Assassin's Creed franchise

[Lambonius]

Yeah, side games are fine.  I'm even okay with the occasional Brotherhood-type spin-off game, but I love this franchise too much to want to see it go the way of the Call of Duty or Halo games and just become yearly releases of the same game with new packaging.  I was okay with Brotherhood because AC2 was just so good and Ezio such a great character that I was totally up for another full-length game's worth of additional material.  But I wouldn't want to do it AGAIN, necessarily.

I wholeheartedly hope they wait a year or so at least for AC3, and really put out something that ups the ante for the franchise.

I worry though, because past experience has shown that Ubisoft are one of those "safe" developers, that hit on a winning formula and then are afraid to change it at all.  See the Prince of Persia trilogy or the Brothers in Arms games for prime examples of this.  I worry that they won't want to take the risk of pushing the envelope with AC3 and that the game will ultimately suffer for it.

[dark-daventry]

Yeah, side games are fine.  I'm even okay with the occasional Brotherhood-type spin-off game, but I love this franchise too much to want to see it go the way of the Call of Duty or Halo games and just become yearly releases of the same game with new packaging.  I was okay with Brotherhood because AC2 was just so good and Ezio such a great character that I was totally up for another full-length game's worth of additional material.  But I wouldn't want to do it AGAIN, necessarily.

I wholeheartedly hope they wait a year or so at least for AC3, and really put out something that ups the ante for the franchise.

Well Brotherhood also had some important plot information too. The way I see it, any console game is a "main" game. within that, any numbered game is a new assassin in a new time period. any subtitled game is an expansion of a previous game. then any handheld game is just a side story.

(Posted on: April 24, 2011, 09:06:18 PM)

So, the next AC game is very likely to be a console release. An article from Joystiq states that a teaser was posted on Facebook a little prematurely. NeoGaf has outed the game as Assassin's Creed: Revelations, and one of the pictures there contains arabic text. When translated and reversed, it is Altair's full name. So one of two things appears to be happening: 1. We're going back to the days of Altair, likely after the events of AC1. 2. The plot description that was supposedly leaked for Lost Legacy, in which Ezio travels to Masayef, was actually for Revaltions, not Lost Legacy. Or, something else entirely is going on. Either way, it's looking like this won't be AC3. Also, the May issue of Game Informer is supposed to have a cover story. Once my copy of Game Informer for May comes in, I'll scan it. Granted, my copy tends to come in rather late, but I'll scan it for everyone anyway.

EDIT: The facebook page can be found here.

EDIT 2: The wonders of YouTube...

[Baggins]

Title renaming? Or the 3DS game is a tie-in and both stories will connect in some way?

Actually many of the portable games tied into the console games in some way and given further explanation in the console games.

[dark-daventry]

And now it's official: Assassin's Creed: Revelations, releasing this November, will conclude Ezio's story as he travels to the Ottoman Empire. The game, for the first time in the franchise's history, will allow you to play as THREE characters, all set across three different timelines. You'll play as Altaïr Ibn-La'Ahad in the 12th Century, Ezio Auditore Da Firenze in the 15th Century, and Desmond Miles in the year 2012. The game also introduces a climbing hook. And of course, multiplayer will return. The June issue of Game Informer has this game as it's cover story. I wonder what E3 will have on this game; no doubt Ubisoft will capitalize on this game during it's press conference.

[Baggins]

Climbing hook? Rope arrows analogue? Thinking to much of Thief series, lol.

[Lambonius]

As much as I love Assassin's Creed--especially II and Brotherhood, I'm finding myself more annoyed than excited about this.  Ezio has had his day, and Altair was never interesting to begin with.  This "trilogy" is nothing but a moneygrub from Ubisoft, who is now officially doing the same thing with Assassin's Creed that it did with Prince of Persia, which is to say, they are producing three identical games without making any major changes to the formula or engine.  Gag me.  I would bet money that this game won't score higher than the 7 out of 10 range on most major review sites, and the main reason cited will be that it doesn't do anything new.

Mod edit - watch your language please

[dark-daventry]

I wouldn't go quite that far, Lambonius. It does have one very interesting new thing going for it, one that the franchise hasn't seen yet: three playable characters, all of which are from three very distinctly different time periods. I'm actually interested in seeing how this pans out. Besides, all we have so far is very little information from a magazine that hasn't even hit shelves yet. We're going to learn more about the game once the june issue of Game Informer comes out, and you never know what kind of surprises Ubisoft has in store.

One issue I see is the following: This definitely isn't the last AC game; I'm willing to bet that we'll get AC3 next year, with a new assassin in a new time period (I'm also willing to bet said assassin will be female, as it's a fairly frequent request from what I can glean). All that's well and good, but the series was meant to be a trilogy; what happens when 2013 hits? Will there be an AC4, another spin off, or will Ubisoft just end the franchise? I can't see them ending the franchise, considering how much money it's made them and how well both 2 and brotherhood have been received. But the guy who created the series, Patrice Desilets (or however you spell his name) left Ubisoft, and intended this only to be a trilogy; I don't know if he had anything after 3 mapped out. The question is whether any games after 3 will be any good, or if the quality will dip. I'm willing to give the franchise the benefit of the doubt for both Revelations and 3, but afterwards, I worry. In the off chance that Ubisoft ends the series at 3, then annualizing the franchise was really just a get-rich-quick scheme that actually worked. Annualizing a franchise only to end it a couple of years later is pointless. Almost as pointless as Disney announcing an awesome Pirates of the Carribean RPG and then canceling it six months later (true story, btw). So I don't see Ubisoft ending the AC franchise at 3, sadly. But I really am worried about the quality of the series after 3. Consequently, because Patrice left, I'm even more worried. But I'm also more interested in what he'll be doing for THQ.

[kindofdoon]

I want a new assassin! Al-tair and Ezio are really cool and good, but they are no longer interesting! The series could go anywhere on Earth at any time...and we're stuck with the same guys, again.

[Lambonius]

You mean three playable characters that we've already played before in the series, and who all control and play EXACTLY THE SAME??  Yeah, wow.  Awesome way to shake things up, Ubisoft.   

[wilco64256]

I'd actually be happy just to be able to play as Desmond for more than 5% of the whole game.  There's some interesting stuff that's been happening to him in his own time and I'd like to see more of where that's going.

And I really don't mind playing the same characters again - I'm more interested in the story that Assassin's Creed is building and how much effort they put into blending the game into real history.  Just heading to another brand new location is plenty of change for me at the moment.

[Lambonius]

...how much effort they put into blending the game into real history. 

This really is what makes the series amazing.  The gameplay itself is still rather repetitive, even in Brotherhood.

With that idea in mind, I have to wonder why we'd ever want to spend a lot of time with Desmond at all.  They are really going to have to do something awesome to make me give a crap about Desmond.  So far in each game, even Brotherhood, where he had a larger role, the Desmond bits were hands down the most boring parts of the game, in my opinion.  I found myself rushing through them as quickly as humanly possible to get back to the actual INTERESTING stuff--i.e. the whole adventuring through historical periods bit.

[dark-daventry]

...how much effort they put into blending the game into real history. 

This really is what makes the series amazing.  The gameplay itself is still rather repetitive, even in Brotherhood.

With that idea in mind, I have to wonder why we'd ever want to spend a lot of time with Desmond at all.  They are really going to have to do something awesome to make me give a crap about Desmond.  So far in each game, even Brotherhood, where he had a larger role, the Desmond bits were hands down the most boring parts of the game, in my opinion.  I found myself rushing through them as quickly as humanly possible to get back to the actual INTERESTING stuff--i.e. the whole adventuring through historical periods bit.

I disagree; for some reason, I actually found the Desmond bits the most interesting part of the game. I like Desmond as a character, and I just wish we could explore more his time period. As for this game, it's by no means the end of the series; Assassin's Creed 3 will almost definitely introduce us to a new Assassin, so there will be some new stuff there.

[Lambonius]

Did you guys see this article from IGN?  It has their picks for possible time periods for AC3 to be set in.  I have to say, I absolutely LOVE their ideas.  My personal favorite is still Colonial-era America, but all of their ideas are well-conceived and damn interesting.  They've also got some cool concept sketches, too.  All hypothetical and speculative, but very interesting nonetheless.  I'm curious about you guys' thoughts on these ideas.

http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/116/1166504p1.html

[Fierce Deity]

I'm a little late to the discussion, but I'm gonna have to agree with Lambonius. Knowing me, I'm going to get Revelations and will probably try to get 100% Synch like I have with the other games, but Ezio is getting kind of old. Also, three playable characters? Hopefully, they will be more drawn out. Technically, Assassin's Creed II had three playable characters, but Desmond just walked from point A to point B, and Altair was just following Maria in a dream sequence. If they are going to play out this three playable character hype, I want all three characters to share development throughout the game.

[Lambonius]

I agree with Fierce Deity.  I'd also like them to get an new, accent-appropriate voice actor for Altair, since is voice acting sucked in the first game. 

[kindofdoon]

Great article, Lambonius. The first three ideas are AWESOME, though all clichéd to some extent. Nonetheless, I would love to play see any of the three ideas realized. But Modern New York? Well, that doesn't make any sense because the point of the series is to use the Animus to send people back in time to relive their ancestors' lives.

[Lambonius]

Great article, Lambonius. The first three ideas are AWESOME, though all clichéd to some extent. Nonetheless, I would love to play see any of the three ideas realized. But Modern New York? Well, that doesn't make any sense because the point of the series is to use the Animus to send people back in time to relive their ancestors' lives.

Another reason Modern New York doesn't quite fit is that the first two games are clearly set in EUROPE.    If you look carefully out the windows in AC2's present-day hideout, you can see Italian architecture that suggests Florence or some other Italian city.  It's more ambiguous in AC1, but given the second game and Brotherhood, they clearly are intending the series to take place in Europe during the present day.  Now that doesn't mean they couldn't travel to America, but the travel would have to be explained in the plot somehow.

Also, I think the article was suggesting that Modern New York would be one of two or more possible time periods for the same game.  A great idea, in my opinion--though not necessarily New York per se.  But think of how sweet it would be to be able to get in and out of the Animus at will and not just walk around your present day hideout but actually go out and explore the present-day city.  That would be awesome.  A great plot idea would be to explore the same city in both the present and at some point in the past--and perhaps you had to unlock secrets in the past that would lead you to things in the present...it could be a great time-travel-like dynamic for the game.  It definitely has possibilities.  

I'm actually more skeptical of the Old West as a setting--mainly because the game would automatically draw so many comparisons to Red Dead Redemption.  I'm not certain Ubisoft could pull off the Old West all that well.  However, I DO think that the Civil War era Deep South could make for an AWESOME setting.  Think Gone With The Wind era Atlanta or Charleston.  Those cities would be AMAZING places to explore in that time period.  Anyone who's been to Charleston in particular knows just how much awesome history there is to work with there.  Fort Sumter, Magnolia Plantation, Rainbow Row....sigh....God, I love Charleston.  lol

[dark-daventry]

From what I understand, Altair's sequences will be a little different; Ezio is able to relive Altair's memories through "seals" that he gets throughout the game. These seals will work in much the same way that Desmond experiences Ezio's memories through the Animus. A memory within a memory, anyone? All of this is from the new Game Informer, which, while I don't presently have, some of the details were leaked to Joystiq. I'm very intrigued by the mention of L.A. Noire like facial capture. And I'm so much a sucker for the AC series that I've actually reserved the game already. I was the first person at my Gamestop to reserve it. I'm probably going to be the only one for a while, too.

[Fierce Deity]

I like the idea of having a triple-tiered gameplay experience, but this seems too much like Inception. A memory within a memory? Oh well, like I said, as long as all three characters get equal face-time, I'm all in. But Ubisoft better make this the last Ezio game, cause this is the last straw.

[wilco64256]

Well based on the ending of Brotherhood...

Spoiler (mouse over to reveal):

There's some doubt that Desmond himself is even real.  Those comments about forcing someone back into the Animus?  Maybe someone else or maybe someone who Abstergo is forcing to experience what Desmond went through for some reason.  Remains to be seen...