Assassin´s Creed III

[DareDemon]

I feel like after 4 games of swordplay, I see no reason why a different feeling combat system and array of weaponry wouldn't be a refreshing difference. Why couldn't there just be a stronger focus on hand to hand combat to compensate? It works well enough for Batman Arkham Asylum. I mean hell, in many ways, that could be MORE awesome. A modern Assassin handling like the perfect Jason Bourne or something. That would be really freaking cool. The ability to improvise with any weaponry or objects lying around.

Also, you're forgetting, this isn't OUR 2012, this is a different future. Wait until you've played Revelations and all of the Desmond's journey sections, and you can see the differences. This isn't our contemporary time.

Played through Revelations and Desmond's journey? I did and I have no idea what you're referring to. I remember in the first game Americans were illegally entering Mexico and the movie industry had collapsed, but other than that it seems like it's pretty much our world.

I really hope Desmond doesn't become Batman. I made a joke a few months back that the only way a modern game (I mean the whole game being modern, in a free roam city) could work is if Desmond became Batman. Well, that backfired and now people actually wants this. Damn.

Play Arkham City without using your cape and grappling hook, and that's why a modern day game in a city wouldn't work. Hell, get to the top of a building and start running around, jumping from building to building. Can't go very far, can you? That's because you need to be able to fly to do this stuff. Something Assassin's are not generally known for. I would like the hand-to-hand combat to be more like Arkham City (especially double/triple counters), though.

I know you didn't say this, Wolvieboy, but it seems like some people think that the whole game will be ONLY Desmond. That doesn't make sense. Without the Animus there's no White Room, no multiplayer, no health bar, no history, no replaying missions.... on and on. The developers have stated so many times how much they love visiting eras that aren't really done in games, so people think they'll make a game that takes place completely in 2012? When the devs said WWII was too recent? And especially when there's so much that happened in 67,000 BCE we still don't know the details to?

My dream for AC3 is an American or French Assassin going through both The French and American Revolutions and a second ancestor going through the Human-First Civilization War and First Disaster. These ancestors alternate when Desmonds' modern day story comes in to play as he looks for clues on how to use and navigate the Great Temple. Something like that makes the most sense to me, given the hints we've recieved in Brotherhood and Revelations.

 

[Llama_Shepherd]

I think a pretty good place to have a game would be the English revolution. Charles I could be an assassin and Oliver Cromwell could be a Templar that uses a PoE on English soldiers and the main game could revolve around deposing him, and leaving Parliament in charge, which is comprised, at that point, of some Assassin's.

 

[ProjectPat2280]

Desmonds story needs to close out, do we really need more ancestors for that?

 

[cherokeesam]

Desmonds story needs to close out, do we really need more ancestors for that?

Why shouldn't there be more ancestors?
We've pretty much seen that the Assassin-Templar War has been going on for the entirety of human history, in pretty much all points of the globe. That means the franchise is wide open to explore any time, any place, and should continue to do so. With or without Desmond. There's plenty of Assassins besides Desmond.

 

[SpideyVille]

I think Pat is talking about AC III and closing Desmond's story out first without introducing any new ancestors since he doesn't really need one to tell him what to do next. But what they decide to do after that is anyone's ballgame. I wouldn't mind a multi ancestral game. Almost like how Ezio and Altair were both playable in ACR, only with both ancestors getting equal treatment and having them be in different time periods and maybe even locations.

 

[Paradox1]

I would definetly be behind ACIII exclusively focusing on Desmond's quest to save the Earth. Desmond is a very unique Assassin in that he now has two lifetime of experience as assassin through the bleeding effect. There were hints in Brotherhood that if Desmond could survive the fracturing of his mind he would be able to see the past without animus. I've even heard one of the writers say Desmond could come out of the coma with superpowers.

 

[Wolvieboy17]

Yeah, if they go into AC 3 without addressing Demond's story in a MAJOR, MAJOR way, then this franchise will die... Because they've strung it along and teased it out for 4 games now, and at the end of a game titled 'REVELATIONS', the only revelation we actually got for Desmond, apart from his back story, was that HE is in charge or control of what to do next for the next game. If we then get another game, with primarily a different Assassin, and in between sections of Desmond going 'What the hell? What's going on?' then the whole drama of the series is going to sink.

I've been playing some Revelations MP, and even that is teasing towards Desmond in the next game ;P

Edit: Exactly what Paradox said. I really wouldn't be surprised if we get one, or multiple extra Assassins that Desmond only BRIEFLY peers into, in order to gain insight into whatever current situation he is in.

After 4 games, for Assassins Creed 3, there needs to be a really significant change in direction or shift in the series in order to stop it from getting stale.

 

[cherokeesam]

I still think a great way to turn the franchise on its head would be to make a sequel that introduces the eternal conflict from the *Templar* point of view. Give Desmond a counterpart who views the assassin's creed as evil, and who can go back and access the past through Templar eyes.

 

[Number 6]

I still think a great way to turn the franchise on its head would be to make a sequel that introduces the eternal conflict from the *Templar* point of view. Give Desmond a counterpart who views the assassin's creed as evil, and who can go back and access the past through Templar eyes.

That would just be more wheel spinning, though, in the grand scheme of things. I haven't gotten a chance to play AC:R just yet, but I'm agreeing with Wolvie that Pat and the others that it's time to do something different, and it's time to address the main story head-on. We've basically got AC, AC2, AC2.2.5 and AC2.5. It's kind of time to **** or get off the pot, and I don't see how they can do that without spending a pretty major amount of time with Desmond in modern times.

I think this idea is a good one for a spin-off or something, though, but not for a main installment in the series. At least at this time.

 

[SpideyVille]

Yeah, people keep acting like AC III has to be completely different in order to "revive" the series, but a lot of these things aren't even necessary to complete the story, which revolves around Desmond. Like i've said before, there is a rich history to the AC franchise, but as far as the games go, they've focused on one story and III will be the end of that story. But its not the end of the franchise or the series and with AC IV or whatever, they'll be more inclined to do something completely different like a new protagonist or era.

But that's not to say that AC III has to be more of the same. They will make some changes, like maybe not as much time spent in the animus since one really isn't needed at this point. I think the biggest change we'll see is that Desmond will interact with things without the help of the animus. I also don't think we'll be seeing the same kind of things like factions and buying property. I think all of that will be removed because its more of an added feature that was really only significant to Ezio.

 

[Wolvieboy17]

Ubisoft have said that AC 3 will finish off Desmonds story and the 2012 end of world scenario, and that after that they will return to a 2 year AC game development cycle, with a new story within the Assassins Creed universe and a new main protagonist (and Assassin)

I still think a great way to turn the franchise on its head would be to make a sequel that introduces the eternal conflict from the *Templar* point of view. Give Desmond a counterpart who views the assassin's creed as evil, and who can go back and access the past through Templar eyes.

That's more or less the story mode of the Revelations multiplayer. It's actually really cool. When you reach certain levels, you get a cut scene where Vidic lets you in on more Templar secrets and you get access to loads of Templar data on the history of Abstergo, the Templar order, current operations, Assassins intel etc. It's a great idea and I find loads more incentive to play MP than just unlocking a weapon or something.

 

[DareDemon]

Is there a webpage anywhere the collects the info obtained from the multiplayer? I wanna read/watch this stuff but I don't have gold for several months so I can't

 

[craigdbfan]

New Survey for Assassins Creed III indicates possible new locales/setting!

Among the following propositions, in which of the following historical periods and locations would you like one of the next Assassin's Creed games to take place?

•The violent conflicts of the Imperial Dynasties in Medieval China
• The advent of the mighty British Empire during Victorian England
• The culmination of the Pharaoh Reign in Ancient Egypt
• The invasion of the Americas by the Spanish Conquistadors
• The confrontation between British colonists and native Americans during The American Revolution
• The overthrow of the Tsar Empire by the Communists during the Russian Revolution
• The Warlord Battles in Feudal Japan (Please this!! Ninjas are a must, duh!)
• The rise of Cesar's Empire in Ancient Rome

- Source

 

[Wolvieboy17]

I would wager this is for whatever Assassin/Protagonist is coming after AC 3. Considering AC 3 is out next year and they've already been working on it for a year or so, they wouldn't be deciding a setting at this late stage.

Possibly though, they may be finding a way to mention this setting/assassin at the END of AC 3 to tease the future game, which won't be till 2014 (assuming Ubisoft stick to this new game every 2 year cycle they've committed to)

 

[cherokeesam]

New Survey for Assassins Creed III indicates possible new locales/setting!

I find that list to be highly, highly dubious. One, because of a totally questionable and uncorroborated source (some dude who claims he took an online survey); and two, because that "survey" is illiterate as hell when it comes to historical knowledge.

*"The violent conflicts of the Imperial Dynasties in Medieval China" --- the dynasties were successive, not contemporaneous. Makes it sound like the Ming Dynasty taking up arms against the Han Dynasty --- 1100 years apart
*"The advent of the mighty British Empire during Victorian England" -- so the British Empire didn't exist until Queen Victoria, eh? I think Elizabeth I would have something to say about that
*"The culmination of the Pharaoh Reign in Ancient Egypt" --- what the hell is a "Pharaoh Reign?" WHICH pharaoh? WHICH culmination?
*"The invasion of the Americas by the Spanish Conquistadors"
*"The confrontation between British colonists and native Americans during The American Revolution" --- overlooking, I assume, the confrontation between British soldiers and American colonists. Which, y'know, is what the revolution was all about. But hey, go ahead and pretend it was about Last of the Mohicans if it makes you feel better.
*"The overthrow of the Tsar Empire by the Communists during the Russian Revolution" --- "Tsar Empire." Who the hell writes this stuff? Borat?
*"The Warlord Battles in Feudal Japan (Please this!! Ninjas are a must, duh!)" --- "Warlord battles" sounds like a bunch of barbarian tribes duking it out, instead of a centuries-long civil war fought for control of the shogunate
*"The rise of Cesar's Empire in Ancient Rome" --- I think even Borat realizes that it's spelled "Caesar."

Puhleez. Ubisoft know their history. They've gone to great detail to research the places and eras in which AC has been set. This list was drawn up by somebody who flunked grade-school history.

 

[Wolvieboy17]

Ubisoft developers and creative designers would know their history, however a community manage may not be the same way. If this was a legit survey, that's who would have organised it and they most likely would have just been handed a list saying "1)Medieval China, 2)Victorian England" etc.

Either way, whether it's legit or not, I don't think it's something to read too deeply into. Like I said before, if this was legitmately for a future installment in the series, it would be a game we wont be seeing for at least three more years.

 

[Spidey-Bat]

If the next game were set in Imperial Russia, I'd pre-order the Collector's Edition and get it Day 1 at GameStop. That's 4 things I hate doing when it comes to buying games.

 

[Wolvieboy17]

If they're looking for a new protagonist after Desmonds story wraps up at the end of AC 3, then they're going to have to take their time and create a character carefully. The protagonist would have to be someone who's ethnicity and background lends themself to one or two unique types of Assassins.

Also, when choosing a new setting, I think for more variety or for the series to feel like it's advancing, they have to do more than simply choose a different location. For instance, as much as people want to keep swashbuckling, choosing a time period that lends itself to most of the exact same technology and hardware does not create much scope for change.

I would say the strongest candidates would be Japan or Russia. France, Ancient Rome or Egypt would be too similar. I think something radically different is needed, just for a few games, then we can come back to something more 'strictly swashbuckling'.

Japan could lend itself perfectly to the Ass Creed universe. While Ezio was a master warrior and fighter, for a Japan game we could have a master at stealth. He/She could be highly skilled at striking without being seen, rather than having as many all out fights to the death. Also they could be a lot more nimble in combat, with perhaps more skills at dodging, rolling, avoiding and multiple counters, things like that. And Russia.... that would just be cool. It was cool in the Truth puzzles, it was cool in the graphic novels, it would just be cool. :P End of story.

 

[cherokeesam]

France (say Louis XIV era, or Revolutionary/Napoleonic) would be a radical departure. The swordplay would be a bit rarer, as armor would be nonexistent and the swordplay would be more about delicacy and finesse --- i.e., fencing, as opposed to hack 'n' slash. Plus, introducing black powder would bring a whole new element to the game.

I don't disagree that Japan *would* be a fun setting; it's just that it's done to death, y'know? We've had ninjas out the ass since, like, 1981. I don't see even Ubisoft bringing anything new to the whole ninjas 'n' samurais milieu.

 

[Wolvieboy17]

Really? I sure do. I can see Ubisoft bring something new to pretty much any setting. I still think French Revolution would be far to similar. Similar architecture to Italy, similar culture, similar weaponry, etc. I mean, Ezio's tale had more than a few touches of Count of Monte Christo as it it. I just don't think it would be DIFFERENT enough, you know? It's something I'd love to see eventually, but I really think Ubisoft would be smarter to go something way different for at least a few games, try something else. Then you can come back to something like the French Revolution and it will feel new but pleasingly familiar too, like how it was going back to Altair after a few Ezio games.

And I don't think Ninjas HAVE been done to death, at least not in any attemptingly factual and historically accurate way. Sure there have been a few notable games, but it feels like there hasn't for a while. I watched Last Samurai quite recently and it'd be awesome to do something like the Assassins Samurais and American Soldiers led by Templar generals, something like that. It would be an interesting mix of something that felt one part feudal Japan but also one part Civil War.

I'm pretty open for any setting to be honest, I trust Ubi have something nice up their sleeves. I expect this is something they've been thinking about for QUITE some time.

 

[carrrnuttt]

I can see the next game being about Desmond as it starts, but he'll be backed by current Assassins with their own "bleeding effect" abilities. This will be the introduction to then explore how these Assassins came by their abilities through *their* ancestors.

 

[SpideyVille]

I thought Desmond was one of the very rare few that experienced the bleeding effect.

 

[Wolvieboy17]

Yeah, what Desmond is able to do is not common place. And Ubisoft have made it very clear that it will be a NEW story after Desmond, not just crowbarred in new Assassins.

 

[cherokeesam]

I can see the next game being about Desmond as it starts, but he'll be backed by current Assassins with their own "bleeding effect" abilities. This will be the introduction to then explore how these Assassins came by their abilities through *their* ancestors.

I dunno....

PlayStation Magazine is now running with the earlier Egypt rumor; their sources are confirming that ancient Alexandria will be at least one setting in AC3.

I'd be willing to bet that AC3 will be a pull-out-all-the-stops 2012 doomsday scenario that will take Desmond across multiple timeline/memory strands to make it suitably Teh Epick. Rather than one central setting like the previous installments, you'll probably jump back and forth through key points in history, and we'll see different ancestors on Desmond's DNA strand, instead of being introduced to unrelated Assassins.

 

[Wolvieboy17]

Yeah, that's always been what I've thought AC 3 was gonna be, ever since Brotherhood. I imagine it will have modern sequences very much like Desmond and Lucy under the Colloseum, where he's looking for the temples, and he'll need to go back to each time period to figure out how to unlock each temple.

Also, I don't think they'll be Desmonds ancestors, but rather memory discs similar to what Ezio used to access Altairs memories (which is one of the reasons I think they introduced that plot device in ACR in the first place). Desmond will be able to activate them since, as a long time Assassin (in his bloodline) he has a percentage of 'Those Who Came Before' DNA.

I imagine the one MAIN temple will need several keys, all located in the smaller temples around the globe, so I think we'll get Desmond across a few MAIN locations, with Alexandria being one of them. And the main temple, or at least the first temple, seems to be in

Spoiler

the US

.

That said, I wouldn't be surprised if the Ancestor segments were little more than extended missions or flashback levels, like Altair's segments, with the bulk of the gameplay occuring with Desmond.