PDA

View Full Version : How could a WWII Assassin's Creed work?



Cactiii
01-19-2015, 12:10 AM
Talk of WWII in Assassin's Creed always sparks up, and usually is met with the contrast of "too many guns would ruin the game" and "but there's so much cool stuff happening in WWII, they have to find some way!" so one has to wonder if it could possibly work. Guns are a big issue, but WWII is still 'recent' memory. Even if games get away with killing swathes of Nazis, it's still going to be a bit weird to see a protagonist stab Goebbels or somehow be involved in Patton's death. Here's a few musings on how it could work:

-Large guns are pick-ups, like in III and IV. This reduces reliance on large guns; the protagonist could have a small pistol, which is weak in actual combat, requiring multiple shots to kill someone, but can kill people with an aimed headshot. Most enemies would have bayonets or trowels or something to fight with in melee, and an enemy with a flamethrower could prove to be a really cool semi-boss archetype, someone impossible to take down conventionally. In addition, most Japanese officers had swords, so that could play well in a game set in the eastern theatre.

-Setting: there's a lot of different options here. Berlin, Amsterdam, Nanjing and New York/Boston are probably the most interesting to me.
Berlin could start after WWI and show us the fall of an assassin organization to the templars' Nazi party, and potentially end well into the cold war. This would, of course, allow for the assassinations of Hitler and Goebbels- two major reasons why it would be popular.
Amsterdam allows us to see a similar failure of the assassins in a setting which would be like a mix of II's Venice and III's New York, allowing us to meet American, British, French and German characters. I think that, outside of Berlin, Amsterdam would be the most interesting WWII setting in Europe because we've already seen glimpses of Paris in Unity but Amsterdam has such a unique styling that it would be an interesting change.
Nanjing is my favorite choice. We get to start in '32, with Japanese occupation of Manchuria, and see the entire Chinese civil war at play, as well as the infamous Rape of Nanjing in the Sino-Japanese War, which would likely be the main setting. Getting to meet Sun-Yat Sen, Mao Ze**** and Jiang Jieshi- some of the most important figures in China in the past century- would be very interesting, especially with Mao being an ultimate Templar victory and Jiang could be an interesting, conflicted character.
Finally, America as a setting would allow us to see the iconic 1940's fashions and propaganda, but obviously there wasn't any conflict in the mainland USA. As such, I think this would be less interesting as a choice, but if it focuses on secret battle between Templars and Assassins it could possibly work.


So, apart from inciting the WWII debate again, does anybody have any discussion? I think that automatically writing off WWII for having guns is a bit naive, because that's what we did for ACIII and guns certainly weren't the problem then. It just means more emphasis on stealth than combat.

EmbodyingSeven5
01-19-2015, 12:25 AM
I would love an WW2 game. but ubi would have to work hard to not demonize the Templars. I agree on Amsterdam being a main city. maybe the Frank Family can make an appearance in game.

EmptyCrustacean
01-19-2015, 12:35 AM
ACIII began a lot of problems within this barely holding on franchise and one of them was the introduction of fast functioning guns. Once you bring semi autos/assault rifles into the equation there's no going back. People will be so used to the fastness of it all that going back to hidden blades and rope darts just won't cut it. Your suggestion to de-power the guns defeats one of the main appeals of playing in WWII setting in the first place. Ubisoft shouldn't have to de-power the mechanics just to make it feel like an AC game.

wickywoowoo
01-19-2015, 12:40 AM
I will only like a WW2 game if Ubisoft are choosing to end the franchise and it is moving towards a final game in modern times where breaking series traditions does not really matter anymore.

So many games have been set in war and this especially, there just is no need.

JamesFaith007
01-19-2015, 12:43 AM
1) Bayonets - Soldiers in WWII didn't used bayonets in cities - and there have to be big city with enemy guards.

Bayonets in AC3 - AC5 were used in cities because there were in era of one shot rifle. In WWII we already have magazines with multiple rounds Which means nearly all conflict in cities would have to be resolved with guns to look reliable. And even outside city soldiers never left bayonets on rifles, because shooting with them was less accurate. They used them mostly only during attack on enemy trench, or when such attack is led against them and enemy is already too close.

2) Guns in WWII - idea using only pistols looks good when only alternative is long obstructive rifle. But you forgot that in WWII we had working compromise - submachine guns. They were widely used by city police - look on any WWII movie form occupied country in Europe and you will see only Germans with submachine guns guarding streets. And some of them even can be hidden under coat. Assassin surely wouldn't skip such weapons and implementation of automatic gun would definitely have big impact on gameplay.

3) More guns, more stealth - this is popular argument but main problem is that AC never was pure stealth game like Splinter Cell or Thief. It is hybrid of stealth game, action game and parkour. Making one of these approach too much superior to others would be big mistake from Ubi, because every player have different taste and want different mixture of these three elements. You can add new features in such hybrid game (like naval fights) but you have to left core elements in balance or you are risking alienating of part of fanbase.

And I say this as someone who sneaked through nearly all missions and is fan of stealth game since Thief 1 release.

Just my two cents.

Assassin_M
01-19-2015, 12:55 AM
Here's how: Don't make an AC game about it.

I'm already dreading Victory and what it means for the franchise.

Perk89
01-19-2015, 01:05 AM
I'm all for it. Would be an excellent stealth setting. Tons of opportunities.

Perk89
01-19-2015, 01:07 AM
Here's how: Don't make an AC game about it.

I'm already dreading Victory and what it means for the franchise.


The series doesn't "mean" anything other than the Assassins Vs the Templars. Everything else is a product of the setting. That setting should and more importantly, must change in order to keep the game progressing,

Perk89
01-19-2015, 01:08 AM
I would love an WW2 game. but ubi would have to work hard to not demonize the Templars. I agree on Amsterdam being a main city. maybe the Frank Family can make an appearance in game.

Little late for that, we already the terrible things that Templars did in WW2. In true Templar style, they slaughtered millions for no other reason than to attain power.

i for one would be delighted that we would finally be getting a game that showcases who the Templars truly are again.

GoldenBoy9999
01-19-2015, 01:45 AM
But WWII is mainly a gun war. People didn't charge with bayonets. You won't find soldiers hopping around stabbing at each other, they will use their guns.

And I doubt that many Japanese soldiers used a whole lot of swords. It would be a last resort, like a knife.

Assassin_M
01-19-2015, 01:46 AM
The series doesn't "mean" anything other than the Assassins Vs the Templars. Everything else is a product of the setting. That setting should and more importantly, must change in order to keep the game progressing,
No, AC is not a traditional shooter. At least until Victory is announced. GTA would not suddenly be set during Medieval times. There's something called genre. If it changes, then it's not the same anymore to me.

Perk89
01-19-2015, 01:49 AM
But WWII is mainly a gun war. People didn't charge with bayonets. You won't find soldiers hopping around stabbing at each other, they will use their guns.

And I doubt that many Japanese soldiers used a whole lot of swords. It would be a last resort, like a knife.



Better not get caught then.

Perk89
01-19-2015, 01:52 AM
No, AC is not a traditional shooter. At least until Victory is announced. GTA would not suddenly be set during Medieval times. There's something called genre. If it changes, then it's not the same anymore to me.

wait a scond, I'm confused, who said anything about making Assassins Creed a shooter

and in case you haven't noticed, taking a series out of its element and dropping into a whole new, unfamiliar environment has become not only fairly common in the gaming industry, it's been a pretty succesful maneuver.

brotersinarms
01-19-2015, 02:02 AM
Yeah i don't know if WW2 would work on a game like this. Don't get me wrong. WW2 games are my favorite genre, but i'm loving this Colonial Era (with Rogue, Assassins Creed 3 and Liberation). WW2 they would have to drastically change the game to meet with warfare weaponry in those times.

I think the Civil War would definitely work, given Warfare in those times wasn't "drastically" different (line fights, muskets etc). Personally, i'd love to see another Brothers In Arms (hence my name). Meanwhile, a game you may enjoy that oddly enough is similar to this, is Sniper Elite 3.

ALOT of crawling around, knifing enemies at the back, collecting intell, huge maps. Mostly all stealth. Its certainly not just about Sniping. Pretty decent game. As far as this, i'm sorry to see them go exclusive to Next Gen on the next game. I won't be doing that for another couple years (i just don't see the price tag matching the quality just yet).

Perk89
01-19-2015, 02:06 AM
The market is WIDE open right now for a WW2 setting game as well. What used to saturate the market is now ripe for the picking.

EmbodyingSeven5
01-19-2015, 02:18 AM
No, AC is not a traditional shooter. At least until Victory is announced. GTA would not suddenly be set during Medieval times. There's something called genre. If it changes, then it's not the same anymore to me.

have you ever played red dead redemption or bully? both great examples of what you can do if you experiment with your games.
the genre was clearly changed from GTA to bully and the game was still great.

brotersinarms
01-19-2015, 02:20 AM
The market is WIDE open right now for a WW2 setting game as well. What used to saturate the market is now ripe for the picking.

Well that's definitely true. Really the only big WW2 boom was actually on PS2 and few at the beginning of PS3 and 360. I wish they would come out with another Brothers in Arms, preferrably in the Battle of the Bulge with flashbacks of Normandy from the old PS 2 days.

AssassinHMS
01-19-2015, 03:32 AM
The series doesn't "mean" anything other than the Assassins Vs the Templars.
Actually there is nothing backing up that statement other than “all AC games so far have featured the Assassins Vs Templars struggle”. So I’m pretty sure that’s just your opinion.
You see, Ubisoft could very well make an AC game without Templars (a story all about the Assassin’s Creed and the protagonist for example). Besides, the whole "Freedom" Vs "Order" argument is overdone imo.


Everything else is a product of the setting. That setting should and more importantly, must change in order to keep the game progressing,
The setting is chosen to fit the gameplay and not the other way around, as you’re suggesting.
AC is an Assassin simulator. Everything else works for that, including the setting. In this case, the setting must include a sprawling city essential for good rooftop navigation (the Assassins’ highway and secondary playground) and for social stealth (crowds are, after all, the Assassin’s primary playground as well as their greatest asset).





No, AC is not a traditional shooter. At least until Victory is announced. GTA would not suddenly be set during Medieval times. There's something called genre. If it changes, then it's not the same anymore to me.

AC falls under the stealth game genre (type of video game that rewards the player for using stealth to avoid or overcome antagonists). A WWII AC wouldn’t turn it into a shooter unless the developers wanted that. While combat would be rebuilt from the ground up, stealth would work the same way and so would navigation. The AI would suffer some heavy changes but the traditional gameplay and situations that AC offered since AC1 would still work.

But I agree that it would feel quite different.

dargor5
01-19-2015, 03:39 AM
Why do people keep on thinking that in order to have an AC in WWII there has to be guns? Yes those are the main weapons in that age but an assassin in those times (and I believe there were lots) will not use guns as guns those days were not very silent, so still the silent assassin aproach with a hidden blade is still valid in this time, maybe not the melee combat, maybe an AC in WWII will be the AC that will require the most stealth aproach of all like Splinter Cell or Hitman. I'm not a fan of those games but I'm sure it can be worked out. Even having assassinations all over Europe not just one country.

Another thing is there were spies, this could also be job for an assassin not necessarily killing but spying, doing sabotage to equipment making plans fail.

Perk89
01-19-2015, 03:41 AM
Actually there is nothing backing up that statement other than “all AC games so far have featured the Assassins Vs Templars struggle”. So I’m pretty sure that’s just your opinion.
You see, Ubisoft could very well make an AC game without Templars (a story all about the Assassin’s Creed and the protagonist for example). Besides, the whole "Freedom" Vs "Order" argument is overdone imo.

Yes, I feel like every game be centered around that is enough basis for that "opinion"



The setting is chosen to fit the gameplay and not the other way around, as you’re suggesting.
AC is an Assassin simulator. Everything else works for that, including the setting. In this case, the setting must include a sprawling city essential for good rooftop navigation (the Assassins’ highway and secondary playground) and for social stealth (crowds are, after all, the Assassin’s primary playground as well as their greatest asset).


Speaking of being featured in every game. I can think of three that don't support your statement. If "city gameplay" and "social stealth" are the absolute defining features of the game, then it's really weird that I can name three games (and a half if we're including Liberation) that don't back up that idea at all. Weird that they would feel comfortable completely minimizing something that the game supposedly cannot do without.

Perk89
01-19-2015, 03:43 AM
Some of the games that I've played that feature the least amount of combat have the most amount of guns.


amazing how that works isn't it,?

AssassinHMS
01-19-2015, 04:02 AM
Yes, I feel like every game be centered around that is enough basis for that "opinion"

Ok, suit yourself. But you do realize there is nothing stopping Ubisoft from replacing Templars with some other faction that has opposite goals/ideals to the Assassins and still call the game “Assassin’s Creed”.




Speaking of being featured in every game. I can think of three that don't support your statement. If "city gameplay" and "social stealth" are the absolute defining features of the game, then it's really weird that I can name three games (and a half if we're including Liberation) that don't back up that idea at all. Weird that they would feel comfortable completely minimizing something that the game supposedly cannot do without.
It’s quite the opposite in fact. None of those games you’re thinking of did away with the urban landscape (they couldn’t do it), they only minimized it (which robbed the spotlight from the core mechanics and only helped damage the whole “Assassin simulator” aspect).
Regardless, I dare you to say Ubisoft would do an AC game in a deserted land, like Red Dead Redemption's. It would be laughable. No social stealth, no rooftop navigation, etc.

So you see. Gameplay comes first, setting comes afterwards.

D.I.D.
01-19-2015, 04:03 AM
To retain the sense of the game's basic design, it would have to be the most stealth-based AC ever. Your attacks would be very reliant on skill: a mixture of close quarters stealth kills and highly accurate shooting. I'd expect it to revolve around a trade-off between kills and noise, where each shot would reveal your position and you'd need to quickly move to a different rooftop to avoid incoming enemies and attacks.

The trouble with superpowered game heroes in games based on recent wars is that the start to look disrespectful to the real soldiers, on top of the problems of "game-ifying" such an event. Wolfenstein: The New Order felt very strange, because it was trying to depict its version of the war in a serious way. Even though it was a ridiculous alternative history, it tried to respect the kinds of struggle resistance movements went through and make its characters very human. This created a problem with Blaskowicz himself. NPCs kept talking about the weirdness of his ability to survive punishment, and this combined with the things I witnessed in the game made me expect a revelation of something supernatural about him. This moment never came, and in the end I felt a bit unsettled about the game. Making Blaskowicz so ridiculously competent seemed like a disservice to the bravery of the real soldiers, who were well aware of their fragility and yet fought anyway until their bodies and minds were destroyed.

If the games ever do stray into modern conflicts, they need to reflect the way modern weapons changed warfare. It could even be to the games' benefit - I've always wanted to see one of these games present knots in the world where your assassin can watch from a distance and realise that going into that spot is suicide. Unity came the closest to providing that ability to assess a situation and decide upon finding an alternative route, and a WWII game would have to be even more strict about that. The topic of respecting the deadly nature of '30s/'40s warfare begs the question of where the line should be on any war, since armed conquest has never been a picnic for the participants. I'd like to see the games getting away from wars and revolutions in any case, since I really take issue with the idea that a tour of history should be a tour of wars. Hopefully Victory will be a good palette-cleanser.

Cactiii
01-19-2015, 04:32 AM
To retain the sense of the game's basic design, it would have to be the most stealth-based AC ever. Your attacks would be very reliant on skill: a mixture of close quarters stealth kills and highly accurate shooting. I'd expect it to revolve around a trade-off between kills and noise, where each shot would reveal your position and you'd need to quickly move to a different rooftop to avoid incoming enemies and attacks.

The trouble with superpowered game heroes in games based on recent wars is that the start to look disrespectful to the real soldiers, on top of the problems of "game-ifying" such an event. Wolfenstein: The New Order felt very strange, because it was trying to depict its version of the war in a serious way. Even though it was a ridiculous alternative history, it tried to respect the kinds of struggle resistance movements went through and make its characters very human. This created a problem with Blaskowicz himself. NPCs kept talking about the weirdness of his ability to survive punishment, and this combined with the things I witnessed in the game made me expect a revelation of something supernatural about him. This moment never came, and in the end I felt a bit unsettled about the game. Making Blaskowicz so ridiculously competent seemed like a disservice to the bravery of the real soldiers, who were well aware of their fragility and yet fought anyway until their bodies and minds were destroyed.

If the games ever do stray into modern conflicts, they need to reflect the way modern weapons changed warfare. It could even be to the games' benefit - I've always wanted to see one of these games present knots in the world where your assassin can watch from a distance and realise that going into that spot is suicide. Unity came the closest to providing that ability to assess a situation and decide upon finding an alternative route, and a WWII game would have to be even more strict about that. The topic of respecting the deadly nature of '30s/'40s warfare begs the question of where the line should be on any war, since armed conquest has never been a picnic for the participants. I'd like to see the games getting away from wars and revolutions in any case, since I really take issue with the idea that a tour of history should be a tour of wars. Hopefully Victory will be a good palette-cleanser.

I think that this becomes more and more of an issue the closer to modern times we get. It seems perfectly fine for Ezio to slaughter guards we know nothing about 500 years in the past, and its okay for Arno to slaughter guards in the French Revolution because we know how many people died, but when it comes to slaughtering fictional versions of our grandparents it just seems... Off. It already felt odd to me, as an American, to massacre American soldiers just standing guard in the Revolutionary War, but it would seem even weirder to slaughter conscripts whose stories we would know in WWII.

As for guns, semi-automatic and automatic weapons obviously make it difficult, and someone argued that soldiers didn't use bayonets in cities- but then, doorknobs weren't invented 1878 but that doesn't mean we find it weird to use them in games. I think we would be fine with Ubisoft taking some artistic license by making soldiers more likely to use melee in close combat. It would mean that your goal would be to try and get in close to initiate combat, before you can get gunned down from afar. It would also allow for some refreshing archetypes.
-Regular soldiers: long guns with bayonets. Try and shoot you at range, taking a while to line up a shot. After you get close enough, they start fighting like troops in AC3 with bayonets or by beating you with guns.
-Submachine gun users: faster to start shooting than regular soldiers, but less accurate and less damaging. When you fight them, they back up to start shooting with the machine gun instead of initiating melee.
-Japanese officers: These would be like Unity's enemies. They fight with the sword, occasionally taking shots with sidearms like a revolver.

Actual machine gunners or snipers would be rare, usually situated in a window or something making it so that you have to be sneaky when in their sightlines and flank them to get rid of them. They would be like assassination side missions: "there's a sniper in the building killing our soldiers! Take him out!"

I think that setting the game in China would be best, gameplay-wise. 20 million Chinese people died, there were famous events like the Rape of Nanking, and famous figures, like the Mao, Jiang Jieshi or the two Japanese officers who had a competition to see how many soldiers they could kill in one day in Nanking. The Japanese also got up close and personal more often than in Europe- think of Banzai charges. The biggest problem would be respectfully portraying the rape of Nanking, which I think could potentially make for an incredible setting.

phoenix-force411
01-19-2015, 05:11 AM
Unity combat + enemies with guns = dead assassin... I don't even think the hidden blade would matter anymore.

VestigialLlama4
01-19-2015, 07:57 AM
The biggest problem would be respectfully portraying the rape of Nanking, which I think could potentially make for an incredible setting.

The real problem with a WW2 Assassin's Creed game is quite simply an event known as "The Holocaust":

The fact is that while you are prancing around trendy wartorn European cities and doing leaps-of-faith off the top of cathedrals or Dams, people are being killed daily in concentration camps, all eleven million of them. An open world game by its very nature promises freedom and exploration, so theoretically you have to wonder why your Assassin super-soldier can't save all those people being gassed, raped and made into soap. WW2 games generally avoid dealing with the Holocaust but they are mostly from a soldier's point of view, as such its a shooting game, no exploration and no objectives aside from what your Commanding Officer gives you. The Saboteur being a Tarantino version of history also avoided it even if the logic of an open world game really feels hollow to anyone who knew the history of Occupied Paris at the time.

They have to explain and justify why the Assassins did not save those people, why these self-annointed superheroes with great physical abilities, intelligence, resources were powerless and they have to show why punishing random Templars is more important, than I don't know, stopping industrialized mass murder. The only way it would make sense is if whole sections of European Assassins were gassed in Treblinka And then what if you decide to put trendy collectibles like "Armor of Resistance" or side-quests. How does that make any sense in the middle of a bloody warzone? I mean this situation is a problem with the first Captain America movie as well (avoid mentioning the Holocaust since it would tarnish any warm "heroic" myth of the character).

Ideally if you want to deal with Hitler and Nazism, then the perfect setting is 20s Berlin. That was a time of economic depression, creative explosion in arts, trendy new architecture, you have lots of famous scientists and artists to hang out, you also have a stealthy gameplay and modern weaponry. And the historical quest isn't too offensive. You can have a coda, where the Soviets are invading Berlin and you have to sneak into Hitler's bunker and kill him.

VestigialLlama4
01-19-2015, 08:27 AM
The trouble with superpowered game heroes in games based on recent wars is that the start to look disrespectful to the real soldiers, on top of the problems of "game-ifying" such an event.

You have actually hit at a real problem in game design which nobody has considered to solve. How to make your character's abilities and actions convincing and worthy of reward. I mean by default the player character is the most powerful being in the universe. So theoretically nothing should stands in its way. Soldier games have you be the character with an endless arsenal who can master different kinds of weapons - Rifles, Machine Guns, Sniper, Bazooka and so on, when a lot of these weapons require highly specialized skills from real-life soldiers. Bazookas are heavy to carry, usually have a two man crew, and they have to be fired with care. Same with snipers (who have spotters working alongside them and so on). Even in AC games, your character can master and wield different weapons like a Swiss Army weapon when many of these weapons are highly specialized. There's no way anyone with a lithe physique like Ezio should be able to wield an Axe or a Broadsword that the Brutes believably can do so.

Ideally they should shift towards realism, limited weapons - The ICO/Shadow of the Colossus Approach.



I'd like to see the games getting away from wars and revolutions in any case, since I really take issue with the idea that a tour of history should be a tour of wars. Hopefully Victory will be a good palette-cleanser.

That I agree on. Wars and Revolutions can be great settings, challening settings, they can provide amazing gameplay settings, but it requires a great deal of guts and creativity and ubisoft has none of that at the moment.

Zafar1981
01-19-2015, 09:18 AM
Talk of WWII in Assassin's Creed always sparks up, and usually is met with the contrast of "too many guns would ruin the game" and "but there's so much cool stuff happening in WWII, they have to find some way!" so one has to wonder if it could possibly work. Guns are a big issue, but WWII is still 'recent' memory. Even if games get away with killing swathes of Nazis, it's still going to be a bit weird to see a protagonist stab Goebbels or somehow be involved in Patton's death. Here's a few musings on how it could work:

​OMG what a brilliant idea. Man I am so much anticipated about that game. We never had a game set in WWII and making an AC game in WWII setting is an awesome idea. The name of the game should be Assassin's Creed: Call of Duty or Medal of Honer or Commandos. It should have DLC Allied Assault, Pacific Assault and Commandos Strike Force. I think it should be a first person shooter game and it support the FPS modern day game play. Instead of hidden blade there is a hidden gun, hidden grenades and hidden farts.

Then this came should have a sequel and we call it Assassin's Creed: Modern Warfare or Battlefield. It have a DLC Black OPS and Black OPS 2

Then another sequel Assassin's Creed: Advance Warfare and it will have a DLC Ghost,

The_Kiwi_
01-19-2015, 09:20 AM
It couldn't.

killzab
01-19-2015, 09:27 AM
I'd love a game set in Berlin during WWII, it's pretty unusual since most WWII games took place in occupied countries. If we could play in the center of the Third Reich it would allow for a more quiet, noir ambiance I think. It reduces the risk of there being too much action.

The plot could be about sabotaging the Nazi/templar activites in Berlin with great stealth opportunities in their HQ.

You could have SOME gunfights but they should be very punishing (one - two bullets and you're dead). That would force stealth even more than Unity pretended to...

JamesFaith007
01-19-2015, 11:09 AM
Why do people keep on thinking that in order to have an AC in WWII there has to be guns? Yes those are the main weapons in that age but an assassin in those times (and I believe there were lots) will not use guns as guns those days were not very silent, so still the silent assassin aproach with a hidden blade is still valid in this time, maybe not the melee combat, maybe an AC in WWII will be the AC that will require the most stealth aproach of all like Splinter Cell or Hitman. I'm not a fan of those games but I'm sure it can be worked out. Even having assassinations all over Europe not just one country.

Another thing is there were spies, this could also be job for an assassin not necessarily killing but spying, doing sabotage to equipment making plans fail.

Actually this isn't true because since 1909 we have patented Maxim sound suppressors here.

There were silenced handguns (most known British Welrod), there were silenced submachine guns (De Lisle carbine, Sten Mark IIS) and there are even documented tests of potential sniper rifle with attached silencers like modified M-1 carbine and Mossberg.

And because Assassin were always little ahead with their equipment there is no reason to assume that WWII assassin wouldn't have access to arsenal of fully silenced guns of different types. As that hidden blade would become more symbol and reserve weapon then main solution.

Pr0metheus 1962
01-19-2015, 02:00 PM
I'll never understand why so many people want to turn AC into freaking CoD.

I don't want AC to be set in WW2 because we already have games that do that. AC2 has always promised to be different - its beauty lies in its ability to get us away from the run-of-the-mill settings for games and take us somewhere unusual.

If there has to be an AC game set in WW2, I'd be happy if the game was set in South America, or Casablanca, or the Holy Land again, or any neutral country - anywhere away from the war. But fighting Hitler? Please, no.

killzab
01-19-2015, 02:09 PM
I'll never understand why so many people want to turn AC into freaking CoD.

I don't want AC to be set in WW2 because we already have games that do that. AC2 has always promised to be different - its beauty lies in its ability to get us away from the run-of-the-mill settings for games and take us somewhere unusual.

If there has to be an AC game set in WW2, I'd be happy if the game was set in South America, or Casablanca, or the Holy Land again - anywhere away from the war. But fighting Hitler? Please, no.


Well... we're gonna have a ****load of games set in Victorian England this year ... so.... so much for originality with Victory ...

JamesFaith007
01-19-2015, 02:27 PM
Well... we're gonna have a ****load of games set in Victorian England this year ... so.... so much for originality with Victory ...

Well, to be fair, how many of them are set in real London, not just some alternative reality version or place using victorian architecture?

killzab
01-19-2015, 02:31 PM
Well, to be fair, how many of them are set in real London, not just some alternative reality version or place using victorian architecture?

They're still very similar ...

dargor5
01-19-2015, 03:02 PM
Honestly Ubi has the means to convert AC into a shooter pretty easy, they have farcry's open world dynamic that they could only reskin and add mechanichs like the ones on dying light and poof, you got yourself an assassin shooter with guns guns guns.

In all seriousness, what about a hidden gun? Ezio had one, and it was not a shooter, meaning it can be done, i just think the only problem will be how to adress combat if you are caught

D.I.D.
01-19-2015, 03:49 PM
Actually this isn't true because since 1909 we have patented Maxim sound suppressors here.

There were silenced handguns (most known British Welrod), there were silenced submachine guns (De Lisle carbine, Sten Mark IIS) and there are even documented tests of potential sniper rifle with attached silencers like modified M-1 carbine and Mossberg.

And because Assassin were always little ahead with their equipment there is no reason to assume that WWII assassin wouldn't have access to arsenal of fully silenced guns of different types. As that hidden blade would become more symbol and reserve weapon then main solution.

There's no such thing as a silenced gun. The idea we have from films and games of silencers making bullets hit targets with nothing more than a gentle "ffff-wip!" sound is a complete myth. Real silencers only reduce the sound from "deafeningly loud" to "ridiculously loud", and the name "silencer" is a misnomer.


They're still very similar ...

Not if Victory is accurate, and I trust that it will be. The others are pure fantasy games, while Victory is the only one putting a fantasy character into a real Victorian setting.


I'll never understand why so many people want to turn AC into freaking CoD.

I don't want AC to be set in WW2 because we already have games that do that. AC2 has always promised to be different - its beauty lies in its ability to get us away from the run-of-the-mill settings for games and take us somewhere unusual.

If there has to be an AC game set in WW2, I'd be happy if the game was set in South America, or Casablanca, or the Holy Land again, or any neutral country - anywhere away from the war. But fighting Hitler? Please, no.

A lot of people seem to get a massive buzz out of being the saviour of the downtrodden, and there's no bigger symbolic battle in the minds of most people than WWII because it has history's favourite villain.

I agree, I'd like to follow wealth/politics in history rather than war.

Perk89
01-19-2015, 05:53 PM
I'll never understand why so many people want to turn AC into freaking CoD.

I don't want AC to be set in WW2 because we already have games that do that. AC2 has always promised to be different - its beauty lies in its ability to get us away from the run-of-the-mill settings for games and take us somewhere unusual.

If there has to be an AC game set in WW2, I'd be happy if the game was set in South America, or Casablanca, or the Holy Land again, or any neutral country - anywhere away from the war. But fighting Hitler? Please, no.


How is it you people are so limited in what your understanding of what a WW2 game would be.


World War 2 actually happened, and as much of a shock as this may come to some, it was nothing like Call of Duty

Jackdaw951
01-19-2015, 06:33 PM
Well, they could always study the beginning of some of the stages in Wolfenstein: The New Order. You start out with a knife, slinking through corridors, and the best you can hope to find is a silenced pistol. There is no parkour, however, and nothing would keep an AC-style protagonist from snaring all sorts of deadly firearms from the period. I doubt it could be made to work without turning it into a shooter, or adding artificial restrictions on what you can do.

VestigialLlama4
01-19-2015, 06:53 PM
How is it you people are so limited in what your understanding of what a WW2 game would be.


World War 2 actually happened, and as much of a shock as this may come to some, it was nothing like Call of Duty

So tell me, can a game with AC's metaphor accomodate a WW2 where the real-stuff (Holocaust, ethnic cleansing) happened and in such numbers, that rescues came far too late...

aL_____eX
01-19-2015, 07:19 PM
It couldn't.
Yep.

ST1NGY
01-19-2015, 07:58 PM
Guns are a major problem here, but it's not impossible for a great outcome to come from a WWII Based AC game, only if Ubisoft actually try and not just leave the game half baked. Seeing as how they're milking the series, it won't be surprising that they actually do consider this setting, if so I hope for a encouraging outcome. Not all hope is lost for this series yet :p

ze_topazio
01-19-2015, 08:44 PM
You people lack imagination, the game would take place in a city not in a battlefield, guns are noisy so Assassins would still use blades and poison, to avoid being shot, stealth would be more necessary than ever.

I still don't want it though, 1940s is too recent, i want to see old cultures and cities, not fairly modern ones.

But since we're at it I suggest Lisbon, :rolleyes:, during WW2 Lisbon was called "The capital of espionage", since Portugal was neutral and had business with both sides, both Allies and Nazis could be seen in Lisbon doing their spy games, smuggling information, etc... Nazi, British and American ships could be seen together in the ports as if no war was happening, Ian Flemming, creator of James Bond lived here at the time and James Bond was inspired by the things he saw, many deposed Kings and their families lived in exile here, Jewish and other refugees arrived here everyday in hopes of escaping to America, meanwhile the dictator of Portugal, Salazar, a very Templarish man, played both sides to his own interests.

Acentik
01-19-2015, 10:15 PM
Is it just me or would a real fan never want an WW based AC game?
I mean there are so many WWII shooters and u want AC turn into an other repetetiv shooter...
AC always was something special because u went to places other games never went. It always feelt special among the many WW based games :(

Hans684
01-19-2015, 10:57 PM
Technically we already have been in a WW.

Shahkulu101
01-19-2015, 11:24 PM
Technically we already have been in a WW.

You mean the rifts?

They were beautiful, but pointless and boring.

Hans684
01-19-2015, 11:43 PM
You mean the rifts?

Yes.


They were beautiful, but pointless and boring.

Indeed, a waste. They could have MD instead of that.

mikeyf1999
01-19-2015, 11:58 PM
Is it just me or would a real fan never want an WW based AC game?


Is it just me, or should people stop using this stupid "real fan" nonsense? It's stupid, and just an attempt at people trying to separate themselves from others
Sorry about that, but I'm tired of people using this term

DemonLord4lf
01-20-2015, 02:18 AM
You people lack imagination, the game would take place in a city not in a battlefield, guns are noisy so Assassins would still use blades and poison, to avoid being shot, stealth would be more necessary than ever.

I still don't want it though, 1940s is too recent, i want to see old cultures and cities, not fairly modern ones.

But since we're at it I suggest Lisbon, :rolleyes:, during WW2 Lisbon was called "The capital of espionage", since Portugal was neutral and had business with both sides, both Allies and Nazis could be seen in Lisbon doing their spy games, smuggling information, etc... Nazi, British and American ships could be seen together in the ports as if no war was happening, Ian Flemming, creator of James Bond lived here at the time and James Bond was inspired by the things he saw, many deposed Kings and their families lived in exile here, Jewish and other refugees arrived here everyday in hopes of escaping to America, meanwhile the dictator of Portugal, Salazar, a very Templarish man, played both sides to his own interests.

Now that could work. Since it's a neutral territory, neither side would want to have a lot of loud guns around to attract attention. They could still use a baton or some kind of melee weapon to deal with the assassin if combat is initiated. If there is to be a WWII AC i would like to see it be in this setting. I cant see the Assassins or Templars being part of an open battlefield.

Now i know alot of people are going to say, "what about blag flag, rouge or AC3?" while yes the assassins/templar were involved in heavy sea battles and/or battlefields, we weren't exactly a major player in them. In AC3 we have to navigate a battlefield to kill a templar general. However, that was just one incident. If they were to go into a battle heavy area for WWII, then we would see alot of these type of scenes. Which, imo, would get old real fast and probably frustrate some players.

VoldR
01-20-2015, 03:41 AM
Wolfenstein did nicely for stealth in a war torn city. Didn't play much of Saboteur but that did nicely from what little I tried. :)

ze_topazio
01-20-2015, 07:28 PM
Now that could work. Since it's a neutral territory, neither side would want to have a lot of loud guns around to attract attention. They could still use a baton or some kind of melee weapon to deal with the assassin if combat is initiated. If there is to be a WWII AC i would like to see it be in this setting. I cant see the Assassins or Templars being part of an open battlefield.

Now i know alot of people are going to say, "what about blag flag, rouge or AC3?" while yes the assassins/templar were involved in heavy sea battles and/or battlefields, we weren't exactly a major player in them. In AC3 we have to navigate a battlefield to kill a templar general. However, that was just one incident. If they were to go into a battle heavy area for WWII, then we would see alot of these type of scenes. Which, imo, would get old real fast and probably frustrate some players.

http://media.catmoji.com/post/vwi6/give-me-five-gif.gif

The_Kiwi_
01-20-2015, 08:12 PM
Now that could work. Since it's a neutral territory, neither side would want to have a lot of loud guns around to attract attention. They could still use a baton or some kind of melee weapon to deal with the assassin if combat is initiated. If there is to be a WWII AC i would like to see it be in this setting. I cant see the Assassins or Templars being part of an open battlefield.

Now i know alot of people are going to say, "what about blag flag, rouge or AC3?" while yes the assassins/templar were involved in heavy sea battles and/or battlefields, we weren't exactly a major player in them. In AC3 we have to navigate a battlefield to kill a templar general. However, that was just one incident. If they were to go into a battle heavy area for WWII, then we would see alot of these type of scenes. Which, imo, would get old real fast and probably frustrate some players.

That is the stupidest sentence I have ever read on any forum thread.
This is your logic:
SWITZERLAND: "Shush everybody, we don't want the Germans to know that we're neutral in the war, so we won't use guns to defend ourselves from possible invasion, we'll only use sticks, because they're quiet."

VestigialLlama4
01-20-2015, 08:25 PM
That is the stupidest sentence I have ever read on any forum thread.
This is your logic:
SWITZERLAND: "Shush everybody, we don't want the Germans to know that we're neutral in the war, so we won't use guns to defend ourselves from possible invasion, we'll only use sticks, because they're quiet."

In any case Switzerland's idea of neutrality during WW2 was storing Nazi Money in their Secure Banks. One of the Swiss financiers, Francois Genoud, later became an executor of prominent Nazis and helped fund Nazis escaping to Argentina and later sponsored terrorist organizations.

Can I ask a simple question?

What do people look for, specifically, in an AC-WW2 game? Do they want to know how modern AC will look and feel like...if they do they have the "Time Anomalies" Eiffel Tower mission in UNITY that in a condensed fashion gives everyone what they look for in such a game anyway. In that mission, you get to dodge Nazis, climb the Eiffel Tower and use a machine gun to take down warplanes. That mission by itself touches some of the high points.

What is the point of making a WW2 game in a neutral location like Lisbon/Switzerland? Yes a game set in WW2 where none of the major battles or most grisly and disturbing incidents happen. Can that possibly satisfy anyone. A WW2 game in the Assassin's Creed series which despite the wretched quality of Unity, is still lodged in most people's mind as the gold standard for historical fiction games. I mean making a game in such a vast setting that doesn't address the enormous gravity and impact of the events that take place.

DemonLord4lf
01-21-2015, 03:41 AM
That is the stupidest sentence I have ever read on any forum thread.
This is your logic:
SWITZERLAND: "Shush everybody, we don't want the Germans to know that we're neutral in the war, so we won't use guns to defend ourselves from possible invasion, we'll only use sticks, because they're quiet."

How is it stupid? Its a neutral territory so neither the Ally or Axis forces would want to start trouble in fear that the country might then pick a side. Also, since its a neutral territory there would be no large battlefields so it'll be mostly about traveling the area.

The_Kiwi_
01-21-2015, 09:03 AM
How is it stupid? Its a neutral territory so neither the Ally or Axis forces would want to start trouble in fear that the country might then pick a side. Also, since its a neutral territory there would be no large battlefields so it'll be mostly about traveling the area.

For the reasons stated.

pirate1802
01-21-2015, 12:32 PM
How is it stupid? Its a neutral territory so neither the Ally or Axis forces would want to start trouble in fear that the country might then pick a side. Also, since its a neutral territory there would be no large battlefields so it'll be mostly about traveling the area.

Yes like the Japanese thought geez, let's not bomb the Muricans, they might join the war! Like the Nazis thought when they invaded a bunchload of countries.
Also, just because someone is neutral, doesn't mean they won't have 'lots of loud guns'. Was the policing in all the neutral countries done with sticks and swords back then? Seriously.. :rolleyes:

Ontopic, let's stop beating around the bush and see the truth. There's no working around the gun problem. If there is a WW2 AC, it would be mostly a stealth shooter, with almost no melee combat. Guns were in abundance, and silenced weapons were known as well. If our putative WW2 assassin is smart enough, he'll get rid of hidden blades and start using silenced weapons and snipers.. you know, like real-life assassins use. (read Day of The Jackal to get a hint) If he is a ******* he'll run around with his not-so-hidden blades and try to melee people, who, will attack you with guns. So if it ever comes down to it, it would be a TPS AC. If people are okay with that then sure I guess. I'm not. I prefer AC to remain in the distant past. I'd play The Saboteur if I want to play an open world TPS/stealth game set during WW2.

Cactiii
01-22-2015, 03:00 AM
It's entirely possible to have a game without it becoming a shooter. To clarify, this doesn't mean that I think we should jump into WWII for a setting in the next handful of years- there's thousands of settings through history that can be used. I'm asking for a debate on whether it could work, not if Ubisoft should make it after Victory. I personally want to see Prague in the 30 years war or Hong Kong during the Opium Wars before I see WWII, but I'm curious as to what people's opinions on it are.

Someone mentioned Lisbon as a setting. That's interesting and could lead to a sort of James Bond inspired game, with a lot of emphasis on social stealth and what not- obviously, it wouldn't be a massive firefight like if we were to go into 1945 Berlin. Someone else mentioned 1920s Berlin, another really interesting setting- I think it could be really cool to see Berlin go through a failed communist revolution, massive inflation and protests against Versailles. I think I'd love to see it as an opportunity for another multi-city game, with Munich being the other major city, so we could see the failed Munich Beer Putsch where Hitler tried to take over the government. Seeing the rise of the Nazi party would be cool- we get to watch occasional victories over Hitler, a promising young templar agent, while finally seeing him take power. Imagine playing the perspective of a German soldier who becomes friends with Hitler during WWI and ultimately sees him go mad? That could be a compelling story if handled well.

Someone mentioned the holocaust. Obviously that would be a concern and I think it would be disrespectful to see liberating concentration camps relegated to side missions, but most of these concentration camps were in the middle of nowhere in Poland, not downtown Berlin. They were slave camps, and no one has ever kept a slave camp in the middle of a bustling city. Obviously they would have to be mentioned, but almost no one in America, Britain, wherever went into WWII thinking "we're doing this to liberate the Jews/Gays/Africans from Hitler's concentration camps." Showing the apathy and commenting on how 'it's disgusting how apathetic everyone is to their plight' would probably be the best way to do it.

VestigialLlama4
01-22-2015, 05:45 AM
Seeing the rise of the Nazi party would be cool- we get to watch occasional victories over Hitler, a promising young templar agent, while finally seeing him take power. Imagine playing the perspective of a German soldier who becomes friends with Hitler during WWI and ultimately sees him go mad? That could be a compelling story if handled well.

Hitler never went mad. He was the same guy all his life. There was never a nicer, kinder version of him to start with.


Someone mentioned the holocaust. Obviously that would be a concern and I think it would be disrespectful to see liberating concentration camps relegated to side missions, but most of these concentration camps were in the middle of nowhere in Poland, not downtown Berlin. They were slave camps, and no one has ever kept a slave camp in the middle of a bustling city. Obviously they would have to be mentioned, but almost no one in America, Britain, wherever went into WWII thinking "we're doing this to liberate the Jews/Gays/Africans from Hitler's concentration camps." Showing the apathy and commenting on how 'it's disgusting how apathetic everyone is to their plight' would probably be the best way to do it.

That is a nice atttitude for the Allied High Command, but does that apply to the Assassins - this super-secret NGO of heroes who have worked behind the scenes throughout history. It would be hard to take that seriously.

pirate1802
01-22-2015, 08:01 AM
People are saying it would become a shooter in the sense that it would get rid of melee combat and consist almost entirely of gunplay. Which, let's face it, will happen when you place an AC in modern times. Unless they want to have our assassin look ludicrous that is.

The_Kiwi_
01-22-2015, 08:12 AM
People are saying it would become a shooter in the sense that it would get rid of melee combat and consist almost entirely of gunplay. Which, let's face it, will happen when you place an AC in modern times. Unless they want to have our assassin look ludicrous that is.

You are 100% correct
Going around with nothing but a blade would be absolutely ridiculous, as no-one is that stupid
The saying "you brought a knife to a gun fight" is perfect in this scenario
It is impossible to avoid heavy gun fire in an AC game set in WW2, which is why it won't ever happen
The devs themselves have said that it's a horrible setting for an AC game

pirate1802
01-22-2015, 09:03 AM
Right, and the Mentor in those Fall/Chain comics even have said that these days the hidden blade is just used for ceremonial purposes. Add to that the gunshots you hear in AC1 modern day, when Vidic tells Desmond his pals have come to rescue him. What conclusion do you reach? That modern day Assassins aren't stupid. They use guns. And why wouldn't they? Hidden Blade was used because it served a purpose, not because they had an obligation to use it. Now it is no longer valid, so it would be ditched. Man, each time I see someone drawing a modern assassin with a hidden blade attached I wince, each time someone comes up with a painfully contrived solution on how the HB would still be valid in modern times I crie.. ;_;

Shahkulu101
01-22-2015, 05:28 PM
Right, and the Mentor in those Fall/Chain comics even have said that these days the hidden blade is just used for ceremonial purposes. Add to that the gunshots you hear in AC1 modern day, when Vidic tells Desmond his pals have come to rescue him. What conclusion do you reach? That modern day Assassins aren't stupid. They use guns. And why wouldn't they? Hidden Blade was used because it served a purpose, not because they had an obligation to use it. Now it is no longer valid, so it would be ditched. Man, each time I see someone drawing a modern assassin with a hidden blade attached I wince, each time someone comes up with a painfully contrived solution on how the HB would still be valid in modern times I crie.. ;_;

There are guns in Far Cry, but your silent knife is your most useful weapon.

Anyway, I wouldn't be opposed to AC becoming a stealth shooter. As long as I have a historical city to parkour in, and a story about Assassin's and Templar's - it's still AC to me. My biggest concern over a WW2 game is how they would handle the subject matter, not the mechanics. If anything the mechanics would be better as it's much easier designing systems around guns.

I draw the line at Modern Day.

RzaRecta357
01-22-2015, 05:57 PM
I'd love it but they're worried about vehicles I think. I say screw it and either just steal Watch Dogs driving or leave it right out and we'll just keep climbing.

UBOSOFT-Gamer
01-25-2015, 05:32 PM
Why during WW2? It could set in Germany and Europe or even the World before WW2. Think of the movie Indiana Jones and the last crusade. We could visit cities like Vienna, Prague, Budapest, Zurich, Alexandria in Egyp, Berlin, London, Wahsington, New York, Tokyo. And the third reich last only 12 years so a small period of time to snap in. No, no, dont let play the full game in those 12 years and never during the war, but maybe a part of it befor 39.

Why? Because the Nazis, were occult and esoteric. Some examples. In the Assassinc creed universe myth and artefacts and secrets are a strong part.

The NS-Headquarter of the occult - The Wewelsburg
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W...n_of_the_North_Tower (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wewelsburg#Description_of_the_North_Tower)

The Nazis did an expedition to Tibet. For the game they could search for more pieces of eden
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1..._Expedition_to_Tibet (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1938-1939_German_Expedition_to_Tibet)

They did an expedition to the Antartica
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Swabia

Rubbish, secret nazi ufo base
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_UFOs

German U-Boats didn't only attacked Allied ships, they also transported agents, saboteurs, etc. Could also be used for a fictional thing for AC
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_submarine_U-234

Or take the secret german airforce unit KG200
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K...0_in_the_Middle_East (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KG_200#KG200_in_the_Middle_East)

Or Brandenburger
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B...arbarossa_-_Ostfront (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandenburger_Regiment#Operation_Barbarossa_-_Ostfront)

Or a piece of enden could be located in an unknown nazibunker somewehre in Europe.


Or underground Berlin
http://berliner-unterwelten.de/home.1.1.html

Or may the red army took the piece of eden and brought it to Moscow.
Or an American soldier found it in a german town and send it to USA.

Hitler and the Hol Lance
http://jettandjahn.com/2013/03/hitle...-roman-empire/ (http://jettandjahn.com/2013/03/hitler-the-crown-jewels-of-the-holy-roman-empire/)


BLACK SUN
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Sun_(occult_symbol)

There could be so many things to be used for the AC universe http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif


The only thing what may cause a bit trouble is the use of nazimyth and (neo)-nazisymbols for the story of a game.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_occultism#Games

Philadelphia Experimenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philadelphia_Experiment


The Bell
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Glocke

Foo Fighter
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foo_fighter

There is many mystical stuff before ww2, that would fit in the AC Universe.