PDA

View Full Version : So AC: Unity's Templars



JustPlainQuirky
03-21-2014, 01:28 AM
How do you think the Templars will be in this game?

Will they be mustache twirlers?

Will they be misunderstood villains?

Will they be the good guys all along?

Will they be working alongside you to defeat a common enemy (hence Unity) ?

Discuss.

TheHumanTowel
03-21-2014, 01:33 AM
I'd hope the number of templars and assassins is kept quite low. At least in terms of actual historical figures. As AC's gone on it's gotten a bit ridiculous how practically every historical figure was involved in or was aware of these supposedly super-secret organisations. I'd rather there be a handful of actual templars among people completely oblivious or being manipulated unknowningly.

RatonhnhakeFan
03-21-2014, 01:36 AM
As AC's gone on it's gotten a bit ridiculous how practically every historical figure was involved in or was aware of these supposedly super-secret organisations.Very much this.

Templar_Az
03-21-2014, 01:36 AM
I think what could be interesting is if the Assassins end up Uniting with the Templars in the modern day storyline but at the same time were killing them when reliving the ancestors (Arno's) memories.

Escappa
03-21-2014, 01:39 AM
I belive that (if the french revolution rumors is true) there will be some templars close to the king (I don't think Louis XVI will be involved in the templar/assassin conflict or even know about it) trying to seize control in the country -cough- Napoleon -cough-. I belive the Templars will be more manipulative from the shadows than out in the open. As before, the templars share a ideology, so there will probably be some "good" guys and some bad and so on (they don't all have to be bad people). I hope we will see more different levels of templars, because so far we've mostly seen the Templar Masters and templars close to him. Since Paris is such a big city, the order has to be big too, so more non.connecting Templars would be a nice new thing.

silvermercy
03-21-2014, 01:40 AM
Even if they unite, I bet my bottom dollar that by the end of the game they will be at each other's throats as usual. lol

Wolfmeister1010
03-21-2014, 01:43 AM
^well of course they will, otherwise they would not still be enemies in the modern day

Escappa
03-21-2014, 01:47 AM
^well of course they will, otherwise they would not still be enemies in the modern day

What if some templars and assassin's, tired of the never ending war between them, brokeaway from their orders in order (no pun intended) to create a new order that works even more in the shadows of the shadows ;)

reddragonhrcro
03-21-2014, 01:48 AM
What if some templars and assassin's, tired of the never ending war between them, brokeaway from their orders in order (no pun intended) to create a new order that works even more in the shadows of the shadows ;)

Sounds like a xibit meme lol

JustPlainQuirky
03-21-2014, 01:48 AM
Even if they unite, I bet my bottom dollar that by the end of the game they will be at each other's throats as usual. lol

There are different branches of templars and assassins.

One group could be allied while another isn't. Darby stressed that in one of his interviews in Assassin's Den Podcast.

DumbGamerTag94
03-21-2014, 01:56 AM
I belive that (if the french revolution rumors is true) there will be some templars close to the king (I don't think Louis XVI will be involved in the templar/assassin conflict or even know about it) trying to seize control in the country -cough- Napoleon -cough-. I belive the Templars will be more manipulative from the shadows than out in the open. As before, the templars share a ideology, so there will probably be some "good" guys and some bad and so on (they don't all have to be bad people). I hope we will see more different levels of templars, because so far we've mostly seen the Templar Masters and templars close to him. Since Paris is such a big city, the order has to be big too, so more non.connecting Templars would be a nice new thing.

This is fairly close to what I think^ cept I don't think it would be Napoleon as a Grand Master. Napoleon was an artillery officer at the time of little importance until after the Revolution he gains fame leading troops in the Italian and Middle Eastern Wars of the Directorate(which after the war in Egypt and the Holy Land he becomes a member of) so he really is not a major figure in France until the late 1790s or 1800. I think it would be more likely that he would assume the role of Grand Master from someone else who is assassinated a good candidate would be Robespierre who was the de facto leader during the reign of terror. I think the royals are personally uninvolved with either the assassins or Templars, moderate groups like the constitutional monarchists(like Lafayette) are more familiar with or are Assassins. I feel it makes more sense that the rebels are the Templars not the monarchs, I mean after all the monarchy did back the Americans in their Revolution and they were backed by the Assassins. Not to mention once the Republic-Seeking Rebels took control they went about killing all those who opposed and martial law(sounds like a Templar strategy to me) Napoleon may not even be involved with the Templars either, him coming to power may be an unintended consequence of the Templars being thwarted by the Assassins and his reign resulted in a much bigger danger that they then need to "unite" to destroy. Napoleon was an egomaniac so I feel he would have been more self interested than being in the Templars and having a goal of ultimate good for all by control, his deal was more personal power, fame, and conquest.

Will_Lucky
03-21-2014, 02:00 AM
I'd hope the number of templars and assassins is kept quite low. At least in terms of actual historical figures. As AC's gone on it's gotten a bit ridiculous how practically every historical figure was involved in or was aware of these supposedly super-secret organisations. I'd rather there be a handful of actual templars among people completely oblivious or being manipulated unknowningly.

Nah I want the series to continue on its fine traditions, I want Another Robert De Sable, Rodrigo Borgia, Cesare Borgia, Prince Ahmet, Governor Torres. I want Napoleon to be the Head of the French Templar Order.

JustPlainQuirky
03-21-2014, 02:00 AM
To add:

Darby said he doesn't write mustache twirlers.


Then again, Corey is the one writing this game I believe.

:rolleyes:

Escappa
03-21-2014, 02:02 AM
This is fairly close to what I think^ cept I don't think it would be Napoleon as a Grand Master.

I didn't mean that he would be the grand master. Just that (Spoiler alert ;) ) he is the one that ends up on the throne

DumbGamerTag94
03-21-2014, 02:09 AM
I didn't mean that he would be the grand master. Just that (Spoiler alert ;) ) he is the one that ends up on the throne

Yeah that's what I go into later in that post. It makes sense he would be some sort of antagonist if not a Templar per se.

Dev_Anj
03-21-2014, 02:10 AM
I hope they aren't like this for sure:

http://www.hardcoregaming101.net/aitd/timegate-04.png

:p

Wolfmeister1010
03-21-2014, 02:12 AM
I hope they aren't like this for sure:

http://www.hardcoregaming101.net/aitd/timegate-04.png

:p

LOL that is that game about Jesus and the disciples right?

Dev_Anj
03-21-2014, 02:17 AM
LOL that is that game about Jesus and the disciples right?

Nah it's this game: http://http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_Gate:_Knight's_Chase (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_Gate:_Knight's_Chase)

It has some decent aesthetics, but the puzzles get ridiculous later on.

JustPlainQuirky
03-21-2014, 02:36 AM
Having just one or two templars would actually be a breath of fresh air.

Especially if you don't have to kill them.

Darby and Corey find any reason to kill off templars no matter how easily the situations could be avoided/compromised. I hate character deaths that are there just for shock value or feels. Completely gets rid of the value..

silvermercy
03-21-2014, 02:51 AM
Having just one or two templars would actually be a breath of fresh air.

Especially if you don't have to kill them.

Darby and Corey find any reason to kill off templars no matter how easily the situations could be avoided/compromised. I hate character deaths that are there just for shock value or feels. Completely gets rid of the value..
You've got an interesting point there.

(That's a bit irrelevant but some deaths in the Hunger Games books drew this exact criticism. Death for the sake of dying. It was sooo obvious when reading them.)

adventurewomen
03-21-2014, 02:53 AM
We need another templar named Charles ;):cool:

JustPlainQuirky
03-21-2014, 02:57 AM
We need another templar named Charles ;):cool:

Speaking of charles, am I the only one who thinks this guy from the Order: 1886 looks like charles? He's even in the templar order and wears blue!

http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3782/10843465353_b5a9cd112b.jpg

poptartz20
03-21-2014, 02:59 AM
I hope they aren't like this for sure:

http://www.hardcoregaming101.net/aitd/timegate-04.png

:p

Bwahahaha.... This is exactly what the need to look like because it's hilarious! XD

@ silver yeah of course they will be back at each other throats. We know how this story always goes! Even father and son couldn't stay away from each others throats for too long! ;_; still too sad it had to happen like that.

Shahkulu101
03-21-2014, 03:04 AM
Speaking of charles, am I the only one who thinks this guy from the Order: 1886 looks like charles? He's even in the templar order and wears blue!

http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3782/10843465353_b5a9cd112b.jpg

That is so obviously Daniel Day Lewis. Either they ripped off his likeness or they've actually recruited an Oscar-winning star to work on a video game.

adventurewomen
03-21-2014, 03:06 AM
Speaking of charles, am I the only one who thinks this guy from the Order: 1886 looks like charles? He's even in the templar order and wears blue!

http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3782/10843465353_b5a9cd112b.jpg
Indeed he does!

Maybe Charles LEE had a love child he didn't know about, followed the same career path as a Templar like his father ;)

JustPlainQuirky
03-21-2014, 03:06 AM
That is so obviously Daniel Day Lewis. Either they ripped off his likeness or they've actually recruited an Oscar-winning star to work on a video game.

googled Daniel Day Lewis but I barely see the resemblance.

ze_topazio
03-21-2014, 03:08 AM
Having just one or two templars would actually be a breath of fresh air.

Especially if you don't have to kill them.

Darby and Corey find any reason to kill off templars no matter how easily the situations could be avoided/compromised. I hate character deaths that are there just for shock value or feels. Completely gets rid of the value..

I don't mind if only two or three Templars are important to the story but we need lots of them to be the targets, they don't need to have much personality or story, kind of like AC1 and 2, they are just targets, nothings personal.

JustPlainQuirky
03-21-2014, 03:10 AM
@adventurewoman

Obviously. :rolleyes:


I don't mind if only two or three Templars are important to the story but we need lots of them to be the targets, they don't need to have much personality or story, kind of like AC1 and 2, they are just targets, nothings personal.

Or we could introduce a new enemy that doesn't call for the need of templar stabbing.

But I think I ask for too much.

ze_topazio
03-21-2014, 03:14 AM
This is called Assassin's Creed, assassinating people is the point of all this and I'm not talking about innocent guards, killing Templars is the Assassins raison d'être.

JustPlainQuirky
03-21-2014, 03:16 AM
This is called Assassin's Creed, assassinating people is the point of all this and I'm not talking about innocent guards, killing Templars is the Assassins raison d'être.

Well Darby said there could be a pacifist assassin who frames people and sabatoges instead of kills. And there could be allied templars. So having a new enemy to fight isn't a stretch IMO.

TheHumanTowel
03-21-2014, 02:40 PM
Well Darby said there could be a pacifist assassin who frames people and sabatoges instead of kills. And there could be allied templars. So having a new enemy to fight isn't a stretch IMO.
A pacifist assassin is an oxymoron

JustPlainQuirky
03-21-2014, 02:42 PM
A pacifist assassin is an oxymoron

Darby said theassassin's creed version of an assassin is more of a philosophy than it is "a man who kills VIP."

Look up one of the darby mcdevitt assassin's den podcasts. He explains it there. There could be a pacifist assassin.

TheHumanTowel
03-21-2014, 02:52 PM
Darby said theassassin's creed version of an assassin is more of a philosophy than it is "a man who kills VIP."

Look up one of the darby mcdevitt assassin's den podcasts. He explains it there. There could be a pacifist assassin.
Well I think that's stupid. The game's called Assassin's Creed. It's pretty reasonable to expect assassinations. Shaun says this in AC2 :"In case you've forgotten Rebecca, we're Assassins. I could look it up for you if you like. Basically, it means we assassinate people."

pacmanate
03-21-2014, 03:51 PM
Oh good, no Connor.

Dome500
03-21-2014, 04:37 PM
I'd hope the number of templars and assassins is kept quite low. At least in terms of actual historical figures. As AC's gone on it's gotten a bit ridiculous how practically every historical figure was involved in or was aware of these supposedly super-secret organisations. I'd rather there be a handful of actual templars among people completely oblivious or being manipulated unknowningly.

I hope the number of Templars and Assassis is quite high, but that there a not so many historical figures which belong to one of the two groups and that not everyone knows about the organization.


Darby said theassassin's creed version of an assassin is more of a philosophy than it is "a man who kills VIP."


Agreed. Even though the actual fantasy of being a stealthy assassin should not be abandoned. But in AC the Assassins represent a secret organization with a philosophy rather than plain murderers of important persons.

Now to the actual topic:

I hope we get some EVIL Templars, some misunderstood with actually good intentions villain Templars, and some Templars who are not sure if they want to be Templars anymore (either thinking about abandoning the Templars or even thinking about switching to the Assassins).

We need diversity- I don't want mustache twirlers. The Templars attract a great variety of people, and we have seen some of them.

Haytham for example is an example for a Templar with good intentions.
While Lee might be an example for someone whos personality changed over time and turned from good to bad.

I want such characters. I also want evil sadists to be among the Templars. A group like the Templars, fighting for CONTROL, attract those types of people as well, those who like to have power and abuse it. But also those who have good intentions.

I hope it's going to be a mix of those...

Templar_Az
03-22-2014, 01:51 PM
I think its obvious that Ubisoft are gonna make this French Monarchy Templars and it will be the Assassins job to take them down; its predictable and its probably what their gonna do. Im still excited tho.

JustPlainQuirky
03-22-2014, 02:14 PM
^it wasn't just the guys on top who were deemed fearful and corrupt. Many members of the mob were extremely brutal despite wanting the best for France.

I think there will be enemies in both sides and the goal will be to put an end to the corrupt system and bloodshed.

Farlander1991
03-22-2014, 02:32 PM
I hope we get to assassinate an Assassin. Somebody we would know for like at least half of the game.

Like, not because we're Templars.

And not because they defected to Templars.

Not because anybody's evil, or good.

But because in such a confusing time, even a shared philosophy may lead to really wide disagreements and actions that possibly can't be accepted.

pirate1802
03-22-2014, 02:35 PM
^I'd love to see that too!

JustPlainQuirky
03-22-2014, 02:37 PM
I hope we get to assassinate an Assassin. Somebody we would know for like at least half of the game.

Like, not because we're Templars.

And not because they defected to Templars.

Not because anybody's evil, or good.

But because in such a confusing time, even a shared philosophy may lead to really wide disagreements and actions that possibly can't be accepted.

Someone mail this to Ubisoft RIGHT NOW

Templar_Az
03-22-2014, 02:38 PM
How cool would it be if at the end the protaganist is thought to be a Templar and gets executed via the Guillotine. Ofcourse he would have to leave a child behind to continue the family line :)

JustPlainQuirky
03-22-2014, 02:40 PM
How cool would it be if at the end the protaganist is thought to be a Templar and gets executed via the Guillotine. Ofcourse he would have to leave a child behind to continue the family line :)

Yeah I'm pretty convinced Arno will die via guillotine at this point.

I can see the writers slapping that in for shock value. :rolleyes:

jayjay275
03-22-2014, 02:43 PM
I hope for the same amount as ACII, but that is ambitious, so I hope for more stealth focused missions.

pirate1802
03-22-2014, 02:43 PM
They can't do that unless we play as Arno's son who grows up uber fast to witness the execution of his father.


I hope for the same amount as ACII, but that is ambitious, so I hope for more stealth focused missions.

AC2 was an overkill. I barely knew the target's names as Ezio got rid of them in a hurry. Things got better after the initial conspirators were dealt with. I'd say AC1/4 amount of targets would be optimal for me.

JustPlainQuirky
03-22-2014, 02:45 PM
They can't do that unless we play as Arno's son who grows up uber fast to witness the execution of his father.

Or they could just show Arno walking up to the guillatine and lowering his head. Then he sees his wife/girlfriend holding an infant in her arms, all sad. It could be the final cutscene.

(OR we could BE Arno walking up to the guillatine THEN the cutscene triggers) :rolleyes:

jayjay275
03-22-2014, 02:48 PM
They can't do that unless we play as Arno's son who grows up uber fast to witness the execution of his father.

AC2 was an overkill. I barely knew the target's names as Ezio got rid of them in a hurry. Things got better after the initial conspirators were dealt with. I'd say AC1/4 amount of targets would be optimal for me.

True, but that's what was one of the many great things about ACII. Killing templars every sequence. :)

pirate1802
03-22-2014, 02:48 PM
Arno walking upto the guillotine would be impossible. because memories happening after the point of transfer aren't view-able. Its fo the same reason we haven't seen a protagonist die in AC, while we are playing as them.

And Arno's child.. for him to be able to walk, thats what I said, he'd have to grow real fast for Arno to finish his revolution business, have sex with someone, and have the child grow up just in time to see his father getting executed. Not very convenient.

JustPlainQuirky
03-22-2014, 02:51 PM
Arno walking upto the guillotine would be impossible. because memories happening after the point of transfer aren't view-able. Its fo the same reason we haven't seen a protagonist die in AC, while we are playing as them.

And Arno's child.. for him to be able to walk, thats what I said, he'd have to grow real fast for Arno to finish his revolution business, have sex with someone, and have the child grow up just in time to see his father getting executed. Not very convenient.


The cutscene would end as soon as the guillatine falls. And it would be in Arno's perspective.

I don't see the need for a grown up son. The game would end afterwards. (At least the non sci-fi part)

Templar_Az
03-22-2014, 02:52 PM
All Arno has to do is sleep with a woman and she can get pregnant. He can be executed even before his child is born. Also the french revolution started in 1887 and ended in 1899 (i think) so his child can be atleast 11 or 12 years old assuming he gets someone pregnant in 1887.

How cool would it be if just before the guillotine kills arno he raises his head and sees his little son who is being held back by guards (kinda like Ezio in AC2) and then Connor comes and grabs Arno's son so Arno then smiles knowing his son is in good hands, the guillotine then takes his life and then were back to the modern day story for the ending.

JustPlainQuirky
03-22-2014, 02:53 PM
All Arno has to do is sleep with a woman and she can get pregnant. He can be executed even before his child is born. Also the french revolution started in 1887 and ended in 1899 (i think) so his child can be atleast 11 or 12 years old assuming he gets someone pregnant in 1887.

How cool would it be if just before the guillotine kills arno he raises his head and sees his little son who is being held back by guards (kinda like Ezio in AC2) and then Connor comes and grabs Arno's son so Arno then smiles knowing his son is in good hands, the guillotine then takes his life and then were back to the modern day story for the ending.

That's Kinda what I was suggesting. I'm convinced this will happen. The writers said they like giving us feels at the end. :rolleyes:

And that way people can't demand Arno sequel :rolleyes:

frodrigues55
03-22-2014, 03:03 PM
The cutscene would end as soon as the guillatine falls. And it would be in Arno's perspective.

I don't see the need for a grown up son. The game would end afterwards. (At least the non sci-fi part)

It can't happen because of how the genetic memories concept work within AC.

You can only relive an ancentor's life up until the point where they conceived a child and transferred the DNA. It doesn't really matter when a child is born. The stopping point is right when they have sex.

That would mean Arno couldn't have conceived a child before the guilhotine scene, but because he dies at that point, he also couldn't have conceived a child afterwards. But no child, no transferred DNA.

What pirate1802 is sugesting is that the only way they can make that scene happen is if you are relieving his son's memories at that point, but that is a bit messy as he would have to be old enough to have that scene written within his memories - yet he can't be too old because as soon as Arno conceives him, we stop having access to Arno's memories. I think it could work, as far as I know AC2 implies that we can access one memories ever since they are born so the child can be a new born and witness the scene. We would only miss 9 months of Arnold's story I guess.

Of course the developers can find some convenient Animus tweek to throw out this concept. It does hold developers a bit and it's not like the modern day has any relevance now anyway. Still, it was one bit of the plot that is still consistent through each game.

JustPlainQuirky
03-22-2014, 03:06 PM
It can't happen because of how the genetic memories concept work within AC.

You can only relive an ancentor's life up until the point where they conceived a child and transferred the DNA. That would mean Arno couldn't have conceived a child before the guilhotine scene, but because he dies at that point, who also couldn't have conceived a child afterwards. But no child, no transferred DNA.

What pirate1802 is sugesting is that the only way you can't make that scene happen is if you are relieving his son's memories at that point, but that is a bit messy as he would have to be old enough to have that scene written within his memories - yet he can't be too old because as soon as Arno conceives him, we stop having access to Arno's memories.

Of course the developers can find some convenient Animus tweek to throw out this concept. It does hold developers a bit and it's not like the modern day has any relevance now anyway. Still, it was one bit of the plot that is still consistent through each game.


Wait really? When was that said? Then again I only played AC3 and AC4. But I don't remember seeing that in the cutscenes of the other games.:confused:

frodrigues55
03-22-2014, 03:11 PM
Wait really? When was that said? Then again I only played AC3 and AC4. But I don't remember seeing that in the cutscenes of the other games.:confused:

They presented this on AC2, that's probably why you don't know it then :p

There's one modern-day scene where they show Altair and Maria having sex in the most weird way (fully clothed on top of a tower). After they are done, Desmond's memories starts following Maria, not Altair, and then fade away when there's some sort of close up on Maria's belly. Lemme find the vid for you!

Edit - Here it is:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KSapMzB7rBw

By the way, I can't believe you haven't played Ezio's trilogy. You have got to give them a try, seriously! One of the upsides of having annual AC's is that you can play the entire saga without getting the feeling that the older games are too old. :p

JustPlainQuirky
03-22-2014, 03:14 PM
They presented this on AC2, that's probably why you don't know it then :p

There's one modern-day scene where they show Altair and Maria having sex in the most weird way (fully clothed on top of a tower). After they are done, Desmond's memories then start following Maria, not Altair, and then fade away when there's some sort of close up on Maria's belly. Lemme find the vid for you!

Oh I think I remember that scene. I didn't pay too much attention to that fact because I was invested in what was going on in the story :eek:

That explains why we play as Connor and not Haytham anymore, then. :)

Templar_Az
03-22-2014, 03:18 PM
They presented this on AC2, that's probably why you don't know it then :p

There's one modern-day scene where they show Altair and Maria having sex in the most weird way (fully clothed on top of a tower). After they are done, Desmond's memories then start following Maria, not Altair, and then fade away when there's some sort of close up on Maria's belly. Lemme find the vid for you!

I did play AC2 and the scene your talking about doesnt neccesarily mean that Altairs memories were no longer viewable, the scene was implying that Maria is also Desmonds ancestor which is why the memory continued from her perspective. I think if Desmond was alive and wanted to continue to see Altairs memories after the Maria scene he would be able to do so.

So ofcourse the scenario I was thinking of earlier can still happen and continue from his sons perspective but personally I think just ending it immediately after the guillotine hits would be better.
Anyway I think im just proving that my possible ending can be true and wouldnt contradict anything established so far in AC.

Templar_Az
03-22-2014, 03:20 PM
Oh I think I remember that scene. I didn't pay too much attention to that fact because I was invested in what was going on in the story :eek:

That explains why we play as Connor and not Haytham anymore, then. :)

Actually you make a good point which contradicts what Frodrigue said, Haytham and Connors mom slept together but the Haytham memory continued and didnt end untill it was revealed they were *SPOILERS* Templars.

frodrigues55
03-22-2014, 03:20 PM
I did play AC2 and the scene your talking about doesnt neccesarily mean that Altairs memories were no longer viewable, the scene was implying that Maria is also Desmonds ancestor which is why the memory continued from her perspective. I think if Desmond was alive and wanted to continue to see Altairs memories after the Maria scene he would be able to do so.

I'm pretty sure what happened on that scene is more like a fact then a theory by now :p


Actually you make a good point which contradicts what Frodrigue said, Haytham and Connors mom slept together but the Haytham memory continued and didnt end untill it was revealed they were *SPOILERS* Templars.

No, that's not when conception happened. Ziio and Haytham had a relationship after that scene, it says so on the game database. It ended later because of Haytham's obsession with the templar goals but Ziio clearly mentioned that they kept on seeing each other and there was love involved.

Also, the only reason why we followed Altair latest years was because he passed his memories through the disks Ezio finds in Revelations.

pirate1802
03-22-2014, 03:33 PM
The cutscene would end as soon as the guillatine falls. And it would be in Arno's perspective.

Then if Arno somehow had sex with someone after he is dead, how will he able to transfer the memory of him dying? :p


I don't see the need for a grown up son. The game would end afterwards. (At least the non sci-fi part)

Yeah, but there still remains the question of why would anyone want to view kid Arno Jr's memories.


All Arno has to do is sleep with a woman and she can get pregnant. He can be executed even before his child is born. Also the french revolution started in 1887 and ended in 1899 (i think) so his child can be atleast 11 or 12 years old assuming he gets someone pregnant in 1887.

So the first thing the guy does after the revolution starts is to find a girl? He sure has his priorities straight.. :P

JustPlainQuirky
03-22-2014, 03:37 PM
Then if Arno somehow had sex with someone after he is dead, how will he able to transfer the memory of him dying? :p



Yeah, but there still remains the question of why would anyone want to view kid Arno Jr's memories.



So the first thing the guy does after the revolution starts is to find a girl? He sure has his priorities straight.. :P

the kid could be in very young age of life but old enough to be traumatized. we won't play as the kid. And the cutscene won't look like it's being shown in the kid's eyes, but it will be from his perspective then. And then when he sees arno executed the game ends.

And arno will be smiling back at him.

I say he starts off already with a woman.

pirate1802
03-22-2014, 03:44 PM
But someone at the other end of the Animus still has to decide there is some value in sifting through infact kid's memories right? Unless they are going fo another "Abstergo Entertainment" escapade I an't think of a good reason to do so..

frodrigues55
03-22-2014, 03:48 PM
But someone at the other end of the Animus still has to decide there is some value in sifting through infact kid's memories right? Unless they are going fo another "Abstergo Entertainment" escapade I an't think of a good reason to do so..

Yeah, if we take into account everything they have shown so far, it simply won't work unless they fit in a reason why we would also go after the kid's memory once Arnold's main story ends.

I will say the ending with the guilhotine would be a nice ending to me, though.

Dome500
03-22-2014, 03:50 PM
I think its obvious that Ubisoft are gonna make this French Monarchy Templars and it will be the Assassins job to take them down; its predictable and its probably what their gonna do. Im still excited tho.

I hope it will not be that simple, I hope it gets more complex and less "Nobles in position of power = Templars, Fighting for the common citizen = Assassins".
AC3 (and a little bit AC4 as well) showed that there is at least POTENTIAL that the groups do not always have to be in "traditional" roles.


Yeah I'm pretty convinced Arno will die via guillotine at this point.

I can see the writers slapping that in for shock value.

I wouldn't like that.
But that's only my opinion.


I hope we get to assassinate an Assassin. Somebody we would know for like at least half of the game.
Like, not because we're Templars.
And not because they defected to Templars.
Not because anybody's evil, or good.
But because in such a confusing time, even a shared philosophy may lead to really wide disagreements and actions that possibly can't be accepted.

I like this idea though.


I hope for more stealth focused missions.

Well, yes and know.

I'd say give us more freedom to do both combat AND stealth, which means, give us the option to do 90% of all main and side missions STEALTHY. I want Stealth to be 90% SUPPORTED. Not focused maybe, but improve the Stealth system and actually support a Stealthy way in 90% of all missions and side activities.
1 or 2 forced battles are not bad IMO, but I want to be ABLE to do Stealth.
1 or 2 forced Stealth or Stealth-focused missions are also not bad, but I want to be able to do most of the mission also in combat (except tailing and eavesdropping missions of course which are obviously only possible with Stealth. Reduce those, but don't remove them, they are cool).
Lift the restrictions - increases replay value.


Arno walking upto the guillotine would be impossible. because memories happening after the point of transfer aren't view-able. Its fo the same reason we haven't seen a protagonist die in AC, while we are playing as them.

This.



You can only relive an ancentor's life up until the point where they conceived a child and transferred the DNA. It doesn't really matter when a child is born. The stopping point is right when they have sex.

This.

Although if the character has multiple children it depends on which child is your ancestor.


Wait really? When was that said? Then again I only played AC3 and AC4. But I don't remember seeing that in the cutscenes of the other games.

Read:


In Assassins Creed II when the bleeding effect kicks in Desmond plays a sequence were Altair follows a woman. He then has sex with this woman (off screen obviously) and then Altair does a leap of faith from the Tower they met on. And then Desmond stays with the women. He then wonders why he doesn't follow Altair and then concludes "****, that must mean...". The implication is clear. Also, In Assassins Creed your memories with Haytham end in the moment he has sex with Ziio, then you are playing Connor. There are several other implications throughout the series. The only thing that did ever break that rule was Assassins Creed Embers. And that was a short animation movie, so not part of the games nor part of the books.



I did play AC2 and the scene your talking about doesnt neccesarily mean that Altairs memories were no longer viewable, the scene was implying that Maria is also Desmonds ancestor which is why the memory continued from her perspective. I think if Desmond was alive and wanted to continue to see Altairs memories after the Maria scene he would be able to do so.

I don't think so. Maria was only Desmonds ancestor because she and Altair had a child which was then Desmonds ancestor. IN the moment Maria conceived a child there was NO way Desmond could have seen Altairs memories if the child was Desmonds ancestor. This is how it works. Unless of course Desmond would have used First Civilization technology.


No, that's not when conception happened. Ziio and Haytham had a relationship after that scene, it says so on the game database. It ended later because of Haytham's obsession with the templar goals but Ziio clearly mentioned that they kept on seeing each other and there was love involved.

Also, the only reason why we followed Altair latest years was because he passed his memories through the disks Ezio finds in Revelations.

This.

pirate1802
03-22-2014, 03:50 PM
Or.. could work if we are seeing Arno's execution from the PoV of Connor! :eek:

And agreed, if they manage to make it happen, it would be an awesome ending indeed.

JustPlainQuirky
03-22-2014, 04:09 PM
Or.. could work if we are seeing Arno's execution from the PoV of Connor! :eek:

And agreed, if they manage to make it happen, it would be an awesome ending indeed.

But Connor wouldn't allow for Arno to be executed :eek:

DumbGamerTag94
03-22-2014, 04:36 PM
All Arno has to do is sleep with a woman and she can get pregnant. He can be executed even before his child is born. Also the french revolution started in 1887 and ended in 1899 (i think) so his child can be atleast 11 or 12 years old assuming he gets someone pregnant in 1887.

How cool would it be if just before the guillotine kills arno he raises his head and sees his little son who is being held back by guards (kinda like Ezio in AC2) and then Connor comes and grabs Arno's son so Arno then smiles knowing his son is in good hands, the guillotine then takes his life and then were back to the modern day story for the ending.

The French Revolution started in 1789 bud. You're off by about 100 years. There may have been another revolution in France in 1880s after the Franco Prussian War to remove whoever the Germans put in power after Napoleon the 3rd. But the French Revolution as it is known internationally is generally considered to be the first one that overthrew King Louis 16 and had the reign of terror. So the period from about 1789 to 1802 ish, then this era gives way to the Napoleonic era when he takes power in 1805(I think) and there is stability for a while. France has had so many revolts and power shifts in the last 200 years its very hard to keep track I believe their government has even changed a few times since WW2 so its an honest mistake to have the wrong date. But the 1789 Revolution is the one I am confident we will be seeing not anything so far in the 19th century(yet anyway).

pirate1802
03-22-2014, 04:48 PM
But Connor wouldn't allow for Arno to be executed :eek:

Not if he constrained somehow

JustPlainQuirky
03-22-2014, 04:54 PM
Not if he constrained somehow

Plot twist. Connor is the executionor. :rolleyes:

pirate1802
03-22-2014, 04:55 PM
Plot twist. Connor is the executionor. :rolleyes:

Dear lord..

my body is not ready

SpiritOfNevaeh
03-22-2014, 05:09 PM
Plot twist. Connor is the executionor. :rolleyes:

*gasp* My heart…. It hurts… lol

Dev_Anj
03-22-2014, 05:15 PM
Plot twist. Connor is the executionor. :rolleyes:

Are you M. Night Shyamalam by any chance? :p :D

Farlander1991
03-22-2014, 05:15 PM
Plot twist: Connor is the Assassin we have to kill in the game! Mwahahahahahahahahaha!

Half the people will be like, "NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO, UBI WHY DO YOU MAKE US DO THIS?!?!?!?!?!?!??!?!?!?!?!"
And half the people will be like, "**** YEEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHH!!!!!!"

pirate1802
03-22-2014, 05:16 PM
Or maybe Arno executes Connor lol

*runs away from angry mob*

Dev_Anj
03-22-2014, 05:18 PM
And then Edward wakes up on his ship and it was all a dream.. :D

Farlander1991
03-22-2014, 05:18 PM
Don't worry pirate, I'll protect you :p As I basically posted that thing first :p

I-Like-Pie45
03-22-2014, 05:24 PM
It turns out that the true culprits playing the Templars and Assassins against each other are twin clones of Hitler who can time travel!

And then Arno rips off his head to reveal that he is Arnold Schwarzenegger, out to redeem the nation of Austria! Arnold takes out a shoulder mounted machine gun and he proceeds to blow away the clones of hitler!

But then the real Hitlar shows up! And Hitlar rips off his head to reveal that he is really Ezio! Then Ezio shows up and rips off his head to reveal that he is Hitlar! So Arnold has to tearfully kill both Ezio and Hitlar since he can't tell who is who

SpiritOfNevaeh
03-22-2014, 05:25 PM
Or maybe Arno executes Connor lol

*runs away from angry mob*

Get him!

Dev_Anj
03-22-2014, 05:26 PM
Desmond relives all the memories of Arnauld, he wasn't dead at all. Teehee!

Dome500
03-22-2014, 05:37 PM
Get him!

Hold them back, help him escape :p

GunnerGalactico
03-22-2014, 05:56 PM
Hold them back, help him escape :p

Oh no you don't!.

*shoots out rope dart* :p

GET OVER HERE!

ihp7
03-22-2014, 06:04 PM
Plot twist: Connor is the Assassin we have to kill in the game! Mwahahahahahahahahaha!

Half the people will be like, "NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO, UBI WHY DO YOU MAKE US DO THIS?!?!?!?!?!?!??!?!?!?!?!"
And half the people will be like, "**** YEEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHH!!!!!!"

Not to be a party pooper, but this won't happen. In 1804, Eseosa visits Connor at the Manor. :cool:

Templar_Az
03-22-2014, 06:19 PM
The French Revolution started in 1789 bud. You're off by about 100 years. There may have been another revolution in France in 1880s after the Franco Prussian War to remove whoever the Germans put in power after Napoleon the 3rd. But the French Revolution as it is known internationally is generally considered to be the first one that overthrew King Louis 16 and had the reign of terror. So the period from about 1789 to 1802 ish, then this era gives way to the Napoleonic era when he takes power in 1805(I think) and there is stability for a while. France has had so many revolts and power shifts in the last 200 years its very hard to keep track I believe their government has even changed a few times since WW2 so its an honest mistake to have the wrong date. But the 1789 Revolution is the one I am confident we will be seeing not anything so far in the 19th century(yet anyway).

lmfao I cant believe I messed up with the dates. yeah your right tho, I was referring to the one in 1789 - 1799. Thanks for correction. I clearly know nothing about the French Revolution but am now eager to pick up a book and learn about it. :P

GunnerGalactico
03-22-2014, 06:27 PM
Not to be a party pooper, but this won't happen. In 1804, Eseosa visits Connor at the Manor. :cool:

Thank you. :D

Could you please tell that to the people in the Connor supporting character/cameo theory

thread and [Theory] Connor in Unity thread.

Dome500
03-22-2014, 06:38 PM
Oh no you don't!.

*shoots out rope dart* :p

GET OVER HERE!

*evades Rope dart, throws smoke bomb*

:D

lothario-da-be
03-22-2014, 06:40 PM
I realy hope we get ac1/ ac3 Templars again. I hope Cory writes this one he is the best at making moral ambigous templars.

I-Like-Pie45
03-22-2014, 06:44 PM
Thank you. :D

Could you please tell that to the people in the Connor supporting character/cameo theory

thread and [Theory] Connor in Unity thread.

Who says Connor is going to stick in France for the entire duration of the Revolution?

Maybe, for his own safety, once **** really hits the fan, Arnold Schwarzenegger forces the reluctant Connor to return to America.

Besides the Revolution ended in 1799. Plenty of time for Connor to return to America between that and 1804.

GunnerGalactico
03-22-2014, 06:46 PM
*evades Rope dart, throws smoke bomb*

:D

*Eagle sense activated, spots target through smoke and fires pistol* :p

Dome500
03-22-2014, 06:53 PM
*Eagle sense activated, spots target through smoke and fires pistol* :p

*may die or not, but I distracted you from the target long enough for him to escape* :p

GunnerGalactico
03-22-2014, 06:56 PM
*may die or not, but I distracted you from the target long enough for him to escape* :p

DAMN IT ! :p

*Punches wall out of frustration*

Okay you win, well played :cool:

pirate1802
03-22-2014, 07:27 PM
*may die or not, but I distracted you from the target long enough for him to escape* :p

Thank you my friend!

"If I shall ever meet you by land or by sea, I will always remember your kindness to me."

:(

Templar_Az
03-22-2014, 07:41 PM
Maybe Connor would play the role of Typical American and start fighting in countries he shouldnt be in?

SpiritOfNevaeh
03-22-2014, 07:54 PM
DAMN IT ! :p

*Punches wall out of frustration*

Okay you win, well played :cool:

Lol there will be another day :)


Maybe Connor would play the role of Typical American and start fighting in countries he shouldnt be in?

Hope not. He's too good of a character to be considered a 'typical american'

GunnerGalactico
03-22-2014, 08:05 PM
Lol there will be another day :)'

Next time he won't escape easily.. I made certain of that :p

*evil laugh*

I-Like-Pie45
03-22-2014, 08:08 PM
keep in mind that in the final years of the French Revolution period (1798 - 1800) the French kinda made the US mad with the XYZ affair and entered into a naval Quasi-War.

this provides an opportunity for Captain Connor to return without outright involvement in the Revolution. we can maybe have Arnold Schwarzenegger and Connor on opposite sides of the world trying to prevent Templars from escalating the conflict into something greater

DumbGamerTag94
03-22-2014, 09:40 PM
keep in mind that in the final years of the French Revolution period (1798 - 1800) the French kinda made the US mad with the XYZ affair and entered into a naval Quasi-War.

this provides an opportunity for Captain Connor to return without outright involvement in the Revolution. we can maybe have Arnold Schwarzenegger and Connor on opposite sides of the world trying to prevent Templars from escalating the conflict into something greater
I think if they tie in Connor that is exactly how they would do it the French Naval War of the late 1790s is a perfect reason to encounter Connor at sea. The only other way I could see fitting in connor or possibly Avaline would be (and idk how long the time frame for Unity goes), but if it is long like AC2 and covers the Napoleonic Wars we may get a mission at the Battle of New Orleans in the period around 1814 when Napoleon was exiled. Perhaps there's a British Templar(who we encounter first in Europe) who takes command of the Force headed for America? Ano goes to New Orleans and takes him out(The Actual British Commander was killed at the Battle of New Orleans) since Europe is calm for about Half a year or more. These two scenarios would be the only way I could see them putting a Connor cameo in ACU without it being just ridiculous and nonsensical for him to be there. Connor=US Ano=France plain and simple.

frodrigues55
03-22-2014, 10:00 PM
Maybe Connor would play the role of Typical American and start fighting in countries he shouldnt be in?

lmfao

poptartz20
03-22-2014, 10:12 PM
Umm... so I've just had a random thought.


what about if unity is about playing As an actual templar instead of Assassin.

Sushiglutton
03-22-2014, 10:15 PM
I have a feeling Robespierre might start out as an assassin, then turn to the templars. Then Arno will shoot him in the jaw (to prevent him from telling who did (he actually was shot in the jaw)) and then Robespierre will be guillotined.

The End

poptartz20
03-22-2014, 10:22 PM
I have a feeling Robespierre might start out as an assassin, then turn to the templars. Then Arno will shoot him in the jaw (to prevent him from telling who did (he actually was shot in the jaw)) and then Robespierre will be guillotined.

The End

ahhh! good point! btw thanks for that documentary Sushi! I so far have watched a little over half of it! I'll be finishing it here shortly! :D

I was also thinking that Robespierre will have something to do with the assassins as well.. or maybe be a close friend of Arno's due to the fact he becomes a speaker for the people. It also makes me wonder how Marie will be portrayed!

Sushiglutton
03-22-2014, 10:27 PM
ahhh! good point! btw thanks for that documentary Sushi! I so far have watched a little over half of it! I'll be finishing it here shortly! :D

I was also thinking that Robespierre will have something to do with the assassins as well.. or maybe be a close friend of Arno's due to the fact he becomes a speaker for the people. It also makes me wonder how Marie will be portrayed!

You're welcome, I also have some left on my re-watch (watched it some while ago before, but I forgot a lot).

Robespierre was good at first. For example he argued against the death penalty and had many progressive enlightenment ideals. Then he went bananas lol. So I'm thinking it would make sense for him to switch sides.

You are bringing up a good point about Marie. She was a very important character in the Revolution for several reaons mentioned in the documentary (the fact that they didn't have a child, her excessive spending, her ties to Austria which came into play later when France was threatened by invasion etc). Interesting to see what they'll do with her and if she will be portraied as mostly good or evil (hopefully something in between).

RinoTheBouncer
03-22-2014, 10:28 PM
I guess they’ll be the same lame faces you see in the countless movie that took place around that time and place.

SpiritOfNevaeh
03-22-2014, 10:30 PM
keep in mind that in the final years of the French Revolution period (1798 - 1800) the French kinda made the US mad with the XYZ affair and entered into a naval Quasi-War.

this provides an opportunity for Captain Connor to return without outright involvement in the Revolution. we can maybe have Arnold Schwarzenegger and Connor on opposite sides of the world trying to prevent Templars from escalating the conflict into something greater

Huh, I didn't know that… Very interesting point.

Sushiglutton
03-22-2014, 10:31 PM
I guess they’ll be the same lame faces you see in the countless movie that took place around that time and place.

What's lame about Robespierre, Danton, Marat, Marie Antoinette, (maybe) Marquis de Sade etc etc? It's a fantastic cast :D!

RinoTheBouncer
03-22-2014, 10:34 PM
What's lame about Robespierre, Danton, Marat, Marie Antoinette, (maybe) Marquis de Sade etc etc? It's a fantastic cast :D!
Marie Antoinette is great. I hope she’ll be part of the game, though I doubt it. It’s just that I’m tired of AC becoming so mainstream and trying to redo settings and periods that have been done a billion times in films, games, books and even paintings. I was hoping for something original or at least less explored in today’s games and films. Lets say the Sumerian Civilization, Ancient Egypt or even China or Japan. Onimusha did a great Japanese setting, though a limited one. I’m sure AC would’ve pulled it perfectly with next-gen graphics.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m getting AC anyway, it’s just that first American Revolution > Pirates > French Revolution. What’s next? 9/11?

Sushiglutton
03-22-2014, 10:42 PM
Marie Antoinette is great. I hope she’ll be part of the game, though I doubt it. It’s just that I’m tired of AC becoming so mainstream and trying to redo settings and periods that have been done a billion times in films, games, books and even paintings. I was hoping for something original or at least less explored in today’s games and films. Lets say the Sumerian Civilization, Ancient Egypt or even China or Japan. Onimusha did a great Japanese setting, though a limited one. I’m sure AC would’ve pulled it perfectly with next-gen graphics.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m getting AC anyway, it’s just that first American Revolution > Pirates > French Revolution. What’s next? 9/11?


To each there own. I don't think we are exactly swimming in books and movies about the French Revoultion. To me it's a lot more interesting when I know some about the characters/events in advance, or at least can relate to them in some way. A bunch of Japanese historical characters would mean absolutely nothing to me.

I visited Thailand a while ago and went to see some of their most famous temples and so on. They were very pretty, but I realized that I just couldn't connect with them at all. On another trip I visited Italy. Standing inside the Colloseum was just an awesome feeling that is hard to describe. I think I need some prior knowledge or relation to really appreciate both buildings and characters.

poptartz20
03-22-2014, 10:57 PM
You're welcome, I also have some left on my re-watch (watched it some while ago before, but I forgot a lot).

Robespierre was good at first. For example he argued against the death penalty and had many progressive enlightenment ideals. Then he went bananas lol. So I'm thinking it would make sense for him to switch sides.

You are bringing up a good point about Marie. She was a very important character in the Revolution for several reaons mentioned in the documentary (the fact that they didn't have a child, her excessive spending, her ties to Austria which came into play later when France was threatened by invasion etc). Interesting to see what they'll do with her and if she will be portraied as mostly good or evil (hopefully something in between).

Each every good points! I'll have to finish the rest of the documentary to draw up some more conclusions but I do agree with your idea about Marie! a good inbetween for her would be perfect! because of her being frivolous and superficial I could see her teeter totting between those lines!

Hans684
03-23-2014, 09:27 AM
Marie Antoinette is great.

Who?


I hope she’ll be part of the game, though I doubt it.

I hope they handle the people they include in a good way.


It’s just that I’m tired of AC becoming so mainstream and trying to redo settings and periods that have been done a billion times in films, games, books and even paintings.

For me that's to far stretch to judge it, if we include everything from films to paintings they everything is mainstream. Like Renaissance.


I was hoping for something original or at least less explored in today’s games, films books and even paintings.

Fixed. Now it is balanced.


Lets say the Sumerian Civilization, Ancient Egypt or even China or Japan. Onimusha did a great Japanese setting, though a limited one. I’m sure AC would’ve pulled it perfectly with next-gen graphics.

Personally I wouldn't call China or Japan original.


Don’t get me wrong, I’m getting AC anyway, it’s just that first American Revolution > Pirates > French Revolution. What’s next? 9/11?

America is mainstream but is there anything that regarding the AR that isn't as historical accurate as AC?

The stereotype pirate(PoTC) is mainstream but the historical accurate version is forgotten. Just watch anything regarding pirates.

Musketeers and modern France(to me) is done "billion times" but not the FR. My French knowledge is low.

All in all it only depends how you look at it.

RinoTheBouncer
03-23-2014, 10:17 AM
Who?



I hope they handle the people they include in a good way.



For me that's to far stretch to judge it, if we include everything from films to paintings they everything is mainstream. Like Renaissance.



Fixed. Now it is balanced.



Personally I wouldn't call China or Japan original.



America is mainstream but is there anything that regarding the AR that isn't as historical accurate as AC?

The stereotype pirate(PoTC) is mainstream but the historical accurate version is forgotten. Just watch anything regarding pirates.

Musketeers and modern France(to me) is done "billion times" but not the FR. My French knowledge is low.

All in all it only depends how you look at it.

All I meant to say is that Europe from 1400 to 1900 has been done a lot in art including the art of video games. I know if we say that then everything is “mainstream” but I’m just saying that it would be much more entertaining to have some place rarely seen. I mean I know it’s about characters and historical events but I’m sure most of us have seen at least 1 film or played one video game set in Europe or America in that time period. What we see less is those in ancient time.

Forget Japan and China, we’ve seen those too. Sumerian Civilization is the oldest known civilization to mankind and it existed in 4000 BC, same goes for Ancient Egypt which existed around 2000 BC. Those two settings, though not very much of their historical events are 100% accurately documented, but they have very close ties to the mythology of AC and the first civilization. I have no problem going somewhere when the story feels right being set there. However, I feel like they’ve only went to America, Caribbean and now France because the general public likes to see those settings. The franchise started in the Middle East and it was very interesting then. Now I feel like they’re not going to places to tell a story but just give people the chance to free roam that time period.

We all know that each era and region had it’s own roles that differ from others. But in AC, we rarely dive much into the characters, except of the Assassin himself. Most of the time we get introduced to characters that we’re supposed to know from real life and not much is revealed about them, so it feels like the story is told from a point in the middle, that’s why it’s kinda hard sometimes to differentiate them from one another. Hence, they look the same at certain points. My point is, in ACIII we had British soldiers, in ACIV as well, and we also have a time period where certain looks of characters was kinda dominant so it kinda feels like we’re seeing the same villains over and over and over.

I know that’s not right because they’re different but as a general look to the games’ secondary characters/enemies, they kinda all look the same. ACII and AC:B looked very close to each other, because it’s just another city in the same country, ACIII and AC:Liberation also looked very similar, ACIV almost had the same type of enemies/soldiers as ACIII and AC:Liberation. I don’t think ACUnity is gonna be that different.

AC1 compared to AC2 was drastically different. AC:R compared to AC2 was very different as well. ACIII was different from all the ones before. But after that, it all felt like a tradition to copy and paste the same gameplay, the same enemies and the same style of 2-3 games.

Farlander1991
03-23-2014, 10:42 AM
French Revolution isn't that common of a topic in games. And certainly not a common topic AT ALL in the action/adventure genre.

Dome500
03-23-2014, 03:19 PM
French Revolution isn't that common of a topic in games. And certainly not a common topic AT ALL in the action/adventure genre.

Yeah, but pretty common in books and movies.

Anyway, I'm still interested. French Rev. was one of the things that got me interested in history, one of my favorite topics, aside from the Cold War.

Fanani
03-24-2014, 06:13 PM
[I apologize in advance for english mistakes]

As AC2 was all about Ezio's revenge for his family, AC Unity could go deep into the 'freedom' theme by allowing you to become an assassin or a templar, depending on the choices you make. That would make the story really immersive and personal (I've always felt that I had more of a templar mindset).
Like, if you choose to be stealthy and believe that peace can be achieved by killing 'bad' guys, you could become a feared assassin, a demon known as a rumor by your enemies and as a legend by younger assassins. OR you could choose to go public, to spread your ideal and acquire followers to your cause, become very well known and influential, maybe even sending others to do the dirty job, then the gameplay would require more strategy than 1st (3rd?) person action, where you could optionally control the 'thugs', or hired assassins (templars and assassins united), or this could even be the co-op multiplayer part. Then you could finally become a templar king (not literally, of course), or martyr or something... And so the game could have multiple endings.

I also really loved the ability to continue playing the side missions of AC Black Flag on my iPhone, reading the stories, analyzing which ships to send, waiting patiently for them to come back (which would cheer up those heavy traffic jams, in the coziness of my car)... I just really missed the ability to gather supplies to sell like AC3, and the ability to BUY MORE STUFF, like properties, hire people, build monuments, bribe... If you would choose to be a templar, this feature could really come in handy, maybe with a gameplay a bit like R.U.S.E., as you would have to think strategically... And could even set the stage for your friends playing as assassins to play in 1st person.


As a huge AC fan, I'm really happy to see such a lively community discussing about the game. I loved most of the ideas from you guys!

Megas_Doux
03-24-2014, 06:14 PM
More haythams less Borgias!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

RinoTheBouncer
03-24-2014, 06:20 PM
More haythams less Borgias!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
GIVE THAT MAN A MEDAL!


Totally agree.

SpiritOfNevaeh
03-24-2014, 06:33 PM
More haythams less Borgias!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

*applause*

DumbGamerTag94
03-24-2014, 06:35 PM
I’m tired of AC becoming so mainstream, it’s just that first American Revolution > Pirates > French Revolution. What’s next? 9/11?

Haha I read this in the South Park goth kids voices haha. "That's soooo mainstream, bunch of nazi conformist posers" hahaha

Assassin_M
03-24-2014, 06:35 PM
They'll be your best friends...

Fanani
03-24-2014, 06:55 PM
More haythams less Borgias!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The Borgias were the true templars!
Haytham was just a spoiled, weak heir with definetelly bad parenting, judging by the lack of morals of his loose grandfather. Such a plot hole...
Or maybe he was made that way so you guys could relate to him.

Megas_Doux
03-24-2014, 07:05 PM
The Borgias were the true templars!
Haytham was just a spoiled, weak heir with definetelly bad parenting, judging by the lack of morals of his loose grandfather. Such a plot hole...
Or maybe he was made that way so you guys could relate to him.

Not sure if trolling....

By the way, by "Haytham´s grandfather" did you mean Edward????? I just disagree, Italian templars were plain cartoonish, awful and one dimensioned, things that in a game like this, I severely despise.....

Assassin_M
03-24-2014, 07:07 PM
The Borgias were the true templars!
Haytham was just a spoiled, weak heir with definetelly bad parenting, judging by the lack of morals of his loose grandfather. Such a plot hole...
Or maybe he was made that way so you guys could relate to him.
I hope you're joking...

Fanani
03-24-2014, 07:26 PM
Not sure if trolling....

By the way, by "Haytham´s grandfather" did you mean Edward????? I just disagree, Italian templars were plain cartoonish, awful and one dimensioned, things that in a game like this, I severely despise.....


I honestly don't know what you mean by cartoonish and one dimensioned...
The Borgias were true models for templars, but I meant as characters. They were actually the plot that got me interested for AC in the first place.
Now... I might agree that the implementation in the games was a bit odd...

Fanani
03-24-2014, 07:40 PM
I honestly don't know what you mean by cartoonish and one dimensioned...
The Borgias were true models for templars, but I meant as characters. They were actually the plot that got me interested for AC in the first place.
Now... I might agree that the implementation in the games was a bit odd...

but since I was really into the borgias plot, I was able to abstract some awkward moments in the game, and fill it with stories from other authors

Assassin_M
03-24-2014, 07:44 PM
I'm convinced that he's joking...

Fanani
03-24-2014, 08:26 PM
I'm convinced that he's joking...

You got me curious, why do you think I am joking?
Did you think the borgias plot in AC was really that bad?
The Borgias, by other authors like mario puzo, is really good. It is this plot that inspired The Godfather. Vito Corleone is equivalent to Rodrigo Borgia, and Michael is Cesare. The story is practically the same.

Assassin_M
03-24-2014, 08:31 PM
You got me curious, why do you think I am joking?
Did you think the borgias plot in AC was really that bad?
The Borgias, by other authors like mario puzo, is really good. It is this plot that inspired The Godfather. Vito Corleone is equivalent to Rodrigo Borgia, and Michael is Cesare. The story is practically the same.
Because you're saying that the Borgias are better Templars than Haytham....
I thought it was horrible...worst antagonists in the AC series ever...

Thing is, though..these stories are not about ambiguity...not about a grey area in a conflict between 2 warring factions...

Templar_Az
03-24-2014, 08:33 PM
I like the Borgias but the morally ambiguous Templars are probably the best because once they make their point (around the time their dying) the Assassins find themselves unable to argue back and are just confused.

Bastiaen
03-24-2014, 09:00 PM
I think that Robespierre is the ultimate villain. He has such noble (Irony, eh?) aims, but quickly becomes a tyrant, ultimately leaving the nation open for Napoleon to conquer. But Robespierre, such a fascinating guy. He was a militant Athiest who enforced his values on the common people (irony again?). Things just got.... weird to say the least.

Super good French Revolution Documentary (Yes, I'm a documentary nerd. My wife can't understand why I would rather search through netflix for documentaries than watch the Avengers).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CUrEJBsWLfA

RatonhnhakeFan
03-24-2014, 09:11 PM
More haythams less Borgias!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I would say more AC1 than AC3. AC3 writing of the Templars was a bit schizophrenic. We start with very calculated goodie-two-shoes portrayal of the Templars for the sake of making the plot twist work just to end up in cartoony-villain territory, like Haytham did at the end, with pretty much 180 change in the view (first Haytham hates killing innocents, then does it himself without any remorse and has lots of fun doing it). Even worst example was Charless Lee who turns into mustache-twirling villain 5 seconds after the plot twist (in little Raton scene).

Templar_Az
03-24-2014, 09:15 PM
^not really 5 seconds but like a few years. Joining the Templars really f*ked him up and made him lose his hair.

RatonhnhakeFan
03-24-2014, 09:17 PM
^not really 5 seconds but like a few years. Joining the Templars really f*ked him up and made him lose his hair.It is still jarring as hell.

Good Charles friend of noble Haytham

*plot twist*

Literally 5 minutes later in the game "I will harass a child muahahaha, you animals living in dirt!"

Hans684
03-24-2014, 09:21 PM
Templars like Haymitch and Torres is something I want more of. They show the Templars in a good light after the evil Borgia's, I want to qestion each side during the game. And I dislike that the we havn't hade a game where the Assassins are just as evil as the Borgia's.


It is still jarring as hell.

Good Charles friend of noble Haytham

*plot twist*

Literally 5 minutes later in the game "I will harass a child muahahaha, you animals living in dirt!"

While we play as an assassin, I can look it up for you if you'd like. It means we assassinate people. They are no better than the Templars. The Assassins want peace/freedom/free will but all they do is murder and mayhem.

They speak of liberty and justice, but for who? How is killing countless of innocent guards only to gett to your target better? How does that give people liberty, justice, peace, freedom and free will, when all they do is making chaos? Who is free when there is only chaos?

Sushiglutton
03-24-2014, 09:21 PM
I think that Robespierre is the ultimate villain. He has such noble (Irony, eh?) aims, but quickly becomes a tyrant, ultimately leaving the nation open for Napoleon to conquer. But Robespierre, such a fascinating guy. He was a militant Athiest who enforced his values on the common people (irony again?). Things just got.... weird to say the least.

Super good French Revolution Documentary (Yes, I'm a documentary nerd. My wife can't understand why I would rather search through netflix for documentaries than watch the Avengers).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CUrEJBsWLfA

I don't think Robespierre was an atheist. In fact he opposed the atheists of the revolution and made "the cult of the supreme being" the new state religion. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cult_of_the_Supreme_Being)


Further (from wiki):

"Robespierre used the religious issue to publicly denounce the motives of many radicals not in his camp, and it led, directly or indirectly, to the executions of Revolutionary de-Christianisers like Hébert, Momoro, and Anacharsis Cloots.[4]"

Fanani
03-24-2014, 09:31 PM
Because you're saying that the Borgias are better Templars than Haytham....
I thought it was horrible...worst antagonists in the AC series ever...

Thing is, though..these stories are not about ambiguity...not about a grey area in a conflict between 2 warring factions...

Exactelly! Haytham is not passionate about the templar's ideal. He is not even a real templar, from my point of view... I kind of got the impression tha he was just 'playing conquering' with his frinds in that little hotel, in a very selfish materialistic way. He didn't believe that a greater good could be achieved by controlling everything. And he is descendent of an assassin/pirate, now that is ambiguity.

Rodrigo Borgia on the other hand was a peasant in spain, who went to Italy with nothing and worked his way up in the hierarchy of the christian church through corruption, greed, treachery and sin. He manipulated the cardinal elections to become pope, he united the roman papal states, made allegiances with the empires of france and spain in order to ensure his position of power in central Italy, against naples and milan. He crowned kings claiming to be god on earth. He created an empire and rebuild the power of christianity, eliminating anyone who got in his way. He even made his son and doughter fall in love, so the family would stay united.

"We are family," Alexander told his children. "And the loyalty of the family must come before everything and everyone else. We must learn from each other, protect each other, and be bound first and foremost to each other. For if we honour that commitment, we will never be vanquished - but if we father in that loyalty, we will all be condemned..."

Now THAT is Templar.
Not as haytham says: "I see the world the way it is, not as I wish it would be." Where is the ambition??
He didn't even made the ritual whe welcoming that new guy to the "templars".

The only mistake Rodrigo commited in his plan was to put his son on the church to follow his steps. Cesare was even greater than his father, more ambitious and unscrupulous, killing his own brother to be banned by the church, and to take his place as head of the christian army.
We need bad guys like these, who kills his sister's husbands out of jealousy, not guys tha burn indian villages to sell their terrain.

Dome500
03-24-2014, 10:02 PM
I honestly don't know what you mean by cartoonish and one dimensioned...
The Borgias were true models for templars, but I meant as characters. They were actually the plot that got me interested for AC in the first place.
Now... I might agree that the implementation in the games was a bit odd...

One Dimensional means they were a stereotype of video game (or cartoon) villains. They were just evil, nothing more. Aside from Rodrigo they had no character besides wanting to rule all of Italy.
And even for Rodrigo the only real personality trait was that he was convinced he was the prophet and ended to be crushed by the fact he was not.

In the end, they were all just evil villains and had no substance beyond that. Not even any form of reasonable goals which you could relate to, unlike the Templars in AC1, the Templars in ACR or the Templars in AC3 or even the Templars in AC4 (although they were more stereotype again).#


He didn't believe that a greater good could be achieved by controlling everything.

Yes he did. Unlike the Brogia who just wanted power. Nothing more, nothing less. Rodrigo was a megalomaniac and Cesar a spoiled kid with psychological issues. Both were one-dimensional and did not once mention any greater good, they just wanted good from themselves...



Rodrigo Borgia on the other hand was a peasant in spain, who went to Italy with nothing and worked his way up in the hierarchy of the christian church through corruption, greed, treachery and sin. He manipulated the cardinal elections to become pope, he united the roman papal states, made allegiances with the empires of france and spain in order to ensure his position of power in central Italy, against naples and milan. He crowned kings claiming to be god on earth. He created an empire and rebuild the power of christianity, eliminating anyone who got in his way. He even made his son and doughter fall in love, so the family would stay united.

Not for the greater good. All for power. And Templars, although tempted by power, actually strive for Control to achieve peace. At least in their ideals. Of course this can end very soon in a tyranny, but unlike other Templars the Borgia right-out went for tyranny.


Not as haytham says: "I see the world the way it is, not as I wish it would be." Where is the ambition??
He didn't even made the ritual whe welcoming that new guy to the "templars".

You raise your attention too much to speeches and rituals (Connor btw. did also not have a ritual. That's just the way the more "modern Assassins/Templars" are) and not enough to the actual intentions and goals of them, and their behavior.


We need bad guys like these, who kills his sister's husbands out of jealousy, not guys tha burn indian villages to sell their terrain.

So basically you want Templars to be evil and Assassins to be good. Black and White, like in comics or video game cliches. You want Templars to be cartoonish villains with a one-dimensional personality filled with stereotype villain goals and ambitions. Sure. Your opinion.

Not mine.

Fanani
03-24-2014, 10:57 PM
One Dimensional means they were a stereotype of video game (or cartoon) villains. They were just evil, nothing more. Aside from Rodrigo they had no character besides wanting to rule all of Italy.
And even for Rodrigo the only real personality trait was that he was convinced he was the prophet and ended to be crushed by the fact he was not.

In the end, they were all just evil villains and had no substance beyond that. Not even any form of reasonable goals which you could relate to, unlike the Templars in AC1, the Templars in ACR or the Templars in AC3 or even the Templars in AC4 (although they were more stereotype again).#



Yes he did. Unlike the Brogia who just wanted power. Nothing more, nothing less. Rodrigo was a megalomaniac and Cesar a spoiled kid with psychological issues. Both were one-dimensional and did not once mention any greater good, they just wanted good from themselves...



Not for the greater good. All for power. And Templars, although tempted by power, actually strive for Control to achieve peace. At least in their ideals. Of course this can end very soon in a tyranny, but unlike other Templars the Borgia right-out went for tyranny.



You raise your attention too much to speeches and rituals (Connor btw. did also not have a ritual. That's just the way the more "modern Assassins/Templars" are) and not enough to the actual intentions and goals of them, and their behavior.



So basically you want Templars to be evil and Assassins to be good. Black and White, like in comics or video game cliches. You want Templars to be cartoonish villains with a one-dimensional personality filled with stereotype villain goals and ambitions. Sure. Your opinion.

Not mine.


All human behavior have a unconscious personal gain as a final objective. Greater good is just a matter of point-of-view, often romanticized. I doubt that by building an empire, an unified Italy wouldn't bring greater good in the process, but sadly this is not depicted in the game.
I guess that is the job of transmidia, of books, short films and mobile games, to expand the story for those who are willing to buy it. And leave the 'good vs bad' for the video game players who just want a bit of fun, so it doesn't get complicated and ubisoft can profit big time

I said we need Villains like these, bad guys. Because assassins fight bad guys, not templars.
They both want the same thing, peace, the problem is, as you said, when the templars choices and means are not in alignment with their ideals.

I totally agree with you, I would love to see a kind of a 'villain' who turns out to be very much like you, and you would suddenly feel an empathy for him, or something... I love it when a story goes there. what would be the opposite of one-dimensional character? multi?

Assassin_M
03-24-2014, 11:14 PM
Exactelly! Haytham is not passionate about the templar's ideal. He is not even a real templar, from my point of view... I kind of got the impression tha he was just 'playing conquering' with his frinds in that little hotel, in a very selfish materialistic way. He didn't believe that a greater good could be achieved by controlling everything. And he is descendent of an assassin/pirate, now that is ambiguity.

Rodrigo Borgia on the other hand was a peasant in spain, who went to Italy with nothing and worked his way up in the hierarchy of the christian church through corruption, greed, treachery and sin. He manipulated the cardinal elections to become pope, he united the roman papal states, made allegiances with the empires of france and spain in order to ensure his position of power in central Italy, against naples and milan. He crowned kings claiming to be god on earth. He created an empire and rebuild the power of christianity, eliminating anyone who got in his way. He even made his son and doughter fall in love, so the family would stay united.

"We are family," Alexander told his children. "And the loyalty of the family must come before everything and everyone else. We must learn from each other, protect each other, and be bound first and foremost to each other. For if we honour that commitment, we will never be vanquished - but if we father in that loyalty, we will all be condemned..."

Now THAT is Templar.
Not as haytham says: "I see the world the way it is, not as I wish it would be." Where is the ambition??
He didn't even made the ritual whe welcoming that new guy to the "templars".

The only mistake Rodrigo commited in his plan was to put his son on the church to follow his steps. Cesare was even greater than his father, more ambitious and unscrupulous, killing his own brother to be banned by the church, and to take his place as head of the christian army.
We need bad guys like these, who kills his sister's husbands out of jealousy, not guys tha burn indian villages to sell their terrain.
That wasn't the Rodrigo in the game. you're bringing quotes and history that had NOTHING to do with the game. nothing to do with the Rodrigo of AC. Heritage and lineage have nothing to do with being a "real" Templar and it's quite ironic that you say that Haytham and co where the ones playing "conquering" when it was Rodrigo and his lackeys who were all over Italy trying to secure positions of power and very selfish and materialistic?? and Rodrigo was selfless?? He indiscriminately killed people for power...even one of his own loyal men. Haytham DID believe that a greater good can be achieved if the Templars controlled everything, did you even play the game??

I don't understand how you can describe Rodrigo's climb through the church with corruption, greed and sin, yet call him a "true" Templar, not like the "selfish and materialistic" Haytham...

Haytham didnt say that, do you even know what he meant?? He sees people as yearning for food chains. They want to be told what to do. they want leaders. Haytham does not seek to change this, but embrace since "all of mankind was built to serve"

also, it was GW who burned the village, not the Templars....you really have no idea what you're talking about do you??

The Rodrigo you're talking about comes from somewhere else, not AC..

What you're trying to say is that you preferred the 2-dimension, mustache twirling antagonist archetype to the more ambiguous and grey archetype of antagonists. that's fine, but you can't say that Rodrigo was a better Templar than Haytham....that's just flat out false...Rodrigo never cared for the Templars...he threw away their ideals in favor of taking control of Italy. he used the Templar banner to further his own control....Rodrigo was a selfish, greedy, heartless SOB. didn't you hear Haytham when he reprimanded Church?? "We had a DREAM Benjamin" it was a dream to him. He fought for it till the end. Rodrigo?? he only cared about power for himself, nothing else...

Dome500
03-24-2014, 11:30 PM
All human behavior have a unconscious personal gain as a final objective. Greater good is just a matter of point-of-view, often romanticized. I doubt that by building an empire, an unified Italy wouldn't bring greater good in the process, but sadly this is not depicted in the game.
I guess that is the job of transmidia, of books, short films and mobile games, to expand the story for those who are willing to buy it. And leave the 'good vs bad' for the video game players who just want a bit of fun, so it doesn't get complicated and ubisoft can profit big time

I said we need Villains like these, bad guys. Because assassins fight bad guys, not templars.
They both want the same thing, peace, the problem is, as you said, when the templars choices and means are not in alignment with their ideals.

I totally agree with you, I would love to see a kind of a 'villain' who turns out to be very much like you, and you would suddenly feel an empathy for him, or something... I love it when a story goes there. what would be the opposite of one-dimensional character? multi?

Normally it's called a deep character or rather character depth.

If a character has real goals - besides wanting power - if he wants to gain power to achieve a goal, like the Templars want peace through order and control, then he has depth. He has personal experiences and motivations beyond wanting the thing for itself. If you want power for powers sake you are a living cartoon villain. I wouldn't mind that if the Templars were that way from the beginning (though I wouldn't find it as interesting, the dynamic between Assassins and Templars would be completely different, and the Templars would only be there so you have someone who opposes you). But the Templars were not established that way. IN fact, it was Al Mualim who actually came pretty close to this kind of motive, though I wouldn't call him one-dimensional, because in contrast to the Borgia he started with other motives (at least that is my opinion) and slowly started wanting the PoE for himself over time. He was addicted to it in the end, persuaded by it's power.

See, and that is the thing that made the plot interesting.

They both wanted the same, but had different ways to achieve it.

Templars => Peace by Order and Control (actually a more logical conclusion)
Assassins => Peace by Freedom and Evolution, and protecting that Freedom and Evolution of humanity

And different means to the same end.

Templars => Not many moral boundaries. Killing in Cold blood, torturing. Calculative, Rational, Unscrupulous.
Assassins => Moving in the moral grey area. Killing with thought, with passion and dedication. But also no saints.

This dynamic created that fascination story. That both of them are not pure evil, and also the fact that often the Assassin can not contradict his target, can not find arguments that are speaking against the Templars ways of thinking. But also the other way around (just that the Templars care a little less).

That's why Altair had doubts, why Connor considered uniting the two Orders.

Revelations shows also another site of the Templars. They seek guidance, as does Ezio (as an Assassin). Both sides become insecure, are getting doubts, struggling with their role in all of this, asking "what is it all for?".

Two organizations that could not be more similar and at the same time couldn't be more different, if you know what I mean. It's an endless struggle that takes many dimensions, plays on a lot of morally ambitious and heavily discussed philosophical themes.

But with a pure evil villain, who wants power and only power, this is not possible. Sure, it's okay for one game, every organization has it's black sheep, every organization has it's members that only join to be able to have power, influence or money. But in the end, the majority of both sides (Assassins and Templars) need depth. And depth is not something the Borgia had much, at least not in the AC games....

Megas_Doux
03-25-2014, 12:54 AM
Maximilien Robespierre is the most cliche, but lets being honest, obvious name here!!!!!

He could make a great templar- the Jacobin´s Club, leader of the revolution, then power hungry etc etc, hey I even see our main protagonist being a member too- and at same time, fit into Juno´s plot! Why???? Well the guy was into some kind of a very strange "religion" called the Cult of the Supreme being, Catholicism was banned and its most most sacred "commandment was "virtue" . I easily can imagine Juno behind all of that.

Fanani
03-25-2014, 01:05 AM
That wasn't the Rodrigo in the game. you're bringing quotes and history that had NOTHING to do with the game. nothing to do with the Rodrigo of AC. Heritage and lineage have nothing to do with being a "real" Templar and it's quite ironic that you say that Haytham and co where the ones playing "conquering" when it was Rodrigo and his lackeys who were all over Italy trying to secure positions of power and very selfish and materialistic?? and Rodrigo was selfless?? He indiscriminately killed people for power...even one of his own loyal men. Haytham DID believe that a greater good can be achieved if the Templars controlled everything, did you even play the game??

I don't understand how you can describe Rodrigo's climb through the church with corruption, greed and sin, yet call him a "true" Templar, not like the "selfish and materialistic" Haytham...

Haytham didnt say that, do you even know what he meant?? He sees people as yearning for food chains. They want to be told what to do. they want leaders. Haytham does not seek to change this, but embrace since "all of mankind was built to serve"

also, it was GW who burned the village, not the Templars....you really have no idea what you're talking about do you??

The Rodrigo you're talking about comes from somewhere else, not AC..

What you're trying to say is that you preferred the 2-dimension, mustache twirling antagonist archetype to the more ambiguous and grey archetype of antagonists. that's fine, but you can't say that Rodrigo was a better Templar than Haytham....that's just flat out false...Rodrigo never cared for the Templars...he threw away their ideals in favor of taking control of Italy. he used the Templar banner to further his own control....Rodrigo was a selfish, greedy, heartless SOB. didn't you hear Haytham when he reprimanded Church?? "We had a DREAM Benjamin" it was a dream to him. He fought for it till the end. Rodrigo?? he only cared about power for himself, nothing else...


Yes, I do believe Rodrigo had a greater goal, at least from the baggage that I had from reading other authors before playing AC. As I said, the borgias plot was what drew me to play AC in the first place. It's sad, really, that your first contact with this character was through AC.
From what I've read, he wanted to be pope so he could restore the power of the christian church from the decadent middle ages, so it could be spread and so it could "bring salvation" to more people (besides the obvious temptation of power and notoriety that a position like a pope brings, which is common desire of most human beigns), which was a promise he made to the last dying pope, when he was still a cardinal.

And by saying "PLAYING conquering" I meant that he didn't actually conquered anything significant, he was quite lame to be put as a main templar in AC3, quite depressing too for a Templars fan. Rodrigo did conquered and controlled many territories and cultures, and (FROM OTHER SOURCES) was a quite impressive and skillful strategist doing it.

I think for me this is what Templars are about, cold "strategy", means to an end, forward thinking. And assassins have a more passionate, emotional, "I live in the present" way of being. I don't know if I could make my point, but do you guys agree with this? Or maybe I am getting something wrong here?

Fanani
03-25-2014, 01:13 AM
Normally it's called a deep character or rather character depth.

If a character has real goals - besides wanting power - if he wants to gain power to achieve a goal, like the Templars want peace through order and control, then he has depth. He has personal experiences and motivations beyond wanting the thing for itself. If you want power for powers sake you are a living cartoon villain. I wouldn't mind that if the Templars were that way from the beginning (though I wouldn't find it as interesting, the dynamic between Assassins and Templars would be completely different, and the Templars would only be there so you have someone who opposes you). But the Templars were not established that way. IN fact, it was Al Mualim who actually came pretty close to this kind of motive, though I wouldn't call him one-dimensional, because in contrast to the Borgia he started with other motives (at least that is my opinion) and slowly started wanting the PoE for himself over time. He was addicted to it in the end, persuaded by it's power.

See, and that is the thing that made the plot interesting.

They both wanted the same, but had different ways to achieve it.

Templars => Peace by Order and Control (actually a more logical conclusion)
Assassins => Peace by Freedom and Evolution, and protecting that Freedom and Evolution of humanity

And different means to the same end.

Templars => Not many moral boundaries. Killing in Cold blood, torturing. Calculative, Rational, Unscrupulous.
Assassins => Moving in the moral grey area. Killing with thought, with passion and dedication. But also no saints.

This dynamic created that fascination story. That both of them are not pure evil, and also the fact that often the Assassin can not contradict his target, can not find arguments that are speaking against the Templars ways of thinking. But also the other way around (just that the Templars care a little less).

That's why Altair had doubts, why Connor considered uniting the two Orders.

Revelations shows also another site of the Templars. They seek guidance, as does Ezio (as an Assassin). Both sides become insecure, are getting doubts, struggling with their role in all of this, asking "what is it all for?".

Two organizations that could not be more similar and at the same time couldn't be more different, if you know what I mean. It's an endless struggle that takes many dimensions, plays on a lot of morally ambitious and heavily discussed philosophical themes.

But with a pure evil villain, who wants power and only power, this is not possible. Sure, it's okay for one game, every organization has it's black sheep, every organization has it's members that only join to be able to have power, influence or money. But in the end, the majority of both sides (Assassins and Templars) need depth. And depth is not something the Borgia had much, at least not in the AC games....



In my point of view every human being has this depth, and it really comes to the storytelling to reveal it or not, and if they don't, the guy looks like a pure villain.

Do you think it is possible for a human to really strive for a greater good (Or perhaps a greater evil), without all coming down, in the end, to a selfish need?

Assassin_M
03-25-2014, 01:20 AM
Yes, I do believe Rodrigo had a greater goal, at least from the baggage that I had from reading other authors before playing AC. As I said, the borgias plot was what drew me to play AC in the first place. It's sad, really, that your first contact with this character was through AC.
From what I've read, he wanted to be pope so he could restore the power of the christian church from the decadent middle ages, so it could be spread and so it could "bring salvation" to more people (besides the obvious temptation of power and notoriety that a position like a pope brings, which is common desire of most human beigns), which was a promise he made to the last dying pope, when he was still a cardinal.

And by saying "PLAYING conquering" I meant that he didn't actually conquered anything significant, he was quite lame to be put as a main templar in AC3, quite depressing too for a Templars fan. Rodrigo did conquered and controlled many territories and cultures, and (FROM OTHER SOURCES) was a quite impressive and skillful strategist doing it.

I think for me this is what Templars are about, cold "strategy", means to an end, forward thinking. And assassins have a more passionate, emotional, "I live in the present" way of being. I don't know if I could make my point, but do you guys agree with this? Or maybe I am getting something wrong here?
Well, the thing is, we're talking about AC's Rodrigo. that Rodrigo sucked...he was a terrible Templar...he was one dimensional in the fact that his only motivation was power...nothing else...he didn't care for the greater good, the Templars, his family nor anything else..he only craved power for himself...The Rodrigo you like so much has depth and would probably have made a better antagonist than what we got in AC II, but unfortunately, that's not the Rodrigo we got..

Fanani
03-25-2014, 01:28 AM
Well, the thing is, we're talking about AC's Rodrigo. that Rodrigo sucked...he was a terrible Templar...he was one dimensional in the fact that his only motivation was power...nothing else...he didn't care for the greater good, the Templars, his family nor anything else..he only craved power for himself...The Rodrigo you like so much has depth and would probably have made a better antagonist than what we got in AC II, but unfortunately, that's not the Rodrigo we got..

Unfortunate indeed, AC only showed enough so the player could hate him. But I was just thinking here... Ezio was not looking for greater good either, he was really looking for revenge, to kill whoever was responsible for killing his father and brother, wasn't him?

Don't get me wrong, I loved his character, the second coolest assassin for me, behind altair.

Assassin_M
03-25-2014, 01:31 AM
Unfortunate indeed, AC only showed enough so the player could hate him. But I was just thinking here... Ezio was not looking for greater good either, he was really looking for revenge, to kill whoever was responsible for killing his father and brother, wasn't him?

Don't get me wrong, I loved his character, the second coolest assassin for me, behind altair.
Nah, don't worry, you can say any crap about Ezio, I wont mind :cool:

Fanani
03-25-2014, 01:37 AM
Nah, don't worry, you can say any crap about Ezio, I wont mind :cool:

I'll take that as a 'yes sir, indeed he was'
But then again, I coldn't stand constantinople and that stupid hook blade, so i've just played half of AC Revelation. I hope I haven't missed much stuff.

Assassin_M
03-25-2014, 01:41 AM
I'll take that as a 'yes sir, indeed he was'
But then again, I coldn't stand constantinople and that stupid hook blade, so i've just played half of AC Revelation. I hope I haven't missed much stuff.
Yeah, you can take it that way..

I loved Constantinople. Probably my favorite city in the series and I'd say you missed a bit. Ezio's explanation of the Creed for example..

Dome500
03-25-2014, 03:12 AM
In my point of view every human being has this depth, and it really comes to the storytelling to reveal it or not, and if they don't, the guy looks like a pure villain.

Do you think it is possible for a human to really strive for a greater good (Or perhaps a greater evil), without all coming down, in the end, to a selfish need?

1. Well, but in this sense, the Rodrigo Borgia and the Brogias in general in Assassins Creed are pure one-dimensional villains. I did never say that it was that way in real life, you probably know more about that then I, all I said is that they were presented that way in Assassins Creed. And if we talk about AC Templars then we talk about how they are shown in the game. And in the game he is a mustache twirling power hungry cartoonish stereotype villain.

2. Yes I believe that is possible, though I think it is rare.


Unfortunate indeed, AC only showed enough so the player could hate him. But I was just thinking here... Ezio was not looking for greater good either, he was really looking for revenge, to kill whoever was responsible for killing his father and brother, wasn't him?


At first yes, but not in the end.

Why do you think he spared Rodrigo? Also, his speech in Florence at the Bonfire of the Vanities proved his change of heart.
IN ACB then he want after Cesare maybe a little bit because of Mario, but mainly because he know that man would be bad for the Italian people.
An ACR he searched for the meaning of being and Assassin, fighting against the Templars.
Yes, he was a little bit more selfish like - let's say- Altair. But in the end he also had the greater good in mind, at least later on. (IMO)
That is of course, also a matter of interpretation.

Assassin_M
03-25-2014, 03:25 AM
Why do you think he spared Rodrigo?
I don't know about you, but I think he did it because he was an idiot...

Dome500
03-25-2014, 03:52 AM
I don't know about you, but I think he did it because he was an idiot...

Okay. You opinion. It's your right to have that opinion.

I think he grew in character and knew that killing Rodrigo wouldn't bring back his father and brothers.
And in the end it was not Rodrigo who caused him problems afterwards, it was his (already born) son.

So why was he stupid? I think he grew as an Assassin. Rodrigo was basically beaten. Ezio won. Rodrigo's dream was crushed.
An enemy that doesn't fight anymore is no enemy.

Assassin_M
03-25-2014, 03:58 AM
I think he grew in character and knew that killing Rodrigo wouldn't bring back his father and brothers.
And in the end it was not Rodrigo who caused him problems afterwards, it was his (already born) son.

So why was he stupid? I think he grew as an Assassin. Rodrigo was basically beaten. Ezio won. Rodrigo's dream was crushed.
An enemy that doesn't fight anymore is no enemy.
Okay, let me analyze this. You say that Ezio grew out of revenge and became a dedicated Assassin near the end of AC II, right? Great..that means he's dedicated to eliminating Templars to end their plans because there's no other way around it, BUT you go on and say that Ezio didn't kill Rodrigo because he knew it wont bring his family back...wasn't he supposed to be over that? wasnt he supposed to be after Rodrigo SOLELY because he was a Templar?? look at what sparing Rodrigo did...It made Cesare amass the papal armies and attack the Villa, kill Mario and take the Apple...Cesare's entire power and influence is because of his father's position as pope. had Ezio killed Rodrigo, Cesare would have NOTHING...Rodrigo was just as much a threat as ever...the moment Rodrigo died in ACB, Cesare's power went to ****

mikeyf1999
03-25-2014, 05:20 AM
Okay, let me analyze this. You say that Ezio grew out of revenge and became a dedicated Assassin near the end of AC II, right? Great..that means he's dedicated to eliminating Templars to end their plans because there's no other way around it, BUT you go on and say that Ezio didn't kill Rodrigo because he knew it wont bring his family back...wasn't he supposed to be over that? wasnt he supposed to be after Rodrigo SOLELY because he was a Templar?? look at what sparing Rodrigo did...It made Cesare amass the papal armies and attack the Villa, kill Mario and take the Apple...Cesare's entire power and influence is because of his father's position as pope. had Ezio killed Rodrigo, Cesare would have NOTHING...Rodrigo was just as much a threat as ever...the moment Rodrigo died in ACB, Cesare's power went to ****
Actually it was before that killing his father was icing on the cake for cesare
If you remember ezio goal throughout life was seeking vengeance it wasn't until the end that he realized vengeance wasn't the answer
He didn't kill them cause they were Templars he killed them cause they destroyed his family
Heck he wasn't even an assassin until the end
It's like when Altair let Maria go there was no point in killing him he was a shell of his former self
Man rodrigo was a broken man there was no point in doing it
Besides didn't rodrigo ask ezio to kill him
He probably wanted rodrigo to live with knowing that he wasted most of his life for nothing

Calvarok
03-25-2014, 06:27 AM
Ezio spared Rodrigo because they decided to push his realization of the futility of revenge to literally the last 30 minutes of the game, instead of doing it like they did Edward's realization that there's more to life than money. (a bit more than halfway thru the game)

If they weren't planning to do brotherhood, I bet the game would have ended a few years later when Rodrigo died, and Ezio would have killed him.

I don't hold Ezio's character accountable for messy situations like that. His character in 2 may have had a disjointed development after the first act, but it's better than the completely flat "here's the master assassin who always knows what to do" non-character he was in Brotherhood. Revelations is the most well-rounded depiction of him.

Back to Rodrigo though, I loved how he changed as a character in Brotherhood. You definitely got the sense that he really did believe in the Order and its goals despite his bluster in the vault, and that Cesare was an example of a Templar who actually did just want power. So Rodrigo was redeemed in the end for me. Cesare... bleh.

I still don't understand what Jeffery Yolahem was trying to do with ACB's story. The final battle with Cesare is just so... weird and ephemeral, like its supposed to be deeply significant but it just feels like a fever dream for no reason

Assassin_M
03-25-2014, 06:29 AM
Actually it was before that killing his father was icing on the cake for cesare
If you remember ezio goal throughout life was seeking vengeance it wasn't until the end that he realized vengeance wasn't the answer
He didn't kill them cause they were Templars he killed them cause they destroyed his family
Heck he wasn't even an assassin until the end
It's like when Altair let Maria go there was no point in killing him he was a shell of his former self
Man rodrigo was a broken man there was no point in doing it
Besides didn't rodrigo ask ezio to kill him
He probably wanted rodrigo to live with knowing that he wasted most of his life for nothing
That's basically what i'm saying...at least for the first 4 lines..

but there actually was a point in killing Rodrigo...he was the source of all the power Cesare had, so killing him would've ended Cesare then and there. His uncle wouldn't have died the way he did, his villa would be fine and his armor would be there...

Assassin_M
03-25-2014, 06:31 AM
Ezio spared Rodrigo because they decided to push his realization of the futility of revenge to literally the last 30 minutes of the game
This, but actually...last 10 minutes...Ezio almost did it...he almost killed him the first time around after jumping him, but nooooo suddenly the second time he's in his grasp, Ezio loses his revenge...

Consus_E
03-25-2014, 06:43 AM
This, but actually...last 10 minutes...Ezio almost did it...he almost killed him the first time around after jumping him, but nooooo suddenly the second time he's in his grasp, Ezio loses his revenge...

Ubi had told Ezio that he was getting a sequel and he felt that he had done enough killing for one game... :p

Assassin_M
03-25-2014, 06:47 AM
Ubi had told Ezio that he was getting a sequel and he felt that he had done enough killing for one game... :p
You know, that actually makes sense...he kills about 9 people in ACB

Calvarok
03-25-2014, 06:51 AM
This, but actually...last 10 minutes...Ezio almost did it...he almost killed him the first time around after jumping him, but nooooo suddenly the second time he's in his grasp, Ezio loses his revenge...
Actually, thinking about it more I feel like it's justified by him not being a true assassin from birth. He had a personal epiphany in the vault, and he made the choice to spare Rodrigo because he wasn't thinking about what The Order needed, he was only thinking of himself and what felt right for him. It took the consequences of Monteriggoni and Machiavelli's teaching to mold him into a truer Assassin.

I feel like AC3 calls back to this with Connor's final kill. He realized that Charles isn't responsible for his mother's death, and he realizes that things might have been better if Charles' plans succeeded. But he also had learned that he had a duty to the Assassin Order regardless of either his feelings or what he once considered to be justice, so he kills him anyways.

Consus_E
03-25-2014, 07:00 AM
You know, that actually makes sense... He kills about 9 people in ACB

Gotta fill those killing quotas...

king-hailz
03-25-2014, 08:30 AM
Well I think ezio did kill all those people because they were responsible for 3 members of his family and that they raped his mother... However after joining the assassins he had 2 reasons to kill Rodrigo. 1 because that he is the assassins enemy and 2 because he is getting revenge... and at the end seeing Rodrigo on the floor like a pathetic old man telling ezio to kill him... ezio must have seen that this man will not bring back his family and that this pathetic deluded old man will not be able to do anything for the templars... I mean Rodrigo wanted to challenge god... but anyway everybody makes a mistake and at that time ezio must have thought it wasn't stupid but he must have realized what he had done... and I don't blame him. Everybody makes mistakes... BUT back on topic...

My favorite villain is Al Mualim... I thought he was an awesome villain... but so far we have loads of different types of templars... I want the templars in the new game to be however they are... I don't want another haytham or another anyone... but I think robespierre might start as an assassin and turn to the templars... and also that man that was in charge of the paper who had skin disease on the French revolution... He created chaos in Paris and then the woman who murders him would be an assassin... cause when she was executed she said fight for peace... I don't think the game will be set in just the french revolution but through napoleon as well... and he will definitely be a templar since he has an apple and that he believes in order and that the world should live by order...I think the king and Queen will not know about the assassins however I think they will be working with templars... not having any knowledge of their identities.... BUT MAINLY we will assassinate on both sides... In AC1 we fought the crusaders and the Saracens in AC2 we fought all the guards in ac revelations we fought the ottomans and the byzantines in ac3 we fought the Americans and the British in ac4 we fought against all of our enemies whoever they were... so I guess we will fight people from both sides of the revolution...

king-hailz
03-25-2014, 08:36 AM
Also robespierre started out as a pacifist and must have gotten brainwashed by the apple which was later passed onto napoleon who maybe wanted to stop people using it... and then he gets brainwashed by it...

king-hailz
03-25-2014, 08:44 AM
Also (again) I want our assassin to grow old... maybe we start as him at the age of 20 and end at 50 or so... plus people have said we also travel to England so maybe we kill napoleon while he is in prison in England... I just hope it is a touching story and not TOO focused on the politics I want the assassin to have his own personal story like ezio and Edward... which is ultimately surrounded by the French revolution also I hope to god we don't play as Connor... not because I don't like him but because I would rather have an assassin who is personally included in the revolution like Connor was with America... If we play as Connor we will just be doing our mission which will be boring... I do think we will hear of Connor... maybe of his death of old age or something if we play into the napoleon if wars...

Consus_E
03-25-2014, 09:02 AM
I really hope the Templar Grandmaster has an elaborate mustache...

Dome500
03-25-2014, 03:19 PM
Okay, let me analyze this. You say that Ezio grew out of revenge and became a dedicated Assassin near the end of AC II, right? Great..that means he's dedicated to eliminating Templars to end their plans because there's no other way around it, BUT you go on and say that Ezio didn't kill Rodrigo because he knew it wont bring his family back...wasn't he supposed to be over that? wasnt he supposed to be after Rodrigo SOLELY because he was a Templar?? look at what sparing Rodrigo did...It made Cesare amass the papal armies and attack the Villa, kill Mario and take the Apple...Cesare's entire power and influence is because of his father's position as pope. had Ezio killed Rodrigo, Cesare would have NOTHING...Rodrigo was just as much a threat as ever...the moment Rodrigo died in ACB, Cesare's power went to ****

Watch:


http://youtu.be/FRzrP9dOC6M?t=17m48s

http://youtu.be/FRzrP9dOC6M?t=17m48s

Assassin_M
03-25-2014, 06:57 PM
Watch:


http://youtu.be/FRzrP9dOC6M?t=17m48s

http://youtu.be/FRzrP9dOC6M?t=17m48s
I don't need to, I know this game's script by heart...

Dome500
03-25-2014, 07:21 PM
I don't need to, I know this game's script by heart...

You asked me if Ezio did not already "move" from the revenge thing before. Well, probably, but the scene I linked here shows that this was the MOMENT where he COMPLETELY broke free from any feeling of revenge. He was content. He grew as an Assassin. Not ONLY in this moment, but before already, but this moment defines and symbolized that change and makes it complete "Killing you won't bring my family back.... I'm done. Nothing is true, everything is permitted. Requiescat in Pace."

That's all I'm saying.

Assassin_M
03-25-2014, 07:35 PM
You asked me if Ezio did not already "move" from the revenge thing before. Well, probably, but the scene I linked here shows that this was the MOMENT where he COMPLETELY broke free from any feeling of revenge. He was content. He grew as an Assassin. Not ONLY in this moment, but before already, but this moment defines and symbolized that change and makes it complete "Killing you won't bring my family back.... I'm done. Nothing is true, everything is permitted. Requiescat in Pace."

That's all I'm saying.
Yes, that's what you said, but then at the start of the mission, he's ready to kill Borgia..."I thought i was beyond this, but i'm not" he wasn't beyond revenge just yet...he hasn't grown out of it at all. he only grew out of it the last 10 minutes of the game without any explanation and without ANY slow growth or progression. he was presumably beyond it near the end, but ohp wait, no he's not..then wait wait wait, he's actually beyond it and he spares Borgia, but but...he's a Templar..his position is dangerous..no no, he wont bring his family back, but aren't you beyond revenge?? yes and no...it's confusing..

Dome500
03-25-2014, 07:38 PM
Yes, that's what you said, but then at the start of the mission, he's ready to kill Borgia..."I thought i was beyond this, but i'm not" he wasn't beyond revenge just yet...he hasn't grown out of it at all. he only grew out of it the last 10 minutes of the game without any explanation and without ANY slow growth or progression. he was presumably beyond it near the end, but ohp wait, no he's not..then wait wait wait, he's actually beyond it and he spares Borgia, but but...he's a Templar..his position is dangerous..no no, he wont bring his family back, but aren't you beyond revenge?? yes and no...it's confusing..

Human Nature IS confusing my friend.
Sometimes one can change his opinion, his behavior, hell even his world view in an instant.
It doesn't happen often. But it does happen.

Assassin_M
03-25-2014, 07:39 PM
Human Nature IS confusing my friend.
It is, but there's a fascinating confusing and just plain bad story telling (imo) confusing...

Farlander1991
03-25-2014, 07:45 PM
The funny part is, in the original AC2 concept Ezio wouldn't have spared Borgia. Since it would've ended in 1503. With Borgia's death. So he would actually put his Assassin duties first.

Dome500
03-25-2014, 07:46 PM
It is, but there's a fascinating confusing and just plain bad story telling (imo) confusing...

I do not see the bad storytelling you refer to sorry :)

IMO you just have a very negative opinion of AC2 as a game, no matter in which section.
But hey, it's your opinion. I'm not gonna argue about it if this is how you see things.

Farlander1991
03-25-2014, 07:49 PM
It feels to me that me and M have a rep here of being AC2 haters when in fact we aren't :D

Assassin_M
03-25-2014, 07:51 PM
It feels to me that me and M have a rep here of being AC2 haters when in fact we aren't :D
I probably replayed it more times than any actual AC II fan here...

I know the script by heart, BY HEART I TELL YOU

jayjay275
03-25-2014, 08:17 PM
I probably replayed it more times than any actual AC II fan here...

I know the script by heart, BY HEART I TELL YOU

Give me a lecture please... :)

Assassin_M
03-25-2014, 08:22 PM
Give me a lecture please... :)
5-10 PM at the science building Room L-24

jayjay275
03-25-2014, 08:28 PM
5-10 PM at the science building Room L-24

Alright, will I need to make notes?

Assassin_M
03-25-2014, 08:32 PM
Alright, will I need to make notes?
Yes, it's a long script..

jayjay275
03-25-2014, 08:34 PM
Yes, it's a long script..

Pen or pencil?

Assassin_M
03-25-2014, 08:35 PM
Pen or pencil?
Pencil, preferably number 2

jayjay275
03-25-2014, 08:37 PM
Pencil, preferably number 2

Ok, I am ready.

Calvarok
03-26-2014, 03:25 AM
I mentioned before: "Actually, thinking about it more I feel like it's justified by him not being a true assassin from birth. He had a personal epiphany in the vault, and he made the choice to spare Rodrigo because he wasn't thinking about what The Order needed, he was only thinking of himself and what felt right for him. It took the consequences of Monteriggoni and Machiavelli's teaching to mold him into a truer Assassin."

So basically as long as you realize that Ezio isn't really a true assassin at the end of AC2, it does make some degree of sense. What makes less sense is why his mentors sent him alone while he was not ready. Although I suppose even Assassins can be bad judges of character. That's happened before in other bits of the AC universe.

Assassin_M
03-26-2014, 04:00 AM
I mentioned before: "Actually, thinking about it more I feel like it's justified by him not being a true assassin from birth. He had a personal epiphany in the vault, and he made the choice to spare Rodrigo because he wasn't thinking about what The Order needed, he was only thinking of himself and what felt right for him. It took the consequences of Monteriggoni and Machiavelli's teaching to mold him into a truer Assassin."

So basically as long as you realize that Ezio isn't really a true assassin at the end of AC2, it does make some degree of sense. What makes less sense is why his mentors sent him alone while he was not ready. Although I suppose even Assassins can be bad judges of character. That's happened before in other bits of the AC universe.
Oh I can totally accept that in this context but that's the thing, really...everybody keeps talking about "oh Enzio is a real azzazzin at ze end of Asscreez 2" because for the most part, Ezio does not go through ANY change in personality or character throughout the entire game..he's a BIT more serious from sequence 2 till 5, but completely loses that new-found demeanor and goes back to being a laid back, joke cracking playboy...

ze_topazio
03-26-2014, 04:25 AM
Altair is not a real Assassin, we never saw him join the order.

Calvarok
03-26-2014, 04:29 AM
Oh I can totally accept that in this context but that's the thing, really...everybody keeps talking about "oh Enzio is a real azzazzin at ze end of Asscreez 2" because for the most part, Ezio does not go through ANY change in personality or character throughout the entire game..he's a BIT more serious from sequence 2 till 5, but completely loses that new-found demeanor and goes back to being a laid back, joke cracking playboy...

Yes, I agree. Ubi wouldn't have had such strong themes of Ezio becoming a true assassin in ACB if they thought his journey had ended in AC2. I much prefer their approach to making sure the character's arc really does end at the end of each game. Altair, Connor, and Edward all felt like they had complete stories told in their respective games. Let's hope we never see a return the the segmented storytelling of the Ezio trilogy.

Assassin_M
03-26-2014, 04:31 AM
Yes, I agree. Ubi wouldn't have had such strong themes of Ezio becoming a true assassin in ACB if they thought his journey had ended in AC2. I much prefer their approach to making sure the character's arc really does end at the end of each game. Altair, Connor, and Edward all felt like they had complete stories told in their respective games. Let's hope we never see a return the the segmented storytelling of the Ezio trilogy.
I would hope so because they started a trend that'll take a long time to end...everybody wants their favorite character to have a full story from birth till death -__-

Consus_E
03-26-2014, 04:38 AM
I would hope so because they started a trend that'll take a long time to end...everybody wants their favorite character to have a full story from birth till death -__-

I miss the old days when AC2 was Ezio's only game...

Assassin_M
03-26-2014, 04:41 AM
I miss the old days when AC2 was Ezio's only game...
it's sad when I see people flailing around "AC IS ENZIO" Ubisoft really screwed it...

Calvarok
03-26-2014, 05:06 AM
it's sad when I see people flailing around "AC IS ENZIO" Ubisoft really screwed it...
People will get over it eventually. And they'll learn that every story being from birth to death would be boring.

What's important is that Ubisoft seems to REALLY not want to go back to that approach. The majority of us can enjoy that while the minority can whine.