PDA

View Full Version : The Story Has No Direction



DaBird-Is-DaWord
02-25-2014, 05:53 AM
I hate that Ubisoft caved to the "I JUST WANNA KILL PEOPLEZ WITH MY SWORDS" crowd. The real-life events outside the Animus drove the story forward. It gave the game context. Now you're just meaninglessly traveling back in time to kill virtual bad guys. That's fun and all, but I'm hoping they put the series in a proper direction within the next couple installments. If not, they may as well completely abandon all pretext--just get rid of all outside-the-animus sequences and make the games 100% historical flashbacks.

Any thoughts on this?

LoyalACFan
02-25-2014, 06:01 AM
First of all, that's an awesome username.

But no, I don't care about the modern-day stuff any more. It was terrible after Brotherhood, and after Revelations it was abundantly clear that they had no idea where they were going with it. I'd much rather have them focus on delivering a good story about the ancestor, rather than try and keep stringing us along on cliffhanger after cliffhanger in the modern story.

RinoTheBouncer
02-25-2014, 11:34 AM
First of all, welcome to the forums. Second, thanks for an amazing first post.
I totally agree with you. I mean I did enjoy ACIV a lot and it was fun and the gameplay was great. The first AC game that I enjoy finishing 100% but the story had no direction and the whole Animus thing is just an excuse to visit that past and kill some bad guys. I miss how the story was deeply connected before with cliffhangers and modern day story. As you said, it drove the story forward.

Now, we’re just playing a game within a game. Nothing more.

Mr_Shade
02-25-2014, 11:40 AM
Welcome to the forums - enjoy your stay. :)

Fatal-Feit
02-25-2014, 02:34 PM
I could care less about the modern day, TBH. This franchise isn't going to end in the next 5 years anyway. I'm more satisfied with getting some answers than cliffhangers after cliffhangers.

But in regards to Ubisoft caving towards the "I JUST WANNA KILL PEOPLEZ WITH MY SWORDS" crowd, I respectfully disagree. Modern day might be a mush, but the ancestors' stories are much MUCH better than before. I play these games to visit unique settings, explore philosophies, and thoroughly enjoy a good story. The whole sci-fi First Civilization and world's end shenanigans are just awful. They're one of the reasons why I think Ezio's adventures were lackluster. My opinion, of course.

Poodle_of_Doom
02-25-2014, 03:45 PM
I'm actually with the OP on this one. I think they should of been doing what they originially started out doing. Frankly, the idea that the TV show Heroes had was a good one, and is remarkably simily to how this franchise started. You should have several minor story arks contributing to the main story ark. Unfortunately, most of these were left unresolved, or abandoned, in very recent history by the franchise. I think this will inevitably suck the life out of it. We don't need another Call of Duty, which is what this is becoming, and rather hastily so at that.

breakdownthewall
02-25-2014, 07:24 PM
Correct me if I'm wrong, but there's still a very important point related to the main story that is yet to be addressed, the descendant of Eve. I think the story will be back on track in a huge way if some light is shed on the descendant of Eve in AC5, because I honestly have no clue about her.
I apologize if this is irrelevant, but can anyone tell me what role she plays in the modern-day story? Why does she matter so much? Why was Juno referring to her? And when will we see her? The speculation about her possible appearance has been going on since Brotherhood.
Also, is it true that Desmond was the descendant of Adam but not Eve...?

LoyalACFan
02-25-2014, 07:27 PM
Correct me if I'm wrong, but there's still a very important point related to the main story that is yet to be addressed, the descendant of Eve. I think the story will be back on track in a huge way if some light is shed on the descendant of Eve in AC5, because I honestly have no clue about her.
I apologize if this is irrelevant, but can anyone tell me what role she plays in the modern-day story? Why does she matter so much? Why was Juno referring to her? And when will we see her? The speculation about her possible appearance has been going on since Brotherhood.
Also, is it true that Desmond was the descendant of Adam but not Eve...?

Juno is trying to access a corporeal body to transfer her consciousness into, and I'll wager that's where the descendant of Eve comes in. Somebody with high First Civilization blood concentration.

breakdownthewall
02-25-2014, 07:32 PM
Juno is trying to access a corporeal body to transfer her consciousness into, and I'll wager that's where the descendant of Eve comes in. Somebody with high First Civilization blood concentration.

And she couldn't transfer her consciousness into Desmond because she wasn't strong enough to do that back then, right?
I think that explains a lot, thanks. Here's hoping we finally get to see Eve's descendant in the next AC.

LoyalACFan
02-25-2014, 07:38 PM
And she couldn't transfer her consciousness into Desmond because she wasn't strong enough to do that back then, right?
I think that explains a lot, thanks. Here's hoping we finally get to see Eve's descendant in the next AC.

She couldn't transfer into Desmond because he had to become a French Fry before she could even be freed :p

Poodle_of_Doom
02-25-2014, 07:43 PM
Correct me if I'm wrong, but there's still a very important point related to the main story that is yet to be addressed, the descendant of Eve. I think the story will be back on track in a huge way if some light is shed on the descendant of Eve in AC5, because I honestly have no clue about her.
I apologize if this is irrelevant, but can anyone tell me what role she plays in the modern-day story? Why does she matter so much? Why was Juno referring to her? And when will we see her? The speculation about her possible appearance has been going on since Brotherhood.
Also, is it true that Desmond was the descendant of Adam but not Eve...?

And all of this ties into the whole S16 deal, and Desmond and his son.....


And she couldn't transfer her consciousness into Desmond because she wasn't strong enough to do that back then, right?
I think that explains a lot, thanks. Here's hoping we finally get to see Eve's descendant in the next AC.

I wonder if the whole thing about Eve, and her decendent, deals specifically with the story of Cain and Abel. (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis 4 &version=NIV) The deal is that Cain kills his brother, and is later marked by GOD, so that others will not kill him. In the AC series, we find that the Mark of Cain is actually the Templar Cross. The passage also references that Cain was the first born son to Eve. I believe this is the lineage they are talking about. Specifically the lineage of Cain. Desmonds son would follow the Lineage of Abel perhaps? None the less, I digress. We were also told that the Cross darkened the horizion, just before killing Lucy. I think she may have been the Eve that Juno was talking about.

DaBird-Is-DaWord
02-26-2014, 02:01 AM
I never did get a sense of closure with Lucy... I expected they would explore her betrayal more after Brotherhood and give us more answers. Instead, they basically wrote her off as a bad guy and never revisited it--except for maybe a couple lines of dialog here and there in Revelations. I wish they had done more with that plot point--even today it feels somewhat unresolved to me.


I could care less about the modern day, TBH. This franchise isn't going to end in the next 5 years anyway. I'm more satisfied with getting some answers than cliffhangers after cliffhangers.

But in regards to Ubisoft caving towards the "I JUST WANNA KILL PEOPLEZ WITH MY SWORDS" crowd, I respectfully disagree. Modern day might be a mush, but the ancestors' stories are much MUCH better than before. I play these games to visit unique settings, explore philosophies, and thoroughly enjoy a good story. The whole sci-fi First Civilization and world's end shenanigans are just awful. They're one of the reasons why I think Ezio's adventures were lackluster. My opinion, of course.

Thanks for your input. Sorry if I offended you or anyone else with my "KILL PEOPLEZ WITH SWORDZ" comment. I know there are plenty of intelligent and passionate gamers out there who disagree with my take on Ubisoft's direction with the franchise and have more valid reasons than just wanting to fight more It wasn't really fair of me to generalize everybody like that. It's just that some of the people I've dealt with who hated anything and everything related to Desmond or being outside-the-animus struck me as being somewhat inattentive and dim-witted--these were the same people that urged me to skip AC1 because it had "nothing to do with the story". Obviously they were only thinking of the Animus story events (ie; Altair and Ezio) and totally dismissing the overlying plot.

I agree, Desmond's story got kind of whack after Brotherhood. I'm totally okay with the idea of releasing a couple games, spinoffs if you will, that don't really have an overarching story. There's so many stories they can tell and they don't need to force them all into the context of some overarching plot-line, especially if they're currently low on inspiration in those areas.

What worries me however, is that they may never refocus on the outside-the-animus story. If they're just taking a break from that then great, but if games like Liberation and AC4 are the future of Assassins Creed then that's a little disappointing to me. When the series started, it was this awesome overarching battle between Templars and Assassins that raged on to the modern day--it didn't only live in the history books. The "Illuminati-esque" conspiracy theory plotlines tied the stories (Animus-and-modern day) together--the idea that a powerful secret society has dominated the world for ages and still reigns supreme today and the ragtag rebellion against that organization was the whole context of the series' overarching plot-line. Now the games just feel much less meaningful. The awesome historical stories and places are still there and there's still plenty to be learned about the past in this fictional realm, but if they don't ever intend to advance the modern-story then all those adventures in the Animus lose a lot of meaning to me. Like I said, they may as well just abandon all modern-day storytelling altogether and just make the games 100% historical flashbacks if that is truly the direction they want to take the series. The whole first person exploring-the-past-for-fun-at-Abstergo thing they've got going just feels cheap and unimaginative.


First of all, welcome to the forums. Second, thanks for an amazing first post.
I totally agree with you. I mean I did enjoy ACIV a lot and it was fun and the gameplay was great. The first AC game that I enjoy finishing 100% but the story had no direction and the whole Animus thing is just an excuse to visit that past and kill some bad guys. I miss how the story was deeply connected before with cliffhangers and modern day story. As you said, it drove the story forward.

Now, we’re just playing a game within a game. Nothing more.


Thanks! I'm glad I'm not alone on this. I was sure I was in for it when I posted this thread. :p I hope that they seriously revisit the modern day story in the near future. Maybe they just want to let the thing breathe and refocus on that aspect of the story when they really know what they want to do with it. But maybe not. ~_~

adventurewomen
02-26-2014, 04:54 AM
But no, I don't care about the modern-day stuff any more. It was terrible after Brotherhood, and after Revelations it was abundantly clear that they had no idea where they were going with it. I'd much rather have them focus on delivering a good story about the ancestor, rather than try and keep stringing us along on cliffhanger after cliffhanger in the modern story.
Agreed with everything you said, in this post. :)

I was about to type something simular, but you have got the words I was about to type. ;)


I could care less about the modern day, TBH. This franchise isn't going to end in the next 5 years anyway. I'm more satisfied with getting some answers than cliffhangers after cliffhangers.

But in regards to Ubisoft caving towards the "I JUST WANNA KILL PEOPLEZ WITH MY SWORDS" crowd, I respectfully disagree. Modern day might be a mush, but the ancestors' stories are much MUCH better than before. I play these games to visit unique settings, explore philosophies, and thoroughly enjoy a good story. The whole sci-fi First Civilization and world's end shenanigans are just awful. They're one of the reasons why I think Ezio's adventures were lackluster. My opinion, of course.
I agree also!

I couldn't care less for the modern day, I'm just interested in the historical side of AC. The storyline for modern day went with Brotherhood, since then it hasn't been the same.

dbzk1999
02-26-2014, 05:10 AM
I actually love the modern day even more now

pirate1802
02-26-2014, 05:41 AM
Over the years I have learned that there are broadly two kinds of people who play AC. One for whom the modern day story is where the main action is, and the historical part is not as important and the play though it to get back to the modern day parts. And then there are people for whom it is exactly the opposite. They play it for the historical day action and skip through the modern day parts as quickly as possible. Both would answer differently to the question on what the story of AC is, and I think its unfair to brand the second group as I WANT MY SWORD AKSHUNZZZ as it is unfair to brand the first group as I WANT MY PSEUDO SCIFI BS!!!

Now, as far as the story having no direction is concerned, I fall into the second category so for me the "story" is what happens after the ..you enters the animus. The modern day story was never the reason I played AC for, and I at best tolerated it, waiting to get back into the Animus. The historical day action is what I'm here for and where AC truly outshines all its competitors. So if someone says the story had no direction I'd have to disagree because I probably don't mean story in the same way as he has in mind. But I'd agree that the modern day part of the story seemed... light? Although that worked in a positive way for me since it allowed me to enjoy the Animus with a minimum of irritating intrusions. I absolutely hated being pulled out of the Animus and forced to do crap missions like in AC3, for example. Either way, the modern day story seems to be getting more and more convoluted even for the writers, so I don't pay much attention to what is happening outside the Animus. As long as I'm given a solid in-animus adventure I'd be a happy panda.

DaBird-Is-DaWord
02-26-2014, 07:15 AM
Over the years I have learned that there are broadly two kinds of people who play AC. One for whom the modern day story is where the main action is, and the historical part is not as important and the play though it to get back to the modern day parts. And then there are people for whom it is exactly the opposite. They play it for the historical day action and skip through the modern day parts as quickly as possible. Both would answer differently to the question on what the story of AC is, and I think its unfair to brand the second group as I WANT MY SWORD AKSHUNZZZ as it is unfair to brand the first group as I WANT MY PSEUDO SCIFI BS!!!

Now, as far as the story having no direction is concerned, I fall into the second category so for me the "story" is what happens after the ..you enters the animus. The modern day story was never the reason I played AC for, and I at best tolerated it, waiting to get back into the Animus. The historical day action is what I'm here for and where AC truly outshines all its competitors. So if someone says the story had no direction I'd have to disagree because I probably don't mean story in the same way as he has in mind. But I'd agree that the modern day part of the story seemed... light? Although that worked in a positive way for me since it allowed me to enjoy the Animus with a minimum of irritating intrusions. I absolutely hated being pulled out of the Animus and forced to do crap missions like in AC3, for example. Either way, the modern day story seems to be getting more and more convoluted even for the writers, so I don't pay much attention to what is happening outside the Animus. As long as I'm given a solid in-animus adventure I'd be a happy panda.

You'll see I back-tracked a little bit on the whole "I WANT MY SWORD"-thing in my last post, lol. I wouldn't say I played through the history just to get to the modern-day stuff. I mean, the in-animus stuff has always been the heart of the games really. That's what Assassins Creed is. Going back in time and free-roaming unique historical environments--no other game series does this as well as AC. I love that aspect of the game. The thing is I never really distinguished between the in-and-out-of-animus story lines. They were always one and the same--they were interconnected. We explore the worlds of Altair, Ezio, and Connor to advance the story in the modern day--to find the Apple and stop Abstergo's plans for world domination.

I guess I never really understood the distaste for Desmond and the modern day storyline. I mean, 99% of the games have always taken place inside the animus. I don't get what's so disconcerting about spending five minutes outside the animus to learn more about the main character's back-story, and more importantly to check up on how the ultimate fight between good and evil is going... It was a nice change of scenery to get out the animus once every four or five hours. That stuff never really got in the way of your historical adventures. Don't get me wrong, I love playing the history stuff--and by history stuff, I mean 99% of the game. If I didn't enjoy 99% of the game then I wouldn't have played up to this point in the first place. lol. The point is, the modern day story was the overarching plot line of the entire franchise. Even though it constituted an extremely small portion of the game, it was half the story. And now that is all gone. It shouldn't come as a surprise that a lot of people will feel like something is missing from the latest installments in the series.

pirate1802
02-26-2014, 07:29 AM
Taken separately, I won't say the modern day is that bad, but the historical aspect is done so well (imo), that being brought back to the present times feels irritating, to me atleast. Its like you're talking to this lovely lady, completely lost in her eyes, and then his ugly brother comes up, shoves her off and forces you to talk to him instead. :( Naturally I'd just bide my time and wait for the lovely lady to return.

Iceternal6
02-26-2014, 07:59 AM
Modern day is full of wasted potential.

But I don't like the idea of all AC games being independant. There needs to be a plotline to connect them all. You know, just to make us anticipate the next game at least.

pacmanate
02-26-2014, 10:23 AM
I could care less about the modern day, TBH. This franchise isn't going to end in the next 5 years anyway.

This is true. Shade told me there is an AC 27 in the works.

But I agree with OP. Its just lost meaning. I liked the idea of Desmond, it was just handled poorly, and i dont think we will get another 3rd person character anytime soon due to how poorly recieved he was.

And whose fault was that? It was the Devs for half arsing Desmonds segments.

pirate1802
02-26-2014, 10:51 AM
You know, just to make us anticipate the next game at least.

For me the prospect of a new protag in a new setting, era etc more than does the job for me. For example, if the rumours are to be believed, I'm far more excited at the prospect to jumping across smokey London rooftops than following the story of the pseudo war between assassins/templars and some scifi stuff thrown in.

Hans684
02-26-2014, 10:51 AM
There is no "The story", there is the present day story and the historical story both is connected. They are parallel story's with a connection. Not to mention that judging "The story" only based on the games only is not a fair judgment. We have the present day and historical, then the MP present day, the comic present day and historical and the most important one is Initiates(the Com Devs said it has become a core pillar). Initates is the present day story that never sleeps and connects everything, at least at some point. So "The story" has more directions than ever, I doubt "The story" in ACIVBF would have changed had there been a protagonist. They might have tweaked it a bit but overal it would have been the same, especially since there is an overal arc. So in my "opionion", the present day story is stronger than before. It gives/tells things the games can't without it feeling forced, out of place or rushed(AC3). And personly I liked the present day story even more becouse of ACB, things really started to happen then. And how the historical story is will depend on the present day.

Farlander1991
02-26-2014, 10:51 AM
Desmond's storyline, IMO, looks absolutely fine on paper. The implementation really suffers, though.

Of course, there are a few reason for this, parallel development being one of them, however that's not all. It's mainly the fact that the series has introduced TWO main plotlines in the first two games. However, the ratio of manhours assigned to modern day sections would always be proportionally much much much lower than assigned to historical ones, because that's the main attraction, but the whole two storylines required it to be a whole something else.

I really don't mind the way ACIV doing things, that seams absolutely reasonable to me, given all the circumstances. Let's not forget that Desmond got the most character development in two games. ACR via abstract first person levels with voice overs, and AC4 with voice over only.

AC3 had the biggest modern day section from the whole series. It had three whole new levels that weren't heavily based on reuse of assets (unlike the ACB levels, for example), plus a whole hub location. Honestly, if AC would've had only one main storyline going, that could've been enough to do it justice. But we had two. So it was kinda messy.

dewgel
02-26-2014, 11:20 AM
I agree with this. Unfortunately there is actually a good direction the modern day story is going in, and it goes on as the days go by through AC Initiates. Personally, I think Initiates is great; but I'd like to see the story progress in a game. I'd like to see what's happening and why stuff is happening.

The modern day needs a stronger part. It was exciting in Assassin's Creed II and Brotherhood. There was enough development and freedom to give you a break from Ezio and find out a little more about the back story.

Assassin's Creed III was on the money with the Desmond missions, they were kind of good. But they ended abruptly. I mean, that poorly designed / modelled Abstergo lobby was terrible.. and when Desmond was walking out with the Apple raised in his hands I was thinking "Oh, something epic is coming", then you reach the door and the screen cuts to black then all of a sudden you're in the van loading screen thing with William playing on his tablet, Desmond just staring at the floor.

Again with Vidic and Cross's deaths. What the Hell? Two iconic characters, Vidic being the primary antagonist of the first and second game's modern day story - the man we've been itching to Assassinate since he kept us captive, and we make Abstergo Guard #453 shoot him.

The modern day segments need better writing, they need to build on the action and to give us more puzzles, exploration or rewards. And definitely better story. No more first person too. I'm sick of that. I want to know the person I'm playing as, I don't want it to be me working in Abstergo.

Farlander1991
02-26-2014, 11:24 AM
Speaking of assassinations, I was hoping Desmond would get his own version of a memory corridor due to the Bleeding Effect messing up his brain.

dewgel
02-26-2014, 11:27 AM
Speaking of assassinations, I was hoping Desmond would get his own version of a memory corridor due to the Bleeding Effect messing up his brain.

Same. They had such a good thing going with the Bleeding Effect. It could've been Desmond's ticket to using the Animus anywhere he wanted. For example just before fighting someone, say in Brazil when he chased after Cross. Cross started having Nikolai bleeding effect moments, Desmond could've brought on Ezio's memories to fight better, or something along those lines. Would've made for a pretty interesting segment / story.

Farlander1991
02-26-2014, 11:34 AM
Same. They had such a good thing going with the Bleeding Effect. It could've been Desmond's ticket to using the Animus anywhere he wanted. For example just before fighting someone, say in Brazil when he chased after Cross. Cross started having Nikolai bleeding effect moments, Desmond could've brought on Ezio's memories to fight better, or something along those lines. Would've made for a pretty interesting segment / story.

Shameless thread self-plug (http://forums.ubi.com/showthread.php/756061-Why-Desmond-shouldn-t-have-had-the-Bleeding-Effect-cured-(SPOILERS)) :rolleyes: (i.e. I'm too lazy to rewrite other possibilities from the bleeding effect, there could be a lot of cool things done with it :D ) The way how it was suddenly resolved in ACR was incredibly disappointing to me... only then to be brought back for one thing in AC3... which I think happened because during AC3 development Desmond was supposed to have the Bleeding Effect and then 'oh crap it's been removed in ACR we need to remove stuff and let's make this ready sequence as being activated by the Temple' or smth.

Fatal-Feit
02-26-2014, 01:43 PM
I agree also!

I couldn't care less for the modern day, I'm just interested in the historical side of AC. The storyline for modern day went with Brotherhood, since then it hasn't been the same.

Well I don't know about everyone else, but I personally enjoyed AC:1 and AC:2 modern day the least. AC:B, AC:R, and AC:3 were alright but I've always wanted the series to let go of Desmond and give us something like first person where we can explore, hack, and discover--something less sci-fi. I just didn't find Desmond's arc to be very interesting with all those shenanigans. I knew since AC:R that the series wasn't going to end for a very long time so I guess that's why I was more satisfied with first person modern day, despite it not having any meaningful cliffhangers. My only regret was that there was not enough Shaun Hastings.

Now don't get me wrong. I love the whole tie-in with the mysterious Apple of Eden and all those other pieces of Eden for the plot-lines, but when the First Civ became too emphasized like in Desmond's arc, it felt less ominous. Like-- why the hell did they give them a face? It makes no sense. I hope they keep up what they're doing with AC:IV. I thoroughly enjoyed AC:2 until the ending, and I definitely enjoyed AC:IV more because it kept the sci-fi at a minimum, especially with Edward's story.

Poodle_of_Doom
02-26-2014, 03:36 PM
I never did get a sense of closure with Lucy... I expected they would explore her betrayal more after Brotherhood and give us more answers. Instead, they basically wrote her off as a bad guy and never revisited it--except for maybe a couple lines of dialog here and there in Revelations. I wish they had done more with that plot point--even today it feels somewhat unresolved to me.

They did a lot with that plot point.....


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Roo6tH_wbXc

And that's part 6, btw....

LoyalACFan
02-26-2014, 04:08 PM
They did a lot with that plot point.....


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Roo6tH_wbXc

And that's part 6, btw....

But I think we can all safely say that The Lost Archive is a disgrace. Naming your game "Revelations," then relegating the only relevant "revelation" into a crappy, short, overpriced POS DLC? That's about as low as you can get in the games industry.

Poodle_of_Doom
02-26-2014, 04:48 PM
But I think we can all safely say that The Lost Archive is a disgrace. Naming your game "Revelations," then relegating the only relevant "revelation" into a crappy, short, overpriced POS DLC? That's about as low as you can get in the games industry.

It's not that I disagree with you, as I have made that point several times. But truth be told, just because the games name is "Revelations" in no way insinuates that the revelations are for you. In fact. I think that the revelations, as they are, pertain solely to the characters themselves. Ezio learns what it is that he was really fighting for, and what his purpose is. Because of this revelation, he fulfills his destiny. Desmond has the next few, and soon to be last, steps of his journey revealed to him. We see how Altair's purposes (revelations) for the order come to fruition. We see him set up everything that we've seen be carried out over the eight hundred years. There's more, I haven't played the game in a while though, and would have to in order to point out more.


Just because the game is entitled "Revelations" doesn't mean that there weren't any. It simple means that there will be some. Just because they weren't the ones you wanted, it bothers you. Frankly, I wasn't impressed either. But when you see the game for what it is, and take it all in stride, you realize that it has a lot of offer. It did close a lot of doors.

That said, the TLA DLC was meant for nothing more than to keep a bunch of folks happy. We all complained that we weren't impressed with the story line regarding Lucy. We all thought that the content should of been included in the game; that her ending should of been made clear to everyone. It wasn't. In order to remedy this, after the fact of course, we ended up with the DLC. Which isn't half bad considering the fact that it expands on the S16 storyline, which is something a lot of people wanted.

I don't know what more you expect.

That wasn't a rhetorical statement either... I almost expect a response to precisely that.

LoyalACFan
02-26-2014, 05:07 PM
It's not that I disagree with you, as I have made that point several times. But truth be told, just because the games name is "Revelations" in no way insinuates that the revelations are for you. In fact. I think that the revelations, as they are, pertain solely to the characters themselves. Ezio learns what it is that he was really fighting for, and what his purpose is. Because of this revelation, he fulfills his destiny. Desmond has the next few, and soon to be last, steps of his journey revealed to him. We see how Altair's purposes (revelations) for the order come to fruition. We see him set up everything that we've seen be carried out over the eight hundred years. There's more, I haven't played the game in a while though, and would have to in order to point out more.

I wasn't disappointed with Ezio's story, that's not what I'm talking about at all. But the game was marketed on the fact that there were going to be some mind-blowing "revelations" for the player, it's not just the title. There was a highly-publicized interview with Amancio regarding precisely that, and he claimed that like half a dozen "burning questions" about the overarching story were going to be answered. Well, they weren't, Alex. We saw how Altair died and learned that Ezio's Apple and Altair's Apple were two different objects. Hardly burning questions by anyone's estimation. The only good thing about modern day was that we found out what happened to Subject 16; Jupiter's message was entirely irrelevant because we already had the location of the Grand Temple from the Da Vinci Disappearance, and Jupiter didn't tell him what to do when he got there ("I know what to do," bull$hit Desmond, you were just as clueless as the others when you got to the Temple).


That said, the TLA DLC was meant for nothing more than to keep a bunch of folks happy. We all complained that we weren't impressed with the story line regarding Lucy. We all thought that the content should of been included in the game; that her ending should of been made clear to everyone. It wasn't. In order to remedy this, after the fact of course, we ended up with the DLC. Which isn't half bad considering the fact that it expands on the S16 storyline, which is something a lot of people wanted.

This is not what happened. The Lost Archive was not a reaction to fan backlash about not getting Lucy's story revealed. Her betrayal was originally meant to be explored in Desmond's block-puzzle missions, with one mission featuring her chasing you in a wedding gown and all sorts of crazy stuff. But they decided to cut it, replace it with a garbage backstory that we already knew, and sell THE major revelation as a DLC. I can't forgive that.

DaBird-Is-DaWord
02-26-2014, 05:11 PM
Frankly I didn't know anything about that DLC mission until now. I'll have to play it or at the very least watch that video sometime. Guess that's my bad, though honestly they ought to have included that in the game...

I also don't know anything about Initiates. What is that? A comic book series or something? That's cool and all and maybe I'll give it a look. But if it's integral to the story then you shouldn't have to go out of your way to find out about it, you know what I mean? The video games are the most important installments in the franchise. You should be able to play them all and know everything you need to know about the Assassins Creed universe. I think the idea of an expanded AC universe so to speak (think Star Wars books and games) is interesting but that realm should lend itself to spinoffs and less relevant story arcs, not mediums that most fans of the series won't even know about.

LoyalACFan
02-26-2014, 05:16 PM
I also don't know anything about Initiates. What is that? A comic book series or something?

It's a website that posts puzzles and info bits about the story as it's developing now, particularly the modern part. But they've also done a little bit about Adewale's grandson Eseosa, which seemed kind of random and led some to believe that he was about to become our next playable Assassin.

Hans684
02-26-2014, 06:08 PM
I also don't know anything about Initiates. What is that? A comic book series or something? That's cool and all and maybe I'll give it a look.

https://acinitiates.com/

http://assassinscreed.wikia.com/wiki/Assassin%27s_Creed:_Initiates


But if it's integral to the story then you shouldn't have to go out of your way to find out about it, you know what I mean?

I know exacly what you meab but why shouldn't we? Can't sit around hoping to gett everything on a golden plate either, can we?


The video games are the most important installments in the franchise.

Thay still are, you don't have to follow the other storys but if you do you will understand it better.


You should be able to play them all and know everything you need to know about the Assassins Creed universe.

You do gett everything you need to know by the games but the other storys will at some point connect to the any other the games. So if you have any other AC media by then to connect it with you will understand better.


I think the idea of an expanded AC universe so to speak (think Star Wars books and games) is interesting but that realm should lend itself to spinoffs and less relevant story arcs, not mediums that most fans of the series won't even know about.

Ubisoft aim at this moment is to expand the AC universe. Every story had one relevance the media it's in doesn't metter, you do know there is an AC movie/film staring Micheal Fessbender coming 2015? If the fans can't keep up is their problem, nothing I can do about that. Here a link to most of AC's expanded universe, http://assassinscreed.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Assassin%27s_Creed_series.

Poodle_of_Doom
02-26-2014, 06:09 PM
I wasn't disappointed with Ezio's story, that's not what I'm talking about at all. But the game was marketed on the fact that there were going to be some mind-blowing "revelations" for the player, it's not just the title. There was a highly-publicized interview with Amancio regarding precisely that, and he claimed that like half a dozen "burning questions" about the overarching story were going to be answered. Well, they weren't, Alex. We saw how Altair died and learned that Ezio's Apple and Altair's Apple were two different objects. Hardly burning questions by anyone's estimation. The only good thing about modern day was that we found out what happened to Subject 16; Jupiter's message was entirely irrelevant because we already had the location of the Grand Temple from the Da Vinci Disappearance, and Jupiter didn't tell him what to do when he got there ("I know what to do," bull$hit Desmond, you were just as clueless as the others when you got to the Temple).



This is not what happened. The Lost Archive was not a reaction to fan backlash about not getting Lucy's story revealed. Her betrayal was originally meant to be explored in Desmond's block-puzzle missions, with one mission featuring her chasing you in a wedding gown and all sorts of crazy stuff. But they decided to cut it, replace it with a garbage backstory that we already knew, and sell THE major revelation as a DLC. I can't forgive that.

Frankly, I'd love to respond to that, but find myself lacking the proper tools, as I don't recall having seen the original sources for either of these claims. Do you, by chance, have a link for the interview, and some links for the other information?

At that, I don't know that the game was ever actually "marketed" with having mind blowing content; be it reletive to secrets or otherwise. At that, Jupiters message wasn't about the Temple itself. The point that he was making was that all their efforts, and all their knowledge of all the things they tried to do was stored at a single location. That this was where Desmond needed to go in order to prevent the end of the world. When Desmond said he knew what to do, he didn't mean that he knew what to do at the Temple, just that they needed to go there, and he'd be able to do something.

twenty_glyphs
02-27-2014, 12:25 AM
Frankly, I'd love to respond to that, but find myself lacking the proper tools, as I don't recall having seen the original sources for either of these claims. Do you, by chance, have a link for the interview, and some links for the other information?

At that, I don't know that the game was ever actually "marketed" with having mind blowing content; be it reletive to secrets or otherwise. At that, Jupiters message wasn't about the Temple itself. The point that he was making was that all their efforts, and all their knowledge of all the things they tried to do was stored at a single location. That this was where Desmond needed to go in order to prevent the end of the world. When Desmond said he knew what to do, he didn't mean that he knew what to do at the Temple, just that they needed to go there, and he'd be able to do something.

Revelations was always marketed as answering many big questions about the overarching story, right from the original reveal in Game Informer in May 2011, including filmed interviews with the creative director hosted on Game Informer's hub for Revelations during May 2011 (the hub on their site says June 2011 because of the weird way magazines are dated). Obviously, the big question was why Juno made Desmond stab Lucy. An interview with Jeffrey Yohalem by loomer called The Lost Archive podcast revealed that Revelations' creative director wanted to focus more on Desmond's past instead of what was going on with Lucy, so that part was stripped out and released as DLC later. The fact that anyone thought a slight elaboration on Desmond's incredibly boring past, which was already mostly known from AC1 alone, would be better to include in the game than the story of Lucy's betrayal is mind-boggling and insulting to fans of the story up to that point.

The Lost Archive was never anything meant for the fans. I'd wager the only reason it was released was just to recoup some of the development costs on it, since it was likely mostly finished by the time Revelations came out. It seems Ubisoft decided to not even spend a dime marketing the DLC just to keep their costs down (likely because they knew the DLC would be unpopular because it was just more puzzle elements that were heavily criticized from the main game). A trailer leaked the week before it came out, and yet even the trailer was never officially released by Ubisoft on the Assassin's Creed YouTube channel or anything. To show you how little they cared about The Lost Archive, promotional art for AC3 leaked the very day after The Lost Archive came out and 2 days after TLA they were officially revealing AC3.

As for the overall story, I agree that it has little direction. I find myself not caring about anything in the universe now. I'm still interested in some of the historical stuff and the settings, but the meta-story really killed my enthusiasm for the series. I even enjoyed AC4 quite a lot, but without the magic of the first 3 games, it didn't make the same impression on me in the long run. It seemed they were building up to something special for Desmond with a real purpose, and then Revelations revealed the cracks in the foundation before AC3 brought the whole house of cards down. Now the meta-story is just filler without actual plot or character development.