View Full Version : How would you have handled the series thus far?

02-29-2012, 04:17 AM
Hello there, I can't be the only one who would have prefered AC3 to follow AC2, then to have AC:B and AC:R. I've had a little think about how I would have ran things in terms of narrative and i'd like to hear your version too in regards to the series!

Here's how I would have ran things.

Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood

AC:B and AC:R would have been one game, a spin off to be made some time in the future after AC3. In this spin off it would focus entirely on Ezio, entirely historical with no modern day and no ancient civilisation story. I'd also tweak some of the existing Ezio narrative because Revelations I felt lacked drama, a compelling motive (no, finding some keys to a library isn't compelling imo). Ezio would rise to the head of the Assassins Order, but also fall from grace. After or during his quest for revenge, several bad choices leave the order in disrepair throughout much of Europe so that it sets up a sense of believablity in how no one in modern day knows of the secret war between the Templars and Assassins (besides the orders themselves).

Assassin's Creed 3

AC3 would be set in the French Revolution with a disenfranchised Assassin order, small in number and influence hundreds of years after the events Ezio sets into motion. Whoever the protagonist would be, he would be responsible single handedly for reviving the order with the Enlightenment, by influencing events in both France and America. In this fictional AC3, we learn the end of the world plotpoint turns out to be a ruse by TWCB to bring themselves back from extinction.The Templar satellite launch is a counter move because they had knowledge that they (First Civ) were going to try and control humanity again. All the drama about Lucy could still take place as a neat mini cliff hangar before this bombshell, Subject 16 would get equal focus as Desmond as a mirror modern day protagonist and by games end, 16 would be destroyed like in Revs along with Lucy as TWCB return.

The game itself would be split 60/40 Ancestory/Modern day and the overarching narrative makes each section flow into each other rather then disjointed as it currently is. Desmond needs to learn X so he goes into the Animus to look for information from his ancestor. A mini revelation forces him to examine ongoing events in the modern day, which in turn, lead back, etc.

Anyway, enough rambling, how would you have handled the series thus far?

02-29-2012, 04:45 AM
I'm happy with the way things are being handled so far. Revelations story was better than brotherhood imo. Brotherhood's story felt like an expansion of AC2. Same revenge-based story, largely the same characters, (Even Ezio looks exactly the same in AC2 (ending) and ACB).the same settings, just finishing off the unfinished business from AC2, and a few new gameplay tricks. Revenge motives aren't the only one that make for compelling stories, The library whose keys Ezio is after is not just any library, it is THE library, something big is inside it and templars are after it too, and are ahead of him, it's compelling enough for me. Revelations felt like a treasure hunt, and an actual sequal with a different setting and storyline. . If anything, I'd have combined Brotherhood and Revelations into one big game, and after that AC3. Either that, or I'd have done away with brotherhood completely and expanded revelations and included more/bigger Altair sequences, subject 16 (third-person) sequences, more side quests, showing Ezio's death, etc. .But all in all, I'm quite happy the way the series is being handled so far.

But I want a gap of atleast 2-2.5 years before the next AC that comes after AC 3.

02-29-2012, 07:00 AM
I would have never had ACB or ACR, but instead made AC3 the largest game ever with Ezio's two stories and the new assassin. MUAHAHAHAHA... no but seriously, as for ACB and ACR, instead they should have combined them into one game and explain what happened between ezio and his family (how his mother died and relation with his sister). As for the combat, i would have never done the killstreak thing but rather just add on to more of the stealth, and have co-op. Single player would be pretty much what i'm hoping AC3 would be :).

but as for co-op, i would have a whole new story in a different location, perhaps if AC3 was in London or America then co-op would be in china or egypt, most likely egypt. Where a gameplay function that would only work for there would be sand boarding :P. the co-op would be based of a class selection/character creation where one is a archer, one a bomb assassin and one a poison assassin. And there would be co-op moves, the archer can shoot an arrow with a rope on it and the assassins can use it as a zipline or combine the arrows with the other classes' special ability. The assassins can only have 3 current weapons on them at a time (including their special weapon). Archer (my assassin :P) would have the bow and arrow, hidden blades and hand to hand combat. The less weapons the faster you are, the less armor the faster you are. But with more armor you have more defense, and both assassin types (armored and no armor) have different animations. More parkour moves for no armor assassin (kashes, dashes, kongs and maybe flips). Hand to hand fighting would have a drastic overhaul, where you could either steal the guards weapon, kill them with your hands or just knock them out, or just use the weapon against the guard like the ACR trailer. As for the story, I think it would be interesting if the Assassins had to commit certain actions at the right time towards the end of the story where one assassin or both could die and fail. but not sure yet.

more to come after i finish my papers :P