PDA

View Full Version : Kind of dissapointed in a few things [Possible spoilers]



GunnarGunderson
12-06-2011, 09:14 PM
First off, I remember back around E3 all of the devs were saying that the events of the E3 trailer happen in the game, was it their intention all along to just slap it onto the game as the opening cutscene?

Secondly, Weren't there 7 or so studios collaborating on this game? Where did all of that man power go? ACR had significantly less content than ACB.


Thirdly, this is just a minor annoyance of mine but I would describe it as inexcusable. During the first few hours you are forced to buy a piece of shoulder armour and you are not allowed to ever remove it, and then in the last cutscene it shows Ezio without it, and that to me is just a slap in the face because I went through the whole game only wearing the armour Ubisoft forced me to, And then I see Ezio wearing an armour set that is and never will be available to me.

Poodle_of_Doom
12-06-2011, 10:15 PM
Not to mention the complete lack of revelations, or any true development of the story line....

eagleforlife1
12-07-2011, 03:27 AM
Originally posted by Poodle_of_Doom:
Not to mention the complete lack of revelations, or any true development of the story line....

Exactly, I'm pretty sure that it is illegal to sell the game on the basis that it contains revelations and then not provide any. Some people may have not intended to buy another filler game but because it was titled revelations done so anyway. The only thing that I can think of as a revelation is the fact that Lucy died but that was so brief and so little emphasis was put on it that even that was barely one. The fact that Altair died was not a revelation as we all know that he had to die at some point. Ezio's retirement wasn't a revelation either, they were both developments of the story.

Poodle_of_Doom
12-07-2011, 09:09 AM
I can't think of any true revelations.

RzaRecta357
12-07-2011, 09:16 AM
Lucy dead.
Shaun thinks Desmond is a sleeper.
Desmonds Dad.
Ezio a conduit.
Altairs Death.
Altairs P.O.E we've been speculating on since AC2.
Ezio's spouse whom he continues the bloodline.
Who the templar master of Constinople was.
What the temples were for exactly and where the grand one is.
What Jupiter looked like. All gods accounted for except Consus.

MP Revelations.

Information on the order.
Information on Abstergo.
Project information.
The location and mission of Daniel Cross.

thekarlone
12-07-2011, 09:25 AM
There's a few revelations in the end of the game, but not in the meaning you think.

The main revelation is the video after Jupiter speaks. Note "apocalypse" means "revelation". Get it?

value_zero
12-07-2011, 09:26 AM
Im not sure but i think acb was made as many studios as this one, dont u notice how AI is much more improved, in ac2 and acb ur assassins and groups were kind of dumb, but in this game they act more accordingly, and the main missions are polished from bugs (still not perfect), and also the vsync bugs are gone, thats still something.

LightRey
12-07-2011, 09:43 AM
Originally posted by RzaRecta357:
Lucy dead.
Shaun thinks Desmond is a sleeper.
Desmonds Dad.
Ezio a conduit.
Altairs Death.
Altairs P.O.E we've been speculating on since AC2.
Ezio's spouse whom he continues the bloodline.
Who the templar master of Constinople was.
What the temples were for exactly and where the grand one is.
What Jupiter looked like. All gods accounted for except Consus.

MP Revelations.

Information on the order.
Information on Abstergo.
Project information.
The location and mission of Daniel Cross.
Exactly. More than enough revelations. Complaints that there weren't many are invalid.

SteelCity999
12-07-2011, 09:59 AM
Originally posted by LightRey:
Exactly. More than enough revelations. Complaints that there weren't many are invalid.

But they failed more often than not.

For instance, they took the time to introduce you to Subject 16 but only really used him in the context of Desmond being trapped in Animus. Why not take the time to reveal what all the fun and games he was doing was all about? Why not expand his story and how it fits into the overall narrative? Wouldn't you being going, "WTF 16! What are you doing? What does it all mean!" We are left to believe he is gone now possibly and those questions may never get answered.

Most of the revelations in the game were all but confirmed in other media and for the most part were letdown revealations - very anti-climatic. For a series that has left you dumbfounded at times during the end of the game, the revelations were a 4 on a 10 scale. There was so much they could have done with the world they had created in the previous games and they didn't.

eagleforlife1
12-07-2011, 10:04 AM
Originally posted by LightRey:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by RzaRecta357:
Lucy dead.
Shaun thinks Desmond is a sleeper.
Desmonds Dad.
Ezio a conduit.
Altairs Death.
Altairs P.O.E we've been speculating on since AC2.
Ezio's spouse whom he continues the bloodline.
Who the templar master of Constinople was.
What the temples were for exactly and where the grand one is.
What Jupiter looked like. All gods accounted for except Consus.

MP Revelations.

Information on the order.
Information on Abstergo.
Project information.
The location and mission of Daniel Cross.
Exactly. More than enough revelations. Complaints that there weren't many are invalid. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

* We already knew Lucy was dead
* Shaun thinking Desmond is a sleeper isn't a revelation it is plot development
* The emails in ACB practically told us about Desmond's dad already and the convo at the end of ACB while the credits rolled basically confirmed it was Desmond's dad.
* Ezio was a conduit in AC2.
* Altair was always going to die; he wasn't going to live forever.
* The fact that it was yet another Apple in the Library was an anti-climax.
* Who Ezio continued his bloodline with and who the templar master of Constantinople were aren't revelations they are basic plot elements.
* I couldn't care less about what Jupiter looked like in all honesty.
* I'll give you the Grand Temple location one; that was a revelation.

I haven't looked at the MP revelations yet as I haven't unlocked everything from that yet.

lRushdown
12-07-2011, 10:42 AM
Originally posted by BradKinn:
Thirdly, this is just a minor annoyance of mine but I would describe it as inexcusable. During the first few hours you are forced to buy a piece of shoulder armour and you are not allowed to ever remove it, and then in the last cutscene it shows Ezio without it, and that to me is just a slap in the face because I went through the whole game only wearing the armour Ubisoft forced me to, And then I see Ezio wearing an armour set that is and never will be available to me.

-Obtain Ishak Pasha's armor and equip it
-Replay Sequence 1 Memory 2 all the way through

Congratulations, you now have no armor.

Poodle_of_Doom
12-07-2011, 12:50 PM
Originally posted by SteelCity999:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LightRey:
Exactly. More than enough revelations. Complaints that there weren't many are invalid.

But they failed more often than not.

For instance, they took the time to introduce you to Subject 16 but only really used him in the context of Desmond being trapped in Animus. Why not take the time to reveal what all the fun and games he was doing was all about? Why not expand his story and how it fits into the overall narrative? Wouldn't you being going, "WTF 16! What are you doing? What does it all mean!" We are left to believe he is gone now possibly and those questions may never get answered.

Most of the revelations in the game were all but confirmed in other media and for the most part were letdown revealations - very anti-climatic. For a series that has left you dumbfounded at times during the end of the game, the revelations were a 4 on a 10 scale. There was so much they could have done with the world they had created in the previous games and they didn't. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Originally posted by eagleforlife1:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LightRey:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by RzaRecta357:
Lucy dead.
Shaun thinks Desmond is a sleeper.
Desmonds Dad.
Ezio a conduit.
Altairs Death.
Altairs P.O.E we've been speculating on since AC2.
Ezio's spouse whom he continues the bloodline.
Who the templar master of Constinople was.
What the temples were for exactly and where the grand one is.
What Jupiter looked like. All gods accounted for except Consus.

MP Revelations.

Information on the order.
Information on Abstergo.
Project information.
The location and mission of Daniel Cross.
Exactly. More than enough revelations. Complaints that there weren't many are invalid. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

* We already knew Lucy was dead
* Shaun thinking Desmond is a sleeper isn't a revelation it is plot development
* The emails in ACB practically told us about Desmond's dad already and the convo at the end of ACB while the credits rolled basically confirmed it was Desmond's dad.
* Ezio was a conduit in AC2.
* Altair was always going to die; he wasn't going to live forever.
* The fact that it was yet another Apple in the Library was an anti-climax.
* Who Ezio continued his bloodline with and who the templar master of Constantinople were aren't revelations they are basic plot elements.
* I couldn't care less about what Jupiter looked like in all honesty.
* I'll give you the Grand Temple location one; that was a revelation.

I haven't looked at the MP revelations yet as I haven't unlocked everything from that yet. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

And now, what most would consider revelations will go out the window...

ProdiGurl
12-07-2011, 01:03 PM
I truly don't grasp why people hold these negative opinions.
I'm not a hardcore, micro story-line follower, but the "revelation" for me out of this was in Ezio watching Altair's memories and learning what Altair did to advance the Order of the Assassins - he put his entire life into it.

I also learned that Altair basically had the final revelation that he (as w/ Ezio's ending) wasn't going to be the one to end the Templar's - that he was just a conduit in the war against them.
Both of them knew when their time was over and to pass the mantle so to speak.

Then you have the whole scene with that TW (whatever) explaining what happened.
It's all set up for AC3.

I think it's becuz you guys had these personal questions that you want answered when that's not what they promised would be answered for you in the first place.

We got a bigger picture imo. It's very possible that AC3 is going to be used to tie the story together more, not the end of Ezio's trilogy. This was more about what Ezio was looking for, not us.
Ezio wasn't looking for Lucy details, some fans were.


? I don't get this disappointment.

iNvid22
12-07-2011, 01:05 PM
brptherhood was a one off still based in italy so they could use things from ac2, and the game still managed to pack a lot in because most of the groundwork was already in place.

acr is a new and completley different city, new groundwork and new features (imo terrible new features such as den defense) must have used up quite a bit of time.

because of this ACR is lacking a lot of content. Ubi thought (rightly) fans would just bite because its the ending to altair and ezio. its not a bad game, but the 1yr cycle is hurting the series now.

Poodle_of_Doom
12-07-2011, 01:12 PM
Truth of the matter is, they presented the game as one to wrap up some of the loose ends for us. It didn't. It created more questions.

At that, we've already gathered said information about Abbas, and Altair, Maria, and whomever else from the books,... so why did we need this game to reiterate these facts?

At that, I'm glad Ezio knew when to step down,... but we've all known that was coming for a while, so why is that top of the list for Revelations?

At that, Lucy's death was nothing super surprising. We've been arguing for almost a year as to wether she was or wasn't dead. Six months ago, people would of fought you tooth and nail, claiming she was still alive. They'd of torn you a new a-hole for suggesting that they were wrong. Now these same people tell you to shut up and get over her death,... WTF? Really?

And the part with Jupiter was no suprise there... These kind of revelations have become common place, and was expected. He told us about the coordinates from The Da Vinci Dissappearance DLC, and how they related to the tombs, but that was really no big deal. It was basically filling in a gap, not answering questions...

AnthonyA85
12-07-2011, 01:25 PM
iNvidious01 wrote:
1yr cycle is hurting the series now.


I agree, 1 year cycles are NOT a good development strategy for games such as this.

But i can see why they did, they want to make sure they hit the 2012 mark, and make sure the storyline doesn't go out of synch with the real roman calender.

Personally, the only thing i've found disapointing about revelations (from watching walkthroughs on youtube) is all that stuff about The Truth is never brought up.

The true meaning behind Subject 16's speech is never brought up or explained, it's like the writers completely forgot about it.

ProdiGurl
12-07-2011, 01:27 PM
>> At that, we've already gathered said information about Abbas, and Altair, Maria, and whomever else from the books,... so why did we need this game to reiterate these facts?<<

Alot of us haven't read any of the books.

But again poodle, those are YOUR questions, I don't recall them saying they'd answer every single fans personal question in the ACR conclusion. I sincerely believe as in the Trailer, this was about what Ezio was looking for and he did find what he needed, and knew about this 'message system' to communicate thru over centuries of time.
It's EZIO'S Revelation - not ours. (imo).

It does wrap up alot and AC3 is going to include more info in it as the story continues so it's probable that alot more info is on the way.

The story was fantastic, to say it's disappointing is really amazing to me.

& as for Subject 16 info, we don't know that his story doesn't continue in AC3.

eagleforlife1
12-07-2011, 01:37 PM
Originally posted by Poodle_of_Doom:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SteelCity999:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LightRey:
Exactly. More than enough revelations. Complaints that there weren't many are invalid.

But they failed more often than not.

For instance, they took the time to introduce you to Subject 16 but only really used him in the context of Desmond being trapped in Animus. Why not take the time to reveal what all the fun and games he was doing was all about? Why not expand his story and how it fits into the overall narrative? Wouldn't you being going, "WTF 16! What are you doing? What does it all mean!" We are left to believe he is gone now possibly and those questions may never get answered.

Most of the revelations in the game were all but confirmed in other media and for the most part were letdown revealations - very anti-climatic. For a series that has left you dumbfounded at times during the end of the game, the revelations were a 4 on a 10 scale. There was so much they could have done with the world they had created in the previous games and they didn't. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Originally posted by eagleforlife1:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LightRey:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by RzaRecta357:
Lucy dead.
Shaun thinks Desmond is a sleeper.
Desmonds Dad.
Ezio a conduit.
Altairs Death.
Altairs P.O.E we've been speculating on since AC2.
Ezio's spouse whom he continues the bloodline.
Who the templar master of Constinople was.
What the temples were for exactly and where the grand one is.
What Jupiter looked like. All gods accounted for except Consus.

MP Revelations.

Information on the order.
Information on Abstergo.
Project information.
The location and mission of Daniel Cross.
Exactly. More than enough revelations. Complaints that there weren't many are invalid. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

* We already knew Lucy was dead
* Shaun thinking Desmond is a sleeper isn't a revelation it is plot development
* The emails in ACB practically told us about Desmond's dad already and the convo at the end of ACB while the credits rolled basically confirmed it was Desmond's dad.
* Ezio was a conduit in AC2.
* Altair was always going to die; he wasn't going to live forever.
* The fact that it was yet another Apple in the Library was an anti-climax.
* Who Ezio continued his bloodline with and who the templar master of Constantinople was aren't revelations they are basic plot elements.
* I couldn't care less about what Jupiter looked like in all honesty.
* I'll give you the Grand Temple location one; that was a revelation.

I haven't looked at the MP revelations yet as I haven't unlocked everything from that yet. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

And now, what most would consider revelations will go out the window... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

iouaj
12-07-2011, 01:43 PM
Originally posted by lRushdown:

-Obtain Ishak Pasha's armor and equip it
-Replay Sequence 1 Memory 2 all the way through

Congratulations, you now have no armor.

Actually just a note on this - you don't need the Ishak Armor, just the master assassin's will do (basically you do need one or the other though) as I tried this on my second playthrough wearing the MA Armor, before even getting all the Ishak pages. You don't need to equip the armor beforehand either as it is automatically equipped when you do the replay anyhow. Hope that helps.

ProdiGurl
12-07-2011, 01:44 PM
>>
* We already knew Lucy was dead
<<

Actually, from the threads I've seen around here, alot didn't believe she was actually dead and still don't even after the info was given.
We know she's buried near Rome too.

But that doesn't stop the speculation that she didn't really die.
Subject 16 may make more appearances so they may not have wanted to close that up w/ all the "revelation" about him at this time. He may have a possible role in the future within the Animus?

When a series literally ends (no more AC), then I do expect to find out everything. But this story is still unfolding and ongoing.
Ezio's story is now concluded, his revelations were given to him (us)....

rileypoole1234
12-07-2011, 01:46 PM
eagleforlife1... It's not bloody illegal. How the hell could it be illegal?

Animuses
12-07-2011, 01:50 PM
The fact that it was only Altair's apple in the library was a JOKE!

twenty_glyphs
12-07-2011, 02:03 PM
Originally posted by ProdiGurl:
I think it's becuz you guys had these personal questions that you want answered when that's not what they promised would be answered for you in the first place.

We are not talking about "personal questions" that weren't answered, we're talking about major plot points that have been built up to a boiling point that were totally ignored in Revelations. What is the purpose of the entire Subject 16 plotline? The glyphs he left obviously have meaning besides just being markers for the Truth files, and there is clearly something important he wants Desmond to see in the Truth video that is majorly important with Adam and Eve. He even told us in Brotherhood to find Eve in Eden because her DNA is the key. We finally meet the guy and his personality is totally different to what we've seen in the past two games, and not once does the topic of what he's been trying to show Desmond come up. Not even one little mention.

And for Lucy, the reason for her death is a major question that hasn't even been alluded to in the games. You seriously don't understand why we would want to find out concrete info about the meaning behind her death when it was the big surprise cliffhanger at the end of Brotherhood, and why we would be upset when that was ignored in Revelations? There are a couple of theories, but so far we don't know anything concrete about why Juno made Desmond do that. All we got in this game were a couple of background conversations talking about burying Lucy. That is a completely anti-climactic followup to an incredible cliffhanger from last year. We waited and speculated for a year and that's all they gave us -- just brushed aside as if it was never important.


Originally posted by Poodle_of_Doom:
Truth of the matter is, they presented the game as one to wrap up some of the loose ends for us. It didn't. It created more questions.

Actually, a big part of my disappointment with Revelations is that it didn't really create more questions. For me, I thought Brotherhood would answer some questions and every time it revealed a little more about the story, it brought up even more questions than it revealed. But at least that was exciting and interesting, leading to fun speculation. Revelations did not really add any new mysteries to the mix because it was missing stuff like the Truth and the Codex pages or Scrolls of Brutus. There was just nothing cryptic or mysterious about it. There was no truth with cryptic puzzles and hidden messages from Subject 16, no mystery about the "memory-within-memory" patterns when Rebecca tried to access Ezio's memory of hiding the Apple and the mention of Subject 15, and no big surprise ending like the last two games had. We got a message from Jupiter, which was actually completely expected.

After Brotherhood, there was so much to digest and try to figure out that kept my interest at a high level for months afterwards. After Revelations, there's just not really anything new to digest and keep my interest -- it feels empty. It was just a victory lap for Alta´r and Ezio that didn't progress the main plot and didn't reveal more about this mysterious universe that had captivated me for the previous 3 games.

eagleforlife1
12-07-2011, 02:43 PM
Originally posted by rileypoole1234:
eagleforlife1... It's not bloody illegal. How the hell could it be illegal?

False advertising is definitely illegal.

Poodle_of_Doom
12-07-2011, 03:50 PM
Originally posted by ProdiGurl:
>> At that, we've already gathered said information about Abbas, and Altair, Maria, and whomever else from the books,... so why did we need this game to reiterate these facts?<<

Alot of us haven't read any of the books.

But again poodle, those are YOUR questions, I don't recall them saying they'd answer every single fans personal question in the ACR conclusion. I sincerely believe as in the Trailer, this was about what Ezio was looking for and he did find what he needed, and knew about this 'message system' to communicate thru over centuries of time.
It's EZIO'S Revelation - not ours. (imo).

It does wrap up alot and AC3 is going to include more info in it as the story continues so it's probable that alot more info is on the way.

The story was fantastic, to say it's disappointing is really amazing to me.

& as for Subject 16 info, we don't know that his story doesn't continue in AC3.


But what you need to understand is that they're not my questions... as I already had the answers. In fact, the questions that I have, are all the same as what I had from Brotherhood... so what did we acomplish?


Originally posted by eagleforlife1:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Poodle_of_Doom:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SteelCity999:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LightRey:
Exactly. More than enough revelations. Complaints that there weren't many are invalid.

But they failed more often than not.

For instance, they took the time to introduce you to Subject 16 but only really used him in the context of Desmond being trapped in Animus. Why not take the time to reveal what all the fun and games he was doing was all about? Why not expand his story and how it fits into the overall narrative? Wouldn't you being going, "WTF 16! What are you doing? What does it all mean!" We are left to believe he is gone now possibly and those questions may never get answered.

Most of the revelations in the game were all but confirmed in other media and for the most part were letdown revealations - very anti-climatic. For a series that has left you dumbfounded at times during the end of the game, the revelations were a 4 on a 10 scale. There was so much they could have done with the world they had created in the previous games and they didn't. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Originally posted by eagleforlife1:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LightRey:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by RzaRecta357:
Lucy dead.
Shaun thinks Desmond is a sleeper.
Desmonds Dad.
Ezio a conduit.
Altairs Death.
Altairs P.O.E we've been speculating on since AC2.
Ezio's spouse whom he continues the bloodline.
Who the templar master of Constinople was.
What the temples were for exactly and where the grand one is.
What Jupiter looked like. All gods accounted for except Consus.

MP Revelations.

Information on the order.
Information on Abstergo.
Project information.
The location and mission of Daniel Cross.
Exactly. More than enough revelations. Complaints that there weren't many are invalid. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

* We already knew Lucy was dead
* Shaun thinking Desmond is a sleeper isn't a revelation it is plot development
* The emails in ACB practically told us about Desmond's dad already and the convo at the end of ACB while the credits rolled basically confirmed it was Desmond's dad.
* Ezio was a conduit in AC2.
* Altair was always going to die; he wasn't going to live forever.
* The fact that it was yet another Apple in the Library was an anti-climax.
* Who Ezio continued his bloodline with and who the templar master of Constantinople was aren't revelations they are basic plot elements.
* I couldn't care less about what Jupiter looked like in all honesty.
* I'll give you the Grand Temple location one; that was a revelation.

I haven't looked at the MP revelations yet as I haven't unlocked everything from that yet. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

And now, what most would consider revelations will go out the window... </div></BLOCKQUOTE> </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Eagle, I assume you burried a post in there some place, I'm just to lazy to look for it.


Originally posted by ProdiGurl:
>>
* We already knew Lucy was dead
<<

Actually, from the threads I've seen around here, alot didn't believe she was actually dead and still don't even after the info was given.
We know she's buried near Rome too.

But that doesn't stop the speculation that she didn't really die.
Subject 16 may make more appearances so they may not have wanted to close that up w/ all the "revelation" about him at this time. He may have a possible role in the future within the Animus?

When a series literally ends (no more AC), then I do expect to find out everything. But this story is still unfolding and ongoing.
Ezio's story is now concluded, his revelations were given to him (us)....

That's a really good point about subject 16.


Originally posted by Animuses:
The fact that it was only Altair's apple in the library was a JOKE!

I completely agree... here we are, thinking we're going to see Altair's Library, and instead, we get another Apple.


Originally posted by twenty_glyphs:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ProdiGurl:
I think it's becuz you guys had these personal questions that you want answered when that's not what they promised would be answered for you in the first place.

We are not talking about "personal questions" that weren't answered, we're talking about major plot points that have been built up to a boiling point that were totally ignored in Revelations. What is the purpose of the entire Subject 16 plotline? The glyphs he left obviously have meaning besides just being markers for the Truth files, and there is clearly something important he wants Desmond to see in the Truth video that is majorly important with Adam and Eve. He even told us in Brotherhood to find Eve in Eden because her DNA is the key. We finally meet the guy and his personality is totally different to what we've seen in the past two games, and not once does the topic of what he's been trying to show Desmond come up. Not even one little mention.

And for Lucy, the reason for her death is a major question that hasn't even been alluded to in the games. You seriously don't understand why we would want to find out concrete info about the meaning behind her death when it was the big surprise cliffhanger at the end of Brotherhood, and why we would be upset when that was ignored in Revelations? There are a couple of theories, but so far we don't know anything concrete about why Juno made Desmond do that. All we got in this game were a couple of background conversations talking about burying Lucy. That is a completely anti-climactic followup to an incredible cliffhanger from last year. We waited and speculated for a year and that's all they gave us -- just brushed aside as if it was never important.


Originally posted by Poodle_of_Doom:
Truth of the matter is, they presented the game as one to wrap up some of the loose ends for us. It didn't. It created more questions.

Actually, a big part of my disappointment with Revelations is that it didn't really create more questions. For me, I thought Brotherhood would answer some questions and every time it revealed a little more about the story, it brought up even more questions than it revealed. But at least that was exciting and interesting, leading to fun speculation. Revelations did not really add any new mysteries to the mix because it was missing stuff like the Truth and the Codex pages or Scrolls of Brutus. There was just nothing cryptic or mysterious about it. There was no truth with cryptic puzzles and hidden messages from Subject 16, no mystery about the "memory-within-memory" patterns when Rebecca tried to access Ezio's memory of hiding the Apple and the mention of Subject 15, and no big surprise ending like the last two games had. We got a message from Jupiter, which was actually completely expected.

After Brotherhood, there was so much to digest and try to figure out that kept my interest at a high level for months afterwards. After Revelations, there's just not really anything new to digest and keep my interest -- it feels empty. It was just a victory lap for Alta´r and Ezio that didn't progress the main plot and didn't reveal more about this mysterious universe that had captivated me for the previous 3 games. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I completely agree with what you said in the beginning. However my point was that there has to be a reason why these things weren't addressed, why Shawn was the only one at her funeral, why S16 and Desmond didn't have more of a chat, or why his personality was radically changed. I completely agree with you on the fact that it expanded on already common knowledge. Truth be known, I consider this a minor blip on the AC radar. A collosal falure at that....


Originally posted by eagleforlife1:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by rileypoole1234:
eagleforlife1... It's not bloody illegal. How the hell could it be illegal?

False advertising is definitely illegal. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I concur. I, for one, got what you meant with it.

LightRey
12-07-2011, 05:45 PM
Originally posted by eagleforlife1:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by rileypoole1234:
eagleforlife1... It's not bloody illegal. How the hell could it be illegal?

False advertising is definitely illegal. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I'm sorry, but aside from the fact that it most definitely wasn't false advertizing, as there most certainly were many revelations in the game, a term so ambiguous as "revelations" isn't going to get you any luck in court. Not to mention that to my knowledge they only claimed such things in interviews, which are generally (officially) not considered to be advertizements and therefore do not apply to the laws regarding false advertizing.

goclo822
12-07-2011, 06:15 PM
While I agree that there were some storyline issues and I was a little disappointed by the lack of revelations in regards to Desmonds story (more info on Lucy, why he had to do what he had to do, why he was in the coma, etc), I wouldn't call it a total disappointment.

There was a lot revealed in regards to Ezio which is probably how they intended it. Ya some of it was already revealed in the books and stuff but some of us haven't read the books. Those revelations should all be in the game regardless because the game is the canon of the series. It was cool to see Altair's past and I loved that Ezio got to see it as well. The apple in the library was somewhat anticlimactic but I think that opened up more storyline then it was meant to close. We also weren't entirely cheated on Desmond revelations. Desmond having TWCB reveal his and their purpose, what happened to them and the world, what Desmond has to do next, his father, I would count those all as revelations. Ya I expected more but I think his storyline is being saved for AC3.

All in all, I think this game was more meant to reveal things about Ezio and to Ezio and Desmond then it was meant to reveal full on plot points. I think everything is being saved for AC3 because the storyline is so deeply connected that revealing one thing will reveal too much too soon. The story is still developing and I think (and hope) AC3 will answer our remaining questions.

My main disappointment in regards to lack of revelations was with Subject 16. They hyped his appearance so much just for us to find out that practically all he had in the game was already spoiled anyway. They needed to answer more in regards to him. He is still just as much a mystery as he was before. Maybe even more-so. But maybe his storyline isn't finished either.

I think after AC3, things will become a lot more clear...I'm hoping anyway and I fear they may have left themselves with too much to deal with in the next game. Especially with them bringing in a new ancestor who's character will need build up.


Originally posted by twenty_glyphs:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ProdiGurl:
I think it's becuz you guys had these personal questions that you want answered when that's not what they promised would be answered for you in the first place.

We are not talking about "personal questions" that weren't answered, we're talking about major plot points that have been built up to a boiling point that were totally ignored in Revelations. What is the purpose of the entire Subject 16 plotline? The glyphs he left obviously have meaning besides just being markers for the Truth files, and there is clearly something important he wants Desmond to see in the Truth video that is majorly important with Adam and Eve. He even told us in Brotherhood to find Eve in Eden because her DNA is the key. We finally meet the guy and his personality is totally different to what we've seen in the past two games, and not once does the topic of what he's been trying to show Desmond come up. Not even one little mention.

And for Lucy, the reason for her death is a major question that hasn't even been alluded to in the games. You seriously don't understand why we would want to find out concrete info about the meaning behind her death when it was the big surprise cliffhanger at the end of Brotherhood, and why we would be upset when that was ignored in Revelations? There are a couple of theories, but so far we don't know anything concrete about why Juno made Desmond do that. All we got in this game were a couple of background conversations talking about burying Lucy. That is a completely anti-climactic followup to an incredible cliffhanger from last year. We waited and speculated for a year and that's all they gave us -- just brushed aside as if it was never important. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
This! This was my main problem with Revelations. While I don't think Revelations was completely lackluster in the revelations department, it was in regards to these 2 topics and these 2 topics were the main things that myself and probably most of the gamers were looking for revelations to. They were the biggest cliffhangers at the end of Brotherhood and they were the 2 things most expected answers to but we got nothing in either one. I'm left with just as many questions in regards to Lucy's death and Subject 16 as I was after Brotherhood...in fact, probably more-so. It wasn't fair for the devs to use Lucy's death as a cliffhanger to bring in gamers if they didn't intend to give us answers to it immediately after when we had waited a year for those answers. My only hope is that we are flooded with answers in Ac3 and that the wait will be worth it.

twenty_glyphs
12-07-2011, 06:36 PM
I agree that they probably have a lot of story surprises waiting for AC3 and simply couldn't reveal them now. They are also possibly so tied into the game's design, such as through new gameplay elements and puzzles, etc., that it would spoil that game to give them away at this point. I get that and am fine with it, but I expected a little more out of this game's story. Even stuff as simple as giving small, tantalizing clues to some of these mysteries without answering them would have gone a long way.

I will say Alta´r's story was disappointing mostly because they took it upon themselves to release The Secret Crusade in June, where they told most of his post-AC1 story. I know most people haven't read that book, but why release that book almost 5 months before Revelations and give away big plot points about what happened to Alta´r? That really took the wind out of his story's sails in the game, and I felt the game didn't even present those scenes as well as the book.

It's also disappointing because Alta´r's story does not elaborate on all the intriguing things that his Codex brought up. They made Genghis Khan seem like this big deal in the Codex, and that was just brushed aside. We also never get the sense during any of his memory seals that this is the same person who wrote the Codex and learned so much about technology and the Prophet, other than maybe the sixth seal. I feel like the Alta´r of the Codex was much more interesting than the Alta´r we saw in Revelations.

And they really never revealed what Alta´r saw in his "one last look" into the Apple, did they? It was hinted that it had something to do with his consciousness, soul, or "being" being preserved after he died. Perhaps that's what they were trying to go for by showing him passing on something of himself through his memories, but it certainly didn't come off as the answer to that tantalizing "one last look".

Having said all my complaints, I did enjoy Ezio's story and the new characters. I thought it was a bit short in places and wished it had been more developed, but I thought it was a good story for him and the game. I'm just disappointed at the lack of development beyond that. You can tell the game is just filler until the main course of AC3. We thought Brotherhood would be that, but it added a lot to the story that took it beyond that.

eagleforlife1
12-08-2011, 12:51 AM
Originally posted by LightRey:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by eagleforlife1:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by rileypoole1234:
eagleforlife1... It's not bloody illegal. How the hell could it be illegal?

False advertising is definitely illegal. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I'm sorry, but aside from the fact that it most definitely wasn't false advertizing, as there most certainly were many revelations in the game, a term so ambiguous as "revelations" isn't going to get you any luck in court. Not to mention that to my knowledge they only claimed such things in interviews, which are generally (officially) not considered to be advertizements and therefore do not apply to the laws regarding false advertizing. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Many people would disagree with you on this thread that there were 'many revelations' in the game.

Of course interviews are advertising the devs are trying to sell their game by bigging it up to magazines/websites for people to read and decide whether to buy the game or not based on what they know about it. People picked up the message that this game is going to clear a lot up from previous installments and yet we were left with more questions than answers.

Anyway, I'm not going to take them to court lol, I love the game; I just don't think there were many revelations.

AC-FANBOY
12-08-2011, 02:27 AM
I dunno, Revelations didn't have that exciting appeal compared to Brotherhood...

LightRey
12-08-2011, 03:16 AM
Originally posted by eagleforlife1:
Many people would disagree with you on this thread that there were 'many revelations' in the game.

Of course interviews are advertising the devs are trying to sell their game by bigging it up to magazines/websites for people to read and decide whether to buy the game or not based on what they know about it. People picked up the message that this game is going to clear a lot up from previous installments and yet we were left with more questions than answers.

Anyway, I'm not going to take them to court lol, I love the game; I just don't think there were many revelations.
Of course many people in this thread would disagree. Most people in this thread came to complain about the game.

This is not a matter of opinion on whether or not interviews are a manner of advertizing or that people "go the idea" that there were many revelations from them. Of course they are technically a form of advertizing, but they are not officially considered to be by law as they are not bound by the same principles as commercials, etc.

If you'd try to argue that they did false advertizing simply because you "feel" there weren't many revelations and you "feel" that they had "advertized" in an interview that there would be, then you will not have much to go on in court.

Besides, if you think 15+ revelations isn't many, then I really think this is just another thread that's being used as an excuse to rant on random aspects of the game.

eagleforlife1
12-08-2011, 03:23 AM
Originally posted by LightRey:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by eagleforlife1:
Many people would disagree with you on this thread that there were 'many revelations' in the game.

Of course interviews are advertising the devs are trying to sell their game by bigging it up to magazines/websites for people to read and decide whether to buy the game or not based on what they know about it. People picked up the message that this game is going to clear a lot up from previous installments and yet we were left with more questions than answers.

Anyway, I'm not going to take them to court lol, I love the game; I just don't think there were many revelations.
Of course many people in this thread would disagree. Most people in this thread came to complain about the game.

This is not a matter of opinion on whether or not interviews are a manner of advertizing or that people "go the idea" that there were many revelations from them. Of course they are technically a form of advertizing, but they are not officially considered to be by law as they are not bound by the same principles as commercials, etc.

If you'd try to argue that they did false advertizing simply because you "feel" there weren't many revelations and you "feel" that they had "advertized" in an interview that there would be, then you will not have much to go on in court.

Besides, if you think 15+ revelations isn't many, then I really think this is just another thread that's being used as an excuse to rant on random aspects of the game. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'm not going to bother arguing with you because your argument is clearly invalid in many areas. However, there were not 15 revelations as I have analysed on page 1 of this thread.

LightRey
12-08-2011, 04:15 AM
Originally posted by eagleforlife1:
I'm not going to bother arguing with you because your argument is clearly invalid in many areas. However, there were not 15 revelations as I have analysed on page 1 of this thread.
Let's assume you did not say that because you just didn't have anything you could counter that with.

If you would sue Ubisoft for false advertizing, you'd have to give grounds for that. Now I'm assuming from what you've said that your grounds are as follows:
1. The game is called Assassin's Creed: Revelations.
2. In interviews with Ubisoft representatives it was stated/hinted that the game would hold many revelations.
3. You don't consider 14 (let's assume you consider ever point on the list on page 1 to be an actual revelation) revelations to be "many".

Now let's remember that both the key terms "many" and "revelations" are very ambiguous. The word "many" is almost completely relative and the word "revelations" can apply to any revealed unknown in the game (every separate aspect of the Desmond missions could be considered a revelation for example).

There's also no contract, no official promise, no commercials that state the same, not even a written statement by the devs. All you have are these very ambiguous terms and your own disappointment.

That's why it will not hold up in court.

Btw, just because someone posted a list of revelations in this thread, doesn't mean that those were the only revelations or if I was basing my previous statement on said list.

eagleforlife1
12-08-2011, 04:34 AM
Originally posted by LightRey:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by eagleforlife1:
I'm not going to bother arguing with you because your argument is clearly invalid in many areas. However, there were not 15 revelations as I have analysed on page 1 of this thread.
Let's assume you did not say that because you just didn't have anything you could counter that with.

If you would sue Ubisoft for false advertizing, you'd have to give grounds for that. Now I'm assuming from what you've said that your grounds are as follows:
1. The game is called Assassin's Creed: Revelations.
2. In interviews with Ubisoft representatives it was stated/hinted that the game would hold many revelations.
3. You don't consider 14 (let's assume you consider ever point on the list on page 1 to be an actual revelation) revelations to be "many".

Now let's remember that both the key terms "many" and "revelations" are very ambiguous. The word "many" is almost completely relative and the word "revelations" can apply to any revealed unknown in the game (every separate aspect of the Desmond missions could be considered a revelation for example).

There's also no contract, no official promise, no commercials that state the same, not even a written statement by the devs. All you have are these very ambiguous terms and your own disappointment.

That's why it will not hold up in court.

Btw, just because someone posted a list of revelations in this thread, doesn't mean that those were the only revelations or if I was basing my previous statement on said list. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Again, you're not a lawyer, so I am not going to bother arguing with you but there are lawyers that could provide a very good case for false advertising.

LightRey
12-08-2011, 04:44 AM
Originally posted by eagleforlife1:
Again, you're not a lawyer, so I am not going to bother arguing with you but there are lawyers that could provide a very good case for false advertising.
Well, you can try of course, but I'm fairly sure that I'm right. I could ask my uncle of course, as he used to be a lawyer.

goclo822
12-08-2011, 04:48 AM
Originally posted by twenty_glyphs:
I agree that they probably have a lot of story surprises waiting for AC3 and simply couldn't reveal them now. They are also possibly so tied into the game's design, such as through new gameplay elements and puzzles, etc., that it would spoil that game to give them away at this point. I get that and am fine with it, but I expected a little more out of this game's story. Even stuff as simple as giving small, tantalizing clues to some of these mysteries without answering them would have gone a long way.

I will say Alta´r's story was disappointing mostly because they took it upon themselves to release The Secret Crusade in June, where they told most of his post-AC1 story. I know most people haven't read that book, but why release that book almost 5 months before Revelations and give away big plot points about what happened to Alta´r? That really took the wind out of his story's sails in the game, and I felt the game didn't even present those scenes as well as the book.

It's also disappointing because Alta´r's story does not elaborate on all the intriguing things that his Codex brought up. They made Genghis Khan seem like this big deal in the Codex, and that was just brushed aside. We also never get the sense during any of his memory seals that this is the same person who wrote the Codex and learned so much about technology and the Prophet, other than maybe the sixth seal. I feel like the Alta´r of the Codex was much more interesting than the Alta´r we saw in Revelations.

And they really never revealed what Alta´r saw in his "one last look" into the Apple, did they? It was hinted that it had something to do with his consciousness, soul, or "being" being preserved after he died. Perhaps that's what they were trying to go for by showing him passing on something of himself through his memories, but it certainly didn't come off as the answer to that tantalizing "one last look".

Having said all my complaints, I did enjoy Ezio's story and the new characters. I thought it was a bit short in places and wished it had been more developed, but I thought it was a good story for him and the game. I'm just disappointed at the lack of development beyond that. You can tell the game is just filler until the main course of AC3. We thought Brotherhood would be that, but it added a lot to the story that took it beyond that.
I do totally agree with you. It bothered me that we didn't even get a hint as to what to expect in the next game. They have hinted at the future since AC1 without giving anything a way (look at us still stumped on questions we've had since AC1), I don't see why they couldn't have done so again! Even if they just left us on a bunch of cliffhangers, at least that would have given us some clue as to what to expect for the next game. But instead we are going into AC3 almost blind. No hints to another ancestor, no info on what Desmond is going to be doing, no answers as to what Subject 16 has been talking about, no answers in regards to Lucy's death and absolutely no idea whether they will answer any of that in AC3.

As for Altair, I never read any of the books so Altair's storyline was a little more fulfilling for me then it was for most. But I see what everyone means when they say it was lackluster cause it definitely was in a lot of ways. Even for me who was completely unspoiled so for those who already knew everything, it really wasn't much. I honestly don't know what they were thinking releasing that book before the game. Had they not done that and had they not hyped this game so much in the "revelations" department, I think this game would have been much more enjoyable for everyone! I think they also could have chosen to focus on the more exciting aspects of Altair's and Ezio's life for their last game rather then this. Both his and Ezio's storylines felt a little short and dull in some places. I think they could have done more with it. Especially in regards to Altair and the apple. It was rather anticlimactic to find yet another apple in the library and then not get any revelation as to what Altair saw in it.

I only hope that Revelations was merely a stepping stone for AC3. It is rather surprising that Brotherhood seemed to be less filler than Revelations.

eagleforlife1
12-08-2011, 04:54 AM
Originally posted by LightRey:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by eagleforlife1:
Again, you're not a lawyer, so I am not going to bother arguing with you but there are lawyers that could provide a very good case for false advertising.
Well, you can try of course, but I'm fairly sure that I'm right. I could ask my uncle of course, as he used to be a lawyer. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

And I could ask my sister's friend's daughter-in-law's dog's cousin twice removed, because he used to be a lawyer as well.

LightRey
12-08-2011, 05:02 AM
Originally posted by eagleforlife1:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LightRey:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by eagleforlife1:
Again, you're not a lawyer, so I am not going to bother arguing with you but there are lawyers that could provide a very good case for false advertising.
Well, you can try of course, but I'm fairly sure that I'm right. I could ask my uncle of course, as he used to be a lawyer. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

And I could ask my sister's friend's daughter-in-law's dog's cousin twice removed, because he used to be a lawyer as well. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
A dog that was a lawyer? Wow, you must know some interesting people.

eagleforlife1
12-08-2011, 05:05 AM
Originally posted by LightRey:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by eagleforlife1:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LightRey:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by eagleforlife1:
Again, you're not a lawyer, so I am not going to bother arguing with you but there are lawyers that could provide a very good case for false advertising.
Well, you can try of course, but I'm fairly sure that I'm right. I could ask my uncle of course, as he used to be a lawyer. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

And I could ask my sister's friend's daughter-in-law's dog's cousin twice removed, because he used to be a lawyer as well. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
A dog that was a lawyer? Wow, you must know some interesting people. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

'Interesting' isn't the word that I would use.

Poodle_of_Doom
12-08-2011, 09:45 AM
Originally posted by LightRey:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by eagleforlife1:
I'm not going to bother arguing with you because your argument is clearly invalid in many areas. However, there were not 15 revelations as I have analysed on page 1 of this thread.
Let's assume you did not say that because you just didn't have anything you could counter that with.

If you would sue Ubisoft for false advertizing, you'd have to give grounds for that. Now I'm assuming from what you've said that your grounds are as follows:
1. The game is called Assassin's Creed: Revelations.
2. In interviews with Ubisoft representatives it was stated/hinted that the game would hold many revelations.
3. You don't consider 14 (let's assume you consider ever point on the list on page 1 to be an actual revelation) revelations to be "many".

Now let's remember that both the key terms "many" and "revelations" are very ambiguous. The word "many" is almost completely relative and the word "revelations" can apply to any revealed unknown in the game (every separate aspect of the Desmond missions could be considered a revelation for example).

There's also no contract, no official promise, no commercials that state the same, not even a written statement by the devs. All you have are these very ambiguous terms and your own disappointment.

That's why it will not hold up in court.

Btw, just because someone posted a list of revelations in this thread, doesn't mean that those were the only revelations or if I was basing my previous statement on said list. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

How about we make this argument. There were aspects of Desmonds conciousness, and life that were to be revealed. Those were supposed to be revelations,... but wait... We already knew he was a bartender, who grew up on a farm because of the assassin order, and that his conciousness would be explored in the game. Not much of a revelation there.

How about we argue that the outcome of Lucy being stabbed was a revelation. Okay we found out she was dead. But who would of guessed? Not me, said I. I would never have guessed that someone who got stabbed, who can't outright seek medical attention would have died. But that still counts as a revelation right?

And Shaun thinks Desmonds a sleeper huh? Well, Shauns always seemed to be a little on the humbuggery side to me. But none the less, Shaun is paranoid, little ****ant who was shaking just entering the vault. I'm sure you see my point.

We were already speculating on who William was, we knew Ezio was a conduit from ACII, the books already Described Altairs Death, Altairs POE isn't a big concern and has no real implications on the games development, we already knew of Ezio's spouse from Embers. As for Jupiter, the Constintipole Templar, and the vaults,... well, we knew Jupiter was going to be here. We get new Templars every game. As for the vaults, +1 to you, we learned something new... but I guess one out of twelve isn't bad.

Poodle_of_Doom
12-08-2011, 10:32 AM
Originally posted by eagleforlife1:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Poodle_of_Doom:
How about we make this argument. There were aspects of Desmonds conciousness, and life that were to be revealed. Those were supposed to be revelations,... but wait... We already knew he was a bartender, who grew up on a farm because of the assassin order, and that his conciousness would be explored in the game. Not much of a revelation there.

How about we argue that the outcome of Lucy being stabbed was a revelation. Okay we found out she was dead. But who would of guessed? Not me, said I. I would never have guessed that someone who got stabbed, who can't outright seek medical attention would have died. But that still counts as a revelation right?

And Shaun thinks Desmonds a sleeper huh? Well, Shauns always seemed to be a little on the humbuggery side to me. But none the less, Shaun is paranoid, little ****ant who was shaking just entering the vault. I'm sure you see my point.

We were already speculating on who William was, we knew Ezio was a conduit from ACII, the books already Described Altairs Death, Altairs POE isn't a big concern and has no real implications on the games development, we already knew of Ezio's spouse from Embers. As for Jupiter, the Constintipole Templar, and the vaults,... well, we knew Jupiter was going to be here. We get new Templars every game. As for the vaults, +1 to you, we learned something new... but I guess one out of twelve isn't bad.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/clap.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You like that huh?

LightRey
12-08-2011, 10:43 AM
Originally posted by Poodle_of_Doom:
How about we make this argument. There were aspects of Desmonds conciousness, and life that were to be revealed. Those were supposed to be revelations,... but wait... We already knew he was a bartender, who grew up on a farm because of the assassin order, and that his conciousness would be explored in the game. Not much of a revelation there.

How about we argue that the outcome of Lucy being stabbed was a revelation. Okay we found out she was dead. But who would of guessed? Not me, said I. I would never have guessed that someone who got stabbed, who can't outright seek medical attention would have died. But that still counts as a revelation right?

And Shaun thinks Desmonds a sleeper huh? Well, Shauns always seemed to be a little on the humbuggery side to me. But none the less, Shaun is paranoid, little ****ant who was shaking just entering the vault. I'm sure you see my point.

We were already speculating on who William was, we knew Ezio was a conduit from ACII, the books already Described Altairs Death, Altairs POE isn't a big concern and has no real implications on the games development, we already knew of Ezio's spouse from Embers. As for Jupiter, the Constintipole Templar, and the vaults,... well, we knew Jupiter was going to be here. We get new Templars every game. As for the vaults, +1 to you, we learned something new... but I guess one out of twelve isn't bad.
You seriously expect that a rant like that will hold up in court? You have to come with solid, cold hard, undebatable facts. It's not like Ubisoft signed a contract. They said, only in interviews, that there would be many revelations. That is so ambiguous that you just can't have that hold up in court.

Now start acting like grown-ups and admit that you got overhyped and paid the price. Seriously, claiming that Ubisoft broke the law by releasing a game they worked really hard on. You guys disgust me sometimes. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

Have some damn respect for the people that worked so hard on this game.

Poodle_of_Doom
12-08-2011, 11:02 AM
Never once said we were actually suing. We simply insinuated that if this had been anything else, any place else, it wouldn't of held up.

eagleforlife1
12-08-2011, 11:21 AM
Originally posted by LightRey:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Poodle_of_Doom:
How about we make this argument. There were aspects of Desmonds conciousness, and life that were to be revealed. Those were supposed to be revelations,... but wait... We already knew he was a bartender, who grew up on a farm because of the assassin order, and that his conciousness would be explored in the game. Not much of a revelation there.

How about we argue that the outcome of Lucy being stabbed was a revelation. Okay we found out she was dead. But who would of guessed? Not me, said I. I would never have guessed that someone who got stabbed, who can't outright seek medical attention would have died. But that still counts as a revelation right?

And Shaun thinks Desmonds a sleeper huh? Well, Shauns always seemed to be a little on the humbuggery side to me. But none the less, Shaun is paranoid, little ****ant who was shaking just entering the vault. I'm sure you see my point.

We were already speculating on who William was, we knew Ezio was a conduit from ACII, the books already Described Altairs Death, Altairs POE isn't a big concern and has no real implications on the games development, we already knew of Ezio's spouse from Embers. As for Jupiter, the Constintipole Templar, and the vaults,... well, we knew Jupiter was going to be here. We get new Templars every game. As for the vaults, +1 to you, we learned something new... but I guess one out of twelve isn't bad.
You seriously expect that a rant like that will hold up in court? You have to come with solid, cold hard, undebatable facts. It's not like Ubisoft signed a contract. They said, only in interviews, that there would be many revelations. That is so ambiguous that you just can't have that hold up in court.

Now start acting like grown-ups and admit that you got overhyped and paid the price. Seriously, claiming that Ubisoft broke the law by releasing a game they worked really hard on. You guys disgust me sometimes. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

Have some damn respect for the people that worked so hard on this game. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You are unbelievable; you haven't actually listened to anything that we have said. I would have paid for it and bought it no matter what the devs said in interviews as I have previously said in this thread. I have also said that I love the game so I don't know where you are getting this ridiculous assumption that I don't have respect for the devs from.

I would also suggest you stop arguing with everyone who posts even the most innocent of things on this forum. There is a world outside of this forum and if your attitude is anything like it is on here you won't find yourself winning any friends out there.

LightRey
12-08-2011, 11:40 AM
Originally posted by eagleforlife1:
You are unbelievable; you haven't actually listened to anything that we have said. I would have paid for it and bought it no matter what the devs said in interviews as I have previously said in this thread. I have also said that I love the game so I don't know where you are getting this ridiculous assumption that I don't have respect for the devs from.

I would also suggest you stop arguing with everyone who posts even the most innocent of things on this forum. There is a world outside of this forum and if your attitude is anything like it is on here you won't find yourself winning any friends out there.
First of all you can always return a game if you don't like it.

Second, interviews aren't commercials and anything said in interviews is not bound by the laws specified as such, because of this. Anything said in an interview is allowed to be a lie unless an official contract is signed.

I would suggest you stop harassing me. On several occasions have you gone completely off topic just to vent your frustration regarding my actions.

There is a difference between an innocent comment and an outright insult. These people work hard for their games and provide you with a service you can pay for. Yet you spit in their faces because you feel they had promised more than they gave, even though said promises were not official advertizements, nor do they have anything to do with the actual value of the game. Not to mention that you can just return the game if it isn't to your liking.

Just because you were disappointed doesn't mean most, or even a significantly large amount of people were.

I can deal with your constant complaining and even the occasional stating of your own opinions as if they were facts, but outright unjustly accusing a game company that works so hard to provide us with such great games of breaking the law is where I draw the damn line. Grow up.

eagleforlife1
12-08-2011, 11:50 AM
Originally posted by LightRey:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by eagleforlife1:
You are unbelievable; you haven't actually listened to anything that we have said. I would have paid for it and bought it no matter what the devs said in interviews as I have previously said in this thread. I have also said that I love the game so I don't know where you are getting this ridiculous assumption that I don't have respect for the devs from.

I would also suggest you stop arguing with everyone who posts even the most innocent of things on this forum. There is a world outside of this forum and if your attitude is anything like it is on here you won't find yourself winning any friends out there.
First of all you can always return a game if you don't like it.

Second, interviews aren't commercials and anything said in interviews is not bound by the laws specified as such, because of this. Anything said in an interview is allowed to be a lie unless an official contract is signed.

I would suggest you stop harassing me. On several occasions have you gone completely off topic just to vent your frustration regarding my actions.

There is a difference between an innocent comment and an outright insult. These people work hard for their games and provide you with a service you can pay for. Yet you spit in their faces because you feel they had promised more than they gave, even though said promises were not official advertizements, nor do they have anything to do with the actual value of the game. Not to mention that you can just return the game if it isn't to your liking.

Just because you were disappointed doesn't mean most, or even a significantly large amount of people were.

I can deal with your constant complaining and even the occasional stating of your own opinions as if they were facts, but outright unjustly accusing a game company that works so hard to provide us with such great games of breaking the law is where I draw the damn line. Grow up. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

WTF??!!! I am not disappointed with the game and have not once stated otherwise. I barely even complained. I said that there were not revelations. I stated my opinion just like you state yours. You are the one that needs to grow up and get a life instead of policing this forum holding your nose up to anybody who dares say anything that you don't agree with. And the first half of your final paragraph is the most hypocritical statement I have ever read.

ACSineQuaNon
12-08-2011, 11:59 AM
Originally posted by eagleforlife1:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LightRey:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by eagleforlife1:
You are unbelievable; you haven't actually listened to anything that we have said. I would have paid for it and bought it no matter what the devs said in interviews as I have previously said in this thread. I have also said that I love the game so I don't know where you are getting this ridiculous assumption that I don't have respect for the devs from.

I would also suggest you stop arguing with everyone who posts even the most innocent of things on this forum. There is a world outside of this forum and if your attitude is anything like it is on here you won't find yourself winning any friends out there.
First of all you can always return a game if you don't like it.

Second, interviews aren't commercials and anything said in interviews is not bound by the laws specified as such, because of this. Anything said in an interview is allowed to be a lie unless an official contract is signed.

I would suggest you stop harassing me. On several occasions have you gone completely off topic just to vent your frustration regarding my actions.

There is a difference between an innocent comment and an outright insult. These people work hard for their games and provide you with a service you can pay for. Yet you spit in their faces because you feel they had promised more than they gave, even though said promises were not official advertizements, nor do they have anything to do with the actual value of the game. Not to mention that you can just return the game if it isn't to your liking.

Just because you were disappointed doesn't mean most, or even a significantly large amount of people were.

I can deal with your constant complaining and even the occasional stating of your own opinions as if they were facts, but outright unjustly accusing a game company that works so hard to provide us with such great games of breaking the law is where I draw the damn line. Grow up. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

WTF??!!! I am not disappointed with the game. Can you not read? I didn't even complain. I said that there were not revelations. I stated my opinion just like you state yours. You are the one that needs to grow up and get a life instead of policing this forum holding your nose up to anybody who dares say anything that you don't agree with. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

LightRey seems to live in his own fantasy world http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif
He has repeatedly used irrelevant arguments to validate his nonsensical notions of opinion and fact. For whatever reason, he only considers the latter as such if they coincide with his own beliefs. More astonishing is his refusal to admit the offense in a developer falsely marketing a product.

I would just ignore LightRey since his posts generally amount to trolling in that they are simply void of any logic or reason, but the opportunity to make him look even stupider, one that is available to any individual with an IQ over 100, is something I cannot pass up.

LightRey
12-08-2011, 12:00 PM
Originally posted by eagleforlife1:
WTF??!!! I am not disappointed with the game and have not once stated otherwise. I barely even complained. I said that there were not revelations. I stated my opinion just like you state yours. You are the one that needs to grow up and get a life instead of policing this forum holding your nose up to anybody who dares say anything that you don't agree with. And your final paragraph is the most hypocritical statement I have ever read.
It's not an opinion whether or not something is a crime and in this case it most certainly is not.

I also needn't remind you that you are limited to stating the opinions that aren't insults.

I would also like to remind you that falsely accusing people of committing crimes is called slander, which most definitely is a criminal offense.

PhiIs1618033
12-08-2011, 12:01 PM
Lightrey, why do you keep on babbling about going to court? Someone said 'well, I think that might actually be illegal'. I think you ought to recognise when someone is making conversation.

Also, yes, a rant like that might not hold up in court, but PoD makes valid points. The Revelations aren't really Revelations.
Lucy is dead. Gee, what a surprise! She only got stabbed, with a TWCB wanting to get rid of her.
Shaun thinks Desmond is a sleeper. If have to think this is what a Revelation is, you've got another think coming. It's plot development.
Ezio is a conduit. Known since AC2.
Desmond grew up on a farm, became a bartender. Known since AC1.
Desmond's dad. Seriously, this was way obvious in AC:B.
Alta´r's death. This counts, sure. One.
Alta´r's P.O.E. A revelation, alright. Thing is, they just dropped the ball out of nowhere. Very anticlimactic. Two.
Ezio's spouse. Yeah, we got that from everything the devs said already. Doesn't count as a Revelation in my eyes.
Who the Templar master was. It was a great plot twist, but that's about it. Noone would've ever asked this question if there hadn't been a game about it.
What the temples were for. Minerva told us in AC2.
Where the grand one is. DaVinci DLC made it fairly obvious.
What Jupiter looked like. Why would you even care?

So, yeah, final count is two. I think we got more revelations in Brotherhood. Just grab two The Truth files and you're done.

E-Zekiel
12-08-2011, 12:01 PM
So uh...where'd you guys see Jupiter? I beat the game and I really don't recall seeing him anywhere. I feel like my game must have glitched and skipped a cut scene.

LightRey
12-08-2011, 12:04 PM
Originally posted by E-Zekiel:
So uh...where'd you guys see Jupiter? I beat the game and I really don't recall seeing him anywhere. I feel like my game must have glitched and skipped a cut scene.
Eh, it was the guy at the end.

I'm babbling about going to court, because that's where it is decided if someone has committed a crime or not. What I'm saying with it is basically that if it were a crime, going to court would result in a conviction, which clearly wouldn't be the case here.

eagleforlife1
12-08-2011, 12:13 PM
Originally posted by PhiIs1618033...:
Lightrey, why do you keep on babbling about going to court? Someone said 'well, I think that might actually be illegal'. I think you ought to recognise when someone is making conversation.

Also, yes, a rant like that might not hold up in court, but PoD makes valid points. The Revelations aren't really Revelations.
Lucy is dead. Gee, what a surprise! She only got stabbed, with a TWCB wanting to get rid of her.
Shaun thinks Desmond is a sleeper. If have to think this is what a Revelation is, you've got another think coming. It's plot development.
Ezio is a conduit. Known since AC2.
Desmond grew up on a farm, became a bartender. Known since AC1.
Desmond's dad. Seriously, this was way obvious in AC:B.
Alta´r's death. This counts, sure. One.
Alta´r's P.O.E. A revelation, alright. Thing is, they just dropped the ball out of nowhere. Very anticlimactic. Two.
Ezio's spouse. Yeah, we got that from everything the devs said already. Doesn't count as a Revelation in my eyes.
Who the Templar master was. It was a great plot twist, but that's about it. Noone would've ever asked this question if there hadn't been a game about it.
What the temples were for. Minerva told us in AC2.
Where the grand one is. DaVinci DLC made it fairly obvious.
What Jupiter looked like. Why would you even care?

So, yeah, final count is two. I think we got more revelations in Brotherhood. Just grab two The Truth files and you're done.

Thank you. Although I made those points before PoD http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif.

LightRey
12-08-2011, 12:26 PM
Final count is 2 huh? So I guess you guys new that <span class="ev_code_RED">[SPOILERS AHEAD]</span> <span class="ev_code_WHITE">Daniel Cross was a Templar agent from the very beginning, or that he's part of a mission to kill William Miles, or that Alta´r's apple wasn't the same as Ezio's apple.</span>

SolidSage
12-08-2011, 12:36 PM
Since 'Embers' came with Revelations, that makes Ezio's relationship with Sofia and their daughter/s a revelation. And how he died. Plus a bunch of other stuff.

I'm not trying to buddy up here, I think Light Rey is being a little argumentative at times but c'mon guys, we're not talking Biblical History here, it's Assassins Creed, what kind of Earth Shattering Revelations could they give you really?
The biggest ones were revealed long ago.

A lot of us seem to expect a bit much some times.

LightRey
12-08-2011, 12:42 PM
I'd say Tarik turning out to be a good guy, especially after how they portrayed the Janissaries as being such bad guys, was quite the revelation too.

E-Zekiel
12-08-2011, 12:48 PM
Originally posted by LightRey:

Eh, it was the guy at the end.



Which guy, though? The post-animus scene was very brief and just had Desmond's pals along with him...And I really don't recall seeing him during any of the animus missions....


I guess I will have to take a look.

eagleforlife1
12-08-2011, 01:01 PM
Originally posted by LightRey:
I'd say Tarik turning out to be a good guy, especially after how they portrayed the Janissaries as being such bad guys, was quite the revelation too.

Not a revelation, plot development.

naran6142
12-08-2011, 01:41 PM
Originally posted by E-Zekiel:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LightRey:

Eh, it was the guy at the end.



Which guy, though? The post-animus scene was very brief and just had Desmond's pals along with him...And I really don't recall seeing him during any of the animus missions....


I guess I will have to take a look. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

remember when ezio talks to desmond, after that you see jupiter, its the guy with the helmet... it would really suck if your game skiped that part

@ ... well everyone else... cmon guys were all friends right http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

LightRey
12-08-2011, 01:43 PM
Originally posted by E-Zekiel:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LightRey:

Eh, it was the guy at the end.



Which guy, though? The post-animus scene was very brief and just had Desmond's pals along with him...And I really don't recall seeing him during any of the animus missions....


I guess I will have to take a look. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Not post animus.

@eagleforlife
Plot development doesn't exclude revelations. The events preceding Tarik's death indicated him being an enemy. Thus him turning out to be an ally was a revelation.

But let's try to make a full list of revelations here, categorizing them of course.

Will contain major spoilers of course.

Revelations confirming (relatively) common suspicions based mostly on information released from the games, novels, etc.:
-William M. is Desmond's father.
-Lucy is dead
-Daniel Cross is a Templar agent
-Jupiter is the third TWCB messenger
-The end of the world is (in part) caused by a solar flare
-Minerva, Juno and Jupiter were a trio of TWCB working together to stop the end of the world (both the first time and the second time)
-Lucy liked Desmond
-Desmond has a rarely high concentration of TWCB DNA
-Both the Assassin Order and the Templar Order were formed long before they "went public" during the crusades

Revelations confirming (relatively) common suspicions based mostly on information released in interviews, trailers, etc. directly relating and prior to ACR and Embers:
-Eagle Vision/Sense can be used to witness past events
-Alta´r left special TWCB seals behind in which he had recorded important memories
-Alta´r left 5 of said seals to Niccolo Polo and told him to hide them well, which he did in Constantinople
-Alta´r had a hidden library under Masyaf which used said 5 seals as keys needed to unlock its door.
-Ezio's father was aware of said library before Ezio was even born
-Ezio falls in love and has 2 children with Sofia Sartor
-There was a (broken) Assassin Order in China during the early 16th century

Revelations that were (almost) completely unexpected:
-TWCB had 7 plans in total to save the world, six of which had failed by the first time the world ended.
-The 7th plan of said plans currently requires Desmond in order to be executed
-There was one temple for each plan
-The temples were built underground to avoid detection and to survive if TWCB's efforts to save the world failed the first time
-All temples send the information they gather to the so-called Grand Temple
-The Grand Temple is located in New York State, likely at the coordinates found at the end of the ACB DLC, The Da Vinci Disappearance
-Alta´r's library never held the location of the Grand Temple
-Alta´r's apple was a different apple from Ezio's apple as he had deliberately lead its potential pursuers away to Cyprus
-Alta´r lived to be 92, dying inside his at that point empty library as he had all of its books moved away just like he had the rest of his order, leaving behind one final memory both explaining why he hid the apple and showing how he died
-Ezio died a peaceful death, most likely unrelated to the people chasing after Shao Jun
-Daniel Cross and all other sleeper agents were Templar Agents from the very start

Feel free to inform me of anything I left out.

twenty_glyphs
12-08-2011, 01:52 PM
Originally posted by eagleforlife1:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LightRey:
I'd say Tarik turning out to be a good guy, especially after how they portrayed the Janissaries as being such bad guys, was quite the revelation too.

Not a revelation, plot development. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Exactly. These kinds of things are not "revelations", they are plot development. More than that, it's specific to just this game's story and has no impact on the overall Desmond, TWCB, or 2012 stories. These kinds of story points were things that made this game's internal Ezio story nice, but they had no impact on the overall story. They did not answer questions that the story had already created after playing the first 3 games. If I didn't already have the question after Brotherhood's story, any plot detail that got revealed does not count as a revelation.

When you title a game "Revelations" in a series full of mystery and conspiracies that has brought up a lot of questions, people expect answers to those questions. A lot of things being cited as revelations here are minor details that fill out the story a little (like who Ezio had kids with or what Subject 16 looks like) or story details wholly contained within Revelations' plot (like who the Templar Grand Master was, and Tarik's true loyalty), but do not satisfy our curiosity of what is actually going on in the overarching story.

Now I'm not arguing that any of this is false advertising, and I don't think a lot of other people are either. That's just ludicrous to try to argue any of that, because obviously much of this is subjective and would never hold up in court as dishonest marketing. But I think a lot of us are disappointed that so many topics presented as important to this series were ignored in this game and not even at least elaborated on a little.

SteelCity999
12-08-2011, 03:37 PM
Originally posted by LightRey:
[Not post animus.

@eagleforlife
Plot development doesn't exclude revelations. The events preceding Tarik's death indicated him being an enemy. Thus him turning out to be an ally was a revelation.

But let's try to make a full list of revelations here, categorizing them of course.

Will contain major spoilers of course.

Revelations confirming (relatively) common suspicions based mostly on information released from the games, novels, etc.:
-William M. is Desmond's father.
-Lucy is dead
-Daniel Cross is a Templar agent
-Jupiter is the third TWCB messenger
-The end of the world is (in part) caused by a solar flare
-Minerva, Juno and Jupiter were a trio of TWCB working together to stop the end of the world (both the first time and the second time)
-Lucy liked Desmond
-Desmond has a rarely high concentration of TWCB DNA
-Both the Assassin Order and the Templar Order were formed long before they "went public" during the crusades

Revelations confirming (relatively) common suspicions based mostly on information released in interviews, trailers, etc. directly relating and prior to ACR and Embers:
-Eagle Vision/Sense can be used to witness past events
-Alta´r left special TWCB seals behind in which he had recorded important memories
-Alta´r left 5 of said seals to Niccolo Polo and told him to hide them well, which he did in Constantinople
-Alta´r had a hidden library under Masyaf which used said 5 seals as keys needed to unlock its door.
-Ezio's father was aware of said library before Ezio was even born
-Ezio falls in love and has 2 children with Sofia Sartor
-There was a (broken) Assassin Order in China during the early 16th century

Revelations that were (almost) completely unexpected:
-TWCB had 7 plans in total to save the world, six of which had failed by the first time the world ended.
-The 7th plan of said plans currently requires Desmond in order to be executed
-There was one temple for each plan
-The temples were built underground to avoid detection and to survive if TWCB's efforts to save the world failed the first time
-All temples send the information they gather to the so-called Grand Temple
-The Grand Temple is located in New York State, likely at the coordinates found at the end of the ACB DLC, The Da Vinci Disappearance
-Alta´r's library never held the location of the Grand Temple
-Alta´r's apple was a different apple from Ezio's apple as he had deliberately lead its potential pursuers away to Cyprus
-Alta´r lived to be 92, dying inside his at that point empty library as he had all of its books moved away just like he had the rest of his order, leaving behind one final memory both explaining why he hid the apple and showing how he died
-Ezio died a peaceful death, most likely unrelated to the people chasing after Shao Jun
-Daniel Cross and all other sleeper agents were Templar Agents from the very start

Feel free to inform me of anything I left out.

First of all....a revelation is something that is previously unknown that is being made known and NOT something that merely confirms something - that would be a confirmation of said suspect information. Therefore, most of your points (as you state in your post) are confirmations. Furthermore, because Ubi has made most of this information so available to anyone and most is on the Wiki, the encyclopedia and every other media they have published alot of this information is known. As such alot of the extremely dedicated fans who stay up to date in the series would have already known alot of these things. Yes, a few things were revealed such as the plans but overall it was a lackluster effort in revelation. Some of your points don't even occur in the game but rather in Embers which is NOT part of the game but rather other media. So you can't count anything learned in Embers - that would be akin to playing AC2 and not watching Lineage.

Second, Ubi does do a bad job of blowing things out of proportion in relation to what's actually in the game. ACB and ACR were both guilty of embellishment. Although, they embellished 95% of what they said was included in the game. They are more guilty of not developing the franchise the way it should have been handled - trying to make a full-fledged game out of a DS game is pretty evident. I think they spent alot of time gearing up for getting systems in-line for AC3 - such as the new graphical updates, etc. Another thing that is lost in all of this is that AC:R was TRULY the first one year dev cycle game that they did. AC:B was quite far along in development because it was meant to be part of AC2 in the beginning but the story got way too big. Multiplayer was already in the works. So AC:R truly shows the fruits, or in some places, lack thereof, of a one year dev cycle with a new concept. Hoepfully, AC3 has long been in development by a dedicated team since AC:B.

And lastly, whether its a revelation is quite subjective. So leave it alone. Please.

ACSineQuaNon
12-08-2011, 03:43 PM
Originally posted by eagleforlife1:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LightRey:
I'd say Tarik turning out to be a good guy, especially after how they portrayed the Janissaries as being such bad guys, was quite the revelation too.

Not a revelation, plot development. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

This. The revelations need to significantly connect to past and future installments of the AC franchise. Tarik's death has no effect on past AC games and will have no effect on future AC games. LightRey, you're way too desperate to defend ACR. I'm 100% positive if you asked Darby McDevitt if Tarik's death was one of the marketed revelations, he'd say no. How the hell do you confuse plot development and a revelation?

ACSineQuaNon
12-08-2011, 03:47 PM
Originally posted by twenty_glyphs:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by eagleforlife1:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LightRey:
I'd say Tarik turning out to be a good guy, especially after how they portrayed the Janissaries as being such bad guys, was quite the revelation too.

Not a revelation, plot development. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Exactly. These kinds of things are not "revelations", they are plot development. More than that, it's specific to just this game's story and has no impact on the overall Desmond, TWCB, or 2012 stories. These kinds of story points were things that made this game's internal Ezio story nice, but they had no impact on the overall story. They did not answer questions that the story had already created after playing the first 3 games. If I didn't already have the question after Brotherhood's story, any plot detail that got revealed does not count as a revelation.

When you title a game "Revelations" in a series full of mystery and conspiracies that has brought up a lot of questions, people expect answers to those questions. A lot of things being cited as revelations here are minor details that fill out the story a little (like who Ezio had kids with or what Subject 16 looks like) or story details wholly contained within Revelations' plot (like who the Templar Grand Master was, and Tarik's true loyalty), but do not satisfy our curiosity of what is actually going on in the overarching story.

Now I'm not arguing that any of this is false advertising, and I don't think a lot of other people are either. That's just ludicrous to try to argue any of that, because obviously much of this is subjective and would never hold up in court as dishonest marketing. But I think a lot of us are disappointed that so many topics presented as important to this series were ignored in this game and not even at least elaborated on a little. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

This again. Much better than my post above ^

ProdiGurl
12-08-2011, 04:46 PM
Originally posted by twenty_glyphs:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ProdiGurl:
I think it's becuz you guys had these personal questions that you want answered when that's not what they promised would be answered for you in the first place.

We are not talking about "personal questions" that weren't answered, we're talking about major plot points that have been built up to a boiling point that were totally ignored in Revelations. What is the purpose of the entire Subject 16 plotline? The glyphs he left obviously have meaning besides just being markers for the Truth files, and there is clearly something important he wants Desmond to see in the Truth video that is majorly important with Adam and Eve. He even told us in Brotherhood to find Eve in Eden because her DNA is the key. We finally meet the guy and his personality is totally different to what we've seen in the past two games, and not once does the topic of what he's been trying to show Desmond come up. Not even one little mention.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ok, I understand what you mean, but I have a hunch that maybe they aren't done with Subject 16 - maybe that whole thing will be finalized in Desmond's big role in AC3 ?
That could be why they didnt' wrap that end up?

If he doesn't make his way back into AC3, then I agree with you, the loose ends should have been tied up in ACR.

E-Zekiel
12-08-2011, 05:05 PM
Originally posted by naran6142:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by E-Zekiel:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LightRey:

Eh, it was the guy at the end.



Which guy, though? The post-animus scene was very brief and just had Desmond's pals along with him...And I really don't recall seeing him during any of the animus missions....


I guess I will have to take a look. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

remember when ezio talks to desmond, after that you see jupiter, its the guy with the helmet... it would really suck if your game skiped that part

@ ... well everyone else... cmon guys were all friends right http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yep, it appears my game skipped this part. He touches Desmond on the shoulder, fades to white, end of memory.

On my first playthrough, it went from this memory, to the island falling apart (no Jupiter), to Desmond waking up.

twenty_glyphs
12-08-2011, 05:07 PM
Originally posted by ProdiGurl:
Ok, I understand what you mean, but I have a hunch that maybe they aren't done with Subject 16 - maybe that whole thing will be finalized in Desmond's big role in AC3 ?
That could be why they didnt' wrap that end up?

If he doesn't make his way back into AC3, then I agree with you, the loose ends should have been tied up in ACR.

I agree with you that the Subject 16 story was probably introduced and intended to be finalized in AC3, especially considering that it was originally planned as a trilogy. The story arc there would have made sense -- crazy and confused introduction to him in AC1, then revealing more about his messages on the walls and floor in AC2 as well as the truth he uncovered about history and Adam and Eve in AC2, followed by the final revelation of his purpose and role in Desmond's mission in AC3. The introduction of 2 in-between chapters likely forced them to stretch out this part of his story. I thought they handled that well in Brotherhood and gave us just enough new info on him while also raising new questions.

I have no problem that Subject 16's story wasn't wrapped up, and never expected it to be. My problem is simply that they did not expand on it at all in Revelations and didn't even mention it. I would have rather not met Subject 16 now than have him show up but ignore the 3 previous episodes of his rantings. I expected them to at least do something interesting with him while we were waiting around for Eve in AC3.

LightRey
12-08-2011, 05:08 PM
Originally posted by E-Zekiel:
Yep, it appears my game skipped this part. He touches Desmond on the shoulder, fades to white, end of memory.

On my first playthrough, it went from this memory, to the island falling apart (no Jupiter), to Desmond waking up.
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

Poodle_of_Doom
12-08-2011, 05:15 PM
Originally posted by SteelCity999:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LightRey:
[Not post animus.

@eagleforlife
Plot development doesn't exclude revelations. The events preceding Tarik's death indicated him being an enemy. Thus him turning out to be an ally was a revelation.

But let's try to make a full list of revelations here, categorizing them of course.

Will contain major spoilers of course.

Revelations confirming (relatively) common suspicions based mostly on information released from the games, novels, etc.:
-William M. is Desmond's father.
-Lucy is dead
-Daniel Cross is a Templar agent
-Jupiter is the third TWCB messenger
-The end of the world is (in part) caused by a solar flare
-Minerva, Juno and Jupiter were a trio of TWCB working together to stop the end of the world (both the first time and the second time)
-Lucy liked Desmond
-Desmond has a rarely high concentration of TWCB DNA
-Both the Assassin Order and the Templar Order were formed long before they "went public" during the crusades

Revelations confirming (relatively) common suspicions based mostly on information released in interviews, trailers, etc. directly relating and prior to ACR and Embers:
-Eagle Vision/Sense can be used to witness past events
-Alta´r left special TWCB seals behind in which he had recorded important memories
-Alta´r left 5 of said seals to Niccolo Polo and told him to hide them well, which he did in Constantinople
-Alta´r had a hidden library under Masyaf which used said 5 seals as keys needed to unlock its door.
-Ezio's father was aware of said library before Ezio was even born
-Ezio falls in love and has 2 children with Sofia Sartor
-There was a (broken) Assassin Order in China during the early 16th century

Revelations that were (almost) completely unexpected:
-TWCB had 7 plans in total to save the world, six of which had failed by the first time the world ended.
-The 7th plan of said plans currently requires Desmond in order to be executed
-There was one temple for each plan
-The temples were built underground to avoid detection and to survive if TWCB's efforts to save the world failed the first time
-All temples send the information they gather to the so-called Grand Temple
-The Grand Temple is located in New York State, likely at the coordinates found at the end of the ACB DLC, The Da Vinci Disappearance
-Alta´r's library never held the location of the Grand Temple
-Alta´r's apple was a different apple from Ezio's apple as he had deliberately lead its potential pursuers away to Cyprus
-Alta´r lived to be 92, dying inside his at that point empty library as he had all of its books moved away just like he had the rest of his order, leaving behind one final memory both explaining why he hid the apple and showing how he died
-Ezio died a peaceful death, most likely unrelated to the people chasing after Shao Jun
-Daniel Cross and all other sleeper agents were Templar Agents from the very start

Feel free to inform me of anything I left out.

First of all....a revelation is something that is previously unknown that is being made known and NOT something that merely confirms something - that would be a confirmation of said suspect information. Therefore, most of your points (as you state in your post) are confirmations. Furthermore, because Ubi has made most of this information so available to anyone and most is on the Wiki, the encyclopedia and every other media they have published alot of this information is known. As such alot of the extremely dedicated fans who stay up to date in the series would have already known alot of these things. Yes, a few things were revealed such as the plans but overall it was a lackluster effort in revelation. Some of your points don't even occur in the game but rather in Embers which is NOT part of the game but rather other media. So you can't count anything learned in Embers - that would be akin to playing AC2 and not watching Lineage.

Second, Ubi does do a bad job of blowing things out of proportion in relation to what's actually in the game. ACB and ACR were both guilty of embellishment. Although, they embellished 95% of what they said was included in the game. They are more guilty of not developing the franchise the way it should have been handled - trying to make a full-fledged game out of a DS game is pretty evident. I think they spent alot of time gearing up for getting systems in-line for AC3 - such as the new graphical updates, etc. Another thing that is lost in all of this is that AC:R was TRULY the first one year dev cycle game that they did. AC:B was quite far along in development because it was meant to be part of AC2 in the beginning but the story got way too big. Multiplayer was already in the works. So AC:R truly shows the fruits, or in some places, lack thereof, of a one year dev cycle with a new concept. Hoepfully, AC3 has long been in development by a dedicated team since AC:B.

And lastly, whether its a revelation is quite subjective. So leave it alone. Please. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

^^
This, because I think picking it apart would cause a massive LightRey meltdown, and possibly destroy the universe. We have to wait until December of 2012 for that...


Originally posted by E-Zekiel:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by naran6142:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by E-Zekiel:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LightRey:

Eh, it was the guy at the end.



Which guy, though? The post-animus scene was very brief and just had Desmond's pals along with him...And I really don't recall seeing him during any of the animus missions....


I guess I will have to take a look. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

remember when ezio talks to desmond, after that you see jupiter, its the guy with the helmet... it would really suck if your game skiped that part

@ ... well everyone else... cmon guys were all friends right http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yep, it appears my game skipped this part. He touches Desmond on the shoulder, fades to white, end of memory.

On my first playthrough, it went from this memory, to the island falling apart (no Jupiter), to Desmond waking up. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Get caught up,... you're missing out. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lt8WAiaie_8)

ProdiGurl
12-08-2011, 05:17 PM
Originally posted by twenty_glyphs:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ProdiGurl:
Ok, I understand what you mean, but I have a hunch that maybe they aren't done with Subject 16 - maybe that whole thing will be finalized in Desmond's big role in AC3 ?
That could be why they didnt' wrap that end up?

If he doesn't make his way back into AC3, then I agree with you, the loose ends should have been tied up in ACR.

I agree with you that the Subject 16 story was probably introduced and intended to be finalized in AC3, especially considering that it was originally planned as a trilogy. The story arc there would have made sense -- crazy and confused introduction to him in AC1, then revealing more about his messages on the walls and floor in AC2 as well as the truth he uncovered about history and Adam and Eve in AC2, followed by the final revelation of his purpose and role in Desmond's mission in AC3. The introduction of 2 in-between chapters likely forced them to stretch out this part of his story. I thought they handled that well in Brotherhood and gave us just enough new info on him while also raising new questions.

I have no problem that Subject 16's story wasn't wrapped up, and never expected it to be. My problem is simply that they did not expand on it at all in Revelations and didn't even mention it. I would have rather not met Subject 16 now than have him show up but ignore the 3 previous episodes of his rantings. I expected them to at least do something interesting with him while we were waiting around for Eve in AC3. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ya, becuz [SPOILER} <span class="ev_code_WHITE">now that Desmond is seen at the end waking up & saying he 'knows what to do now',</span> {END SPOILER] it means he's talked w/ 16 & knows what's going on with him & maybe he can try to fix things for 16 & get him back?
Or . . something. At least he's spoken with him & can relay the exchanges he experienced w/ what's left of a fragmented 16.

I'll be honest, I find it hard to closely follow the story w/ all these details & people involved...
but I really did enjoy the flow of the story in ACR for whatever that's worth. I found it harder to follow ACB's story for some reason.

Poodle_of_Doom
12-08-2011, 05:24 PM
He didn't say that because of any conversation he had with S16, it was because of his conversation with Jupiter.

LightRey
12-08-2011, 05:30 PM
Originally posted by SteelCity999:
First of all....a revelation is something that is previously unknown that is being made known and NOT something that merely confirms something - that would be a confirmation of said suspect information. Therefore, most of your points (as you state in your post) are confirmations. Furthermore, because Ubi has made most of this information so available to anyone and most is on the Wiki, the encyclopedia and every other media they have published alot of this information is known. As such alot of the extremely dedicated fans who stay up to date in the series would have already known alot of these things. Yes, a few things were revealed such as the plans but overall it was a lackluster effort in revelation. Some of your points don't even occur in the game but rather in Embers which is NOT part of the game but rather other media. So you can't count anything learned in Embers - that would be akin to playing AC2 and not watching Lineage.

Second, Ubi does do a bad job of blowing things out of proportion in relation to what's actually in the game. ACB and ACR were both guilty of embellishment. Although, they embellished 95% of what they said was included in the game. They are more guilty of not developing the franchise the way it should have been handled - trying to make a full-fledged game out of a DS game is pretty evident. I think they spent alot of time gearing up for getting systems in-line for AC3 - such as the new graphical updates, etc. Another thing that is lost in all of this is that AC:R was TRULY the first one year dev cycle game that they did. AC:B was quite far along in development because it was meant to be part of AC2 in the beginning but the story got way too big. Multiplayer was already in the works. So AC:R truly shows the fruits, or in some places, lack thereof, of a one year dev cycle with a new concept. Hoepfully, AC3 has long been in development by a dedicated team since AC:B.

And lastly, whether its a revelation is quite subjective. So leave it alone. Please.
I'm sorry, I was a little unclear about this. They were revelations to the main character(s), not the player. Nobody ever said that all revelations were for the players and I felt listing them was valid as they do apply to the term "revelation", but in a different context. Lucy's death is somewhat of a unique case, but seeing as Desmond had forgotten about it, I felt it was worthy of the list.

Every game company blows things out of proportion to what's actually in the game. It's called advertizing. Aside from the developers obviously being proud of their accomplishments, they're going to try to create a hype to up sales. That's normal and legal as long as the actual advertizements (which of course does not apply to interviews) don't carry outright lies.

You have to remember that Ubisoft is a company and has strong competition. In case you hadn't noticed, the holiday season is when all popular games are released. ACR had to compete with Skyrim, Halo: Combat Evolved Anniversary, hell even Minecraft.

If it's subjective, then you have as much right criticizing Ubisoft for it as I have defending it. If I have to leave it alone so do you. Let's not forget that I wasn't the one who started the whole conversation about the amount of revelations in the game to begin with.

ProdiGurl
12-08-2011, 05:56 PM
Originally posted by Poodle_of_Doom:
He didn't say that because of any conversation he had with S16, it was because of his conversation with Jupiter.

Oh I know that, I just meant that [SPOILER]since he does wake up & is coherent (not mentally fried), & knows what to do,[END SPOILER]
then he can relay his info on 16 to them - it's information they (the van crew) don't know since they weren't inside the animus to be privy to it like Desmond is who directly spoke w/ him.
Hope that clarifies what I meant

Poodle_of_Doom
12-08-2011, 06:27 PM
Originally posted by ProdiGurl:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Poodle_of_Doom:
He didn't say that because of any conversation he had with S16, it was because of his conversation with Jupiter.

Oh I know that, I just meant that [SPOILER]since he does wake up & is coherent (not mentally fried), & knows what to do,[END SPOILER]
then he can relay his info on 16 to them - it's information they (the van crew) don't know since they weren't inside the animus to be privy to it like Desmond is who directly spoke w/ him.
Hope that clarifies what I meant </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I understand.

twenty_glyphs
12-08-2011, 07:35 PM
I don't feel like the developers hyped up the game too much beyond what it was. They were just secretive about a lot of things and that let our minds naturally assume that many questions we had would be answered. They also said a lot of questions would be answered Ś just not which ones. I've been through enough game release cycles to not get too hyped up with unrealistic expectations, so that wasn't a factor. My biggest disappointment is not with the title "Revelations" making me think there would be more to the story than there was, but with the fact that I thought Brotherhood's story added so much more to the AC universe than Revelations did. I expected to get at least as much as last year, but the level of detail to the present day story and the mysteries of last year's game just were not a factor.

RzaRecta357
12-08-2011, 11:15 PM
Prodi I'm with you that 16 probably isn't gone.

I don't know. It rebuilt the animus island. I think it'll have him there too some how.

They probably wanted to have him flash or something in the ending credit but decided it would be to much as we catch everything.

PhiIs1618033
12-09-2011, 03:02 AM
Originally posted by LightRey:
Final count is 2 huh? So I guess you guys new that <span class="ev_code_RED">[SPOILERS AHEAD]</span> <span class="ev_code_WHITE">Daniel Cross was a Templar agent from the very beginning, or that he's part of a mission to kill William Miles, or that Alta´r's apple wasn't the same as Ezio's apple.</span>
I know that Daniel Cross is the guy from the novels, but that's about it. It's basically the same as saying: "Yeah, there was the guy once and he was a Templar agent infiltrated in the assassin order!" That isn't a revelation.
And I counted Alta´r's apple. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

ProdiGurl
12-09-2011, 03:36 AM
Originally posted by twenty_glyphs:
I don't feel like the developers hyped up the game too much beyond what it was. They were just secretive about a lot of things and that let our minds naturally assume that many questions we had would be answered. They also said a lot of questions would be answered Ś just not which ones. I've been through enough game release cycles to not get too hyped up with unrealistic expectations, so that wasn't a factor.
My biggest disappointment is not with the title "Revelations" making me think there would be more to the story than there was, but with the fact that I thought Brotherhood's story added so much more to the AC universe than Revelations did. I expected to get at least as much as last year, but the level of detail to the present day story and the mysteries of last year's game just were not a factor.

Yep - I think you might have explained it better than I did earlier, but that's exactly how I view this revelation issue.
Fans all had their own hopes & ideas on what would be revealed & when it wasn't, felt let down but I don't see as it's any of the dev's fault for what people assume & give ACR a bad rap.

In the one Trailer AC put out, it was Ezio's quest for answers to His part in this. He got them.

As for me being a general follower, it answered my basic question of how Ezio ends & what he finds to close his chapter. Plus what did happen w/ Lucy.
[SPOILER] <span class="ev_code_GREY">For me, finding that he learned that he was just a conduit - one necessary piece of the bigger puzzle and that it was time to stop & get on with his personal life, was what I wanted to know. Also what he learns of the truth of Altair's life w/ the Order & his ending. They solidify the ends of both our previous characters & set up AC3 pretty nicely imo</span> [END SPOILER]


Prodi I'm with you that 16 probably isn't gone.

I don't know. It rebuilt the animus island. I think it'll have him there too some how.

They probably wanted to have him flash or something in the ending credit but decided it would be to much as we catch everything.

Well, Desmond was with 16 hearing all the details of what's happened w/ him & the condition he's in (that he wants out). If I were Desmond & woke up from that, I'd be wanting to grill the crew on how to help the guy stuck in there!?

Or is he gone as of ACR? [SPOILER] I kinda don't get what may have happened as he put his arms around Desmond & said he was programmed for deletion? Did 16 get removed at that point or is he still there?? [END SPOILER] http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif
I have to admit, if they don't include 16 in AC3, I think they didn't do a good job of sealing up his character & the mystery surrounding him.
But then if that's the case, it's very possible that the AC devs don't consider 16 to be a serious factor of AC & didn't devote alot of their time/resources into closing his story or giving us more background.

They just have a guy who was put in an animus, then cracks & hides puzzle/info stuff (filler) into AC2 & then is shut down & removed in ACR.

That would kind of be a shame, but it wouldn't ruin my experience any. To me, the main story has been Ezio & his journey - not so much Desmond's & that whole side of it, altho now that Ezio's 'retired', I think I may get more interested in this part of it w/ AC3.

LightRey
12-09-2011, 03:52 AM
Originally posted by PhiIs1618033...:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LightRey:
Final count is 2 huh? So I guess you guys new that <span class="ev_code_RED">[SPOILERS AHEAD]</span> <span class="ev_code_WHITE">Daniel Cross was a Templar agent from the very beginning, or that he's part of a mission to kill William Miles, or that Alta´r's apple wasn't the same as Ezio's apple.</span>
I know that Daniel Cross is the guy from the novels, but that's about it. It's basically the same as saying: "Yeah, there was the guy once and he was a Templar agent infiltrated in the assassin order!" That isn't a revelation.
And I counted Alta´r's apple. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Not entirely the case. Daniel was never suspected of consciously having been a Templar Agent before joining the Assassins. He was one of the Animus subjects, brainwashed by Abstergo and later on found by the Assassins, who were unaware of this. Eventually he killed the Mentor because he had been given a subconscious command to do so, then returned to Abstergo. Most people thought he was just a poor, confused soul seeking refuge in the only place that would protect him from the Assassins, but as it turns out from the MP Abstergo info, all sleeper agents joined Abstergo before becoming a sleeper agent.

ElDoucherino
12-09-2011, 06:12 AM
Originally posted by ProdiGurl:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by twenty_glyphs:
I don't feel like the developers hyped up the game too much beyond what it was. They were just secretive about a lot of things and that let our minds naturally assume that many questions we had would be answered. They also said a lot of questions would be answered Ś just not which ones. I've been through enough game release cycles to not get too hyped up with unrealistic expectations, so that wasn't a factor.
My biggest disappointment is not with the title "Revelations" making me think there would be more to the story than there was, but with the fact that I thought Brotherhood's story added so much more to the AC universe than Revelations did. I expected to get at least as much as last year, but the level of detail to the present day story and the mysteries of last year's game just were not a factor.

Yep - I think you might have explained it better than I did earlier, but that's exactly how I view this revelation issue.
Fans all had their own hopes & ideas on what would be revealed & when it wasn't, felt let down but I don't see as it's any of the dev's fault for what people assume & give ACR a bad rap.

In the one Trailer AC put out, it was Ezio's quest for answers to His part in this. He got them.

As for me being a general follower, it answered my basic question of how Ezio ends & what he finds to close his chapter. Plus what did happen w/ Lucy.
[SPOILER] <span class="ev_code_GREY">For me, finding that he learned that he was just a conduit - one necessary piece of the bigger puzzle and that it was time to stop & get on with his personal life, was what I wanted to know. Also what he learns of the truth of Altair's life w/ the Order & his ending. They solidify the ends of both our previous characters & set up AC3 pretty nicely imo</span> [END SPOILER]


Prodi I'm with you that 16 probably isn't gone.

I don't know. It rebuilt the animus island. I think it'll have him there too some how.

They probably wanted to have him flash or something in the ending credit but decided it would be to much as we catch everything.

Well, Desmond was with 16 hearing all the details of what's happened w/ him & the condition he's in (that he wants out). If I were Desmond & woke up from that, I'd be wanting to grill the crew on how to help the guy stuck in there!?

Or is he gone as of ACR? [SPOILER] I kinda don't get what may have happened as he put his arms around Desmond & said he was programmed for deletion? Did 16 get removed at that point or is he still there?? [END SPOILER] http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif
I have to admit, if they don't include 16 in AC3, I think they didn't do a good job of sealing up his character & the mystery surrounding him.
But then if that's the case, it's very possible that the AC devs don't consider 16 to be a serious factor of AC & didn't devote alot of their time/resources into closing his story or giving us more background.

They just have a guy who was put in an animus, then cracks & hides puzzle/info stuff (filler) into AC2 & then is shut down & removed in ACR.

That would kind of be a shame, but it wouldn't ruin my experience any. To me, the main story has been Ezio & his journey - not so much Desmond's & that whole side of it, altho now that Ezio's 'retired', I think I may get more interested in this part of it w/ AC3. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I highly doubt it was the last we saw of Subject 16 seeing as he has always been the characters moving the story forward.

The mystery around him in AC1 that opens Desmonds eyes for something beyond him. The more detail explaination what all those figures and symbols back in AC1 was and a clip showing something very important to Desmond in the second installment. To finally explaining although in codes what Desmond has to do to stop the templars (for now) in Brotherhood. Yes, his parts in Revelation was very few and not at all informative but they could do so because of what had happened to Desmond. As he says the first or second time we run into him on the island, his job was to keep the animus busy and oblivious of Desmonds state so that Desmond had time to snap out of his coma finding what he needed to find. The writters knew that they could cut corners not giving away his purpose in Revelations due to the state Desmond was in.

But the last bit where he wraps his arms around Desmond has me thinking that he maybe left a part of him in Desmonds mind. And that he will be there til the end.

And I have to agree with LightRey. The dev did say that must will be unrawelled but they never say that it'll be Desmonds story. You expactiations were to high, and come on fellas, who really thought that they would give away all tasty bits before the last installement of Desmonds story? Even I, and I am not the sharpest knife, didn't think that.

dxsxhxcx
12-09-2011, 06:13 AM
Originally posted by twenty_glyphs:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ProdiGurl:
I think it's becuz you guys had these personal questions that you want answered when that's not what they promised would be answered for you in the first place.

We are not talking about "personal questions" that weren't answered, we're talking about major plot points that have been built up to a boiling point that were totally ignored in Revelations. What is the purpose of the entire Subject 16 plotline? The glyphs he left obviously have meaning besides just being markers for the Truth files, and there is clearly something important he wants Desmond to see in the Truth video that is majorly important with Adam and Eve. He even told us in Brotherhood to find Eve in Eden because her DNA is the key. We finally meet the guy and his personality is totally different to what we've seen in the past two games, and not once does the topic of what he's been trying to show Desmond come up. Not even one little mention.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

if you expect them to explain every single bit of information they gave us with the glyphs/puzzles then you'll wait forever, I believe that information was given just to give us an insight about the Templar x Assassin war, TWCB and the POEs, the only thing they NEED to explain IMO is the truth video (why that memory was so important?) and about what S16 was talking about in ACB, I'm certain what he said in ACB will be explained/happen in AC3, but I was expecting that he would at least mention something more regarding to that in ACR.

What is so hard about making a cutscene where Desmond asks what S16 meant with all those puzzles/truth video in AC2/what he said in ACB, and then S16 saying that he would understand all that once he wake up?! IMO this would've been much better than just ignore everything like if never happened...


IMO his role in ACR was a waste of character/opportunity, I believe Desmond is smart enough to figure out everything that happened in the island by himself (he didn't need to know why he was there, the only important thing he needed to know is that he needed to enter that portal), he wouldn't just sit there and wait to see what would happen, or worse, swim before try to enter that portal (lol), once he started to see Ezio's memories he would continue seeing them, between stay in a place you don't know and a "familiar ground" (Ezio's memories), I would certainly choose the second option...



Originally posted by LightRey:
all sleeper agents joined Abstergo before becoming a sleeper agent.

Daniel was kidnapped and brainwashed by Abstergo when he was a kid, he didn't choose to be submitted to that, and it's not like every sleeper agent (ex-assassin or not) come to Abstergo asking for a job and then they say, "Ok! You'll be a sleeper agent!!", they're probably kidnapped and then brainwashed the same way they did with Daniel...

LightRey
12-09-2011, 06:48 AM
Originally posted by dxsxhxcx:
Daniel was kidnapped and brainwashed by Abstergo when he was a kid, he didn't choose to be submitted to that, and it's not like every sleeper agent (ex-assassin or not) come to Abstergo asking for a job and then they say, "Ok! You'll be a sleeper agent!!", they're probably kidnapped and then brainwashed the same way they did with Daniel...
See, that is not the case. That's what said Abstergo information revealed. Every sleeper agent was already an Abstergo agent before becoming a sleeper agent.

dxsxhxcx
12-09-2011, 07:04 AM
Originally posted by LightRey:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by dxsxhxcx:
Daniel was kidnapped and brainwashed by Abstergo when he was a kid, he didn't choose to be submitted to that, and it's not like every sleeper agent (ex-assassin or not) come to Abstergo asking for a job and then they say, "Ok! You'll be a sleeper agent!!", they're probably kidnapped and then brainwashed the same way they did with Daniel...
See, that is not the case. That's what said Abstergo information revealed. Every sleeper agent was already an Abstergo agent before becoming a sleeper agent. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

some may be, but that's not Daniel's case...

Il_Divo
12-09-2011, 07:11 AM
Originally posted by twenty_glyphs:


Exactly. These kinds of things are not "revelations", they are plot development. More than that, it's specific to just this game's story and has no impact on the overall Desmond, TWCB, or 2012 stories. These kinds of story points were things that made this game's internal Ezio story nice, but they had no impact on the overall story. They did not answer questions that the story had already created after playing the first 3 games. If I didn't already have the question after Brotherhood's story, any plot detail that got revealed does not count as a revelation.

When you title a game "Revelations" in a series full of mystery and conspiracies that has brought up a lot of questions, people expect answers to those questions. A lot of things being cited as revelations here are minor details that fill out the story a little (like who Ezio had kids with or what Subject 16 looks like) or story details wholly contained within Revelations' plot (like who the Templar Grand Master was, and Tarik's true loyalty), but do not satisfy our curiosity of what is actually going on in the overarching story.

Now I'm not arguing that any of this is false advertising, and I don't think a lot of other people are either. That's just ludicrous to try to argue any of that, because obviously much of this is subjective and would never hold up in court as dishonest marketing. But I think a lot of us are disappointed that so many topics presented as important to this series were ignored in this game and not even at least elaborated on a little.

Agreed, for the most part. Revelations implies something important, critical, and dramatic enough to alter our understanding of the story. Essentially, a plot twist on steroids. And it also indicates answers to questions which the players have. I thought AC:R's storyline was pretty fantastic, but what it did not do is provide many answers to the questions at hand, the most prominent being why Juno forced Desmond to stab Lucy, though the Subject 16 storyline does bear mentioning.

LightRey
12-09-2011, 07:46 AM
Originally posted by dxsxhxcx:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LightRey:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by dxsxhxcx:
Daniel was kidnapped and brainwashed by Abstergo when he was a kid, he didn't choose to be submitted to that, and it's not like every sleeper agent (ex-assassin or not) come to Abstergo asking for a job and then they say, "Ok! You'll be a sleeper agent!!", they're probably kidnapped and then brainwashed the same way they did with Daniel...
See, that is not the case. That's what said Abstergo information revealed. Every sleeper agent was already an Abstergo agent before becoming a sleeper agent. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

some may be, but that's not Daniel's case... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
No, all are. That's what the MP info states. Nobody knows what happened between the point where Daniel was released and the point where he was recruited by the Assassins.

PhiIs1618033
12-09-2011, 08:11 AM
Originally posted by LightRey:
Not entirely the case. Daniel was never suspected of consciously having been a Templar Agent before joining the Assassins. He was one of the Animus subjects, brainwashed by Abstergo and later on found by the Assassins, who were unaware of this. Eventually he killed the Mentor because he had been given a subconscious command to do so, then returned to Abstergo. Most people thought he was just a poor, confused soul seeking refuge in the only place that would protect him from the Assassins, but as it turns out from the MP Abstergo info, all sleeper agents joined Abstergo before becoming a sleeper agent.
I didn't read the comics and I could care less about this guy named Daniel Cross, which was my point. If you're going to reveal something unexpected, reveal something about a subject I know of.

Prodigurl, Ezio being a conduit has been known since AC2. I think it'd be wise to play AC1 and AC2 before you're going to talk about what revelations there were in Revelations.

LightRey
12-09-2011, 11:51 AM
Originally posted by PhiIs1618033...:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LightRey:
Not entirely the case. Daniel was never suspected of consciously having been a Templar Agent before joining the Assassins. He was one of the Animus subjects, brainwashed by Abstergo and later on found by the Assassins, who were unaware of this. Eventually he killed the Mentor because he had been given a subconscious command to do so, then returned to Abstergo. Most people thought he was just a poor, confused soul seeking refuge in the only place that would protect him from the Assassins, but as it turns out from the MP Abstergo info, all sleeper agents joined Abstergo before becoming a sleeper agent.
I didn't read the comics and I could care less about this guy named Daniel Cross, which was my point. If you're going to reveal something unexpected, reveal something about a subject I know of.

Prodigurl, Ezio being a conduit has been known since AC2. I think it'd be wise to play AC1 and AC2 before you're going to talk about what revelations there were in Revelations. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
That still makes it a revelation to those who were aware of Daniel. Might not be one to you, but I'm pretty sure at least half the people of this forum would find this info to be a revelation.

Poodle_of_Doom
12-09-2011, 10:00 PM
I still say the MP was a bad place to implement story line.

eagleforlife1
12-10-2011, 12:40 AM
^ Agree

ProdiGurl
12-10-2011, 04:38 AM
Originally posted by PhiIs1618033...:

I didn't read the comics and I could care less about this guy named Daniel Cross, which was my point. If you're going to reveal something unexpected, reveal something about a subject I know of.

Prodigurl, Ezio being a conduit has been known since AC2. I think it'd be wise to play AC1 and AC2 before you're going to talk about what revelations there were in Revelations.

I did play ACII - twice so far. I don't remember it relaying that?

eagleforlife1
12-10-2011, 05:34 AM
Originally posted by ProdiGurl:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by PhiIs1618033...:

I didn't read the comics and I could care less about this guy named Daniel Cross, which was my point. If you're going to reveal something unexpected, reveal something about a subject I know of.

Prodigurl, Ezio being a conduit has been known since AC2. I think it'd be wise to play AC1 and AC2 before you're going to talk about what revelations there were in Revelations.

I did play ACII - twice so far. I don't remember it relaying that? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
***Spoilers*** <span class="ev_code_WHITE">Ezio was the prophet who needed to enter the vault to speak to Minerva and relay her message to Desmond through him.</span>

SupremeCaptain
12-10-2011, 09:17 AM
Originally posted by eagleforlife1:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LightRey:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by eagleforlife1:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LightRey:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by eagleforlife1:
Again, you're not a lawyer, so I am not going to bother arguing with you but there are lawyers that could provide a very good case for false advertising.
Well, you can try of course, but I'm fairly sure that I'm right. I could ask my uncle of course, as he used to be a lawyer. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

And I could ask my sister's friend's daughter-in-law's dog's cousin twice removed, because he used to be a lawyer as well. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
A dog that was a lawyer? Wow, you must know some interesting people. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

'Interesting' isn't the word that I would use. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

XDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD

I love you.

CrazyShrapnel
12-10-2011, 10:13 AM
Originally posted by Poodle_of_Doom:
Truth of the matter is, they presented the game as one to wrap up some of the loose ends for us. It didn't. It created more questions.

To be honest, I don't even have more questions than before. I kept myself in the dark about ACR before release. I wasn't expecting some grand story arc to tie everything together but I was expecting some progress in the whole "The Ones Who Came Before" thing. So when I finished ACR I didn't feel disappointed... just indifferent.

I found Desmond's story (Not talking about gameplay) fairly interesting. The info on Altair was interesting and the idea that Altair and Ezio knew they were only middlemen in this whole thing was okay. But revelations? I don't think there were any.

My opinion on the ending- oh look. More magical, glowing people who only appear in the last 5 minutes of an AC game. They came before and made bunkers and used pieces of eden and then there was fire and it was almost the end. So what cryptic messages do they have this time?

...A recap. On stuff I already knew. Anything else? Pass words from head to hands to open the way? k.

The cutscene was nice though.

RzaRecta357
12-10-2011, 10:46 AM
Originally posted by LightRey:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by dxsxhxcx:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LightRey:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by dxsxhxcx:
Daniel was kidnapped and brainwashed by Abstergo when he was a kid, he didn't choose to be submitted to that, and it's not like every sleeper agent (ex-assassin or not) come to Abstergo asking for a job and then they say, "Ok! You'll be a sleeper agent!!", they're probably kidnapped and then brainwashed the same way they did with Daniel...
See, that is not the case. That's what said Abstergo information revealed. Every sleeper agent was already an Abstergo agent before becoming a sleeper agent. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

some may be, but that's not Daniel's case... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
No, all are. That's what the MP info states. Nobody knows what happened between the point where Daniel was released and the point where he was recruited by the Assassins. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

No we don't but it's heavily heavily implied that they caught him as a kid and programmed him then let him loose. Besides, thinking just because one folder doesn't mention a special case means it for everyone is a bit crazy.

Why was that blood trail there and red again? Oh yeah because they forgot about it from the play testing.

Sometimes they just don't think about it and this one was even written by some guy outside of the montreal studio whereever the multiplayer was done.


Also, having them reveal the templar side of stuff in the multiplayer is awesome. Good for people that enjoy it as LOTS do and for anyone else read the wiki and quit whining about it.

E-Zekiel
12-10-2011, 12:51 PM
Originally posted by Poodle_of_Doom:

Get caught up,... you're missing out. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lt8WAiaie_8)

Awesome. Thank you for posting this.

eagleforlife1
12-10-2011, 01:52 PM
Originally posted by RzaRecta357:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LightRey:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by dxsxhxcx:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LightRey:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by dxsxhxcx:
Daniel was kidnapped and brainwashed by Abstergo when he was a kid, he didn't choose to be submitted to that, and it's not like every sleeper agent (ex-assassin or not) come to Abstergo asking for a job and then they say, "Ok! You'll be a sleeper agent!!", they're probably kidnapped and then brainwashed the same way they did with Daniel...
See, that is not the case. That's what said Abstergo information revealed. Every sleeper agent was already an Abstergo agent before becoming a sleeper agent. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

some may be, but that's not Daniel's case... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
No, all are. That's what the MP info states. Nobody knows what happened between the point where Daniel was released and the point where he was recruited by the Assassins. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

No we don't but it's heavily heavily implied that they caught him as a kid and programmed him then let him loose. Besides, thinking just because one folder doesn't mention a special case means it for everyone is a bit crazy.

Why was that blood trail there and red again? Oh yeah because they forgot about it from the play testing.

Sometimes they just don't think about it and this one was even written by some guy outside of the montreal studio whereever the multiplayer was done.


Also, having them reveal the templar side of stuff in the multiplayer is awesome. Good for people that enjoy it as LOTS do and for anyone else read the wiki and quit whining about it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Indeed. They are not going to admit to kidnapping children. In fact I believe it was Abstergo's very own Dr. Warren Vidic who said:

"Anyone can write a book Mr. Miles. And they can put whatever they want on its pages. I even believe there is a book that claims the world was created in seven days...A best-seller too".

Poodle_of_Doom
12-10-2011, 02:01 PM
Originally posted by E-Zekiel:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Poodle_of_Doom:

Get caught up,... you're missing out. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lt8WAiaie_8)

Awesome. Thank you for posting this. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Your welcome.

LightRey
12-10-2011, 02:58 PM
Originally posted by RzaRecta357:
No we don't but it's heavily heavily implied that they caught him as a kid and programmed him then let him loose. Besides, thinking just because one folder doesn't mention a special case means it for everyone is a bit crazy.

Why was that blood trail there and red again? Oh yeah because they forgot about it from the play testing.

Sometimes they just don't think about it and this one was even written by some guy outside of the montreal studio whereever the multiplayer was done.


Also, having them reveal the templar side of stuff in the multiplayer is awesome. Good for people that enjoy it as LOTS do and for anyone else read the wiki and quit whining about it.
Actually, the red trail was there to guide players back to the Villa. The person who said it was because they forgot to take it out was wrong on that. It was later explained by Darby I think in an interview by Escoblades. It was completely intentional to leave it in.

That makes your point somewhat moot and there's no good reason to doubt this info. Daniel had all the opportunity to join Abstergo before joining the Assassins and as he'd not have been aware of doing so as he was a sleeper agent, it's more than possible. If the info in MP says so, and it's classified info given to people who are well aware of the capabilities of the Templars and the kinds of decisions they make, then there's no good reason to doubt it's accuracy.

SupremeCaptain
12-10-2011, 03:06 PM
I was a bit sad when that red trial had no importance to the game.

When I saw it I got freaked out, and started thinking of what it could be. But noooooooo...

The symbols at the end of AC1 made by Subject 16 also wasn't meant to be speculated either. They just put it in the end for the sake of it.

Il_Divo
12-10-2011, 03:11 PM
Originally posted by SupremeCaptain:
I was a bit sad when that red trial had no importance to the game.

When I saw it I got freaked out, and started thinking of what it could be. But noooooooo...

The symbols at the end of AC1 made by Subject 16 also wasn't meant to be speculated either. They just put it in the end for the sake of it.

Wasn't it just meant to signify how the end of the world was coming?

Poodle_of_Doom
12-10-2011, 03:46 PM
I thought that the symbols were the bases for the S16 story line...

LightRey
12-10-2011, 03:56 PM
Originally posted by SupremeCaptain:
I was a bit sad when that red trial had no importance to the game.

When I saw it I got freaked out, and started thinking of what it could be. But noooooooo...

The symbols at the end of AC1 made by Subject 16 also wasn't meant to be speculated either. They just put it in the end for the sake of it.
Maybe not. Remember they showed the masonic eye glyph at the end of ACB? That suggests they had more significance.

Poodle_of_Doom
12-10-2011, 04:26 PM
Originally posted by LightRey:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SupremeCaptain:
I was a bit sad when that red trial had no importance to the game.

When I saw it I got freaked out, and started thinking of what it could be. But noooooooo...

The symbols at the end of AC1 made by Subject 16 also wasn't meant to be speculated either. They just put it in the end for the sake of it.
Maybe not. Remember they showed the masonic eye glyph at the end of ACB? That suggests they had more significance. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, it's also as I've said. The symbols were the introductory factor for the S16 portion of the story line.

LightRey
12-10-2011, 04:35 PM
Originally posted by Poodle_of_Doom:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LightRey:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SupremeCaptain:
I was a bit sad when that red trial had no importance to the game.

When I saw it I got freaked out, and started thinking of what it could be. But noooooooo...

The symbols at the end of AC1 made by Subject 16 also wasn't meant to be speculated either. They just put it in the end for the sake of it.
Maybe not. Remember they showed the masonic eye glyph at the end of ACB? That suggests they had more significance. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, it's also as I've said. The symbols were the introductory factor for the S16 portion of the story line. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
True, but there seems to be more to them than just that.

SupremeCaptain
12-10-2011, 05:20 PM
Originally posted by LightRey:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SupremeCaptain:
I was a bit sad when that red trial had no importance to the game.

When I saw it I got freaked out, and started thinking of what it could be. But noooooooo...

The symbols at the end of AC1 made by Subject 16 also wasn't meant to be speculated either. They just put it in the end for the sake of it.
Maybe not. Remember they showed the masonic eye glyph at the end of ACB? That suggests they had more significance. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Nah it was stated in an interview when AC2 was announced. They didn't think people would speculate about the symbols so much.

Poodle_of_Doom
12-10-2011, 05:57 PM
Originally posted by LightRey:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Poodle_of_Doom:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LightRey:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SupremeCaptain:
I was a bit sad when that red trial had no importance to the game.

When I saw it I got freaked out, and started thinking of what it could be. But noooooooo...

The symbols at the end of AC1 made by Subject 16 also wasn't meant to be speculated either. They just put it in the end for the sake of it.
Maybe not. Remember they showed the masonic eye glyph at the end of ACB? That suggests they had more significance. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, it's also as I've said. The symbols were the introductory factor for the S16 portion of the story line. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
True, but there seems to be more to them than just that. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I completely agree.

twenty_glyphs
12-11-2011, 12:03 AM
The glyphs do have a meaning. I've seen an interview for AC2 with Patrice where he said the glyphs were never meant to be clues to the next game's location, but clues about the bigger Assassin's Creed universe. A lot of people thought they were clues pointing to Japan because of the few glyphs that obviously reference the place, but if you look at different interpretations of them you can see there are definite patterns and meanings. Even the new multiplayer dossiers shed some new light on them. The big, bad satellite is called the "Eye-Abstergo", and images of it in the dossiers show a pyramid of light coming from it pointing down to the Earth. That certainly echoes the Masonic Eye and the glyph that is my avatar (an apple above a pyramid).

More than that, there is an interview (that I can't find right now) with Patrice for AC2 where they asked him to tell them something about the AC story that no one else knew yet. He said that one day they'll probably explain all the glyphs.

I think the sad part is the glyphs seemed so intentional and thought out that it made us look at every little detail for meaning. It seems only natural to assume that those details had important meanings after they had put the wall and floor writings in AC1 and then elaborated on them in AC2, then had an Apple show those glyphs to Desmond in Brotherhood. That red trail ended up being very unfortunate. I hope they'll realize how everyone scrutinizes things now and only leave in things that have real meaning.

SteelCity999
12-11-2011, 02:46 PM
Originally posted by twenty_glyphs:
I hope they'll realize how everyone scrutinizes things now and only leave in things that have real meaning.

I wish they would have been smart enough to realize that this entire series was a conspiracy (the entire templar role is one) from the beginning and that people would scrutinize things for answers. That's a bit of a no-brainer.

kurnis2010
12-12-2011, 05:35 PM
Originally posted by RzaRecta357:
Lucy dead. (probably the worst. what we really want to know is WHY he killed her)
Shaun thinks Desmond is a sleeper. (who cares)
Desmonds Dad. (who cares)(meh, we finally put a face and <STRIKE>identity</STRIKE> relationship to the voice. we still dont really know anything)
Ezio a conduit. (we knew this before)
Altairs Death. (we knew this before, just hadn't seen it with our eyes)
Altairs P.O.E we've been speculating on since AC2.
Ezio's spouse whom he continues the bloodline. (we saw altair "continue the bloodline" already)
Who the templar master of Constinople was. (again, who cares? now youre just stating random facts that we encountered in the game. this is not a revelation)
What the temples were for exactly and where the grand one is. (this is probably the closest to a "revelation" of all the things you mentioned)
What Jupiter looked like. All gods accounted for except Consus. (more faces to names. useless)
MP Revelations.

Information on the order.
Information on Abstergo.
Project information.
The location and mission of Daniel Cross.

The only thing you mentioned that is even remotely interesting is the final video about the temples. All in all a TERRIBLE game to be named Revelations... I was severely disappointed in this games plot.

edit: bolded my words. also, this is the WORST forum ive ever seen. the editing tools are pre-historic. I guess they had the plot-developers working forum tech now...

ProdiGurl
12-12-2011, 07:13 PM
There's a Notice up top that they're switching to a new forum service so this site will be closed for a little while as they get it up and running.

Lots of complaining going on -

Poodle_of_Doom
12-12-2011, 09:19 PM
Originally posted by twenty_glyphs:
The glyphs do have a meaning. I've seen an interview for AC2 with Patrice where he said the glyphs were never meant to be clues to the next game's location, but clues about the bigger Assassin's Creed universe. A lot of people thought they were clues pointing to Japan because of the few glyphs that obviously reference the place, but if you look at different interpretations of them you can see there are definite patterns and meanings. Even the new multiplayer dossiers shed some new light on them. The big, bad satellite is called the "Eye-Abstergo", and images of it in the dossiers show a pyramid of light coming from it pointing down to the Earth. That certainly echoes the Masonic Eye and the glyph that is my avatar (an apple above a pyramid).

More than that, there is an interview (that I can't find right now) with Patrice for AC2 where they asked him to tell them something about the AC story that no one else knew yet. He said that one day they'll probably explain all the glyphs.

I think the sad part is the glyphs seemed so intentional and thought out that it made us look at every little detail for meaning. It seems only natural to assume that those details had important meanings after they had put the wall and floor writings in AC1 and then elaborated on them in AC2, then had an Apple show those glyphs to Desmond in Brotherhood. That red trail ended up being very unfortunate. I hope they'll realize how everyone scrutinizes things now and only leave in things that have real meaning.

In a way, I kind of enjoy it really. It makes you question yourself, making you wonder if you should speculate or not. It's like you're never able to fully trust yourself, and your understanding of the world around. In a way, that's kind of central to the story line.

DavisP92
12-12-2011, 09:32 PM
Originally posted by LightRey:
False advertising is definitely illegal.
I'm sorry, but aside from the fact that it most definitely wasn't false advertizing, as there most certainly were many revelations in the game, a term so ambiguous as "revelations" isn't going to get you any luck in court. Not to mention that to my knowledge they only claimed such things in interviews, which are generally (officially) not considered to be advertizements and therefore do not apply to the laws regarding false advertizing.[/QUOTE]

I'm sorry lightrey, i haven't read the rest of this thread but do u still say that ACR had a lot of revelations? if so, could u name them with proof http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Poodle_of_Doom
12-13-2011, 03:27 PM
Originally posted by Pdavis3:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LightRey:
False advertising is definitely illegal.
I'm sorry, but aside from the fact that it most definitely wasn't false advertizing, as there most certainly were many revelations in the game, a term so ambiguous as "revelations" isn't going to get you any luck in court. Not to mention that to my knowledge they only claimed such things in interviews, which are generally (officially) not considered to be advertizements and therefore do not apply to the laws regarding false advertizing.

I'm sorry lightrey, i haven't read the rest of this thread but do u still say that ACR had a lot of revelations? if so, could u name them with proof http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

No... He can. But he won't. Know why? Because you should of gone back, and read the rest of the thread. That's why.

CRUDFACE
12-14-2011, 01:11 AM
Originally posted by Pdavis3:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LightRey:
False advertising is definitely illegal.
I'm sorry, but aside from the fact that it most definitely wasn't false advertizing, as there most certainly were many revelations in the game, a term so ambiguous as "revelations" isn't going to get you any luck in court. Not to mention that to my knowledge they only claimed such things in interviews, which are generally (officially) not considered to be advertizements and therefore do not apply to the laws regarding false advertizing. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'm sorry lightrey, i haven't read the rest of this thread but do u still say that ACR had a lot of revelations? if so, could u name them with proof http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif[/QUOTE]

Revelations? Personally, Revelations is more of just continuing the story lines of Ezio and Altair and kind of touching up on Desmond (nothing we didn't know already.)

The only revelations was what Altair did with his Apple and what the temples are used for. That's basically it.

LightRey
12-14-2011, 02:36 AM
Originally posted by Poodle_of_Doom:
No... He can. But he won't. Know why? Because you should of gone back, and read the rest of the thread. That's why.
Eh, I can and I did. You didn't even bother to read through all of the thread did you?

joelsantos24
12-14-2011, 01:00 PM
I haven't gotten Revelations just yet, so I'm sort of biding my time for now. Nevertheless, I've read some reviews, especially through the official Playstation magazine, and the only real weakness of the game, at least in the eyes of the reporters, is the somewhat "outdated" combat system (since it seems to be basically more of the same already experienced in/through Brotherhood, for instance), and the fact that it didn't have that many literally new features, when compared to the previous titles, that is.
In their opinion, Revelations provides closure in a rather ambiguous manner, and if the fans wanted something refreshing then they got something amazingly fun, with a profound and conclusive narrative. It may not have the impact of previous instalments, but it is definitely mandatory for any true fan of the saga.

Through their analysis, I tend to believe the strengths and weaknesses balance each other out. But I'll check it for myself soon, I suppose. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

D.I.D.
12-14-2011, 01:09 PM
Originally posted by POP_WW_2008:
I haven't gotten Revelations just yet, so I'm sort of biding my time for now. Nevertheless, I've read some reviews, especially through the official Playstation magazine, and the only real weakness of the game, at least in the eyes of the reporters, is the somewhat "outdated" combat system (since it seems to be basically more of the same already experienced in/through Brotherhood, for instance), and the fact that it didn't have that many literally new features, when compared to the previous titles, that is.
In their opinion, Revelations provides closure in a rather ambiguous manner, and if the fans wanted something refreshing then they got something amazingly fun, with a profound and conclusive narrative. It may not have the impact of previous instalments, but it is definitely mandatory for any true fan of the saga.

Through their analysis, I tend to believe the strengths and weaknesses balance each other out. But I'll check it for myself soon, I suppose. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Official Playstation Magazine and analysis don't really go together. Objectivity is a rare thing in review publications at the best of times.

The only way I was able to sum this up was to say that it's good if you already love this series, but you're going to need that love in order to look past the problems.

eagleforlife1
12-14-2011, 01:19 PM
Originally posted by LightRey:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Poodle_of_Doom:
No... He can. But he won't. Know why? Because you should of gone back, and read the rest of the thread. That's why.
Eh, I can and I did. You didn't even bother to read through all of the thread did you? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

A lot of the revelations you claimed were argued against by a lot of people.

Poodle_of_Doom
12-14-2011, 01:54 PM
Originally posted by eagleforlife1:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LightRey:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Poodle_of_Doom:
No... He can. But he won't. Know why? Because you should of gone back, and read the rest of the thread. That's why.
Eh, I can and I did. You didn't even bother to read through all of the thread did you? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

A lot of the revelations you claimed were argued against by a lot of people. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

See... I told you he wouldn't. At that, they may have been argued against, but that doesn't necessarily mean he's wrong. Truth be known, I accepted all of his points, but that doesn't mean my opinions swayed any. At that, that's exactly what all of this is anyway. Opinion.

ProdiGurl
12-14-2011, 01:58 PM
Here's the short trailer again of what Ezio's seeking.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cfR_ncxSRGU

He isn't asking what happened w/ Lucy, etc.

I think his answers get revealed to him and he got his Revelation as to the past (w/ Altair) & what he needed to do next with his own life.
That he fought a worthy cause and it's time for the next Assassin to take the reigns.

I just cant' see it any other way - the Series isn't over with for us to get the complete answers to everything, it's continuing to lead us thru it.

phoenix-force411
12-14-2011, 02:16 PM
This game actually revealed a lot of stuff. Lucy is dead if you stuck around long enough to hear. Subject 16 has been deleted from the Animus where he pushes Desmond back into the Synch Nexus! They revealed the true meaning of the Assassin's "Nothing is true, everything is permitted". They revealed why the Juno, Minerva, and Jupiter failed to save the world from the Solar Flare. They revealed that there were actually two apples, that Ezio and Altair's apples are different. They talked about the Central Vault where Juno, Jupiter, and Minerva conducted the experiment to save the world. And the activation and location of the central vault at the end. See! So much crap and all you are worried about is useless stuff. :P

joelsantos24
12-14-2011, 03:53 PM
Originally posted by DoubleclickTF:
Official Playstation Magazine and analysis don't really go together. Objectivity is a rare thing in review publications at the best of times.

The only way I was able to sum this up was to say that it's good if you already love this series, but you're going to need that love in order to look past the problems.
That is not my reading, at all. Does it have problems? I am sure it does, seldom is there any game without them. But then again, maybe the problems you referred to, are not as prominent as you may think. And I totally disagree with the remark regarding the official magazine and objective analysis not "mixing". From my experience with the magazine, I have never been disenchanted with it.

eagleforlife1
12-15-2011, 04:05 AM
Originally posted by Poodle_of_Doom:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by eagleforlife1:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LightRey:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Poodle_of_Doom:
No... He can. But he won't. Know why? Because you should of gone back, and read the rest of the thread. That's why.
Eh, I can and I did. You didn't even bother to read through all of the thread did you? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

A lot of the revelations you claimed were argued against by a lot of people. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

At that, that's exactly what all of this is anyway. Opinion. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I agree. That's exactly what it should be. Unfortunately people get flamed too often on this forum for stating their opinion. I didn't say LightRey was wrong I said a lot of people disagreed with him (including me).

LightRey
12-15-2011, 04:26 AM
Originally posted by eagleforlife1:
I agree. That's exactly what it should be. Unfortunately people get flamed too often on this forum for stating their opinion. I didn't say LightRey was wrong I said a lot of people disagreed with him (including me).
Then I see little point in discussing this further. I think we have established that most of what I said can be interpreted as being revelations (be it to the player or the main character(s) in the game), which makes the title and the so-called "advertizements" (the devs saying in interviews that there would be many revelations) legitimate ones.

CRUDFACE
12-15-2011, 05:57 AM
I think it has to do allot with the revelations that game writers of different type basically forced out into the public. While at times Ubi hinted at only going into things slightly, they expanded it into learning about everything and more.

It just got overly hyped is all. Not so much that there weren't any revelations, more like they just weren't as big as people, including myself, wanted them to be.

LightRey
12-15-2011, 06:02 AM
Originally posted by t260z:
I think it has to do allot with the revelations that game writers of different type basically forced out into the public. While at times Ubi hinted at only going into things slightly, they expanded it into learning about everything and more.

It just got overly hyped is all. Not so much that there weren't any revelations, more like they just weren't as big as people, including myself, wanted them to be.
I think that's exactly the case. People got caught up in the hype, which often leads to disappointment. That is understandable, but no excuse to accuse a company like Ubisoft of lying or being lazy, as they are clearly not.

CRUDFACE
12-15-2011, 06:35 AM
Originally posted by LightRey:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by t260z:
I think it has to do allot with the revelations that game writers of different type basically forced out into the public. While at times Ubi hinted at only going into things slightly, they expanded it into learning about everything and more.

It just got overly hyped is all. Not so much that there weren't any revelations, more like they just weren't as big as people, including myself, wanted them to be.
I think that's exactly the case. People got caught up in the hype, which often leads to disappointment. That is understandable, but no excuse to accuse a company like Ubisoft of lying or being lazy, as they are clearly not. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Clearly yes or no depends on how much you wanted from the series. Take Desmond. They didn't explain his tattoo which was of high speculation. They glossed over his interaction with his parents in just a few sentences as well as never showing how good he was to how he somehow snuck away from an assassins camp.

I think more should have been addressed. Some weren't. I'm not going to call Ubisoft liars or that they're the Saturday morning cartoon villain, but I am saying that it looks like some things are diminishing. Or that they just couldn't focus everywhere you know?

They need a break from the series to put a bit more into the overall writing http://media.ubi.com/us/forum_images/gf-glomp.gif

ProdiGurl
12-15-2011, 06:55 AM
Originally posted by t260z:
I think it has to do allot with the revelations that game writers of different type basically forced out into the public. While at times Ubi hinted at only going into things slightly, they expanded it into learning about everything and more.

It just got overly hyped is all. Not so much that there weren't any revelations, more like they just weren't as big as people, including myself, wanted them to be.

I think this is pretty accurate here. I would have liked more too (regarding stuff I'm more interested in which I haven't commented on here), but I think the Writers have a destination in their minds & they're only releasing certain info in certain installs to carry the story along at their own pace, not ours. lol

I figure that they've story-boarded everything & know where they're going, when to cut off & when to start each detail where we play it & want it all.

Even with that, I do think the story suffered drama & intensity that could have been added along the way. I care more about that than what we didn't learn.

LightRey
12-15-2011, 07:16 AM
Originally posted by t260z:
Clearly yes or no depends on how much you wanted from the series. Take Desmond. They didn't explain his tattoo which was of high speculation. They glossed over his interaction with his parents in just a few sentences as well as never showing how good he was to how he somehow snuck away from an assassins camp.

I think more should have been addressed. Some weren't. I'm not going to call Ubisoft liars or that they're the Saturday morning cartoon villain, but I am saying that it looks like some things are diminishing. Or that they just couldn't focus everywhere you know?

They need a break from the series to put a bit more into the overall writing http://media.ubi.com/us/forum_images/gf-glomp.gif
Well that is your opinion and I disagree. I think they're doing as good a job as ever.

eagleforlife1
12-15-2011, 07:24 AM
Originally posted by LightRey:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by eagleforlife1:
I agree. That's exactly what it should be. Unfortunately people get flamed too often on this forum for stating their opinion. I didn't say LightRey was wrong I said a lot of people disagreed with him (including me).
I think we have established that most of what I said can be interpreted as being revelations (be it to the player or the main character(s) in the game), which makes the title and the so-called "advertizements" (the devs saying in interviews that there would be many revelations) legitimate ones. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

We haven't established anything. The fact that large amount of people disagreed with your points means that nothing has been established in that respect.

LightRey
12-15-2011, 07:43 AM
Originally posted by eagleforlife1:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LightRey:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by eagleforlife1:
I agree. That's exactly what it should be. Unfortunately people get flamed too often on this forum for stating their opinion. I didn't say LightRey was wrong I said a lot of people disagreed with him (including me).
I think we have established that most of what I said can be interpreted as being revelations (be it to the player or the main character(s) in the game), which makes the title and the so-called "advertizements" (the devs saying in interviews that there would be many revelations) legitimate ones. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

We haven't established anything. The fact that large amount of people disagreed with your points means that nothing has been established in that respect. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
That "large amount of people" you're talking about is about 5 and this thread is mainly visited by people who agree with the OP, as most members, including me, are tired of discussing your disappointment in whatever. The only reason I'm around here is because I have a loathing for naggers, especially when they claim to offer constructive criticism when all they're really doing is making the same unwarranted and inadequately supported claims over and over again.

If I weren't so damn stubborn or didn't have the kind of respect for the AC devs as I do, I'd have left this place long ago.

When I joined this forum was mostly about theories and curiosity. It was focused around people's interests in the game. Even though people made just as many false/ridiculous claims as they do now, at least those were made while attempting to understand or even add to the story.
I disagree on many points with Poodle of Doom for example, but at the very least he takes the time to actually post about his takes on certain events in the series and theories on how they could be explained. Such discussions are the ones that really deserved to be called such.

This thread is just a nagfest imo. I just wish there was a separate forum for complaints, feedback, etc.

eagleforlife1
12-15-2011, 08:14 AM
Originally posted by LightRey:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by eagleforlife1:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LightRey:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by eagleforlife1:
I agree. That's exactly what it should be. Unfortunately people get flamed too often on this forum for stating their opinion. I didn't say LightRey was wrong I said a lot of people disagreed with him (including me).
I think we have established that most of what I said can be interpreted as being revelations (be it to the player or the main character(s) in the game), which makes the title and the so-called "advertizements" (the devs saying in interviews that there would be many revelations) legitimate ones. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

We haven't established anything. The fact that large amount of people disagreed with your points means that nothing has been established in that respect. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
That "large amount of people" you're talking about is about 5 and this thread is mainly visited by people who agree with the OP, as most members, including me, are tired of discussing your disappointment in whatever. The only reason I'm around here is because I have a loathing for naggers, especially when they claim to offer constructive criticism when all they're really doing is making the same unwarranted and inadequately supported claims over and over again.

If I weren't so damn stubborn or didn't have the kind of respect for the AC devs as I do, I'd have left this place long ago.

When I joined this forum was mostly about theories and curiosity. It was focused around people's interests in the game. Even though people made just as many false/ridiculous claims as they do now, at least those were made while attempting to understand or even add to the story.
I disagree on many points with Poodle of Doom for example, but at the very least he takes the time to actually post about his takes on certain events in the series and theories on how they could be explained. Such discussions are the ones that really deserved to be called such.

This thread is just a nagfest imo. I just wish there was a separate forum for complaints, feedback, etc. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

We only complain because we are fans of the series and want the best game possible. I have posted many positive things about ACR and I enjoyed it but having paid good money for it I believe that I have just as much of a right to complain about it as I have to praise it.

If you don't like the content of this thread you don't have to keep returning to it.

I have genuine respect for people who go beyond their call of duty; such as Harry Moseley; a young kid who due to circumstances could have asked for anything he wanted and got it but he chose to do something to help others from meeting the same fate as him. That is somebody who I have respect for.

I appreciate what the Ubi devs do just as I do for the people who take my bins away in the morning; they're both just doing what they are paid to do; and I have complained about my binmen in the past too.

LightRey
12-15-2011, 08:21 AM
Originally posted by eagleforlife1:
We only complain because we are fans of the series and want the best game possible. I have posted many positive things about ACR and I enjoyed it but having paid good money for it I believe that I have just as much of a right to complain about it as I have to praise it.

If you don't like the content of this thread you don't have to keep returning to it.
I have nothing against complaining. However, as you are not the only fans out there and as this forum is a forum for general discussion about the series, I'd say you should tone it down a little. Besides, this very issue is basically being discussed in three separate threads and in each one it's the same people saying the same things. We get it. I don't go everywhere stating the same theory either. Once is enough.

I keep returning to it because you guys make it seem like your opinion is that of the majority, or that the devs didn't do their best. You should come up with actual data to back you up if you say that. It's insulting to the the devs and the people that disagree as you don't even give them a chance to defend it.

eagleforlife1
12-15-2011, 08:36 AM
Originally posted by LightRey:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by eagleforlife1:
We only complain because we are fans of the series and want the best game possible. I have posted many positive things about ACR and I enjoyed it but having paid good money for it I believe that I have just as much of a right to complain about it as I have to praise it.

If you don't like the content of this thread you don't have to keep returning to it.
I have nothing against complaining. However, as you are not the only fans out there and as this forum is a forum for general discussion about the series, I'd say you should tone it down a little. Besides, this very issue is basically being discussed in three separate threads and in each one it's the same people saying the same things. We get it. I don't go everywhere stating the same theory either. Once is enough.

I keep returning to it because you guys make it seem like your opinion is that of the majority, or that the devs didn't do their best. You should come up with actual data to back you up if you say that. It's insulting to the the devs and the people that disagree as you don't even give them a chance to defend it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

What anybody says on these forums may insult the devs, it may not, that's life nobody is going to be happy 100% of the time. The devs are capable of responding; Darby McDevitt has before as has Cameron Stewart and UbiGabe, but they choose not to. The devs have said many times that they read the forums and listen to the fans. If they didn't expect to get criticism they wouldn't have entered the gaming industry; it's the same with every game. Nobody is personally attacking them or aiming crude vitriol at them, they're stating their opinion on where they felt the game could have been better.

twenty_glyphs
12-15-2011, 08:38 AM
I'm one of the people disappointed in the revelations we got in this game. But I just went back and looked at the Game Informer article that gave us our first details about Revelations in May, and its closing paragraph says the following:


Assassin's Creed has developed a devoted following in the years since its first release. After pouring dozens of hours into the story, gamers are itching for Ubisoft to address some major questions. Who is Subject 16? What's the status of Lucy, Shaun and Rebecca? What happened to the first civilization? What is the link between the two mysterious voices from that civilization, Juno and Minerva? What happened to Alta´r? How are Alta´r, Ezio and Desmond linked, and why are they so important? Where is the last temple? All of this and more will be unveiled, according to creative director Alexandre Amancio. If he stays true to his word, fans will finally have what they've waited for so long to receive: Answers.

Funny enough, every question mentioned there was answered. I do take issue with some of the questions though -- they weren't all questions I had. I didn't care who Subject 16 was, only about what he discovered. I didn't care as much about Lucy's status, which was addressed in a lackluster and disappointing way, but about why it had to happen to her. I already knew what happened to the first civilization. And the "and more will be unveiled" never really came to pass. So say what I want about being disappointed about what was answered, they did stay true to their word about the answers they were going to give. I do think many of the answers were delivered in a lackluster way that really diminished their impact.

I still think if this game had something along the lines of The Truth with a final reward, I would have been much happier with it. I wanted more clues and images to pour over, new encrypted messages and even a new mystery or two to solve. Even making Ishak Pasha's memoir pages tell an actual story like Alta´r's Codex or the Scrolls of Romulus would have added something nice. I think if those two things had been in the game, it wouldn't have felt so empty to me. They were two of the things that really fleshed out a lot of intrigue and mystery in AC2 and ACB and were sorely missed.

LightRey
12-15-2011, 08:42 AM
Originally posted by eagleforlife1:
What anybody says on these forums may insult the devs, it may not, that's life nobody is going to be happy 100% of the time. The devs are capable of responding; Darby McDevitt has before as has Cameron Stewart and UbiGabe, but they choose not to. The devs have said many times that they read the forums and listen to the fans. If they didn't expect to get criticism they wouldn't have entered the gaming industry; it's the same with every game. Nobody is personally attacking them or aiming crude vitriol at them, they're stating their opinion on where they felt the game could have been better.
Again, I'm not against criticism. I'm against the way it has become common to post it on the forums. You should all keep in mind that these games aren't made just for you, they're made for all the fans. Something you take issue with, might very well be something others love. It's your humble opinion that you're posting, so act that way.

DavisP92
12-15-2011, 09:56 AM
Originally posted by LightRey:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Poodle_of_Doom:
No... He can. But he won't. Know why? Because you should of gone back, and read the rest of the thread. That's why.
Eh, I can and I did. You didn't even bother to read through all of the thread did you? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

no i didn't, if u actually read my post u wouldn't even ask the question. Seeing how u can't even do something that doesn't really take more then 3 minutes, i'm just gonna assume the revelations (from what i saw) are Altair's death, Lucy's death (not really tho), and what happened to those that came before. Seeing how they didn't even explain why Lucy died, with a good reason. I don't count it as a revelation, and they didn't even explain what Subject 16 meant when he said she can't be trusted. So really it was only two and they weren't big revelations just oh yea well this is how it happens. And we already knew altiar dies so that's not a revelation.

eagleforlife1
12-15-2011, 10:05 AM
Originally posted by LightRey:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by eagleforlife1:
What anybody says on these forums may insult the devs, it may not, that's life nobody is going to be happy 100% of the time. The devs are capable of responding; Darby McDevitt has before as has Cameron Stewart and UbiGabe, but they choose not to. The devs have said many times that they read the forums and listen to the fans. If they didn't expect to get criticism they wouldn't have entered the gaming industry; it's the same with every game. Nobody is personally attacking them or aiming crude vitriol at them, they're stating their opinion on where they felt the game could have been better.

It's your humble opinion that you're posting, so act that way. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

And what way would that be? Like I say we're not being insulting or vitriolic or abusive so I'm not sure what you mean.

Poodle_of_Doom
12-15-2011, 10:55 AM
Originally posted by LightRey:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by eagleforlife1:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LightRey:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by eagleforlife1:
I agree. That's exactly what it should be. Unfortunately people get flamed too often on this forum for stating their opinion. I didn't say LightRey was wrong I said a lot of people disagreed with him (including me).
I think we have established that most of what I said can be interpreted as being revelations (be it to the player or the main character(s) in the game), which makes the title and the so-called "advertizements" (the devs saying in interviews that there would be many revelations) legitimate ones. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

We haven't established anything. The fact that large amount of people disagreed with your points means that nothing has been established in that respect. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
That "large amount of people" you're talking about is about 5 and this thread is mainly visited by people who agree with the OP, as most members, including me, are tired of discussing your disappointment in whatever. The only reason I'm around here is because I have a loathing for naggers, especially when they claim to offer constructive criticism when all they're really doing is making the same unwarranted and inadequately supported claims over and over again.

If I weren't so damn stubborn or didn't have the kind of respect for the AC devs as I do, I'd have left this place long ago.

When I joined this forum was mostly about theories and curiosity. It was focused around people's interests in the game. Even though people made just as many false/ridiculous claims as they do now, at least those were made while attempting to understand or even add to the story.
I disagree on many points with Poodle of Doom for example, but at the very least he takes the time to actually post about his takes on certain events in the series and theories on how they could be explained. Such discussions are the ones that really deserved to be called such.

This thread is just a nagfest imo. I just wish there was a separate forum for complaints, feedback, etc. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thanks for the complement. That said, I think your beginning to see why I've begun to leave this post alone.

ProdiGurl
12-15-2011, 12:36 PM
Originally posted by twenty_glyphs:
I'm one of the people disappointed in the revelations we got in this game. But I just went back and looked at the Game Informer article that gave us our first details about Revelations in May, and its closing paragraph says the following:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Assassin's Creed has developed a devoted following in the years since its first release. After pouring dozens of hours into the story, gamers are itching for Ubisoft to address some major questions. Who is Subject 16? What's the status of Lucy, Shaun and Rebecca? What happened to the first civilization? What is the link between the two mysterious voices from that civilization, Juno and Minerva? What happened to Alta´r? How are Alta´r, Ezio and Desmond linked, and why are they so important? Where is the last temple? All of this and more will be unveiled, according to creative director Alexandre Amancio. If he stays true to his word, fans will finally have what they've waited for so long to receive: Answers.

Funny enough, every question mentioned there was answered. I do take issue with some of the questions though -- they weren't all questions I had. I didn't care who Subject 16 was, only about what he discovered. I didn't care as much about Lucy's status, which was addressed in a lackluster and disappointing way, but about why it had to happen to her. I already knew what happened to the first civilization. And the "and more will be unveiled" never really came to pass. So say what I want about being disappointed about what was answered, they did stay true to their word about the answers they were going to give. I do think many of the answers were delivered in a lackluster way that really diminished their impact.

I still think if this game had something along the lines of The Truth with a final reward, I would have been much happier with it. I wanted more clues and images to pour over, new encrypted messages and even a new mystery or two to solve. Even making Ishak Pasha's memoir pages tell an actual story like Alta´r's Codex or the Scrolls of Romulus would have added something nice. I think if those two things had been in the game, it wouldn't have felt so empty to me. They were two of the things that really fleshed out a lot of intrigue and mystery in AC2 and ACB and were sorely missed. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Exactly. That's what we've been saying.
People are demanding THEIR questions have to be answered, or else the game Title is false or misleading.

I also added the short Trailer link to Ezio explaining what he was seeking - it wasn't what [some] fans were wondering.

I just see alot of this as fans being impatient and running ahead of Ubi creators to expect what they expect & be upset if they didn't meet their personal demands.

I agree w/ LightRey, there's like 3 threads going on that this same subject is in. I'm getting confused & I know I'm repeating myself everywhere, I just cant' remember where lol.

Like I said someplace else, ACR does have its writing flaws & there are valid criticisms. I'm fine with all that (as long as it isn't rudely conveyed w/ flames against Ubi etc.), but they're getting beat up for stuff that isn't fair or warranted and on those things, I want to defend them.

luckyto
12-15-2011, 01:36 PM
One, threads where people disagree or have an 'antagonist' always stay on the top of forums more often. The positive threads that are agreeable to most readers simply don't need a response. That's the internet, welcome.

With all due respect, commenting on the actual game/franchise and its successes and failures is a LOT more important than just wildly theorizing about a fantasy world. That why game magazines post reviews and comment on aspects of 'gameplay', and hardly delve into the plots.

I respect that people want to theorize on story. That's fun too. If that is your thing, then I suggest you take the same course that fans of armor and crossbows say; don't participate. Ignore the complaint thread. Participate in those threads you find enthralling.

Also - I don't think any fans should hold the developers at fault. If they knew their work schedule, they wouldn't. It's the people in charge of those developers that I hold responsible, and SHOULD be held responsible with threads like this. So that when the next meeting in Ubisoft Conference Room 5C takes place, a developer can whip out this forum and say, "Fans are commenting on this...."

I do understand that some people are just constantly trolling and never offering anything positive. That isn't helpful. For me, there are a lot of good things in Revelations --- and I have mentioned them repeatedly. But there are a lot of failures, and the lack of "Revelations" is a big one.

This list ----



Originally posted by RzaRecta357:
Lucy dead.
Shaun thinks Desmond is a sleeper.
Desmonds Dad.
Ezio a conduit.
Altairs Death.
Altairs P.O.E we've been speculating on since AC2.
Ezio's spouse whom he continues the bloodline.
Who the templar master of Constinople was.
What the temples were for exactly and where the grand one is.
What Jupiter looked like. All gods accounted for except Consus.


Frankly, most of those were priori knowledge or not even necessary to the story.

*We knew Lucy was dead, what we needed to know was why and that was not answered.
*Sleeper, really? Is that even relevant to the overall plot? It's not a revelation. Perhaps a new twist or plot point, but not a revelation... there is a difference.
*Desmonds dad. Yes, unless he is Jesus, he has one. We knew he was an Assassin. Original Assassin's Creed.
*Ezio is a conduit = end of AC2
*Altair's death. Unless Altair is immortal, yes, he would die. Nothing was revealed of the greater plot (Assassin's fight to save the world) with that knowledge. I DID LIKE IT, but that's just for me, the fan. It gave closure.
*Location of Altair's POE. I had always thought that it was the same POE as Ezio's, but that was news. One Revelation.
*Ezios bloodline spouse. Is that really important to the overall story? Interesting trivia, maybe.
*Who the Templar Master of Constantinople = Plot Point in an Animus session not even relevant to Desmond's story or even Ezio's.
*Temples and Jupiter. Some of that is new. The world ends in cataclysm, not so much. But Jupiter and the Temple info was the only truly revealing piece.
*Subject16. We saw him. I'm still not even sure who he is or how he is relevant.

Compare this information to the other three and I'd say it reveals the least amount of info. Noone should be prosecuted or sued, but it was misleading.

eagleforlife1
12-15-2011, 01:41 PM
Originally posted by luckyto:
One, threads were people disagree or have an 'antagonist' always stay on the top of forums more often. The positive threads that are agreeable to most readers simply don't need a response. That's the internet, welcome.

With all due respect, commenting on the actual game/franchise and its successes and failures is a LOT more than important than just wildly theorizing about a fantasy world. That why game magazines post reviews and comment on aspects of 'gameplay', and hardly delve into the plots.

I respect that people want to theorize on story. That's fun too. If that is your thing, then I suggest you take the same course that fans of armor and crossbows say; don't participate. Ignore the complaint thread. Participate in those threads you find enthralling.

Also - I don't think any fans should hold the developers at fault. If they knew their work schedule, they wouldn't. It's the people in charge of those developers that I hold responsible, and SHOULD be held responsible with threads like this. So that when the next meeting in Ubisoft Conference Room 5C takes place, a developer can whip out this forum and say, "Fans are commenting on this...."

I do understand that some people are just constantly trolling and never offering anything positive. That isn't helpful. For me, there are a lot of good things in Revelations --- and I have mentioned them repeatedly. But there are a lot of failures, and the lack of "Revelations" is a big one.

This list ----

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">
Originally posted by RzaRecta357:
Lucy dead.
Shaun thinks Desmond is a sleeper.
Desmonds Dad.
Ezio a conduit.
Altairs Death.
Altairs P.O.E we've been speculating on since AC2.
Ezio's spouse whom he continues the bloodline.
Who the templar master of Constinople was.
What the temples were for exactly and where the grand one is.
What Jupiter looked like. All gods accounted for except Consus.


Frankly, most of those were priori knowledge or not even necessary to the story.

*We knew Lucy was dead, what we needed to know was why and that was not answered.
*Sleeper, really? Is that even relevant to the overall plot? It's not a revelation. Perhaps a new twist or plot point, but not a revelation... there is a difference.
*Desmonds dad. Yes, unless he is Jesus, he has one. We knew he was an Assassin. Original Assassin's Creed.
*Ezio is a conduit = end of AC2
*Altair's death. Unless Altair is immortal, yes, he would die. Nothing was revealed of the greater plot (Assassin's fight to save the world) with that knowledge. I DID LIKE IT, but that's just for me, the fan. It gave closure.
*Location of Altair's POE. I had always thought that it was the same POE as Ezio's, but that was news. One Revelation.
*Ezios bloodline spouse. Is that really important to the overall story? Interesting trivia, maybe.
*Who the Templar Master of Constantinople = Plot Point in an Animus session not even relevant to Desmond's story or even Ezio's.
*Temples and Jupiter. Some of that is new. The world ends in cataclysm, not so much. But Jupiter and the Temple info was the only truly revealing piece.
*Subject16. We saw him. I'm still not even sure who he is or how he is relevant.

Compare this information to the other three and I'd say it reveals the least amount of info. Noone should be prosecuted or sued, but it was misleading. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

This is the best post I have read on here in a long time http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif.

eagleforlife1
12-15-2011, 01:44 PM
Originally posted by ProdiGurl:
I agree w/ LightRey, there's like 3 threads going on that this same subject is in. I'm getting confused & I know I'm repeating myself everywhere, I just cant' remember where lol.

Like I said someplace else, ACR does have its writing flaws & there are valid criticisms. I'm fine with all that (as long as it isn't rudely conveyed w/ flames against Ubi etc.), but they're getting beat up for stuff that isn't fair or warranted and on those things, I want to defend them.

If there are 3 threads then one of them needs to be the official one; this one is fine.

Nobody on this thread has flamed Ubi, there has been no abuse, offense, insult, or even rudeness. I know there has been on other threads, but not this one. This thread has just been people stating their opinions on whether or not revelations are revelations or not.

LightRey
12-15-2011, 06:12 PM
Originally posted by eagleforlife1:
And what way would that be? Like I say we're not being insulting or vitriolic or abusive so I'm not sure what you mean.
That would be humbly. As you may or may not know, humility involves more than merely not being insulting, vitriolic or abusive. It means showing that you're just one person and your opinion is merely one of many.

Oh, and no, just because there are a few people in this thread that agree doesn't mean you can be less humble.


Originally posted by eagleforlife1:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ProdiGurl:
I agree w/ LightRey, there's like 3 threads going on that this same subject is in. I'm getting confused & I know I'm repeating myself everywhere, I just cant' remember where lol.

Like I said someplace else, ACR does have its writing flaws & there are valid criticisms. I'm fine with all that (as long as it isn't rudely conveyed w/ flames against Ubi etc.), but they're getting beat up for stuff that isn't fair or warranted and on those things, I want to defend them.

If there are 3 threads then one of them needs to be the official one; this one is fine.

Nobody on this thread has flamed Ubi, there has been no abuse, offense, insult, or even rudeness. I know there has been on other threads, but not this one. This thread has just been people stating their opinions on whether or not revelations are revelations or not. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Then please keep it that way. Make this the primary thread for discussing any things anyone found disappointing in ACR. You have your thread, so keep your complaints there and leave the rest of the forum alone. I will do my best to direct any people who attempt to post such things elsewhere to this thread then.

eagleforlife1
12-16-2011, 01:05 AM
Originally posted by LightRey:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by eagleforlife1:
And what way would that be? Like I say we're not being insulting or vitriolic or abusive so I'm not sure what you mean.
That would be humbly. As you may or may not know, humility involves more than merely not being insulting, vitriolic or abusive. It means showing that you're just one person and your opinion is merely one of many.

Oh, and no, just because there are a few people in this thread that agree doesn't mean you can be less humble.


Originally posted by eagleforlife1:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ProdiGurl:
I agree w/ LightRey, there's like 3 threads going on that this same subject is in. I'm getting confused & I know I'm repeating myself everywhere, I just cant' remember where lol.

Like I said someplace else, ACR does have its writing flaws & there are valid criticisms. I'm fine with all that (as long as it isn't rudely conveyed w/ flames against Ubi etc.), but they're getting beat up for stuff that isn't fair or warranted and on those things, I want to defend them.

If there are 3 threads then one of them needs to be the official one; this one is fine.

Nobody on this thread has flamed Ubi, there has been no abuse, offense, insult, or even rudeness. I know there has been on other threads, but not this one. This thread has just been people stating their opinions on whether or not revelations are revelations or not. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Then please keep it that way. Make this the primary thread for discussing any things anyone found disappointing in ACR. You have your thread, so keep your complaints there and leave the rest of the forum alone. I will do my best to direct any people who attempt to post such things elsewhere to this thread then. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'm not sure where you have developed this erroneous view from that I am posting nothing but complaints all over the forum but nobody else seems to have any sort of problem with me. So maybe you could start showing some humility towards me as well by not assuming that your voice is that of the majority. These things work both ways; maybe you could drop the aggressive, argumentative, all-knowing, obnoxious, charlatan, crusading attitude.

jmk1999
12-16-2011, 01:44 AM
stay on topic or i'm closing this thread. i've seen enough pointless arguing in this thread to last a lifetime. why don't we agree to disagree on whatever the heck you've been arguing about now for the past few pages. now quit it and get back on topic. FIRST and LAST warning. don't make me come back here.