PDA

View Full Version : Question regarding Juno (SPOILERS)



djack10
11-10-2012, 11:41 PM
So I just beat the game and am wondering how was Juno able to survive the first solar flare and why does she need to be freed/released? Released from what? They all were supposed to have died and how can she communicate with Desmond in the present time like that? Minerva too?

Krayus Korianis
11-10-2012, 11:54 PM
You really need to pay attention to the entire story...

1. Only a few thousand survived the first apocalypse. (TWCB)
2. Minerva was able to communicate with Desmond because she looked once more before she died into the Eye.
3. Juno survived because she transferred herself into a machine. You'd know all this if you looked or paid attention to Juno's visions to Desmond. She LITERALLY states it.

Silhouelle
11-11-2012, 12:00 AM
The real question is what will she do now that she is freed of the machine. I'm assuming she takes over Desmond's body, given his dna. :o

djack10
11-11-2012, 12:03 AM
You really need to pay attention to the entire story...

1. Only a few thousand survived the first apocalypse. (TWCB)
2. Minerva was able to communicate with Desmond because she looked once more before she died into the Eye.
3. Juno survived because she transferred herself into a machine. You'd know all this if you looked or paid attention to Juno's visions to Desmond. She LITERALLY states it.

Thanks for the answers, this was my first AC game and I loved it.

Saqaliba
11-11-2012, 04:36 AM
Oh, Juno being the antagonist was such a deus ex machina. It makes me think that with each new game each of the new writers has his say in the mythology and then leaves it up to the next scriptwriter to add his part. It seems that the whole 'Ones Who Came Before' stuff is so inconsistent that there was never any over-arching direction. Maybe, I'm wrong, but there is so many plot-holes here.

The biggest one:

They tried too answer the whole transcending time thing by saying that the Ones Who Came before used a predictive technology, but come on. Not even all those genius algorithms from a machine built by a superior race could possibly know that one day this or that DNA would end up being called Desmond by his parents.

Why does Desmond get referred to as Cypher? Why did they not give more clues to Juno's insurrection!?! They just dump it on us at the end. That is a friggin' deus ex machina.

I mean, killing Desmond off.... I tell you what would have been a way better ending


THIS!!!!!:

http://img594.imageshack.us/img594/1610/desmondt.jpg

So much opportunity could have been had with this ending. Firstly they could have developed Desmond's personality and made him an interesting character. Secondly because the post-apocalyptic world would have made a perfect free-running environment. Withered modern cities, charred wilderness for tree-running and the struggle to unite the Assassins while the Templars try to take control of the 'new world'. Having Shaun, Rebecca, William as recruits! Man, Desmond chose wrong. It would have made so much sense to have Desmond rebuild a new world after having his lessons from Connor who was himself apart of the establishment of the new world in America! That seems the most logical and perfect plot development. Ubisoft chose wrong. Terrible writing. It could have been like Fallout meets Assassin's creed with Desmond reliving his ancestors as they interacted with TWCB and how the initial schisms took place.

Juno was a benevolent god. The mythology never has any form of betrayal. Just make it up as you go Ubisoft. And make all the wrong decisions. Your opinions on the political compass need reorientation.

Em-Man
11-11-2012, 05:35 AM
They tried too answer the whole transcending time thing by saying that the Ones Who Came before used a predictive technology, but come on. Not even all those genius algorithms from a machine built by a superior race could possibly know that one day this or that DNA would end up being called Desmond by his parents.
Are you questioning the technology behind ancinet magical dragonballs? This is a sci-fi story, and ancient time-travel technology was talked about even in AC1. How is it hard to believe that the first civ know Desmonds name when they can SEE THE FUTURE? I fail to understand your logic.


Why does Desmond get referred to as Cypher?
Most likely because Desmond was a mere variable in the bigger equation that is "saving the world".


Why did they not give more clues to Juno's insurrection!?
Oh but they did. I predicted Juno being evil since they introduced her in brotherhood screaming about how "horrible and wrong" humanity is and that our whole creation was a "mistake". AC3 does a pretty good job at spoon-feeding us with clues too, especially in the emails Desmond gets.


So much opportunity could have been had with this ending.
Didn't the game make it clear enough for you that letting the solar flare hit would solve nothing at all? That it would kill off 99% of humanity just for the cycle to repeat itself?
If he would have chosen to follow that path, I bet you would whine about it being "anti-climactic and stupid" that he fought to stop the solar flare the entire time just for him to give up and let everybody die.

pirate1802
11-11-2012, 05:47 AM
Oh, Juno being the antagonist was such a deus ex machina. It makes me think that with each new game each of the new writers has his say in the mythology and then leaves it up to the next scriptwriter to add his part. It seems that the whole 'Ones Who Came Before' stuff is so inconsistent that there was never any over-arching direction. Maybe, I'm wrong, but there is so many plot-holes here.

The biggest one:

They tried too answer the whole transcending time thing by saying that the Ones Who Came before used a predictive technology, but come on. Not even all those genius algorithms from a machine built by a superior race could possibly know that one day this or that DNA would end up being called Desmond by his parents.

Why does Desmond get referred to as Cypher? Why did they not give more clues to Juno's insurrection!?! They just dump it on us at the end. That is a friggin' deus ex machina.

I mean, killing Desmond off.... I tell you what would have been a way better ending


THIS!!!!!:

http://img594.imageshack.us/img594/1610/desmondt.jpg

So much opportunity could have been had with this ending. Firstly they could have developed Desmond's personality and made him an interesting character. Secondly because the post-apocalyptic world would have made a perfect free-running environment. Withered modern cities, charred wilderness for tree-running and the struggle to unite the Assassins while the Templars try to take control of the 'new world'. Having Shaun, Rebecca, William as recruits! Man, Desmond chose wrong. It would have made so much sense to have Desmond rebuild a new world after having his lessons from Connor who was himself apart of the establishment of the new world in America! That seems the most logical and perfect plot development. Ubisoft chose wrong. Terrible writing. It could have been like Fallout meets Assassin's creed with Desmond reliving his ancestors as they interacted with TWCB and how the initial schisms took place.

Juno was a benevolent god. The mythology never has any form of betrayal. Just make it up as you go Ubisoft. And make all the wrong decisions. Your opinions on the political compass need reorientation.

We already have people saying Desmond didn't actually save the world. Then to have this, where he really doesn't save the world. There would be even more fans raging. You would have liked it, but I'd have not. Furthermore, this wouldn't have ended Desmond's story. The devs clearly wanted to end Desmond here. Also, Deus ex Machina is a cheap word now, which people throw around to describe anything they don't like, without having any real understanding of it.

CodeWarrior-SDK
11-11-2012, 08:46 AM
What were Minerva and Juno talking about when Juno asked "how was she still there? you destroyed the device." and Minerva replied "did you think there was only one?" Also what is this eye thing that Minerva used to aid them and later used by Juno for her evil deeds?

witness84
11-12-2012, 06:27 AM
Are you questioning the technology behind ancinet magical dragonballs? This is a sci-fi story, and ancient time-travel technology was talked about even in AC1. How is it hard to believe that the first civ know Desmonds name when they can SEE THE FUTURE? I fail to understand your logic.


Most likely because Desmond was a mere variable in the bigger equation that is "saving the world".


Oh but they did. I predicted Juno being evil since they introduced her in brotherhood screaming about how "horrible and wrong" humanity is and that our whole creation was a "mistake". AC3 does a pretty good job at spoon-feeding us with clues too, especially in the emails Desmond gets.


Didn't the game make it clear enough for you that letting the solar flare hit would solve nothing at all? That it would kill off 99% of humanity just for the cycle to repeat itself?
If he would have chosen to follow that path, I bet you would whine about it being "anti-climactic and stupid" that he fought to stop the solar flare the entire time just for him to give up and let everybody die.

Jeez. You need to slow your roll, here. You're coming off like a pedantic, neckbearded autist in your attempts to defend this ending as some kind of high literature.
But since you're being so kind to everyone here, I'll return the favor.

Like the ending or not, this is not high literature. The problems people have with the ending of this game are based on age-old storytelling expectations that MUST be met in order for a story to be considered "good". In short, if I told you a long, detailed story with deeply illustrated characters only to abruptly end the story with "And then everyone runs away as MAIN character touches a button and dies and the world is saved OR IS ITTTT???????????"; are you really of such bad taste that you would find that satisfactory?

Because that's what you're saying here.

Em-Man
11-12-2012, 06:45 AM
Jeez. You need to slow your roll, here. You're coming off like a pedantic, neckbearded autist in your attempts to defend this ending as some kind of high literature.
But since you're being so kind to everyone here, I'll return the favor.

Like the ending or not, this is not high literature. The problems people have with the ending of this game are based on age-old storytelling expectations that MUST be met in order for a story to be considered "good". In short, if I told you a long, detailed story with deeply illustrated characters only to abruptly end the story with "And then everyone runs away as MAIN character touches a button and dies and the world is saved OR IS ITTTT???????????"; are you really of such bad taste that you would find that satisfactory?

Because that's what you're saying here.

Woah, woah, woah... excuse me?
Never did I mention ANYTHING about the ending being satisfactory or good. I've been one of those saying that the ending is bad and ends abruptly with a huge lack of closure. I agree with everything you say. Maybe you should take a closer look at exactly who and what I quoted? I tried to defend on what he specifically thought was "plot-holes", never did I try to defend the ending being good or not.

witness84
11-12-2012, 07:08 AM
Woah, woah, woah... excuse me?
Never did I mention ANYTHING about the ending being satisfactory or good. I've been one of those saying that the ending is bad and ends abruptly with a huge lack of closure. I agree with everything you say. Maybe you should take a closer look at exactly who and what I quoted? I tried to defend on what he specifically thought was "plot-holes", never did I try to defend the ending being good or not.

Misquoted you. Wrong post/wrong thread. Was headed back to edit my original post, but you got to it before I did. Apologies!

shadowlord4001
11-13-2012, 10:19 PM
Why didn't minerva just use the eye in the first place