PDA

View Full Version : Alan Rikkin, Project Lead #9 and Co.



DiamondBlade_R
10-01-2012, 09:20 PM
Seriously, I hate how Ubisoft makes such little effort in terms of tying up loose ends with the story, as well as keeping things consistent. I have a very good memory and so I've played through all the sequels to AC1 while remembering many of the little details in the story, such as things you could only know if you went through all the emails etc. And playing through the sequels, I was disappointed by how little to no effort was put by the AC writing staff to ensure that the little details of the plot remain consistent.

Perhaps the most disappointing fact in that regard is how it seems we're never gonna get any more information about the structure of the modern Templar Order, i.e. Abstergo. It's been 3 sequels now and we haven't gotten anything on Alan Rikkin, Project Lead #9 (for starters, who the hell was he? What was\his role in the company?) or any of their co-workers. We haven't gotten any information on the Leila Marino case or any other cases described in the AC1 emails. It's as if Ubi considers them a "side thing" and expects you to forget about them, while in truth, expanding on those aspects of the story would deepen it greatly.

My issue with the story in the sequels isn't only that they seem to "abandon" certain aspects of the story that would be interesting to explore, but also that when the writers do attempt to revisit AC1, they don't do a very good job at it, to say the list. While playing through the sequels I have come across many plot details that don't match up with AC1's plot.
Just to list a few:

Altair's surname, Ibn La-ahad, translates to "son of no one" in Arabic, which was meant to give his character a sense of mystery and make his background vague. That being the case, why the hell did they ruin it by having him declare in Revelations that he is the "son of Umar?" Altair son of no one, son of Umar? D'oh!
At the end of the first game, during his conversation with Al Mualim, during their fight and even in the aftermath of it (as can be seen in the very last "memory log" of Mem. Block 7), Altair is clearly resentful of his Master's deeds, accusing him of lying to him about his goals, losing all respect for him (addressing him during the fight as "Al Mualim" instead of the usual "master": "my blade sees for me, Al Mualim. It cuts through the darkness"). Yet in Revelations, Altair seems to have no resentment towards his master whatsoever, simply deducing that his change was heart was a result of his exposure to the Apple.
3. In regards to "The Mentor's Keeper":
A) Whenever was young Altair such a dedicated believer in the Creed, that he would use it in an argument with the crusader to point out the good in humanity?
B) Whenever was young Altair such a noble, moral person, that he would preach to the crusader about "having been living a lie" and being "doubly wretched" for it?
C) During their fight in AC1, Al Mualim tells Altair that he has fought over a thousand men, all of them superior to him, and all of them dead by his hand. Are you telling me he did all of that Neo-esque superhuman-like stuff but couldn't free himself from the two or 3 men who were holding him hostage?

phil.llllll
10-01-2012, 09:30 PM
Just disregard everything to do with Revelation's story -- it was terrible.

Calvarok
10-02-2012, 12:43 AM
Son of none is just a last name. Umar was also called Ibin la Ahad.
Altair WAS a follower of the creed. That's how he became a master assassin in the first place. Then he grew arrogant. People are not static.

Alan Rikkin will likely be involved in AC3 in some way. He hasn't been forgotten at all. And he was Vidic's boss.

Altair's thougts about Al mualim were consistent. He never said that he was evil just for being around the apple, but that the power of the apple was what drove him to deception.

For me personally, the Ezio side of Revelations was far better than the Ezio side of Brotherhood.

And it is presumable that Al Mualim killed those men with the Apple. Or it wasn't literal, since that doesn't make much sense.

The game's story is very big, and I'm impressed with how connected they've managed to keep it all.

Jexx21
10-02-2012, 12:49 AM
They haven't abandoned it, they just haven't picked it up yet.

Also, you don't know everything apparently. Altair fell to arrogance when he saw that Abbas wasn't as good of an Assassin to him; this is when he stopped strictly following the Creed. As for point 3, letter C, Al Mualim is an old man when Altair is in his prime, he probably was a great warrior when he was younger. Plus, it was a taunt, not all taunts are necessarily true.

Calvarok covered everything else.

LoyalACFan
10-02-2012, 02:59 AM
C) During their fight in AC1, Al Mualim tells Altair that he has fought over a thousand men, all of them superior to him, and all of them dead by his hand. Are you telling me he did all of that Neo-esque superhuman-like stuff but couldn't free himself from the two or 3 men who were holding him hostage?

There was another Crusader standing right in front of him with a loaded crossbow. Wouldn't do much good to fight back if you're just going to get shot in the face if you break free, so he wasn't really trying. Once Altair took out the leader dude, Al Mualim easily overpowered those two guys.

Calvarok
10-02-2012, 03:19 AM
^^ good point. ^^

NewBlade200
10-02-2012, 03:33 AM
I think they made Alty reasonable and follow the creed in the first memory was so that newer players wouldn't get confused at his sudden character development between two memories

GreatBeyonder
10-02-2012, 04:06 AM
I have to agree with you on certain points about Altair. Its like they retconned all of his character development in ACI.

Evenesque
10-02-2012, 04:51 AM
I never saw a problem with the story. I also don't nitpick it to death because I'm busy having fun playing the game.

Calvarok
10-02-2012, 07:48 AM
I have to agree with you on certain points about Altair. Its like they retconned all of his character development in ACI.
AC1 made it clear that he was responsible and wise, and then grew arrogant.

Holy Heck, we've been saying this ever since we saw that first Altair gameplay from Revelations, tons of devs have said the same, and people STILL don't get it. Ughhh.

RzaRecta357
10-02-2012, 08:14 AM
Yeah.... Doesn't Al Muahlim totally kill those two guys when you jump onto buddy?

GreatBeyonder
10-02-2012, 08:27 AM
AC1 made it clear that he was responsible and wise, and then grew arrogant.

Holy Heck, we've been saying this ever since we saw that first Altair gameplay from Revelations, tons of devs have said the same, and people STILL don't get it. Ughhh.

I'm not sure what you're referring to. Every single assassin refers to Altair as arrogant and reckless, only respected for his skill and loyalty. He doesn't even properly understand the creed until just before he goes to kill Robert. At no point is it even implied Altair was NEVER a jerk, at least in AC1.

Jexx21
10-02-2012, 08:34 PM
Pay attention to dialogue; you'll learn some things.

MasterSimaYi
10-02-2012, 08:46 PM
I would advise everyone here to read Assassin's Creed: The Secret Crusade, all becomes clear... As for Alan Rikkin, his name has appeared in a lot of the recent media; he hasn't been forgotten at all. Just because he hasn't been shown yet doesn't mean he is forgotten. And he is listed in the Abstergo Files as being the CEO of Abstergo Industries.

Calvarok
10-03-2012, 01:39 AM
I thought that it was heavily implied that Altair had known the creed and then forgotten it. Al Mualim would not have promoted him to the highest rank if that had not been so. ACR seal 1 Altair and AC1 Altair were any years apart. And in real life it's not uncommon for people to lose their way in adulthood.

MasterSimaYi
10-03-2012, 08:38 PM
I thought that it was heavily implied that Altair had known the creed and then forgotten it. Al Mualim would not have promoted him to the highest rank if that had not been so. ACR seal 1 Altair and AC1 Altair were any years apart. And in real life it's not uncommon for people to lose their way in adulthood.

The Secret Crusade says that after Alta´r achieved the rank of Master Assassin [in 1189], he grew arrogant and developed the belief that his actions were above that of the Creed.

DiamondBlade_R
10-04-2012, 11:21 AM
Altair WAS a follower of the creed. That's how he became a master assassin in the first place. Then he grew arrogant. People are not static.

Perhaps, but even then, in the beginning of AC1, Altair was a MAJOR ******. You don't become that arrogant just by gaining a rank. His elevation to Master Assassin could've been a boosting factor to his arrogance, sure, but it doesn't make sense that up until that point he apparently was this saint, super noble guy. If you're that much of a saint, you don't become a ****** on that level. To become that, you have to be arrogant, at least to an extent, by nature.

Alan Rikkin will likely be involved in AC3 in some way. He hasn't been forgotten at all. And he was Vidic's boss.

Altair's thougts about Al mualim were consistent. He never said that he was evil just for being around the apple, but that the power of the apple was what drove him to deception.
No. Just no. In AC1 he NEVER associated the Apple with Al Mualim's change of heart. Al Mualim even says himself that "he can feel the hatred in Altair's voice" when Altair demands he release him from the Apple's grip.

Son of none is just a last name. Umar was also called Ibin la Ahad.

Son of No One was more than "just a last name"; it was meant to give Altair's background a sense of appealing mystery - a sense of mystery that was diminished with the revelation that the name of Altair's father was Umar. The fact that the Ibn La-Ahad thing was shared by Altair's entire family doesn't make much sense, as it was first implemented as a tool to make Altair more interesting. They should have just left the names of Altair's parents unknown.

For me personally, the Ezio side of Revelations was far better than the Ezio side of Brotherhood.

And it is presumable that Al Mualim killed those men with the Apple. Or it wasn't literal, since that doesn't make much sense.

Al Mualim did not possess the Apple in the days before AC1. The mission Altair, Malik and his brother were sent to Solomon's Temple for was retrieving it. Therefore, it wouldn't have been possible for Al Mualim to have used the Apple to kill those men.

The game's story is very big, and I'm impressed with how connected they've managed to keep it all.

I'm sorry, but it seems to me that for whatever reason you're blindly defending the series, even in areas where no defending is due. You really should pay more attention to the little details.




They haven't abandoned it, they just haven't picked it up yet.

Also, you don't know everything apparently. Altair fell to arrogance when he saw that Abbas wasn't as good of an Assassin to him; this is when he stopped strictly following the Creed. As for point 3, letter C, Al Mualim is an old man when Altair is in his prime, he probably was a great warrior when he was younger. Plus, it was a taunt, not all taunts are necessarily true.

Calvarok covered everything else.
I never claimed to know everything about the game - only to have a good memory and recollection of AC1's plot's little details.

About Altair, see my comment to Calvarok. As for Al Mualim, I guess that makes sense.


AC1 made it clear that he was responsible and wise, and then grew arrogant.

Holy Heck, we've been saying this ever since we saw that first Altair gameplay from Revelations, tons of devs have said the same, and people STILL don't get it. Ughhh.

Again, my first comment in bold.


I would advise everyone here to read Assassin's Creed: The Secret Crusade, all becomes clear... As for Alan Rikkin, his name has appeared in a lot of the recent media; he hasn't been forgotten at all. Just because he hasn't been shown yet doesn't mean he is forgotten. And he is listed in the Abstergo Files as being the CEO of Abstergo Industries.
That's interesting. I didn't know that.


I thought that it was heavily implied that Altair had known the creed and then forgotten it. Al Mualim would not have promoted him to the highest rank if that had not been so. ACR seal 1 Altair and AC1 Altair were any years apart. And in real life it's not uncommon for people to lose their way in adulthood.
My first comment in bold; besides, the fact that you have to assert something that important about a character based only on a "real-life logic based assumption", as opposed to some other basis from the games themselves, just proves that the writers didn't make an effort to justify Altair's character change in-game.


The Secret Crusade says that after Alta´r achieved the rank of Master Assassin [in 1189], he grew arrogant and developed the belief that his actions were above that of the Creed.

Maybe, but TSC was written well after AC1 was released, and so I can't help but ponder the possibility that they used TSC to justify the continuity mistake they made in ACR, and not the other way around.

MasterSimaYi
10-05-2012, 04:50 PM
Maybe, but TSC was written well after AC1 was released, and so I can't help but ponder the possibility that they used TSC to justify the continuity mistake they made in ACR, and not the other way around.

And how would that be possible, given that The Secret Crusade was released in June 2011 while Revelations was released in November 2011?

DiamondBlade_R
10-05-2012, 08:36 PM
And how would that be possible, given that The Secret Crusade was released in June 2011 while Revelations was released in November 2011?
Okay, so maybe they didn't release it just to "justify continuity mistakes" they made in ACR, but it still seems highly likely to me that its the characteristics changes made to Altair and co. weren't planned from the start. They just decided to write them into ACR and use TSC to back them up.

MasterSimaYi
10-05-2012, 08:43 PM
Okay, so maybe they didn't release it just to "justify continuity mistakes" they made in ACR, but it still seems highly likely to me that its the characteristics changes made to Altair and co. weren't planned from the start. They just decided to write them into ACR and use TSC to back them up.

Yes, it was not planned from the start. His early life and later life story were conceived later, but were used for both Revelations and The Secret Crusade, not just Revelations. Oliver Bowden (who writes the novels) also helped in the story's conception.

Jexx21
10-05-2012, 08:58 PM
Stories are almost never completely planned from the start. Altair's character changed, but they never retconned anything.

EDIT: Also, I don't think they changed Altair's character. When I first played AC1, I was never under the impression that Altair was always that arrogant, I got the impression that he fell from being faithful to the creed.

DiamondBlade_R
10-05-2012, 09:15 PM
Stories are almost never completely planned from the start. Altair's character changed, but they never retconned anything.

EDIT: Also, I don't think they changed Altair's character. When I first played AC1, I was never under the impression that Altair was always that arrogant, I got the impression that he fell from being faithful to the creed.
Stories are only seldom completely planned for the start, true - but skillful writers who truly care about their work make sure to keep their characters consistent even when deciding to take the story in a different direction. They did retcon Altair's character. It was never implied in AC1 that he was once faithful to the Creed. I don't know what gave you that idea, but it most certainly wasn't anything in AC1 itself.

Calvarok
10-05-2012, 09:24 PM
The fact that he BECAME a master assassin in the first place implied that he DESERVED that rank at one point. I think Al Mualim said you have "BECOME" arrogant, not that he'd always been arrogant.

Seriously, if it doesn't make sense you're not thinking it through. Training is an intense and long process, do you think Al Mualim and the other assassin trainers never paid attention to the kind of person he was? He would have remained a novice if he was arrogant from the start. It was being a master and considered the best of the order that made him arrogant eventually.

The only way you could see this as a retcon is if you think that darby mcdevitt and many other people who were interviewed lied when they said that Altair was not always the way he was in AC1. Why would they lie about that, or for that matter change it for that one memory? It could easily have been done with Altair as an overconfident jerk.

Jexx21
10-05-2012, 09:30 PM
Stories are only seldom completely planned for the start, true - but skillful writers who truly care about their work make sure to keep their characters consistent even when deciding to take the story in a different direction. They did retcon Altair's character. It was never implied in AC1 that he was once faithful to the Creed. I don't know what gave you that idea, but it most certainly wasn't anything in AC1 itself.

That speech Al Mualim gave you at the beginning before he stabbed you mentions you becoming arrogant, not that you were always arrogant. Not to mention the Rafiq's and certain side missions with other Assassins.

Not to mention Abbas, there was always a history between you an Abbas is AC1, it was just never delved upon in the game.

DiamondBlade_R
10-06-2012, 10:05 AM
The fact that he BECAME a master assassin in the first place implied that he DESERVED that rank at one point. I think Al Mualim said you have "BECOME" arrogant, not that he'd always been arrogant.

Seriously, if it doesn't make sense you're not thinking it through. Training is an intense and long process, do you think Al Mualim and the other assassin trainers never paid attention to the kind of person he was? He would have remained a novice if he was arrogant from the start. It was being a master and considered the best of the order that made him arrogant eventually.

The very fact that you have to deduce such an important plot detail based on your logic, as opposed to anything the writers wrote into the game, means that they didn't do a good job justifying his change of character themselves.

Assassin_M
10-06-2012, 10:31 AM
The very fact that you have to deduce such an important plot detail based on your logic, as opposed to anything the writers wrote into the game, means that they didn't do a good job justifying his change of character themselves.
That can work the other way around as well..

Concerning your Logic, Of course..