PDA

View Full Version : (Spoilers) The case for Connor being a bad character



Pages : [1] 2

CSKarasu
08-18-2014, 09:15 AM
Recently people have told me, and rather condescendingly, that I did not understand Connor and that he is not one-dimensional and not just out for revenge. They explain that Connor is a nuanced and thoroughly misunderstood character. I played the same game as you and I respectfully beg to differ.

In the beginning Connor was childish and impetuous, his actions ruled by anger and revenge, later on he fights for freedom but I still believe this is a quest for revenge, revenge against a world that facilitates these kind of evils. Now, he may have hardened his heart after his mother's death, but this does not make for an entertaining, interesting or engaging character. When someone is unemotional (except for anger) it makes for a character with zero personality.

Funnily enough Connor is analogous to Batman, a character I like, both in respects to his origin and his quest for justice. But Batman, although grim and expressionless, actually has some personality, he even grins and smiles sometimes! He is also aided by his role as Bruce, where he can be more of an open character. Connor on the other hand is not an open character, he does not let his guard down.

This is my opinion and interpretation, feel free to disagree. Cheers buds!

Fatal-Feit
08-18-2014, 09:35 AM
Funnily enough Connor is analogous to Batman, a character I like, both in respects to his origin and his quest for justice. But Batman, although grim and expressionless, actually has some personality, he even grins and smiles sometimes! He is also aided by his role as Bruce, where he can be more of an open character. Connor on the other hand is not an open character, he does not let his guard down.

Connor have grinned and smiled plenty of times. Like when he first got his hidden blades, his uniform, the wedding, the homestead gathering, and occasional smirks towards the Templar. You might have missed a few cut-scenes or something. And Connor's counterpart as Bruce are with his Homestead villagers and friends. If you have not already, you should give Homestead Missions a go, it really stretches out his character.


Now, he may have hardened his heart after his mother's death, but this does not make for an entertaining, interesting or engaging character. When someone is unemotional (except for anger) it makes for a character with zero personality.

Except Connor have and has shown emotions. Connor have been the least 1-dimensional character we have had in a long while, if I may be honest. Have he shown an excess amount of anger? Yes, but that doesn't delude him of his other personalities and traits. While he may have gotten only 9 sequences to himself, about half of those were of him developing from child to manhood. The difference between boyhood, adolescence, and adult Connor are very apparent.

Sushiglutton
08-18-2014, 09:43 AM
Since everyone pretty much agree with your opinion I doubt this will spur much discussion.

jeordievera
08-18-2014, 09:45 AM
Ah here we go again...
Connor is not a bad character, he is just different due to what has happened to him as a child and due to his upbringings.
People that don't get him just lacks empathy I guess. Not everyone is happy go lucky all the time. He was written very well, his personality fits the story.

Sesheenku
08-18-2014, 09:51 AM
OP I totally hate Connor, I just did not like him much.

...

Except for that one time when Putnam is like "That's cause your mad as a march hare son" and Connor was like "I expect an apology upon my return" that was pretty lulzy.

I did find him boring though, he didn't have the mystery of Altair and YET I feel like we players didn't get to know enough of him besides the gruff and cold part. There's a few touches here and there and big smattering in the homestead missions but it wasn't enough.

His warm heart and good intentions were really overshadowed by the gruffness and the anger. There wasn't a good balance imo.

I wouldn't say he's 1 dimensional but he's certainly not a guy I'd be inviting to... well anything. If I invited him to a ball he'd probably smash the roast beef and yell at me for not using enough seasoning.

Then I would be like, but sir... we're fresh off England, we still don't know what a bottle of seasoning is!

Then he'd storm off angrily and assassinate me or something.

Then in my white room I'd be like I just wanted to make authentic English roast beef! Connor would say, you succeeded now rest.

Wow it's late. Ignore the latter half of that post.

Fatal-Feit
08-18-2014, 09:53 AM
Ah here we go again...
Connor is not a bad character, he is just different due to what has happened to him as a child and due to his upbringings.
People that don't get him just lacks empathy I guess. Not everyone is happy go lucky all the time. He was written very well, his personality fits the story.

No, this is more of a debate about the supposed lack of emotion and personality that Connor possesses, which I beg to differ. Connor WAS expressive, and was full of emotion.

I think the point that people aren't realizing is that;

Emotions =/= Happy-go-lucky

Sesheenku
08-18-2014, 09:55 AM
No, this is more of a debate about the supposed lack of emotion and personality that Connor possesses, which I beg to differ. Connor WAS expressive, and was full of emotion.

I think the point that people aren't realizing is that;

Emotions =/= Happy-go-lucky

Imo there wasn't enough of his other emotions. It was mostly cold shoulder type stuff.

They needed a better balance.

When the best portrayal of your character in the game is optional you're doing it wrong.

Fatal-Feit
08-18-2014, 09:59 AM
Imo there wasn't enough of his other emotions. It was mostly cold shoulder type stuff.

They needed a better balance.

When the best portrayal of your character in the game is optional you're doing it wrong.

No, the homestead missions weren't the best portrayal. Cut-scenes aside, the voice acting and animations really sucked.

The cold-shoulder type stuff only lasted for a few missions. And mostly towards the founding fathers. --Which I thought was funny. Despite his efforts in supporting the rebels, he really didn't like the founding fathers all that much. Well, except for Samuel Adams. Although, if anything, people were more iffy about how compliant he was towards characters like George Washington.

Legendz54
08-18-2014, 10:07 AM
He is an Assassin, a brutal killer not an annoying over the top jumping harlequin.

Sesheenku
08-18-2014, 10:09 AM
No, the homestead missions weren't the best portrayal. Cut-scenes aside, the voice acting and animations really sucked.

The cold-shoulder type stuff only lasted for a few missions. And mostly towards the founding fathers. --Which I thought was funny. Despite his efforts in supporting the rebels, he really didn't like the founding fathers all that much. Well, except for Samuel Adams. Although, if anything, people were more iffy about how compliant he was towards characters like George Washington.

I disagree, he showed a lot of heart and kindness during those missions, a stark contrast to the majority of his time in the main story.

Even when he's not being cold shouldered he's usually a bit too serious, you don't need to be happy to not be serious. I feel we got more of a feel for Altair than we did Connor. Especially cause we got to see him develop with the conspiracies much more than Connor, I love Haytham but perhaps if he hadn't been playable we would have had more assassinations and thus much better insight into Connor's line of thought and emotions.

As it stands the game and Connor are just getting going before it abruptly ends.

Hans684
08-18-2014, 10:12 AM
Ooookay, time for some articulate BS because i'm bored.

I would say Ezio is the worst lead we had in AC because so many writing problems to his character, progression, consistency and motivations.

in AC II, Ezio dons the robes of his father for some unexplained reason ("take everything you find in there" oooooh, how thoughtful of Papa, he wanted me to have this kick-*** costume, let me just try it on while my dad is rotting in jail expecting me to deliver very important letters to save him from being hanged) but anyways, dad dies, Paola trains him yada yada and then Ezio kills Uberto--our revenge is finished with the death of Uberto, which is all well and good- Ezio continues to join the fight because the Pazzi were his enemies and they had a personal hand in his father's death; cool but then earlier he and Mario discuss Giovanni's work and Ezio "takes it up" with no reason or explanation as to why he's suddenly so willing to take responsibility when 5 minutes ago he was going to escape Italy with the remainder of his family and adding to that, the extremely awkward conversations with Mario during training that showed Ezio being in NO WAY convinced and Mario indoctrinating him forcefully.

Going back to Ezio's unexplained sudden "maturity", Ezio really has no reason to fight the Templars in Venice...or Templars at all after the Pazzi, for that matter since he makes it pretty clear that he's only after revenge by pursuing Rodrigo. The quest is thus minimized to a list of names on a sheet of paper that Ezio has to eliminate....uhhh why? because his uncle told him so although AGAIN, it was shown that Ezio never really cared for the dribble that his uncle talked about in the office about the Codex pages and Giovanni's work. We are then left with a story of a repoman....except instead of taking your stuff, he stabs you in the face.

Many of the alliances that Ezio makes throughout the story make absolutely no sense--There's no way that a 20 something kid who was betrayed by a close family friend would be so huggy huggy and friendly with EACH and EVERY person he meets, it just doesn't make any sense. He's all friendly with Antonio when he's suspicious as hell "we know all about you Ezio and we know your name too lol" and why in god's name would Ezio friggin risk getting killed or imprisoned on his FIRST DAY in Venice--during his revenge vendetta--by helping Rosa? oooooh the lady in distress plot device and we all know how ***** Ezio is because that makes sense. Ezio spends the next 5 years helping Antonio...5 years to assassinate ONE target and then the script strips all that away when Grimaldi says "the Assassin has been here for weeks" No, man....no, I haven't, I'v been here for years.

Ezio's motivations are also another point of frustration. He joins the Assassins and becomes fully dedicated to eradicating Templar tyranny, supposedly--which FINALLY brings his actions in sync with his motivations after 5 sequences of aimlessness--No more revenge "Revenge would have consumed me but i'm fine now" GREAT, man...great.
Do any of you remember Altair's conversation with Richard in Arsuf after killing Robert? when Richard asks why Altair came this far to kill one man? Altair's entire motivations, progression and goals were summarized in that bit. Richard erroneously thinks Altair was here for revenge--and he would have been correct if it was in the beginning of the game--but Altair corrects him and tells him that it was rather justice, than revenge. BOOM, full circle.
Now, with Ezio...he shifts and jumps in the last 5 minutes of the game...we're under the impression that Ezio is only pursuing Rodrigo because he's a dangerous Templar with access to the vault which houses a powerful weapon and the staff of Eden in his hands...no more revenge because he's totally over it, right? No..."I thought i was beyond this but i'm not" is what Ezio says when he reaches Rodrigo. oh....okay then, so...you're still kinda finding your place in the dedication to the Creed, yeah? okay, mate...kill him, one less Templar for the Creed but then..."killing you wont bring my family back, i'm done"--WHAT? so you're not over revenge but wait you're over it and you're a dedicated assassin but wait, you're not because you're...over revenge? how does this make any sense?

adding to all of that, Ezio is just really dumb, rude and closed minded--which makes his Brotherhood self nonsensical to the extent that it almost feels like a retcon--He's very rude and insensitive to Leonardo when the machine doesn't fly all the way to the palace. He insults and berates Leonardo in front of Antonio for the rest of that scene when they're together. He's your best friend and helped you loads, that's really how you treat him? He never even apologized afterwards--even when Leonardo confides in him as a friend and tells him about his machine, Ezio idiotically scoffs and laughs in his face--what an idiot.
He needed to be SHOWN how to do a climb leap twice, all Edward did was pickup on the words Du Casse and Rogers said when he was "showing" them assassination techniques but Ezio had to be shown TWICE how to do a climb leap. wow.

I think i'm in the majority when I say that Ezio was a complete dumb-*** and badly written character--Like....99.9 percent of my basement friends dislike Ezio, that's the majority of the fanbase

Written by Assassin_M.

Fatal-Feit
08-18-2014, 10:25 AM
I disagree, he showed a lot of heart and kindness during those missions, a stark contrast to the majority of his time in the main story.

Even when he's not being cold shouldered he's usually a bit too serious, you don't need to be happy to not be serious. I feel we got more of a feel for Altair than we did Connor. Especially cause we got to see him develop with the conspiracies much more than Connor, I love Haytham but perhaps if he hadn't been playable we would have had more assassinations and thus much better insight into Connor's line of thought and emotions.

As it stands the game and Connor are just getting going before it abruptly ends.

That's why people want Connor to get a sequel. He wasn't a bad character, he was just second in development compared to the whole. AC:3's story isn't about Connor foremost, it's its an entirety.

As for you're reasoning for disagreeing, I still disagree. Being kind hearted and compassionate doesn't simply make him a good character. His main endeavors and the emotional trip that followed are why I, and others like him. The Homestead Missions were extra icing on the cake.

Now about Connor being too serious, I don't think he was serious. He was just calm and collected, exactly like Haytham. They're aware of the world, it hasn't been a happy place for neither of them. And while Connor still had hope, he was also scarred. Let alone having to leave the comfort of his village on a dangerous voyage for the better good. The more I put myself in Connor's shoes, the more human I find in him. --Sort of like being exposed to the comforting light that isn't present on his face. Like OP mentioned, Connor is almost a comparison of Batman. Except, I find his character to be just as deep, if not, more interesting.

Namikaze_17
08-18-2014, 10:26 AM
Bait Thread is Baitable....


But seriously, THREE days worth of these Connor threads?

Jesus, someone should make a 'Connor Hate' thread to stop all this...

And I like Connor... ;)

Namikaze_17
08-18-2014, 10:30 AM
I don't get it, Connor is very alike to Batman..

Yet BRUCE WAYNE gets Money and *******, and

Batman > Connor

Fatal-Feit
08-18-2014, 10:34 AM
Batman is the ****. I'm glad my friend introduced me to superheroes. Anime have been pretty awful ever since the loli stage.

CSKarasu
08-18-2014, 10:34 AM
Bait Thread is Baitable....


But seriously, THREE days worth of these Connor threads?

Jesus, someone should make a 'Connor Hate' thread to stop all this...

And I like Connor... ;)


See this kind of opinion I don't respect. Apparently, trollbait now is anything classed as 'I don't agree with' rather than the old definition of something designed to get a rise out of people.

If you don't like the topic, and have nothing to add, then don't post. If you want dissenting opinions silenced then you're not looking for a forum, you're looking for a support group to nod and validate your own opinions.

Sesheenku
08-18-2014, 10:34 AM
Ooookay, time for some articulate BS because i'm bored.

I would say Ezio is the worst lead we had in AC because so many writing problems to his character, progression, consistency and motivations.

in AC II, Ezio dons the robes of his father for some unexplained reason ("take everything you find in there" oooooh, how thoughtful of Papa, he wanted me to have this kick-*** costume, let me just try it on while my dad is rotting in jail expecting me to deliver very important letters to save him from being hanged)

He's supposed to do what? Storm the tower with little experience of being an assassin and save his father?


but anyways, dad dies, Paola trains him yada yada and then Ezio kills Uberto--our revenge is finished with the death of Uberto, which is all well and good- Ezio continues to join the fight because the Pazzi were his enemies and they had a personal hand in his father's death; cool but then earlier he and Mario discuss Giovanni's work and Ezio "takes it up" with no reason or explanation as to why he's suddenly so willing to take responsibility when 5 minutes ago he was going to escape Italy with the remainder of his family and adding to that, the extremely awkward conversations with Mario during training that showed Ezio being in NO WAY convinced and Mario indoctrinating him forcefully.

Gee, apparently we're all psychology majors now, we are all qualified to determine what decisions are sensible for someome who was just betrayed, had his family murdered in front of him, and then came face to face with his fathers killer and saw that the people working for him were part of his plans.


Going back to Ezio's unexplained sudden "maturity", Ezio really has no reason to fight the Templars in Venice...or Templars at all after the Pazzi, for that matter since he makes it pretty clear that he's only after revenge by pursuing Rodrigo.

Yeah it's not like he'd wonder why some guy just barged into his life murdered his family and has a bunch of guys working for him. I'm pretty sure he'd want answers on top of ruining Rodrigos plans.


The quest is thus minimized to a list of names on a sheet of paper that Ezio has to eliminate....uhhh why? because his uncle told him so although AGAIN, it was shown that Ezio never really cared for the dribble that his uncle talked about in the office about the Codex pages and Giovanni's work. We are then left with a story of a repoman....except instead of taking your stuff, he stabs you in the face.

Once again please tell me you wouldn't take on your fathers work after seeing all Ezio did prior to that.


Many of the alliances that Ezio makes throughout the story make absolutely no sense--There's no way that a 20 something kid who was betrayed by a close family friend would be so huggy huggy and friendly with EACH and EVERY person he meets, it just doesn't make any sense. He's all friendly with Antonio when he's suspicious as hell "we know all about you Ezio and we know your name too lol" and why in god's name would Ezio friggin risk getting killed or imprisoned on his FIRST DAY in Venice--during his revenge vendetta--by helping Rosa? oooooh the lady in distress plot device and we all know how ***** Ezio is because that makes sense. Ezio spends the next 5 years helping Antonio...5 years to assassinate ONE target and then the script strips all that away when Grimaldi says "the Assassin has been here for weeks" No, man....no, I haven't, I'v been here for years.

Meh people cope, recover, and deal with things differently. It's rare but there exists people with the optimism and hope for the future to push through problems like that.

As for Rosa stuff I can give you that one, I don't see a reason for him to help them.


Ezio's motivations are also another point of frustration. He joins the Assassins and becomes fully dedicated to eradicating Templar tyranny, supposedly--which FINALLY brings his actions in sync with his motivations after 5 sequences of aimlessness--No more revenge "Revenge would have consumed me but i'm fine now" GREAT, man...great.
Do any of you remember Altair's conversation with Richard in Arsuf after killing Robert? when Richard asks why Altair came this far to kill one man? Altair's entire motivations, progression and goals were summarized in that bit. Richard erroneously thinks Altair was here for revenge--and he would have been correct if it was in the beginning of the game--but Altair corrects him and tells him that it was rather justice, than revenge. BOOM, full circle.
Now, with Ezio...he shifts and jumps in the last 5 minutes of the game...we're under the impression that Ezio is only pursuing Rodrigo because he's a dangerous Templar with access to the vault which houses a powerful weapon and the staff of Eden in his hands...no more revenge because he's totally over it, right? No..."I thought i was beyond this but i'm not" is what Ezio says when he reaches Rodrigo. oh....okay then, so...you're still kinda finding your place in the dedication to the Creed, yeah? okay, mate...kill him, one less Templar for the Creed but then..."killing you wont bring my family back, i'm done"--WHAT? so you're not over revenge but wait you're over it and you're a dedicated assassin but wait, you're not because you're...over revenge? how does this make any sense?

This is easy. He's likely conflicted, it's obvious throughout the games he's hot headed and pretty violent, he likely had to fight his inner nature pretty damn hard to be able to dedicate himself to more than just revenge. Even then in all of the games there's several times when he lets his emotions get the best of him.

He wants to be a dedicated assassin but he lacks the demeanor and the wisdom, even in Revelations.


adding to all of that, Ezio is just really dumb, rude and closed minded--which makes his Brotherhood self nonsensical to the extent that it almost feels like a retcon--He's very rude and insensitive to Leonardo when the machine doesn't fly all the way to the palace. He insults and berates Leonardo in front of Antonio for the rest of that scene when they're together. He's your best friend and helped you loads, that's really how you treat him? He never even apologized afterwards--even when Leonardo confides in him as a friend and tells him about his machine, Ezio idiotically scoffs and laughs in his face--what an idiot.

Dumb and close minded is debatable, as for rude it is a bit rude BUT they've been friends for years, guys are just straight with each other like that, I don't have a male friend that sugar coats crap for me and I don't do it either.


He needed to be SHOWN how to do a climb leap twice, all Edward did was pickup on the words Du Casse and Rogers said when he was "showing" them assassination techniques but Ezio had to be shown TWICE how to do a climb leap. wow.

It's more like the developers made a moronic choice here rather than Ezio himself. They also temporarily took your double hidden blade for absolutely no reason.


I think i'm in the majority when I say that Ezio was a complete dumb-*** and badly written character--Like....99.9 percent of my basement friends dislike Ezio, that's the majority of the fanbase


Written by Assassin_M.

Dumb is debatable, badly written? To an extent he is.

Ugh, screw you man, I'm tired but I can't resist a debate v-v

CSKarasu
08-18-2014, 10:39 AM
He is an Assassin, a brutal killer not an annoying over the top jumping harlequin.

I'd argue brutal killers are usually the most interesting people because of their psychological issues. It's also interesting how they rationalise what is blatantly wrong.

Fatal-Feit
08-18-2014, 10:41 AM
See this kind of opinion I don't respect. Apparently, trollbait now is anything classed as 'I don't agree with' rather than the old definition of something designed to get a rise out of people.

If you don't like the topic, and have nothing to add, then don't post. If you want dissenting opinions silenced then you're not looking for a forum, you're looking for a support group to nod and validate your own opinions.

I don't think you were baiting, or trying rustle anyone's jimmies. Your opinions were genuine. :p

But to be fair, I think he was just sick of all the Connor threads and debates, just like a majority of us, especially SixKeys. The past few days, there have just been many people trying to troll one another and starting bait threads.

Sesheenku
08-18-2014, 10:43 AM
That's why people want Connor to get a sequel. He wasn't a bad character, he was just second in development compared to the whole. AC:3's story isn't about Connor foremost, it's its an entirety.

As for you're reasoning for disagreeing, I still disagree. Being kind hearted and compassionate doesn't simply make him a good character. His main endeavors and the emotional trip that followed are why I, and others like him. The Homestead Missions were extra icing on the cake.

No but showing something other than anger and gruffness made him more likeable and there wasn't enough of it. There's his mothers death, fathers death, best friends death, and mentors death, other then that he's pretty flat most of the time.


That's why people want Connor to get a sequel. He wasn't a bad character, he was just second in development compared to the whole. AC:3's story isn't about Connor foremost, it's its an entirety.

As for you're reasoning for disagreeing, I still disagree. Being kind hearted and compassionate doesn't simply make him a good character. His main endeavors and the emotional trip that followed are why I, and others like him. The Homestead Missions were extra icing on the cake.

Now about Connor being too serious, I don't think he was serious. He was just calm and collected, exactly like Haytham. They're aware of the world, it hasn't been a happy place for neither of them. And while Connor still had hope, he was also scarred. Let alone having to leave the comfort of his village on a dangerous voyage for the better good. The more I put myself in Connor's shoes, the more human I find in him. --Sort of like being exposed to the comforting light that isn't present on his face. Like OP mentioned, Connor is almost a comparison of Batman. Except, I find his character to be just as deep, if not, more interesting.

I disagree about him being calm and collected, if he was calm and collected he wouldn't get angry. It's quite the opposite, there's several times when he just gets up and gives his enemies the death stare in public places. That's not what calm and collected people do. If it was Altair for example, who is the epitome of calm and collected, he probably would have just sat down, shut up, and eavesdropped.

I'm not saying he's not human but I couldn't find much to like. He had a few admirable traits that as I said are overshadowed by his anger.

UGH excuse the quote derps... I'm more out of it than I've ever been.

Namikaze_17
08-18-2014, 10:48 AM
See this kind of opinion I don't respect. Apparently, trollbait now is anything classed as 'I don't agree with' rather than the old definition of something designed to get a rise out of people.

If you don't like the topic, and have nothing to add, then don't post. If you want dissenting opinions silenced then you're not looking for a forum, you're looking for a support group to nod and validate your own opinions.

No, it is a BAIT thread because some of us have already seen something similar to this a million times before...and we're sick of it! I personally don't care about your opinion, as everyone is free to like what they want. But damn, if you didn't CARE about what people say about Connor, you wouldn't be having this Thread now would you? You just wanna stir up the pot to make yourself feel better about your opinion on Connor.

Plus, why is it ALWAYS Connor? Like seriously, it's like he's the be all and end all of these forums because one positive or negative opinion about him STARTS an F'N Flame war....and that's what we're tired of. Besides, it isn't like people who don't like Altair, Ezio, Edward, Adewale, and Aveline are starting "threads" as to why they hate them yet Connor does.

Now why is that?

CSKarasu
08-18-2014, 10:50 AM
No but showing something other than anger and gruffness made him more likeable and there wasn't enough of it. There's his mothers death, fathers death, best friends death, and mentors death, other then that he's pretty flat most of the time.

I can agree with this, he showed faint glimpses of a character that could be related to. I rather enjoyed his interactions with Haytham.

HiddenKiller612
08-18-2014, 10:56 AM
Now why is that?
not to butt in but... the reason is... there's posters here that turn every thread into an I love connor thread... and they don't seem to drop it... even with a full on discuss connor thread... Thus making yourselves quite the target for trolls.

CSKarasu
08-18-2014, 10:56 AM
No, it is a BAIT thread because some of us have already seen something similar to this a million times before...and we're sick of it! I personally don't care about your opinion, as everyone is free to like what they want. But damn, if you didn't CARE about what people say about Connor, you wouldn't be having this Thread now would you? You just wanna stir up the pot to make yourself feel better about your opinion on Connor.

Plus, why is it ALWAYS Connor? Like seriously, it's like he's the be all and end all of these forums because one positive or negative opinion about him STARTS an F'N Flame war....and that's what we're tired of. Besides, it isn't like people who don't like Altair, Ezio, Edward, Adewale, and Aveline are starting "threads" as to why they hate them yet Connor does.

Now why is that?

1. The only one here starting a flame war is you.

2. Nobody else has expressed that they are tired of the topic, except you.

3. Nobody is forcing you to read or post in this topic.

Fatal-Feit
08-18-2014, 10:58 AM
No but showing something other than anger and gruffness made him more likeable and there wasn't enough of it. There's his mothers death, fathers death, best friends death, and mentors death, other then that he's pretty flat most of the time.

There's more to his journey than just death. There's his development, his chemistry with said characters, the moral greyness of the franchise that was reflected in his story.

Anyway, I really don't remember him always been angry and gruff like people keep describing. I've replayed AC:3 many times, and his character was constantly altered throughout the sequences. He went from sad to happy to mad to calm to annoyed.


I disagree about him being calm and collected, if he was calm and collected he wouldn't get angry. It's quite the opposite, there's several times when he just gets up and gives his enemies the death stare in public places. That's not what calm and collected people do. If it was Altair for example, who is the epitome of calm and collected, he probably would have just sat down, shut up, and eavesdropped.

I'm not saying he's not human but I couldn't find much to like. He had a few admirable traits that as I said are overshadowed by his anger.

Except different situation calls for different measures. There was only one time when he gave the death stare (lul luigi), and that was when he needed to find Charles Lee before he escaped. You can't expect him to sit and wait for that guy to magically spill out a secret he wasn't suppose to tell anyone. When the stakes weren't that high he have eavesdropped, and in the side missions.

You're also forgetting that Connor on already agitated, and on a mission for the last Templar. When Ezio was after Cesare in the end, he literally jumped into the middle of a war to stab the guy instead of doing other calm and collected methods. You know, like poison. Or climb to the top of the wall and air assassinate.

Sesheenku
08-18-2014, 11:02 AM
No, it is a BAIT thread because some of us have already seen something similar to this a million times before...and we're sick of it! I personally don't care about your opinion, as everyone is free to like what they want. But damn, if you didn't CARE about what people say about Connor, you wouldn't be having this Thread now would you? You just wanna stir up the pot to make yourself feel better about your opinion on Connor.

Plus, why is it ALWAYS Connor? Like seriously, it's like he's the be all and end all of these forums because one positive or negative opinion about him STARTS an F'N Flame war....and that's what we're tired of. Besides, it isn't like people who don't like Altair, Ezio, Edward, Adewale, and Aveline are starting "threads" as to why they hate them yet Connor does.

Now why is that?

Probably because he was one of the more disliked characters in the franchise. So obviously he's going to be a big subject, just like all the things we hate.

Hate is good. Embrace the hate. Feed on it....


.... NO okay I am walking away from the keyboard. I need sleep... I'm starting to go off on nonsensical tangents.

We'll continue this tomorrow Alpaca 8U!

I'm gonna sleep with your mug. No homo. Maybe a little. Not really. Maybe. Maybe. I don't know. Don't look at me that way.

Namikaze_17
08-18-2014, 11:05 AM
1. The only one here starting a flame war is you.

2. Nobody else has expressed that they are tired of the topic, except you.

3. Nobody is forcing you to read or post in this topic.

1. What Flame war? I'm not the one starting a Thread on a character I don't like.
2. EVERYONE hasn't seen this Thread yet...but they will.
3. Well sorry, but when I've seen these threads a MILLION times...you kinda feel like talking about it.

For the most part, I understand and respect your opinion.....but I don't care about that. I'm only posting due to me getting tired of these similar threads over and over and over and over...you see what I'm saying?

It's Annoying...


Probably because he was one of the more disliked characters in the franchise. So obviously he's going to be a big subject, just like all the things we hate.

Hate is good. Embrace the hate. Feed on it....


.... NO okay I am walking away from the keyboard. I need sleep... I'm starting to go off on nonsensical tangents.

We'll continue this tomorrow Alpaca 8U!

I'm gonna sleep with your mug. No homo. Maybe a little.
Not really. Maybe. Maybe. I don't know. Don't look at me that way.

This is why I like you Sesh...and no, not in that way.

AherasSTRG
08-18-2014, 11:32 AM
I strongly disagree with the OP.

Connor was the most realistic and relatable character this series has (and probably will) ever had (have).

Of English and Native American origin he grew up in a settlement along with other Mohawks. A place where everything was simple: You hunt, you eat. You respect the gods, they answer back. You resist, you survive.

He joined the Assassins, not only because Juno told him to, but because he wanted to protect his people, his village, he wanted to make the world a place of freedom, a place where people from all races and gennders can live without discrimination and violence.

And that is why he joined Washington, Revere and Franklin on their quest for Independence. Politics and politicians made him believe that he could actually achieve the goals of equality if he fought for their cause (both physically and ideologically).

But, in the end, it appears that none of that is true. Washington will be giving the order for the extermination of the Mohawks and racism will keep existing. His village, the one he sworn to protect will be but deserted. And that is when Connor realises that... it's not the result that matters. It's our devotion to our cause, our passion to make things right. The effort to make the world a better place. The race for a better tomorrow. A race which never in our whole lives ends.

"One of my brotherhood asks me something I have been struggling with myself. What happens if - when - we win? That is a question I still do not have the answer for", at Achilles' funeral.

But, later on, after his mission is complete, to deceased Haytham: "Because I believe things can still change. I may never succeed. The Assassins may struggle for another thousand years in vain. But we will not... Compromise. That's what everyone has insisted upon. And so I have learnt it. But differently than most, I think... (a road whose) end I might not live to see its end... In the face of all that insists I turn back, I carry on. This- this is my compromise".

And tell me now. How is Connor different than humanity as a whole? For generations we have sought to improve our lives, by fighting for a cause alongside influential or political figures. Sometimes (most of the times), we were betrayed or used. Some others we made it. But, we Never. Stopped. Fighting.
Have you stopped fighting for a better tomorrow? I might have gotten tired now and then, but Connor never had. He was a fighter, a real hero. Not the kind of heroes you see in movies, but an actual everyday hero, the one you can relate with.

I could really write much more, but I think I got my point across.

Namikaze_17
08-18-2014, 11:42 AM
@Ahe.

Why aren't we Friends? ;)

Your post just defined why some of us like Connor.

And I put emphasis on 'Some'.

Fatal-Feit
08-18-2014, 11:46 AM
*snip*

Pimpaca approves.

AherasSTRG
08-18-2014, 11:49 AM
@Ahe.

Why aren't we Friends? ;)

Maybe because I am anti-social. No, jk. It's just that I do not post so much.


Your post just defined why some of us like Connor.

And I put emphasis on 'Some'.

For me, Connor is the best character in the series. His story is a life lesson and that is in my opinion, what makes Video Games art. Connor's story and then Edward's story were just... amazing. Maybe in another thread, I will be able to talk about how much one I learnt from Edward's story. I nearly cried at the end of Black Flag.

Namikaze_17
08-18-2014, 12:19 PM
Maybe because I am anti-social. No, jk. It's just that I do not post so much.



For me, Connor is the best character in the series. His story is a life lesson and that is in my opinion, what makes Video Games art. Connor's story and then Edward's story were just... amazing. Maybe in another thread, I will be able to talk about how much one I learnt from Edward's story. I nearly cried at the end of Black Flag.


*Nods*

I agree completely...I'll miss the Kenways and their saga honestly..they're what drew me into AC! But I agree about Connor and Edward...though my favorite is Altair, I REALLY felt emotionally involved in both Connor's, Haytham's, and Edward's stories due to how Human and Organic all of them came off. Not to mention, they pretty much the started the 'gray area' for this series alongside their side characters and future games such as Unity and Rogue that should fully establish this.

But I'm ranting....so I'll stop here.

;)

Fatal-Feit
08-18-2014, 12:23 PM
The grey area have been in the series since the first game. The Ezio Trilogy was when it went ridiculously black and white for a while.

CSKarasu
08-18-2014, 12:27 PM
I strongly disagree with the OP.

Connor was the most realistic and relatable character this series has (and probably will) ever had (have).



I agree he is a somewhat realistic character, but people don't want realistic characters, they just think they do. After suffering many people become closed off, but that does not make for an entertaining character and does not serve to bring his personality to the fore.

Also, talking about relatability, it was my poor choice of words, what I mean is endearing qualities, of which Connor has few.

Shahkulu101
08-18-2014, 01:21 PM
I find Connor's naïveté very endearing. There was something so heartening about the way Connor wanted to make the world a better place. Freedom for all, an ideal he thought the colonists shared. A world where everybody was equal. Sounds a tad cheesy, but it made sense for Connor. He led a simple life, in his village sheltered from the reality of urban life. It's very telling just how innocent he is when he asks Sam Adams "Why can't we just explain I did not do it?". It's just that headstrong conviction to fight for all that's good in the world, some call it stupid and to an extent they are right because he never succeeded in his lofty aims. But if we don't aim high and think positively where does that get us? Connor in the end isn't a grey character himself, he fought for a world where everything was right. This kind of idealism made him very endearing to me. I also liked his introverted manner and awkwardness, it was amusing at times and made him feel more human. Maybe not entertaining, but I think there was certainly depth of character. Nothing amazing, and I'll admit not presented all that well, but personally I really like Connor as a character.

On a simpler note, I just enjoyed his kindness and willingness to help others. His anger was understandable to me, and I was never bothered by it or found it a problem because it was part of who he was. A flawed person. In the end, his anger towards Achilles were just spurs of the moment. He loved Achilles like a father in the end, and was grateful for all Achilles help. How do his few verbal scuffles (which were shown as development of their father-son relationship and for comedic purposes anyway) even matter anymore? I use that as a example because many cite his anger toward Achilles as an example of his so called intolerable anger.

Also, you say that people are claiming you don't understand his character and condemn you for vocalising your opinion, but those people just offered counter arguments to your interpretation. You should respect that.

Legendz54
08-18-2014, 01:24 PM
Connor is not that hard to understand.. why is it that some human brains just can't comprehend the type of person he is.. people blatantly saying he had no "personality" which again is false.. no one can have no personality. I didn't really feel relatable to Ezio at all.. The guy was hitting on everything he saw... Cristina, Paola, Caterina, Rosa and not to mention like 3 prostitutes, I just got tired of it after seeing it every game. It felt like he had shown no real growth until the end of Revelations.

Im not saying don't have love interests.. Arno has ONE and quite frankly thats all he needs.. don't get me wrong im keen for some next gen sex scenes.. But don't shove it in my face every damn game..

Altair, Connor and Edward can do in one game what took Ezio 3 games to get.. proper character development.

Hans684
08-18-2014, 01:27 PM
An interesting read for people screaming character development on both sides.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=End-of-history_illusion

Fatal-Feit
08-18-2014, 01:41 PM
I agree he is a somewhat realistic character, but people don't want realistic characters, they just think they do. After suffering many people become closed off, but that does not make for an entertaining character and does not serve to bring his personality to the fore.

You're neglecting the part where people in this thread continuously say they like that. Entertainment comes in various ways. There isn't one single version of fun, entertainment, an engaging character. So what if Connor isn't cracking a one liner, or a humorous remark at the expense of the situation? So what if he's normally angry, or distressed during the line of work? It didn't make him a bad character. Connor's character was one of the most consistent we've had in a while, and the product of good writing. His story was realistic and relatable, and don't give me that ''people don't want realistic characters'', of course they do. They always have. Silent Hill is known for endorsing players by using sympathetic characters. Highly acclaimed movies and books are usually regarded for it, as well. And I definitely wouldn't be so invested into the Kenway Saga if they were otherwise.


Also, talking about relatability, it was my poor choice of words, what I mean is endearing qualities, of which Connor has few.

Connor and his struggling endeavors ARE the epitome of endearing qualities. He's basically a war hero who, since he was a teenager, have sacrificed his life for the sake of others.

SpiritOfNevaeh
08-18-2014, 03:26 PM
And now I shall dedicate the post I made to this thread :)

There’s love and hate of course on each side regarding Connor which I see just about everyday, but I think it has pushed me to the point where I must say something, considering I always keep to myself and barely get involved with Internet activities. In other words, this is a very rare occasion where I will actually post/write something in response to anything misunderstood and such. Hopefully I got all the points down in one take. Basically, I like to do a ton of research on things that catch my attention and would like to know more about, not only to keep me intrigued about the topic, but also to also shed some light on those that disagree with something when they do not know the full story yet. Now, please DO NOT take this to intentionally hurt/degrade/offend anyone as I am just making some points that will hopefully make any haters reconsider their mislead thoughts about the character. I truly believe that everyone is entitled to his or her own opinions, but it should not be when they barely know the backstory of the character or when they are so used to a character like Ezio.

1. “Connor isn’t much of a character or too bland.” I truly believe it’s because he was a totally different person than what you were used to from Altair and Ezio. Maybe you’re just not the type of person who can appreciate him for who he was; a real human being who put his people before anything else and tries to always do what is right. Was it because he wasn’t searching for an “outlet” as much as Ezio was in his younger years (aside from the later games that only existed because of his character development)? Or as careless and filled with undeserved pride like Altair? Don’t get me wrong: both those characters were great in their time periods (Altair was my favorite mainly because of his voice, but that changed in the other games - FAIL), but the fact is that for a real person to be introduced into a series like this lets us know that we can still have moral principles and be a badass at the same time, but it was time for a change – in my opinion, it made me think Italians were ***** all the time. >_< You only think he’s boring if you compare him to previous characters like Ezio; they lived in different time periods for goodness sake! And if you have a problem with a virgin superhero/main character as a badass, there is something wrong with you. First impressions are painful, but don’t judge a character based on the glitches either. He has lots of potential so he deserves a proper comeback. And if I had a nickel for every time Connor was compared to another character for comparison, I’d probably be rich!

And, since when did video game characters have to be recklessly violent and brutal like Kratos? Or try to be a flirt with the ladies like Leon Kennedy? But then again, I still see people who criticize him still trying to get more information about him, watching his videos, etc. Believe it or not, when I first played, I didn’t like him either, nor did I hate him, but after playing the game a few more times, as well as the side missions, it just made me keep falling in love with him all over again. To be honest, I personally think Ubisoft rushed the game (hence the amount of glitches and such?) since they did admit they were working on AC4 at the same time as AC3. They should have put more time into him as well as the game itself and then we wouldn’t have such mixed feedback about them both, but yet the fans that understood him loved him regardless and that shows in the growing fan base as well as petitions for his return. . I can't tell you how many petitions have started, and I know it will not stop here… Hint, Ubisoft?

There’s a reason why he was nominated for Character of the Year. Not to mention the awesome acceptance speech video had he won? Furthermore, he DID win the Best Video Game Character at the Virgin Media Awards.

2. “Connor is too ignorant or too ambitious or too naïve or too rude or shows no emotion.” Were we all not like this at a point of time in our lives, specifically when we were younger? To judge a character based on these characteristics makes you just as ignorant as you claim him to be. Altair was involved because it’s his duty; Ezio was involved to get revenge; Connor was in it for finding freedom for everyone – Freedom speaks way louder than the other two on any occasion to be honest. He was doing what was right and fought not just for his people, but for anyone caught in the freedom debate.

And please consider what the guy went through: he lost his mother at a young age, betrayed by those who he helped willingly, had to kill his father and best friend, lost his mentor (and yes I will admit some teary eyes when he spoke to Achilles’ grave) and after all that, his people were evicted to the west. How was he supposed to know this would happen? I know that if there was something that could be done to save who I held dear and wanted to protect, I would make sure that I would do everything that I was humanly possible to do to ensure their protection/safety. He did eventually mature near the end, did he not? And from what I’ve seen, he clearly doesn’t like the fact that he has to lie to reduce his notoriety and even argued with Sam Adams to who really started the Battle at Lexington and Concord. Need I mention how humble he was throughout the war itself?

He has every right to be seen as maybe ungrateful or emotionless because the colonists have been stealing their land and killing his people off, not to mention he doesn’t have much experience in the western culture so how was he supposed to act around them? The Internet was not available back then so he couldn’t look it up. He was basically being neutral and staying true to his roots in the mean time, including the fact about him not liking to be touched by people. In truth, in some Native American cultures, it is considered taboo to touch or be touched by someone who is not family or someone you don’t know (Don’t get me started with Paul Revere, Sam Adams but he lightened up, George Washington came to that side). Eventually, the people he spent a lot of time with grew accustomed to this and respected this “behavior.” People also said that he was whiny and such. Wasn’t Ezio whiny at the beginning as well and then matured over time? That’s exactly what happened with Connor considering he’s of a more cultural background.

3. If and when they do make a Connor sequel, I would say:
Northwest Indian Wars (1785-1795) – This one may be an ideal event for him: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northwest_Indian_War
Key figures:
United States
George Washington, President of the United States
Henry Knox, Secretary of War
Josiah Harmar, general
Arthur St. Clair, governor of the Northwest Territory, major general
Anthony Wayne, major general
Timothy Pickering, diplomat, secretary of war, secretary of state
John Hardin, Colonel - killed on a peace mission at what would later become Hardin, Shelby County, Ohio.
Alexander Truman, Major - killed on a peace mission at what later became Ottawa, Ohio.

War of 1812?

And please keep the same voice actor, Noah Watts; he did an epic job – I think he wants to pay Connor again as much as the fans do! And you know what will really please the fans? If he was involved in more than one war/event in his next game; he is that much of an ambitious person to get involved as much as he can to stop the Templars and fight for freedom.

Speaking of acting, people believe the voice acting of the Native Americans, specifically Connor, was terrible. English is not his native language and the voice actor specifically did the acting like this on purpose because when you have a second language that you will eventually need to use, but not fluent in, you will expect to speak slowly and not to the fluent speaker’s normal speech as you are still trying to formulate the words to speak. You can’t expect to be fluent in a second language when you’ve only learned it recently and such, not to mention he mainly started using it in his teenage years. Furthermore, English is the most complicated language in the world, but that’s a different story altogether.

4. Why is it every time that we ask a staff member of Ubisoft or Ubisoft directly about Connor’s return, we get mixed answers and ambiguous statements?

When asked for a AC3 sequel or two with Connor:

Alex Hutchison: It’s hard to answer that without giving spoilers… Our goal is to ship a game every year but never to develop a game in a year. So obviously there has to be some decision-making before the previous one comes out. If there’s a huge response to Connor then obviously it will fit into our future plans.

Julien Laferrière: “We’re going to see how players react to the guy [Connor] for sure. You’ll get to experience portions of his life, you’ll see why he becomes an assassin and what his motivations are. The more you know about Connor the more you’ll love him, but in the end we’ll see what the reception is like.”

Needless to say, there is; the fanbase has definitely grown by a huge margin recently.

When asked about how the fans felt about Connor:

Alex Hutchison: “We spent a lot of time working on this Assassin, trying to make someone who was compelling to people and seemed like a cool person to be. The fact that responses have been positive – we’ve already seen cosplaying and fan art – and people seem to really have adopted him, which was really satisfying.” - and this comment was made AFTER the game came out for a while.

So what’s the problem? The fans loved him, the reaction was positive as they hoped, so why does it sound like they may be going back on their word about bringing him back?

There are many Connor supporters out there but they don’t speak up much because they have better things to do I suppose, so hopefully they will join the rest of us in being heard; we all have the right to be heard. The fan reception was huge and the company knows it, including Corey May and Alex Hutchison. I also wished they would release the survey results they had on him so we can see how strong the response from the fans were.

And yes, we do know that he was planned way before we even heard his name and such, but the fact of the matter is that when he came out and we played the game, the fans want more. I’m pretty sure Ezio’s sequels wasn’t planned after AC2 came out until the fans demanded it.

When asked about giving Connor an Ember’s ending:

Darby McDevitt: “Not at this time. Embers took 6 months to make. It was a big project, and beloved by all, but those teams are busy with other things right now. But we loved the project, so maybe we’ll go that route again one day.”

I would rather have the sequel than a movie because writing a novel is taking the easy way out.

When asked again about making Connor come back for a sequel on Reddit:

Darby McDevitt: “Not likely. We want Tumblr to pick up where we left off.”

To be honest, I found this to be a little offensive: you’re basically telling the fans to continue the story themselves (fanfiction, really?) If that was the case, we would all have our own companies and be making them ourselves, but for a company to tell us that, then why are you in business? Unfortunately in this world, if you stop or don’t give fans or customers what they want/need, you are not going to last long. If you need help creating a new story for Connor to appear in, have a contest or something where whoever submits the best story for them to use for Connor will be used for a Connor sequel. But like I said, that statement is ambiguous. Then he said something about don’t rely on us and make your own stories. Really? Isn’t that why the fans are paying for your products, to see stories properly and professional done? Need I say that you also mentioned “bringing closure is the top priority?”

He was basically sending us into loops. First, we’ll see what the fan reception is like → The fans loved him → I would love to do another Connor game → His return is not likely. Seriously? Did you not see the fan reception and you can’t even give us a straight answer?

Considering there are people constantly asking Ubisoft just about everyday about Connor to come back, with the numbers growing by the day as well, we obviously want his return, so it would be stupid to not bring him back. Heck, even Noah Watts admitted himself that he would love to reprise his role in another game.

5. I even saw this beautiful Reddit post created sometime around February/March 2014 that really spoke to a lot of people, including the “haters” (credit goes to IFeelLikeAndy):
I've never seen a more ignorant and downright one sided comment before in my entire life. Connor Kenway was one of the most well developed characters in the entirety of the Assassin's Creed Franchise. What Ubisoft did with Connor is what inspired me to want to write and gives me hope that more writers can take note of [Corey May, Matt Turner,] and their team did with Connor, Native Americans everywhere, and Assassin's Creed in general. Ubisoft's team of writers did what many in the industry are afraid of doing; They told the harsh but undeniable truth about America's history Connor was a very stoic and troubled young man, there's no doubt about that, but its not because he's a ****, or a ****** as I've read, but because in the Mohawk tribe men and women are taught at a very young age that to show emotion is to show weakness. This is why Connor seems very stern and straightforward when talking to "the white man" and he even goes out of his way and refuses to speak with contractions so as to keep himself on a higher level than non natives. Not only that, but these are the people who have abandoned him, shunned him, taken his land his home his life, and spat on him afterwards. Oh, and when I say him I mean his people and Native Americans in all of Colonial North America.

Connor is the soul embodiment of millions of Native Americans who fought and died for what they believed knew was right, and Ubisoft did a beautiful job of expressing this. If you study Connor as a character you will see that whenever someone who is not from his tribe touches him, he will look at them and move away quickly and scornfully. However, as he spends more time in the new world he digresses from his native culture and even uses contractions when speaking, allows himself to befriend non natives, and later on he even begins to show much emotion in his voice, which is completely different from the Connor we met in the beginning of his life.

But after everything he went through he saw that what these men were doing to his people was also being done to their own men. He witnessed The Boston Massacre and saw that the world was more than he once thought, and the corruption of these people was much more than he thought. It was then that he learned to not only fight for the freedom of his people but for the freedom of all people, no matter the cost. Even if he must go at it alone, Connor had a moral obligation to help save the world around him.

Lee: "Even those men you sought to save have turned their backs on you. Yet you fight, you resist. Why?"
Connor: "Because no one else will!"

Ubisoft honored Native Americans by not making this a game about some angry red skin who goes by the name Soars With Eagles who is covered head to toe in feathers, but instead they focused on remaining true to history and truly expressing the hatred, fear, and will power of The Native Man in The New World. Ubisoft even went so far out of their way as to learn that in Mohawk Culture people do not use a name more than once and after learning this, Ubisoft had to do extensive amounts of research to find a suitable name for their new conflicted protagonist that has never before been used in recorded history. And thus, Ratonhnhaké:ton was born. Yet after all this work, Ubisoft got hurt by bringing to life the heart of the real Native American Culture instead of tarnishing it like the media enjoys doing so often. And its because of this, that I have lost a lot of hope for the culturally diverse world that I thought I was now living in.

Connor was a significantly more believable character than most people's beloved Ezio was. He saw things at a young age that scarred him for life and experienced so much that it made him into the tragic hero that is praised by few and underappreciated by many more. The only mistake Ubisoft made was not releasing Connor's Epilogue that summed up the tragic story that is his life and after ACIV is now the Kenway Family Tragedy.

All of this was not done by Connor but by a team of gifted writers who know that telling a story the way it should be told is more important than showing a blatant disregard of the harsh truth of the Native American culture.

IN CONCLUSION, if you are still not convinced that Connor is an awesome character, I strongly encourage you to play the game again, along with the side missions, and I assure you that you will most likely have a better understanding and different opinion about the character. Maybe this is one of those games where you have to play more than once to establish a deeper connection to the character. If you still can’t relate to him in some way afterwards, I have nothing else to say to you and maybe you can’t appreciate real characters in a video game like him. Therefore, I have nothing else to say to you.

Ubisoft, I am not only speaking for me, but for all the Connor lovers out there who remain silent. PLEASEEEEEEEEE make an awesome Connor sequel. You’re a great company with great games released just about all the time. It’s not like you’re guessing what we like; we are telling you exactly what we like. No more mixed messages. No more enigmas. No more switcheroos. The fan bases and petitions of this character grow every single day and eventually you guys will take the hint of what your fans are demanding. Unless you guys have planned an epic surprise for us in the near future to give off such ambiguity, then by all means, keep leaving us in anticipation, but don’t decide to “double cross” us in the end. Eventually our voices will become loud enough for you to no longer ignore, because having an awesome character for one installment is not cool, or as Connor would say, “it is not enough.”

Yours truly,
The Assassin’s Creed Fanbase

.. And not to mention that famous "Tunnel Vision" article thats gained some attention regarding this same matter. Yeah.. I'm done :P

lothario-da-be
08-18-2014, 03:49 PM
Not this AGAIN...
@ Humble amazing post!

Hans684
08-18-2014, 03:53 PM
They did say they plan ahead, so Connor might return Soon™. We just don't know when.

SpiritOfNevaeh
08-18-2014, 04:09 PM
Not this AGAIN...
@ Humble amazing post!

Thx ^_^


They did say they plan ahead, so Connor might return Soon™. We just don't know when.

Actually. It's just so hard to wait sometimes lol

Hans684
08-18-2014, 04:14 PM
Actually. It's just so hard to wait sometimes lol

I understand, I'm waiting on Half-Life 3. Waiting isn't even right word for it, it's been so long.

lothario-da-be
08-18-2014, 04:15 PM
Thx ^_^



Actually. It's just so hard to wait sometimes lol
The problem is not waiting for me, it's just the uncertainty of ever getting a sequel/ closure. I would be okay if they just said there won't be a sequel but no, they just keep being mysterious.

SpiritOfNevaeh
08-18-2014, 04:46 PM
The problem is not waiting for me, it's just the uncertainty of ever getting a sequel/ closure. I would be okay if they just said there won't be a sequel but no, they just keep being mysterious.

I know. I'd just hate for them to do something like:

"After making you guys wait for so long, we have decided to make all those "maybe's" a no." T_T

Megas_Doux
08-18-2014, 04:50 PM
Problems that get "attributed" to connor:

1 Overhyped game that DID NOT deliver.
2 Confusive narrative.
3 VA Watts performance! Roger Craig Smith is one of the most recognized VA´s in the business and despite his "Puss in Boots" Antonio banderas like accent he did a GREAT job with Ezio setting the bar really high. Watts just did not appeal to me, his voice makes me sleep. not convinced by him.

UBI took a risk and with Connor and I appreciate that, but those factors above harmed his reception.

killzab
08-18-2014, 04:55 PM
IN CONCLUSION, if you are still not convinced that Connor is an awesome character, I strongly encourage you to play the game again, along with the side missions, and I assure you that you will most likely have a better understanding and different opinion about the character. Maybe this is one of those games where you have to play more than once to establish a deeper connection to the character. If you still can’t relate to him in some way afterwards, I have nothing else to say to you and maybe you can’t appreciate real characters in a video game like him. Therefore, I have nothing else to say to you.



Now if that isn't a stupid statement, I don't know what is ... especially the bolded part....

Maybe people who don't like Connor just ... don't you know ?

you can't please everyone, it's called opinions ...

jeordievera
08-18-2014, 05:00 PM
I just want Connor to be the next Batman instead of Ben Affleck!

Sesheenku
08-18-2014, 05:05 PM
There's more to his journey than just death. There's his development, his chemistry with said characters, the moral greyness of the franchise that was reflected in his story.

Anyway, I really don't remember him always been angry and gruff like people keep describing. I've replayed AC:3 many times, and his character was constantly altered throughout the sequences. He went from sad to happy to mad to calm to annoyed.

The development is seen through the few Templars he kills. His happiness is usually pretty fleeting imo, not like it shouldn't be, I'm not arguing that he's unrealistic and I'm not arguing for him to be like Ezio, I just found him dull is all, it's not like I found Ezio fun, he's just an average character and I didn't pay much attention to him besides his badassness. Altair is my favorite character to this day.

Unfortunately for this character to work out for me they have to be like Altair, trained in the brotherhood and being more logical about things, otherwise they just kind of end up like a less extreme version of Cloud from FF.


Except different situation calls for different measures. There was only one time when he gave the death stare (lul luigi), and that was when he needed to find Charles Lee before he escaped. You can't expect him to sit and wait for that guy to magically spill out a secret he wasn't suppose to tell anyone. When the stakes weren't that high he have eavesdropped, and in the side missions.

You're also forgetting that Connor on already agitated, and on a mission for the last Templar. When Ezio was after Cesare in the end, he literally jumped into the middle of a war to stab the guy instead of doing other calm and collected methods. You know, like poison. Or climb to the top of the wall and air assassinate.

Firstly no, he got mad at Nicholas Biddle the first time he met him and got pretty agitated with Lee during Washingtons promotion. So that's at least three times with yours. Two of those times he should have had more self control IMO. If there was anything he failed to learn and all assassins after Altair fail at it's self control.

We're talking about Connor here, I'm not making a comparison of Connor to anyone except perhaps Altair, there's no need to bring up Ezio cause I'm not saying he's more realistic or a better character.

In fact I'm overall neutral toward him. I didn't find that he was a dedicated assassin.



This is why I like you Sesh...and no, not in that way.

Don't worry baby, I know exactly what you mean ; )

SpiritOfNevaeh
08-18-2014, 06:03 PM
Now if that isn't a stupid statement, I don't know what is ... especially the bolded part....

Maybe people who don't like Connor just ... don't you know ?

you can't please everyone, it's called opinions ...

I'm not trying to sound like a bad person.

In other words, after reading all the things that explain why he is who is he, if you still "hate" him for those SAME reasons, then I consider that to be, for lack of a better word, ignorant. That's all.

Yes, he may not appeal to everybody, but we're just "justifying" why he is like that, which makes him a more relatable character.

And on a side note, it's really sad that people can't relate to "relatable" characters. =/

Assassin_M
08-18-2014, 06:15 PM
He's supposed to do what? Storm the tower with little experience of being an assassin and save his father?
Which he actually did lol but no, i'd have thought he'd be quicker in wanting to deliver the letter to Uberto instead of putting on some costume.


Gee, apparently we're all psychology majors now, we are all qualified to determine what decisions are sensible for someome who was just betrayed, had his family murdered in front of him, and then came face to face with his fathers killer and saw that the people working for him were part of his plans.
it has nothing to do with being a psychology major, it's just sensible and consistent writing. I'v read stories, watched stories and played stories--NONE of the betrayal stories had the characters friendly and huggy huggy with everyone they ran into. It's not psychology, it's logical and consistent writing. Would you be huggy huggy with a complete stranger and be okay for them to take your mom and sister in RIGHT after your dad's close friend betrayed all of you and the entire city was after you? You don't need a major to know that.


Yeah it's not like he'd wonder why some guy just barged into his life murdered his family and has a bunch of guys working for him. I'm pretty sure he'd want answers on top of ruining Rodrigos plans.
What answers? Mario already told him everything. These people were Templars and they killed your father because he's an Assassin and was in the way of their plans. Ezio never cared for ANY of that, he never understood it and he never listened. Ezio only cared about revenge so why go after the lackeys? Why is he hunting people who are irrelevant to his objective?


Once again please tell me you wouldn't take on your fathers work after seeing all Ezio did prior to that.
of course I would but Ezio never cared...He thought the codex pages were dribble and an old man's fantasy and he solely hunted the other Templars because they were on a list of paper that his uncle told him about...that's it--repoman.


Meh people cope, recover, and deal with things differently. It's rare but there exists people with the optimism and hope for the future to push through problems like that.
I didn't say he shouldn't recover, Ezio's optimism is his defense mechanism to continue to survive but like I said, his trust of COMPLETELY random strangers who mysteriously know his name is bewildering--if I met someone who knows my name for no reason, i'd be creeped as hell and be distrustful but Ezio trusts EVERYBODY...no, really EVERYBODY--I bet if Uberto told Ezio i'm sorry and lets start a new page, Ezio would'v trusted him.


This is easy. He's likely conflicted, it's obvious throughout the games he's hot headed and pretty violent, he likely had to fight his inner nature pretty damn hard to be able to dedicate himself to more than just revenge. Even then in all of the games there's several times when he lets his emotions get the best of him.

He wants to be a dedicated assassin but he lacks the demeanor and the wisdom, even in Revelations.
It still makes 0 sense, like I said..it's not just his getting over revenge, it's HOW he got over it. by 1499, Ezio is a dedicated Assassin but sure, conflicted as well...his getting over revenge in the shape of sparing Rodrigo was wrong...why? because then the point about being conflicted is moot because if he wanted to be a dedicated Assassin then he'd have ended Rodrigo because he's a dangerous Templar (and the death of Mario most likely would not have happened)


Dumb and close minded is debatable, as for rude it is a bit rude BUT they've been friends for years, guys are just straight with each other like that, I don't have a male friend that sugar coats crap for me and I don't do it either.
Nah, he's dumb..I demonstrated why he is and dismissing an idea is close minded, sugar coating or not, mates or not--it's still close minded. the fact that Leonardo helped Ezio for YEARS should make Ezio a bit more humble with his friend..okay, so this thing didn't work...Ezio goes on and on more than once in berating his friend during that cutscene. It's also funny how up there, you said that I can't make a qualified decision because i'm not a psychology major but have no qualms here about burrowing from your real life experience to support your argument;) (just a likely backup in case you tell me that my life experience doesn't count)


It's more like the developers made a moronic choice here rather than Ezio himself. They also temporarily took your double hidden blade for absolutely no reason.
EVERYTHING can be attributed to the writers and developers but we're talking about Ezio in the realm of strict fiction, this is a criticism of Ezio and thus by extension, the writers.


Dumb is debatable, badly written? To an extent he is.
Nah, he's dumb.


Ugh, screw you man, I'm tired but I can't resist a debate v-v
Hehe, i'm still gonna call you out on Connor:p

Just chill out, people...have fun. This isn't YT. Lets all debate civilliy and like grown ups.

Namikaze_17
08-18-2014, 06:26 PM
Problems that get "attributed" to connor:

1 Overhyped game that DID NOT deliver.
2 Confusive narrative.
3 VA Watts performance! Roger Craig Smith is one of the most recognized VA´s in the business and despite his "Puss in Boots" Antonio banderas like accent he did a GREAT job with Ezio setting the bar really high. Watts just did not appeal to me, his voice makes me sleep. not convinced by him.

UBI took a risk and with Connor and I appreciate that, but those factors above harmed his reception.

1) True
2) I honestly didn't feel all that confused with the Narrative honestly...if there's a one that's confusing, it was liberation.
3) Noah Watts actually said in Loomer's Podcast that comparing Roger's VA's to his VA's
( Ezio & Connor) was basically a high bar, and comparing the two was basically like comparing Coffee to 7up. ;)

Jexx21
08-18-2014, 06:27 PM
I find Connor's naïveté very endearing. There was something so heartening about the way Connor wanted to make the world a better place. Freedom for all, an ideal he thought the colonists shared. A world where everybody was equal. Sounds a tad cheesy, but it made sense for Connor. He led a simple life, in his village sheltered from the reality of urban life. It's very telling just how innocent he is when he asks Sam Adams "Why can't we just explain I did not do it?". It's just that headstrong conviction to fight for all that's good in the world, some call it stupid and to an extent they are right because he never succeeded in his lofty aims. But if we don't aim high and think positively where does that get us? Connor in the end isn't a grey character himself, he fought for a world where everything was right. This kind of idealism made him very endearing to me. I also liked his introverted manner and awkwardness, it was amusing at times and made him feel more human. Maybe not entertaining, but I think there was certainly depth of character. Nothing amazing, and I'll admit not presented all that well, but personally I really like Connor as a character.

On a simpler note, I just enjoyed his kindness and willingness to help others. His anger was understandable to me, and I was never bothered by it or found it a problem because it was part of who he was. A flawed person. In the end, his anger towards Achilles were just spurs of the moment. He loved Achilles like a father in the end, and was grateful for all Achilles help. How do his few verbal scuffles (which were shown as development of their father-son relationship and for comedic purposes anyway) even matter anymore? I use that as a example because many cite his anger toward Achilles as an example of his so called intolerable anger.

Also, you say that people are claiming you don't understand his character and condemn you for vocalising your opinion, but those people just offered counter arguments to your interpretation. You should respect that.

Connor's idealism is something we should all have by the way... A world where everyone is equal may not be attainable in our lifetime, but it's something we should strive for. Always strive for the betterment of mankind.

Oh, and I PMed the OP before he/she posted this topic, I did say I think they didn't understand the character of Connor, but at the end I also tried to be respectful, and I wasn't condemning them at all for sharing their opinions.

Sesheenku
08-18-2014, 06:35 PM
Which he actually did lol but no, i'd have thought he'd be quicker in wanting to deliver the letter to Uberto instead of putting on some costume.

It's not like it took him long to throw on a robe, or do you think he took a trip to his sisters room to borrow her makeup too?


it has nothing to do with being a psychology major, it's just sensible and consistent writing. I'v read stories, watched stories and played stories--NONE of the betrayal stories had the characters friendly and huggy huggy with everyone they ran into. It's not psychology, it's logical and consistent writing. Would you be huggy huggy with a complete stranger and be okay for them to take your mom and sister in RIGHT after your dad's close friend betrayed all of you and the entire city was after you? You don't need a major to know that.

I've seen a lot of bad **** happen to real life people, not just in stories and you know what? A few of them manage to be okay outwardly. Do they trust inside? Dunno but on the outside they appear to be normal. People are capable of doing that.



What answers? Mario already told him everything. These people were Templars and they killed your father because he's an Assassin and was in the way of their plans. Ezio never cared for ANY of that, he never understood it and he never listened. Ezio only cared about revenge so why go after the lackeys? Why is he hunting people who are irrelevant to his objective?

First off Mario told him the bare basics, that wouldn't be satisfying enough imo.

Finally how are they irrelevant? He knows for a fact they're working for Rodrigo, that they all played a part in the death of his family in one way or another.



of course I would but Ezio never cared...He thought the codex pages were dribble and an old man's fantasy and he solely hunted the other Templars because they were on a list of paper that his uncle told him about...that's it--repoman.

That's teens for you but again after he killed Vieri he changed his mind which isn't unreasonable after seeing what he was up against, what his father had been up against.



I didn't say he shouldn't recover, Ezio's optimism is his defense mechanism to continue to survive but like I said, his trust of COMPLETELY random strangers who mysteriously know his name is bewildering--if I met someone who knows my name for no reason, i'd be creeped as hell and be distrustful but Ezio trusts EVERYBODY...no, really EVERYBODY--I bet if Uberto told Ezio i'm sorry and lets start a new page, Ezio would'v trusted him.

Read point 2.



It still makes 0 sense, like I said..it's not just his getting over revenge, it's HOW he got over it. by 1499, Ezio is a dedicated Assassin but sure, conflicted as well...his getting over revenge in the shape of sparing Rodrigo was wrong...why? because then the point about being conflicted is moot because if he wanted to be a dedicated Assassin then he'd have ended Rodrigo because he's a dangerous Templar (and the death of Mario most likely would not have happened)

... Cesare is the cause of Mario's death, you did see the scen in brotherhood where Rodrigo says "It was not my decision to attack Monteriggioni" right?

Secondly once again, he was forced to choose whether to give in to his emotions or give in to his duty, he essentially picked a middle ground.

Why didn't Connor beat up the guards when they tried to take him to jail? Ezio took on guards at near a decade younger than Connor without being man handled and sent to prison.. Not to mention that Connor is a tank compared to Ezio.

Sorry bro you seem really biased sometimes with Connor, he made plenty of nonsensical screw ups too. I find it amusing that the bulkiest assassin ever is capable of being handled by weak *** guards at the prime of his life. That's called BS.



Nah, he's dumb..I demonstrated why he is and dismissing an idea is close minded, sugar coating or not, mates or not--it's still close minded. the fact that Leonardo helped Ezio for YEARS should make Ezio a bit more humble with his friend..okay, so this thing didn't work...Ezio goes on and on more than once in berating his friend during that cutscene. It's also funny how up there, you said that I can't make a qualified decision because i'm not a psychology major but have no qualms here about burrowing from your real life experience to support your argument;) (just a likely backup in case you tell me that my life experience doesn't count)

Experience counts but neither of us have hands on experience being betrayed and even if we did, we'd just be two stories of many.

Didn't say it wasn't a little rude but you're overblowing the hell out of it. Leonardo is gay and he wasn't even sensitive about it.



EVERYTHING can be attributed to the writers and developers but we're talking about Ezio in the realm of strict fiction, this is a criticism of Ezio and thus by extension, the writers.

So I guess Haytham is a ******* too cause he can't climb trees. That's the level of stupid that goes to the game developers, when something is THAT stupid and nonsensical it's a game development problem.

Why the hell did they remove the climb leap and double blades? Why can't Haytham climb a simple tree? How the hell does Connor already know counter kills before he's trained as an assassin? How the hell do they not realize he's Native American in Boston when he's obviously dressed like a Native American?

I can go on forever, if you insist on carrying on this part of the argument there's plenty to discuss.



Nah, he's dumb.


Hehe, i'm still gonna call you out on Connor:p

Just chill out, people...have fun. This isn't YT. Lets all debate civilliy and like grown ups.

I'm not tired anymore ;P

Of course you will, this forum is weird. I've never met anyone who liked Connor till I came on here lol.

Ezio isn't dumb as much as he is driven emotionally but Connor is guilty of precisely the same thing. Every assassin is except for Altair and maybe Edward at times who just wanted a bit of freedom at first.

Assassin_M
08-18-2014, 06:36 PM
I disagree.


In the beginning Connor was childish and impetuous, his actions ruled by anger and revenge, later on he fights for freedom but I still believe this is a quest for revenge, revenge against a world that facilitates these kind of evils. Now, he may have hardened his heart after his mother's death, but this does not make for an entertaining, interesting or engaging character. When someone is unemotional (except for anger) it makes for a character with zero personality.
Okay, Connor was 13-19 in the beginning (sequences 4-6)..he was just a kid. His childishness lied in his impatience and impulsiveness but that was not all there is to him. That went hand in hand with his innocent naivete of the colonist world and his capability to quickly learn. If those sequences showed only anger, impatience and childishness, then I would be inclined to agree with you but we explore more those sequences...we explore Connor's lack of comprehension of racial prejudice and Achilles providing a realistic point of view as always to balance the scales, we explore Connor's distrust of the colonists like when he met Sam Adams and his honest approach of wanting to explain his actions when he was notorious rather than bribe printers and heralds.
His childishness is not only shaped by his impatience and impulsiveness but also by his honesty, innocence and mistrust of the outside world. Those are what Connor an endearing character to me in the beginning of his story.

Connor's self control is not thrown in your face, it's more subtle...sure, he confronted Charles Lee in the continental congress angrily and demands to know where Lee is when he runs into Biddle (Note: he was 19 and 15 in those 2 occasions respectively) if Connor was really after revenge and was as impulsive as everyone says...why wouldn't he run after Charles the moment he saw him in Boston after destroying all the tea? he IS impulsive, is he not? if he's only after revenge, why would he throw it ALL away (while still under the impression that Lee and the Templars burned his village) to unite the Assassins and Templars? he thought Haytham was the one who ordered the burning and Lee was the one who did it, why would Connor throw all of that away for the greater good? There's no other way but to come to the conclusion that Connor was not really after revenge...he hated Charles...he hated him with a passion but it wasn't revenge that fueled him, it was justice...the hatred slowly turned into necessity and then in the end mutual respect.

About the whole unemotional except for anger part, that's just wrong, i'm sorry. The Homestead missions show a MUCH more relaxed Connor--He's happy, joyful..etc when Norris tells him that Myriam agreed to marry him, when the wedding happens and when he learns of Prudence's pregnancy. In the Naval missions, it also shows more of a leader, where he celebrates with his crew the victory over Nicolas Biddle. The main story shows him smirking, smiling in times and having a dry sense of sarcastic humor.


Funnily enough Connor is analogous to Batman, a character I like, both in respects to his origin and his quest for justice. But Batman, although grim and expressionless, actually has some personality, he even grins and smiles sometimes! He is also aided by his role as Bruce, where he can be more of an open character. Connor on the other hand is not an open character, he does not let his guard down.
Connor's Bruce Wayne is the homestead.

This is my opinion and interpretation, feel free to disagree. Cheers buds![/QUOTE]

Jexx21
08-18-2014, 06:42 PM
i've been on these forums since before Connor was revealed to be a character so I can't say whether or not I knew people who liked Connor before I came on these forums

..but I can tell you this: I have friends in real life who play Assassin's Creed and as far as I know, none of them dislike the character of Connor. They're more likely than not, pretty indifferent. TBH, I'm not completely sure as I really don't talk to them about Assassin's Creed... which is sort of odd, but meh.

Locopells
08-18-2014, 06:43 PM
Why didn't Connor beat up the guards when they tried to take him to jail? Ezio took on guards at near a decade younger than Connor without being man handled and sent to prison.. Not to mention that Connor is a tank compared to Ezio.

Sorry bro you seem really biased sometimes with Connor, he made plenty of nonsensical screw ups too. I find it amusing that the bulkiest assassin ever is capable of being handled by weak *** guards at the prime of his life. That's called BS.

Doesn't he get smacked over the head or something, while doing the thing of thinking that trying to explain himself to the guards is going to work?

Sesheenku
08-18-2014, 06:50 PM
Doesn't he get smacked over the head or something, while doing the thing of thinking that trying to explain himself to the guards is going to work?

He couldn't feel that? The Assassins who constantly counter attack people behind them that they can't even see and aren't even sure are in that position can't dodge a sudden attack all of a sudden?

It's amusing because during the game play you're constantly doing just that, stopping attacks from people behind you as if you have eyes in the back of your head.

Plus it was a dumb idea in the first place to explain, kill the target and get out. That's what any of the more clever assassins would have done, his naivete would have cost him his life if it wasn't for Haytham saving him from the gallows as well as Washingtons and the colonists.

While some of his traits are nice, his honesty and honor just end up getting in the way most of the time.

Assassin_M
08-18-2014, 07:02 PM
It's not like it took him long to throw on a robe, or do you think he took a trip to his sisters room to borrow her makeup too?
The robes of the time were pretty elaborate and putting them on was no as easy as putting on clothes nowadays, if your father was rotting in some tower and told you to bring letters to Messer whatever, would you put on a costume you found inside a box? too long or not, your friggin dad is rotting in some tower.


I've seen a lot of bad **** happen to real life people, not just in stories and you know what? A few of them manage to be okay outwardly. Do they trust inside? Dunno but on the outside they appear to be normal. People are capable of doing that.
Yay, inside or outside, there's distrust somewhere..there HAS to be, you can't convince me otherwise--that a 17 year old rich, pampered kid would be so trustful with EVERYONE is not just a stretch but it's also illogical. That distrust HAD to be shown somehow.


First off Mario told him the bare basics, that wouldn't be satisfying enough imo.

Finally how are they irrelevant? He knows for a fact they're working for Rodrigo, that they all played a part in the death of his family in one way or another.
bare basics? that was EVERYTHING he needed to know...your dad is an Assassin and they are Templars, he was in the way of their plans of world dominion so they killed him...there's nothing more to it.

Uberto killed his dad by the order of Rodrigo, the ONLY people involved that he should concern himself with are Uberto and Rodrigo--one he killed and the other took him 23 years to find. Sure, they were all part of the conspiracy to kill his dad but it's all really irrelevant because his motivations for killing the Templars in Venice is not in sync with his progression...he's hunting the Templars in Venice because they're on his father's list...his motivation is STILL revenge, by that time it shouldn't be--why? because he's not chasing those guys in Venice for revenge but because they're on his father's list. That's my problem.


That's teens for you but again after he killed Vieri he changed his mind which isn't unreasonable after seeing what he was up against, what his father had been up against.
He NEVER changed his mind, until sequence 10 he was sure that the codex was just a bunch of crap made up by some old dude.


Read point 2.
done;)


... Cesare is the cause of Mario's death, you did see the scen in brotherhood where Rodrigo says "It was not my decision to attack Monteriggioni" right?
Cesare is the cause, what did he use? Papal armies, why? because he's the captain general of the papal armies, why? because his father made him so..had Ezio killed Rodrigo, the Borgia would be stripped of their power because Rodrigo was their most powerful member and EVERYTHING led up to him..he was the one who held all the power together, end him and Cesare would no longer have an army.


Secondly once again, he was forced to choose whether to give in to his emotions or give in to his duty, he essentially picked a middle ground.
But the story presents it as him getting over revenge, not choosing a middle ground...it's faulty writing because what the story portrays, goes against what actually happened.


Why didn't Connor beat up the guards when they tried to take him to jail? Ezio took on guards at near a decade younger than Connor without being man handled and sent to prison.. Not to mention that Connor is a tank compared to Ezio.

Sorry bro you seem really biased sometimes with Connor, he made plenty of nonsensical screw ups too. I find it amusing that the bulkiest assassin ever is capable of being handled by weak *** guards at the prime of his life. That's called BS.

What does Connor have to do with anything? Connor was an honest man and he always detested playing dirty, he was explaining what happened to the guards before they knocked him out. Connor COULD have beat them to a pulp but he thought that there was no reason to, he could just explain himself. I never said Connor had no screw ups...Lets stay on Ezio, mate:p


Experience counts but neither of us have hands on experience being betrayed and even if we did, we'd just be two stories of many.
So I could i just dismiss the experience of you and your best as one story of many? See, this is consistent and logical writing, like I said...you wont convince me that a 17 year old kid who got betrayed by a close family friend and has the whole city after his family would be so trusting of everyone he runs into.


Didn't say it wasn't a little rude but you're overblowing the hell out of it. Leonardo is gay and he wasn't even sensitive about it.
Because Leonardo is a good friend and that's what makes him a FAR more endearing character than Ezio ever was in AC II.


So I guess Haytham is a ******* too cause he can't climb trees. That's the level of stupid that goes to the game developers, when something is THAT stupid and nonsensical it's a game development problem.

Why the hell did they remove the climb leap and double blades? Why can't Haytham climb a simple tree? How the hell does Connor already know counter kills before he's trained as an assassin? How the hell do they not realize he's Native American in Boston when he's obviously dressed like a Native American?

I can go on forever, if you insist on carrying on this part of the argument there's plenty to discuss.
What are you talking about? I'm talking about when Ezio sees Rosa climb leap and he then he had to be shown AGAIN the climb leap--this has nothing to do with gameplay oversights or Ezio being given one hidden blade.


I'm not tired anymore ;P
Good, this should be fun then;)


Of course you will, this forum is weird. I've never met anyone who liked Connor till I came on here lol.
You must'v not been paying enough attention then:p


Ezio isn't dumb as much as he is driven emotionally but Connor is guilty of precisely the same thing. Every assassin is except for Altair and maybe Edward at times who just wanted a bit of freedom at first.
If Ezio was driven by emotion, he'd have been distrusting of everyone and I didn't say Connor wasn't, it just made sense with Connor. Connor had his dumb moments and screw ups, just like Altair and Edward did.


He couldn't feel that? The Assassins who constantly counter attack people behind them that they can't even see and aren't even sure are in that position can't dodge a sudden attack all of a sudden?

It's amusing because during the game play you're constantly doing just that, stopping attacks from people behind you as if you have eyes in the back of your head.
In those times, he's prepared for an attack...he's in a skirmish but with the guards, his guard was down and he wasn't expecting to be hit from behind.


Plus it was a dumb idea in the first place to explain, kill the target and get out. That's what any of the more clever assassins would have done, his naivete would have cost him his life if it wasn't for Haytham saving him from the gallows as well as Washingtons and the colonists.
Connor did not want to kill Hickey, he wanted to get him in Jail to prevent him from getting to Washington, just like how he wanted to eliminate Johnson's finances instead of killing him..


While some of his traits are nice, his honesty and honor just end up getting in the way most of the time.
Which is endearing, he continues to hold on to these traits even after everything that happens.

Jexx21
08-18-2014, 07:07 PM
He couldn't feel that? The Assassins who constantly counter attack people behind them that they can't even see and aren't even sure are in that position can't dodge a sudden attack all of a sudden?

It's amusing because during the game play you're constantly doing just that, stopping attacks from people behind you as if you have eyes in the back of your head.

Plus it was a dumb idea in the first place to explain, kill the target and get out. That's what any of the more clever assassins would have done, his naivete would have cost him his life if it wasn't for Haytham saving him from the gallows as well as Washingtons and the colonists.

While some of his traits are nice, his honesty and honor just end up getting in the way most of the time.

I see..

it seems you're all about immediate results from actions, rather than about things like the actual characteristics of characters

I don't think you should judge these characters like that. Maybe you feel differently, of course.

LoyalACFan
08-18-2014, 07:14 PM
Welp, here's my take, since we're really going to do the Connor discussion again.

Connor was a good character, but his story was told so awfully that it was hard to really appreciate him. For one, Haytham took up a quarter of the game, leaving Connor with a whole story that was shorter than Ezio's final chapter. Haytham is a simpler, less conflicted character (at least during the part we play as him before he finds out about Birch) so he's pretty easy to like right off the bat. Connor, on the other hand, has a ton of stuff going on in his life and you really need to fully explore his development to get a sense of who he is. After three sequences of Haytham and two sequences of kid Connor (which, aside from his mother's death, were mostly filler and tutorials) and a host of contrived, forced connections to unrelated historical events, we just didn't get enough time to adequately do that.

That alone would be problematic enough, but his character is divided almost schizophrenically across two separate storylines; the main sequences and the Homestead sequence. In the main sequences he's largely stone-faced and single-minded, with occasional explosions of naive, petulant anger at Achilles, and distrustful of anyone he doesn't know. THIS Connor would be very difficult to like, if it weren't for the Homestead missions telling the other half of the story, where he's kind, generous, and willing to see the best in people. I was unable to fully reconcile the brash, naive kid from the story missions with the wise and world-weary community leader shown in the homestead missions. And the worst of it is, the Homestead missions give you no indication that they're relevant to the plot. The first several of them are just recruiting missions, which pop up with a notification after completion reading "(blank) is now able to craft (blank) for your Homestead." I took one look at the needlessly complicated (and since money served no purpose in that game, pointless) crafting and trading mechanic and decided not to screw with them anymore. I didn't finish them until I decided to go for 100% completion, and I was shocked at how different this Connor was from main story Connor.

So basically, if I was going to restructure it, the game would go like this.

Sequence 1- Haytham arrives in America and meets Lee, who takes him to the tavern where the others are already assembled. Long cutscene of introductions ensues, Johnson informs them of Silas Thatcher's slavery ring, Haytham devises a plan to free the natives and have them lead them to the Temple. This mission could be restructured to be more of a tutorial if needed, since it was pretty much filler anyway. Haytham kills Thatcher and frees Ziio and her people, she takes him to the Temple in repayment, blah blah blah the sequence plays out pretty much the same from there. Haytham makes Lee a Templar for his excellent service during the Thatcher mission, Desmond wakes up all "WTF he was a Templar?" and Ziio explains that she and Haytham fell in love and had a son during that loading screen where you play as her.

Sequence 2- Hide and seek, village burning, Connor's vision, basically the same thing Sequence 4 was in the game, except it doesn't end after the vision. He goes to the manor, meets Achilles who's reluctant to train him, fights off the guys at the barn and Achilles finally brings him inside. Only now, we skip the Boston Massacre crap and instead he tells Connor that if he can prove his commitment to learning by fixing up the Aquila and assembling her crew, he'll make him an Assassin. So we get the ship tutorial at Martha's Vineyard, and return to a welcoming Achilles who then trains Connor and gives him his robes. So basically we're an Assassin by the end of Sequence 2 rather than Sequence 6.

Given that we've cut out about four sequences worth of filler and tutorial by now, we have plenty of time left to weave the Homestead missions into the main story. The relevant, story-based ones at least; the fetch quests, pig farming, and all that could be dropped. So that way we get to see the softer side of Connor, plus the critical bit of character development after Achilles' death, within the actual story.

@M are you really complaining that Ezio put on a different outfit before going to Uberto's? You know, the outfit that his dad specifically told him to take? Man, you nitpick Ezio more than Connor haters nitpick Connor... :rolleyes:

Jexx21
08-18-2014, 07:19 PM
I agree with most of Loyal's post :)

LoyalACFan
08-18-2014, 07:21 PM
I agree with most of Loyal's post :)

Which parts don't you agree with? We're all about discussion here :p

Assassin_M
08-18-2014, 07:22 PM
That alone would be problematic enough, but his character is divided almost schizophrenically across two separate storylines; the main sequences and the Homestead sequence. In the main sequences he's largely stone-faced and single-minded, with occasional explosions of naive, petulant anger at Achilles, and distrustful of anyone he doesn't know. THIS Connor would be very difficult to like, if it weren't for the Homestead missions telling the other half of the story, where he's kind, generous, and willing to see the best in people. I was unable to fully reconcile the brash, naive kid from the story missions with the wise and world-weary community leader shown in the homestead missions. And the worst of it is, the Homestead missions give you no indication that they're relevant to the plot. The first several of them are just recruiting missions, which pop up with a notification after completion reading "(blank) is now able to craft (blank) for your Homestead." I took one look at the needlessly complicated (and since money served no purpose in that game, pointless) crafting and trading mechanic and decided not to screw with them anymore. I didn't finish them until I decided to go for 100% completion, and I was shocked at how different this Connor was from main story Connor.
He's not JUST divided between main story and Homestead but also the Naval missions, Liberation missions and Captain Kidd missions (I still believe that these scavengers were Templars and his angry reaction to them was a scare tactic:p)

Also, I would agree with you had anything in the main storyline contradicted what happens in the Homestead, which never happened. Other than that, I agree with everything else.

JustPlainQuirky
08-18-2014, 07:23 PM
Hey look, it's the daily connor debate thread.

https://31.media.tumblr.com/c1db23cc27f19399c596a535cb49b766/tumblr_inline_na4fbdt9rM1r5lwz0.gif

LoyalACFan
08-18-2014, 07:24 PM
He's not JUST divided between main story and Homestead but also the Naval missions, Liberation missions and Captain Kidd missions (I still believe that these scavengers were Templars and his angry reaction to them was a scare tactic)

Also, I would agree with you had anything in the main storyline contradicted what happens in the Homestead, which never happened. Other than that, I agree with everything else.

I didn't say they contradicted each other, just that neither one gave you the whole story. The side of Connor that we saw during the Homestead missions needed to be shown in the main missions, but it wasn't.

Jexx21
08-18-2014, 07:26 PM
Which parts don't you agree with? We're all about discussion here :p

Basically just that MainStory!Connor is hard to like. The main story contains many of his endearing traits, in my opinion.

Also that I would have included the boston massacre in the Connor sequence, but with more Sam Adams interaction (or just more throughout the game as a whole), and that I probably would have given Haytham 2 sequences still. I really loved the first mission as Haytham in the Theatre, I still hold it as a favorite mission of mine.

Assassin_M
08-18-2014, 07:29 PM
I didn't say they contradicted each other, just that neither one gave you the whole story. The side of Connor that we saw during the Homestead missions needed to be shown in the main missions, but it wasn't.
Well, they had to have contradicted each other if you'v seen a schizophrenic contrast:p I think that's what they intended. Neither was supposed to give a full story of the character but together, they do. I'm not saying it's ideal but I liked it...it made the Homestead missions feel warmer and more relevant, that's why the Homestead missions are special..they're different from the story missions and show a different side to Connor--that's how I saw it anyway.

GunnerGalactico
08-18-2014, 07:31 PM
And now I shall dedicate the post I made to this thread :)

There’s love and hate of course on each side regarding Connor which I see just about everyday, but I think it has pushed me to the point where I must say something, considering I always keep to myself and barely get involved with Internet activities. In other words, this is a very rare occasion where I will actually post/write something in response to anything misunderstood and such. Hopefully I got all the points down in one take. Basically, I like to do a ton of research on things that catch my attention and would like to know more about, not only to keep me intrigued about the topic, but also to also shed some light on those that disagree with something when they do not know the full story yet. Now, please DO NOT take this to intentionally hurt/degrade/offend anyone as I am just making some points that will hopefully make any haters reconsider their mislead thoughts about the character. I truly believe that everyone is entitled to his or her own opinions, but it should not be when they barely know the backstory of the character or when they are so used to a character like Ezio.

1. “Connor isn’t much of a character or too bland.” I truly believe it’s because he was a totally different person than what you were used to from Altair and Ezio. Maybe you’re just not the type of person who can appreciate him for who he was; a real human being who put his people before anything else and tries to always do what is right. Was it because he wasn’t searching for an “outlet” as much as Ezio was in his younger years (aside from the later games that only existed because of his character development)? Or as careless and filled with undeserved pride like Altair? Don’t get me wrong: both those characters were great in their time periods (Altair was my favorite mainly because of his voice, but that changed in the other games - FAIL), but the fact is that for a real person to be introduced into a series like this lets us know that we can still have moral principles and be a badass at the same time, but it was time for a change – in my opinion, it made me think Italians were ***** all the time. >_< You only think he’s boring if you compare him to previous characters like Ezio; they lived in different time periods for goodness sake! And if you have a problem with a virgin superhero/main character as a badass, there is something wrong with you. First impressions are painful, but don’t judge a character based on the glitches either. He has lots of potential so he deserves a proper comeback. And if I had a nickel for every time Connor was compared to another character for comparison, I’d probably be rich!

And, since when did video game characters have to be recklessly violent and brutal like Kratos? Or try to be a flirt with the ladies like Leon Kennedy? But then again, I still see people who criticize him still trying to get more information about him, watching his videos, etc. Believe it or not, when I first played, I didn’t like him either, nor did I hate him, but after playing the game a few more times, as well as the side missions, it just made me keep falling in love with him all over again. To be honest, I personally think Ubisoft rushed the game (hence the amount of glitches and such?) since they did admit they were working on AC4 at the same time as AC3. They should have put more time into him as well as the game itself and then we wouldn’t have such mixed feedback about them both, but yet the fans that understood him loved him regardless and that shows in the growing fan base as well as petitions for his return. . I can't tell you how many petitions have started, and I know it will not stop here… Hint, Ubisoft?

There’s a reason why he was nominated for Character of the Year. Not to mention the awesome acceptance speech video had he won? Furthermore, he DID win the Best Video Game Character at the Virgin Media Awards.

2. “Connor is too ignorant or too ambitious or too naïve or too rude or shows no emotion.” Were we all not like this at a point of time in our lives, specifically when we were younger? To judge a character based on these characteristics makes you just as ignorant as you claim him to be. Altair was involved because it’s his duty; Ezio was involved to get revenge; Connor was in it for finding freedom for everyone – Freedom speaks way louder than the other two on any occasion to be honest. He was doing what was right and fought not just for his people, but for anyone caught in the freedom debate.

And please consider what the guy went through: he lost his mother at a young age, betrayed by those who he helped willingly, had to kill his father and best friend, lost his mentor (and yes I will admit some teary eyes when he spoke to Achilles’ grave) and after all that, his people were evicted to the west. How was he supposed to know this would happen? I know that if there was something that could be done to save who I held dear and wanted to protect, I would make sure that I would do everything that I was humanly possible to do to ensure their protection/safety. He did eventually mature near the end, did he not? And from what I’ve seen, he clearly doesn’t like the fact that he has to lie to reduce his notoriety and even argued with Sam Adams to who really started the Battle at Lexington and Concord. Need I mention how humble he was throughout the war itself?

He has every right to be seen as maybe ungrateful or emotionless because the colonists have been stealing their land and killing his people off, not to mention he doesn’t have much experience in the western culture so how was he supposed to act around them? The Internet was not available back then so he couldn’t look it up. He was basically being neutral and staying true to his roots in the mean time, including the fact about him not liking to be touched by people. In truth, in some Native American cultures, it is considered taboo to touch or be touched by someone who is not family or someone you don’t know (Don’t get me started with Paul Revere, Sam Adams but he lightened up, George Washington came to that side). Eventually, the people he spent a lot of time with grew accustomed to this and respected this “behavior.” People also said that he was whiny and such. Wasn’t Ezio whiny at the beginning as well and then matured over time? That’s exactly what happened with Connor considering he’s of a more cultural background.

3. If and when they do make a Connor sequel, I would say:
Northwest Indian Wars (1785-1795) – This one may be an ideal event for him: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northwest_Indian_War
Key figures:
United States
George Washington, President of the United States
Henry Knox, Secretary of War
Josiah Harmar, general
Arthur St. Clair, governor of the Northwest Territory, major general
Anthony Wayne, major general
Timothy Pickering, diplomat, secretary of war, secretary of state
John Hardin, Colonel - killed on a peace mission at what would later become Hardin, Shelby County, Ohio.
Alexander Truman, Major - killed on a peace mission at what later became Ottawa, Ohio.

War of 1812?

And please keep the same voice actor, Noah Watts; he did an epic job – I think he wants to pay Connor again as much as the fans do! And you know what will really please the fans? If he was involved in more than one war/event in his next game; he is that much of an ambitious person to get involved as much as he can to stop the Templars and fight for freedom.

Speaking of acting, people believe the voice acting of the Native Americans, specifically Connor, was terrible. English is not his native language and the voice actor specifically did the acting like this on purpose because when you have a second language that you will eventually need to use, but not fluent in, you will expect to speak slowly and not to the fluent speaker’s normal speech as you are still trying to formulate the words to speak. You can’t expect to be fluent in a second language when you’ve only learned it recently and such, not to mention he mainly started using it in his teenage years. Furthermore, English is the most complicated language in the world, but that’s a different story altogether.

4. Why is it every time that we ask a staff member of Ubisoft or Ubisoft directly about Connor’s return, we get mixed answers and ambiguous statements?

When asked for a AC3 sequel or two with Connor:

Alex Hutchison: It’s hard to answer that without giving spoilers… Our goal is to ship a game every year but never to develop a game in a year. So obviously there has to be some decision-making before the previous one comes out. If there’s a huge response to Connor then obviously it will fit into our future plans.

Julien Laferrière: “We’re going to see how players react to the guy [Connor] for sure. You’ll get to experience portions of his life, you’ll see why he becomes an assassin and what his motivations are. The more you know about Connor the more you’ll love him, but in the end we’ll see what the reception is like.”

Needless to say, there is; the fanbase has definitely grown by a huge margin recently.

When asked about how the fans felt about Connor:

Alex Hutchison: “We spent a lot of time working on this Assassin, trying to make someone who was compelling to people and seemed like a cool person to be. The fact that responses have been positive – we’ve already seen cosplaying and fan art – and people seem to really have adopted him, which was really satisfying.” - and this comment was made AFTER the game came out for a while.

So what’s the problem? The fans loved him, the reaction was positive as they hoped, so why does it sound like they may be going back on their word about bringing him back?

There are many Connor supporters out there but they don’t speak up much because they have better things to do I suppose, so hopefully they will join the rest of us in being heard; we all have the right to be heard. The fan reception was huge and the company knows it, including Corey May and Alex Hutchison. I also wished they would release the survey results they had on him so we can see how strong the response from the fans were.

And yes, we do know that he was planned way before we even heard his name and such, but the fact of the matter is that when he came out and we played the game, the fans want more. I’m pretty sure Ezio’s sequels wasn’t planned after AC2 came out until the fans demanded it.

When asked about giving Connor an Ember’s ending:

Darby McDevitt: “Not at this time. Embers took 6 months to make. It was a big project, and beloved by all, but those teams are busy with other things right now. But we loved the project, so maybe we’ll go that route again one day.”

I would rather have the sequel than a movie because writing a novel is taking the easy way out.

When asked again about making Connor come back for a sequel on Reddit:

Darby McDevitt: “Not likely. We want Tumblr to pick up where we left off.”

To be honest, I found this to be a little offensive: you’re basically telling the fans to continue the story themselves (fanfiction, really?) If that was the case, we would all have our own companies and be making them ourselves, but for a company to tell us that, then why are you in business? Unfortunately in this world, if you stop or don’t give fans or customers what they want/need, you are not going to last long. If you need help creating a new story for Connor to appear in, have a contest or something where whoever submits the best story for them to use for Connor will be used for a Connor sequel. But like I said, that statement is ambiguous. Then he said something about don’t rely on us and make your own stories. Really? Isn’t that why the fans are paying for your products, to see stories properly and professional done? Need I say that you also mentioned “bringing closure is the top priority?”

He was basically sending us into loops. First, we’ll see what the fan reception is like → The fans loved him → I would love to do another Connor game → His return is not likely. Seriously? Did you not see the fan reception and you can’t even give us a straight answer?

Considering there are people constantly asking Ubisoft just about everyday about Connor to come back, with the numbers growing by the day as well, we obviously want his return, so it would be stupid to not bring him back. Heck, even Noah Watts admitted himself that he would love to reprise his role in another game.

5. I even saw this beautiful Reddit post created sometime around February/March 2014 that really spoke to a lot of people, including the “haters” (credit goes to IFeelLikeAndy):
I've never seen a more ignorant and downright one sided comment before in my entire life. Connor Kenway was one of the most well developed characters in the entirety of the Assassin's Creed Franchise. What Ubisoft did with Connor is what inspired me to want to write and gives me hope that more writers can take note of [Corey May, Matt Turner,] and their team did with Connor, Native Americans everywhere, and Assassin's Creed in general. Ubisoft's team of writers did what many in the industry are afraid of doing; They told the harsh but undeniable truth about America's history Connor was a very stoic and troubled young man, there's no doubt about that, but its not because he's a ****, or a ****** as I've read, but because in the Mohawk tribe men and women are taught at a very young age that to show emotion is to show weakness. This is why Connor seems very stern and straightforward when talking to "the white man" and he even goes out of his way and refuses to speak with contractions so as to keep himself on a higher level than non natives. Not only that, but these are the people who have abandoned him, shunned him, taken his land his home his life, and spat on him afterwards. Oh, and when I say him I mean his people and Native Americans in all of Colonial North America.

Connor is the soul embodiment of millions of Native Americans who fought and died for what they believed knew was right, and Ubisoft did a beautiful job of expressing this. If you study Connor as a character you will see that whenever someone who is not from his tribe touches him, he will look at them and move away quickly and scornfully. However, as he spends more time in the new world he digresses from his native culture and even uses contractions when speaking, allows himself to befriend non natives, and later on he even begins to show much emotion in his voice, which is completely different from the Connor we met in the beginning of his life.

But after everything he went through he saw that what these men were doing to his people was also being done to their own men. He witnessed The Boston Massacre and saw that the world was more than he once thought, and the corruption of these people was much more than he thought. It was then that he learned to not only fight for the freedom of his people but for the freedom of all people, no matter the cost. Even if he must go at it alone, Connor had a moral obligation to help save the world around him.

Lee: "Even those men you sought to save have turned their backs on you. Yet you fight, you resist. Why?"
Connor: "Because no one else will!"

Ubisoft honored Native Americans by not making this a game about some angry red skin who goes by the name Soars With Eagles who is covered head to toe in feathers, but instead they focused on remaining true to history and truly expressing the hatred, fear, and will power of The Native Man in The New World. Ubisoft even went so far out of their way as to learn that in Mohawk Culture people do not use a name more than once and after learning this, Ubisoft had to do extensive amounts of research to find a suitable name for their new conflicted protagonist that has never before been used in recorded history. And thus, Ratonhnhaké:ton was born. Yet after all this work, Ubisoft got hurt by bringing to life the heart of the real Native American Culture instead of tarnishing it like the media enjoys doing so often. And its because of this, that I have lost a lot of hope for the culturally diverse world that I thought I was now living in.

Connor was a significantly more believable character than most people's beloved Ezio was. He saw things at a young age that scarred him for life and experienced so much that it made him into the tragic hero that is praised by few and underappreciated by many more. The only mistake Ubisoft made was not releasing Connor's Epilogue that summed up the tragic story that is his life and after ACIV is now the Kenway Family Tragedy.

All of this was not done by Connor but by a team of gifted writers who know that telling a story the way it should be told is more important than showing a blatant disregard of the harsh truth of the Native American culture.

IN CONCLUSION, if you are still not convinced that Connor is an awesome character, I strongly encourage you to play the game again, along with the side missions, and I assure you that you will most likely have a better understanding and different opinion about the character. Maybe this is one of those games where you have to play more than once to establish a deeper connection to the character. If you still can’t relate to him in some way afterwards, I have nothing else to say to you and maybe you can’t appreciate real characters in a video game like him. Therefore, I have nothing else to say to you.

Ubisoft, I am not only speaking for me, but for all the Connor lovers out there who remain silent. PLEASEEEEEEEEE make an awesome Connor sequel. You’re a great company with great games released just about all the time. It’s not like you’re guessing what we like; we are telling you exactly what we like. No more mixed messages. No more enigmas. No more switcheroos. The fan bases and petitions of this character grow every single day and eventually you guys will take the hint of what your fans are demanding. Unless you guys have planned an epic surprise for us in the near future to give off such ambiguity, then by all means, keep leaving us in anticipation, but don’t decide to “double cross” us in the end. Eventually our voices will become loud enough for you to no longer ignore, because having an awesome character for one installment is not cool, or as Connor would say, “it is not enough.”

Yours truly,
The Assassin’s Creed Fanbase

.. And not to mention that famous "Tunnel Vision" article thats gained some attention regarding this same matter. Yeah.. I'm done :P

Good post Humble. You covered pretty much everything, plus more. :cool:

But still, we're always having people starting threads like this and it is becoming a nuisance. I shouldn't have to defend my reasons for liking a character. I thought Ezio and Connor were great characters. Ezio is charming and charismatic, whereas Connor was more on the serious side. I don't feel that Connor was a terrible character. I liked his humble and down-to-earth personality, even though he tends to be a bit moody sometimes. I found him more relatable than any of the Assassins.

Sesheenku
08-18-2014, 07:32 PM
The robes of the time were pretty elaborate and putting them on was no as easy as putting on clothes nowadays, if your father was rotting in some tower and told you to bring letters to Messer whatever, would you put on a costume you found inside a box? too long or not, your friggin dad is rotting in some tower.

His dad emphasized to him that everything is important and again he had all night to do what he had to do as well. Executions don't happen at 9 PM.


Yay, inside or outside, there's distrust somewhere..there HAS to be, you can't convince me otherwise--that a 17 year old rich, pampered kid would be so trustful with EVERYONE is not just a stretch but it's also illogical. That distrust HAD to be shown somehow.

Didn't say there's isn't some degree of distrust but it's not impossible for someone like that to keep it as an internal process. They show hints of trying to show distrust like when he meets La Volpe and asks who he is showing clear agitation, I think that they tried to include it but just wrote him terribly there.


bare basics? that was EVERYTHING he needed to know...your dad is an Assassin and they are Templars, he was in the way of their plans of world dominion so they killed him...there's nothing more to it.

You'd be satisfied with that? I'd be wanting to go after them, know more about the Templars, know more about them and why they did what they did specifically, what they're planning, why they obey Rodrigo, etc. etc. etc.


Uberto killed his dad by the order of Rodrigo, the ONLY people involved that he should concern himself with are Uberto and Rodrigo--one he killed and the other took him 23 years to find. Sure, they were all part of the conspiracy to kill his dad but it's all really irrelevant because his motivations for killing the Templars in Venice is not in sync with his progression...he's hunting the Templars in Venice because they're on his father's list...his motivation is STILL revenge, by that time it shouldn't be--why? because he's not chasing those guys in Venice for revenge but because they're on his father's list. That's my problem.

People can only feel one motivation and be motivated by one thing now? He can't want to complete his fathers work AND want revenge at once. I knew you thought Ezio was dumb but I didn't know you thought he had the emotional range of a teaspoon too ;P

I can be motivated to feed my family AND also be motivated to get nice things for example, I don't have to pick one.



He NEVER changed his mind, until sequence 10 he was sure that the codex was just a bunch of crap made up by some old dude.

ALL he said in sequence 10 was that when he was young he was too brash to believe in it. Just a few minutes prior he's talking about the pieces of Eden with Leonardo so yeah obviously he decided they weren't tripe before that scene at some point.



Cesare is the cause, what did he use? Papal armies, why? because he's the captain general of the papal armies, why? because his father made him so..had Ezio killed Rodrigo, the Borgia would be stripped of their power because Rodrigo was their most powerful member and EVERYTHING led up to him..he was the one who held all the power together, end him and Cesare would no longer have an army.

I doubt that, even if Rodrigo died, Cesare would want to kill the person responsible for daring to oppose the Borgia. Oh and Cesare looked to be doing just fine when he killed Rodrigo himself.



But the story presents it as him getting over revenge, not choosing a middle ground...it's faulty writing because what the story portrays, goes against what actually happened.

Is it trying to convey that? It shows the conflict so I don't think anyone can be sure of such an interpretation. It could also mean rather than getting over revenge it shows he's maturing a bit and not letting his emotions rule him so easily.



What does Connor have to do with anything? Connor was an honest man and he always detested playing dirty, he was explaining what happened to the guards before they knocked him out. Connor COULD have beat them to a pulp but he thought that there was no reason to, he could just explain himself. I never said Connor had no screw ups...Lets stay on Ezio, mate:p

So like you're saying about Ezio, he made a dumb decision. He SHOULD have stabbed Hickey in the head and then ran off. I bring up Connor because he's part of the Assassin order and this thread IS about him first so it's fair to compare them.



So I could i just dismiss the experience of you and your best as one story of many? See, this is consistent and logical writing, like I said...you wont convince me that a 17 year old kid who got betrayed by a close family friend and has the whole city after his family would be so trusting of everyone he runs into.

I'm a logical man, one man alone doesn't have the power to change my perspective often, indeed not when it comes to stuff like that, if I told you that experience and you sympathized but not necessarily believed it as representative of things as a whole I wouldn't be mad about it. Much like if a friend comes to me and tells me the president is terrible because x, x, and y.

Indeed his story is just one of many, I can sympathize with his views perhaps but I certainly don't take them to heart, I collect the data to make my own informed conclusions. Hence why you'll never see my actually have a real discussion on politics btw, they bore the hell out of me and I cba to care about them lol.

As for Ezio well most of us aren't skillful assassins that could just stab someone in the face to resolve our problems either. I probably wouldn't be scared either if I knew I could take care of him easily in case of possible betrayal and also once again it could simply be an internal process for him. Finally I can admit it's also possibly badly written, I think there's hints showing that it's there but terribly written.


Because Leonardo is a good friend and that's what makes him a FAR more endearing character than Ezio ever was in AC II.

Leonardo is huggable.



What are you talking about? I'm talking about when Ezio sees Rosa climb leap and he then he had to be shown AGAIN the climb leap--this has nothing to do with gameplay oversights or Ezio being given one hidden blade.

It wasn't an oversight, they removed it for obvious reasons that still don't make any sense. Same with the climb leap, same with all the stuff I mentioned.


Good, this should be fun then;)


Indeed, although I may crash again, I only had four hours of sleep thanks to a headache. Bah I need to move from this damn black mold infested florida swampland house is murdering me slowly.


You must'v not been paying enough attention then:p

I've been paying pretty good attention, most everywhere else I go people either don't care or downright dislike him.



If Ezio was driven by emotion, he'd have been distrusting of everyone and I didn't say Connor wasn't, it just made sense with Connor. Connor had his dumb moments and screw ups, just like Altair and Edward did.

He's not driven by distrust but anger and hatred.

Assassin_M
08-18-2014, 07:34 PM
Basically just that MainStory!Connor is hard to like. The main story contains many of his endearing traits, in my opinion.
That too. I found his innocence, naivete, honor, selflessness, honesty and respect to be HUGELY endearing traits in the main story. His wonder and amazement at the Colonist world, his lack of comprehension of racial prejudice that Achilles suffered from, his straight-forward honesty, his kindness and willingness to help others (Terry and Godfrey and the patriots in Concord and Lexington), his mission to protect his people, his anger towards death and massacre on both sides, his respect for the dead Hickey and his willingness to throw his supposed revenge away for the greater good of uniting the Assassin and Templars.

FourDea123
08-18-2014, 07:41 PM
I liked Connor he was mayhaps my fav. then this forum. this wonderful mix of mediocre writing dumb in jokes and over-sensitivity (which i love by the way). turned me against him we are so insecure that their is a charecter in the series that wasnt flawless brilliant and just downright amazing that we make essays defending him. essays attacking him. And essays on how to kill him. like geez man, slow your roll. its alright to like Connor he cup of tea but hell stop being so insecure. the same aplies to his haters. just please shuttup about him please for the love of god we moved on from Ezio fine how is we struggle with our charles lee stalking pottato faced, taco hatted fathered, fellow so slowly. (sorry bout grammar got dysgraphia)

also please stop praising altier as the master assassin who can never be bested he has the personallity of a brick wall that's got a ham and cheese sandwich mushed on it

Jexx21
08-18-2014, 07:43 PM
mm.. sandwhiches...

LoyalACFan
08-18-2014, 07:44 PM
Well, they had to have contradicted each other if you'v seen a schizophrenic contrast:p I think that's what they intended. Neither was supposed to give a full story of the character but together, they do. I'm not saying it's ideal but I liked it...it made the Homestead missions feel warmer and more relevant, that's why the Homestead missions are special..they're different from the story missions and show a different side to Connor--that's how I saw it anyway.

Yes, contrast, not contradiction. It's perfectly normal for him to behave differently at home (everyone does) but the way it was written made the divide feel more like "Story Connor vs. Side Mission Connor" rather than "Connor at Home vs. Connor in Town." That's why I said the Homestead missions should have been part of the main sequences, so we could see all sides of Connor during his main story arc. We really didn't get a sense of him being a wise leader during the main sequences, which is a shame because he obviously WAS one.

Sesheenku
08-18-2014, 07:45 PM
I liked Connor he was mayhaps my fav. then this forum. this wonderful mix of mediocre writing dumb in jokes and over-sensitivity (which i love by the way). turned me against him we are so insecure that their is a charecter in the series that wasnt flawless brilliant and just downright amazing that we make essays defending him. essays attacking him. And essays on how to kill him. like geez man, slow your roll. its alright to like Connor he cup of tea but hell stop being so insecure. the same aplies to his haters. just please shuttup about him please for the love of god we moved on from Ezio fine how is we struggle with our charles lee stalking pottato faced, taco hatted fathered, fellow so slowly. (sorry bout grammar got dysgraphia)

also please stop praising altier as the master assassin who can never be bested he has the personallity of a brick wall that's got a ham and cheese sandwich mushed on it

Opinions are like *******s, everyone has one.

Pro tip -> Your ******* is not nicer and cleaner than the next respectable human being.

Jexx21
08-18-2014, 07:47 PM
and also the Brotherhood Missions were you sent your recruits across the colonies make it clear that connor was a smart cookie

LoyalACFan
08-18-2014, 07:52 PM
[Connor's] willingness to throw his supposed revenge away for the greater good of uniting the Assassin and Templars.

... no. Connor never gave up his revenge mission. He was always hell-bent on killing Lee, even when he was toying with allying with Haytham, and hell, even after he found out Lee wasn't behind it. He couldn't kill Washington because it would cripple the Patriot cause that Connor believed in. It's his biggest flaw, and honestly one of the best-written parts of the game IMO. He NEEDED to kill Lee, it had been his mission for damn near his entire life. Even when Lee was discredited, stripped of all of his power, and exonerated of the village burning, he still HAD to kill him. It was all he had left.

Namikaze_17
08-18-2014, 07:55 PM
Not to mention he is CAPTAIN of a Ship.

To be Captain, you gotta have some type of Charisma about you...

Edward had it due to his skills and his way of dealing with situations.

Same for Connor...his CHARISMA is that he's the dude you wanna follow in battle, or give those uplifting Speeches.

pacmanate
08-18-2014, 07:57 PM
Not to mention he is CAPTAIN of a Ship.

To be Captain, you gotta have some type of Charisma about you...

Edward had it due to his skills and his way of dealing with situations.

Same for Connor...his CHARISMA is that he's the dude you wanna follow in battle, or give those uplifting Speeches.

Im pretty sure Connor was Captain of that ship because it was in the Homesteads harbor and he was the only one capable of sailing it.

LoyalACFan
08-18-2014, 08:03 PM
Im pretty sure Connor was Captain of that ship because it was in the Homesteads harbor and he was the only one capable of sailing it.

TBH I never understood why Faulkner wasn't the captain. The captain isn't the one who steers the ship (as the game itself showed in the opening sequence). They could have made Connor the helmsman; the gameplay would have been the exact same. I had difficulty accepting the fact that Faulkner, a sailing veteran with like forty years of experience, deferred captaincy to a fourteen-year-old kid.

Assassin_M
08-18-2014, 08:03 PM
His dad emphasized to him that everything is important and again he had all night to do what he had to do as well. Executions don't happen at 9 PM.
I still would not take a shirt I found in a box just because my dad emphasized how important it is. Ezio never knew anything about an execution nor when it would happen, just that it was important he delivered the letter as quickly as possible


Didn't say there's isn't some degree of distrust but it's not impossible for someone like that to keep it as an internal process. They show hints of trying to show distrust like when he meets La Volpe and asks who he is showing clear agitation, I think that they tried to include it but just wrote him terribly there.
Sure, they show it with La Volpe but not with Paola nor Antonio, which SHOULD have happened...it could have masterfully been portrayed with subtle hints of distrust like asking questions whenever someone like Antonio commands him to do something, less friendliness..etc. it didn't have to be thrown in my face "HEY, I DON'T TRUST YOU, YOU LIEEEE"


You'd be satisfied with that? I'd be wanting to go after them, know more about the Templars, know more about them and why they did what they did specifically, what they're planning, why they obey Rodrigo, etc. etc. etc.
except NONE of that is discussed AT ALL. EVERYTHING Mario told Ezio was all the answers the game gave Ezio. Ezio literally learned nothing new about the Templars, why they obey Rodrigo or any of the things you mentioned...by the end of the game, Ezio knew as much about the Templars as he did with what Mario told him about them.


People can only feel one motivation and be motivated by one thing now? He can't want to complete his fathers work AND want revenge at once. I knew you thought Ezio was dumb but I didn't know you thought he had the emotional range of a teaspoon too ;P

I can be motivated to feed my family AND also be motivated to get nice things for example, I don't have to pick one.
Because Revenge and completing his father's work go against each other. His revenge makes him want to kill Rodrigo but his father's work demands that he spend YEARS to hunt all these other men...why? That's why it should have been one or the other..the two motivations are not in harmony. Feeding your family and getting nice things may not be in harmony if you're not rich, then you'd HAVE to choose only ONE motivation.


ALL he said in sequence 10 was that when he was young he was too brash to believe in it. Just a few minutes prior he's talking about the pieces of Eden with Leonardo so yeah obviously he decided they weren't tripe before that scene at some point.
"When my uncle told me about the Codex, I was too young, too brash to realize it was anything but an old man's fantasy but now I see" He only told Leonardo about the pieces of eden as something related to the things he's reading in the codex "Hey, man...my uncle told me this thing about pieces of Eden?" He pretty much never believed anything Mario said about the codex until sequence 10, the revelation and his belief in it was in sequence 10, nowhere before.


I doubt that, even if Rodrigo died, Cesare would want to kill the person responsible for daring to oppose the Borgia. Oh and Cesare looked to be doing just fine when he killed Rodrigo himself.
Just fine? The moment Rodrigo died, Cesare was stripped of his power and sent to prison. it took 4 whole years for him to assemble an army, that would have been more than enough time for Ezio to find and kill Cesare and just end this once and for all but when he went back to Monterrigionni, he was all happy and gitty "my battles have already been won, i have all the time in the world now"


Is it trying to convey that? It shows the conflict so I don't think anyone can be sure of such an interpretation. It could also mean rather than getting over revenge it shows he's maturing a bit and not letting his emotions rule him so easily.
EVERYONE who played AC II would unanimously agree that the scene portrayed Ezio as getting over revenge, not choosing any middle ground. Sure, he matured and all (although maturing in 5 minutes seems like a bit of a stretch) but again, the whole thing makes no sense from a story telling perspective.


So like you're saying about Ezio, he made a dumb decision. He SHOULD have stabbed Hickey in the head and then ran off. I bring up Connor because he's part of the Assassin order and this thread IS about him first so it's fair to compare them.
no, he SHOULDN'T have because his character and his goal in this sequence are not to KILL Hickey but to imprison him and get him away from GW. Connor screwed up, of course but his motivation, character and personality are in sync with this dumb decision. Was it dumb? sure, did he screw up? yes but it made sense.
You're not comparing them, though....you're bringing cases where Connor screws up and then call me biased:p


I'm a logical man, one man alone doesn't have the power to change my perspective often, indeed not when it comes to stuff like that, if I told you that experience and you sympathized but not necessarily believed it as representative of things as a whole I wouldn't be mad about it. Much like if a friend comes to me and tells me the president is terrible because x, x, and y.

Indeed his story is just one of many, I can sympathize with his views perhaps but I certainly don't take them to heart, I collect the data to make my own informed conclusions. Hence why you'll never see my actually have a real discussion on politics btw, they bore the hell out of me and I cba to care about them lol.

As for Ezio well most of us aren't skillful assassins that could just stab someone in the face to resolve our problems either. I probably wouldn't be scared either if I knew I could take care of him easily in case of possible betrayal and also once again it could simply be an internal process for him. Finally I can admit it's also possibly badly written, I think there's hints showing that it's there but terribly written.
I haven't seen a single hint of Ezio being distrustful of Paola and Antonio, I would LOVE it if you point me to them.


Leonardo is huggable.
isn't he?


It wasn't an oversight, they removed it for obvious reasons that still don't make any sense. Same with the climb leap, same with all the stuff I mentioned.
Removed what, man? I'm not talking about Brotherhood, i'm talking about when Ezio sees Rosa do the climb leap in Setta but then had to be shown again how to do it in their hideout.


Indeed, although I may crash again, I only had four hours of sleep thanks to a headache. Bah I need to move from this damn black mold infested florida swampland house is murdering me slowly.
Ah, sorry about that, bro...maybe I should take it easy then:p


I've been paying pretty good attention, most everywhere else I go people either don't care or downright dislike him.
If you did, you'd have noticed Connor winning a public voted award beating Max Payne, Master Chief and Agent 47 for best character in 2012;)


He's not driven by distrust but anger and hatred.
distrust can't drive people but emotional drive should dictate distrust if the person was betrayed.

Megas_Doux
08-18-2014, 08:05 PM
I like Connor´s character, my issue is with the VA´s performance, which I dont feel connected to AT ALL. Roger Craig Smith is a top VA and despite his pretty awful "italian", he was excelllent in that role, whereas Watts was weak, imo.

Adrian Hough outclassed him.

pacmanate
08-18-2014, 08:06 PM
TBH I never understood why Faulkner wasn't the captain. The captain isn't the one who steers the ship (as the game itself showed in the opening sequence). They could have made Connor the helmsman; the gameplay would have been the exact same. I had difficulty accepting the fact that Faulkner, a sailing veteran with like forty years of experience, deferred captaincy to a fourteen-year-old kid.

Good point, but maybe its cause it was owned by the Assassin's and Connor was training to be an Assassin so he just let him have it.

Assassin_M
08-18-2014, 08:07 PM
Yes, contrast, not contradiction. It's perfectly normal for him to behave differently at home (everyone does) but the way it was written made the divide feel more like "Story Connor vs. Side Mission Connor" rather than "Connor at Home vs. Connor in Town." That's why I said the Homestead missions should have been part of the main sequences, so we could see all sides of Connor during his main story arc. We really didn't get a sense of him being a wise leader during the main sequences, which is a shame because he obviously WAS one.
We'v seen hints of his leadership and diplomacy in the main story arc. During the Naval missions like chasing church and the battle of the Chesapeake, he shows leadership over his crew and control of the situation--Also, during the battles of Lexington and Concord and Monmouth, he maintained control of the situation, assessed threats and tactically issued retreats to minimize casualties as much as possible.

Namikaze_17
08-18-2014, 08:07 PM
Im pretty sure Connor was Captain of that ship because it was in the Homesteads harbor and he was the only one capable of sailing it.

But the Crew members still let him be Captain of the ship...they had a choice to say no or not let Connor be Captain....hell, they could've let Faulkner still the Captain, but Connor ( Like Edward) had that aura about him that made you wanna make him captain. Arguably Adewale and Faulkner knew the seas way more than Connor and Edward, yet both of them still were Captain because they both had that Charisma. Only look at how Connor starts a Chant after he Assassinated Biddle, someone with none of that would've gotten nothing....same for Edward.

pacmanate
08-18-2014, 08:08 PM
I like Connor´s character, my issue is with the VA´s performance, which I dont feel connected to AT ALL. Roger Craig Smith is a top VA and despite his pretty awful "italian", he was excelllent in that role, whereas Watts was weak, imo.

Adrian Hough outclassed him.

Agree, its the memorabilty of a voice. This is why I love David Hayter as Snake.

Assassin_M
08-18-2014, 08:10 PM
... no. Connor never gave up his revenge mission. He was always hell-bent on killing Lee, even when he was toying with allying with Haytham, and hell, even after he found out Lee wasn't behind it. He couldn't kill Washington because it would cripple the Patriot cause that Connor believed in. It's his biggest flaw, and honestly one of the best-written parts of the game IMO. He NEEDED to kill Lee, it had been his mission for damn near his entire life. Even when Lee was discredited, stripped of all of his power, and exonerated of the village burning, he still HAD to kill him. It was all he had left.
How did he not give it up? I just said how he was willing to give it up. JUST the thought of allying with his father is enough since he was under the impression that Haytham was the one who ordered the attack. I never said he didn't want to kill Lee, he hated Lee a whole lot.
Lee still had a lot of power, he was already amassing an army to overthrow the Patriot leaders and he was planning to sail for England to regroup with the Templars there--Lee was as much of a threat as Cesare and Rodrigo were, he HAD to kill him not because of some weird fetish but because he NEEDED to...to save everyone.

LoyalACFan
08-18-2014, 08:17 PM
How did he not give it up? I just said how he was willing to give it up. JUST the thought of allying with his father is enough since he was under the impression that Haytham was the one who ordered the attack. I never said he didn't want to kill Lee, he hated Lee a whole lot.
Lee still had a lot of power, he was already amassing an army to overthrow the Patriot leaders and he was planning to sail for England to regroup with the Templars there--Lee was as much of a threat as Cesare and Rodrigo were, he HAD to kill him not because of some weird fetish but because he NEEDED to...to save everyone.

His revenge quest was always directed specifically against Lee. He never hated Haytham or the other Templars that way. Although this is just another instance of AC3's sloppy, contrived writing, because why the hell would he NOT be ragingly angry at Haytham if he thought he was behind it? He couldn't even be in the same room with Lee without having to be literally held back from attacking the man. Either way, no, he never put aside his revenge quest, which is fine, because he never should have.

Namikaze_17
08-18-2014, 08:18 PM
I like Connor´s character, my issue is with the VA´s performance, which I dont feel connected to AT ALL. Roger Craig Smith is a top VA and despite his pretty awful "italian", he was excelllent in that role, whereas Watts was weak, imo.

Adrian Hough outclassed him.


I disagree...I think I'll remember Connor's voice in the future.

But then again, I think I'll remember everyone's voice really. ;)

LoyalACFan
08-18-2014, 08:19 PM
Only look at how Connor starts a Chant after he Assassinated Biddle, someone with none of that would've gotten nothing....same for Edward.

Faulkner told him to do that :p

pacmanate
08-18-2014, 08:25 PM
I disagree...I think I'll remember Connor's voice in the future.

But then again, I think I'll remember everyone's voice really. ;)

I remember Connors voice boring me death. But thats just me haha

Assassin_M
08-18-2014, 08:25 PM
His revenge quest was always directed specifically against Lee. He never hated Haytham or the other Templars that way. Although this is just another instance of AC3's sloppy, contrived writing, because why the hell would he NOT be ragingly angry at Haytham if he thought he was behind it? He couldn't even be in the same room with Lee without having to be literally held back from attacking the man. Either way, no, he never put aside his revenge quest, which is fine, because he never should have.
The difference between Haytham and Lee is that Connor HATED Lee--the things Lee said to him as a child were unforgivable. He was ragingly angry at Haytham, perhaps not as much as he was Lee because like I said, Connor hated Lee...it's just another proof that Connor was WILLING to let go of his hatred and revenge to unite the Assassins and Templars, what was his plan? "Oh sorry, father, I wanna kill this Lee because I hate him but we can still have peace"? Haytham would have staunchly refused and Connor knew it. How did you know he was going to attack the man? he just confronted him and didnt take a step to hit up or anything, Connor's resistance was due to Adams' restraint, he doesn't like being touched. Nah, he did put it aside.

Assassin_M
08-18-2014, 08:26 PM
Faulkner told him to do that :p
Doesnt make a difference.

I thought all the protagonists had awesome voice acting that suited each of them perfectly.

Namikaze_17
08-18-2014, 08:31 PM
Faulkner told him to do that :p

But he Still attracted the Crew members to join in...

Connor doesn't always have to be like that for the hell of it, just when he does it, it works. Plus Faulkner offered him to do that as well...Connor still had a choice not to.

Namikaze_17
08-18-2014, 08:32 PM
I remember Connors voice boring me death. But thats just me haha

Well to each it's own... ;) lollollol

king-hailz
08-18-2014, 08:34 PM
Well... I didn't like Connor but not just for those reasons I thought he had many problems as a character... He might have a personality but it isn't a very good one. He is not likeable. He is so rude to everyone that I feel I have no connection with any of the other characters. I hated how he was with achilles and found it laughable when he was sad that he died! I know he has a hard time to get close to people because of his life. However I will now use Joel from last of us as an example... He was the same but the story was about him getting close to a character. Connor is like Joel before he met ellie. And I don't think the last of us would be regarded that good if this was the case....

Shahkulu101
08-18-2014, 08:36 PM
If you think Connor meant what he said to Achilles and they were both so scarred by the arguments that Connor wouldn't be sad when he died, you're a bit of a plonker. There was more to their relationship than that for God's sake.

Sesheenku
08-18-2014, 08:37 PM
I still would not take a shirt I found in a box just because my dad emphasized how important it is. Ezio never knew anything about an execution nor when it would happen, just that it was important he delivered the letter as quickly as possible

One of three things happens in prison, you rot to death, you get a present for your backside, or you get executed.


Sure, they show it with La Volpe but not with Paola nor Antonio, which SHOULD have happened...it could have masterfully been portrayed with subtle hints of distrust like asking questions whenever someone like Antonio commands him to do something, less friendliness..etc. it didn't have to be thrown in my face "HEY, I DON'T TRUST YOU, YOU LIEEEE"

Paola was the sister to his longtime maid, what reason does he have to distrust her? As for Antonio he asks how he knows his name too at least, again I feel it was put in but put in lazily and carelessly to the point where it's debatable.



except NONE of that is discussed AT ALL. EVERYTHING Mario told Ezio was all the answers the game gave Ezio. Ezio literally learned nothing new about the Templars, why they obey Rodrigo or any of the things you mentioned...by the end of the game, Ezio knew as much about the Templars as he did with what Mario told him about them.

He did learn more about the people he went after, just like every AC. They may not have been the exact answers he sought but he got some type of closure.


Because Revenge and completing his father's work go against each other. His revenge makes him want to kill Rodrigo but his father's work demands that he spend YEARS to hunt all these other men...why? That's why it should have been one or the other..the two motivations are not in harmony. Feeding your family and getting nice things may not be in harmony if you're not rich, then you'd HAVE to choose only ONE motivation.

His fathers work leads up to the same end anyways, off with the Templars heads. The motivations may not be in harmony but it doesn't mean I'm not motivated by them only that I choose to do the more accessible one until I can do both. I still WANT nice things and that STILL motivates me to push forward.



"When my uncle told me about the Codex, I was too young, too brash to realize it was anything but an old man's fantasy but now I see" He only told Leonardo about the pieces of eden as something related to the things he's reading in the codex "Hey, man...my uncle told me this thing about pieces of Eden?" He pretty much never believed anything Mario said about the codex until sequence 10, the revelation and his belief in it was in sequence 10, nowhere before.


This doesn't prove he started to believe it all of a sudden, all he says is that when he was YOUNG he didn't believe. The now I see part leads off into his realization of what all the killing was for.

So no we can't be 100% sure he realized it there. It could also be the realization of why the Templars did what they did.

"But now I see....the killing of Mocenigo (http://assassinscreed.wikia.com/wiki/Giovanni_Mocenigo)....even the Medici (http://assassinscreed.wikia.com/wiki/House_of_Medici)....my father and brothers....it was all part of his plan! To find the vault...the Spaniard!"


Just fine? The moment Rodrigo died, Cesare was stripped of his power and sent to prison. it took 4 whole years for him to assemble an army, that would have been more than enough time for Ezio to find and kill Cesare and just end this once and for all but when he went back to Monterrigionni, he was all happy and gitty "my battles have already been won, i have all the time in the world now"

Uh, the moment Rodrigo died Cesare went to grab the apple the ONLY reason he was stripped of power is because he failed to do so and Ezio used it to end his plans quickly.


EVERYONE who played AC II would unanimously agree that the scene portrayed Ezio as getting over revenge, not choosing any middle ground. Sure, he matured and all (although maturing in 5 minutes seems like a bit of a stretch) but again, the whole thing makes no sense from a story telling perspective.

Everyone always agrees on the simplest answer. The one that's at the surface and most easily viewable, the one that you can clearly see with your brain off. What about the other possibilities? What I said is equally viable. It does make sense, a story does not have to end in the way that it seems to be going for it to make sense.


no, he SHOULDN'T have because his character and his goal in this sequence are not to KILL Hickey but to imprison him and get him away from GW. Connor screwed up, of course but his motivation, character and personality are in sync with this dumb decision. Was it dumb? sure, did he screw up? yes but it made sense.
You're not comparing them, though....you're bringing cases where Connor screws up and then call me biased:p

I don't recall that, he barges into the shop after all and looks perfectly prepared to plant his Tomahawk in his skull, all the horrible problems could have been avoided.

Cause you do seem biased sometimes when it comes to Connor, I'm just making sure you're not by pointing out Connor is not without similar flaws in some cases.



I haven't seen a single hint of Ezio being distrustful of Paola and Antonio, I would LOVE it if you point me to them.

As I said with Paola she's the sister of a close maid. No reason to distrust her really, as for Antonio he does question him like La Volpe at first, asking him how he knows what he does.

Besides Antonio also just brushes it off and says, your work in Florence and Tuscany did not go unnoticed.


isn't he?

He is.


Removed what, man? I'm not talking about Brotherhood, i'm talking about when Ezio sees Rosa do the climb leap in Setta but then had to be shown again how to do it in their hideout.

Hm? I don't recall that, I remember her teaching him a single time and then having him practice at the Santa Maria dei Frari. At Setta all she does is say "remember what I taught you!"


Ah, sorry about that, bro...maybe I should take it easy then:p

The headache's gone for now but it recurs often because of the mold 8U, no worries though, I'll be out of here within the next week.


If you did, you'd have noticed Connor winning a public voted award beating Max Payne, Master Chief and Agent 47 for best character in 2012;)

FFS Master Chief made a list of best characters in 2012... Ugh all my hope in humanity just evaporated. He's got as much character as Doom from Quake 3 of which he is a blatant rip off.

I must admit I don't know the other two, I don't play their games. Can't argue with that though, I guess I hang with all dem haters.



distrust can't drive people but emotional drive should dictate distrust if the person was betrayed.

Could be that anger and revenge overrode it or again I find it possible they intended to include it but wrote it terribly.

Namikaze_17
08-18-2014, 08:41 PM
Well... I didn't like Connor but not just for those reasons I thought he had many problems as a character... He might have a personality but it isn't a very good one. He is not likeable. He is so rude to everyone that I feel I have no connection with any of the other characters. I hated how he was with achilles and found it laughable when he was sad that he died! I know he has a hard time to get close to people because of his life. However I will now use Joel from last of us as an example... He was the same but the story was about him getting close to a character. Connor is like Joel before he met ellie. And I don't think the last of us would be regarded that good if this was the case....

I suggest you read Humble's post mate as I'm too tired to explain further. Her post is everything I would say and then some. ;)

CoachAssassin
08-18-2014, 08:43 PM
I honestly found Connor one of the most touched characters in AC. You literally notice he is torn between 2 fights, not allowing him to fully support 1 side. It's tearing him apart, and making him very jumpy and defensive. But you can really feel the heartbreak I think when he notices his people are gone and he had chosen his side and how that had consequences. I think in a future AC with Connor we see him very less conflicted and much more himself.


To me he is just a very realistic character for that time setting. What were you going to expect; somebody who was given every reason to hate the sight of the colonials to be a charming ezio-god-lookalike who is accepting and opens up to them? It's more that the average player just wants to connect with Connor and want to play as that guy they want to be.

Connor is in my eyes, the most realistic and complex character of the entire series. But I simpely adore Edward the most because we see him learning the harshest of lessons that lead him to a goal, while still being this charming and brash prankster.

LoyalACFan
08-18-2014, 09:01 PM
The difference between Haytham and Lee is that Connor HATED Lee--the things Lee said to him as a child were unforgivable. He was ragingly angry at Haytham, perhaps not as much as he was Lee because like I said, Connor hated Lee...it's just another proof that Connor was WILLING to let go of his hatred and revenge to unite the Assassins and Templars, what was his plan? "Oh sorry, father, I wanna kill this Lee because I hate him but we can still have peace"? Haytham would have staunchly refused and Connor knew it. How did you know he was going to attack the man? he just confronted him and didnt take a step to hit up or anything, Connor's resistance was due to Adams' restraint, he doesn't like being touched. Nah, he did put it aside.

Well... yeah, that's pretty much exactly it, actually. When he's talking about Haytham in his pre-sequence 10 monologue; "If I can be rid of Lee, there may still be a chance for reconciliation - and through it, peace." Those were his exact words. He wanted peace with Haytham, but he didn't ever stop trying to kill Lee. I'm sorry, I can't accept the claim that Connor ever put aside his desire for revenge against Lee. He just didn't.

Shahkulu101
08-18-2014, 09:07 PM
Loyal do you think Connor's naïveté is a negative aspect of his personality overall? And even as a kid?

Because I quite like that about him. So tenacious and determined that he can make things right, and seeing him suffer because of that just makes me want to ruffle his hair and tell him to never give up.

Oh and take him for a beer to get him some tail so he'll lighten the **** up. I did think he was little too conservative, to be honest. Wasn't a huge problem for me though.

king-hailz
08-18-2014, 09:11 PM
I know many people who have lost their mothers as children but there not like Connor at all... humans have more depth to them than that... oh well... The only good point of Connor was when he threatened to kill Washington.... I wanted him to do it........ However I don't hate Connor... I still want a conclusion to him... The character is fine... He was just written and voice acted poorly.

I just wished he met someone who he would get close too... and for us to see him change from a dark limited character that he shows on the outside to a different person... that would have been better... However Connor was still the same from when he met achilles to the end. I do find it sad that Connor did so much to save his people but at the end of it none of it was worth it... In the past and the present.... He wasn't able to really save his people, and in the present he didn't really help... He just ducked thongs up... In no fault of his own...

To be honest that games story was just so poorly written and executed... I didn't feel impact when anything happened like when his mother died...

Edit: ducked thongs up??? Sorry I think you can figure out what I am saying!

GunnerGalactico
08-18-2014, 09:16 PM
Loyal do you think Connor's naïveté is a negative aspect of his personality overall? And even as a kid?

Because I quite like that about him. So tenacious and determined that he can make things right, and seeing him suffer because of that just makes me want to ruffle his hair and tell him to never give up.

Oh and take him for a beer to get him some tail so he'll lighten the **** up. I did think he was little too conservative, to be honest. Wasn't a huge problem for me though.

TBH, I didn't find any of those things to be a problem. That's what I liked about him in the first place.

Shahkulu101
08-18-2014, 09:19 PM
TBH, I didn't find any of those things to be a problem. That's what I liked about him in the first place.

No no, I'm saying I liked those things about him. Especially his idealism.

Just thought that maybe he could have be an a bit more outgoing in his personality. I mean...he did only laugh like once.

Rugterwyper32
08-18-2014, 09:27 PM
I think that one of the main issues regarding Connor has far more to do with the entire development process of the game itself. I'm almost certain that at some point the main set of homestead missions (at least getting every of those characters to the homestead itself) would've been part of the main story, including Achilles' funeral (that's something pretty big and you'd imagine it'd be main story material), and we have a lot of cut content which probably would have made sense of the jumbled up characterization it feels he has at some points. We have the entire Benedict Arnold stuff made into exclusive content for one console (not that important, but still would fit within the story) and then we have all the events that were cut: The Great Fire of New York, the battles of Trenton and Princeton... And I'm pretty sure along with that more was lost that could've expanded Connor's character as a whole. The story had its issues as it was with the Gump factor and whatnot, but I think the most damning thing going for it was certainly the likely amount of cut content. We can see it with Daniel Cross as well and the cut dialogue that really hurt his character in this game, for instance.

Assassin_M
08-18-2014, 09:35 PM
Well... I didn't like Connor but not just for those reasons I thought he had many problems as a character... He might have a personality but it isn't a very good one. He is not likeable. He is so rude to everyone that I feel I have no connection with any of the other characters. I hated how he was with achilles and found it laughable when he was sad that he died! I know he has a hard time to get close to people because of his life. However I will now use Joel from last of us as an example... He was the same but the story was about him getting close to a character. Connor is like Joel before he met ellie. And I don't think the last of us would be regarded that good if this was the case....
Connor wasnt a jerk to everyone, now here are the YT arguments. He wasn't a jerk to ANYONE, he was distrustful of most of the Patriot leaders who were all huggy huggy and friendly with him. The first fight with Achilles was there as a progression of their relationship and a bit of a comic relief. Achilles always discouraged Connor, Connor continues to succeed in his mission, Achilles smugly congratulates Connor, Connor gets upset, Achilles continues to be smug and reprimands his student for being optimistic, Connor then shows ungratefulness and youthful cockiness..it was a normal father-child banter. Connor apologized after the second argument, which means it's done.


Well... yeah, that's pretty much exactly it, actually. When he's talking about Haytham in his pre-sequence 10 monologue; "If I can be rid of Lee, there may still be a chance for reconciliation - and through it, peace." Those were his exact words. He wanted peace with Haytham, but he didn't ever stop trying to kill Lee. I'm sorry, I can't accept the claim that Connor ever put aside his desire for revenge against Lee. He just didn't.
That was in sequence 10, after Lee instigated the conflict with his people and forced him to kill Kanen. Nothing prior to sequence implies that this was Connor's plan at all.

I'll reply to you you, Seeshenku after my run.

Sesheenku
08-18-2014, 09:38 PM
I'll reply to you you, Seeshenku after my run.

Kai dude, go get dat exercise.

GunnerGalactico
08-18-2014, 09:41 PM
No no, I'm saying I liked those things about him. Especially his idealism.

Just thought that maybe he could have be an a bit more outgoing in his personality. I mean...he did only laugh like once.

Oh. Thanks for the clarification. I wished he could've smiled more as well.

LoyalACFan
08-18-2014, 09:43 PM
That was in sequence 10, after Lee instigated the conflict with his people and forced him to kill Kanen. Nothing prior to sequence implies that this was Connor's plan at all.

:nonchalance: Do you really think that made him hate Lee MORE than he already did? Because I'm pretty sure that's not possible.


Loyal do you think Connor's naïveté is a negative aspect of his personality overall? And even as a kid?

As a kid first arriving in Boston it made sense and added to him as a character, but there was a point where it seemed like the naivete had lasted a little too long IMO. His continued support of Washington after Haytham pointed out all of his faults didn't really sit well with me, at least until he turned his back on him when he found out about the village.

Shahkulu101
08-18-2014, 09:45 PM
Loyal you ignored me.

http://www.elle.com/cm/elle/images/3r/Cryinggifs_01_1.gif

Namikaze_17
08-18-2014, 09:48 PM
@Gunner

This goes with what we want in a future Connor...something similar to his TOKW self.

He was still himself but he was less naive, more accepting of people touching, he even had some sarcastic humor as well. But I do agree he should smile more .

LoyalACFan
08-18-2014, 09:49 PM
Loyal you ignored me.

http://www.elle.com/cm/elle/images/3r/Cryinggifs_01_1.gif

I updated my post after I saw your question, please forgive meeeeeeee

Jexx21
08-18-2014, 09:51 PM
As a kid first arriving in Boston it made sense and added to him as a character, but there was a point where it seemed like the naivete had lasted a little too long IMO. His continued support of Washington after Haytham pointed out all of his faults didn't really sit well with me, at least until he turned his back on him when he found out about the village.

actually he probably supported Washington afterwards more because he still believe in the cause of the colonials

Shahkulu101
08-18-2014, 09:53 PM
I updated my post after I saw your question, please forgive meeeeeeee

Nah it's alright. ;)

And yes, I kind of agree with that. I was filled with rage that he didn't let Washington have it, but at the same time no longer supporting the patriots would just end up with the Templars and his greatest enemy Lee in charge. In essence, giving up on the revolution was conceding to the Templar's.

I can only see a scenario where he sides with the British, to fight alongside his village against the Templar controlled patriot's after Washington was already 'dealt' with the Templar's.

LoyalACFan
08-18-2014, 10:02 PM
Nah it's alright. ;)

And yes, I kind of agree with that. I was filled with rage that he didn't let Washington have it, but at the same time no longer supporting the patriots would just end up with the Templars and his greatest enemy Lee in charge. In essence, giving up on the revolution was conceding to the Templar's.

I can only see a scenario where he sides with the British, to fight alongside his village against the Templar controlled patriot's after Washington was already 'dealt' with the Templar's.

Yeah, I can see why he still kinda-supported Washington until the war was over, but then he did him a favor again at West Point... then played bowls with him... then helped him again with the Apple of Eden. The last one especially rubbed me wrong, it's like dude, Connor, you have the guy who killed your mom alone in the woods with nobody around for miles, just strangle the mofo and nobody will ever know you were there :p I just had trouble believing that he eternally hated Lee with a passion for supposedly burning the village, but then just acted vaguely pissy with Washington when it was revealed that he did it.


actually he probably supported Washington afterwards more because he still believe in the cause of the colonials

I just think he should have been a lot more cautious about it, he still pretty much gave Washington his undivided support until the village revelation. And I'm still not entirely sure why he was so devoted to Washington in the first place, he didn't even trust Adams that much and he knew him a lot better.

GunnerGalactico
08-18-2014, 10:03 PM
@Gunner

This goes with what we want in a future Connor...something similar to his TOKW self.

He was still himself but he was less naive, more accepting of people touching, he even had some sarcastic humor as well. But I do agree he should smile more .

I know, you did mention that in Connor's Future thread. I also suggested that he should be less naïve, as well as more calm and relaxed.

Jexx21
08-18-2014, 10:03 PM
it wasn't communicated very well, I agree.

Connor either needs a sequel or AC3 needs a remake.

StocktonBrawler
08-18-2014, 10:09 PM
Assassin_M had implored me to examine and properly explain my utter hatred for all things Connor Kenway. I had thought he was going to make a thread dedicated specifically to this subject, but being that this thread is still active, I believe it would be best to post it here. First and foremost, I am a pretty respectful person and I respect others views and I ask you to respect mine as well. If you disagree with me, there's no need to get angry, merely offer a valid counterpoint and attempt to disprove what I believe. Who knows, over the course of this discussion you very well may change how I view Connor and his character (or lack there of, in my honest opinion). What I ask you to do is act maturely, and to not insult me. We're not children, it's best to not act like them.

Let me first say, I am a massive fan of the assassin's creed series. I have played and beaten every single game to 100% completion, excluding Assassin's Creed 3. Despite my hatred for Connor, I did believe that AC3 was in some ways a revolutionary game (please excuse the pun). All in all, I believed it did some things very well. The graphics were astounding, the frontier was very interesting as were the cities, but where it really had shined was the naval combat (which was obviously refined in AC4). But as one former developer had said, "It was a widespread opinion that AC3 was just a massive tech demo for AnvilNext, in anticipation for AC4 and future projects. Took a while for the some programmers to get used to the engine given the processing constraints.". Looking in hindsight, it's an incredibly valid statement (just by judging from the relative success of AC4; which is largely loved; and the relative failure of AC3; which is largely hated). At the end of the day, AC3 was really just a tech demo for AC4 and the character of Connor is evident of that.

Here are some articles I had found discussing their general disgust with AC3. Here are some excerpts, the links are posted below....


When I wrote my appraisal of Ubisoft Montreal’s open world romp, I struggled to find positive things to say about it. To me it embodied everything wrong with modern gaming today. The developer had somehow managed to take the dense geography of colonial America and make it feel like a dull corridor devoid of choice and features....Ubisoft knows it ****ed up hard, that’s why special attention is being drawn to Assassin’s Creed 4: Black Flag’s naval exploration, seeing as it is the one positive element of Assassin’s Creed 3 that most critics agreed on.


http://www.vg247.com/2013/03/04/is-it-too-early-for-assassins-creed-4/


If ACIII was anything to judge the future of AC by, the future for AC is very dark indeed, and here are five reasons why the next addition to the series is now doomed.


http://du.uloop.com/news/view.php/77337/5-reasons-why-assassins-creed-iv-will-fail


At this point, there may be no hands-off preview I'm less willing to trust than an Assassin's Creed demo. Last year, Assassin's Creed III just looked so good, so full of potential... and the final product was a mess. So when I went and watched a big chunk of Assassin's Creed IV: Black Flag in action, I did so with a massive grain of salt clutched in each hand.

I was sorely disappointed by Assassin's Creed III. The game was a jumbled disaster, and almost entirely unfun for me. And yet when I saw it running at press events and last year's E3, it looked ****ing amazing.


http://kotaku.com/assassins-creed-iv-sure-looks-impressive-but-im-stil-512126634


That sounds pretty damning, huh? Let's just start with this one, then. Nothing in Assassin's Creed III works all that well. Good video games have a good feel to them. Think of it this way: it's not necessarily that every toy, trick, and game mechanic feels intuitive and smooth. But in an action game, the core mechanics, the ones you use over and over again, should.


And I won't post the article in it's entirety but here's a link that discussed everything that was 'wrong' with AC3.
http://kotaku.com/5958941/how-has-assassins-creed-iii-disappointed-me-let-me-count-the-ways

I suppose you may be asking yourself, why discuss this? We're talking about Connor Kenway? Well, I'll get to that soon enough. What I am attempting to convey is that Ubisoft viewed AC3 as a tech demo for AC4, nothing more and nothing less...and I'd like to believe that's why Connor's character was just so appalling. It was really due to the faux pas that was AC3's development cycle. I don't think the team had any idea as to what they wanted to do with Connor. I'll discuss the development cycle later on.

Do you remember AC3's initial trailer? Yes? If not, here it is.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1W6JsIyiQHE

Some would say that his character was advertised as being a loose cannon of sorts, a badass not unlike DDL's Hawkeye from the Last of the Mohicans. Confident, calculating and of unquestionable integrity. What Ubisoft advertised was something entirely different than what we got. Connor, to be brutally honest, is a moody, pessimistic failure of a man. Some may argue that this makes Connor interesting, I personally don't understand this in the slightest. He was a weak man, who was absolutely befuddled almost all of the time and his stupidity killed the people he loved. I suppose I'd have to start from the beginning of AC3 to really explain my views so I will.

As we all know, Connor foolishly commits himself to the Assassin cause because he believes that Lee had burned down his village, when it was really Washington. His initial reason for joining the Assassins was because a giant glowing eagle appeared to him. He manages to venture through Colonial lands, murdering anyone who so much as looks at him funny, with the ultimate goal of training under an aging mass murderer who lives in the back *** of nowhere. He commits himself to a cause he doesn't understand, nor does he care for all so he can hunt down Charles Lee - the man who he believes murdered his people. This of course isn't the case at all. Well, any who, he embarks on near suicidal missions to rid North America of Templar influence where he mainly kills innocent soldiers who have absolutely no grasp of the Templar-Assassin conflict at all. Very rarely does he actually murder crucial Templar figures, and when he does he flees back to his wretched home in the sticks. He's nothing more than a thug, a brutish killer who is seemingly incapable of helping others. Over the course of the game, he swears allegiance to a cause that will systematically destroy his people, he inadvertently killed his closest friends and loved ones, and murdered his father...all because he did not have the wherewithal to actually give up on his near demonic and disgustingly obsessive quest to find and kill Lee. If he was so obsessed with killing the man who murdered his people, then why didn't he kill Washington when he had learned of his betrayal? It's fairly obvious to the player that Connor's sole intention is to enact revenge on the man who wronged him, not to carry out the Assassin's wishes (and it's been discussed at length on numerous forums and gaming websites). Why does he stay loyal to the Assassin's cause, instead of his own people? Is there a reason really, or is it just bad writing? I would count on the latter.

I have discussed this with several people, and they all agree that Connor is nothing more than a mindless brute...but one did suggest that the homesteading missions did show a kinder, lighter side of Connor. To that I say, ********. It doesn't change the fact that Connor is not only impulsive, reckless and foolish and it certainly does not erase his faults as a character. Not to mention the fact, it doesn't even jive with who he is as a person. The Homesteading missions were handled by a separate team and they were shoe horned in just weeks before release, and they absolutely do not jive with Connor's character at all.


Dissemination of information between individual employees was also pretty bad. A disturbingly large portion of team members had no idea about the majority of the Homestead, Caravan, and assassin crew side missions. There was basically so much content that even approaching release, plenty of grunt workers like myself on the ground were finding new features they didn't know existed that needed more attention. Upon completing the story, there's an origami-crane node collecting mini game that unlocks that I've NEVER seen covered or mentioned in any gaming blogs, reviews, or fan vids. Most of us didn't even know it existed. That's how random and disjointed the design was. Everything was documented on the company wiki of course. The impenetrably deep, confused, several-thousand page wiki.


He largely attributes the inclusion of the homesteading missions, and the general failure of AC3 to...

So why was AC3 a wreck? Without going into too much details, basically because of ridiculously unrealistic expectations and constantly tacked on features by producers / the creative team, it became literally impossible to get everything done with just Ubi Montreal. In order to get everything in the design doc completed in time for the annual release (ugh!), team size was constantly fluctuating. The game was worked on by large majority of the Montreal team, as well as Ubi Quebec, Ubi Annecy, Ubi Bucharest, and Ubi Singapore. Between 500-600 people touched the game before it's release. Contrast that with teams like Naughty Dog or Sony Santa Monica, who operate with 80-100 (maybe 200 during crunch).


People got too involved as he has already said, and it flawed the game severely...in addition to seriously destroying any semblance of Connor's true character. The homesteading missions should not be taken as canon, they were a flawed idea to begin with. Hell, you can replay them even after Achille's has died. So he can essentially come back from the dead, that's just how badly planned they really were! In other words, when you examine Connor's life and story and actual character, you'll see that he's a pathetic figure really.

In conclusion, I believe that AC3 was really just a tech demo for AC4 like so many others and I believe this is why Connor was such a disappointing character. Many of us were expecting to play as a Hawkeye like figure, but that just wasn't the case. What we got instead was a blood thirst idiot, who hid in his home like a curmudgeon while supporting the very people who systematically killed off his own people.

Now, if you reply, I ask you to be civil, kind and courteous. Just because I don't like a fictional character does not mean that I don't like you. I like many of you and I enjoy our discussions, I was asked to explain my views and here they are. Please do not insinuate that I am a troll, a noob, or a child, because I am not. I am a fan just as you are, and unfortunately I am in the minority on this forum that believes Connor to be a poor character. Please do not bully me, because I won't bully you.

Cheers

Namikaze_17
08-18-2014, 10:13 PM
it wasn't communicated very well, I agree.

Connor either needs a sequel or AC3 needs a remake.

Meh...I'd take the sequel. I already understood Connor and AC3 with or without the added dialogue and speeches. Though I wish Connor's epilogue speech should've been in the game.

GunnerGalactico
08-18-2014, 10:21 PM
Meh...I'd take the sequel. I already understood Connor and AC3 with or without the added dialogue and speeches. Though I wish Connor's epilogue should've been in the game.

^ This. I prefer a sequel.

DumbGamerTag94
08-18-2014, 10:31 PM
actually he probably supported Washington afterwards more because he still believe in the cause of the colonials

I always thought he and Washington remained on good terms because Connor realized that he was a good man and didn't do any of his wrongs with any evil intent.

I mean sure he technically was the one ultimately responsible for Connor's village burning but it was during a time of war. And the second time around it was because Connors tribe was siding with the British thanks to Charles Lee convincing them.

If anything Connor was frustrated/annoyed by Washington not so much anything that would cause him to hate him.

After all if Connor hated him it would be fairly hypocritical. Both he and Washington are the same type of person. They are both men extremely focused on one cause(Connor for the freedom of his people and the colonies, and Washington to free only the colonies). Now they do share a common goal however their interests do not always align. People seem to forget that Connor is not exactly best friends forever with Washington. They had more of an alliance of convenience. They only work together when it suits both of their goals. Neither would really go out of their way for the other if they didn't get something out of it.

In the long run they were both men who sought to protect their people. They're very similar. Even to the point of both being too serious sometimes.

Connor is disgusted with him actually after the incident with Haytham. And he only aids him at Monmouth because he didn't want Lee's gambit there to end the revolution. He even says in a pissed off way to him "this is the last victory I deliver you" and walks away disgusted.

Connor though has a forgiving nature and after thinking about the same things I listed above softened to Washington after the war thus why he is with him when Washington finds the apple. When Washington refused to keep the apple and asked Connor to destroy it is the ultimate proof to Connor that Washington wasn't in it for himself and is 100% loyal to his people and does not want anything more(hell he didn't even want to be president).

I feel after that Connor and Washington would be on good terms and for good reason.

Washington even worked extremely hard to protect Native Americans when he became president actually just for a little historic background. He actually wanted to create independent Native American States that he hoped would one day join the US(however settlers and outlaws ruined that).

Once Connor got over it they actually make for really good friends if you think about it. You just have to forgive and understand eachother

Also I'm sorry if someone read this or posted something I accidentally hit the post button halfway through my post

Assassin_M
08-18-2014, 10:39 PM
One of three things happens in prison, you rot to death, you get a present for your backside, or you get executed.
All the more reason for Ezio to be quick and not bother with putting on a costume and waste more time.


Paola was the sister to his longtime maid, what reason does he have to distrust her? As for Antonio he asks how he knows his name too at least, again I feel it was put in but put in lazily and carelessly to the point where it's debatable.
Uberto was a close friend of Giovanni's, what reason did he have to betray him? He doesn't actually ask Antonio how he knows his name.


He did learn more about the people he went after, just like every AC. They may not have been the exact answers he sought but he got some type of closure.
Which makes it all the more pointless--He got no closure from ANYTHING, if there was something, he learned from the Templars. It was sequence 10 and he STILL did not know why his father and brothers were killed, even though Mario already told him the reasons...so what closure did he get, if after 10 sequences and 10 years he still had no answers?


His fathers work leads up to the same end anyways, off with the Templars heads. The motivations may not be in harmony but it doesn't mean I'm not motivated by them only that I choose to do the more accessible one until I can do both. I still WANT nice things and that STILL motivates me to push forward.
But that's not his revenge motivation--his revenge is off with Rodrigo's head, he's the head honcho, he's the guy that ordered it--the two motivations align only 23 years. It still makes no sense from a story telling perspective, like I said..there's no reason for Ezio to wait 23 years to try and get his revenge.


This doesn't prove he started to believe it all of a sudden, all he says is that when he was YOUNG he didn't believe. The now I see part leads off into his realization of what all the killing was for.

So no we can't be 100% sure he realized it there. It could also be the realization of why the Templars did what they did.

"But now I see....the killing of Mocenigo (http://assassinscreed.wikia.com/wiki/Giovanni_Mocenigo)....even the Medici (http://assassinscreed.wikia.com/wiki/House_of_Medici)....my father and brothers....it was all part of his plan! To find the vault...the Spaniard!"
"But now I see" is the keyword...but now, meaning sequence 10, I see...I see everything I said before was right, so yes...now he sees that everything makes sense now.


Uh, the moment Rodrigo died Cesare went to grab the apple the ONLY reason he was stripped of power is because he failed to do so and Ezio used it to end his plans quickly.
The Borgias had the apple in the first place because of Cesare attacking the Villa--and like I said, had Ezio killed Rodrigo, there wouldnt have been an army for Cesare to attack the Villa so by default, the Apple would still have remained in Ezio's hands.


Everyone always agrees on the simplest answer. The one that's at the surface and most easily viewable, the one that you can clearly see with your brain off. What about the other possibilities? What I said is equally viable. It does make sense, a story does not have to end in the way that it seems to be going for it to make sense.
Didn't you say before that only the view of the majority that counts? If the majority saw it one way, then the story didn't do well to portray otherwise.


I don't recall that, he barges into the shop after all and looks perfectly prepared to plant his Tomahawk in his skull, all the horrible problems could have been avoided.
He wanted to scare him out of the shop and into the open and chase him towards guards who would catch him, see the counterfeit money and arrest him--Which half worked, the guards arrested him, saw the money and threw him in jail, except like I said, the plan got botched. He and Talmadge talk about this plan as they make their way through NY.


Cause you do seem biased sometimes when it comes to Connor, I'm just making sure you're not by pointing out Connor is not without similar flaws in some cases.
Where did I ever seem biased towards Connor? I one of the people who hated Ezio because he was a perfect god in ACB--I like Connor BECAUSE he had flaws but his flaws made sense with his characterization.


As I said with Paola she's the sister of a close maid. No reason to distrust her really, as for Antonio he does question him like La Volpe at first, asking him how he knows what he does.
Besides Antonio also just brushes it off and says, your work in Florence and Tuscany did not go unnoticed.

and as I said with Uberto, he was the close friend of his father so no reason to distrust him ever really. No, he doesn't ever question Antonio.
Which is actually more suspicious, how does Antonio, a Venetian thief, know of Ezio's work in Florence and Tuscany?


Hm? I don't recall that, I remember her teaching him a single time and then having him practice at the Santa Maria dei Frari. At Setta all she does is say "remember what I taught you!"
When Ezio first arrives in Venice, he sees Rosa doing the climb leap but then she shows him AGAIN when her leg is healing.


The headache's gone for now but it recurs often because of the mold 8U, no worries though, I'll be out of here within the next week.
Ah well, good--hopefully you get better.


FFS Master Chief made a list of best characters in 2012... Ugh all my hope in humanity just evaporated. He's got as much character as Doom from Quake 3 of which he is a blatant rip off.

I must admit I don't know the other two, I don't play their games. Can't argue with that though, I guess I hang with all dem haters.
He's still widely popular and so are the other two:p I guess you do;)


Could be that anger and revenge overrode it or again I find it possible they intended to include it but wrote it terribly.
Written and portrayed horribly, we can talk intentions all day but what's done is what was shown and how it was received.

GunnerGalactico
08-18-2014, 11:09 PM
Some would say that his character was advertised as being a loose cannon of sorts, a badass not unlike DDL's Hawkeye from the Last of the Mohicans. Confident, calculating and of unquestionable integrity. What Ubisoft advertised was something entirely different than what we got. Connor, to be brutally honest, is a moody, pessimistic failure of a man. Some may argue that this makes Connor interesting, I personally don't understand this in the slightest. He was a weak man, who was absolutely befuddled almost all of the time and his stupidity killed the people he loved. I suppose I'd have to start from the beginning of AC3 to really explain my views so I will.

As we all know, Connor foolishly commits himself to the Assassin cause because he believes that Lee had burned down his village, when it was really Washington. His initial reason for joining the Assassins was because a giant glowing eagle appeared to him. He manages to venture through Colonial lands, murdering anyone who so much as looks at him funny, with the ultimate goal of training under an aging mass murderer who lives in the back *** of nowhere. He commits himself to a cause he doesn't understand, nor does he care for all so he can hunt down Charles Lee - the man who he believes murdered his people. This of course isn't the case at all. Well, any who, he embarks on near suicidal missions to rid North America of Templar influence where he mainly kills innocent soldiers who have absolutely no grasp of the Templar-Assassin conflict at all. Very rarely does he actually murder crucial Templar figures, and when he does he flees back to his wretched home in the sticks. He's nothing more than a thug, a brutish killer who is seemingly incapable of helping others. Over the course of the game, he swears allegiance to a cause that will systematically destroy his people, he inadvertently killed his closest friends and loved ones, and murdered his father...all because he did not have the wherewithal to actually give up on his near demonic and disgustingly obsessive quest to find and kill Lee. If he was so obsessed with killing the man who murdered his people, then why didn't he kill Washington when he had learned of his betrayal? It's fairly obvious to the player that Connor's sole intention is to enact revenge on the man who wronged him, not to carry out the Assassin's wishes (and it's been discussed at length on numerous forums and gaming websites). Why does he stay loyal to the Assassin's cause, instead of his own people? Is there a reason really, or is it just bad writing? I would count on the latter.

I have discussed this with several people, and they all agree that Connor is nothing more than a mindless brute...but one did suggest that the homesteading missions did show a kinder, lighter side of Connor. To that I say, ********. It doesn't change the fact that Connor is not only impulsive, reckless and foolish and it certainly does not erase his faults as a character. Not to mention the fact, it doesn't even jive with who he is as a person. The Homesteading missions were handled by a separate team and they were shoe horned in just weeks before release, and they absolutely do not jive with Connor's character at all.


@ Stockton Brawler

I respectfully disagree with your statements. They are not accurate at all.

Connor very much understood the cause he was fighting for. He was fighting to protect his village and keep the colonies free from Templar influence. He is not the mindless brute that you labelled him as. It may have started out as a misguided revenge against Charles Lee, but when he realised it was actually Washington that was responsible for burning down his village, he severed all ties with him. Even though he stopped aiding Washington, he still helped the colonials fight for their freedom. Charles Lee was responsible for causing disharmony and deceiving the people in his village- which eventually lead to the death of his friend. Connor could not exact revenge on Washington because he would've achieved what the Templars wanted all along... control of the colonies. To this end, he still had to pursue Charles Lee ( in this case, not out of revenge) because he still posed a threat to Washington's position. Connor knew that he had to stop the Templars, if were not for his actions- the Revolution would not have been successful.

As for the rest of your comments, I'm not really going to bother commenting on those. Connor is not this revenge-driven, mindless jerk that you made him out to be.

Assassin_M
08-18-2014, 11:13 PM
Assassin_M had implored me to examine and properly explain my utter hatred for all things Connor Kenway. I had thought he was going to make a thread dedicated specifically to this subject, but being that this thread is still active, I believe it would be best to post it here. First and foremost, I am a pretty respectful person and I respect others views and I ask you to respect mine as well. If you disagree with me, there's no need to get angry, merely offer a valid counterpoint and attempt to disprove what I believe. Who knows, over the course of this discussion you very well may change how I view Connor and his character (or lack there of, in my honest opinion). What I ask you to do is act maturely, and to not insult me. We're not children, it's best to not act like them.
I just sent a message, I didnt implore you:p


Let me first say, I am a massive fan of the assassin's creed series. I have played and beaten every single game to 100% completion, excluding Assassin's Creed 3. Despite my hatred for Connor, I did believe that AC3 was in some ways a revolutionary game (please excuse the pun). All in all, I believed it did some things very well. The graphics were astounding, the frontier was very interesting as were the cities, but where it really had shined was the naval combat (which was obviously refined in AC4). But as one former developer had said, "It was a widespread opinion that AC3 was just a massive tech demo for AnvilNext, in anticipation for AC4 and future projects. Took a while for the some programmers to get used to the engine given the processing constraints.". Looking in hindsight, it's an incredibly valid statement (just by judging from the relative success of AC4; which is largely loved; and the relative failure of AC3; which is largely hated). At the end of the day, AC3 was really just a tech demo for AC4 and the character of Connor is evident of that.
And here we come at the first point of odds. This is my problem with you and your arguments. You include your opinion as part of a larger one and the majority, I suggest you drop it because it's of no relevance to any discussion--neither are statements from Kotaku, Polygon or VG247. Your arguments should stand alone as representative of your opinion alone, nothing more and nothing less so i'm skipping your linked statements.


I suppose you may be asking yourself, why discuss this? We're talking about Connor Kenway? Well, I'll get to that soon enough. What I am attempting to convey is that Ubisoft viewed AC3 as a tech demo for AC4, nothing more and nothing less...and I'd like to believe that's why Connor's character was just so appalling. It was really due to the faux pas that was AC3's development cycle. I don't think the team had any idea as to what they wanted to do with Connor. I'll discuss the development cycle later on.
First off, just the budget of the game would demonstrate that the developers did not just view AC III as a simple tech demo for the engine. The development was troubled, i'll give you that but a game with such a huge budget, production value and resources is simply NOT a tech demo. The game was marred by poor design choices, time constraints and over the top ambitiousness.



Some would say that his character was advertised as being a loose cannon of sorts, a badass not unlike DDL's Hawkeye from the Last of the Mohicans. Confident, calculating and of unquestionable integrity. What Ubisoft advertised was something entirely different than what we got. Connor, to be brutally honest, is a moody, pessimistic failure of a man. Some may argue that this makes Connor interesting, I personally don't understand this in the slightest. He was a weak man, who was absolutely befuddled almost all of the time and his stupidity killed the people he loved. I suppose I'd have to start from the beginning of AC3 to really explain my views so I will.
None would argue that this makes interesting because he's not moody, pessimistic, weak nor a failure of a man.


As we all know, Connor foolishly commits himself to the Assassin cause because he believes that Lee had burned down his village, when it was really Washington.
His initial reason for joining the Assassins was because a giant glowing eagle appeared to him.
He didn't know it was GW and for good reason. His first intention was to protect his people from colonial encroachment because of his earlier experience with the Templars, not to hunt down Lee, he had no clue where Lee or if he was still alive even at the time.
That glowing eagle was a part of his culture and Religion...if you believe in something and that something told you that this is the truth, you'd believe it in a heartbeat..whether you're Religious or irreligious, you commit to an authority--whether it's scientists wearing lab robes, a bearded man in the sky or a spiritual figure.


He manages to venture through Colonial lands, murdering anyone who so much as looks at him funny
That never happened.


with the ultimate goal of training under an aging mass murderer who lives in the back *** of nowhere.
He didnt know any of that prior and besides, what makes this so different from any of the other Assassins' training? how does this make Connor more of a disgusting, murderous brute than Ezio or Edward?


He commits himself to a cause he doesn't understand
Yes, he does quite well...Achilles explains to him who the Assassins are and what their enemies, the Templars, plan...The one who really takes a cause who does not understand is Ezio. He hunts down men whose names were written on a piece of paper just because "it was his father's work"


nor does he care for all so he can hunt down Charles Lee
Actually, he does care...why else would he bother to rebuild its headquarters, bolster its community, strengthen its ranks with recruits, cut Templar networks in colonial cities and diminish Templar influence in the revolution by following its events and sending his recruits to deal with problems and put the revolution back on the right course? I could go on and on but I can go all day.


This of course isn't the case at all. Well, any who, he embarks on near suicidal missions to rid North America of Templar influence where he mainly kills innocent soldierswho have absolutely no grasp of the Templar-Assassin conflict at all.
So does every other Assassin, this is HARDLY exclusive to Connor. Ezio and Altair murdered TONS and TONS of innocent soldiers, heck Ezio even caused the death of hundreds of civilians in Cappadocia and Istanbul. At least some mission objectives restrict killing a certain amount of soldiers with Connor.


Very rarely does he actually murder crucial Templar figures, and when he does he flees back to his wretched home in the sticks. He's nothing more than a thug, a brutish killer who is seemingly incapable of helping others.
ALL of this can be applied to Ezio and Altair, it's hardly exclusive to Connor anymore than it is to both and Connor did help out A LOT of people, he assisted the Patriots in Lexington and Concord and Monmouth and a helped a lot of colonists who were facing hardships around NY, Boston and the Frontier. He saved the cities of NY and Boston from Templar conspiracies in the shapes of spreading disease, martial law, imposition of Taxes and the terrorizing of citizens. He also kept the eastern seaboard safe for traders and passengers.


Over the course of the game, he swears allegiance to a cause that will systematically destroy his people, he inadvertently killed his closest friends and loved ones, and murdered his father
Except you only know that in hindsight, Connor's view was that getting rid of the Templars would ensure freedom and peace for all, it's not Connor's allegiance that systimatically destroyed his people, it was the betrayal of the Patriot leaders.


...all because he did not have the wherewithal to actually give up on his near demonic and disgustingly obsessive quest to find and kill Lee.
Every time I read statements like "disgusting", "demonic" etc..I can't help but laugh that you'd hate a character like Connor for doing this when Ezio, whom you adore, did worse.


If he was so obsessed with killing the man who murdered his people, then why didn't he kill Washington when he had learned of his betrayal? It's fairly obvious to the player that Connor's sole intention is to enact revenge on the man who wronged him, not to carry out the Assassin's wishes (and it's been discussed at length on numerous forums and gaming websites). Why does he stay loyal to the Assassin's cause, instead of his own people? Is there a reason really, or is it just bad writing? I would count on the latter.
He does not kill GW because he has been put in an impossible situation. Kill GW and risk Lee taking his place and thus ensuring that ALL of his work the past few years to stop the Templars from controlling the Patriots would be undone or spare GW. I agree that it was poorly executed, they should have showed Connor struggling more with this impossible decision but they decide instead to show the battle of the Chesapeake.
If by that point you'v not realized that Connor was working for the Assassins not just his people, then it's your fault, to be honest. Connor--by that point--had stopped fighting for JUST his people. He committed himself to the freedom and peace of EVERYONE who yearns for both, it's why he does all the things I mentioned above.


I have discussed this with several people, and they all agree that Connor is nothing more than a mindless brute
Again with this mentality


...but one did suggest that the homesteading missions did show a kinder, lighter side of Connor. To that I say, ********. It doesn't change the fact that Connor is not only impulsive, reckless and foolish and it certainly does not erase his faults as a character. Not to mention the fact, it doesn't even jive with who he is as a person. The Homesteading missions were handled by a separate team and they were shoe horned in just weeks before release, and they absolutely do not jive with Connor's character at all.
Please present proof of the Homestead missions being shoe horned just weeks before release because logically, that's quite frankly BS..If you also had bothered to pay attention to the story of the game, you'd have noticed the kinder and lighter side to Connor...His halting of Putnam when he kicks Hickey's corpse, just that scene is enough to show how much of a compassionate and respectful person Connor is.




He largely attributes the inclusion of the homesteading missions, and the general failure of AC3 to...
People got too involved as he has already said, and it flawed the game severely...in addition to seriously destroying any semblance of Connor's true character. The homesteading missions should not be taken as canon, they were a flawed idea to begin with. Hell, you can replay them even after Achille's has died. So he can essentially come back from the dead, that's just how badly planned they really were! In other words, when you examine Connor's life and story and actual character, you'll see that he's a pathetic figure really.
Uhhh, you can't replay the Homestead missions and Achilles dies IN the homestead missions, this is just more proof that YOU did not pay attention to the game. I already explained Connor character above and that no, it does mesh with the Connor in the main story who was compassionate, kind and respectful--not whatever headcanon you have of him.


In conclusion, I believe that AC3 was really just a tech demo for AC4 like so many others and I believe this is why Connor was such a disappointing character. Many of us were expecting to play as a Hawkeye like figure, but that just wasn't the case. What we got instead was a blood thirst idiot, who hid in his home like a curmudgeon while supporting the very people who systematically killed off his own people.
Again, the same could be said for all the Assassins we played as.


Now, if you reply, I ask you to be civil, kind and courteous. Just because I don't like a fictional character does not mean that I don't like you. I like many of you and I enjoy our discussions, I was asked to explain my views and here they are. Please do not insinuate that I am a troll, a noob, or a child, because I am not. I am a fan just as you are, and unfortunately I am in the minority on this forum that believes Connor to be a poor character. Please do not bully me, because I won't bully you.
I only have one problem with your argument style. The "my opinion is part of the majority mentality" drop it and this'll be FAR less tense and we can talk on equal ground.

I'd also like to point out how funny it is that when Connor fans say "you just need to look deeper into his character" people get angry and flail around but when Stock does the same and says "if you look closely, you'd see that he's a pathetic figure really"
Hey, hypocrites.

Jexx21
08-18-2014, 11:33 PM
M, you should also respond to the quotes used in the latter half of the post that supposedly come from someone who actually worked in Ubisoft on AC3, although he doesn't actually link to any source so we have no idea where those quotes came from.

Assassin_M
08-18-2014, 11:44 PM
M, you should also respond to the quotes used in the latter half of the post that supposedly come from someone who actually worked in Ubisoft on AC3, although he doesn't actually link to any source so we have no idea where those quotes came from.
Done.



He largely attributes the inclusion of the homesteading missions, and the general failure of AC3 to...

As for these quotes supposedly from a former AC III developer, Darby pretty much shot the statements down and said they were false, not to mention the fact of A LOT of inaccurate statements about development time and the mentality of collaboration between all of the teams.

Namikaze_17
08-18-2014, 11:47 PM
All this is still going on?

I don't understand really...Us who do and who don't like Connor can debate about till the end of time...

Yet, it's not really gonna change anything...I'm bored with it personally.

JustPlainQuirky
08-18-2014, 11:50 PM
All this is still going on?

I don't understand really...Us who do and who don't like Connor can debate about till the end of time...

Yet, it's not really gonna change anything...I'm bored with it personally.

We're no better than the assassins/templars

Namikaze_17
08-18-2014, 11:56 PM
@Mayrice

And Ubisoft is the first Civ?

JustPlainQuirky
08-18-2014, 11:58 PM
@Mayrice

And Ubisoft is the first Civ?

Yes. And the AC games are the pieces of eden.

The Connor sequel is a powerful piece of eden. The assassins (anti-connor fans) want it kept locked away and the templars (connor fans) wants to unleash it upon the world.

Thus the endless war wages on.

Namikaze_17
08-19-2014, 12:04 AM
Yes. And the AC games are the pieces of eden.

The Connor sequel is a powerful piece of eden. The assassins (anti-connor fans) want it kept locked away and the templars (connor fans) wants to unleash it upon the world.

Thus the endless war wages on.

"For Centuries we have fought off against the "Assassins" but soon my brothers and sisters we shall have our "Piece of Eden" and win this war once and for all!"

But somehow the war doesn't end....

StocktonBrawler
08-19-2014, 12:14 AM
And here we come at the first point of odds. This is my problem with you and your arguments. You include your opinion as part of a larger one and the majority, I suggest you drop it because it's of no relevance to any discussion--neither are statements from Kotaku, Polygon or VG247. Your arguments should stand alone as representative of your opinion alone, nothing more and nothing less so i'm skipping your linked statements.


But if they support my argument, how can you ignore them? They are only strengthening my views, because they are the views shared by a number of other people. It lends credibility to what I have to say.


First off, just the budget of the game would demonstrate that the developers did not just view AC III as a simple tech demo for the engine. The development was troubled, i'll give you that but a game with such a huge budget, production value and resources is simply NOT a tech demo. The game was marred by poor design choices, time constraints and over the top ambitiousness.


A member of the development team had clearly stated that this was viewed as a tech demo for the AnvilNext engine, his word is far more credible than either you or I. No offense at all, but who are you more likely to believe? A fan, or someone who helped develop the game? Here's his post in it's entirety, surely, you cannot ignore it.


Oh god, I could write about this for hours.
I worked on it unfortunately. It was a mind**** of an experience.
PREFACE: I only worked on the Single Player module and never touched Multiplayer. Also, I cherished my time at Ubisoft, and despite my following complaints, working there was a great experience despite the ********.
So why was AC3 a wreck? Without going into too much details, basically because of ridiculously unrealistic expectations and constantly tacked on features by producers / the creative team, it became literally impossible to get everything done with just Ubi Montreal. In order to get everything in the design doc completed in time for the annual release (ugh!), team size was constantly fluctuating. The game was worked on by large majority of the Montreal team, as well as Ubi Quebec, Ubi Annecy, Ubi Bucharest, and Ubi Singapore. Between 500-600 people touched the game before it's release. Contrast that with teams like Naughty Dog or Sony Santa Monica, who operate with 80-100 (maybe 200 during crunch).
The coordination of resources between all of these teams separated by thousands of miles and differing time zones was a damn joke, and at the same time studio resources were constantly stolen for work on Watchdogs and Far Cry 3 (AC4, Splinter Cell and Rayman tended to be a little more isolated for the most part though).
Almost everybody on the bottom knew that the Desmond missions were a disgrace. Why? Because a B-team filled with new hires and the least talent handled all production of the Desmond content, and they were rarely in communication with the main gameplay teams. But we couldn't really say anything, and the higher ups basically stuck their fingers in their ears and convinced themselves that they were amazing.
Dissemination of information between individual employees was also pretty bad. A disturbingly large portion of team members had no idea about the majority of the Homestead, Caravan, and assassin crew side missions. There was basically so much content that even approaching release, plenty of grunt workers like myself on the ground were finding new features they didn't know existed that needed more attention. Upon completing the story, there's an origami-crane node collecting mini game that unlocks that I've NEVER seen covered or mentioned in any gaming blogs, reviews, or fan vids. Most of us didn't even know it existed. That's how random and disjointed the design was. Everything was documented on the company wiki of course. The impenetrably deep, confused, several-thousand page wiki.
Stuff like the homestead economy, weapon crafting, hunting, board games, and the late-game set pieces were all heavily ignored til the very end of development, and no time was given to polish them or make them cohesive. Getting 100% went from something fun for the diehard fans, to a herculean task of tedium and dumb-luck. A large action set piece near the Haytham boss fight was entirely cut ~2 weeks before we went gold. On top of that, some vital cutscenes anims and audio weren't implemented until right befoe gold. So the (massive and disjointed) test teams were often sitting on their laurels waiting for more content while the thousands of issues they had already flagged were marked as "Won't Fix" due to time constraints.
Also, the Tyranny of Washington DLC was completely in Quebec's court, and no one outside of Quebec city knew what was going on with it or how it would be integrated/implemented until the last possible second. There was also some ocnfusion on the implementation of the PS3 exclusive missions for quite a while. It's a shame, because I thought Tyranny of Washington was the best work we did. I almost wish it was released as a standalone like Infamous Festival of Blood, or Red Dead Redemption Undead Nightmare.
As for the ****ty performance, it was the first project ever used on the new AnvilNext engine, which was pretty much designed with next-gen consoles and future pc tech in mind, so it was super inefficient on PS3/360. It was a widespread opinion that AC3 was just a massive tech demo for AnvilNext, in anticipation for AC4 and future projects. Took a while for the some programmers to get used to the engine given the processing constraints.
In conclusion, while the Ubisoft work atmosphere is actually quite calm and respectful in comparison to other larger devs in the industry, the time constraints of an annual release, too many teams to coordinate, and new engine all created a perfect storm of ********.



None would argue that this makes interesting because he's not moody, pessimistic, weak nor a failure of a man.


Can you offer a valid counterpoint by providing evidence from a gaming outlet site that proves the contrary? Please find me an article from a major gaming publication that clearly states that he's a confident, strong, successful Assassin.


He didn't know it was GW and for good reason. His first intention was to protect his people from colonial encroachment because of his earlier experience with the Templars, not to hunt down Lee, he had no clue where Lee or if he was still alive even at the time.
That glowing eagle was a part of his culture and Religion...if you believe in something and that something told you that this is the truth, you'd believe it in a heartbeat..whether you're Religious or irreligious, you commit to an authority--whether it's scientists wearing lab robes, a bearded man in the sky or a spiritual figure.


Why didn't he avenge his people then? Why didn't he strike out against Washington, if he murdered his people and family?

Regarding his religion, I'm interested, can you find a source that discusses that the eagle that appeared to him is part of his religion? Regarding his piety, (a) he's hardly a pious figure (b) I don't remember him being a fairly religious figure at all, as a matter of fact he and most assassins seem fairly secular.


That never happened.



After receiving a vague suggestion from a mysterious glowing eagle, he staggers out into the world and immediately starts killing people if they so much as look at him funny – remember back to the first few minutes outside of his home camp, where enemy guards seem very keen on shooting at him for reasons that are never made clear. - theaveragegamer



He didnt know any of that prior and besides, what makes this so different from any of the other Assassins' training? how does this make Connor more of a disgusting, murderous brute than Ezio or Edward?


Ezio was avenging the deaths of his brother and father, and he successfully did. Edward only became an assassin because he had realized that the path he was on, was a dark and tumultuous one that had destroyed the lives of the ones he loved...unlike Connor, he changed to help save those around him.


Yes, he does quite well...Achilles explains to him who the Assassins are and what their enemies, the Templars, plan...The one who really takes a cause who does not understand is Ezio. He hunts down men whose names were written on a piece of paper just because "it was his father's work"


Does he really though? Under Assassin influence, Connor's people were eradicated and later on whole tribes of Native Americans would be slaughtered. If he understood it so well, then why would he ally themselves with them?


Actually, he does care...why else would he bother to rebuild its headquarters, bolster its community, strengthen its ranks with recruits, cut Templar networks in colonial cities and diminish Templar influence in the revolution by following its events and sending his recruits to deal with problems and put the revolution back on the right course? I could go on and on but I can go all day.


Because those were core mechanics or prior games, and they were added because Ubisoft executives didn't want to see those features be erased? I could go on and on but I can go all day. I posted the reply by the Ubisoft developer earlier, I think that should settle the matter.


So does every other Assassin, this is HARDLY exclusive to Connor. Ezio and Altair murdered TONS and TONS of innocent soldiers, heck Ezio even caused the death of hundreds of civilians in Cappadocia and Istanbul. At least some mission objectives restrict killing a certain amount of soldiers with Connor.


We're not discussing those characters, we're discussing Connor. By discussing the faults of others, you're not bolstering your defense of Connor. I'm intrigued by this, Ezio murdered innocent civilians?


Except you only know that in hindsight, Connor's view was that getting rid of the Templars would ensure freedom and peace for all, it's not Connor's allegiance that systimatically destroyed his people, it was the betrayal of the Patriot leaders.


Regardless, doesn't change the fact that he was enthralled to the Patriots and Assassins. He was loyal to the very men who killed his people.


Every time I read statements like "disgusting", "demonic" etc..I can't help but laugh that you'd hate a character like Connor for doing this when Ezio, whom you adore, did worse.


You wanted to have a civil discussion, let's try and keep civil, yeah? i would never adore a video game character, that's ludicrous. I thought Ezio was a mildly interesting character for a videogame franchise I enjoy. I would hardly consider myself an admirer. Again, condemning others doesn't bolster your defense of Connor.


He does not kill GW because he has been put in an impossible situation. Kill GW and risk Lee taking his place and thus ensuring that ALL of his work the past few years to stop the Templars from controlling the Patriots would be undone or spare GW. I agree that it was poorly executed, they should have showed Connor struggling more with this impossible decision but they decide instead to show the battle of the Chesapeake.
If by that point you'v not realized that Connor was working for the Assassins not just his people, then it's your fault, to be honest. Connor--by that point--had stopped fighting for JUST his people. He committed himself to the freedom and peace of EVERYONE who yearns for both, it's why he does all the things I mentioned above.


It would have been more logical to have shown his befuddlement, yes that much is true.


Please present proof of the Homestead missions being shoe horned just weeks before release because logically, that's quite frankly BS..If you also had bothered to pay attention to the story of the game, you'd have noticed the kinder and lighter side to Connor...His halting of Putnam when he kicks Hickey's corpse, just that scene is enough to show how much of a compassionate and respectful person Connor is.


Here you go buddy, please try not to ignore it this time. It's 'of relevance to the discussion', I posted it before, but I think it would be beneficial to all parties involved to read it again...



Dissemination of information between individual employees was also pretty bad. A disturbingly large portion of team members had no idea about the majority of the Homestead, Caravan, and assassin crew side missions. There was basically so much content that even approaching release, plenty of grunt workers like myself on the ground were finding new features they didn't know existed that needed more attention. Upon completing the story, there's an origami-crane node collecting mini game that unlocks that I've NEVER seen covered or mentioned in any gaming blogs, reviews, or fan vids. Most of us didn't even know it existed. That's how random and disjointed the design was. Everything was documented on the company wiki of course. The impenetrably deep, confused, several-thousand page wiki.
Stuff like the homestead economy, weapon crafting, hunting, board games, and the late-game set pieces were all heavily ignored til the very end of development, and no time was given to polish them or make them cohesive. Getting 100% went from something fun for the diehard fans, to a herculean task of tedium and dumb-luck. A large action set piece near the Haytham boss fight was entirely cut ~2 weeks before we went gold. On top of that, some vital cutscenes anims and audio weren't implemented until right befoe gold. So the (massive and disjointed) test teams were often sitting on their laurels waiting for more content while the thousands of issues they had already flagged were marked as "Won't Fix" due to time constraints.
Also, the Tyranny of Washington DLC was completely in Quebec's court, and no one outside of Quebec city knew what was going on with it or how it would be integrated/implemented until the last possible second. There was also some ocnfusion on the implementation of the PS3 exclusive missions for quite a while. It's a shame, because I thought Tyranny of Washington was the best work we did. I almost wish it was released as a standalone like Infamous Festival of Blood, or Red Dead Redemption Undead Nightmare.
As for the ****ty performance, it was the first project ever used on the new AnvilNext engine, which was pretty much designed with next-gen consoles and future pc tech in mind, so it was super inefficient on PS3/360. It was a widespread opinion that AC3 was just a massive tech demo for AnvilNext, in anticipation for AC4 and future projects. Took a while for the some programmers to get used to the engine given the processing constraints.
In conclusion, while the Ubisoft work atmosphere is actually quite calm and respectful in comparison to other larger devs in the industry, the time constraints of an annual release, too many teams to coordinate, and new engine all created a perfect storm of ********.

http://www.gamenguide.com/articles/9292/20140122/ubisoft-staffer-explains-what-went-wrong-assassins-creed-3.htm
http://www.reddit.com/r/truegaming/comments/1vrude/so_what_really_happened_with_assassins_creed_3/cev82t1


Uhhh, you can't replay the Homestead missions and Achilles dies IN the homestead missions, this is just more proof that YOU did not pay attention to the game. I already explained Connor character above and that no, it does mesh with the Connor in the main story who was compassionate, kind and respectful--not whatever headcanon you have of him.


Headcanon? No need to get snarky. This was going to be a civil discussion friend, let's keep it civil.

From a post on reddit

Where you say about the Homestead missions, does that explain why Achilles dies in the story but suddenly comes back to life in those missions if you've done them out of order? I always thought that was majorly overlooked.



Again, the same could be said for all the Assassins we played as.


No, it can't be at all.


As for the ****ty performance, it was the first project ever used on the new AnvilNext engine, which was pretty much designed with next-gen consoles and future pc tech in mind, so it was super inefficient on PS3/360. It was a widespread opinion that AC3 was just a massive tech demo for AnvilNext, in anticipation for AC4 and future projects. Took a while for the some programmers to get used to the engine given the processing constraints.
In conclusion, while the Ubisoft work atmosphere is actually quite calm and respectful in comparison to other larger devs in the industry, the time constraints of an annual release, too many teams to coordinate, and new engine all created a perfect storm of ********.


http://www.gamenguide.com/articles/9292/20140122/ubisoft-staffer-explains-what-went-wrong-assassins-creed-3.htm
http://www.reddit.com/r/truegaming/comments/1vrude/so_what_really_happened_with_assassins_creed_3/cev82t1



I only have one problem with your argument style. The "my opinion is part of the majority mentality" drop it and this'll be FAR less tense and we can talk on equal ground.

I'd also like to point out how funny it is that when Connor fans say "you just need to look deeper into his character" people get angry and flail around but when Stock does the same and says "if you look closely, you'd see that he's a pathetic figure really"
Hey, hypocrites.


Are you trying to say you have an issue with my argumentative skills? I have been 'talking on equal ground', as a peer, and a friend. Not sure what you're talking about. My views are aligned with the majority of Assassin's creed fans, and there's nothing wrong with that. I'm not talking down to you, as a matter of fact I would argue the contrary. You are looking down on my views because mine are fairly popular among gamers, and because they are fairly popular it somehow makes them less valid.

Are you referring to me as a hypocrite, I distinctly remember saying that I want this to be a civil and kind discussion. As far as Connor being a weak character, I stand by those sentiments. He was a destructive force and he hurt everyone around him.

Although, I will admit that I did like his fighting style, although it was very crude and untrained, and I did think he looked cool in TOKW. :)

In closing, I would like to post yet another article that would support my sentiments and generally aupports my views on Connor and Assassin's Creed 3. Hopefully you will respect that, and understand that I am merely supporting my sentiments with known facts and articles. Thank you and take care my friend.



Assassin's Creed's Connor, Who Was The Worst, Is Done For

Nothing typified the regression the Assassin's Creed series took between Revelations and III more than the game's star. We went from Ezio, a lovable, charismatic rogue, to Connor, who was...nothing. He was nothingness in a white hood.

Sucking much of the life out of the franchise with his solemn frown and humour deficiency, the series has swiftly moved on without him, the only people seemingly caring to remember being cosplayers and a crowd on Tumblr who immortalise him with fanart and fanfiction.2

So it's hilarious to most, and upsetting to that minority, that in a Reddit AMA earlier today, lead writer Darby McDevitt responded to the question "How likely is it that Connor's story will be continued in another game in the future?" with:

"Not very. We want Tumblr to pick up where we left off."

Now, that's funny. It shows public self-awareness from a major developer, which is a rare treat. It also shows that, as weird as it can sometimes get, the people responsible for creating the character have been keeping tabs on stuff like this. And this. And this.

It's also a line McDevitt circled back around to, explaining Ubisoft's motivations (and forward planning) in detail:

Firstly, though my answer was terse, I am not being snide when I say I am eager to see how fans continue our characters' stories in other outlets and mediums. Tumblr and live journal and dozens of other sites provide perfect outlets for AC fans to continue the stories of their favorite characters. I absolutely love this process. I love the fact that people have discovered resonant topics and characters in our universe. I love the fact that fans can expand or elaborate on points they feel have not been well addressed. This should happen as often as possible. Take what we begin and make it your own. Remix and remake. This leads to wonderful things.

That being said, it would be wrong to imagine that anyone is "brushing Connor off" ... we planned the Edward, Haytham, Connor saga more than 2 years ago, long before any of you had heard Connor's name or learned his backstory. We had no idea how he (or Haytham) would be received, but we had our own long story to tell, and we embraced it. And it was our hope that — taken together — this saga would represent the story of a family... a migration, a mixing of cultures, and a dashing of ideals... Connor played his part, Haytham played his, and now Edward has had his say too. The fact that Connor's story feels incomplete to you is unfortunate (and likely made worse by the cut dialog people found), but this only means there is more room for your imaginations to take over.

Don't rely on us to deliver new content... make your own stories. Finally, there is ALWAYS room for interesting things to happen in the AC universe. We are open to many ideas. But it's also important to realize that we make critical decisions YEARS before they come to fruition... which means we cannot usually respond immediately to fan reactions. This is why petitions aren't terribly useful... we're on a completely different schedule. But we are eager to see what you do with our characters... the stories you tell, the places you go. That's why we do this. Thanks for your reply, Zoe.
Nevertheless...that first line of his was a doozie, and if you feel like a laugh at the expense of mildly crazy Assassin's Creed fanboys/fangirls devastated at the news, this Tumblr tag has some fairly emotional stuff on it right now.


http://kotaku.com/assassins-creeds-connor-who-was-the-worst-is-done-f-1459894621

Sesheenku
08-19-2014, 12:20 AM
All the more reason for Ezio to be quick and not bother with putting on a costume and waste more time.

I should have added in other words, he had a bit of time to think on it, an execution isn't going to happen at night.


Uberto was a close friend of Giovanni's, what reason did he have to betray him? He doesn't actually ask Antonio how he knows his name.

Friend of Giovanni's, exactly. Not really comparable to someone who's been living with you for years, maids back then practically became part of the family. He trusts her for the same reason he trusts Claudia.


Which makes it all the more pointless--He got no closure from ANYTHING, if there was something, he learned from the Templars. It was sequence 10 and he STILL did not know why his father and brothers were killed, even though Mario already told him the reasons...so what closure did he get, if after 10 sequences and 10 years he still had no answers?

He may have set out to do it but people are unpredictable after all, life doesn't always work out how you want it. It doesn't change the possibility that he set out to do just that. Neither of us have the authority after all to definitively say that he went out for revenge or he went out for answers or both.



But that's not his revenge motivation--his revenge is off with Rodrigo's head, he's the head honcho, he's the guy that ordered it--the two motivations align only 23 years. It still makes no sense from a story telling perspective, like I said..there's no reason for Ezio to wait 23 years to try and get his revenge.

They all played a part. They all sat down at the same table and conspired to kill him together. They're all part of both revenge AND his fathers work.. The two are not separate they go hand in hand.


"But now I see" is the keyword...but now, meaning sequence 10, I see...I see everything I said before was right, so yes...now he sees that everything makes sense now.

The problem is it precedes his realization of the reasons of why everyone was killed, which is a separate realization from believing in the codex. The "but" is transitioning away from the codex into his knowledge about the reason for the killings.

It's debatable honestly unless we heard from the horses mouth that the but is separate from the sentence that follows it, else it's a transition into his next subject.



The Borgias had the apple in the first place because of Cesare attacking the Villa--and like I said, had Ezio killed Rodrigo, there wouldnt have been an army for Cesare to attack the Villa so by default, the Apple would still have remained in Ezio's hands.

Uh why? That makes no sense. The Borgia were still in power, Cesare could have succeeded him as the pope, the only reason he didn't near the end of the game is because Ezio gave the people of Rome the means to do so, without Ezio going to Rome and doing what he did there is no fall of the Borgia regardless of Rodrigo being alive or not.


Didn't you say before that only the view of the majority that counts? If the majority saw it one way, then the story didn't do well to portray otherwise.

It is often the most sensible, generally at least, I also said I don't deal in absolutes so it's not ALWAYS the case. For example the majority that thinks CoD is a quality game.

However in this case I believe they are right, I don't feel the story portrayed it well.


He wanted to scare him out of the shop and into the open and chase him towards guards who would catch him, see the counterfeit money and arrest him--Which half worked, the guards arrested him, saw the money and threw him in jail, except like I said, the plan got botched. He and Talmadge talk about this plan as they make their way through NY.

History has shown time and again that the Templars are ALWAYS rich and never get into trouble, not for long anyways. Connor should have been taught that simple fact by Achilles. Even if he had succeeded he would of been bailed out by the Templars anyways. The assassins exist because the ONLY way to deal with Templars is to kill them. There is no other method.


Where did I ever seem biased towards Connor? I one of the people who hated Ezio because he was a perfect god in ACB--I like Connor BECAUSE he had flaws but his flaws made sense with his characterization.

Idk man it might just be the sudden Connor love of this forum, as I said I am not used to this. It's foreign lol.

As for Ezio he was portrayed good in ACB BUT he regresses to being driven by emotion in the first few hours, completely regressing his development from AC2, he treats his sister horridly when she's just trying to help, and he just seems a bit over aggressive in the game. He did good to but he's not portrayed without flaws.



and as I said with Uberto, he was the close friend of his father so no reason to distrust him ever really. No, he doesn't ever question Antonio.
Which is actually more suspicious, how does Antonio, a Venetian thief, know of Ezio's work in Florence and Tuscany?

As I said maids are practically part of the family, he could trust her for the same reason he can trust Claudia, Uberto doesn't match up with that. Oh and I do recall him asking "how do you know my name" to which he then replies with knowing about his work.

I'm sure news like that spreads, even back then. Especially when a noble family is killed off.


When Ezio first arrives in Venice, he sees Rosa doing the climb leap but then she shows him AGAIN when her leg is healing.

He SEES it, he's not TAUGHT it. I can WATCH parkour but that doesn't TEACH me parkour.. Not everyone is a visual learner.


Ah well, good--hopefully you get better.

Thanks man ;P


He's still widely popular and so are the other two:p I guess you do;)

I'm baffled at MC being so popular lol.. Then again I suppose most of the voters just did it because they like him for various reasons besides his lack of personality.


Written and portrayed horribly, we can talk intentions all day but what's done is what was shown and how it was received.

Actually the first part of the sentence is saying that it could be that his more powerful emotions overrode his more sensible ones. Then the second part is also possible lol, not gonna deny it's not.

StocktonBrawler
08-19-2014, 12:28 AM
As for these quotes supposedly from a former AC III developer, Darby pretty much shot the statements down and said they were false, not to mention the fact of A LOT of inaccurate statements about development time and the mentality of collaboration between all of the teams.


Darby is a writer, why would he be plugged in on all aspects of the game's development when apparently no one else was? I also linked it earlier, but I thought I'd do it again. Here's me providing sources for my statements

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/131537-Update-Assassins-Creed-3-Dev-Exposes-Development-Woes-on-Reddit
http://www.vg247.com/2014/01/22/assassins-creed-3-alleged-insider-discusses-troubled-development/
http://za.ign.com/news/72543/assassins-creed-3-dev-blames-ridiculously-unrealis
http://www.gamnesia.com/news/assassins-creed-3-developer-explains-development-woes-and-unrealistic-expec#.U_KKWPldUgg
http://wolfsgamingblog.com/2014/01/22/former-ubisoft-employee-describes-working-on-assassins-creed-3-as-a-mindfck-and-reveals-developmental-problems/
http://www.ign.com/articles/2014/01/22/assassins-creed-3-dev-explains-alleged-development-troubles

And Darby never commented on it professionally, as a matter of fact, he deleted his reddit reply to that unnamed developer. His twitter response said that he didn't doubt that was his impression of things. So much for him 'shooting those comments down'.

StocktonBrawler
08-19-2014, 01:29 AM
All this is still going on?

I don't understand really...Us who do and who don't like Connor can debate about till the end of time...

Yet, it's not really gonna change anything...I'm bored with it personally.

Wonderful.

Assassin_M
08-19-2014, 01:43 AM
But if they support my argument, how can you ignore them? They are only strengthening my views, because they are the views shared by a number of other people. It lends credibility to what I have to say.
I ignored them because they're irrelevant. you using OPINIONS to back your OPINION is not relevant. Other opinions are of no consequence or effect on this discussion--they don't add strength to your argument either because your arguments have false facts in them and are mostly subjective. This is only showing that a couple of people saw it the way you did, you're supposed to back your arguments with factual evidence from the game, not articles on the internet.


A member of the development team had clearly stated that this was viewed as a tech demo for the AnvilNext engine, his word is far more credible than either you or I. No offense at all, but who are you more likely to believe? A fan, or someone who helped develop the game? Here's his post in it's entirety, surely, you cannot ignore it.
I find it disturbing that you're so willing to trust someone--with absolutely NO proof--that he was a developer on AC III but yet have the decency to ask me who I'd trust lol. Do you have proof that this guy is actually a developer?
Also, about Darby, he did SHOOT him down...Darby may have conceded that he was a developer but he said he got facts wrong....that alone, should be reason enough to dismiss anything this supposed developer had to say.
http://i.gyazo.com/34fb728ec49da06dec52ecaef0814741.png
And lol about why a writer would be involved in the development of a game....I just wont even say anything to that, it just shows how much you really don't know.


Can you offer a valid counterpoint by providing evidence from a gaming outlet site that proves the contrary? Please find me an article from a major gaming publication that clearly states that he's a confident, strong, successful Assassin.
Nope, this is not an "show me articles that agree with me" argument. This is an argument where you back your points with facts from the source material. Your intention is to waltz in here and show that you're part of some majority...yo don't care if you're wrong or if you're right, you only care that others agree with you, unfortunately that's not how it works.
-He was confident in his skills. Evidence: His nonchalance in offering to over-take suicidal missions.
-He was strong in his conviction. Evidence: He refused to give up on humanity because he believes that humanity can one day overcome their problems and form eventual peace, he held on to this thought till the very end of the game.
-He was largely successful, Evidence: He destroyed Templar networks in the cities of NY and Boston, he rebuilt the Homestead from the ground up, he bolstered the ranks of the Brotherhood, he eliminated Templar influence in the colonies, He kept the eastern seaboard a safe haven for traders by eliminating Pirates and privateers.
That's how you argue...by bringing facts from the source material not articles that are just as legitimate as your opinion


Why didn't he avenge his people then? Why didn't he strike out against Washington, if he murdered his people and family?
I just explained why, read again.


Regarding his religion, I'm interested, can you find a source that discusses that the eagle that appeared to him is part of his religion? Regarding his piety, (a) he's hardly a pious figure (b) I don't remember him being a fairly religious figure at all, as a matter of fact he and most assassins seem fairly secular.
Religion does not negate secularism. He thought of Juno as a spirit, Connor's tribes saw her as a guardian who watches over them, that's likely what Connor was taught as his first words to Juno were "are you...a spirit?"


Ezio was avenging the deaths of his brother and father, and he successfully did.
Ah, so just because he succeeded, then it negates everything he did? killing of innocents guards and whatnot? why exactly? because it suits your argument? i'm sorry, that does not work, it's just a--to burrow from your vocabulary-- a disgusting double standard.


Edward only became an assassin because he had realized that the path he was on, was a dark and tumultuous one that had destroyed the lives of the ones he loved
That doesnt change all the atrocities he did and all the innocent guards he killed, please be consistent.


..unlike Connor, he changed to help save those around him.
I'm sorry but no, again with the inconsistency and double standards. Connor changed to save the colonists from Templar grasp and Edward's chancing does not negate that Mary, Blackbeard, Hornigold, Bonette and many others have died in Edward's vain quest for glory and infamy. If Connor's a murderous demon, so are Ezio and Edward--there's no other way around it.


Does he really though? Under Assassin influence, Connor's people were eradicated and later on whole tribes of Native Americans would be slaughtered. If he understood it so well, then why would he ally themselves with them?
Because as I explained, it's not Connor's allegiance with the Assassins that kills his people, it's the betrayal of the Patriots. You really didn't pay attention to the game. Connor's allegiance with the Assassins has actually done LESS damage to his people. Connor stopped them from allying with the British and thus clashing with colonists because of his Assassin allegiance...They left their village but they lived another day. It was arguably a success.


Because those were core mechanics or prior games, and they were added because Ubisoft executives didn't want to see those features be erased? I could go on and on but I can go all day. I posted the reply by the Ubisoft developer earlier, I think that should settle the matter.
Ah no, they were there and they had stories, end of. You can't dismiss something when it goes against your argument, you either offer a logical counter argument or conceded to the point.


We're not discussing those characters, we're discussing Connor. By discussing the faults of others, you're not bolstering your defense of Connor. I'm intrigued by this, Ezio murdered innocent civilians?
It's relevant because it shows your double standards. You don't think of Ezio is a murderous, disgusting, demonic brute even though he did the same things (arguably worse) as Connor, then i'll sure as hell call you out on it. I didn't say murdered, I said he CAUSED the death of civilians in Istanbul and Cappadocia.


Regardless, doesn't change the fact that he was enthralled to the Patriots and Assassins. He was loyal to the very men who killed his people.
The Assassins did not kill his people, they protected them from Templars. Connor did not know that the Patriots were the ones who killed his people when he was a child. He wasn't loyal to them either, he supported them because the colonists wanted freedom, he was always distrustful of the patriot leaders.


You wanted to have a civil discussion, let's try and keep civil, yeah? i would never adore a video game character, that's ludicrous. I thought Ezio was a mildly interesting character for a videogame franchise I enjoy. I would hardly consider myself an admirer. Again, condemning others doesn't bolster your defense of Connor.
you obviously prefer Ezio over Connor, I didn't condemn you anywhere, stop playing victim.


Headcanon? No need to get snarky. This was going to be a civil discussion friend, let's keep it civil.
Of course it's a head canon, you have ERRONEOUS double standards and facts that are just plain wrong lol. it's still pretty civil, I don't see your problem.


From a post on reddit
That post is wrong (it's not even your experience? lol) Achilles only dies in the Homestead missions, nowhere else and you can't replay Homestead missions.


No, it can't be at all.
Yes, it does, sorry...They were all murderous, disgusting, demonic bastards who killed innocent guards who had no grasp on the Assassin-Templar conflict.


Are you trying to say you have an issue with my argumentative skills?
Skills? I didn't say skills...:rolleyes:


I have been 'talking on equal ground', as a peer, and a friend. Not sure what you're talking about. My views are aligned with the majority of Assassin's creed fans, and there's nothing wrong with that. I'm not talking down to you, as a matter of fact I would argue the contrary. You are looking down on my views because mine are fairly popular among gamers, and because they are fairly popular it somehow makes them less valid.
Not talking down on you, you're the one who's talking down here, buddy. You're the one who places your arguments on a high pedestal. I can easily bring forth articles and quotes that speak positively of AC III and Connor but I wont do that because it's irrelevant--see, this is your defense mechanic "Oh boo hooo, i'm being bullied" No, you're not.


Are you referring to me as a hypocrite, I distinctly remember saying that I want this to be a civil and kind discussion. As far as Connor being a weak character, I stand by those sentiments. He was a destructive force and he hurt everyone around him
No, I wasn't referring to you, read properly.
and no, Connor didn't hurt everyone around him.


Although, I will admit that I did like his fighting style, although it was very crude and untrained, and I did think he looked cool in TOKW. :)
Good for you

I have ignored your kotaku article because it's irrelevant.

Sesheenku, i'll reply later because i'm watching the wrestling show:p

Sesheenku
08-19-2014, 01:51 AM
Sesheenku, i'll reply later because i'm watching the wrestling show:p

Take your time ;P I'm watching AlphaOmegaSin, specifically his new video about that new silent hill interactive trailer for PS4.

I may go to sleep in a couple of hours but I'll get back to you in the morning.

I-Like-Pie45
08-19-2014, 01:55 AM
Wrestling's fake you know, M.

JustPlainQuirky
08-19-2014, 01:56 AM
I want to read the debate out of sheer curiousity but

so

many

WORDS

Xstantin
08-19-2014, 02:01 AM
Just got back. Is it 14 pgs talk about what makes a character lovable and relatable or something more exciting?

Sesheenku
08-19-2014, 02:03 AM
I want to read the debate out of sheer curiousity but

so

many

WORDS

Ahhhh, I do love spending 30 minutes replying to large posts and making even bigger posts ^_^


Just got back. Is it 14 pgs talk about what makes a character lovable and relatable or something more exciting?

I'd suggest reading Stockton VS M.

JustPlainQuirky
08-19-2014, 02:03 AM
@KEV

Something about misquotes of devs regarding Connor or something.

I only read one post cuz of the Darbs mention.

I'll skim over it....maybe.... hngh

2manyConnorDebates.

@Sesh

I rather spend my time doing something else.

Like continuing to be an unproductive member of society.

Sesheenku
08-19-2014, 02:08 AM
@KEV
@Sesh

I rather spend my time doing something else.

Like continuing to be an unproductive member of society.

Debating keeps the mind sharp ;P

Don't worry about it though I was born an old man. My wish is already to retire to a large country manor and sit on my swinging bench sipping tea during a heavy thunder storm.

StocktonBrawler
08-19-2014, 02:15 AM
I ignored them because they're irrelevant. you using OPINIONS to back your OPINION is not relevant. Other opinions are of no consequence or effect on this discussion--they don't add strength to your argument either because your arguments have false facts in them and are mostly subjective. This is only showing that a couple of people saw it the way you did, you're supposed to back your arguments with factual evidence from the game, not articles on the internet.


So you're questioning the credibility of my views?



I find it disturbing that you're so willing to trust someone--with absolutely NO proof--that he was a developer on AC III but yet have the decency to ask me who I'd trust lol. Do you have proof that this guy is actually a developer?
Also, about Darby, he did SHOOT him down...Darby may have conceded that he was a developer but he said he got facts wrong....that alone, should be reason enough to dismiss anything this supposed developer had to say.



http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news...Woes-on-Reddit
http://www.vg247.com/2014/01/22/assa...d-development/
http://za.ign.com/news/72543/assassi...ously-unrealis
http://www.gamnesia.com/news/assassi...c#.U_KKWPldUgg
http://wolfsgamingblog.com/2014/01/2...ntal-problems/
http://www.ign.com/articles/2014/01/...pment-troubles

Yet it was reported by how many major gaming outlets? Of course you must take everything you read on the internet with a grain of salt, yet judging by just how many major publications were reported - IN ADDITION - to Darby's rebuttal, I would be inclined to say that the man in question was most definitely a developer.

I wouldn't say he shot him down either, that's a bit much. He said that 'he didn't doubt that was his impression of things', hardly something you've made it out to be. When you said shot him down, I would have expected him to have outed the man who posted that as a faker, and completely disprove his sentiments NOT merely respect his impression of things. As a matter of fact, Darby had commented on his post when the developer replied Darby deleted his post, tucked tail and ran from the forum. So much for that...




And lol about why a writer would be involved in the development of a game....I just wont even say anything to that, it just shows how much you really don't know.


I'm inclined to believe that you're reading comprehension very well may be lacking. I distinctly remember posting this...


Oh god, I could write about this for hours.
I worked on it unfortunately. It was a mind**** of an experience.
PREFACE: I only worked on the Single Player module and never touched Multiplayer. Also, I cherished my time at Ubisoft, and despite my following complaints, working there was a great experience despite the ********.
So why was AC3 a wreck? Without going into too much details, basically because of ridiculously unrealistic expectations and constantly tacked on features by producers / the creative team, it became literally impossible to get everything done with just Ubi Montreal. In order to get everything in the design doc completed in time for the annual release (ugh!), team size was constantly fluctuating. The game was worked on by large majority of the Montreal team, as well as Ubi Quebec, Ubi Annecy, Ubi Bucharest, and Ubi Singapore. Between 500-600 people touched the game before it's release. Contrast that with teams like Naughty Dog or Sony Santa Monica, who operate with 80-100 (maybe 200 during crunch).
The coordination of resources between all of these teams separated by thousands of miles and differing time zones was a damn joke, and at the same time studio resources were constantly stolen for work on Watchdogs and Far Cry 3 (AC4, Splinter Cell and Rayman tended to be a little more isolated for the most part though).
Almost everybody on the bottom knew that the Desmond missions were a disgrace. Why? Because a B-team filled with new hires and the least talent handled all production of the Desmond content, and they were rarely in communication with the main gameplay teams. But we couldn't really say anything, and the higher ups basically stuck their fingers in their ears and convinced themselves that they were amazing.
Dissemination of information between individual employees was also pretty bad. A disturbingly large portion of team members had no idea about the majority of the Homestead, Caravan, and assassin crew side missions. There was basically so much content that even approaching release, plenty of grunt workers like myself on the ground were finding new features they didn't know existed that needed more attention. Upon completing the story, there's an origami-crane node collecting mini game that unlocks that I've NEVER seen covered or mentioned in any gaming blogs, reviews, or fan vids. Most of us didn't even know it existed. That's how random and disjointed the design was. Everything was documented on the company wiki of course. The impenetrably deep, confused, several-thousand page wiki.
Stuff like the homestead economy, weapon crafting, hunting, board games, and the late-game set pieces were all heavily ignored til the very end of development, and no time was given to polish them or make them cohesive. Getting 100% went from something fun for the diehard fans, to a herculean task of tedium and dumb-luck. A large action set piece near the Haytham boss fight was entirely cut ~2 weeks before we went gold. On top of that, some vital cutscenes anims and audio weren't implemented until right befoe gold. So the (massive and disjointed) test teams were often sitting on their laurels waiting for more content while the thousands of issues they had already flagged were marked as "Won't Fix" due to time constraints.
Also, the Tyranny of Washington DLC was completely in Quebec's court, and no one outside of Quebec city knew what was going on with it or how it would be integrated/implemented until the last possible second. There was also some ocnfusion on the implementation of the PS3 exclusive missions for quite a while. It's a shame, because I thought Tyranny of Washington was the best work we did. I almost wish it was released as a standalone like Infamous Festival of Blood, or Red Dead Redemption Undead Nightmare.
As for the ****ty performance, it was the first project ever used on the new AnvilNext engine, which was pretty much designed with next-gen consoles and future pc tech in mind, so it was super inefficient on PS3/360. It was a widespread opinion that AC3 was just a massive tech demo for AnvilNext, in anticipation for AC4 and future projects. Took a while for the some programmers to get used to the engine given the processing constraints.
In conclusion, while the Ubisoft work atmosphere is actually quite calm and respectful in comparison to other larger devs in the industry, the time constraints of an annual release, too many teams to coordinate, and new engine all created a perfect storm of ********

There was a complete lack of coordination among the ubisoft developers, no one knew exactly what was going on. I highly, highly doubt that Darby was plugged in on all aspects of the game nor do I believe anyone was. Just like that developer said, "The coordination of resources between all of these teams separated by thousands of miles and differing time zones was a damn joke".

And anyway, it's not like Darby is the official be all and end all. His refutation is so brief it hardly deserves attention; it does nothing to disprove what the developer had said.


Nope, this is not an "show me articles that agree with me" argument. This is an argument where you back your points with facts from the source material. Your intention is to waltz in here and show that you're part of some majority...yo don't care if you're wrong or if you're right, you only care that others agree with you, unfortunately that's not how it works.
-He was confident in his skills. Evidence: His nonchalance in offering to over-take suicidal missions.
-He was strong in his conviction. Evidence: He refused to give up on humanity because he believes that humanity can one day overcome their problems and form eventual peace, he held on to this thought till the very end of the game.
-He was largely successful, Evidence: He destroyed Templar networks in the cities of NY and Boston, he rebuilt the Homestead from the ground up, he bolstered the ranks of the Brotherhood, he eliminated Templar influence in the colonies, He kept the eastern seaboard a safe haven for traders by eliminating Pirates and privateers.
That's how you argue...by bringing facts from the source material not articles that are just as legitimate as your opinion


So you don't have any major publications that discusses Connor's confidence, strength and success? No? Ok, that's all I was asking for. So no major publications agree with your views, nor do they support your sentiments.

I think I know how to argue, thank you for the advice though.


Religion does not negate secularism. He thought of Juno as a spirit, Connor's tribes saw her as a guardian who watches over them, that's likely what Connor was taught as his first words to Juno were "are you...a spirit?"


Yes, but I repeat, Connor was never a pious individual. How many times does he mention his gods throughout the entirety of the game? You said "That glowing eagle was a part of his culture and Religion.". I want a historical source that outlines the religion of the Mohicans, and it's relation to the eagle that Juno represented in AC3. You did say it was part of his religion and culture, I want proof.


Ah, so just because he succeeded, then it negates everything he did? killing of innocents guards and whatnot? why exactly? because it suits your argument? i'm sorry, that does not work, it's just a--to burrow from your vocabulary-- a disgusting double standard.


We're discussing Connor Kenway, and regardless of what Ezio may have done, that doesn't change the fact that Connor fought for the man who burned his mother and people alive. That applies to your other posts regarding Edward and Ezio as well.


That post is wrong (it's not even your experience? lol) Achilles only dies in the Homestead missions, nowhere else and you can't replay Homestead missions

According to whom exactly? You?



Not talking down on you, you're the one who's talking down here, buddy. You're the one who places your arguments on a high pedestal. I can easily bring forth articles and quotes that speak positively of AC III and Connor but I wont do that because it's irrelevant--see, this is your defense mechanic "Oh boo hooo, i'm being bullied" No, you're not.


Then why don't you? Find me articles specifically dedicated to the greatness of Connor as a character, and Connor alone. Do that for me my friend.



Skills? I didn't say skills...

Coming from such an enlightened wordsmith such as yourself, I must say I stand in awe of argumentative ability. Surely one day, I hope to be as good as you.


Good for you

I have ignored your kotaku article because it's irrelevant.

Sesheenku, i'll reply later because i'm watching the wrestling show


So you can't find any sources that agree with your support of Connor all the while condemning my evidence? Ok.

Enjoy your wrestling show my friend.

Au revoir my friend, my point has been proven. No need to discuss this any further.

HDinHB
08-19-2014, 02:26 AM
Since everyone pretty much agree with your opinion I doubt this will spur much discussion.

;)

15 pages later....well, not much new discussion anyway

Namikaze_17
08-19-2014, 02:32 AM
And the Connor debates continue...

And the wars Continue...

And this thread still isn't closed...

And no, I'm not trying to start anything...don't like it, ignore it.

Assassin_M
08-19-2014, 02:38 AM
So you're questioning the credibility of my views?
Questioning? no, i'm flat out saying you have wrong facts. you're entitled to your views but you have not backed a single one with credible factual evidences from the source material.



Yet it was reported by how many major gaming outlets?
So was the Comet rumor about Eseosa--guess what? it was wrong. "Major" gaming publications report all kinds of crap that turns out to be wrong.


Of course you must take everything you read on the internet with a grain of salt, yet judging by just how many major publications were reported - IN ADDITION - to Darby's rebuttal, I would be inclined to say that the man in question was most definitely a developer.
If that's all it takes for you to believe someone claiming to be a developer, then I really feel sorry for you.


I wouldn't say he shot him down either, that's a bit much. He said that 'he didn't doubt that was his impression of things', hardly something you've made it out to be. When you said shot him down, I would have expected him to have outed the man who posted that as a faker, and completely disprove his sentiments NOT merely respect his impression of things. As a matter of fact, Darby had commented on his post when the developer replied Darby deleted his post, tucked tail and ran from the forum. So much for that...
Did you read his tweet? He got a lot of things wrong, that's enough to dismiss most of the things in his claim.


I'm inclined to believe that you're reading comprehension very well may be lacking. I distinctly remember posting this...


There was a complete lack of coordination among the ubisoft developers, no one knew exactly what was going on. I highly, highly doubt that Darby was plugged in on all aspects of the game nor do I believe anyone was. Just like that developer said, "The coordination of resources between all of these teams separated by thousands of miles and differing time zones was a damn joke".

And anyway, it's not like Darby is the official be all and end all. His refutation is so brief it hardly deserves attention; it does nothing to disprove what the developer had said.
It has been dismissed, end of story. Darby is just as credible as this "developer" if you'll take this guy's word, then you'll take Darby's. At least we have concrete proof that Darby is an actual developer. This developer is not the be all either. I can bring forth other ACTUAL developers talking about the development of AC III with proper presentations, pitches and development plans. Do you watch GDC?


So you don't have any major publications that discusses Connor's confidence, strength and success? No? Ok, that's all I was asking for. So no major publications agree with your views, nor do they support your sentiments.
Again, like I said...it has no effect on ANYTHING in this argument. I don't need to bring forth any major publication article to back my arguments and views, my views are my own, I don't need others' opinions to feel good about myself or feel that my opinion holds merit. My views represent my experience with the game, I back it up with factual evidence from the source material not from other people's opinions.
My advice would be to drop this bogus claim that articles bolster any of your claims, don't embarrass yourself.


I think I know how to argue, thank you for the advice though.
No, you don't


Yes, but I repeat, Connor was never a pious individual. How many times does he mention his gods throughout the entirety of the game? You said "That glowing eagle was a part of his culture and Religion.". I want a historical source that outlines the religion of the Mohicans, and it's relation to the eagle that Juno represented in AC3. You did say it was part of his religion and culture, I want proof.
Read properly please, Connor doesn't have to pray everyday to show you that he's religious. He references a faceless one and refers to Juno as a spirit, that's enough to show his beliefs. I didn't say that glowing eagle was part of his culture and religion, I said Juno was, please improve your comprehension skills.


We're discussing Connor Kenway, and regardless of what Ezio may have done, that doesn't change the fact that Connor fought for the man who burned his mother and people alive. That applies to your other posts regarding Edward and Ezio as well.
Yeah and your double standards are against Connor, it's why I bring it up, not my fault you don't understand this. It also does not change the fact that Ezio and Edward were just as "demonic, disgusting and murderous" as Connor


According to whom exactly? You?
Yes, sir. Someone who has played the game over 6 times and 100%ed more than once, I know what i'm talking about and i'm not--unlike you--using other experiences as references for MY views.


Then why don't you? Find me articles specifically dedicated to the greatness of Connor as a character, and Connor alone. Do that for me my friend.
Like I said (please read) I wont because it's irrelevant, I have nothing to prove to you--you choose to think that this makes you victorious, sure...you can gloat about it too and say "Oh, so you don't have any? no? okay" all you want. It's all irrelevant. This is MY view, MY opinion, MY experience, I don't need OTHER opinions to support my views--only factual evidence from the game that I played.


Coming from such an enlightened wordsmith such as yourself, I must say I stand in awe of argumentative ability. Surely one day, I hope to be as good as you.
If you listen to the advice I give you, then maybe you'll improve, don't give up:)



So you can't find any sources that agree with your support of Connor all the while condemning my evidence? Ok.
Like I said, it's irrelevant.

Seesh, i'm sorry, man...I just HAD to reply to him xD

Sesheenku
08-19-2014, 02:57 AM
Seesh, i'm sorry, man...I just HAD to reply to him xD

No rush bud ;P I have all the time in the world... well at least for a couple more days lol. I'm sure we'll conclude it as usual before I move and go without internet for a few days.

Assassin_M
08-19-2014, 03:04 AM
I should have added in other words, he had a bit of time to think on it, an execution isn't going to happen at night.
But a beating will...He was beat before, what wont make him get beaten again?


Friend of Giovanni's, exactly. Not really comparable to someone who's been living with you for years, maids back then practically became part of the family. He trusts her for the same reason he trusts Claudia.
Claudia is his sister, though...she grew up with the family sure, still doesn't make sense to have Ezio be so trusting of her sister.


He may have set out to do it but people are unpredictable after all, life doesn't always work out how you want it. It doesn't change the possibility that he set out to do just that. Neither of us have the authority after all to definitively say that he went out for revenge or he went out for answers or both.
The authority is in the source materials, we burrow from them to support our views. It doesn't change the fact that Ezio never got any answers so my original argument that it was unnecessary and pointless to go after the Templars stands--when a plot point is introduced, there's supposed to be pay-off.


They all played a part. They all sat down at the same table and conspired to kill him together. They're all part of both revenge AND his fathers work.. The two are not separate they go hand in hand.
Rodrigo is the leader, he's the one who brought the idea forward and devised it all. it was basically all his idea. They're separate because as I said, his pursuing of the Templars is pointless and delayed him 23 years from his actual target, Rodrigo. He killed 13 men (one of them being innocent who had no idea what he was doing) to spare the man behind it all.


The problem is it precedes his realization of the reasons of why everyone was killed, which is a separate realization from believing in the codex. The "but" is transitioning away from the codex into his knowledge about the reason for the killings.

It's debatable honestly unless we heard from the horses mouth that the but is separate from the sentence that follows it, else it's a transition into his next subject.
that route would lead us down the path of grammar and that can take days. I also despise grammar...lets just agree to disagree:p


Uh why? That makes no sense. The Borgia were still in power, Cesare could have succeeded him as the pope, the only reason he didn't near the end of the game is because Ezio gave the people of Rome the means to do so, without Ezio going to Rome and doing what he did there is no fall of the Borgia regardless of Rodrigo being alive or not.
No, he wouldn't...Ezio didn't give the people of Rome any means of anything..the Borgia were despised and loathed before Ezio did anything, had Rodrigo died, Cesare would have been stripped of his power and jailed, no problem...there's no reason to think that Rome would just let Cesare succeed Rodrigo. It's why Cesare abides by what the Vatican says because ultimately, his power is because of his father.


It is often the most sensible, generally at least, I also said I don't deal in absolutes so it's not ALWAYS the case. For example the majority that thinks CoD is a quality game.

However in this case I believe they are right, I don't feel the story portrayed it well.
I....don't think the majority think that CoD is a quality game lol


History has shown time and again that the Templars are ALWAYS rich and never get into trouble, not for long anyways. Connor should have been taught that simple fact by Achilles. Even if he had succeeded he would of been bailed out by the Templars anyways. The assassins exist because the ONLY way to deal with Templars is to kill them. There is no other method.
And Achilles did teach Connor that but like I said, it makes sense with the character of Connor...imagine the situation had Connor not been arrested as well. Talmadge indicted Hickey, Connor and Putnam would be key witnesses and there may have been a chance to avoid killing Hickey...like I said, it was not the best decision or route but it made sense with the character.


Idk man it might just be the sudden Connor love of this forum, as I said I am not used to this. It's foreign lol.
You'll get used to it;)


As for Ezio he was portrayed good in ACB BUT he regresses to being driven by emotion in the first few hours, completely regressing his development from AC2, he treats his sister horridly when she's just trying to help, and he just seems a bit over aggressive in the game. He did good to but he's not portrayed without flaws.
I felt that this was all under-shown...his flaws were COMPLETELY outshined by his utter perfection at everything else--for heaven's sake, they regressed Bartolomeo into an ogre headed buffoon to make Ezio seem like a capable military strategist.


As I said maids are practically part of the family, he could trust her for the same reason he can trust Claudia, Uberto doesn't match up with that. Oh and I do recall him asking "how do you know my name" to which he then replies with knowing about his work.
I'm sure news like that spreads, even back then. Especially when a noble family is killed off.
I disagree, like I said. I think he should have been the LEAST bit vigilant. Trust me, Ezio never asks him..I played the game over 100 times and I know xP

it makes sense how Antonio knows his name and of his work (being an Assassin) but it makes no sense for Ezio to not be distrustful of Antonio, news spreading fast or not. The Auditore were not THAT large or influential--I didn't even hear the heralds talk about the incident.


He SEES it, he's not TAUGHT it. I can WATCH parkour but that doesn't TEACH me parkour.. Not everyone is a visual learner.
Both times, he was shown it. It's why i'm arguing that Ezio is dumb:p


Thanks man ;P
not a problem


I'm baffled at MC being so popular lol.. Then again I suppose most of the voters just did it because they like him for various reasons besides his lack of personality.
Oh trust me, me too..even the article that talked about Connor winning mentions "Master Chief not doing as well as many might'v expected" :p


Actually the first part of the sentence is saying that it could be that his more powerful emotions overrode his more sensible ones. Then the second part is also possible lol, not gonna deny it's not.
I can agree with that.

Assassin_M
08-19-2014, 03:11 AM
No rush bud ;P I have all the time in the world... well at least for a couple more days lol. I'm sure we'll conclude it as usual before I move and go without internet for a few days.
I'm gonna miss you, mate..hopefully it all goes well:D

StocktonBrawler
08-19-2014, 03:24 AM
Questioning? no, i'm flat out saying you have wrong facts. you're entitled to your views but you have not backed a single one with credible factual evidences from the source material

Ha! Funny! You have deliberately twisted the source material to support your erroneous claims. If you find me articles that actually support your views, then I'll listen. As of right now, you haven't defended a single one of your opinions. I have.



So was the Comet rumor about Eseosa--guess what? it was wrong. "Major" gaming publications report all kinds of crap that turns out to be wrong.


You do understand that Darby's acknowledgement is enough to lend credence to the developer itself, correct? Why you're attempting to dispute this is beyond me.

Not to mention, I'm fairly certain that the Eseosa storylines that were being circulated were not circulated and reported to the extent that the developer's woes were. Not in the slightest, as a matter of fact, a simple Eseosa Assassin's Creed 5 game search on google will result in a mere two links. One of which claims that the rumors for the Eseosa game come from this very forum.



Did you read his tweet? He got a lot of things wrong, that's enough to dismiss most of the things in his claim.


What are you talking about? He disagreed with what he had to say, but he didn't dispute his view of what had happened. Reading comprehension my friend.


It has been dismissed, end of story. Darby is just as credible as this "developer" if you'll take this guy's word, then you'll take Darby's. At least we have concrete proof that Darby is an actual developer. This developer is not the be all either. I can bring forth other ACTUAL developers talking about the development of AC III with proper presentations, pitches and development plans. Do you watch GDC?


Haha! Do you understand the fundamental differences between coding and screenwriting?


Again, like I said...it has no effect on ANYTHING in this argument. I don't need to bring forth any major publication article to back my arguments and views, my views are my own, I don't need others' opinions to feel good about myself or feel that my opinion holds merit. My views represent my experience with the game, I back it up with factual evidence from the source material not from other people's opinions.
My advice would be to drop this bogus claim that articles bolster any of your claims, don't embarrass yourself.


Ok, so nothing? So you have nothing to support your views, except for source material that you that have in turn interpreted in your own way to support your own views.

And the reason you haven't brought ANYTHING into this argument, is simply because the evidence against Connor is overwhelming. You might be able to find an article that may portray Connor to be a great character, but you damn well know I could find dozens of articles talking about just how bad of a character he is.



No, you don't


You haven't supported anyone of your claims at all, instead you attempt to hearken back to source material, which you have deliberately filtered and altered to support your views.

You literally haven't made a single valid claim, yet you somehow insult my argumentative ability. That's hilarious. But whatever, you're my friend and I love the brashness and audacity. Admirable, but foolish.


Read properly please, Connor doesn't have to pray everyday to show you that he's religious. He references a faceless one and refers to Juno as a spirit, that's enough to show his beliefs. I didn't say that glowing eagle was part of his culture and religion, I said Juno was, please improve your comprehension skills.


Do you know what Piety even means? Here you go.
pi·e·ty
ˈpī-itē/Submit
noun
the quality of being religious or reverent.
"acts of piety and charity"

It doesn't mean you have to pray every day, it's a measure of how religious someone is. I never made mention of Judeo-Christian prayer, why you would bring it up is beyond me.

...And you dodge the question yet again, you said it was part of his religion and culture, show me proof of it being part of Mohican life and culture. Stop befuddling facts and twisting plot points to favor your argument. You never said Juno was part of his culture and religion, you said this, "That glowing eagle was a part of his culture and Religion". I repeat, show me proof of a glowing eagle being part of a Mohican theology.

Your reading comprehension skills, writing and vocabulary are severely lacking. You're hardly qualified to advise anyone on such matters. But again, we're buds, and I do appreciate the audacity regardless of just how doltish your arguments may sound at times.


Yeah and your double standards are against Connor, it's why I bring it up, not my fault you don't understand this. It also does not change the fact that Ezio and Edward were just as "demonic, disgusting and murderous" as Connor


I'm not defending Edward or Ezio, but you are acknowledging that my claims are in fact valid and for that I thank you my friend. You acknowledged that Connor was a brutish thug. There's nothing left to discuss.




Like I said (please read) I wont because it's irrelevant, I have nothing to prove to you--you choose to think that this makes you victorious, sure...you can gloat about it too and say "Oh, so you don't have any? no? okay" all you want. It's all irrelevant. This is MY view, MY opinion, MY experience, I don't need OTHER opinions to support my views--only factual evidence from the game that I played.


Factual evidence here is relative, as we can both see. Some may cite major gaming publications to successfully bolster their argument, and support their views all the while discrediting his opponent's notions on the matter. Others refuse to cite anything, instead they hearken back to source material that they have filtered through their own lens in order to defend their argument as adequately as they can.

YOUR View hasn't been supported, YOUR opinion isn't held by others in any media outlets, OTHER views would bolster your credibility. But hey, if you want to keep doing this then fine by me. I do appreciate the je ne sais quoi...dogged...determination.



Yes, sir. Someone who has played the game over 6 times and 100%ed more than once, I know what i'm talking about and i'm not--unlike you--using other experiences as references for MY views.


So because you beat a videogame, you're denying that someone was experiencing technical difficulty with the homestead missions in assassin's creed 3? That's what you're saying. So YOUR views, completely negate what he had to say even though it's been documented on other forums. Good to know, next time I glitch in AC4, I'll be sure to ask for your dismissal on the matter.


If you listen to the advice I give you, then maybe you'll improve, don't give up


How sweet of you! Thank you my fine feathered friend! Surely one day we can argue alongside each other against another member of the forum.

In all seriousness, I always find myself questioning the saneness of people who are largely incapable of discerning the rather tumultuous mires they frequently find themselves whilst wrangling.


Like I said, it's irrelevant.

Seesh, i'm sorry, man...I just HAD to reply to him xD



Again, I'm constantly questioning. Although I am amused by how pleased you seem to be, despite the fact you have yet to bolster your argument in the slightest...well, you did post as you said, headcanon. I suppose that would suffice.

So I must ask, before we go round and round again. Would you care to exactly why I should like Connor as a character? I'm interested in why I should like him, and consider him to be a worthy protagonist even after you admitted that Connor was a horrible human being? After all...

"It also does not change the fact that Ezio and Edward were just as "demonic, disgusting and murderous" as Connor"

You did say that, so you'll have to be pretty convincing.


Good bye!

Namikaze_17
08-19-2014, 03:30 AM
@M.

Just don't bother...you, I, or anybody can't change his mind so let him be.

"Men should do as they believe, it is not our right to punish one for thinking what they do, no matter how much we disagree."

Even though no one's getting punished for expressing their opinions... ;)

Sesheenku
08-19-2014, 03:36 AM
But a beating will...He was beat before, what wont make him get beaten again?

It would suck to know that he's getting beaten as you do what you're told to but on the other hand at least you can be sure they won't kill him without it being public.


Claudia is his sister, though...she grew up with the family sure, still doesn't make sense to have Ezio be so trusting of her sister.

I still think it makes sense that he'd believe Annetta wouldn't lead him into trouble.


The authority is in the source materials, we burrow from them to support our views. It doesn't change the fact that Ezio never got any answers so my original argument that it was unnecessary and pointless to go after the Templars stands--when a plot point is introduced, there's supposed to be pay-off.

I can agree that the result made it pointless but my argument was that he didn't know it would end up fruitless and thus took on the job. I do agree there needs to be a pay off to any plot points that come into play and I guess they didn't do it very well, he neither completed his fathers work properly nor did he act as a proper assassin.


Rodrigo is the leader, he's the one who brought the idea forward and devised it all. it was basically all his idea. They're separate because as I said, his pursuing of the Templars is pointless and delayed him 23 years from his actual target, Rodrigo. He killed 13 men (one of them being innocent who had no idea what he was doing) to spare the man behind it all.

To be fair he comes into contact with Rodrigo several times while taking out these targets and is able to learn more of his plans. It makes sense that at the time Ezio likely felt he was making the most appropriate decision. Rodrigo and the other Templars lead him to more Templars which is part of his fathers work. Personally I still think that it fits with the revenge cause while Rodrigo may have devised the plan there's no telling whether they helped or not and there's no denying that regardless of whether they helped or not they went along with it.

Oh and he actually kills 16 men with sequence 12 and 13 factored in.

As for the bolded, poor Dante : (

When you put that final sentence like that though.. "killed 13 men to spare the last" I suppose in the end he did fail to act as an assassin and failed to properly complete his fathers work.




that route would lead us down the path of grammar and that can take days. I also despise grammar...lets just agree to disagree:p

Alright lol, I do hate when they make sentences like that but I guess it's an easy thing to overlook.


No, he wouldn't...Ezio didn't give the people of Rome any means of anything..the Borgia were despised and loathed before Ezio did anything, had Rodrigo died, Cesare would have been stripped of his power and jailed, no problem...there's no reason to think that Rome would just let Cesare succeed Rodrigo. It's why Cesare abides by what the Vatican says because ultimately, his power is because of his father.

Well, I look at it this way. Cesare has his own killer, controls the French forces, has his own banker, and controls the papal army. If Rodrigo was able to control him then he should have simply taken away his control of the papal army upon realizing his treachery and out of control ambition.

I still think that had he died in AC2 and Cesare remained in good health he could have very well had everything in place to forcefully take control.


I....don't think the majority think that CoD is a quality game lol

I said as an example, it was a random, easy made up thing off the top of my head lol.


And Achilles did teach Connor that but like I said, it makes sense with the character of Connor...imagine the situation had Connor not been arrested as well. Talmadge indicted Hickey, Connor and Putnam would be key witnesses and there may have been a chance to avoid killing Hickey...like I said, it was not the best decision or route but it made sense with the character.

I'll give Connor one thing, at least his character traits are clear enough to leave no room for debate. I feel like Ezio on the other hand is constantly in conflict with himself. I believe his actions in Brotherhood and Revelations prove that regardless of age from time to time his emotions are still what drive him rather than his duty with the assassins.


You'll get used to it;)

Indeed.


I felt that this was all under-shown...his flaws were COMPLETELY outshined by his utter perfection at everything else--for heaven's sake, they regressed Bartolomeo into an ogre headed buffoon to make Ezio seem like a capable military strategist.

I can agree that it's under shown, it's more of a sublte thing that can be missed. As for Bartolomeo, did he ever seem intelligent? I always felt like he was a bit loud and dim in AC2 as well. Then again in AC2 he comes up with the plans for the most part while in ACB Ezio does.

Unrelated to the debate, perhaps it was a poor attempt to show development.


I disagree, like I said. I think he should have been the LEAST bit vigilant. Trust me, Ezio never asks him..I played the game over 100 times and I know xP

it makes sense how Antonio knows his name and of his work (being an Assassin) but it makes no sense for Ezio to not be distrustful of Antonio, news spreading fast or not. The Auditore were not THAT large or influential--I didn't even hear the heralds talk about the incident.

I've played the game many times as well and I could swear that "your work in Florence and the rest of Tuscany did not go unnoticed." is preceded by Ezio asking how Anotonio knew his name.

I keep trying to find a full list of Antonios dialogue but nothing 8U


Both times, he was shown it. It's why i'm arguing that Ezio is dumb:p

So are you saying that if you watched a youtube video on parkour yourself that you could replicate it?


Oh trust me, me too..even the article that talked about Connor winning mentions "Master Chief not doing as well as many might'v expected" :p

Lol jeez. Talk about high expectations for what is essentially a throw back to classic FPS chars.

http://static.giantbomb.com/uploads/original/0/4432/199547-doom.jpg



I can agree with that.

Alright, I think you've broken through a few of my points as well. Making dat progress lol.

Assassin_M
08-19-2014, 03:49 AM
Ha! Funny! You have deliberately twisted the source material to support your erroneous claims. If you find me articles that actually support your views, then I'll listen. As of right now, you haven't defended a single one of your opinions. I have.
I twisted nothing, it's not my fault that you never payed attention while you played and instead resorted to use OTHER views as a basis of all your views and opinions. Your opinions are empty vessels filled with foreign basis, not your own. You haven't defended ANY point you brought forth, you simply said "hey, look...a deadbeat agreed with me" bolly for you, chap.


You do understand that Darby's acknowledgement is enough to lend credence to the developer itself, correct? Why you're attempting to dispute this is beyond me.
No, it's not enough...acknowledging a false claim does not mean it's true. The guys was wrong, Darby said so, move on.


Not to mention, I'm fairly certain that the Eseosa storylines that were being circulated were not circulated and reported to the extent that the developer's woes were. Not in the slightest, as a matter of fact, a simple Eseosa Assassin's Creed 5 game search on google will result in a mere two links. One of which claims that the rumors for the Eseosa game come from this very forum.
They were still reported by major gaming publications.


What are you talking about? He disagreed with what he had to say, but he didn't dispute his view of what had happened. Reading comprehension my friend.
"he got a lot of facts wrong" that's not disagreement, that's flat out saying he's wrong. I think comprehension is your problem, not mine.


Haha! Do you understand the fundamental differences between coding and screenwriting?
Do you? do you understand that a writer has to coordinate with programmers and designers to make sure story and gameplay mesh well? do you? Do you have ANY idea of how game development works? no.


Ok, so nothing? So you have nothing to support your views, except for source material that you that have in turn interpreted in your own way to support your own views.
You're so predictable, my god. I have explained and stripped your argument naked, stop embarrassing yourself, i'm not going to explain again, you should just learn how to read.


And the reason you haven't brought ANYTHING into this argument, is simply because the evidence against Connor is overwhelming. You might be able to find an article that may portray Connor to be a great character, but you damn well know I could find dozens of articles talking about just how bad of a character he is.
HAHA, so now it's a score? "Oh oh, I have 5 articles that say Conner is bad, booooo, you only have 2, I WIN, mommy I WIIIIN" You probably did a quick google search or something lol. you should just drop it, bro...you're unbelievable and no, it's not;)


You haven't supported anyone of your claims at all, instead you attempt to hearken back to source material, which you have deliberately filtered and altered to support your views.
Nope, haven't altered a single thing. you would know that everything I reference is fact if you actually payed attention to the game. Don't hang your failures on me, bud...you can try to play the game but pay attention this time, okay? :) I believe anyone with a pee brain can know that everything I referenced is truth unaltered and that I have more back up that's actually authentic.


You literally haven't made a single valid claim, yet you somehow insult my argumentative ability. That's hilarious. But whatever, you're my friend and I love the brashness and audacity. Admirable, but foolish.
Right.


Do you know what Piety even means? Here you go.
pi·e·ty
ˈpī-itē/Submit
noun
the quality of being religious or reverent.
"acts of piety and charity"

It doesn't mean you have to pray every day, it's a measure of how religious someone is. I never made mention of Judeo-Christian prayer, why you would bring it up is beyond me.
I knew what piety meant, I used praying (which is not exclusive to Judaism nor Christianity, some reading would help you) as a metaphor. Do you know what a metaphor is?


..And you dodge the question yet again, you said it was part of his religion and culture, show me proof of it being part of Mohican life and culture. Stop befuddling facts and twisting plot points to favor your argument. You never said Juno was part of his culture and religion, you said this, "That glowing eagle was a part of his culture and Religion". I repeat, show me proof of a glowing eagle being part of a Mohican theology.
That glowing eagle was Juno, mate...please read AND pay attention to the game.


Your reading comprehension skills, writing and vocabulary are severely lacking. You're hardly qualified to advise anyone on such matters. But again, we're buds, and I do appreciate the audacity regardless of just how doltish your arguments may sound at times.
I hardly believe you're qualified to grade mt vocabulary or comprehension. You cannot grade your teacher but i am humble enough to advice my buddy:)


I'm not defending Edward or Ezio, but you are acknowledging that my claims are in fact valid and for that I thank you my friend.
I believe you need you don't understand what Sarcasm is. If you criticize Connor for being a murderous, demonic, disgusting bastard (which is a shallow assessment) then that's a double standard because Ezio is the same way, is what I meant...I guess I just have to break down everything for you from now on.


Factual evidence here is relative, as we can both see. Some may cite major gaming publications to successfully bolster their argument, and support their views all the while discrediting his opponent's notions on the matter. Others refuse to cite anything, instead they hearken back to source material that they have filtered through their own lens in order to defend their argument as adequately as they can.
Nope. Read the above points when you'v learned to read.


YOUR View hasn't been supported, YOUR opinion isn't held by others in any media outlets
Which is of no consequence nor relevance to anything logical or sensible in this discussion.


OTHER views would bolster your credibility.
No. "So many of the world are Christians, that means I'm right" <---- does not work. "So many of my friends are atheists, so i'm right" <---- does not work. Do you see your problem? "Why are you a Christian?" you'd probably answer this "Because most of the world is" <----- does not work. (I don't know what you are, Christian or whatever, this was an example, I know I know, I have to break down everything for you)


But hey, if you want to keep doing this then fine by me. I do appreciate the je ne sais quoi...dogged...determination.
I can speak other languages too.


So because you beat a videogame, you're denying that someone was experiencing technical difficulty with the homestead missions in assassin's creed 3? That's what you're saying. So YOUR views, completely negate what he had to say even though it's been documented on other forums. Good to know, next time I glitch in AC4, I'll be sure to ask for your dismissal on the matter.
yes, just like reading a book and referencing it would negate someone making a false claim about the content of the book. Again, read what I said. Achilles does NOT die in the story and the homestead is not replayable--end of, it's not glitch, it's wrong.


How sweet of you! Thank you my fine feathered friend! Surely one day we can argue alongside each other against another member of the forum.
Haha, you're so funny--I wouldn't argue on your side, silly...I don't want to lose;)


In all seriousness, I always find myself questioning the saneness of people who are largely incapable of discerning the rather tumultuous mires they frequently find themselves whilst wrangling.
Are you questioning my sanity? are you bullying me right now? stop it, i'm your friend.


Again, I'm constantly questioning. Although I am amused by how pleased you seem to be, despite the fact you have yet to bolster your argument in the slightest...well, I* did post as you said, headcanon. I suppose that would suffice.
Corrected that for ya, you posted headcanon, I posted facts and bolstered my argument.


So I must ask, before we go round and round again. Would you care to exactly why I should like Connor as a character? I'm interested in why I should like him, and consider him to be a worthy protagonist.
I don't care to explain because quite frankly i'm not here to MAKE you like him--if you didn't, you didn't. I just thought you'll argue your reasons with authentic citations from the source material rather than cite articles that agree with you as a means to "bolster your view" I don't care if you like him, I care about facts...correct facts, which yours are not and their citations being not yours.


Good bye!
3

StocktonBrawler
08-19-2014, 03:55 AM
I don't care to explain because quite frankly i'm not here to MAKE you like him--if you didn't, you didn't. I just thought you'll argue your reasons with authentic citations from the source material rather than cite articles that agree with you as a means to "bolster your view" I don't care if you like him, I care about facts...correct facts, which yours are not and their citations being not yours.


Last thing I'll post in this thread, I'm interested in your views on Connor. Please explain why you like him. I could care less about your argument, it was weak and I'm tired of talking about your lack of sources and head canon.

Sesheenku
08-19-2014, 03:57 AM
-snip-

Dude, what we think of Connor is subjective, therefore adding more articles of subjective opinions doesn't really help here unless you're trying to prove the majority hate Connor or something.

If you're trying to argue about what you think of Connor and why it's valid though you need in game examples to be credible. Hence factual statements that have a basis in fact that contain your opinion.

Right now you have a basis of someone else's opinion and then you're adding your opinion.

Articles are great when you're debating factual scientific facts or stuff like that but on stuff like this where there's a lot of subjectivity, you need to rely on an objective and factual basis.

Essentially you can't prove a subjective view with another subjective view, you have to start with an objective fact which proves your subjective view.

For example Connor is really rash because he's constantly doing things his way and rarely listens to Achilles.

Not Connor is really rash because a bunch of subjective views on various articles say so.

I hope you actually read this instead of brushing it off.

A debate of this subjective nature is basically a debate about how valid the way you came to your subjective opinion is rather than a debate on the opinions themselves.

Jexx21
08-19-2014, 04:08 AM
Stockton doesn't understand the difference between a persuasive argument and a scientific/factual argument.

Sesheenku
08-19-2014, 04:14 AM
I'm gonna miss you, mate..hopefully it all goes well:D

Lol I got caught up in the debate and missed this, I'll miss you too dude don't worry though, I'll be back before you've even had a satisfyingly long enough vacation from me lol.


Stockton doesn't understand the difference between a persuasive argument and a scientific/factual argument.

Curse my verbosity. You shortened my point into one sentence...

Jexx21
08-19-2014, 04:39 AM
Curse my verbosity. You shortened my point into one sentence...

:P

Yours is more detailed though. Also, you can also make persuasive arguments in support of certain things that are backed up by other articles, but usually those articles also have to backed up by actual data and such.

In the cases of arguing about the story, it's really all subjective. Personally, I don't believe that "bad characters," as long as they're well though out characters, exist. Most, if not all, characters can touch people emotionally, provide them inspiration, etc, and I believe that's what makes characters, and stories in general, good.

Sesheenku
08-19-2014, 04:45 AM
:P

Yours is more detailed though. Also, you can also make persuasive arguments in support of certain things that are backed up by other articles, but usually those articles also have to backed up by actual data and such.

In the cases of arguing about the story, it's really all subjective. Personally, I don't believe that "bad characters," as long as they're well though out characters, exist. Most, if not all, characters can touch people emotionally, provide them inspiration, etc, and I believe that's what makes characters, and stories in general, good.

Oh yeah, meh I think he'll get the idea if he just reads "needs objective, factual basis" lol.

I had a debate a long time ago about the nature of subjectivity and objectivity. The person said they don't believe that objectivity exists. Imagine that. Impossible to argue with when everything can be brushed off as subjective lol.

HDinHB
08-19-2014, 04:47 AM
I've played the game many times as well and I could swear that "your work in Florence and the rest of Tuscany did not go unnoticed." is preceded by Ezio asking how Anotonio knew his name.

I keep trying to find a full list of Antonios dialogue but nothing 8U

When Ezio comes to the aid of the wounded Rosa: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vf4kiUo19d4&feature=youtu.be&t=1h52m55s

E: I'm Ezio.
R: I know.
E: What do you mean "I know"?

When he meets Antonio a few minutes later, it's more nonverbal: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vf4kiUo19d4&feature=youtu.be&t=1h56m26s

A: Don't look so surprised Ser Ezio, we know all about you.



So are you saying that if you watched a youtube video on parkour yourself that you could replicate it?


Ezio didn't need to be taught the climb leap as much as he wanted Rosa to teach it to him. Of course he had to settle for Franco's culo.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vf4kiUo19d4&feature=youtu.be&t=1h58m35s

Jexx21
08-19-2014, 04:48 AM
technically objectivity can't truly exist unless you simply have no opinion on a subject. But you'll probably form an opinion as you learn about the subject.

but you can get objective to a certain extent even if you hold an opinion on the matter.

Objectively, I realize a Connor sequel is unlikely because of his reception and due to comments said by Ubisoft.

However, I still think it's possible, and I feel like they have to be saving something for his character, because I feel like they could have expanded upon his character in other ways by now. I also love Connor as a character and he's my favorite AC protagonist.

Sesheenku
08-19-2014, 04:53 AM
When Ezio comes to the aid of the wounded Rosa: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vf4kiUo19d4&feature=youtu.be&t=1h52m55s
E: I'm Ezio.
R: I know.
E: What do you mean "I know"?

When he meets Antonio a few minutes later, it's more nonverbal: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vf4kiUo19d4&feature=youtu.be&t=1h56m26s
A: Don't look so surprised Ser Ezio, we know all about you.




Ezio didn't need to be taught the climb leap as much as he wanted Rosa to teach it to him. Of course he had to settle for Franco's culo.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vf4kiUo19d4&feature=youtu.be&t=1h58m35s

Oh yes! Thanks man, I was thinking for hours trying to figure out what the hell he said to Ezio lol.


technically objectivity can't truly exist unless you simply have no opinion on a subject. But you'll probably form an opinion as you learn about the subject.

but you can get objective to a certain extent even if you hold an opinion on the matter.

Objectively, I realize a Connor sequel is unlikely because of his reception and due to comments said by Ubisoft.

However, I still think it's possible, and I feel like they have to be saving something for his character, because I feel like they could have expanded upon his character in other ways by now. I also love Connor as a character and he's my favorite AC protagonist.

Well objectivity is generally based on facts. Indeed it's when you don't have an opinion or don't allow it to influence you as well.

Assassin_M
08-19-2014, 06:30 AM
Last thing I'll post in this thread, I'm interested in your views on Connor. Please explain why you like him. I could care less about your argument, it was weak and I'm tired of talking about your lack of sources and head canon.
i COULDN'T* care less. Saying I could care less implies that you care a bit.
My source is AC III and yeah, my lack of head-canon...thank you for admitting that.

I like Connor because of his honesty, tenacity, integrity, kindness, optimism, devotion and selflessness.
His honesty lies in his discomfort of using lies and deception to further a goal, as he explains to Adams after he teaches Connor how to remove notoriety and when Adams tells him of quickly using the news to rally people on their side by saying that the regulars had fired first.
His tenacity lies in his conviction that what he's doing is the right thing--no matter what anyone said, he held firm on this belief that he was doing good for his people first and then everyone in America. He never stopped believing in the cause of the Assassins--the cause of freedom. It can all be summarized in the one line he replies to Lee with "Because no one else will"
His integrity lies in his morality and principles, his disdain for slavery, his sense of justice and honor and his dislike of killing, seeing it as a last resort (it was only dictated in 4 missions that he MUST kill someone)
His kindness lies in his willingness to help others who face injustice of all kinds.
His optimism lies in his hope for humanity. He comes to realize how flawed humanity is but he hopes that one day, they will be able to form peace on their own without guidance from anyone. Which is the root of the Assassins philosophy and Creed, which Connor personifies.
His selflessness lies in his willingness to fight for others and forget about himself.
These traits are what make Connor such an endearing character. He risked his life with wolves and climbing a cliff to get Norris some flowers to give to Myriam, he fought a bear to save Prudence, he saved Terry from drowning in a river, he saved Norris from drunk bullies, he saved Ellen from her abusive husband, he saved David from tyrannical red coats, he saved Prudence and Warren from regulars, he brought a doctor and restored his reputation, he rescued Lance from poachers, he built a church entirely out of his own pocket for the people of the Homestead. The guy scuffs at the idea of him being a lord and the Homesteaders being his townsfolk and prefers to instead call them his friends and that's how he really viewed all of them, as his friends.

His main motivation was ensuring peace and freedom for his people but then when he saw Colonists struggling against tyranny as well, he did not hesitate to include the colonists in his quest for freedom and peace for all.

So yeah, that's just a brief summary of why I like Connor a lot.

Namikaze_17
08-19-2014, 06:37 AM
"Everytime there is a Connor debate on the forums, Ubi pushes back the Connor sequel another year."

Assassin_M
08-19-2014, 06:47 AM
It would suck to know that he's getting beaten as you do what you're told to but on the other hand at least you can be sure they won't kill him without it being public.
I don't think that's how i'd think about it...I wouldn't want my dad to be beaten up to be honest.


I still think it makes sense that he'd believe Annetta wouldn't lead him into trouble.
I don't, I think a subtle distrust should have been there...another point i'd like to mention is Ezio's rudeness towards her when she tells him he's not a killer....He scoffs at her and refuses to listen. That woman is holding your mom and sister and keeping them safe, you'd AT LEAST show some humility and respect, boy and he never even apologizes later.


I can agree that the result made it pointless but my argument was that he didn't know it would end up fruitless and thus took on the job. I do agree there needs to be a pay off to any plot points that come into play and I guess they didn't do it very well, he neither completed his fathers work properly nor did he act as a proper assassin.
We can agree on the rest of that point then and wrap it up.


To be fair he comes into contact with Rodrigo several times while taking out these targets and is able to learn more of his plans. It makes sense that at the time Ezio likely felt he was making the most appropriate decision. Rodrigo and the other Templars lead him to more Templars which is part of his fathers work. Personally I still think that it fits with the revenge cause while Rodrigo may have devised the plan there's no telling whether they helped or not and there's no denying that regardless of whether they helped or not they went along with it.
The movie tells if they helped or not, Lineage. It was all Rodrigo's thinking.


Oh and he actually kills 16 men with sequence 12 and 13 factored in
Yeah but they're not on his father's list:p


As for the bolded, poor Dante : (
indeed.


When you put that final sentence like that though.. "killed 13 men to spare the last" I suppose in the end he did fail to act as an assassin and failed to properly complete his fathers work.
Which is why I feel the ending was such a disappointment.


Alright lol, I do hate when they make sentences like that but I guess it's an easy thing to overlook.
Right? it's so frustrating when a phrase can be interpreted a thousand ways.


Well, I look at it this way. Cesare has his own killer, controls the French forces, has his own banker, and controls the papal army. If Rodrigo was able to control him then he should have simply taken away his control of the papal army upon realizing his treachery and out of control ambition.
Own killer: Cesare still had him at the end of ACB and that didn't do much good.
Control over french forces: The Baron only allowed Cesare to control them was to take over Italy himself later on, if Cesare had no power, the Baron wouldn't really allow Cesare any control over the french forces.
His own banker: The banker received funds from Rodrigo by Rodrigo's permission so like I said, had Rodrigo been gone, the funds would be gone as well because the only reason Cesare got any funding from Rodrigo was because he was his son.
I never said Rodrigo was able to control him, I said that Cesare's power source was Rodrigo's position in the Vatican.


I still think that had he died in AC2 and Cesare remained in good health he could have very well had everything in place to forcefully take control.
He tried at the end of ACB to forcefully take back control but that ended up no where.


I said as an example, it was a random, easy made up thing off the top of my head lol.
Oh...okay then xP


I'll give Connor one thing, at least his character traits are clear enough to leave no room for debate. I feel like Ezio on the other hand is constantly in conflict with himself. I believe his actions in Brotherhood and Revelations prove that regardless of age from time to time his emotions are still what drive him rather than his duty with the assassins.
Agreed. I think what I like about Ezio is that he's this little ball of emotion that rarely lashes out on the world and rather prefers to use the defense mechanism of being lively to continue to survive but yeah, you're right about the flip flopping.


I can agree that it's under shown, it's more of a sublte thing that can be missed. As for Bartolomeo, did he ever seem intelligent? I always felt like he was a bit loud and dim in AC2 as well. Then again in AC2 he comes up with the plans for the most part while in ACB Ezio does.
Exactly, why is Bartolomeo even unable to comprehend Ezio's plans? I would'v been fine if Ezio came up with plans but why is Bartolomeo SUCH an idiot? lol


Unrelated to the debate, perhaps it was a poor attempt to show development.
It was.


I've played the game many times as well and I could swear that "your work in Florence and the rest of Tuscany did not go unnoticed." is preceded by Ezio asking how Anotonio knew his name.

I keep trying to find a full list of Antonios dialogue but nothing 8U
Since you'v seen the dialogue now and Ezio never really asks, I can concede that sure, his surprised look (which is hidden by the hood but mentioned by Antonio anyway) is an ever so subtle way of showing SOME distrust.


So are you saying that if you watched a youtube video on parkour yourself that you could replicate it?
Yes....maybe.


Lol jeez. Talk about high expectations for what is essentially a throw back to classic FPS chars.
I know, right? I guess the times change...silent but strong types were pretty popular back in the day:p


Alright, I think you've broken through a few of my points as well. Making dat progress lol.
You have too to my points. What i'm particularly proud of is what you set an example for civil discussion, no matter how intense or long it got, you kept your cool and that's admirable.

Assassin_M
08-19-2014, 06:49 AM
Stockton doesn't understand the difference between a persuasive argument and a scientific/factual argument.
I was going to explain the difference to him in my post but seeing yours and Sesheenku's was enough.


Lol I got caught up in the debate and missed this, I'll miss you too dude don't worry though, I'll be back before you've even had a satisfyingly long enough vacation from me lol.
Haha, that's alright, thanks for replying. bring it on, bro :cool:

Sesheenku
08-19-2014, 07:13 AM
I don't think that's how i'd think about it...I wouldn't want my dad to be beaten up to be honest.

Me neither but the robe probably helped him stay incognito for the sequence, the guards were looking for him after all. The only reason the first few guards knew who he was is because he basically walks out of his front door, who else could be in the Auditore residence?


I don't, I think a subtle distrust should have been there...another point i'd like to mention is Ezio's rudeness towards her when she tells him he's not a killer....He scoffs at her and refuses to listen. That woman is holding your mom and sister and keeping them safe, you'd AT LEAST show some humility and respect, boy and he never even apologizes later.

Teenagers can be *******s and he was probably particularly impatient, nervous, and angry after what happened. I don't think the average person is going to be calm and cool during such a time, especially not Ezio.



The movie tells if they helped or not, Lineage. It was all Rodrigo's thinking.

Ah I did love that movie, I can't recall its details at this moment well but I trust you so I'll concede.

Yeah but they're not on his father's list:p

Oh yeah. No way Giovanni could have known Savonarola lol.


Right? it's so frustrating when a phrase can be interpreted a thousand ways.

Indeed, it's stopped me dead in my tracks many a time.

Own killer: Cesare still had him at the end of ACB and that didn't do much good.
Control over french forces: The Baron only allowed Cesare to control them was to take over Italy himself later on, if Cesare had no power, the Baron wouldn't really allow Cesare any control over the french forces.
His own banker: The banker received funds from Rodrigo by Rodrigo's permission so like I said, had Rodrigo been gone, the funds would be gone as well because the only reason Cesare got any funding from Rodrigo was because he was his son.
I never said Rodrigo was able to control him, I said that Cesare's power source was Rodrigo's position in the Vatican.

I don't know I just think the Templars have shown themselves to be much more resourceful than to be defeated even if the head is chopped off.

He tried at the end of ACB to forcefully take back control but that ended up no where.

Well in sequence 8 he's not in perfect health and can't do much, and then in 9 he's just escaping Viana when you show up. In the original scenario he would have had more time to make plans.


Exactly, why is Bartolomeo even unable to comprehend Ezio's plans? I would'v been fine if Ezio came up with plans but why is Bartolomeo SUCH an idiot? lol

Poor guy got demoted to mercenary level intelligence too.

Since you'v seen the dialogue now and Ezio never really asks, I can concede that sure, his surprised look (which is hidden by the hood but mentioned by Antonio anyway) is an ever so subtle way of showing SOME distrust.

I knew there was something lol I just couldn't remember perfectly.

Yes....maybe.

Actually HDinHB had a much more compelling argument than mine imo lol

"Ezio didn't need to be taught the climb leap as much as he wanted Rosa to teach it to him. Of course he had to settle for Franco's culo."


I know, right? I guess the times change...silent but strong types were pretty popular back in the day:p

True!


You have too to my points. What i'm particularly proud of is what you set an example for civil discussion, no matter how intense or long it got, you kept your cool and that's admirable.

I like a good debate. Most of my ragey posts are often just me amusing myself with the complaining. I did it when I first joined IGN forums too lol.

Assassin_M
08-19-2014, 07:17 AM
I shall continue this in the morning so with that, i'm off to bed, gents. Tata and farewell. Thank you seshenku for a good back and forth, looking forward for more.

Mr.Black24
08-19-2014, 07:19 AM
Last thing I'll post in this thread, I'm interested in your views on Connor. Please explain why you like him. I could care less about your argument, it was weak and I'm tired of talking about your lack of sources and head canon.
Sorry pal, but all those articles are indeed just ill informed crap. All those articles posted were only opinions that were formed in the matter of hours since the writers themselves have a deadline to publish them and cannot have the time to deluge in them unlike us players. Of course they would have rushed and not fully formed information to help formulate an opinion. Assassin M had evidence from the game itself to back it up. He has brought facts from the game, Assassin's Creed 3, as well as other information from the other games, himself, creating a well constructed argument called an educated opinion. You, Stock, only had biased uneducated OPINIONS, that back up YOUR OPINION. M has brought more quality to the table than you ever had.

What is happening here can be explained in a simple analogy:

Both of you are outside, looking at the cloudless sky.
M sees that the sky is blue, however Stockton sees it red.
M brings in a variety of information detailing that the sky is blue. Such as a freakin color chart that has a color that conveniently matches with the corresponding color up in the sky, Sky Blue.
However Stockton says that the sky is red, because a bunch of other misinformed people behind him say so.
M brings more color charts, and even a freakin 10 year experienced artist to support his claim.
Stockton still insists with these weird clueless bunch behind him.
M is getting nowhere.....


M, you truly have good argument skills and I salute you for your efforts. Indeed, sometimes you can't convince some people that the sky is blue.

Namikaze_17
08-19-2014, 07:23 AM
@Black

Good post. And you're right.... ;)

Jexx21
08-19-2014, 07:24 AM
nah, the sky is clearly green.

Mr.Black24
08-19-2014, 07:25 AM
nah, the sky is clearly green.
Really? I thought it was Piss Yellow, but alright!


@Black

Good post. And you're right.... ;)

Thank you sir!

Namikaze_17
08-19-2014, 07:30 AM
nah, the sky is clearly green.

No, it's yellow like my hair and nickname...

Sesheenku
08-19-2014, 07:34 AM
I shall continue this in the morning so with that, i'm off to bed, gents. Tata and farewell. Thank you seshenku for a good back and forth, looking forward for more.

Same here! Night ^_^

Fatal-Feit
08-19-2014, 07:38 AM
Sorry pal, but all those articles are indeed just ill informed crap. All those articles posted were only opinions that were formed in the matter of hours since the writers themselves have a deadline to publish them and cannot have the time to deluge in them unlike us players. Of course they would have rushed and not fully formed information to help formulate an opinion. Assassin M had evidence from the game itself to back it up. He has brought facts from the game, Assassin's Creed 3, as well as other information from the other games, himself, creating a well constructed argument called an educated opinion. You, Stock, only had biased uneducated OPINIONS, that back up YOUR OPINION. M has brought more quality to the table than you ever had.

What is happening here can be explained in a simple analogy:

Both of you are outside, looking at the cloudless sky.
M sees that the sky is blue, however Stockton sees it red.
M brings in a variety of information detailing that the sky is blue. Such as a freakin color chart that has a color that conveniently matches with the corresponding color up in the sky, Sky Blue.
However Stockton says that the sky is red, because a bunch of other misinformed people behind him say so.
M brings more color charts, and even a freakin 10 year experienced artist to support his claim.
Stockton still insists with these weird clueless bunch behind him.
M is getting nowhere.....


M, you truly have good argument skills and I salute you for your efforts. Indeed, sometimes you can't convince some people that the sky is blue.

Don't bother, it's like arguing with a wall.

Mr.Black24
08-19-2014, 07:55 AM
Don't bother, it's like arguing with a wall.
Exactly!

CSKarasu
08-19-2014, 09:01 AM
And now I shall dedicate the post I made to this thread :)

There’s love and hate of course on each side regarding Connor which I see just about everyday, but I think it has pushed me to the point where I must say something, considering I always keep to myself and barely get involved with Internet activities. In other words, this is a very rare occasion where I will actually post/write something in response to anything misunderstood and such. Hopefully I got all the points down in one take. Basically, I like to do a ton of research on things that catch my attention and would like to know more about, not only to keep me intrigued about the topic, but also to also shed some light on those that disagree with something when they do not know the full story yet. Now, please DO NOT take this to intentionally hurt/degrade/offend anyone as I am just making some points that will hopefully make any haters reconsider their mislead thoughts about the character. I truly believe that everyone is entitled to his or her own opinions, but it should not be when they barely know the backstory of the character or when they are so used to a character like Ezio.

1. “Connor isn’t much of a character or too bland.” I truly believe it’s because he was a totally different person than what you were used to from Altair and Ezio. Maybe you’re just not the type of person who can appreciate him for who he was; a real human being who put his people before anything else and tries to always do what is right. Was it because he wasn’t searching for an “outlet” as much as Ezio was in his younger years (aside from the later games that only existed because of his character development)? Or as careless and filled with undeserved pride like Altair? Don’t get me wrong: both those characters were great in their time periods (Altair was my favorite mainly because of his voice, but that changed in the other games - FAIL), but the fact is that for a real person to be introduced into a series like this lets us know that we can still have moral principles and be a badass at the same time, but it was time for a change – in my opinion, it made me think Italians were ***** all the time. >_< You only think he’s boring if you compare him to previous characters like Ezio; they lived in different time periods for goodness sake! And if you have a problem with a virgin superhero/main character as a badass, there is something wrong with you. First impressions are painful, but don’t judge a character based on the glitches either. He has lots of potential so he deserves a proper comeback. And if I had a nickel for every time Connor was compared to another character for comparison, I’d probably be rich!

And, since when did video game characters have to be recklessly violent and brutal like Kratos? Or try to be a flirt with the ladies like Leon Kennedy? But then again, I still see people who criticize him still trying to get more information about him, watching his videos, etc. Believe it or not, when I first played, I didn’t like him either, nor did I hate him, but after playing the game a few more times, as well as the side missions, it just made me keep falling in love with him all over again. To be honest, I personally think Ubisoft rushed the game (hence the amount of glitches and such?) since they did admit they were working on AC4 at the same time as AC3. They should have put more time into him as well as the game itself and then we wouldn’t have such mixed feedback about them both, but yet the fans that understood him loved him regardless and that shows in the growing fan base as well as petitions for his return. . I can't tell you how many petitions have started, and I know it will not stop here… Hint, Ubisoft?

There’s a reason why he was nominated for Character of the Year. Not to mention the awesome acceptance speech video had he won? Furthermore, he DID win the Best Video Game Character at the Virgin Media Awards.

2. “Connor is too ignorant or too ambitious or too naïve or too rude or shows no emotion.” Were we all not like this at a point of time in our lives, specifically when we were younger? To judge a character based on these characteristics makes you just as ignorant as you claim him to be. Altair was involved because it’s his duty; Ezio was involved to get revenge; Connor was in it for finding freedom for everyone – Freedom speaks way louder than the other two on any occasion to be honest. He was doing what was right and fought not just for his people, but for anyone caught in the freedom debate.

And please consider what the guy went through: he lost his mother at a young age, betrayed by those who he helped willingly, had to kill his father and best friend, lost his mentor (and yes I will admit some teary eyes when he spoke to Achilles’ grave) and after all that, his people were evicted to the west. How was he supposed to know this would happen? I know that if there was something that could be done to save who I held dear and wanted to protect, I would make sure that I would do everything that I was humanly possible to do to ensure their protection/safety. He did eventually mature near the end, did he not? And from what I’ve seen, he clearly doesn’t like the fact that he has to lie to reduce his notoriety and even argued with Sam Adams to who really started the Battle at Lexington and Concord. Need I mention how humble he was throughout the war itself?

He has every right to be seen as maybe ungrateful or emotionless because the colonists have been stealing their land and killing his people off, not to mention he doesn’t have much experience in the western culture so how was he supposed to act around them? The Internet was not available back then so he couldn’t look it up. He was basically being neutral and staying true to his roots in the mean time, including the fact about him not liking to be touched by people. In truth, in some Native American cultures, it is considered taboo to touch or be touched by someone who is not family or someone you don’t know (Don’t get me started with Paul Revere, Sam Adams but he lightened up, George Washington came to that side). Eventually, the people he spent a lot of time with grew accustomed to this and respected this “behavior.” People also said that he was whiny and such. Wasn’t Ezio whiny at the beginning as well and then matured over time? That’s exactly what happened with Connor considering he’s of a more cultural background.

3. If and when they do make a Connor sequel, I would say:
Northwest Indian Wars (1785-1795) – This one may be an ideal event for him: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northwest_Indian_War
Key figures:
United States
George Washington, President of the United States
Henry Knox, Secretary of War
Josiah Harmar, general
Arthur St. Clair, governor of the Northwest Territory, major general
Anthony Wayne, major general
Timothy Pickering, diplomat, secretary of war, secretary of state
John Hardin, Colonel - killed on a peace mission at what would later become Hardin, Shelby County, Ohio.
Alexander Truman, Major - killed on a peace mission at what later became Ottawa, Ohio.

War of 1812?

And please keep the same voice actor, Noah Watts; he did an epic job – I think he wants to pay Connor again as much as the fans do! And you know what will really please the fans? If he was involved in more than one war/event in his next game; he is that much of an ambitious person to get involved as much as he can to stop the Templars and fight for freedom.

Speaking of acting, people believe the voice acting of the Native Americans, specifically Connor, was terrible. English is not his native language and the voice actor specifically did the acting like this on purpose because when you have a second language that you will eventually need to use, but not fluent in, you will expect to speak slowly and not to the fluent speaker’s normal speech as you are still trying to formulate the words to speak. You can’t expect to be fluent in a second language when you’ve only learned it recently and such, not to mention he mainly started using it in his teenage years. Furthermore, English is the most complicated language in the world, but that’s a different story altogether.

4. Why is it every time that we ask a staff member of Ubisoft or Ubisoft directly about Connor’s return, we get mixed answers and ambiguous statements?

When asked for a AC3 sequel or two with Connor:

Alex Hutchison: It’s hard to answer that without giving spoilers… Our goal is to ship a game every year but never to develop a game in a year. So obviously there has to be some decision-making before the previous one comes out. If there’s a huge response to Connor then obviously it will fit into our future plans.

Julien Laferrière: “We’re going to see how players react to the guy [Connor] for sure. You’ll get to experience portions of his life, you’ll see why he becomes an assassin and what his motivations are. The more you know about Connor the more you’ll love him, but in the end we’ll see what the reception is like.”

Needless to say, there is; the fanbase has definitely grown by a huge margin recently.

When asked about how the fans felt about Connor:

Alex Hutchison: “We spent a lot of time working on this Assassin, trying to make someone who was compelling to people and seemed like a cool person to be. The fact that responses have been positive – we’ve already seen cosplaying and fan art – and people seem to really have adopted him, which was really satisfying.” - and this comment was made AFTER the game came out for a while.

So what’s the problem? The fans loved him, the reaction was positive as they hoped, so why does it sound like they may be going back on their word about bringing him back?

There are many Connor supporters out there but they don’t speak up much because they have better things to do I suppose, so hopefully they will join the rest of us in being heard; we all have the right to be heard. The fan reception was huge and the company knows it, including Corey May and Alex Hutchison. I also wished they would release the survey results they had on him so we can see how strong the response from the fans were.

And yes, we do know that he was planned way before we even heard his name and such, but the fact of the matter is that when he came out and we played the game, the fans want more. I’m pretty sure Ezio’s sequels wasn’t planned after AC2 came out until the fans demanded it.

When asked about giving Connor an Ember’s ending:

Darby McDevitt: “Not at this time. Embers took 6 months to make. It was a big project, and beloved by all, but those teams are busy with other things right now. But we loved the project, so maybe we’ll go that route again one day.”

I would rather have the sequel than a movie because writing a novel is taking the easy way out.

When asked again about making Connor come back for a sequel on Reddit:

Darby McDevitt: “Not likely. We want Tumblr to pick up where we left off.”

To be honest, I found this to be a little offensive: you’re basically telling the fans to continue the story themselves (fanfiction, really?) If that was the case, we would all have our own companies and be making them ourselves, but for a company to tell us that, then why are you in business? Unfortunately in this world, if you stop or don’t give fans or customers what they want/need, you are not going to last long. If you need help creating a new story for Connor to appear in, have a contest or something where whoever submits the best story for them to use for Connor will be used for a Connor sequel. But like I said, that statement is ambiguous. Then he said something about don’t rely on us and make your own stories. Really? Isn’t that why the fans are paying for your products, to see stories properly and professional done? Need I say that you also mentioned “bringing closure is the top priority?”

He was basically sending us into loops. First, we’ll see what the fan reception is like → The fans loved him → I would love to do another Connor game → His return is not likely. Seriously? Did you not see the fan reception and you can’t even give us a straight answer?

Considering there are people constantly asking Ubisoft just about everyday about Connor to come back, with the numbers growing by the day as well, we obviously want his return, so it would be stupid to not bring him back. Heck, even Noah Watts admitted himself that he would love to reprise his role in another game.

5. I even saw this beautiful Reddit post created sometime around February/March 2014 that really spoke to a lot of people, including the “haters” (credit goes to IFeelLikeAndy):
I've never seen a more ignorant and downright one sided comment before in my entire life. Connor Kenway was one of the most well developed characters in the entirety of the Assassin's Creed Franchise. What Ubisoft did with Connor is what inspired me to want to write and gives me hope that more writers can take note of [Corey May, Matt Turner,] and their team did with Connor, Native Americans everywhere, and Assassin's Creed in general. Ubisoft's team of writers did what many in the industry are afraid of doing; They told the harsh but undeniable truth about America's history Connor was a very stoic and troubled young man, there's no doubt about that, but its not because he's a ****, or a ****** as I've read, but because in the Mohawk tribe men and women are taught at a very young age that to show emotion is to show weakness. This is why Connor seems very stern and straightforward when talking to "the white man" and he even goes out of his way and refuses to speak with contractions so as to keep himself on a higher level than non natives. Not only that, but these are the people who have abandoned him, shunned him, taken his land his home his life, and spat on him afterwards. Oh, and when I say him I mean his people and Native Americans in all of Colonial North America.

Connor is the soul embodiment of millions of Native Americans who fought and died for what they believed knew was right, and Ubisoft did a beautiful job of expressing this. If you study Connor as a character you will see that whenever someone who is not from his tribe touches him, he will look at them and move away quickly and scornfully. However, as he spends more time in the new world he digresses from his native culture and even uses contractions when speaking, allows himself to befriend non natives, and later on he even begins to show much emotion in his voice, which is completely different from the Connor we met in the beginning of his life.

But after everything he went through he saw that what these men were doing to his people was also being done to their own men. He witnessed The Boston Massacre and saw that the world was more than he once thought, and the corruption of these people was much more than he thought. It was then that he learned to not only fight for the freedom of his people but for the freedom of all people, no matter the cost. Even if he must go at it alone, Connor had a moral obligation to help save the world around him.

Lee: "Even those men you sought to save have turned their backs on you. Yet you fight, you resist. Why?"
Connor: "Because no one else will!"

Ubisoft honored Native Americans by not making this a game about some angry red skin who goes by the name Soars With Eagles who is covered head to toe in feathers, but instead they focused on remaining true to history and truly expressing the hatred, fear, and will power of The Native Man in The New World. Ubisoft even went so far out of their way as to learn that in Mohawk Culture people do not use a name more than once and after learning this, Ubisoft had to do extensive amounts of research to find a suitable name for their new conflicted protagonist that has never before been used in recorded history. And thus, Ratonhnhaké:ton was born. Yet after all this work, Ubisoft got hurt by bringing to life the heart of the real Native American Culture instead of tarnishing it like the media enjoys doing so often. And its because of this, that I have lost a lot of hope for the culturally diverse world that I thought I was now living in.

Connor was a significantly more believable character than most people's beloved Ezio was. He saw things at a young age that scarred him for life and experienced so much that it made him into the tragic hero that is praised by few and underappreciated by many more. The only mistake Ubisoft made was not releasing Connor's Epilogue that summed up the tragic story that is his life and after ACIV is now the Kenway Family Tragedy.

All of this was not done by Connor but by a team of gifted writers who know that telling a story the way it should be told is more important than showing a blatant disregard of the harsh truth of the Native American culture.

IN CONCLUSION, if you are still not convinced that Connor is an awesome character, I strongly encourage you to play the game again, along with the side missions, and I assure you that you will most likely have a better understanding and different opinion about the character. Maybe this is one of those games where you have to play more than once to establish a deeper connection to the character. If you still can’t relate to him in some way afterwards, I have nothing else to say to you and maybe you can’t appreciate real characters in a video game like him. Therefore, I have nothing else to say to you.

Ubisoft, I am not only speaking for me, but for all the Connor lovers out there who remain silent. PLEASEEEEEEEEE make an awesome Connor sequel. You’re a great company with great games released just about all the time. It’s not like you’re guessing what we like; we are telling you exactly what we like. No more mixed messages. No more enigmas. No more switcheroos. The fan bases and petitions of this character grow every single day and eventually you guys will take the hint of what your fans are demanding. Unless you guys have planned an epic surprise for us in the near future to give off such ambiguity, then by all means, keep leaving us in anticipation, but don’t decide to “double cross” us in the end. Eventually our voices will become loud enough for you to no longer ignore, because having an awesome character for one installment is not cool, or as Connor would say, “it is not enough.”

Yours truly,
The Assassin’s Creed Fanbase

.. And not to mention that famous "Tunnel Vision" article thats gained some attention regarding this same matter. Yeah.. I'm done :P

Please be brief I don't have time to respond to lengthy posts.

1. Connor's blandness - I'm sorry but Connor is a bland character in my eyes, he isn't multi-faceted. Your copy pasted response makes a lot of assumptions I never compared him to Altair or Ezio I'm talking in broad terms and comparing him with engaging characters.

2. Connor's emotion, or lack thereof - It is realistic to become closed off after losing someone so close, but that does not make for an interesting or engaging character in and of itself.

3. I hope if there is a Connor sequel it is not a main series entry.

Your conclusion isn't something I'm willing to do, "play it again till you like it". I played it once and I got a measure of Connor and his story - I found it boring and I found Connor to be devoid of any interesting or endearing qualities. What makes it even worse is that Haytham comes before Connor, so players play as a fully fleshed out character with interesting characters surrounding him from the offset and then are switched into an emotional wreck of a loner that is Connor.

CSKarasu
08-19-2014, 09:08 AM
Sorry pal, but all those articles are indeed just ill informed crap. All those articles posted were only opinions that were formed in the matter of hours since the writers themselves have a deadline to publish them and cannot have the time to deluge in them unlike us players. Of course they would have rushed and not fully formed information to help formulate an opinion. Assassin M had evidence from the game itself to back it up. He has brought facts from the game, Assassin's Creed 3, as well as other information from the other games, himself, creating a well constructed argument called an educated opinion. You, Stock, only had biased uneducated OPINIONS, that back up YOUR OPINION. M has brought more quality to the table than you ever had.

What is happening here can be explained in a simple analogy:

Both of you are outside, looking at the cloudless sky.
M sees that the sky is blue, however Stockton sees it red.
M brings in a variety of information detailing that the sky is blue. Such as a freakin color chart that has a color that conveniently matches with the corresponding color up in the sky, Sky Blue.
However Stockton says that the sky is red, because a bunch of other misinformed people behind him say so.
M brings more color charts, and even a freakin 10 year experienced artist to support his claim.
Stockton still insists with these weird clueless bunch behind him.
M is getting nowhere.....


M, you truly have good argument skills and I salute you for your efforts. Indeed, sometimes you can't convince some people that the sky is blue.

Please leave the topic if you're going to be so condescending. There is a way to show disagreement and this is not it.

avk111
08-19-2014, 10:10 AM
Ok here is my touch on the matter,

Connor is a very very good written character/bad screen and portrayal time/screening , as a player myself it took me couple of years to know what his inner perception of the event at AC3 were.

Not to mention , as a consumer for his fictitious plot and story line, I had to rely on secondary material (Novels , Encyclopedias) in order to understand him,

Connor portray would be as the simple nature living kid who wants nothing more than peace for his tribesmen, his main intention was not to see the same thing that happened with his experience with his mom happen again, At the beginning of the game he starts as this innocent (yet angry/rash) young man who seeks peace , even if he had to help the whites who invaded his land , after all he is a half-white himself.

Slowly as the game progresses you start realizing how his idealism diminishes as he start realizing that his premonition that the templars are all evil , and that his goal of saving his people is slowly fading away,

Whats remarkable is with all the damage the whites have done to his people in the end , he still has hope that things will change and that people will realize to live together in peace , rather than having some sort of authority figure dictating your life.

He held on to that little flame called hope.

That was even quoted by Desmond experience inside the Animus as Connor.


Ooookay, time for some articulate BS because i'm bored.

I would say Ezio is the worst lead we had in AC because so many writing problems to his character, progression, consistency and motivations.

in AC II, Ezio dons the robes of his father for some unexplained reason ("take everything you find in there" oooooh, how thoughtful of Papa, he wanted me to have this kick-*** costume, let me just try it on while my dad is rotting in jail expecting me to deliver very important letters to save him from being hanged) but anyways, dad dies, .

Apologies for the double post, my rendition is that Ezio had to take the robes as a sort of protection/hiding tool since he was a wanted man in Florence at the time.

GunnerGalactico
08-19-2014, 10:37 AM
Sorry pal, but all those articles are indeed just ill informed crap. All those articles posted were only opinions that were formed in the matter of hours since the writers themselves have a deadline to publish them and cannot have the time to deluge in them unlike us players. Of course they would have rushed and not fully formed information to help formulate an opinion. Assassin M had evidence from the game itself to back it up. He has brought facts from the game, Assassin's Creed 3, as well as other information from the other games, himself, creating a well constructed argument called an educated opinion. You, Stock, only had biased uneducated OPINIONS, that back up YOUR OPINION. M has brought more quality to the table than you ever had.

What is happening here can be explained in a simple analogy:

Both of you are outside, looking at the cloudless sky.
M sees that the sky is blue, however Stockton sees it red.
M brings in a variety of information detailing that the sky is blue. Such as a freakin color chart that has a color that conveniently matches with the corresponding color up in the sky, Sky Blue.
However Stockton says that the sky is red, because a bunch of other misinformed people behind him say so.
M brings more color charts, and even a freakin 10 year experienced artist to support his claim.
Stockton still insists with these weird clueless bunch behind him.
M is getting nowhere.....


M, you truly have good argument skills and I salute you for your efforts. Indeed, sometimes you can't convince some people that the sky is blue.

I agree with this. Those articles are only filled with people's opinions and their personal takes on things. They don't do anything to sustantiate a person's argument.

Matt.mc
08-19-2014, 10:56 AM
So, I just started playing through ACIII again to see how I like it now and I got to say, I think the reason I don't like Conner so much is the voice acting. For starters he sounds like Hayden Christianson (Guy who played Anikan in episodes 123),

Fatal-Feit
08-19-2014, 11:59 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iU1KeUWEVa4

His voice acting meant a lot more to me after listening to this podcast. I wish Loomer would have a podcast with Matt Ryan.

jeordievera
08-19-2014, 12:06 PM
^^ yes and also he is explaining that huge inspiration for Connor's 'coldness' was Magua from the The Last of the Mohicans. If you ever watch the movie you will also understand why he was the way he was. I thought it was interesting.

GunnerGalactico
08-19-2014, 12:16 PM
^^ yes and also he is explaining that huge inspiration for Connor's 'coldness' was Magua from the The Last of the Mohicans. If you ever watch the movie you will also understand why he was the way he was. I thought it was interesting.

I haven't watched the Last of the Mohicans, but I do like the way Connor is voiced in AC3... I personally didn't find anything wrong with it. I also like the fact that Connor didn't talk or sound like a stereotypical, cliched Native American (like Tonto from The Lone Ranger, for example :p).

jeordievera
08-19-2014, 12:48 PM
I haven't watched the Last of the Mohicans, but I do like the way Connor is voiced in AC3... I personally didn't find anything wrong with it. I also like the fact that Connor didn't talk or sound like a stereotypical, cliched Native American (like Tonto from The Lone Ranger, for example :p).
Same for me, I think it would make him less serious if he had an accent. And I personally like Noah's voice and his intonationation. He did a good job with that.

Fatal-Feit
08-19-2014, 01:03 PM
I wish Connor would read me a bedtime story. His voice is so calming... What I wouldn't give for that.

jeordievera
08-19-2014, 01:17 PM
I wish Connor would read me a bedtime story. His voice is so calming... What I wouldn't give for that.
And then as soon as you close your eyes, all comfortable and ready to fall asleep, Connor shouts "Where is Charles Leeeee!"

joelsantos24
08-19-2014, 01:19 PM
Recently people have told me, and rather condescendingly, that I did not understand Connor and that he is not one-dimensional and not just out for revenge. They explain that Connor is a nuanced and thoroughly misunderstood character. I played the same game as you and I respectfully beg to differ.

In the beginning Connor was childish and impetuous, his actions ruled by anger and revenge, later on he fights for freedom but I still believe this is a quest for revenge, revenge against a world that facilitates these kind of evils. Now, he may have hardened his heart after his mother's death, but this does not make for an entertaining, interesting or engaging character. When someone is unemotional (except for anger) it makes for a character with zero personality.

Funnily enough Connor is analogous to Batman, a character I like, both in respects to his origin and his quest for justice. But Batman, although grim and expressionless, actually has some personality, he even grins and smiles sometimes! He is also aided by his role as Bruce, where he can be more of an open character. Connor on the other hand is not an open character, he does not let his guard down.

This is my opinion and interpretation, feel free to disagree. Cheers buds!
I really don't think Connor is one-dimensional. He might not have been single-minded, especially about revenge, but I do feel that he manifested or displayed, at least onto others, one single justification for his actions, over and over again: it seemed it was all about protecting his people, his village, etc. He might not have been the most extroverted character in AC, and probably that's why his purposes and character were somehow regarded as one-dimensional.

In the beginning, he was indeed rash and impetuous, but most unsurprisingly though, considering what he had gone through. Not everyone in real-life has a happy, sheltered and supported upbringing and life. Why should fictional characters reflect the opposite? I really don't understand what you mean with Connor not being interesting, entertaining and engaging, even considering the death of his mother. Put yourself in his shoes, so to speak. Would you be all smiles, fairies, rainbows and unicorns, after your entire world shattered beneath your feet? I think he developed exactly the way someone else would, in his context.

However, none of this means you have to like him as a character, whatever the reasons and criteria you use to reach that conclusion. Altaïr is my favorite character, and Connor is very much like him, in many ways, so I really enjoy playing AC3 with him.

TheHumanTowel
08-19-2014, 02:13 PM
Ezio putting on his father's assassin robes is obviously supposed to be ****ing symbolic of him inheriting his father's legacy that was hidden from him you utter dopes. "Wah he wasted time when he should've been delivering letters wah". No one cares.

StocktonBrawler
08-19-2014, 04:55 PM
Please be brief I don't have time to respond to lengthy posts.

1. Connor's blandness - I'm sorry but Connor is a bland character in my eyes, he isn't multi-faceted. Your copy pasted response makes a lot of assumptions I never compared him to Altair or Ezio I'm talking in broad terms and comparing him with engaging characters.

2. Connor's emotion, or lack thereof - It is realistic to become closed off after losing someone so close, but that does not make for an interesting or engaging character in and of itself.

3. I hope if there is a Connor sequel it is not a main series entry.

Your conclusion isn't something I'm willing to do, "play it again till you like it". I played it once and I got a measure of Connor and his story - I found it boring and I found Connor to be devoid of any interesting or endearing qualities. What makes it even worse is that Haytham comes before Connor, so players play as a fully fleshed out character with interesting characters surrounding him from the offset and then are switched into an emotional wreck of a loner that is Connor.

Thank you, just try to ignore them.

Before visiting this forum, I had yet to see or meet a single Connor apologist. Boy, was I surprised. I think it's very fair to say that we're both in the majority, we both hate Connor, but that minority sure is a feisty one. Lol.

Whilst arguing and When providing evidence to support my argument, in an attempt to show that I am not in the minority they dismiss me all the while touting their head canon. It's mind numbingly enraging,

I've come to accept the fact that the majority of Connor fans are obsessed overweight, and more importantly unattractive fangirls who have some sort of sexual attraction to the character. The tumbler thread is a prime example of the absolute perversion and lunacy of some of the fans of Kenway saga. The small male demographic who actively defend connor are either (a) sexually attracted to the character (look at tumblr) or (b) are desperate, and they're trying to appeal to girls who are fans of Connor.i suppose, It's similar to male feminism in a way.


"Everytime there is a Connor debate on the forums, Ubi pushes back the Connor sequel another year."

Ha! He's not even going to make an appearance in rogue, they're not even going to mention that moronic nincompoop in unity.

Sequel's never coming bud.

He's a horrible character who's been completely abandoned by ubisoft because they realize just how bad of a character he was. They didn't even record how he died! They don't even care enough about him to end his saga.

Jexx21
08-19-2014, 05:02 PM
Wow, you are so extremely offensive.

StocktonBrawler
08-19-2014, 05:05 PM
I was going to explain the difference to him in my post but seeing yours and Sesheenku's was enough.


Haha, that's alright, thanks for replying. bring it on, bro :cool:

Lol, I supported my beliefs with canonical data in my original post you fool....and then I provided links to major gaming publications to show that I am not alone. Others actively agree with me, who agrees with you? Maybe 4-5 overweight fangirls and 2-3 flamboyant fanboys who are somehow attracted to connor who visit this very forum?

I can't believe you're this dense Mate. Haha.


Wow, you are so extremely offensive.

And others have mocked me, made fun of me, and openly criticized me for my views. I've been far too nice for far too long. And you didn't defend me, not did you try to stop them from doing it?

If you want respect, then show respect.

Jexx21
08-19-2014, 05:11 PM
on the Sucker Punch forums (devs of the inFAMOUS games and the first three Sly Cooper games), most people agree there that they think Connor is the best assassin

on that one Kotaku article you posted, their head editor posted a comment saying that he loved Connor

Connor won the "Best Character of the Year" award in the Virgin Media awards, going up against characters like Master Chief

On the Assassin's Creed wikia, when proposed with the question of whether or not they would buy another Connor game, most people answered yes.

AherasSTRG
08-19-2014, 05:11 PM
I demand that StocktonBrawler's behaviour be brought to the moderators' attention. Such language and attitude should not be tolerated in civilised forums as those we are currently browsing.

"Moronic nincompoop", "you fool", "overweight fangirls", "flamboyant fanboys" are reasons enough to issue a ban.

PS: Spare him the attention, Jexx. As a member of these forums, I ask that the rules be respected. It's up to the devs what happens to him.

JustPlainQuirky
08-19-2014, 05:12 PM
lol @ "overweight fangirls" & "flamboyant boys"

like, really?

creedalien
08-19-2014, 05:13 PM
connor was a great character i mean better than Arno will be ubisoft think ac unity story is gonna be great and great characters

Unity:
Arno: he want justice,revenge,love for elise lol.. still not better character than connor...
Elise: burned with revenge, and love for arno the(most flat character in ac universe its worse than maria from ac1)
Unity----SOAP OPERA. I would never call this game Assassin's Creed.

Jexx21
08-19-2014, 05:14 PM
I demand that StocktonBrawler's behaviour be brought to the moderators' attention. Such language and attitude should not be tolerated in civilised forums as those we are currently browsing.

"Moronic nincompoop", "you fool", "overweight fangirls", "flamboyant fanboys" are reasons enough to issue a ban.

I'd also argue that calling characters demonic and mindless brutes is a terrible thing to say.

In a way, these characters are a part of many people, the voice actors, the writers, the fans who were emotionally touched by them and their stories...
...there are no bad characters, just undeveloped ones.

JustPlainQuirky
08-19-2014, 05:15 PM
Nah I personally think Aveline is a bad character, but that's just me.

StocktonBrawler
08-19-2014, 05:17 PM
I demand that StocktonBrawler's behaviour be brought to the moderators' attention. Such language and attitude should not be tolerated in civilised forums as those we are currently browsing.

"Moronic nincompoop", "you fool", "overweight fangirls", "flamboyant fanboys" are reasons enough to issue a ban.

PS: Spare him the attention, Jexx. As a member of these forums, I ask that the rules be respected. It's up to the devs what happens to him.

Why didn't they defend me when I was being mocked and chided for my views when I was the most often the most compassionate poster in the threads I participated in! I could provide evidence of such slander and crass behavior and how I responded with kindness.

You dare suggest that I be banned for my views, I have done nothing wrong! Others have mocked me, and destroyed my character but when I respond negatively, it is I who. Just be banned? Madness, madness I tell you. I won't stand for it.


lol @ "overweight fangirls" & "flamboyant boys"

like, really?

I could have posted something much harsher, but I am first and foremost a gentleman and I would never want to seriously hurt others opinions. Just a little chiding to put some people back in place is all I Need to do. Nothing more.

As radio superstar, and broadcasting legend DJ Dennis Falcone says.' I don't work in the blue'.

Jexx21
08-19-2014, 05:21 PM
you were never a compassionate poster

you're attempts at compassion seemed insincere at best, snidely mocking at worst


Nah I personally think Aveline is a bad character, but that's just me.

lolno

you just don't connect to her very well, and she also isn't that overtly developed

I stand by my statement, there are no bad characters, only undeveloped ones.

DumbGamerTag94
08-19-2014, 05:23 PM
Welllll this escalated out if control. I expect a Iocked thread and possibly a banned user^

And for the record I like Connor as a character. Do I think he's amazing? No. Do I think he's the best of the series? No. But do I like him and his story and understand why he is the way he is? Yes.
He was a decent character. My favorite no. But I did like him.

And for the record I'm a guy, not overweight, no relationship troubles, i don't swing that way to be attracted to Connor, and I have never even seen tumblr.

The fact that you think that just because someone likes Connor that they must fit that bill is hilarious. Your obsession with Connor fans supposedly only having a sexual attraction(to a fictional being might I add). Raises the concern to me that you are just raging in some sort of obsessive denial of your own sexual frustration(maybe even Tward the character of Connor). It just seems like a rather odd assumption to be so obsessed and raging over

StocktonBrawler
08-19-2014, 05:23 PM
I'd also argue that calling characters demonic and mindless brutes is a terrible thing to say.

In a way, these characters are a part of many people, the voice actors, the writers, the fans who were emotionally touched by them and their stories...
...there are no bad characters, just undeveloped ones.

Oh heavens to murgatroyd, they're videogame characters for Pete's sake. It's not offensive, if it is then I feel shamed. You clearly have no respect for my views.

Can't we just all agree to disagree?a!?!?

JustPlainQuirky
08-19-2014, 05:24 PM
Nah stock you went a bit too far when you went strouding around trashing Connor's character at any chance you got. Even threads that barely related to him.

That's far from 'gentlemenly'

Nobody sees you in that light as long as you continue to drag on about how you hate a character.

I personally am not offended, but seeing your Connor hate powder the forums all the time is just as annoying as overly optimistic Connor fans who thought Arno was Connor.

@jexx

"lol" yes

I dislike aveline's character.

Whether it has to do with connecting or not doesn't matter.

I dislike her character. That's my personal opinion. I don't hate her, but I do personally consider her poorly-written.

But I respect people who like her and won't shout that on rooftops.

Dont pull the stupid "oh you just don't understand or comprehend this character" card. It's perspective.

Jexx21
08-19-2014, 05:29 PM
"lol" yes

I dislike aveline's character.

Whether it has to do with connecting or not doesn't matter.

I dislike her character. That's my personal opinion. I don't hate her, but I do personally consider her poorly-written.

But I respect people who like her and won't shout that on rooftops.

Dont pull the stupid "oh you just don't understand or comprehend this character" card. It's perspective.

dlslike of a character =/= a bad character

I said you didn't connect to her, not that you don't understand her. There's a large difference. Like how you understand Fetch but don't connect to her.

Connection IS a perspective thing.

AherasSTRG
08-19-2014, 05:30 PM
EDIT: Nothing was ever written here.

JustPlainQuirky
08-19-2014, 05:32 PM
dlslike of a character =/= a bad character

I said you didn't connect to her, not that you don't understand her. There's a large difference. Like how you understand Fetch but don't connect to her.

Connection IS a perspective thing.


I dislike her because I personally consider her a poorly written/bad character.

And i consider fetch poorly written/a bad character too.

Don't tell me who I do and do not consider bad characters.

They're my personal opinions regardless of whether or not I connect with them.

Christ.

@adher

you'd blend well in the tumblr fandom :rolleyes:

Jexx21
08-19-2014, 05:36 PM
I dislike her because I personally consider her a poorly written/bad character.

And i consider fetch poorly written/a bad character too.

Don't tell me who I do and do not consider bad characters.

They're my personal opinions regardless of whether or not I connect with them.

Christ.

I never told you what to think, I was just voicing my perspective.

I don't think bad characters exist.

Poorly written characters are poorly written, if they were better written, they would be better written. Characters are symbols, you can use symbols poorly or in a good way.

JustPlainQuirky
08-19-2014, 05:38 PM
Alright whatever that's fine I guess.

I'm just clarifying my thoughts.

Sorry if I came off as grump.

SpiritOfNevaeh
08-19-2014, 05:59 PM
Thank you, just try to ignore them.

Before visiting this forum, I had yet to see or meet a single Connor apologist. Boy, was I surprised. I think it's very fair to say that we're both in the majority, we both hate Connor, but that minority sure is a feisty one. Lol.

Whilst arguing and When providing evidence to support my argument, in an attempt to show that I am not in the minority they dismiss me all the while touting their head canon. It's mind numbingly enraging,

I've come to accept the fact that the majority of Connor fans are obsessed overweight, and more importantly unattractive fangirls who have some sort of sexual attraction to the character. The tumbler thread is a prime example of the absolute perversion and lunacy of some of the fans of Kenway saga. The small male demographic who actively defend connor are either (a) sexually attracted to the character (look at tumblr) or (b) are desperate, and they're trying to appeal to girls who are fans of Connor.i suppose, It's similar to male feminism in a way.



Ha! He's not even going to make an appearance in rogue, they're not even going to mention that moronic nincompoop in unity.

Sequel's never coming bud.

He's a horrible character who's been completely abandoned by ubisoft because they realize just how bad of a character he was. They didn't even record how he died! They don't even care enough about him to end his saga.

....Seriously? How offensive! Do you have any proof of that by any chance?... Or are you taking someone else's opinion of that?

This is coming from someone who just started posting recently, like you have got some nerve to say that...

Trust me, we don't need people like you here.

And you're basically saying later on that just because you were offended that you think you have the right to "bite back" and say things like this.

This forum was much better without you and you deserve to be banned.

I really sick of people like you, especially those who can't even make their own opinion and based their "opinion" on the opinion of others.

But really, where are the mods? This matter needs to be taken care of before I post something I'll regret.

GunnerGalactico
08-19-2014, 06:02 PM
Whilst arguing and When providing evidence to support my argument, in an attempt to show that I am not in the minority they dismiss me all the while touting their head canon. It's mind numbingly enraging,

I've come to accept the fact that the majority of Connor fans are obsessed overweight, and more importantly unattractive fangirls who have some sort of sexual attraction to the character. The tumbler thread is a prime example of the absolute perversion and lunacy of some of the fans of Kenway saga. The small male demographic who actively defend connor are either (a) sexually attracted to the character (look at tumblr) or (b) are desperate, and they're trying to appeal to girls who are fans of Connor.i suppose, It's similar to male feminism in a way.

Just when I thought this idiot couldn't sink any lower, he goes and makes that horrendous statement. I am utterly disgusted by this. How he came to the conclusion that the Connor fans are only tumblr fangirls, is beyond me. They do not represent his fanbase as a whole. This guy also has selective memory, not too long ago.... he liked KEVT's drawing which was posted in the AC Fun Thread and then makes a statement that that particular thread is only filled with perverted pictures posted by people. This guy has officially crossed the line.

JustPlainQuirky
08-19-2014, 06:02 PM
I've come to accept the fact that the majority of Connor fans are obsessed overweight, and more importantly unattractive fangirls who have some sort of sexual attraction to the character. The tumbler thread is a prime example of the absolute perversion and lunacy of some of the fans of Kenway saga. The small male demographic who actively defend connor are either (a) sexually attracted to the character (look at tumblr) or (b) are desperate, and they're trying to appeal to girls who are fans of Connor.i suppose, It's similar to male feminism in a way.

Oh wow I actually didn't read this quote.

This is hilariously offensive in so many ways.

I'm usually too lazy to report but yeah that's not contributing to debate thats insulting fans on a personal level.

Locopells
08-19-2014, 06:04 PM
Alright, situation noted, time to move on people...

jeordievera
08-19-2014, 06:06 PM
This is actually so upsetting. Not because it's not even truth but because someone can have so much anger that they feel the need to spill their guts all over the internet while hiding in anonymity..

JustPlainQuirky
08-19-2014, 06:06 PM
Loco comes to save the day.

In loco we trust.

GunnerGalactico
08-19-2014, 06:07 PM
Loco, please lock this thread.

Mr.Black24
08-19-2014, 06:08 PM
Please leave the topic if you're going to be so condescending. There is a way to show disagreement and this is not it.
Please elaborate on how "condescending" I am. M makes extremely valid points brought up with information from the games themselves, and Stock brought nothing to the table but rushed reviewed articles. The way I disagreed is perfectly fine, I didn't even resort to insult stock, merely criticizing his debating skills, which are poor by the way. Kind of like looking at a piece of artwork and pointing out the highlights and flaws of the piece you know, little stuff like that?

And don't tell me to leave, who are you, my parent?

StocktonBrawler
08-19-2014, 06:10 PM
I just want to say I am sorry for comments I made. They were rude, uncaring, offensive, brutal, and disrespectful. Apologies to the people I insulted. Will never happen again.

Regarding KEVT, he's a great poster and a fantastic artist who I am an absolute fan and supporter of. Never did I insult him, nor would I. I had shown displeasure with other pictures, that I am now completely embarrassed because I had made fun of them. In other words, the TUMBLR thread is a great thread with great people in it and great pictures in it and it has great posts in it

JustPlainQuirky
08-19-2014, 06:12 PM
I just want to say I am sorry for comments I made. They were rude, uncaring, offensive, brutal, and disrespectful. Apologies to the people I insulted. Will never happen again.

Regarding KEVT, he's a great poster and a fantastic artist who I am an absolute fan and supporter of. Never did I insult him, nor would I.

Thanks Stock.

I appreciate your willingness to come out like that.

Most people with that behavior aren't willing to do that.

Just please try to keep respecting fans of all characters. :o

GunnerGalactico
08-19-2014, 06:18 PM
I just want to say I am sorry for comments I made. They were rude, uncaring, offensive, brutal, and disrespectful. Apologies to the people I insulted. Will never happen again.

Regarding KEVT, he's a great poster and a fantastic artist who I am an absolute fan and supporter of. Never did I insult him, nor would I. I had shown displeasure with other pictures, that I am now completely embarrassed of.

I never said that you have disrespected KEVT, only that you think that the thread is only for perverted pictures. I've been in these forums since Feb and majority of the time- people have posted really good, artistic and non-perverted pictures of all AC characters. However, you do get some people out there that post some really obscene or silly pictures, but it is only up to a minimum and we don't really have control over that. For the most part, people do find some really nice and decent pictures to post there.

JustPlainQuirky
08-19-2014, 06:22 PM
Stock, if you're weirded out by 'connor fans' or 'tumblr fans' just redirect that weirdness to me.

Because unlike every other respectable member here I'm pretty much the epitome of disturbing connor/tumblr stuff.

And I'm not offended by critisizms. I find them amusing.

As long as they don't get repetative.

Mr.Black24
08-19-2014, 06:24 PM
Please be brief I don't have time to respond to lengthy posts. Than why debate? The point of debating is going through and analyzing every inch of your opponent's argument, exploit any weaknesses and counter with a better point and information until one has the better argument and the other cannot truly respond. Thats kind of like me going to a Debate Club, and saying "Hey guys I have other stuff to do, can you make this like 5 minutes for me?" , when debates on topics within a Debate Club always go much longer than that.

Telling me to leave and yet you can't properly sit down and listen for a while since you got "other stuff" to do. How about this? What would do to make Connor more interesting and realistic for that time period, and after going through all that trials and tribulation? I cannot see a lucky-to-go guy moving around in those days, if anything I'd be afraid of such a person, as people like that will snap and turn psychopathic. Need I remind you again he is a emotional wreak due to the destruction of his village and burning of his mother? The boy was 5, seeing his own mom BURNING.....Google burned victims and tell me how can the mind of a 5 year old recover from seeing such a view like that? Of course the man will be more serious than most people! But like I said, how would you make him differently?

Although I will give you a point, some people like charismatic characters, others like more down to earth fellas and gals. Its kind of like what kind of soda do you like, we all have our preferred flavors, and I respect that. However what I don't like is when people pick up a drink that THEY DON'T LIKE, look at it, and smash it to the floor and say "I hate this soda cuz its not what I like", than find another! Why pick it up in the first place? Don't block someone's else fun.

GunnerGalactico
08-19-2014, 06:36 PM
Stock, if you're weirded out by 'connor fans' or 'tumblr fans' just redirect that weirdness to me.

Because unlike every other respectable member here I'm pretty much the epitome of disturbing connor/tumblr stuff.

And I'm not offended by critisizms. I find them amusing.

As long as they don't get repetative.

@ Mayrice

I was not talking about you, in fact the only weird pic you posted was the one with Ezio in the Haytham Thread :p

CSKarasu
08-19-2014, 06:42 PM
Than why debate? The point of debating is going through and analyzing every inch of your opponent's argument, exploit any weaknesses and counter with a better point and information until one has the better argument and the other cannot truly respond. Thats kind of like me going to a Debate Club, and saying "Hey guys I have other stuff to do, can you make this like 5 minutes for me?" , when debates on topics within a Debate Club always go much longer than that.

Telling me to leave and yet you can't properly sit down and listen for a while since you got "other stuff" to do. How about this? What would do to make Connor more interesting and realistic for that time period, and after going through all that trials and tribulation? I cannot see a lucky-to-go guy moving around in those days, if anything I'd be afraid of such a person, as people like that will snap and turn psychopathic. Need I remind you again he is a emotional wreak due to the destruction of his village and burning of his mother? The boy was 5, seeing his own mom BURNING.....Google burned victims and tell me how can the mind of a 5 year old recover from seeing such a view like that? Of course the man will be more serious than most people! But like I said, how would you make him differently?

Although I will give you a point, some people like charismatic characters, others like more down to earth fellas and gals. Its kind of like what kind of soda do you like, we all have our preferred flavors, and I respect that. However what I don't like is when people pick up a drink that THEY DON'T LIKE, look at it, and smash it to the floor and say "I hate this soda cuz its not what I like", than find another! Why pick it up in the first place? Don't block someone's else fun.

As William Strunk said "A sentence should contain no unnecessary words, a paragraph no unnecessary sentences, for the same reason that a drawing should have no unnecessary lines and a machine no unnecessary parts", or even simpler: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l1YmS_VDvMY

On the subject of Connor, yes being an emotional wreck is realistic in that situation, regardless that's no excuse not to be engaging. How would I make him different? I'd make him less serious, the events of the past would have still affected him but not controlled his life. I'd also give him his own brotherhood so there is more camaraderie and more to bring him out of his shell (ACIV did this well). I'd also make his speech less clipped and more expansive.

It is totally a matter of opinion, which this forum is for. I don't think it's a matter of liking or not liking charisma either, it's about being engaged. There have been plenty of plenty of uncharismatic characters that engage players, but those uncharismatic characters have strong personality.

RinoTheBouncer
08-19-2014, 06:49 PM
I don’t understand why many people dislike him. I mean he’s not my No.1, Ezio’s my No.1 but he’s my No.2 or if I may, I could put Ezio, Connor and Altair on one rank called “The Greatest Assassins” because each one was totally different and special in their own ways, and they are almost equally great and influential. Connor was just not the type of character the majority likes.

Connor was written exactly as someone in his situation, in reality would become. He doesn’t have to be ideal, he doesn’t have to be what you expect him to be, he also doesn’t have to do the right thing. He’s a character and he’s under the influence of society and the actions of others towards him and life will change him in different ways and affect him in a different way than it affects other people, because we’re all different and we’re all affected by and react to life differently even if we were all in the same situation

I guess people are really obsessed with seeing the right thing and the ideal thing being portrayed in art while I think that’s not right. Art should be telling stories, portraying different cases in society and they don’t have to be ideal. Connor could be a racist, misogynist, rude, he can also be kind, respectful, compassionate, peaceful and forgiving, he could be straight, gay, bisexual, he could be funny, gloomy, dramatic, cold-hearted. He could be anything you can imagine and still make a good character. The problem is that people can’t tell the difference between a good character, a bad character and a realistic character. Most people expect the protagonist to be ideal even when his story demands that he becomes something different.

ACIII is not my No.1 AC game but it’s definitely more dear to me than ACIV, ACL and probably AC:U. The only disappointing part was the ending of Desmond’s story which was badly directed. I’m not talking about being happy or sad, but badly made. Otherwise, Connor’s character and his story were perfect.

Connor became exactly what life shaped him to become. It wasn’t his choice to become what he became. It’s not like he woke up on his expensive alligator leather sofa in his lavish home with his family and the maids all around and decided to be cold and stone-hearted just because he thought it’s cool to do so. He lead a life that would break most of us if we were in his place and I appreciate what and who he is because he’s true to the role, rather than being the typical hero, the common Hollywood characters who’s either the perfectly ideal hero who does nothing wrong or the a**hole who eventually finds meaning in life and decides to change and give life a meaning or the loser who has no chance in hell with the pretty girl and decides to become a hero out of nowhere and she falls for him.

Connor was a product of the world he lived and he was a very realistic and a believable one. It may be strange to hear me say that since Ezio who’s kind of an opposite to Connor is my No.1, but I love diversity and Connor has so much potential despite the completely different personality and method of Ezio.

JustPlainQuirky
08-19-2014, 06:51 PM
@ Mayrice

I was not talking about you, in fact the only weird pic you posted was the one with Ezio in the Haytham Thread :p

...Hm..

Then I haven't been doing my job well enough.

CSKarasu
08-19-2014, 06:53 PM
Connor became exactly what life shaped him to become. .

I've seen a lot of people who have suffered extreme pain, hardship and adversity, and been happier than most regular people. While it is likely the situation would turn someone into an emotional wreck, it is not a certainty, as people are varied and grow in different ways.

SpiritOfNevaeh
08-19-2014, 07:00 PM
I've seen a lot of people who have suffered extreme pain, hardship and adversity, and been happier than most regular people. While it is likely the situation would turn someone into an emotional wreck, it is not a certainty, as people are varied and grow in different ways.

Exactly. So why should Connor go the same way other people have gone already?

Thats what makes him unique because he went through a different experience that most.

joelsantos24
08-19-2014, 07:07 PM
http://tommcfarlin.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/escalated-quickly.jpg

RinoTheBouncer
08-19-2014, 07:10 PM
I've seen a lot of people who have suffered extreme pain, hardship and adversity, and been happier than most regular people. While it is likely the situation would turn someone into an emotional wreck, it is not a certainty, as people are varied and grow in different ways.

That’s exactly my point, if you read my post. People kind of blamed him for being that way while it’s just the combination of life with his personality and right and wrong decisions. He was real, not idea. And I know many others could be completely different but here, they’re showing the story of someone who happened to turned out this way, and I personally embraced it for what it is and appreciated that fact about it.

I appreciated how they showed different kinds of emotional wrecks, I mean Altair, if anything, he was wrecked since he was a child yet he became a completely different person because he was in a different atmosphere and he had a different personality.

GunnerGalactico
08-19-2014, 07:12 PM
And not to mention, Ezio allowed his emotions to get the better of him at times. Particularly after that time he killed Vieri de Pazzi.

Jexx21
08-19-2014, 07:26 PM
CSKarasu, for the same reasons you dislike Connor, other people like him because of those characteristics.

However, calling him one-dimensional is kind of ignoring his many characteristics. It's fine if you don't like the character, it's fine if you think his story was poorly executed, but the character of Connor himself is not really one-dimensional, as he has many different facets. Maybe you don't see those facets, and that's alright, but he's not a "bad character."

Namikaze_17
08-19-2014, 07:36 PM
( Sigh) Can someone please get StocktonBrawler out of these forums? Because I personally think he's crossed the line in calling me and other Connor fans unattractive and overweight flamboyant fanboys/ fangirls....

I'll have EVERYONE know that I'm none of those things...all of these generalizations are highly offensive and attention-seeking as right now I could argue, yell, or do the same as stock and his immature ways, but I won't because unlike him, I respect other members opinions and don't try to cast a generalization on any of them.

Thank you... ^.^

Assassin_M
08-19-2014, 07:53 PM
What really baffles me about this thread is that someone like Mr.Black--who quite frankly was not rude at all--gets called out by OP and told to stay out of this thread but someone like Stock--who I wont even describe because I wont bother to lower my level to his--makes flaming posts, insulting a lot of people. I was banned for a post on the Watch Dogs forums a few weeks ago because someone made a post about how inaccurate Chicago was but then decided to turn it into a thread, so I said "You HAD to make it a thread? lol"

I have PAWNED, literally, PAWNED stock and his "arguments" and it took 3 members (me, Sesh and I) to just explain to him how wrong his argument style is. Stock is a burned card now, it'd be better if everyone ignored him. He realized his failure so he's only trying to save face.
HumanTowel is HumanTowel, he's fine.
OP on the other hand is a hypocrite.

Jexx21
08-19-2014, 07:59 PM
humantowel is in this thread?

CSKarasu
08-19-2014, 08:00 PM
@Assassin_M IIRC stockton made the inflammatory comment after I posted @mr.black. I don't condone his comment at all.

If anything I'd rather you and stockton took the flaming elsewhere, because you're shutting down an interesting discussion.

TheHumanTowel
08-19-2014, 08:00 PM
HumanTowel is HumanTowel
How dare you.

Namikaze_17
08-19-2014, 08:01 PM
@M

You should've been here when this thread first started...

I was basically like: "This is Another Bait Thread"

And the hypocritical OP has the nerve to say I shouldn't post if I don't anything meaningful to say, but when other people post meaningful things, OP dusts them off and calls them wrong and incorrect. Yet Stock posts obscene and insulting Comments yet OP says and does nothing about it.

ze_topazio
08-19-2014, 08:06 PM
http://www.narutoforums.com/images/smilies/series2/899e1ad6.gif

Xstantin
08-19-2014, 08:07 PM
connor was a great character i mean better than Arno will be ubisoft think ac unity story is gonna be great and great characters

Unity:
Arno: he want justice,revenge,love for elise lol.. still not better character than connor...
Elise: burned with revenge, and love for arno the(most flat character in ac universe its worse than maria from ac1)
Unity----SOAP OPERA. I would never call this game Assassin's Creed.

You've never played as the dude and you make soap opera statements. Jesus H Christ.

Assassin_M
08-19-2014, 08:07 PM
Me neither but the robe probably helped him stay incognito for the sequence, the guards were looking for him after all. The only reason the first few guards knew who he was is because he basically walks out of his front door, who else could be in the Auditore residence?
Oh really? I never noticed that...I would have thought the robe would have made him MORE notorious:p


Teenagers can be *******s and he was probably particularly impatient, nervous, and angry after what happened. I don't think the average person is going to be calm and cool during such a time, especially not Ezio.
Aha, point conceded. To be honest, that bit of criticism was aimed at people who call Connor a rude a-hole for his arguments with Achilles, not realizing he was only 2 years older than Ezio when the first argument happened.


Ah I did love that movie, I can't recall its details at this moment well but I trust you so I'll concede.
I did like it a lot too. I talking about it makes me want to watch it again.


Oh yeah. No way Giovanni could have known Savonarola lol.
Yeah, he was entirely circumstantial.


Indeed, it's stopped me dead in my tracks many a time.
Yup


I don't know I just think the Templars have shown themselves to be much more resourceful than to be defeated even if the head is chopped off.
Situations can differ, especially since the Templar Order of Brotherhood wasn't exactly a cohesive unit.


Well in sequence 8 he's not in perfect health and can't do much, and then in 9 he's just escaping Viana when you show up. In the original scenario he would have had more time to make plans.
well, it's just the first couple of missions that he's not in perfect health but then a few months later and he's fine again. That is my point, it took him 4 years to assemble anything close to an army.


Poor guy got demoted to mercenary level intelligence too.
lower than that, he couldn't make out the rest of the plan without Ezio having to spell it ALL out for him.


I knew there was something lol I just couldn't remember perfectly.
hehe:p



Actually HDinHB had a much more compelling argument than mine imo lol

"Ezio didn't need to be taught the climb leap as much as he wanted Rosa to teach it to him. Of course he had to settle for Franco's culo."
Which actually makes sense so i'll concede.


I like a good debate. Most of my ragey posts are often just me amusing myself with the complaining. I did it when I first joined IGN forums too lol.
And how surplus is the complaining at IGN...

CSKarasu
08-19-2014, 08:11 PM
CSKarasu, for the same reasons you dislike Connor, other people like him because of those characteristics.

However, calling him one-dimensional is kind of ignoring his many characteristics. It's fine if you don't like the character, it's fine if you think his story was poorly executed, but the character of Connor himself is not really one-dimensional, as he has many different facets. Maybe you don't see those facets, and that's alright, but he's not a "bad character."

You're right he's not one-dimensional, he's angry, or serious. That's another facet.

Haytham had just as traumatic an upbringing and still was engaging on some level, and his sly digs at Connor were gold.

Assassin_M
08-19-2014, 08:11 PM
connor was a great character i mean better than Arno will be ubisoft think ac unity story is gonna be great and great characters

Unity:
Arno: he want justice,revenge,love for elise lol.. still not better character than connor...
Elise: burned with revenge, and love for arno the(most flat character in ac universe its worse than maria from ac1)
Unity----SOAP OPERA. I would never call this game Assassin's Creed.
Can you please tell me how long the story mode is? I always wanted to know.


How dare you.
Love you


@Assassin_M IIRC stockton made the inflammatory comment after I posted @mr.black. I don't condone his comment at all.

If anything I'd rather you and stockton took the flaming elsewhere, because you're shutting down an interesting discussion.
After or before, why didn't you reply to him as well if you're dealing "lectures of discipline" left and right?

I didn't flame anyone, so AGAIN, speak to stock only because quite frankly, he's the only one in this thread shutting down anything remotely interesting.
If you want an interesting discussion, I have replied to your OP.

I propose everyone ignore stock and continuing this because it IS interesting.

Assassin_M
08-19-2014, 08:14 PM
You're right he's not one-dimensional, he's angry, or serious. That's another facet.

Haytham had just as traumatic and upbringing and still was engaging on some level, his sly digs at Connor were gold.
The difference between Haytham and Connor is that for most of the game, Connor is a 20 something year old. Haytham was 34 when he arrived in the colonies. Connor's experience was a lot more recent than Haytham's

Also, do you realize that you're asking for copy-paste characters? "I know people who went through trauma but are happy" "Haytham went through trauma and he was fine" Connor is Connor, he's not Haytham and he's not your friends. I just can't take you seriously when you say that he was ONLY serious or angry...that's just wrong.

Sesheenku
08-19-2014, 09:24 PM
Oh really? I never noticed that...I would have thought the robe would have made him MORE notorious:p

You know how it works in this game, hood=invisible. Lol. In all seriousness though, the guards probably were looking for him in his Auditore er... uniform? Lol All the Audtiore dress the same.


Aha, point conceded. To be honest, that bit of criticism was aimed at people who call Connor a rude a-hole for his arguments with Achilles, not realizing he was only 2 years older than Ezio when the first argument happened.

Ah I don't think he's rude, I think his attitude is realistic, my only gripe is that realistic or not he feels dull to me personally.



I did like it a lot too. I talking about it makes me want to watch it again.

I'll do it the next time I beat AC1 and go to replay 2.


Yeah, he was entirely circumstantial.

Ezio's reclaiming of the apple was... insane he went to spain and back I wonder why the hell Ubisoft stretched it out so crazy.
Yup



Situations can differ, especially since the Templar Order of Brotherhood wasn't exactly a cohesive unit.

Ah yes... the Borgia were kind of a break off from the Templars and the Templars referred to their rule as the dark age of the order I guess they wouldn't help them out either. I'll concede.


well, it's just the first couple of missions that he's not in perfect health but then a few months later and he's fine again. That is my point, it took him 4 years to assemble anything close to an army.

I suppose I can't argue, it was based on my previous point which I conceded ;P


lower than that, he couldn't make out the rest of the plan without Ezio having to spell it ALL out for him.

Not a good mix when you have a loud mouth character that you go and make dumber lol.



Which actually makes sense so i'll concede.

Ezio confirmed for *** man!


And how surplus is the complaining at IGN...

Surprisingly they were very calm, I think they could tell I wasn't serious with the rage ;P

jeordievera
08-19-2014, 09:29 PM
http://gifatron.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/get_a_room.gif

Sesheenku
08-19-2014, 09:48 PM
http://gifatron.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/get_a_room.gif

We need a third baby, wanna join ; )?

Assassin_M
08-19-2014, 09:59 PM
You know how it works in this game, hood=invisible. Lol. In all seriousness though, the guards probably were looking for him in his Auditore er... uniform? Lol All the Audtiore dress the same.
Yeah, I noticed it too...during the first sequence, Ezio's gang all dressed the same.


Ah I don't think he's rude, I think his attitude is realistic, my only gripe is that realistic or not he feels dull to me personally.
I wasn't referring to you, I don't think you ever said anything about the fight between Connor and Achilles, it was at others like Stock who would hate Connor because he was a "murderous, demonic, disgusting bastard" while at the same time like Ezio when he was no different from Connor. I understand how he can feel dull so I wont argue with you there.


I'll do it the next time I beat AC1 and go to replay 2.
Just finished watching it:p


Ezio's reclaiming of the apple was... insane he went to spain and back I wonder why the hell Ubisoft stretched it out so crazy.
Historical constrictions, I guess...Ezio ONLY came to Florence in 1498, which leaves a 5 year gap.


Ah yes... the Borgia were kind of a break off from the Templars and the Templars referred to their rule as the dark age of the order I guess they wouldn't help them out either. I'll concede.
Yeah, they were all a bunch of weirdos with power fetishes.


I suppose I can't argue, it was based on my previous point which I conceded ;P
fine:cool:


Not a good mix when you have a loud mouth character that you go and make dumber lol.
indeed, makes it feel contrived.


Ezio confirmed for *** man!
Hahahaha


Surprisingly they were very calm, I think they could tell I wasn't serious with the rage ;P
that IS surprising.

Sesheenku
08-19-2014, 10:42 PM
Yeah, I noticed it too...during the first sequence, Ezio's gang all dressed the same.

Lol It seemed odd to me how all the Pazzi and Auditore dress in their own little uniform.


I wasn't referring to you, I don't think you ever said anything about the fight between Connor and Achilles, it was at others like Stock who would hate Connor because he was a "murderous, demonic, disgusting bastard" while at the same time like Ezio when he was no different from Connor. I understand how he can feel dull so I wont argue with you there.

I know, just clarifying my thoughts on Connor


Historical constrictions, I guess...Ezio ONLY came to Florence in 1498, which leaves a 5 year gap.

Amusing how his story was already the longest in AC2 alone and then they made a ton of sequels and uh... midquels.


Yeah, they were all a bunch of weirdos with power fetishes.

Indeed.


indeed, makes it feel contrived.

Least they didn't ruin La Volpe.



that IS surprising.

Indeed, the AC forum there is a very calm and collected bunch of people. They're not bothered with my trollish rage posts.