not all good storytelling has to be spoon-fed. Letting the viewer/player fill in some gaps is effective, subtle storytelling.

Using tropes like a 'practice ring' such as the one at Mario's villa is predictable and boring storytelling - pretty much AC2 and Brotherhood in a nutshell.

Fatal-Feit
01-11-2014, 08:43 PM
I'm not sure how I'm supposed to take an argument that says they are not assumptions and then has to use the words "probably" and "most likely" to make the point.

Anyway, those points, which I don't really have a problem with, don't really address the issue. And I'm not talking about tutorial gameplay (there was already plenty of piratey tutorial gameplay), just some decent, fleshed out story telling that doesn't require "probably" and "most likely" to fill in the character blanks. That's all..

You misinterpreted my first sentence. Exactly might have been the wrong word. ''100%'' any better for you?

Attempts in filling in the blanks and assumptions are nothing new to the series, but I understand how you feel. Although, I can't say I would have enjoyed an extra 1-2 hours of Edward simply learning how to climb, fight, and steer a ship.

ziljn
01-11-2014, 09:05 PM
You misinterpreted my first sentence. Exactly might have been the wrong word. ''100%'' any better for you?

Attempts in filling in the blanks and assumptions are nothing new to the series, but I understand how you feel. Although, I can't say I would have enjoyed an extra 1-2 hours of Edward simply learning how to climb, fight, and steer a ship.

Me either, since how he learned to climb rigging, fight, and steer a ship makes sense since he was a privateer. However, some story tidbit on how a privateer got to be an assassin from the get go would have made the game a better, less awkward experience for me.

Shahkulu101
01-11-2014, 09:21 PM
Me either, since how he learned to climb rigging, fight, and steer a ship makes sense since he was a privateer. However, some story tidbit on how a privateer got to be an assassin from the get go would have made the game a better, less awkward experience for me.

I was expecting exactly that but was relieved to be thrown into the action...especially after AC3. To be honest though, some of his privateering days being in the story would have been great for non-tutorial/training gameplay as well - I would have loved to witness Edward turning Pirate with his buddies after his country leaving them in the dirt.

Fatal-Feit
01-11-2014, 09:40 PM
I was expecting exactly that but was relieved to be thrown into the action...especially after AC3. To be honest though, some of his privateering days being in the story would have been great for non-tutorial/training gameplay as well - I would have loved to witness Edward turning Pirate with his buddies after his country leaving them in the dirt.

They should make a short film or a DLC of this!!!

Hans684
01-11-2014, 10:00 PM
They should make a short film or a DLC of this!!!

Devil`s Of The Caribbean: Origins

salman147
01-12-2014, 05:32 PM
Yes.I realized Ubisoft did this with purpose because they wanted to test if this was worthy to be have the new upcoming pirate game sequel they asked in the survey a few days ago.
Trust me.They are going to have a refocus on this series in the next game..... Clues still hidden in the Freedom Cry DLC that hints of the new French setting with some naval missions added with an excuse of the templar involvement on seas of the Atlantic.

predatorpulse7
01-12-2014, 09:17 PM
People are overanalyzing this.

Assassins AND Templars have become dime a dozen. In the AC universe, belonging to one of these groups doesn't exactly make you special skillwise, at least not from a few games back, as someone posted above they literally picked people from the streets and boom! - Assassin. Both Edward and Ezio(and Connor tbh) are doing Altair'ish things before they even get to know the Creed, let alone become assassins. As far as Ezio is concerned, only in Brotherhood and Revelations is he an actual assassin. The order of killings does seem to be frankly weird in the AC4 game(killing targets before you know the threat they pose to the pirates/assassins) but that's what you get when you have 30 assassination contracts plus the main ones. If this annual thing continues I doubt that they will show a "how they got their skills" montage a la Ezio or Connor. We must assume from the get-go that they have these skills because it's in their DNA and bla bla bla.

Assassin_M
01-13-2014, 06:31 PM
This thread is the reason why I don't visit these forums anymore

TexasToast712
01-13-2014, 07:40 PM
Doesnt really matter. As others have said, Ezio was the same way. When I think of Edward I think of pirate first and assassin second. When I think of Ezio I think of Ladies' man first and Assassin second. lol