PDA

View Full Version : Meet Galina - A new assassin appears during the full moon



RinoTheBouncer
03-16-2014, 06:16 PM
https://dvi10j2ubhdlg.cloudfront.net/content-data/database/surveillance/SVG_MeetGalina_L.jpg

Uploading to the Initiates Database in all available languages…

REPORT BEGINS:

The following is an excerpt from Emmett's report on their mission in Moscow:

Hey guys. We have established contact with an Assassin in Moscow, Galina Voronina.

So this is awkward: she wants us to assassinate her mother, an Assassin scientist who went nuts. Apparently this lady built her own Animus and forced the other members of her cell into it!

The mother's holed up inside the lab, but, to get to her, we have to fight through the remains of the Russian Brotherhood, driven insane by the Bleeding Effect.

It gets worse: this old bat might be the craziest of all. She swears that through the Animus, she's talking to Eve.

That's…unsettling.

I remain your humble spy.


SOURCE: acinitiates.com

JCH33T-
03-16-2014, 06:23 PM
What's this about then? Haha

Hans684
03-16-2014, 06:55 PM
https://dvi10j2ubhdlg.cloudfront.net/content-data/database/surveillance/SVG_MeetGalina_L.jpg

It gets worse: this old bat might be the craziest of all. She swears that through the Animus, she's talking to Eve.

Interesting.

Templar_Az
03-16-2014, 06:55 PM
Will this become part of a game or book do you think?

RinoTheBouncer
03-16-2014, 06:58 PM
Will this become part of a game or book do you think?

I think for now, it’s part of the ACINITAITES self-contained story (which is linked to the games). But I hope they’re introducing her to become the 3rd person protagonist of the modern day portion of upcoming AC games.


Interesting.

Yeah, I wonder if she’ll be the modern day protagonist. It would be extremely interesting. I mean Russia in present day, female, Eve... all that perfection mixed together would make a hell of an AC game. I hope we won’t be let down.

I-Like-Pie45
03-16-2014, 07:09 PM
I'm surprised that the writers even remember the Bleeding Effect exists.

Kaschra
03-16-2014, 07:18 PM
She thinks she's talking to Eve?
Now this is really interesting.

pirate1802
03-16-2014, 07:20 PM
More female assassins can only be a good thing so yes pls

Hans684
03-16-2014, 07:33 PM
IYeah, I wonder if she’ll be the modern day protagonist. It would be extremely interesting. I mean Russia in present day, female, Eve... all that perfection mixed together would make a hell of an AC game. I hope we won’t be let down.

Sadly we won't have a MD protagonist in a while. Since Eve is important the possibility of her being involved in a future AC is likely and it would be a hell of an AC, it's mother Russia. We will most likely get let down.

frodrigues55
03-16-2014, 07:37 PM
I'm surprised that the writers even remember the Bleeding Effect exists.

Of course they do, just because it doesn't appear on the games anymore doesn't mean they forgot about it. It's just so much fun to wonder when the next one is happening.

Will it be on the novels? On the comics? On the graphics novels? On the Facebook game? On a DLC? On the handheld exclusives? On a Twitter? On a live-action short film? On a animated short film? On the board game (gotta have the board game)? On the interactive website (everything is connected after all)? On the Encyclopedia? On Watch Dogs? It keeps me on my toes!

GunnerGalactico
03-16-2014, 07:51 PM
https://dvi10j2ubhdlg.cloudfront.net/content-data/database/surveillance/SVG_MeetGalina_L.jpg

So that's the mysterious lady from the earlier picture in AC Initiates. That is a good find... looks promising.

Wolfmeister1010
03-16-2014, 07:51 PM
I love how both "Eve" and "Erudito" have been a part of the AC story since Brotherhood, yet NONE of them have been expanded on since. Erudito has just been a stupid MP background character. Hopefully Eve has something to do with Juno, and maybe even the missing blood vials, so that the story finally starts to come together.

I-Like-Pie45
03-16-2014, 07:54 PM
Wolfmeister

Is that you?

Hans684
03-16-2014, 08:03 PM
Wolfmeister

Is that you?

No, this is Patrick.

I-Like-Pie45
03-16-2014, 08:10 PM
No, this is Patrick.

Dennis

Perk89
03-16-2014, 08:10 PM
Maybe a modern day female protagonist will help reduce the amount of weird ***** preteens who are obsessed with having a female protagonist

ACfan443
03-16-2014, 08:11 PM
I love how both "Eve" and "Erudito" have been a part of the AC story since Brotherhood, yet NONE of them have been expanded on since. Erudito has just been a stupid MP background character. Hopefully Eve has something to do with Juno, and maybe even the missing blood vials, so that the story finally starts to come together.

I wouldn't count on it. I think it's clear at this point that they have no intention of expanding the present day story any further. More like the opposite and dumbing it down to the point of nonexistence, where it's no longer a narrative-constraining nuisance and liability to them.


No, this is Patrick.

I laughed.

killzab
03-16-2014, 08:14 PM
I wouldn't count on it. I think it's clear at this point that they have no intention of expanding the present day story any further. More like the opposite and dumbing it down to the point of nonexistence, where it's no longer a narrative-constraining nuisance and liability to them.

Yes ... unfortunately

Wolfmeister1010
03-16-2014, 08:35 PM
Maybe a modern day female protagonist will help reduce the amount of weird ***** preteens who are obsessed with having a female protagonist

I love you

Megas_Doux
03-16-2014, 08:43 PM
Interesting, rather interesting indeed.....

The thing is that almost all the initiates stuff is never mentioned in the games.

Wolfmeister1010
03-16-2014, 08:53 PM
Interesting, rather interesting indeed.....

The thing is that almost all the initiates stuff is never mentioned in the games.

yeah to really is all quite annoying. All this stuff with Gavin and William and Japan and Russia and Esoesa and all this stuff is completely irrelevant. All this info should be in the games, not on some poorly designed website

Megas_Doux
03-16-2014, 09:05 PM
yeah to really is all quite annoying. All this stuff with Gavin and William and Japan and Russia and Esoesa and all this stuff is completely irrelevant. All this info should be in the games, not on some poorly designed website

Agree!

I mean, there is some genuinely good stuff in that site. A shame it seems to be a filler to "feed" some hardcore/lucky fans.

Fatal-Feit
03-16-2014, 10:07 PM
Oh look... No beak. Clearly she's a fake Assassin.

RinoTheBouncer
03-16-2014, 10:45 PM
yeah to really is all quite annoying. All this stuff with Gavin and William and Japan and Russia and Esoesa and all this stuff is completely irrelevant. All this info should be in the games, not on some poorly designed website

I’m glad you said that. I hope more people like you voice their opinions about this matter and I hope Ubisoft learns that we’re not just some children that they’re fooling with a few text blocks on a lame website and call it “Modern Day story” while the games turn to some soulless, reductive historical GTA.

Wolfmeister1010
03-16-2014, 10:49 PM
I’m glad you said that. I hope more people like you voice their opinions about this matter and I hope Ubisoft learns that we’re not just some children that they’re fooling with a few text blocks on a lame website and call it “Modern Day story” while the games turn to some soulless, reductive historical GTA.

Aw..thanks you made my day!

To be honest, AC is my favorite series PERIOD but I don't give a crap about the modern day storyline anymore. Too messed up. I think I started to lose interest in the modern day part ever since they just killed off Lucy and didn't bother to explain why until a crappy 10 minute DLC

RinoTheBouncer
03-16-2014, 10:59 PM
Aw..thanks you made my day!

To be honest, AC is my favorite series PERIOD but I don't give a crap about the modern day storyline anymore. Too messed up. I think I started to lose interest in the modern day part ever since they just killed off Lucy and didn't bother to explain why until a crappy 10 minute DLC

You too, my friend. I adore the AC series and I treasure the modern day missions. But ACIV was the definition of REDUCTIVE. I mean c’mon, from Desmond to a floating camera that we’re told to believe it’s me? who said I wanna be in the game? put me in the game after you render me at Ubisoft studios not make fun of us with such badly directed, plotless segment with a few references to Juno. Just when things got interesting, they ended the game.

I’m totally disappointed as Edward was great and I thought the story will get more serious after ACIII, now that Juno is let lose. And I bet you that they’ll end her story by “deleting her” from the servers rather than having some epic moment. That, I assure you. It bothers me a lot cause AC started like an original story with conspiracy theories, sci-fi, religious references, historical missions, perfectly directed, emotional scenes and now it’s trading all that in favor of Call of Duty and GTA fans hopping on board. I mean the game had 3rd person modern day from day one so if somebody doesn’t like it, they can just not play the game rather than stripping them down of every quality in modern day and every meaning to the story in such a merciless and shameless way until it’s a shadow of it’s former self.

It’s only 10% of the game, so I guess any modern day hater can tolerate it. They say “We develop games a year or two before announcing them, so there’s always time” and then Darby comes and says to me, personally on ACINITAITES that “they stripped down Modern day cause of time and resources constraints”. THE CONTRADICTIONS! LOL. I mean if the game needs 3 years to develop, then that’s how long it needs, no need to force the annual thing if you’re incapable of delivering something that matches the standards of the past games.

Jish_01
03-16-2014, 11:08 PM
You too, my friend. I adore the AC series and I treasure the modern day missions. But ACIV was the definition of REDUCTIVE. I mean c’mon, from Desmond to a floating camera that we’re told to believe it’s me? who said I wanna be in the game? put me in the game after you render me at Ubisoft studios not make fun of us with such badly directly, plotless segment with a few references to Juno. Just when things got interesting, they ended the game.

I’m totally disappointed as Edward was great and I thought the story will get more serious after ACIII, now that Juno is let lose. And I bet you that they’ll end her story by “deleting her” from the servers rather than having some epic moment. That, I assure you. It bothers me a lot cause AC started like an original story with conspiracies theories, sci-fi, religious references, historical missions, perfectly directed, emotional scenes and now it’s trading all that in favor of Call of Duty and GTA fans hopping on board. I mean the game had 3rd person modern day from day one so if somebody doesn’t like it, they can just not play the game rather than have the game strip it down in such a merciless and shameless way until it’s a shadow of it’s former self.

It’s only 10% of the game, so I guess any modern day hater can tolerate it. They say “We develop games a year or two before announcing them, so there’s always time” and then Darby comes and says to me, personally on ACINITAITES that “they stripped down Modern day cause of time and resources constraints”. THE CONTRADICTIONS! LOL. I mean if the game needs 3 years to develop, then that’s how long it needs, no need to force the annual thing if you’re incapable of delivering something that matches the standards of the past games.

^^ this. so much this.

RinoTheBouncer
03-16-2014, 11:13 PM
^^ this. so much this.

Much appreciated. I’m glad more people are with me on this because I hate to see the franchise become another Resident Evil, which sells 4 to 6 million copies (which isn’t bad) but tons and tons of bad reviews from hardcore fans, newcomers and critics.

I-Like-Pie45
03-16-2014, 11:37 PM
Oh look... No beak. Clearly she's a fake Assassin.

this proves that like indians and pirates

women cant be assassins

TO_M
03-17-2014, 12:08 AM
You too, my friend. I adore the AC series and I treasure the modern day missions. But ACIV was the definition of REDUCTIVE. I mean c’mon, from Desmond to a floating camera that we’re told to believe it’s me? who said I wanna be in the game? put me in the game after you render me at Ubisoft studios not make fun of us with such badly directed, plotless segment with a few references to Juno. Just when things got interesting, they ended the game.

I’m totally disappointed as Edward was great and I thought the story will get more serious after ACIII, now that Juno is let lose. And I bet you that they’ll end her story by “deleting her” from the servers rather than having some epic moment. That, I assure you. It bothers me a lot cause AC started like an original story with conspiracy theories, sci-fi, religious references, historical missions, perfectly directed, emotional scenes and now it’s trading all that in favor of Call of Duty and GTA fans hopping on board. I mean the game had 3rd person modern day from day one so if somebody doesn’t like it, they can just not play the game rather than stripping them down of every quality in modern day and every meaning to the story in such a merciless and shameless way until it’s a shadow of it’s former self.

It’s only 10% of the game, so I guess any modern day hater can tolerate it. They say “We develop games a year or two before announcing them, so there’s always time” and then Darby comes and says to me, personally on ACINITAITES that “they stripped down Modern day cause of time and resources constraints”. THE CONTRADICTIONS! LOL. I mean if the game needs 3 years to develop, then that’s how long it needs, no need to force the annual thing if you’re incapable of delivering something that matches the standards of the past games.

I also fully agree with you on this.

rprkjj
03-17-2014, 12:08 AM
You too, my friend. I adore the AC series and I treasure the modern day missions. But ACIV was the definition of REDUCTIVE. I mean c’mon, from Desmond to a floating camera that we’re told to believe it’s me? who said I wanna be in the game? put me in the game after you render me at Ubisoft studios not make fun of us with such badly directed, plotless segment with a few references to Juno. Just when things got interesting, they ended the game.

I’m totally disappointed as Edward was great and I thought the story will get more serious after ACIII, now that Juno is let lose. And I bet you that they’ll end her story by “deleting her” from the servers rather than having some epic moment. That, I assure you. It bothers me a lot cause AC started like an original story with conspiracy theories, sci-fi, religious references, historical missions, perfectly directed, emotional scenes and now it’s trading all that in favor of Call of Duty and GTA fans hopping on board. I mean the game had 3rd person modern day from day one so if somebody doesn’t like it, they can just not play the game rather than stripping them down of every quality in modern day and every meaning to the story in such a merciless and shameless way until it’s a shadow of it’s former self.

It’s only 10% of the game, so I guess any modern day hater can tolerate it. They say “We develop games a year or two before announcing them, so there’s always time” and then Darby comes and says to me, personally on ACINITAITES that “they stripped down Modern day cause of time and resources constraints”. THE CONTRADICTIONS! LOL. I mean if the game needs 3 years to develop, then that’s how long it needs, no need to force the annual thing if you’re incapable of delivering something that matches the standards of the past games.

Mr. Shade, please pass this along to the devs, for the love of AC.

Layytez
03-17-2014, 01:21 AM
Eve you say ? Now i'm interested. Don't fail me Ubi !!!

jeffies04
03-17-2014, 01:26 AM
You too, my friend. I adore the AC series and I treasure the modern day missions. But ACIV was the definition of REDUCTIVE. I mean címon, from Desmond to a floating camera that weíre told to believe itís me? who said I wanna be in the game? put me in the game after you render me at Ubisoft studios not make fun of us with such badly directed, plotless segment with a few references to Juno. Just when things got interesting, they ended the game.

Iím totally disappointed as Edward was great and I thought the story will get more serious after ACIII, now that Juno is let lose. And I bet you that theyíll end her story by ďdeleting herĒ from the servers rather than having some epic moment. That, I assure you. It bothers me a lot cause AC started like an original story with conspiracy theories, sci-fi, religious references, historical missions, perfectly directed, emotional scenes and now itís trading all that in favor of Call of Duty and GTA fans hopping on board. I mean the game had 3rd person modern day from day one so if somebody doesnít like it, they can just not play the game rather than stripping them down of every quality in modern day and every meaning to the story in such a merciless and shameless way until itís a shadow of itís former self.

Itís only 10% of the game, so I guess any modern day hater can tolerate it. They say ďWe develop games a year or two before announcing them, so thereís always timeĒ and then Darby comes and says to me, personally on ACINITAITES that ďthey stripped down Modern day cause of time and resources constraintsĒ. THE CONTRADICTIONS! LOL. I mean if the game needs 3 years to develop, then thatís how long it needs, no need to force the annual thing if youíre incapable of delivering something that matches the standards of the past games.

I also agree.

I liked exploring the pretty Abstergo office, but I felt like it was so empty in substance.

Especially felt empty after the scene with John and the poison and Melanie is all like, "oh you're ok? Good a doctor came by. So sorry but by the way here's our trailer!!" And then a moment hearing Shaun and Rebecca and that was it. I felt like how could a normal person just casually go back to work after that?? Oh by the way I'm a spy now!

frodrigues55
03-17-2014, 01:44 AM
AC4's modern day was a mess. Having a faceless and nameless character won't make me feel like it's me, that's ridiculous. It just prevents character interaction and make dialogues very uncomfortable as "I" never ever say or answer anything to the people talking to "me". They somehow think conversations would ruin the feeling that's "me" even though it's appropriate to have me writting diaries I never wrote. I don't know whose ideia was it, but it sucks.

Darby straight out said they can't make proper sequels anymore because of all the games being developed at the same time, so Desmond's death was really the death of the modern day plot (and as they say, only fans really care about that). It's funny because they say annual releases don't get in the way of quality but it clearly does at some level.

Anyway, they could at least develop third person segments with self-contained stories for each game if they don't want to carry it through various games. Anything is better than Black Flag's floating head in my opinion.

jeffies04
03-17-2014, 02:28 AM
AC4' "I" never ever say or answer anything to the people talking to "me". They somehow think conversations would ruin the feeling that's "me" even though it's appropriate to have me writting diaries I never wrote. I don't know whose ideia was it, but it sucks.

.

Exactly, I never felt like I was ANYbody... Compare that to Bioshock Infinite's first person character Booker Dewitt, I actually felt like I was someone, even though it wasn't me talking, nothing like me, and maybe having thoughts or feelings I don't have personally. Put me in someone else's body, I say...games have been doing it for years.The silent floating head thing is totally disconnecting.

frodrigues55
03-17-2014, 02:38 AM
Exactly, I never felt like I was ANYbody... Compare that to Bioshock Infinite's first person character Booker Dewitt, I actually felt like I was someone, even though it wasn't me talking, nothing like me, and maybe having thoughts or feelings I don't have personally. Put me in someone else's body, I say...games have been doing it for years.The silent floating head thing is totally disconnecting.

Really. That's the beauty of games, movies or books. You get to know other characters. You create someone on your imagination based on how they talk, how they act, how they respond. AC was always great at creating new and interesting characters so I could never understand the whole "THE CHARACTER IS YOU THE PLAYER!!!!11". They couldn't possibly be excited by having a camera leading the story.

The example you mentioned on your previous post was a great one of how things were poorly handled. It made no sense how I couldn't react to anything or anybody, acting like everything was fine and not being able to talk to the ones talking to me. "Why do they even bother to aknowledge me", I wondered. It's not like I can say anything to them, lol.

I-Like-Pie45
03-17-2014, 03:05 AM
Since she appears during the full moon, I have to ask this question

Is she a were-femassassin

like a guy who turns into a female assassin when the moon is full

Dome500
03-17-2014, 04:36 AM
You too, my friend. I adore the AC series and I treasure the modern day missions. But ACIV was the definition of REDUCTIVE. I mean c’mon, from Desmond to a floating camera that we’re told to believe it’s me? who said I wanna be in the game? put me in the game after you render me at Ubisoft studios not make fun of us with such badly directed, plotless segment with a few references to Juno. Just when things got interesting, they ended the game.

I’m totally disappointed as Edward was great and I thought the story will get more serious after ACIII, now that Juno is let lose. And I bet you that they’ll end her story by “deleting her” from the servers rather than having some epic moment. That, I assure you. It bothers me a lot cause AC started like an original story with conspiracy theories, sci-fi, religious references, historical missions, perfectly directed, emotional scenes and now it’s trading all that in favor of Call of Duty and GTA fans hopping on board. I mean the game had 3rd person modern day from day one so if somebody doesn’t like it, they can just not play the game rather than stripping them down of every quality in modern day and every meaning to the story in such a merciless and shameless way until it’s a shadow of it’s former self.

It’s only 10% of the game, so I guess any modern day hater can tolerate it. They say “We develop games a year or two before announcing them, so there’s always time” and then Darby comes and says to me, personally on ACINITAITES that “they stripped down Modern day cause of time and resources constraints”. THE CONTRADICTIONS! LOL. I mean if the game needs 3 years to develop, then that’s how long it needs, no need to force the annual thing if you’re incapable of delivering something that matches the standards of the past games.

Yeah seriously, this.

I'm all for making a lot of the modern day stuff optional, but seriously, would they make the effort half of the people who are not interested in modern day would be, and the ones that hate modern day would have to stand it, because they are not the only ones playing the game.

Assassins Creed started with a modern day story, the reduction makes me very disappointed.

I thought after Desmond we might get a new character to play, a new story to tell, that is how it sounded. Someone else. But "us" in a 1st person floating camera? This is basically nothing else than trying to keep the modern day part for the sake of it. I mean - the modern day once had a real identity, I feel like AC4 doesn't provide this.

I don't mind WHO I play. The way I understood it when AC3 came out and developers said some things about modern day in interviews I though that Desmond was only a story of many, many stories and we would get a new modern-day protagonist. And after the story of the new one is told, we get another new one. They are all connected the stories (in a loose way), but all have their own moments, goals and their own unique circumstances. Everyone plays their role.

I mean that concept is fool proof. Construct a story for a modern day protagonist and continue it over 3 - 4 games, then conclude it and start with a new one. The story of that protagonist can be planned YEARS ahead. Desmonds story throughout AC1 - AC3 would - if taken together - barely fit the length of 1 of the games. You can construct a story for modern day and then build the next 3 - 4 games with it in mind - minor changes can be made and that's - what the hell is so f***ing hard about that? It's even easier then telling the story of Altair, Ezio, Connor or Edward (or at least on the same level), because you can spread it across multiple games and the percentage of modern day is not much, aside from the additional dialogue which is of course always cool to be able to talk to your friends/allies when out of the animus, getting to know modern perspectives of those things - vastly different ones from person to person at that.



Darby straight out said they can't make proper sequels anymore because of all the games being developed at the same time, so Desmond's death was really the death of the modern day plot (and as they say, only fans really care about that). It's funny because they say annual releases don't get in the way of quality but it clearly does at some level.

Anyway, they could at least develop third person segments with self-contained stories for each game if they don't want to carry it through various games. Anything is better than Black Flag's floating head in my opinion.

Should I be honest? If the next setting is not something I completely LOVE and just can't bare to miss (which is very unlikely) and if they continue with that 1st-person-bulls*** I might as well skip on AC5. I mean yeah, history and all, it's cool, but the overall story always fascinated me and it was a part of AC for me. With other things and elements I liked gone and now modern day also disappearing into nothing, it's kinda not worth the buy until half a year later for half the price, or not at all (depending on protagonist, setting and other factors)

pirate1802
03-17-2014, 05:08 AM
However, badly designed, laughter-inducing modern day "missions" were not part of the franchise from day one. Why should someone be asked to not play the game if he doesn't like this new "feature"?

Also I'd never understand why people use the "historical GTA" to describe AC IV as if that is some sort of insult. AC was always historical GTA, just with 10 minutes of modern day. Also GTA and CoD fans hopping on now... I'm imagining those fans are like " wow! Modern day AC is gone? Now that franchise is totally like our favorite CoD and GTA games, lets play it guise!!!" I doubt CoD and GTA fans would care one way or another about modern day AC so I don't think the "they're reducing modern day to please cod and gta fans!" is a valid one imo.

Fatal-Feit
03-17-2014, 05:26 AM
Them elitists on this forum... SMH.

I-Like-Pie45
03-17-2014, 05:29 AM
bow b4 uz u sheepie :)

Fatal-Feit
03-17-2014, 05:32 AM
http://i59.tinypic.com/4qjtjm.jpg

I-Like-Pie45
03-17-2014, 05:38 AM
I was just trying to help :(

frodrigues55
03-17-2014, 12:47 PM
I mean that concept is fool proof. Construct a story for a modern day protagonist and continue it over 3 - 4 games, then conclude it and start with a new one. The story of that protagonist can be planned YEARS ahead. Desmonds story throughout AC1 - AC3 would - if taken together - barely fit the length of 1 of the games. You can construct a story for modern day and then build the next 3 - 4 games with it in mind - minor changes can be made and that's - what the hell is so f***ing hard about that? It's even easier then telling the story of Altair, Ezio, Connor or Edward (or at least on the same level), because you can spread it across multiple games and the percentage of modern day is not much, aside from the additional dialogue which is of course always cool to be able to talk to your friends/allies when out of the animus, getting to know modern perspectives of those things - vastly different ones from person to person at that.

That's what I was thinking, what is stopping them :confused: They could direct some effort to it, but I don't think it's on their agenda because "general public don't care for modern day". I didn't think I would miss much, but after Black Flag I noticed how disconnected things could get. What's the point of Juno, Shaun and Rebecca being there anyway, it's not like they have any intention to tie the games anymore with anything other than those rare appearences.

Layytez
03-17-2014, 01:19 PM
That's what I was thinking, what is stopping them :confused: They could direct some effort to it, but I don't think it's on their agenda because "general public don't care for modern day". I didn't think I would miss much, but after Black Flag I noticed how disconnected things could get. What's the point of Juno, Shaun and Rebecca being there anyway, it's not like they have any intention to tie the games anymore with anything other than those rare appearences.

Fan service I bet.

Dome500
03-17-2014, 03:12 PM
Fan service I bet.

This. Absolutely this.

They are basically saying "We do not want modern day anymore, we are too lazy to make up a story for it and only the fans care about it anyway. So I tell you what: We construct a few little modern-day texts and audio messages, Desmond and Juno related stuff, stuff in Shaun and Rebecca and make up all kinds of inside jokes and crazy stuff that doesn't mean anything and was constructed within 10 minutes in the evening (example: The "future locations" email in AC4) so you fans are not completely raging and we keep the illusion for you to have a real modern-day plot while we are actually not developing modern day any further in order to make endless AC games without having to think of new modern day plots. Enjoy the game(s)"

They are throwing us a bone. We once had a steak.... (even if it was a very small and lean steak).

andrew_m50
03-17-2014, 03:26 PM
They are throwing us a bone.
The problem is that we eat this bone. Because we can not do anything else. And they know this.

Bring back Corey May! He knows how to write a good AC story...in the present and the past as well.

Hans684
03-17-2014, 04:26 PM
This. Absolutely this.

They are basically saying "We do not want modern day anymore, we are too lazy to make up a story for it and only the fans care about it anyway. So I tell you what: We construct a few little modern-day texts and audio messages, Desmond and Juno related stuff, stuff in Shaun and Rebecca and make up all kinds of inside jokes and crazy stuff that doesn't mean anything and was constructed within 10 minutes in the evening (example: The "future locations" email in AC4) so you fans are not completely raging and we keep the illusion for you to have a real modern-day plot while we are actually not developing modern day any further in order to make endless AC games without having to think of new modern day plots. Enjoy the game(s)"

They are throwing us a bone. We once had a steak.... (even if it was a very small and lean steak).

It's not like people have been complaining about getting rid of modern day since the begging :rolleyes:

RinoTheBouncer
03-17-2014, 04:29 PM
Yeah seriously, this.

I'm all for making a lot of the modern day stuff optional, but seriously, would they make the effort half of the people who are not interested in modern day would be, and the ones that hate modern day would have to stand it, because they are not the only ones playing the game.

Assassins Creed started with a modern day story, the reduction makes me very disappointed.

I thought after Desmond we might get a new character to play, a new story to tell, that is how it sounded. Someone else. But "us" in a 1st person floating camera? This is basically nothing else than trying to keep the modern day part for the sake of it. I mean - the modern day once had a real identity, I feel like AC4 doesn't provide this.

I don't mind WHO I play. The way I understood it when AC3 came out and developers said some things about modern day in interviews I though that Desmond was only a story of many, many stories and we would get a new modern-day protagonist. And after the story of the new one is told, we get another new one. They are all connected the stories (in a loose way), but all have their own moments, goals and their own unique circumstances. Everyone plays their role.

I mean that concept is fool proof. Construct a story for a modern day protagonist and continue it over 3 - 4 games, then conclude it and start with a new one. The story of that protagonist can be planned YEARS ahead. Desmonds story throughout AC1 - AC3 would - if taken together - barely fit the length of 1 of the games. You can construct a story for modern day and then build the next 3 - 4 games with it in mind - minor changes can be made and that's - what the hell is so f***ing hard about that? It's even easier then telling the story of Altair, Ezio, Connor or Edward (or at least on the same level), because you can spread it across multiple games and the percentage of modern day is not much, aside from the additional dialogue which is of course always cool to be able to talk to your friends/allies when out of the animus, getting to know modern perspectives of those things - vastly different ones from person to person at that.



Should I be honest? If the next setting is not something I completely LOVE and just can't bare to miss (which is very unlikely) and if they continue with that 1st-person-bulls*** I might as well skip on AC5. I mean yeah, history and all, it's cool, but the overall story always fascinated me and it was a part of AC for me. With other things and elements I liked gone and now modern day also disappearing into nothing, it's kinda not worth the buy until half a year later for half the price, or not at all (depending on protagonist, setting and other factors)

Thank you. I totally agree with every word you said. I mean, why not just keep the game at the same level it was on before? why keep declining? just because a franchise is selling well doesnít mean the success have to be taken for granted. Weíve all seen it before with so many grand franchises. I wonít be surprised if theyíll be rebooting the franchise in the next 5-7 years, that if AC4 wasnít already a reboot to everything.

I was also hoping the we get a new protagonist to carry on 3-5 more games in another country, another group, and theyíre somehow in touch with Desmondís team. For Godís sake, thereís nothing too hard about even giving one self-contained story, starring one 3rd person character who does as little as ďIĒ did in ACIV modern day. At least give them an identity. Let them have an impact on us. I donít really feel it, at all. I mean I canít stop laughing at myself when I say ďI hacked Abstergo computersĒ cause I know Iím only asked to believe itís me. I honestly believed Iím inside the game when I was playing as Desmond a billion times more than I did when Iím playing this lame floating camera.


I also agree.

I liked exploring the pretty Abstergo office, but I felt like it was so empty in substance.

Especially felt empty after the scene with John and the poison and Melanie is all like, "oh you're ok? Good a doctor came by. So sorry but by the way here's our trailer!!" And then a moment hearing Shaun and Rebecca and that was it. I felt like how could a normal person just casually go back to work after that?? Oh by the way I'm a spy now!

I know, right? I mean it had no soul. I was hacking to discover some stuff about Desmond or Abstergo. Ok, that was cool but all those were like archives. What about something going on, now? and Iím surprised Abstergo was ok with some low-level employee to just be exposed to all that just walk away with it and now suddenly, heís a spy. I can say that just when things got interesting, the game ended. There was no justice at all to the fans who invest time in understanding AC as a whole, not just roaming around, killing people.


Mr. Shade, please pass this along to the devs, for the love of AC.

Much appreciated. I might make it a thread just to have a better chance having our voices heard.


I also fully agree with you on this.

Thank you :)

I wanna add that Iíve once respected Assassinís Creed very much because it had an identity and it gave the impression that itís trying to push boundaries for video gaming and story-telling more than any franchise and it even succeeded in doing that for a while. The game had a vision and it was changing the way the story required it to change. But now, I canít say the same things I said back when I was playing AC games from ACI to AC:R. ACIII had a good starting point, some great characters (mainly Connor and Haytham) but then it faltered with the badly directed ending.

Now the game is basically changing to satisfy newcomers, thatís all. Itís becoming something that is ďplaying it safeĒ. Itís not ready to take any risks other than risking what hardcore fans love so much and invested so much time in it. If I was in charge of Assassinís Creed, Iíd treat each game as if itís a brand new IP, not by not linking it to past games but by giving it the same importance and originality. In my opinion, ACIII shouldíve taken place in modern-day entirely or almost-entirely. Why? because the story required us to work to know the location of the Grand Temple and save the world. Not faint there to do the ďoh, so typicalĒ task of ďfinding the key.

However, the developers only care for a game that sells and they care that people arenít gonna say ďOh AC is no longer ACĒ. If I were in charge, Iíd take each game to the direction the story desires, not people or mainstream culture desires. If they respect their game, theyíd take it where itís right to do so, no where itís more profitable to do so. Money will come just like they did with the first game. Because itís original, not a try-hard attempt to please the majority and screw the minority.

frodrigues55
03-17-2014, 04:47 PM
Fan service I bet.

It certainly is. It's cute and all, but if they won't tell new stories, they will run out of material to shut us up. I mean, there's only so much Rebecca and Shaun's 2 seconds useless appearances can do.


The problem is that we eat this bone. Because we can not do anything else. And they know this.


Well, they are still telling engaging stories on the past portion, so the games are still pretty much alive. I'm just not sure what will happen when the games start to pile up like a bunch of random stories.

Black Flag was just the first, but how long can the lack of a modern day plot make the series last? They will do what, just stop making AC once they stop selling? I hope I'm over the series by then, I don't want to miss it. :(

taperoo2k
03-17-2014, 04:50 PM
I don't think it's exactly rocket science to sort out the modern day narrative and link it in with the ones that came before, and the Assassin's vs Templar war.
Without a proper modern day aspect to the games, you are just going for a joyride in the past with no clear goals to achieve and move
the story along. Having a faceless modern character felt disjointed and the modern era stuff was reduced to hacking and
delivering notes to Rebecca. Juno's stuff felt tacked on for fan service, it did not really elaborate what she has been upto
since she escaped other than being a bit like Skynet floating around the worlds computer systems railing against humanity.

Hans684
03-17-2014, 05:46 PM
http://www.accesstheanimus.com/full_moon_and_a_russian_assassin.html

It's worth the read. Those people are updated regarding anything and everything about AC. I recommend to "like" them on Facebook(if you have an acount) if you want to keep up with the story, unless you want a mess.

Dome500
03-17-2014, 06:45 PM
It's not like people have been complaining about getting rid of modern day since the begging :rolleyes:

A minority.
Same counts for other things that they also didn't get rid of, because other people like it.


I don’t really feel it, at all. I mean I can’t stop laughing at myself when I say “I hacked Abstergo computers” cause I know I’m only asked to believe it’s me. I honestly believed I’m inside the game when I was playing as Desmond a billion times more than I did when I’m playing this lame floating camera.

To be honest, I always liked to believe that I - personally - am in an "Animus" at the moment playing Desmond who plays Altair/Ezio/Connor. Of course that is not "true". But the story allowed for that. It was kinda like inception. We experience the story of someone who experiences the story of someone.
(I know it kinda contradicts the fact that Desmond died and that AC3 plays in 2012, but still, until AC3 it was possible. And even without that we still had 2 cool 3rd person characters to play - 1 in the past, and one in modern day (or so I thought)

Now they took one layer away. It was part of AC's identity for me. And those few voices saying they do not want modern day.... well... I would make a part of modern day optional (only the start, a middle and the beginning being mandatory). That way you satisfy those who are always complaining that they "hate* modern day". Though actually if you like a game you should accept it as a whole, even if you like one part of the game better than another, especially since the past is about 90% and modern day 10% max.

Hans684
03-17-2014, 07:45 PM
A minority. Same counts for other things that they also didn't get rid of, because other people like it.

And at the end of the day it's just an opionion.


To be honest, I always liked to believe that I - personally - am in an "Animus" at the moment playing Desmond who plays Altair/Ezio/Connor. Of course that is not "true". But the story allowed for that. It was kinda like inception. We experience the story of someone who experiences the story of someone.
(I know it kinda contradicts the fact that Desmond died and that AC3 plays in 2012, but still, until AC3 it was possible. And even without that we still had 2 cool 3rd person characters to play - 1 in the past, and one in modern day (or so I thought)

Agree.


Now they took one layer away. It was part of AC's identity for me.

They don't need to create a 3rd person protagonist to keep the layer missing. Because of the yearly releases some sacrifices has to be made, so instead of creating another "Desmond" they can let us play in 1st person but as someone with an identity instead of "us" and make each story arc self contained but connected. The connection can be new and old games and other AC media. And there you go, the layer is back but in a way that Ubisoft can have self contained arc's while keeping different protagonists without all the current trouble it gives because of yearly releases.


And those few voices saying they do not want modern day.... well... I would make a part of modern day optional (only the start, a middle and the beginning being mandatory). That way you satisfy those who are always complaining that they "hat modern day". Though actually if you like a game you should accept it as a whole, even if you like one part of the game better than another, especially since the past is about 90% and modern day 10% max.

They did make MD as optional as possible and everyone hates it, so do you accept AC as a whole even with the disappointing 10%(more or less) of each game?

rprkjj
03-17-2014, 09:32 PM
A minority.


I didn't hear everyone praising the modern day story either. At first, I was thoroughly interested in the modern storyline, and it was one of the reasons I bought the games, among many. But when I first looked through these forums and payed a little more attention to reviews, I consistently heard about how much of a boring ****** Desmond is. I never really cared for him, not liking nor disliking him, but AC was always about the historical aspect for me, so whether he was boring or not was kind of inconsequential.

Now, I would definitely prefer a new 3rd person modern protagonist, maybe Berg, Gavin or Galina, and I can understand criticism of the new approach to the modern gameplay, but you can't say Ubi's decision is objectively wrong. I'm sure it has something to do with time constraints, but you can't really say people who didn't like the modern day are the minority, and vice versa. This decision to reduce modern day to what it is in AC4 isn't unfounded, affected by the annual release schedule or not, because whether those people who disliked modern day gameplay are the minority or no, they were vocal enough to have some affect on the outcome of AC4

Edit: Also, it doesn't make any sense to call the people who didn't like the modern day story, "those few voices," when you and 1 or 2 others who've I've heard for the first time in favor of the modern day portion actually say so in this thread.

dxsxhxcx
03-17-2014, 09:42 PM
They don't need to create a 3rd person protagonist to keep the layer missing. Because of the yearly releases some sacrifices has to be made, so instead of creating another "Desmond" they can let us play in 1st person but as someone with an identity instead of "us" and make each story arc self contained but connected. The connection can be new and old games and other AC media. And there you go, the layer is back but in a way that Ubisoft can have self contained arc's while keeping different protagonists without all the current trouble it gives because of yearly releases.

while I prefer the 3rd person perspective, the camera angle IMO is the least of their problems, to create a unique character like Desmond, this character would need to react to the events he takes part (something that AC4's protagonist doesn't do) and for this to happen they would probably need to add at least the same effort they did with Desmond, at the end of the day they would have the same trouble they had with Desmond.

and IMO a self contained story is a story that has a beginning, a middle and an end, something that AC4's modern day story doesn't have because it left questions that still need to be answered without an answer and also added new plots that will certainly affect the events of the next games as well, leaving the player without an ending for this so called "self contained" story of AC4's modern day.




They did make MD as optional as possible and everyone hates it

No they didn't, make MD as optional as possible IMO would be ask the player if he/she wants to be interrupted by the modern day sequences or not right before we begin to play the game (before the previous games recap for example) or allow us to return to the animus as soon as we are ejected from it without forcing us to go through a few cutscenes before that.

Dome500
03-17-2014, 10:03 PM
I didn't hear everyone praising the modern day story either. At first, I was thoroughly interested in the modern storyline, and it was one of the reasons I bought the games, among many. But when I first looked through these forums and payed a little more attention to reviews, I consistently heard about how much of a boring ****** Desmond is. I never really cared for him, not liking nor disliking him, but AC was always about the historical aspect for me, so whether he was boring or not was kind of inconsequential.

Now, I would definitely prefer a new 3rd person modern protagonist, maybe Berg, Gavin or Galina, and I can understand criticism of the new approach to the modern gameplay, but you can't say Ubi's decision is objectively wrong. I'm sure it has something to do with time constraints, but you can't really say people who didn't like the modern day are the minority, and vice versa. This decision to reduce modern day to what it is in AC4 isn't unfounded, affected by the annual release schedule or not, because whether those people who disliked modern day gameplay are the minority or no, they were vocal enough to have some affect on the outcome of AC4

Edit: Also, it doesn't make any sense to call the people who didn't like the modern day story, "those few voices," when you and 1 or 2 others who've I've heard for the first time in favor of the modern day portion actually say so in this thread.

Okay, I do not say that either of the two sides - those who like MD and those who hate it - are a majority. I think a big part think it's "okay" and then there are the people at the end of the spectrum either hating it or loving it.

All I am saying is that a person can not justify modern day being reduced so much just because "everyone is complaining about modern day being useless".
That's all I'm saying.


They did make MD as optional as possible and everyone hates it

Yeah, but the reason they don't like it is not that they made it optional, the reason is HOW modern day plays, that our protagonist is mute, that he is supposed to be "me", that there is no real modern day story progression. Things like that. If someone does absolutely NOT want the modern day story he does not need context, which means that a beginning - a middle - and an end part which is mandatory would be enough to show the player "there is more possible in modern day, but you don't have to do this". Everyone who cares about the meta-story will go around, talk to people, explore, it's like Side Missions in Assassins Creed, just that it continues the modern day story. There is no need for this to be mandatory, but if you want the understand the ENTIRETY of Assassins Creed you should. Those people who "hate modern day and always hated it" will not be interested in that story anyway, so they don't miss anything here.

pirate1802
03-18-2014, 07:23 AM
Bring back Corey May! He knows how to write a good AC story...in the present and the past as well.

Remind me who wrote AC3's ending again?

By this I don't mean to say he's a bad writer and I hate his guts. But right after AC3 got out, people were comparing its endingfail to Mass Effect 3's . The people hated him. Now after Black Flag people want him back again? Wut??

Farlander1991
03-18-2014, 09:01 AM
Remind me who wrote AC3's ending again?

By this I don't mean to say he's a bad writer and I hate his guts. But right after AC3 got out, people were comparing its endingfail to Mass Effect 3's . The people hated him. Now after Black Flag people want him back again? Wut??

Are you really that surprised? :p

pirate1802
03-18-2014, 09:05 AM
Are you really that surprised? :p

Sadly, no.. :/

misterB2001
03-18-2014, 01:58 PM
not sure if it's been mentioned but i looked up the name Galina. This is the info it brought up...


Galina \g(a)-li-na\ as a girl's name is pronounced ga-LEEN-ah. It is of Greek origin, and the meaning of Galina is "calm". From Galenus, which derives from "galene". Feminine form of Galen. Also sometimes used as Russian variant of Helen (Greek) "shining brightly". Popular in Russia.



Russian variant of Helen, whose meaning is "sun ray" or "shining brightly". Is this linked to the "look to the stars" reference/clue?

RinoTheBouncer
03-18-2014, 02:07 PM
A minority.
Same counts for other things that they also didn't get rid of, because other people like it.



To be honest, I always liked to believe that I - personally - am in an "Animus" at the moment playing Desmond who plays Altair/Ezio/Connor. Of course that is not "true". But the story allowed for that. It was kinda like inception. We experience the story of someone who experiences the story of someone.
(I know it kinda contradicts the fact that Desmond died and that AC3 plays in 2012, but still, until AC3 it was possible. And even without that we still had 2 cool 3rd person characters to play - 1 in the past, and one in modern day (or so I thought)

Now they took one layer away. It was part of AC's identity for me. And those few voices saying they do not want modern day.... well... I would make a part of modern day optional (only the start, a middle and the beginning being mandatory). That way you satisfy those who are always complaining that they "hate* modern day". Though actually if you like a game you should accept it as a whole, even if you like one part of the game better than another, especially since the past is about 90% and modern day 10% max.

To be perfectly honest, I believe making it completely optional or ďas optional as possibleĒ would defeat the purpose. They will obviously not make cutscenes or important story elements for the sequels if it was optional. It will be just like any of those side missions where youíre basically asked to kill someone and thatís it.

I believe a 10% modern day missions wonít really hurt anybody. I mean you win some, you lose some. I donít think itís problematic to anybody that 10% of the game is set in some place that they can tolerate for 1 hour in total of all the 14 to 18 hours of gameplay in historical setting.

dxsxhxcx
03-18-2014, 02:27 PM
To be perfectly honest, I believe making it completely optional or “as optional as possible” would defeat the purpose. They will obviously not make cutscenes or important story elements for the sequels if it was optional. It will be just like any of those side missions where you’re basically asked to kill someone and that’s it.

I believe a 10% modern day missions won’t really hurt anybody. I mean you win some, you lose some. I don’t think it’s problematic to anybody that 10% of the game is set in some place that they can tolerate for 1 hour in total of all the 14 to 18 hours of gameplay in historical setting.

they do side content that is completely optional for the historical part, I don't see a problem with making the modern days completely optional as well, it's not like they're taking away this content from the players, they are just giving you the option to don't be bothered by it if you don't like it, at least this way some people won't be able to complain about it being in the way of the experience provided by the historical portion of the game because the choice to play this content or not will be only theirs.

2 ways they could do that:

1. before the game begins ask the player if he/she want to be interrupted by it;
2. allow us to go back to the animus as soon as we are ejected from it without forcing the player to watch some cutscenes or interact with the modern days;

andrew_m50
03-18-2014, 02:48 PM
Remind me who wrote AC3's ending again?

I wouldn't call the ending of AC3 bad...it was unexpected. Why should always be a happy end? Desmond made a choice and he died.
The story was good, the implementing of the written story was poor, I think. I mean that the developers could have made the ending scene much more epic (when touching the pedestal which made the Earth safe). But the story's own was OK.

You think that the modern day storyline of Black Flag was good? A noname floating camera which can not say a single word? What a stupid idea?!

pirate1802
03-18-2014, 03:32 PM
I wouldn't call the ending of AC3 bad...it was unexpected. Why should always be a happy end? Desmond made a choice and he died.
The story was good, the implementing of the written story was poor, I think. I mean that the developers could have made the ending scene much more epic (when touching the pedestal which made the Earth safe). But the story's own was OK.

I feel exactly like that. I wasn't even up in arms over it and defending the ending last year. But the fan reaction was overwhelmingly negative. I guess you can't please everyone..


You think that the modern day storyline of Black Flag was good? A noname floating camera which can not say a single word? What a stupid idea?!

Any idea that allows me to spend as much time as possible in the past and as less as possible in the present is an idea I give thumbs up to. The reason for floating camera that doesnt say a word is, they said the character is "you" (you may or may not think its a good idea but thats a different discussion.) Now some AC players are females. Some are fat, some are ultra thin. Some might even be transsexuals. Its easy to forget that. You maybe happy with him being a male and having an average build. But what about the women? In that situation, to ensure that the "you" is valid for everyone, they'd either have to go through an elaborate character creation process for what is like 5% of the total playtime. Or take the simpler route and make him gender neutral. Why do you think oldtimer RPG fans still prefer silent protagonists? :D For the exact same reason!

I'm not saying that having you as the protagonist is a good or bad idea (infact I'd prefer a 3rd person protagonist again), but once they decided on "you", this was always on the cards. Thats the whole point of making modern day first person. Giving them gender and body on top of that, doesnt make sense.

RinoTheBouncer
03-19-2014, 12:22 PM
^ I know that this is what they intended to do but honestly, I felt more “me” in Tomb Raider, playing as Lara Croft and I’m a guy, than being put into first person. I know what they wished to achieve but it seemed rather lazy way of ignoring a portion that a considerable number of fans love and admire and anticipate in each game. I don’t think 10% or 5% or lets say 1 hour out of 15 hours of historical gameplay is gonna be that intolerable to you or anyone who hates modern day. I mean even movies on T.V. and series have advertisement breaks, LOL.

pirate1802
03-19-2014, 03:40 PM
I mean even movies on T.V. and series have advertisement breaks, LOL.

As long as that doesnt involve crappy AC3-type missions :eek:

Hans684
03-19-2014, 05:31 PM
while I prefer the 3rd person perspective, the camera angle IMO is the least of their problems, to create a unique character like Desmond, this character would need to react to the events he takes part (something that AC4's protagonist doesn't do) and for this to happen they would probably need to add at least the same effort they did with Desmond, at the end of the day they would have the same trouble they had with Desmond.

Not exactly, we are not gonna play the same "us" in ACV at Abstergo Entertainment. We are not even gonna be at Abstergo Entertainment.


and IMO a self contained story is a story that has a beginning, a middle and an end, something that AC4's modern day story doesn't have because it left questions that still need to be answered without an answer and also added new plots that will certainly affect the events of the next games as well, leaving the player without an ending for this so called "self contained" story of AC4's modern day.

It was a self contained story becouse we are not gonna be at Abstergo Entertainment nor play as the research analyst("us") again. That arc, that "us" is finished and Initiates connects everything regarding the MD arc. Do you expect all the answers at the end of the game?


No they didn't, make MD as optional as possible IMO would be ask the player if he/she wants to be interrupted by the modern day sequences or not right before we begin to play the game (before the previous games recap for example) or allow us to return to the animus as soon as we are ejected from it without forcing us to go through a few cutscenes before that.

Thay made it as optional as possible while keeping the story, take the MD away and there is no reason to relive memories. It's like making a military shooter without guns, the purpose of it being a shooter is gone then. Since people are different we might as well give the option to skip the historical part for those who does not like it, that sounds stupid doesn't it? You can't please everyone, sometimes you have to do things you don't like. So from story perspective they did it as optional as possible.


Yeah, but the reason they don't like it is not that they made it optional, the reason is HOW modern day plays, that our protagonist is mute, that he is supposed to be "me", that there is no real modern day story progression. Things like that. If someone does absolutely NOT want the modern day story he does not need context, which means that a beginning - a middle - and an end part which is mandatory would be enough to show the player "there is more possible in modern day, but you don't have to do this". Everyone who cares about the meta-story will go around, talk to people, explore, it's like Side Missions in Assassins Creed, just that it continues the modern day story. There is no need for this to be mandatory, but if you want the understand the ENTIRETY of Assassins Creed you should. Those people who "hate modern day and always hated it" will not be interested in that story anyway, so they don't miss anything here.

Read above.

Sdwakias
03-19-2014, 06:07 PM
I actually found the Modern Day part of ACIV pretty nice, but surely the end was a bit anti-climatix. Also, am I the only one who thinks that the devs used 1st person mode so that we can't see the character we are playing? It could be someone important, you know...

dxsxhxcx
03-19-2014, 06:54 PM
Not exactly, we are not gonna play the same "us" in ACV at Abstergo Entertainment. We are not even gonna be at Abstergo Entertainment.

I know that but do you really think the new "us" in the next game will do more than the old "us" did in AC4? Our role might be different in the next game (instead of an analyst, we may be a janitor or a CEO) but I doubt we'll be more than the spectator we were in AC4, of course I'm judging it prematurely but if they continue with the 1st person mute generic flying tablet or whatever device we'll become next, the chracter we control will never be comparable to Desmond or IMO have the importance he had for the story he took part.


It was a self contained story becouse we are not gonna be at Abstergo Entertainment nor play as the research analyst("us") again. That arc, that "us" is finished and Initiates connects everything regarding the MD arc. Do you expect all the answers at the end of the game?

I know it's a matter of opinion but how anyone can find this better (story-wise) than what we had with Desmond (as flawed as it was)? I know I don't, I prefer to have those crappy missions we had with Desmond in AC3 (or anything we had before) than what we have now, at least the character we controlled (Desmond) and the story he took part mattered, something that I cannot say about the new one (that began with AC4), I didn't feel attached to the character and for this same reason, this made me not care about the story.

People are just happy now because they aren't forced to pass throught all the modern day segments like they were before, a shame that instead of Ubisoft fix the problem, they decided take out everything that used to make that portion of the story great.


Thay made it as optional as possible while keeping the story, take the MD away and there is no reason to relive memories. It's like making a military shooter without guns, the purpose of it being a shooter is gone then. Since people are different we might as well give the option to skip the historical part for those who does not like it, that sounds stupid doesn't it? You can't please everyone, sometimes you have to do things you don't like. So from story perspective they did it as optional as possible.

in each Desmond game we had a reason to relive his ancestors memories, a goal to achieve that would advance the story, AC4 (IMO) didn't have that, it was the first game that made me ask myself what was the point of seeing Edward's memories, they removed the reason to relive the memories when they made the role of the character we control (in the modern days) meaningless.

Also, if people don't care about the modern day story, don't have a reason to relive the ancestors memories shouldn't be a problem.

Hans684
03-19-2014, 07:38 PM
I know that but do you really think the new "us" in the next game will do more than the old "us" did in AC4? Our role might be different in the next game (instead of an analyst, we may be a janitor or a CEO) but I doubt we'll be more than the spectator we were in AC4, of course I'm judging it prematurely but if they continue with the 1st person mute generic flying tablet or whatever device we'll become next, the chracter we control will never be comparable to Desmond or IMO have the importance he had for the story he took part.

That would depend on the arc "we" have in ACV. "We" have an arc, Desmond had an arc, it's not so different. But Desmond is the most important, he saved the Earth. If he hadn't we would be left with nothing to continue.


I know it's a matter of opinion but how anyone can find this better (story-wise) than what we had with Desmond (as flawed as it was)? I know I don't, I prefer to have those crappy missions we had with Desmond in AC3 (or anything we had before) than what we have now, at least the character we controlled (Desmond) and the story he took part mattered, something that I cannot say about the new one (that began with AC4), I didn't feel attached to the character and for this same reason, this made me not care about the story.

It is better story-wise becouse with someone like Desmond they must end that arc and that regcuire sequels, they can't push Desmond to the side. It's something that is an long stretched arc unlike how it is now. Now it is self contained unlike Desmond's arc that's also is limiting. Then take to acout the yearly releases, development time etc...


People are just happy now because they aren't forced to pass throught all the modern day segments like they were before, a shame that instead of Ubisoft fix the problem, they decided take out everything that used to make that portion of the story great.

If people are happy that it is optional, then "fixing" it won't help either. If people actually cared the outcome might have been different.


in each Desmond game we had a reason to relive his ancestors memories, a goal to achieve that would advance the story, AC4 (IMO) didn't have that, it was the first game that made me ask myself what was the point of seeing Edward's memories, they removed the reason to relive the memories when they made the role of the character we control (in the modern days) meaningless.

We did have a reason, "we" are hired by Abstergo entertainment to relive the memories of an ancestor of the generous downer Desmond Miles. We are just some random employe that got involved in the AvT war. I'm sure you would say that's a bad/lame/stupid excuse but a bad/lame/stupid excuse is better than none at all.


Also, if people don't care about the modern day story, don't have a reason to relive the ancestors memories shouldn't be a problem.

Can't please everyone.