PDA

View Full Version : Discussion about modern story in AC1, expectations etc



UKassassinsfan
06-23-2014, 10:50 PM
So I was thinking, in terms of excitement the modern story in the first game is my favourite I think, I think I really liked Desmond and there was so much I thought was exciting, whilst I agree that it was abit slow walking back and forwards from the room! at the end when all the writing was in blood and it was so filled with conspiracy! It made me excited for the next game just to see what Desmond would do and what abstergo was...

So I guess this thread is just me wandering what you guys expected and thought of the first game, try to say without arguing your points in hindsight of future games.
What would you have done differently as the sequel to the first game?

Farlander1991
06-23-2014, 10:59 PM
In essence, wouldn't have a Solar Flare plot (or at least wouldn't introduce it until the Satellite plot was over). The problem with the AC1-AC3 modern day is that it became too overcomplicated for its own good.

I remember I was so intrigued by the Satellite in AC1. I thought it was a clever play on the end of the world prophecy, and couldn't wait to race against time trying to prevent Abstergo from launching it in AC3 in 2012 (after all, we all knew it would be a trilogy back then and it was pretty obvious that the third part would be released in 2012). That the plotline became irrelevant and got pushed to the sidelines is... very disappointing.

rob.davies2014
06-23-2014, 11:47 PM
I agree, it was a great plotline with a lot more potential than 'Touch the orb-sacrifice yourself-save the world'.
I was theorising about all sorts of things like a race against time, breaking into Abstergo's space facility and sabotaging the satellite! That would have been better I feel.
Maybe it'll be something they revisit in the future or hopefully will address why it was abandoned. Like saying Desmond's infiltration of Abstergo derailed the operation...

Will_Lucky
06-23-2014, 11:59 PM
Well, the obvious problem was the modern story became convoluted by the additions of Brotherhood and Revelations. Kristen Bell for example was contracted to do three games if I recall, and well with Brotherhood that kind of ruined what they may have gone for if a theoretical AC3 had been released after 2.

I'm not against the idea of Brotherhood and Revelations, I just think the modern story should not have been attached and it should have more been a Desmond only adventure perhaps where he explores Brotherhood in the Van and Revelations in the aftermath and he regains counciousness in time for AC3 with the full modern story and cast. Of course we have no idea what the original idea was. We know it was supposed to be a trilogy of AC1-3 and Ezio was never supposed to get three games as originally AC2 ended in 1503 with the death of Rodrigo Borgia until that was rewritten to allow Brotherhood to exist.

AC3 itself might have been entirely different given Hutchinson had a lot of control over it. We don't know what Patrice Desilets would have done with the AC3 story at all, he might have aimed for elsewhere like the French Revolution for example.

The simple existance of Brotherhood and Revelations tying into the modern story just threw everything out of sync and caused a lot to be rewritten.

Farlander1991
06-24-2014, 12:23 AM
The simple existance of Brotherhood and Revelations tying into the modern story just threw everything out of sync and caused a lot to be rewritten.


To be fair, I'm not sure things would be that good or coherent without Brotherhood and Revelations.

The thing is, AC2 hasn't done anything with the plotline introduced in AC1. In fact, it hasn't progressed the main plotline at all, it only introduced a second one in the form of a cliffhanger (so, no progress on that either). I think it's safe to presume that the scope of the Modern Day in AC3 would be approx. the same as we got it at most, some sort of a hub plus 3 (maybe 4) missions (AC3 had the biggest scope as it comes to modern day out of all games, and the idea of it being fully modern day was just that - an idea that certain people liked on the team, not a definite plan).

So it's 3-4 missions for the team and co to find the Great Temple (Minerva mentions it in AC2 but doesn't specify where it is exactly), to figure out how to save the world, to stop Abstergo from launching the satellite, and we know that the Lucy betrayal subplot was thought of during AC2 development (and in retrospective it kinda explains a few things in AC2), so there'd also be that. Even not counting everything that got introduced via ACB and ACR, that's still tons of stuff. Sure, there are ways that can connect the two (for example, launching the satellite would save the planet from the solar flare), but it still has to be done properly. But as it stands, AC1 was a set-up for one plotline, AC2 was a set-up for another plotline, so AC3 was left with a mess to progress and resolve EVERYTHING.

Yeah, I don't think that would work out THAT well. At least ACB in some ways tried to progress both satellite and solar flare plotlines simultaneously (by finding an Apple before Abstergo and the location of the Temple), so it eased off the load and added substance. But Revelations would've been a wedge in terms of Modern Day. Since it appeared only mid-development of AC3, when they already knew Desmond was in a coma (so they'd start with that, I actually have a theory that Haytham sequences were supposed to be in the coma and Desmond would wake up to tell the location of the Temple after Haytham finds it), AC3 had to change things. It also had to give some of its plotlines/subplots to ACR. Subplots that ACR handled with... not the best success I'd say. So ACR definitely somehow shook up AC3's modern day, ACB was developed while AC3 was in pre-production, so it shouldn't have had that big of a negative effect on AC3.

SpiritMuse
06-24-2014, 02:12 AM
To me it sometimes feels as if after the first game, they got lots of criticism of the modern day part, and then they caved and reduced it in AC2, which really did nothing to appease the naysayers because 1) it was still there and 2) it was now even less interesting. Then in ACB they expanded it again, with a few Desmond climbing sequences and plenty of emails to hack into, though otherwise not really a lot of things to do. And then in ACR they reduced it again, constricting it to a tiny island and some weird creepy first person block puzzles about Desmond's past - which really should have been presented in proper gameplay, it's such a shame that the single biggest moment of character development for Desmond (his finally accepting his role as an Assassin after a lifetime of running away) pretty much happened offscreen. Also I would have loved to actually see Desmond as a kid, play through his training sessions with dad, and his escape from the compound might have made a cool sneaking mission.

Anyway on to AC3 where we get the most involved story yet, with even some actual sneaking missions for Desmond to do. Finally Desmond gets to put to use some of the awesome Assassin skills he picked up from the bleeding effect! But then the ending was disappointingly short, abrupt and anticlimactic. IMMAPRESSBUTTONNOWKTHXBYE and that was it. So, backlash, and the next game sees an according reduction in the modern day again, to some first person traipsing around hacking computers with a nameless, faceless character.

And now, the protagonist becomes even less defined, as they are supposed to be our actual selves... I really wonder if it'll be any good. Though I can't deny I'm looking forward to seeing what happens next in the story, what with the Initiates possibly getting involved and all.

It's almost as if they're afraid to be bold with it, afraid to actually put some meat into that story. Almost as if they're trying to make it optional, to appease those who don't like it. Which really isn't doing the story any good at all.

RinoTheBouncer
06-24-2014, 08:56 AM
I’m happy to have been introduced to AC since the first game came out. By that time, I just played the game without seeing any trailers or having any expectations and I’m not a big fan of historical settings for film or games but this game stood out because it tied itself to everything, to conspiracies, to ancient astronauts theories (something similar to it) and to actual history. By the time I got to the part where Vidic says “they’re gifts from those who came before” and then in the end when we saw the effects of the Apple and in modern day when we saw all the writings, I was extremely intrigued and I became so excited to play the following installment and the whole Modern Day and First Civ. plots because my most favorite parts of the AC franchise.

Until now, I look forward to any visit to a First Civ. temple and I get so happy when we leave the Animus. They half-a*sed the modern day with ACIV, and the whole story became way too complicated for it’s own good and that it had way too many loose ends to even try to tie up and that disappointed me, greatly but I look forward to see it improve rather than get omitted, completely.

shobhit7777777
06-24-2014, 09:22 AM
I expect it to finally die...or at the very least not be intrusive or forced upon. It should be completely and utterly optional for folks like me.

SpiritMuse
06-24-2014, 12:28 PM
I expect it to finally die...or at the very least not be intrusive or forced upon. It should be completely and utterly optional for folks like me.

Which is pretty much why it sucks as a storyline right now, because they do cater to people like you and make it less and less intrusive (and interesting) with each game. Modern day as an optional side quest just doesn't work to make it any good.

Jexx21
06-24-2014, 01:10 PM
I liked AC4's modern day as it did give a lot more depth to the modern day story of AC3.

I'm thinking that in Unity we might make our own characters and that's what they meant when they say it's actually you.

shobhit7777777
06-24-2014, 03:37 PM
Which is pretty much why it sucks as a storyline right now, because they do cater to people like you and make it less and less intrusive (and interesting) with each game. Modern day as an optional side quest just doesn't work to make it any good.

No

It was in ACBF that they tried to minimize it and even then I was pulled out of the core experience to suffer through some Modern day BS IDGAF about.

Modern day has been given many chances to take an interesting turn....its just gotten worse.

If Ubi wants to tell a modern day story - they should pump out some novels to keep the Modern day folks engaged....not shove it into the game...and if they do...it should be completely optional. Because frankly...it simply kills the narrative for me.

ACfan443
06-24-2014, 04:54 PM
I’m happy to have been introduced to AC since the first game came out. By that time, I just played the game without seeing any trailers or having any expectations and I’m not a big fan of historical settings for film or games but this game stood out because it tied itself to everything, to conspiracies, to ancient astronauts theories (something similar to it) and to actual history. By the time I got to the part where Vidic says “they’re gifts from those who came before” and then in the end when we saw the effects of the Apple and in modern day when we saw all the writings, I was extremely intrigued and I became so excited to play the following installment and the whole Modern Day and First Civ. plots because my most favorite parts of the AC franchise.

Exactly how I felt about the present day overarching narrative when I completed AC1, and I was hooked ever since. It was honestly my favourite aspect of the franchise and primary incentive for purchasing the sequels. It had the potential to be so much more.
Now it's become an embarrassing, watered down shell of what it once set out to be, and it's only getting worse. In all honesty I'd prefer it if they just put it out of its misery altogether instead of letting it suffer a slow and undignified death. Saturating it with ludicrous plot lines while failing to provide any satisfying closure to the ones that already exist also adds insult to injury.

SpiritMuse
06-27-2014, 12:41 AM
No

It was in ACBF that they tried to minimize it and even then I was pulled out of the core experience to suffer through some Modern day BS IDGAF about.

Modern day has been given many chances to take an interesting turn....its just gotten worse.

If Ubi wants to tell a modern day story - they should pump out some novels to keep the Modern day folks engaged....not shove it into the game...and if they do...it should be completely optional. Because frankly...it simply kills the narrative for me.

I guess that depends on what you consider the core experience of the game. For me, the modern day storyline is the core of the game, to the point where all the historical stuff feels almost like filler that I have to "suffer through" in order to get some progress in the actual storyline. (Because isn't the whole reason you go through the historical events in the first place only to find some information you need to progress in the current modern day situation?) Especially in AC4, it took a good long while before I cared even a little about what happened to Edward & co., as opposed to the modern day where I couldn't wait to explore the Abstergo office, meet new people, and hack into new computers to find more secret information. If not for the enjoyable Assassin gameplay I wonder if I would have finished it at all.

You're right though that in AC4 it was probably reduced the most, but even in AC2 it was reduced compared to AC1 (as you were only allowed out of the Animus once during the game, apart from the beginning and the end), and by ACR it was practically nonexistant. Only AC3 really broke the trend by having it expand to some properly playable stuff for once, and for that it still remains my favorite AC game.