PDA

View Full Version : Question PC Explain AC



Aztec251
08-05-2017, 08:01 PM
I don't understand AC story, what about it? what are Templers? what is there goal? why assassins killing them?


2nd question, I was playing ac4 it AMAZING GAME


AC4: is the last guy who was shot by pistols by Abstrgo was the guy who told you to hack Computers and cameras? and by the way why djd I hack PC devices?

and explain the ending of ac4.. how did Edward kenway died?



by the way... do you think the new ac is bad? I don't find it nice.. Ubisoft ruined ac games after 4 and rogue.. AC2 was the best one so far. the soundtracks (jesper kyd ofc) and the city

SixKeys
08-06-2017, 01:20 PM
Brace yourself. :p

http://gag.fm/uploads/posts/t/l-9875.png


The short version: Assassins think humanity should be free to make their own choices, good or bad. Templars think most humans are not capable of making rational choices, so they want to control mankind and make their decisions for them.

Your other questions require a slightly more complex explanation:

Yes, the guy who was shot at the end of AC4 was the guy who had been telling you to hack stuff. He used the alias John Standish, but was actually the reincarnated husband of Juno, Aita. Juno and Aita were both members of the First Civilization, aka the people who created the Pieces of Eden. People who have been reincarnated as Aita are known as Sages. (Sort of like the Dalai Lama is just a title that gets passed on from generation to generation.) So the person you fought as Edward Kenway was essentially the same person you meet as "yourself" at Abstergo. The reason you were hacking computers was because John/Aita was using you to get closer to Juno. Juno is currently searching for a human body to use as a host for her consciousness, so Aita believed that if she took over your body, they could finally be together again. However, Juno rejects you for reasons that aren't really explained.

Edward doesn't die in AC4. The ending (post-credits) shows him at the London Opera with his daughter, Jenny, and his son, Haytham (the father of Connor from AC3). Edward's death happens outside the games, specifically in the AC3 novelization ("Forsaken" by Oliver Bowden). He is attacked during the night in his own home and killed by Templars while defending his family.


As for the upcoming AC: Origins: none of us have played the game yet, so who knows how it'll be? A few of us have gotten to play the demo, and most of us seem to have a positive feeling about the game based on those impressions. :)

cawatrooper9
08-07-2017, 03:44 PM
I'm guessing AC4 is your first entry in the series?

Just to add to what Six said-

The Templars are based off the real life Knights Templar (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knights_Templar), and the Assassins are based on the Hashshashin (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassins), particularly their depiction in Bartol's Alamut (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alamut_(Bartol_novel)). So, it's kind of cool that both groups have real life inspiration!

You'll also notice that both of those groups existed during the Crusades. That's why if you go all the way back to the first game in the series, it occurs during the Third Crusade- it was a time when the shadowy war between the Assassin and Templars in the series was just a little more out in the open.

However, remember that while that era might have been the beginnings of the real-life Assassins and Templars, in the game they existed for far longer. That's why we're going to see many of the Assassin traditions coming up in the new Assassins Creed: Origins.

Even before both orders started, though, they were represented by opposing idealogies. Templars value control, while Assassins value freedom. While the Assassins are typically portrayed as "good guys", this dichotomy does allow for some grey morality. For example, if the Assassins value freedom, are they responsible for when freedom causes individuals to act against their own interested or the interests of society? If the Templars value control, might their strategies be effective in stopping terrorism and crime? It's definitely a good jumping off point for some classic philosophical discussion.