Assassin's Creed

[Mr W Phallus]

I'm liking the idea of the bombs. Hoping you're not old crippled n restricted for all the game and just in this specific case.

Did you watch the whole video? He heals at a doctor's table (don't need the doctor any more apparently) and is right as rain - not even an indication that he's old, which is kinda disappointing actually, I wouldn't have minded having to lean on gadgets a bit more and not being so physical. Perhaps the getting injured beyond a certain point and losing your free-running abilities until you heal will be a permanent feature throughout the game, that could be kinda cool, you'll have have to make the decision whether to stand and fight and risk losing your chance of escape. Of course with the amount of health potions Ezio tends to carry around, and his (apparently undiminished) combat skills, it still looks like we're a long way away from getting a 'hard' AC game. (That's not an complaint).

[deanb]

To HH: Ah yeah I remember that one. There has been others, mainly with ACII from what I can remember. The locations would probably be yanked from the game, but it was small specifically built purpose area to show off as many new features in one go (cos it ended with Ezio diving into water, which killed Altiar)

 

To Phallus: I may have missed that part. I did notice he was suddenly running up walls to get to the guy. I also had to rewind a bit cos suddenly Ezio was younger, wearing different clothes and talking to a guy I'm pretty sure was dead (I did stick a knife in his neck after all)

[Mr W Phallus]

When has a target's death ever stopped Altair or Ezio from having lengthy philosophical discussions with them?

[deanb]

He doesn't tend to have a philosophical discussion with people while walking about with them in the sun.

[Mr W Phallus]

No, true, although there's no reason why he couldn't, I mean those moments are hardly adhering to realism, in the first game I always thought of the conversations as possibly imaginary, an externalisation of Altair's struggle to understand and justify his actions. Doesn't work so well with ACII, where they cut out a lot of the conversations anyway, in fact it's kinda stupid how some targets have a cutscene just to show Ezio saying 'Requiescat in pace', talk about pointless, plus kinda cruel to all the guards Ezio massacres without a second thought.

 

But you do realise in the second part of that video it's Altair, not Ezio, and the conversation is taking place before the events of the first game (when Altair first becomes a master assassin in fact)?

[Hot Heart]

I think this was one of those infamous 'Dean jokes'.

[Waldorf and Statler]

Anybody know if Ezio will be riddled with Alzheimer's and ask for his pancakes back from the toaster? Don't know about you, but a man going around town asking about where his grandchildren are would be fun as hell.

Edited August 27, 2011 by Jesus Christ

[TheRevanchist]

You mean "fun as heaven", right?

[deanb]

In plain speak:

 

When I was watching the video the first time I wasn't wholly paying attention. In fact I was writing up the post and embedding the video as I was watching. The side effect of this was I missed the part where it explained the transition from Ezio on top of the battlements to Altair speaking to Al Mulamin in Masyaf. Hence " suddenly Ezio was younger, wearing different clothes and talking to a guy I'm pretty sure was dead (I did stick a knife in his neck after all*)"

 

*alluding to the end of Assassins Creed 1

[Waldorf and Statler]

Oh you!

[Mr W Phallus]

I got that Dean, and when I actually think about it, the fact you said 'I also had to rewind a bit' implies you did in fact rewind and means there was no point in me checking to make sure you had rewound and now knew what was going on.

 

 

Let's get back on track, I'm not too worried about the basic game play (even if Ezio is a bit silly overpowered for an old geezer, I'm not exactly looking for realism here), I just worry they'll try and make the game too bombastic (bombastic - seewhatididthere?) - we've already seen Ezio's 'burn the entire harbour' approach to a quick getaway, and now he's being blown up in a carriage, falling into a canyon, surviving the unsurvivable impact, then climbing up and out seconds later. I get the feeling 'cinematic' was thrown around a lot during development, where cinematic means more explosions, bigger explosions and more explosions. I'm fine with bombs being in the game, I'm fine with them being a huge part of the game, I just don't want each mission to be trying to trump the last one in terms of spectacle, I'd much rather stick to the classic AC formula of effortlessly stylish speed stealth.

[Harri]

I wish ezio functioned a bit like old snake gameplay wise, with not as much of a tendency to go free running and stabbing, but rather taking a more passive approach with bombs and new gadgets. Instead, altair would fulfill the free running and roaming segments.

[CorgiShinobi]

There might be other moments where Ezio becomes injured due to his age, though I hope that wouldn't happen to often. You never know, his final moments could be in a weakened state where he's trying desperately to escape. In the end, he does elude his foes, but all his strength has left him.

 

As this is "Revelations," it would be kinda cool if Ezio, before dying, talked to Desmond as he's aware of his role as a "prophet." Not as directly as Minerva did, but kinda like, "If you're out there, know this..." kinda deal.

Edited August 28, 2011 by Atomsk88

[Yantelope]

So I saw this:

 

http://www.destructoid.com/ac-revelations-answers-some-questions-leaves-some-open-210035.phtml

 

and I read this: ""Keep in mind we're following the typical trilogy structure," Revelations creative director Alex Amancio told us during a behind-closed-doors demo at PAX. "So of course, everything can't be answered."

 

So what part of releasing several filler games in the middle to pad out the profit margins qualifies as "typical trilogy structure"?

 

Also this bothers me: "But at the same time, we want to avoid what I like to fall the X-Files effect, where you risk crumbling under the weight of your own mythology, so a lot of doors have been left open."

 

So they don't have the mythology written out already yet eh? I'd like to think this is a surprise but sadly I suspected this already. I fear they're going to suffer from MGS syndrome where they have trouble wrapping it all up because they're making it up as they go.

[deanb]

Oh come on. Even TV shows tend to suck at having it all planned out from the get go. This is a video game, expect even worse.

 

 

From the Trilogy thing I assume that means after Revelations is done we have Assassins Creed III with the final ancestor, and wrapping up the game. But yeah it's a bit weird. It's more a stretched out part II than individual stories.

 

The typical trilogy structure goes:

 

1 - You start off. You're still feeling your way through the world and since you should never assume you'll get to do your whole trilogy it's usually self enclosed (enough). Usually introduces you to most of the charachters and the big bad.

 

2. The obstacle. Something bad will happen (say you get discovered by Abstergo or stab the wrong person). As you're now lined up for a trilogy you can be more open ended. Normally this is a time of struggle.

 

3. The fight. You finally go and fight back on the big bad. The protagonist is now stronger, wiser, etc. Evil is vanquished and good prevails. The end scrolling credits please leave the cinema quietly.

 

 

 

 

1. The empire arrives on the scene, you find out your destiny. You go on a self enclosed adventure, meet a bunch of people, meet the bad guy, fend it off.

 

2. Your friends are betrayed, cut up into pieces, and frozen. You also lose a limb. All in all life sucks. Oh and it turns out you were adopted.

 

3. You are now wiser stronger and able to fend off a mobsters pet. You then go to your final battle. Fight off the evil, your dad turns out to be good and throws evil down a maintenance shaft. HOORAY!! FIREWORKS! GHOSTS!

 

 

1. You go on a standard mission, the bad guys and your destiny is revealed. You go on a self enclosed adventure, meet a bunch of people, screw one of them, fend off the bad guy.

 

2. Humans are being stolen. You meet more people, your ex is pissed and your old non-nuked friend even more so. You find out the kidnapped humans don't look so pretty anymore and a bunch of new people you meet die and you also kinda trigger all of the bad guys to come at you and you currently have no hope of defending yourself.

 

3. You're stronger, wiser and you get to play alongside your old mentor. You go in for the final battle and all that has improved up to now is you have a claw and a sex change.

[Yantelope]

Yeah, George Lucas described the typical trilogy best. What he said was basically Chapter 1: introduce the characters. Chapter 2: get them into the worst possible situation. Chapter 3: get them out of it. It makes sense really.

 

For AC it would be Chapter 1: Introduce Miles, Lucy, templars, assassin's and struggle. Chapter 2: learn

The world is headed for destruction when the sun is going to explode

Chapter 3: save the world.

 

Yes, I know that you can't have everything planned out from the get go but filling in the cracks is different from filling in the major plot points.

Edited August 29, 2011 by Yantelope

[Hot Heart]

They are equating a trilogy structure to a three act structure? I know there are similarities but I think each installment needs to stand on its own as well. That's why any extraneous stuff is going to be seen as filler.

[deanb]

Most games can stand on their own in a game mechanic sense. But playing Brotherhood on it's own in a story sense just doesn't work. It relies so much on playing (at least) ACII.

[Yantelope]

Most games can stand on their own in a game mechanic sense. But playing Brotherhood on it's own in a story sense just doesn't work. It relies so much on playing (at least) ACII.

 

 

That's pretty common these days though. Look at Halo: Recon ODST

Edited August 29, 2011 by Yantelope

[Hot Heart]

I don't think ODST relied on 2, storywise. Just helped if you wanted more of the background knowledge.

[Mr W Phallus]

Hmm well you can sort of fit the major plot points of Desmond's story so far onto the Star Wars template, the divisions between games are just in the wrong places. Really it should go something like this:

 

 

1. Desmond is held captive at Abstergo, he discovers he has special ancestry and has inherited a special power: 'eagle vision'. He is rescued by Lucy, who takes him to meet the plucky underdog good guy rebel team. Yay, everyone is happy we all celebrate.

2. Shit, the plucky underdog good guy rebel team's hideout on Hoth has been discovered, they narrowly escape. Things start to get a bit better, Desmond hones his powers (the bleeding effect). The team make an important discovery and head to cloud city Rome. Oh snap! Stabby stabby. Everything goes down the shitter and we're left with more problems than we began with.

3. Desmond, presumably, saves the world.

 

I couldn't even begin to start mapping out Altair and Ezio's stories. The first part of the above trilogy is really lacking compared to the increased scope of the later games. Basically it's bullshit because they've played their 'oh no' trump card for part two already and yet supposedly part two isn't done yet.

 

 

Most games can stand on their own in a game mechanic sense. But playing Brotherhood on it's own in a story sense just doesn't work. It relies so much on playing (at least) ACII.

It does? The actual story is simple and self-contained, it just lacks a bit of exposition at the start to give you a reason to care about the characters, but even then I can't see it making much difference. Mario's death was hardly emotional even having played ACII.

[Hot Heart]

Mario's death was hardly emotional even having played ACII.

 

You didn'ta care? But it'sa him: Mario!

[Mr W Phallus]

Mario's death was hardly emotional even having played ACII.

 

You didn'ta care? But it'sa him: Mario!

Admittedly one of the best lines ever included in a video game, unfortunately for all the wrong reasons.

[CorgiShinobi]

While I haven't played Brotherhood, I'm leaning towards Yant's suspicion that AC is going to contract MGS syndrome. The story isn't that revolutionary, but it's setting itself up for an epic conclusion. I mean, when you start going on about two world organizations and historical figures either being Templar or Assassin, it's putting a lot on the plate. Then you have Subject 16's ramblings and so forth.

 

EDIT: 'Ight, I got all 20 clips and watched "The Truth." Haven't seen it since 2009.

 

I have to say, the third and second to last puzzles were a bit ridiculous. I got that the item that was worshiped was the Sun, but I didn't know what picture to use as the fifth entry. Eventually I realized the Eastern Gate referred to the Sun's rising, but I accidentally removed one of the correct pictures. I was baffled until I realized what I had done.

 

The second to last... I feel almost idiotic. I thought the symbols at first went into three separate patterns. 3-6-9, 11-12-13, and 25-30-35. It worked out for the first two patterns, but there was no 30 in the glyphs. I could clearly see the math equation to the side, but I brushed it off as techno-garble (like in the background). Looked up the solution and I felt great shame. I thought it too coincidental that the equation ended in 35 and that was the last number on the wheel.

Edited August 30, 2011 by Atomsk88

[Hot Heart]

Obviously I don't know what they've got planned but it seems like the gameplay is never going to be able to match the scope of the story. I felt the same way about inFAMOUS which, by now, seems too shackled to the same 'restore the ruined city' sandbox elements to really do something great.