PDA

View Full Version : Did Juno make The Eye



shadowlord4001
11-19-2012, 08:27 AM
Did Juno make the eye because minera said they destroyed the time travel device
isent it the same one

pablo2977
11-19-2012, 08:54 AM
I think minera made it because she trapped Juno in it and thought that was it

Layytez
11-19-2012, 09:20 AM
Minerva made it and Juno messed with it before it was completed and they stopped it. Juno then continued to work on it I think.

shadowlord4001
11-19-2012, 09:29 AM
But was it the same as the divice Minerva used to speak to desmond

Layytez
11-19-2012, 10:11 AM
But was it the same as the divice Minerva used to speak to desmond

I think so ? The whole thing was terribly explained.

twenty_glyphs
11-19-2012, 05:06 PM
I don't think the orb that Desmond touched was the "Eye". I think the Eye was the device Minerva built to look into the future, and that orb was just something else for the Grand Temple. The strategy guide says that there was a "divination device" (divination being predicting the future) in the Grand Temple that Minerva built for one of the methods of salvation from the solar flare. Minerva used it to contact Ezio in AC2, then Juno used it to contact Desmond in Brotherhood. Then the others discovered Juno's betrayal and killed her in the Grand Temple. Tinia sent a message to Desmond in Revelations with the device, then destroyed it and locked Juno's body in the Grand Temple. The strategy guide says Juno wasn't dead though, and used the sixth method of salvation to transfer her mind into the hardware of the Grand Temple and survive.

Apparently Minerva had another device that Juno was unaware of. Minerva used it to take another look into the future to see if Desmond succeeded sometime after locking Juno's body in the Grand Temple and sealing it up. That's how she showed up at the end of AC3. Holy crap, I just realized how little sense that makes. If Minerva was in the past, looking into 2012 and saw Juno there, why the heck didn't she do anything about it while she was still alive after taking that look? Apparently she just said screw it, and left things as they were despite knowing that it would harm everything Minerva had been working towards. It already makes no sense why Minerva chastised humanity for wasting time and it being too late to salvage the First Civilization's work after she constatnly told Ezio she wasn't talking to him and to shut up, and addressed Desmond by name. I just managed to make AC3's ending make even less sense.

All that in addition to needing the strategy guide to make any sort of sense out of the ending. What a poorly presented joke.

F4H bandicoot
11-19-2012, 06:00 PM
I don't think the orb that Desmond touched was the "Eye". I think the Eye was the device Minerva built to look into the future, and that orb was just something else for the Grand Temple. The strategy guide says that there was a "divination device" (divination being predicting the future) in the Grand Temple that Minerva built for one of the methods of salvation from the solar flare. Minerva used it to contact Ezio in AC2, then Juno used it to contact Desmond in Brotherhood. Then the others discovered Juno's betrayal and killed her in the Grand Temple. Tinia sent a message to Desmond in Revelations with the device, then destroyed it and locked Juno's body in the Grand Temple. The strategy guide says Juno wasn't dead though, and used the sixth method of salvation to transfer her mind into the hardware of the Grand Temple and survive.

Apparently Minerva had another device that Juno was unaware of. Minerva used it to take another look into the future to see if Desmond succeeded sometime after locking Juno's body in the Grand Temple and sealing it up. That's how she showed up at the end of AC3. Holy crap, I just realized how little sense that makes. If Minerva was in the past, looking into 2012 and saw Juno there, why the heck didn't she do anything about it while she was still alive after taking that look? Apparently she just said screw it, and left things as they were despite knowing that it would harm everything Minerva had been working towards. It already makes no sense why Minerva chastised humanity for wasting time and it being too late to salvage the First Civilization's work after she constatnly told Ezio she wasn't talking to him and to shut up, and addressed Desmond by name. I just managed to make AC3's ending make even less sense.

All that in addition to needing the strategy guide to make any sort of sense out of the ending. What a poorly presented joke.

You don't need the strategy guide to make sense of it. I didn't have it, and I understood just fine.

Time is obviously not linear, she looked forward, she obviously couldn't do anything about it in her time frame.
She never said that they had lost centuries to work on getting to the temple either. Just that they had lost centuries with their squabble.

twenty_glyphs
11-19-2012, 07:24 PM
To the OP, rewatching the end of AC3, Minerva specifically says she built the Eye:


While we worked to save the world, she sought, instead, to conquer it. She used our machines to set her plans in motion. Divination through numbers. There is a pattern to existence. To comprehend the calculations is to tame time. This was my focus. And so I built the eye to aid us. But she turned it towards her own ends. When we discovered her treachery, we put a stop to it. And then we left. But first we called to you... That you might try again. We thought it would be safe with her gone.


You don't need the strategy guide to make sense of it. I didn't have it, and I understood just fine.

Time is obviously not linear, she looked forward, she obviously couldn't do anything about it in her time frame.
She never said that they had lost centuries to work on getting to the temple either. Just that they had lost centuries with their squabble.

But time is linear, it just branches off at different points. Minerva's just looking forward through it based on her current reality. Obviously what she sees in the future affects her in the past and can cause her to take actions that will change the future she already saw. She must have seen past Ezio to Desmond to even know that Ezio would be the right person to deliver her first message to and to know Desmond's name.

She's still alive thousands of years in the past when she looks forward to 12/21/2012 and sees Juno waiting to be released by Desmond, who point blank tells her that's what he's going to do. Logically, I think she would take some sort of action to try to prevent what she saw from coming to pass. Maybe try to send another message to Desmond a month or two before he walked up to the podium to release Juno. Or maybe, I don't know, go back to the Grand Temple and try to delete Juno from it or destroy the Temple completely, giving humanity no choice to stop the solar disaster so she can prevent Juno's release. There are things she could do about it in her own time, the story just ignores that for the convenience of trying to create this dramatic moment.

This is what Minerva says about wasting centuries:


I had hoped you might find this place -- and finish our work. But it is too late. You and the Templars have squabbled over our refuse. You have wasted centuries. And so you have lost your chance.

This makes literally no sense based on the previous contact we had with Minerva in AC2. Minerva contacts Ezio 500 years before the doomsday date, yet tells him to be quiet and that her words aren't meant for him. In addition to that, she specifically says to "guard against the Cross, for there are many who will stand in your way". In what way would you interpret that as a warning to Ezio to get started on finishing Minerva's work, and setting aside the Assassin squabble with the Templars? She specifically says to guard against the Templars, then shows up later to rebuke Desmond for squabbling with them? She gives no warning to Ezio, but addresses everything to Desmond -- a message he gets about 3 months before the doomsday date. Why would she then say they've wasted centuries? It does not logically fit with anything she said before. She must have expected them to do something in the centuries leading up to this, but she gave them no warning and no chance at getting started. The only thing she and Tinia guided humanity on was finding the Grand Temple, which Desmond did. And yet he's just out of luck? If she really expected them to spend centuries salvaging their work, maybe a logical solution would have been to give humanity a hint how to get started centuries in advance?

Obviously this plot twist seems like it was planned at least as far back as Brotherhood. They did create doubts about Juno all the way back then, which is fine. So I can't fault them for making this up at the last minute, but it's just so poorly presented and does not fit many other details already presented in the games, and fails to hold up to even a basic line of motivation questioning.

It's also just bad storytelling. The end of each numbered game has simply thrown aside the previous main plot conflict to introduce an even bigger one. AC2's ending presented a bigger plot conflict than Abstergo's satellite (which AC3 really tossed aside as pointless), now AC3's ending resolves the solar flare conflict with the press of a button and introduces another threat in Juno. I seriously won't be surprised if AC4's ending defeats Juno with the press of a button, only to show us the real conflict this time is after all of Minerva's divination and future visitations, the space-time continuum is in danger of coming unraveled.

pirate1802
11-19-2012, 07:44 PM
But time is linear, it just branches off at different points.

The very definition of non-linearity.

F4H bandicoot
11-19-2012, 08:28 PM
[QUOTE=twenty_glyphs;8711512





But time is linear, it just branches off at different points.[/QUOTE]

Unless of course it doesn't.
If she can't act on what she sees, then time can't be as straightforward as a 'branching tree', it must be something else.

twenty_glyphs
11-20-2012, 12:12 AM
Unless of course it doesn't.
If she can't act on what she sees, then time can't be as straightforward as a 'branching tree', it must be something else.

Once a timeline branches, it's still a straight line moving forward that Minerva should be able to calculate. If Minerva can't act on what she sees, then how the heck did she contact Ezio to begin with, already knowing about Desmond? She must have acted to contact Ezio after having seen Desmond in the future, thus changing the future she would see the next time she ran the calculations and looked forward in time. You're just adding different opt-outs for the plot that are never even hinted at within the story. After seeing a lot of the story cards laid on the table in AC3, I just can't believe that plot points like the shape of time have been as well thought through as we're arguing about when the simpler, more practical elements of the story don't even make much sense when I'm not even trying to find holes in them. If a story requires me to speculate about the nature of the shape of time just to make sense of an illogical statement by a character, it's poor storytelling, plain and simple.

Before AC3, I would defend the AC writers for all their criticized mumbo-jumbo and sci-fi plot elements with TWCB because I thought everything fit together and a profound answer to their mystery was awaiting. But after this story, I really don't think they've defined their own mythology well enough to create a solid framework of rules to tell a story in. They just keep moving the goalposts, thus frustrating any attempts to make any sense of their story, seemingly all in the name of shock value.

Will_Lucky
11-20-2012, 01:26 AM
You don't suppose Minerva intended for Haytham/Connor to actually reach and breach the Temple? Juno was the direct reason they were prevented from doing so, had she not acted Connor would likely have never found the Assassins and Haytham would have eventually unlocked the Temple far earlier than Juno intended.

twenty_glyphs
11-20-2012, 04:18 AM
You don't suppose Minerva intended for Haytham/Connor to actually reach and breach the Temple? Juno was the direct reason they were prevented from doing so, had she not acted Connor would likely have never found the Assassins and Haytham would have eventually unlocked the Temple far earlier than Juno intended.

That would have been an interesting story point, but then why was her message delivered to Ezio and ultimately directed at Desmond? Haytham and Connor had no clues from Minerva. In fact, Haytham just gave up when he couldn't access the Grand Temple. There have been a lot of interesting story points brought up here. My problem with the game is that it doesn't delve into any of the issues we're bringing up and just glosses over everything. That's in addition to ignoring so many of the plot points already introduced in the series. I don't want every little detail, but the story has ceased to make sense anymore. I was a fan of the complex layers within the story before, but now it's really coming apart at the seams.

Assassin_M
11-20-2012, 04:24 AM
If a story requires me to speculate about the nature of the shape of time just to make sense of an illogical statement by a character, it's poor storytelling, plain and simple.

Oh Really ? How Wrong is this statement..How Wrong Coming from someone who used to take part in VERY interesting Discussions...

I`m disappointed..

You basically said "If a story forces me to think a little bit more than usual, then it`s bad writing"

Will_Lucky
11-20-2012, 05:03 AM
That would have been an interesting story point, but then why was her message delivered to Ezio and ultimately directed at Desmond? Haytham and Connor had no clues from Minerva. In fact, Haytham just gave up when he couldn't access the Grand Temple. There have been a lot of interesting story points brought up here. My problem with the game is that it doesn't delve into any of the issues we're bringing up and just glosses over everything. That's in addition to ignoring so many of the plot points already introduced in the series. I don't want every little detail, but the story has ceased to make sense anymore. I was a fan of the complex layers within the story before, but now it's really coming apart at the seams.

I could take a crack at it....

Perhaps Minerva in the original look back saw Desmond relive the lives of two ancestors (Altair and Ezio) and knew the Temple would be opened later by the Templars in America so told Ezio intending that to go to Desmond to potentially finish some last step in this grand scheme to saving them (Perhaps his DNA could activate the device necessary because he had the right amount to do so at the right time). Juno directly intervened and told Connor to join the Assassins and destroy the Templars in order to save his people otherwise the Templars would gain entrance earlier than anticipated. I suspect Connor may never have been a piece of the puzzle, but Juno ensured it preventing the Templars from opening and accessing the Temple for 300 years.

Remember, Washington acquired a POE. Had the Templars succeeded Charles Lee would have become CiC and conceivably acquired the Apple himself therefore giving them both keys to access the Temple way earlier than intended and in a position to actually do something.

By intervening Juno caused the destruction of the Templars in America therefore increasing the intensity of the battle between the two groups in the future without a way of opening the Temple after Connor hid the key. So the Temple remains shut for 300 years meaning it can't be studied, and the Templars and Assassins spend more time fighting each other than one group being able to dissect the temple and learn its secrets.

twenty_glyphs
11-20-2012, 05:03 AM
Oh Really ? How Wrong is this statement..How Wrong Coming from someone who used to take part in VERY interesting Discussions...

I`m disappointed..

You basically said "If a story forces me to think a little bit more than usual, then it`s bad writing"

No, I basically said if a story forces me to make up my own explanations for plot inconsistencies or major questions that it's bad writing. It's one thing if some clues or hints are there, but when they are missing and make me have to create my own out of thin air, it is indeed bad writing (or bad editing). I enjoyed the extra thought I used to put into the AC stories, but that's because I thought there was an actual endgame and that the clues had been carefully laid. I thought there was a real mystery to be uncovered if I looked hard enough. Now I think they've been throwing out intriguing ideas and clues with no real pattern hinting at the true mystery. I'd love for them to prove me wrong, but I'm done wasting my time trying to decipher their story after 5 years with no return on my investment. I didn't want to be right, but I wanted to see how the clues all fit together. It's too bad they don't right now. It would be nice if one day they did.

twenty_glyphs
11-20-2012, 05:06 AM
I could take a crack at it....

Perhaps Minerva in the original look back saw Desmond relive the lives of two ancestors (Altair and Ezio) and knew the Temple would be opened later by the Templars in America so told Ezio intending that to go to Desmond to potentially finish some last step in this grand scheme to saving them (Perhaps his DNA could activate the device necessary because he had the right amount to do so at the right time. Juno directly intervened and told Connor to join the Assassins and destroy the Templars in order to save his people otherwise the Templars would gain entrance earlier than anticipated. I suspect Connor may never have been a piece of the puzzle, but Juno ensured it preventing the Templars from opening and accessing the Temple for 300 years.

Remember, Washington acquired a POE. Had the Templars succeeded Charles Lee would have become CiC and conceivably acquired the Apple himself therefore giving them both keys to access the Temple way earlier than intended and in a position to actually do something.

By intervening Juno caused the destruction of the Templars in America therefore increasing the intensity of the battle between the two groups in the future without a way of opening the Temple after Connor hid the key.

It's an interesting theory, but it still doesn't explain why her message was for Ezio and Desmond. She could have done nothing and gotten the same result if not for Juno, because there's no evidence her message lead to the historical events in AC3.

Assassin_M
11-20-2012, 05:08 AM
No, I basically said if a story forces me to make up my own explanations for plot inconsistencies or major questions that it's bad writing. It's one thing if some clues or hints are there, but when they are missing and make me have to create my own out of thin air, it is indeed bad writing (or bad editing). I enjoyed the extra thought I used to put into the AC stories, but that's because I thought there was an actual endgame and that the clues had been carefully laid. I thought there was a real mystery to be uncovered if I looked hard enough. Now I think they've been throwing out intriguing ideas and clues with no real pattern hinting at the true mystery. I'd love for them to prove me wrong, but I'm done wasting my time trying to decipher their story after 5 years with no return on my investment. I didn't want to be right, but I wanted to see how the clues all fit together. It's too bad they don't right now. It would be nice if one day they did.
This did not make one bit of sense to me...It seems to me that you`re just clinching at anything to criticize this game...

You have some very valid complaints and I agree with MANY of them, but this...Nope..Does not make any bit of sense to me..Say whatever, However....makes no sense.

We had so much more twisted Mysteries to uncover...forced to pour so much thought and we loved it...I dunno what happened now

Will_Lucky
11-20-2012, 05:13 AM
It's an interesting theory, but it still doesn't explain why her message was for Ezio and Desmond. She could have done nothing and gotten the same result if not for Juno, because there's no evidence her message lead to the historical events in AC3.

As I said, theoretically Desmond did not relive the events of Connor or Haythem in fact that was brought about by Juno to help him find the key. Ezio was the last in line Desmond could have visited and did directly visit a temple of TWCB making him the best candidate. He also acquired an Apple that could be sealed away for Desmond to use (Destroy opposition such as the Templars if necessary?).

Minerva in her initial look back may have seen a Desmond that didn't relive Connors life, but Ezios last. Therefore making him the prime candidate for it. Altair had access to an Apple, but to our knowledge didn't visit a temple. Its also obvious Jupiter had to expel a lot of his power in order to be able to achieve what he did at the end of Revelations.

De Filosoof
11-20-2012, 02:13 PM
This did not make one bit of sense to me...It seems to me that you`re just clinching at anything to criticize this game...

You have some very valid complaints and I agree with MANY of them, but this...Nope..Does not make any bit of sense to me..Say whatever, However....makes no sense.

We had so much more twisted Mysteries to uncover...forced to pour so much thought and we loved it...I dunno what happened now

They ****ed up the story, that's what happened and that's why twenty_glyphs is criticizing the plot.

I don't blame the writers for ****ing up the story. Everybody makes mistakes and it was very easy to make mistakes with a universe this complex and mysterious, so...can't really blame them :).
I really respect the team for all their hard work and their controversial material. I guess it must be hard for them with all the ignorant criticism about all these controversial subjects sometimes. I still think it's one of the main reasons why they left out the glyph puzzles at one point, it just doesn't fit a game that wants to appeal to the Mainstream masses.

I'm leaving the forums now, so i want to thank everybody (especially twenty_glyphs) for participating in some great discussions and posting thought provoking stuff.

Assassin's creed will always be my favorite franchise, but AC3 (especially the ending) left a really bad taste in my mouth. In my opinion (for all the whiners) the ending was stupid. I really liked the alternate ending though, and would have liked it if the franchise ended like this with the everlasting loop Juno was talking about. It would have been thought provoking without being a happy ending. I think this would have been the "perfect" conclusive mind**** ending with leaving just enough room for possible new AC games.
Now i don't say the ending should have been like this, just that i would have liked it a lot more (for all the whiners again).
They left out too many stuff, and the atmosphere i fell in love with in previous AC games was almost gone.

It felt like a game with a huge identity crisis (maybe because they switched creative directors with different philosophies a few times?)
The franchise just doesn't feel consistent anymore because of this.

So, goodbye y'all !! :D

Peace out.

http://www.bio-vert.com/upload/images/thumbs/imgctrlthb_w300_h180_q80_214343263484655797-wrecwyet-f_u120528212540.jpg

POP1Fan
11-20-2012, 02:53 PM
Well, if you ask me (like someone cares about my opinion) the reason why the ending still feels "incomplete" is meant too. I mean, with everything answered and simplified, what would you guys be disscusing now? XD

twenty_glyphs
11-20-2012, 05:31 PM
Well, if you ask me (like someone cares about my opinion) the reason why the ending still feels "incomplete" is meant too. I mean, with everything answered and simplified, what would you guys be disscusing now? XD

And this is the core problem with AC3's ending. In no way does it feel like a conclusion to a trilogy, let alone a 5 game story arc. There are tons of ways to end Desmond's story in a more satisfying way that actually has pay off for the story so far while still leaving the door wide open for future stories. They could even have the same development with Juno, but majorly elaborate on it and hint at where the story might be going. And give Desmond something more to do; he needed to actually do something to fight Juno at the end. Instead, we get a short cutscene where Desmond pushes a button as he's told to end his story arc. Five years of story buildup for nothing. Five years to be told "See you back here next year!" The story can continue, but there has to be some kind of payoff and conflict resolution, not a constantly escalating threat that pushes previous conflicts to the back burner.

And this isn't just my reaction to AC3, but to Revelations as well. I was forgiving of Revelations because I thought they were keeping their powder dry for AC3, where they were really going to lay all of the story cards on the table. Now it seems apparent to me they just never really had a clear direction or profound answers to deliver. All of the interesting story elements have been neutered for me. Abstergo launching this satellite was an interesting threat, but they made that a laughing stock in AC3 by saying it wasn't going to work anyway. Lucy was a relatively interesting character, and her death was really intriguing. Then they just brushed that aside with a DLC they didn't even advertise and a couple of lines of dialogue in AC3. Subject 16 was fascinating, and Revelations really ended that for me. Despite going crazy, he laid all these clues for Desmond and then killed himself to lead him to something profound and important. Then we meet him in Revelations as a jerk who doesn't even mention what all the fuss has been about. Well, at least maybe whatever he did to Desmond when he "hugged" him at the end of Revelations was important? No, Rebecca brushed that aside in AC3 with one line of dialogue that basically said what Subject 16 did to Desmond just let him spend more time in the Animus. Well surely Desmond acquiring the knowledge and skills of his ancestors was going to be important and have a payoff in the end? Nope, his whole mission was to push a button.

So AC3's ending just feels like a giant slap in the face. It's a plot twist just for the sake of a plot twist, and feels contrived to keep the series going forever. Like I said, if it was better explained and didn't have so many elements that don't fit well with the previous story, it would be better. I have no problem if the series continues forever, but if you don't have satisfying conclusions to stories at some point, people will lose interest. And AC3 just did that for me.

infamous_ezio
11-20-2012, 07:20 PM
I'm pretty upset with the ending... I spent 5 years busting my balls in excitement over what's next, and this is what we got.
Corey may said there will be pay off, Desmond's story will come to a conclusion. What kind of conclusion was that? Seriously, 'hey Desmond ya dawg, push this button and I'll save the world, also I'll go conquer everything'. 'yeah sure, hey dad gonna sacrifice myself now' 'ah yeah, no worries, later bruh'......

I will admit, it is hinted at in and brotherhood and revelations of juno's betrayal, so that's ok. But it was presented poorly, infact, it was still a cliff hanger. Everything seemed too convenient, as twenty glyphs said, why didn't Minerva do something about Juno? She was able to look into the future, why the hell couldn't she see that coming? Oh and I loved how they made almost no mention of what happened to Desmond during his coma. 16 was the most interesting character, and their couldn't be a simple question from one of the crew that asked Desmond what happened to him, what happened to 16, what was his message in to in the truth all about? Why did he stab Lucy? Not even that, they just made a convenient way of justifying why he killed her by saying he knew what she was going to become... If that's the case why did he resist? At the end of brotherhood he pleads Juno to stop..

It pissed me right off when they just skimmed over the 16 stuff.. The entire modern day part was ridicolous. The missions were to short, they just wanted to shut players up by adding an extra 5 mins of Desmond game time. Wander what's next... Ladies and gentlemen, I present to you AC4: man enters animus, man finds answers, somehow uses this to kill a pre cursor being, but... There's one twist... Desmond's actually alive and is actually.......


From twcb time'

Their wasn't any closure to Desmond's story, we were left with nothing but more questions...

infamous_ezio
11-20-2012, 07:21 PM
I'm pretty upset with the ending... I spent 5 years busting my balls in excitement over what's next, and this is what we got.
Corey may said there will be pay off, Desmond's story will come to a conclusion. What kind of conclusion was that? Seriously, 'hey Desmond ya dawg, push this button and I'll save the world, also I'll go conquer everything'. 'yeah sure, hey dad gonna sacrifice myself now' 'ah yeah, no worries, later bruh'......

I will admit, it is hinted at in and brotherhood and revelations of juno's betrayal, so that's ok. But it was presented poorly, infact, it was still a cliff hanger. Everything seemed too convenient, as twenty glyphs said, why didn't Minerva do something about Juno? She was able to look into the future, why the hell couldn't she see that coming? Oh and I loved how they made almost no mention of what happened to Desmond during his coma. 16 was the most interesting character, and their couldn't be a simple question from one of the crew that asked Desmond what happened to him, what happened to 16, what was his message in to in the truth all about? Why did he stab Lucy? Not even that, they just made a convenient way of justifying why he killed her by saying he knew what she was going to become... If that's the case why did he resist? At the end of brotherhood he pleads Juno to stop..

It pissed me right off when they just skimmed over the 16 stuff.. The entire modern day part was ridicolous. The missions were to short, they just wanted to shut players up by adding an extra 5 mins of Desmond game time. Wander what's next... Ladies and gentlemen, I present to you AC4: man enters animus, man finds answers, somehow uses this to kill a pre cursor being, but... There's one twist... Desmond's actually alive and is actually.......


From twcb time'

Their wasn't any closure to Desmond's story, we were left with nothing but more questions...

ACfan443
11-20-2012, 08:31 PM
And this is the core problem with AC3's ending. In no way does it feel like a conclusion to a trilogy, let alone a 5 game story arc. There are tons of ways to end Desmond's story in a more satisfying way that actually has pay off for the story so far while still leaving the door wide open for future stories. They could even have the same development with Juno, but majorly elaborate on it and hint at where the story might be going. And give Desmond something more to do; he needed to actually do something to fight Juno at the end. Instead, we get a short cutscene where Desmond pushes a button as he's told to end his story arc. Five years of story buildup for nothing. Five years to be told "See you back here next year!" The story can continue, but there has to be some kind of payoff and conflict resolution, not a constantly escalating threat that pushes previous conflicts to the back burner.

And this isn't just my reaction to AC3, but to Revelations as well. I was forgiving of Revelations because I thought they were keeping their powder dry for AC3, where they were really going to lay all of the story cards on the table. Now it seems apparent to me they just never really had a clear direction or profound answers to deliver. All of the interesting story elements have been neutered for me. Abstergo launching this satellite was an interesting threat, but they made that a laughing stock in AC3 by saying it wasn't going to work anyway. Lucy was a relatively interesting character, and her death was really intriguing. Then they just brushed that aside with a DLC they didn't even advertise and a couple of lines of dialogue in AC3. Subject 16 was fascinating, and Revelations really ended that for me. Despite going crazy, he laid all these clues for Desmond and then killed himself to lead him to something profound and important. Then we meet him in Revelations as a jerk who doesn't even mention what all the fuss has been about. Well, at least maybe whatever he did to Desmond when he "hugged" him at the end of Revelations was important? No, Rebecca brushed that aside in AC3 with one line of dialogue that basically said what Subject 16 did to Desmond just let him spend more time in the Animus. Well surely Desmond acquiring the knowledge and skills of his ancestors was going to be important and have a payoff in the end? Nope, his whole mission was to push a button.

So AC3's ending just feels like a giant slap in the face. It's a plot twist just for the sake of a plot twist, and feels contrived to keep the series going forever. Like I said, if it was better explained and didn't have so many elements that don't fit well with the previous story, it would be better. I have no problem if the series continues forever, but if you don't have satisfying conclusions to stories at some point, people will lose interest. And AC3 just did that for me.

Assassin's Creed now just feels like one story that'll be stretched on forever, I was hoping AC3 would give Desmond's story a full and satisfying conclusion, and the next game would start a new story arc, but that's not happened. To me, it feels like the 'main story' has just begun, and everything done from AC1-AC3 was just a massive waste.

In Assassin's Creed X, we'll find out that Juno was actually manipulated by someone else, who kills her and then takes over the world, and so on, and so on...

twenty_glyphs
11-20-2012, 09:43 PM
Assassin's Creed now just feels like one story that'll be stretched on forever, I was hoping AC3 would give Desmond's story a full and satisfying conclusion, and the next game would start a new story arc, but that's not happened. To me, it feels like the 'main story' has just begun, and everything done from AC1-AC3 was just a massive waste.

In Assassin's Creed X, we'll find out that Juno was actually manipulated by someone else, who kills her and then takes over the world, and so on, and so on...

Yep, AC3 leaves me feeling like the first 5 games were just a prequel to the real story that's still coming, but they don't hold together on their own. They feel just like Star Wars Episodes 1 through 3, which I think most people would agree were pretty lacking in story. Imagine the Star Wars series started with those movies instead of presenting them as a prequel to the original story. Do you think enough people would have been interested enough for them to continue and make Episodes 4 through 6? The ending of Episode 3 resolves nothing and only introduces new conflicts and issues to set the stage for Episode 4. The only reason that even half works is because most people are watching them to see how the story leads up to the original movies. Episode 3 on its own is a terrible story conclusion, because there is no conclusion. Anakin and Obi-Wan don't stop the central conflict introduced in Episode 1; they fail. But their failure isn't a final, true failure that can serve as an ending. Anakin himself just switches sides and becomes an additional, new antagonist. The central story conflict just gets worse. The end. See you in Episode 4!

AC3's story makes the entire series so far feel like it only exists to set the stage for what's to come. It's just not a story that stands on its own. In storytelling and music composition, there's the concept of tension and release. You create tension in all sorts of ways, but without some kind of eventual release from that tension, you don't feel satisfied. The Assassin's Creed story has been all about creating tension and has done a great job of that. But there's no release, no sense of catharsis -- "The process of releasing, and thereby providing relief from, strong or repressed emotions." Constant tension will be exciting for a while, but eventually it just gets boring. That point was reached in AC3 for me.

LoyalACFan
11-20-2012, 09:47 PM
Yep, AC3 leaves me feeling like the first 5 games were just a prequel to the real story that's still coming, but they don't hold together on their own. They feel just like Star Wars Episodes 1 through 3, which I think most people would agree were pretty lacking in story. Imagine the Star Wars series started with those movies instead of presenting them as a prequel to the original story. Do you think enough people would have been interested enough for them to continue and make Episodes 4 through 6? The ending of Episode 3 resolves nothing and only introduces new conflicts and issues to set the stage for Episode 4. The only reason that even half works is because most people are watching them to see how the story leads up to the original movies. Episode 3 on its own is a terrible story conclusion, because there is no conclusion. Anakin and Obi-Wan don't stop the central conflict introduced in Episode 1; they fail. But their failure isn't a final, true failure that can serve as an ending. Anakin himself just switches sides and becomes an additional, new antagonist. The central story conflict just gets worse. The end. See you in Episode 4!

AC3's story makes the entire series so far feel like it only exists to set the stage for what's to come. It's just not a story that stands on its own. In storytelling and music composition, there's the concept of tension and release. You create tension in all sorts of ways, but without some kind of eventual release from that tension, you don't feel satisfied. The Assassin's Creed story has been all about creating tension and has done a great job of that. But there's no release, no sense of catharsis -- "The process of releasing, and thereby providing relief from, strong or repressed emotions." Constant tension will be exciting for a while, but eventually it just gets boring. That point was reached in AC3 for me.

Agreed. My desire to see the conclusion of Desmond's story wasn't fulfilled by this game in the slightest. I simply stopped caring. I'm still interested in the series for the historical stuff, but if they continue the modern-times stuff, it'll just be something to slog through to get to the next memory sequence for me. Very disappointing.

Shingram
11-20-2012, 11:25 PM
No, I basically said if a story forces me to make up my own explanations for plot inconsistencies or major questions that it's bad writing. It's one thing if some clues or hints are there, but when they are missing and make me have to create my own out of thin air, it is indeed bad writing (or bad editing). I enjoyed the extra thought I used to put into the AC stories, but that's because I thought there was an actual endgame and that the clues had been carefully laid. I thought there was a real mystery to be uncovered if I looked hard enough. Now I think they've been throwing out intriguing ideas and clues with no real pattern hinting at the true mystery. I'd love for them to prove me wrong, but I'm done wasting my time trying to decipher their story after 5 years with no return on my investment. I didn't want to be right, but I wanted to see how the clues all fit together. It's too bad they don't right now. It would be nice if one day they did.

Very easy point to understand and pretty much can't be argued with. The motivations, lack of emotions and overlal presentation of the resolutions to conflicts in this series has just been utter trash since AC1 ended. Groundwork 10/10 Resolution 3/10

Shingram
11-20-2012, 11:26 PM
This did not make one bit of sense to me...It seems to me that you`re just clinching at anything to criticize this game...

You have some very valid complaints and I agree with MANY of them, but this...Nope..Does not make any bit of sense to me..Say whatever, However....makes no sense.

We had so much more twisted Mysteries to uncover...forced to pour so much thought and we loved it...I dunno what happened now

He actually has made an extraordinarily simple and accurate point...

Shingram
11-20-2012, 11:34 PM
And this is the core problem with AC3's ending. In no way does it feel like a conclusion to a trilogy, let alone a 5 game story arc. There are tons of ways to end Desmond's story in a more satisfying way that actually has pay off for the story so far while still leaving the door wide open for future stories.

And this isn't just my reaction to AC3, but to Revelations as well. I was forgiving of Revelations because I thought they were keeping their powder dry for AC3, where they were really going to lay all of the story cards on the table. Now it seems apparent to me they just never really had a clear direction or profound answers to deliver.

. Lucy was a relatively interesting character, and her death was really intriguing. Then they just brushed that aside with a DLC they didn't even advertise and a couple of lines of dialogue in AC3. Subject 16 was fascinating, and Revelations really ended that for me. Despite going crazy, he laid all these clues for Desmond and then killed himself to lead him to something profound and important. Then we meet him in Revelations as a jerk who doesn't even mention what all the fuss has been about.

So AC3's ending just... feels contrived to keep the series going forever. Like I said, if it was better explained and didn't have so many elements that don't fit well with the previous story, it would be better. I have no problem if the series continues forever, but if you don't have satisfying conclusions to stories at some point, people will lose interest. And AC3 just did that for me.

10/10 Notice the bold underline? Yea thats what garbage profit driven companies seem to be doing forsaking quality and their fans once they know they've got enough of a base to keep buying the games. Gameplay isn';t the best in the world. I seriously don't get grades beyond an 8/10 with the lack of story reward being a killer. Lots of bugs. Still game is satisfying to play for sure, lots of great questions and thought provoking issues presented about actual history, good side missions, plenty of content. But the presentation of the main story being annihilated to perpetuate the series makes me want to not buy future AC games. Major plot points being poorly explained or left to DLC/portable side games is frankly just an insult.

Will_Lucky
11-21-2012, 12:05 AM
Honestly I have no problem with the series going on forever, my main problem is that they seemed to disregard their own canon from previous releases and ultimately not end the current trilogy in a fitting manner. I was hoping the entire arc would be resolved and we could move onto something else revolving around the Assassin-Templar conflict. Instead we discover in the final 5 minutes that Desmond, Connor and Clay were merely puppets of Juno who has been the main antagonist after all with the Templars a side show.

What annoys me to no end still is Minervas comment on wasted centuries...I'm still gobsmacked by it, I can't believe the writers were stupid enough to include something like that without explaining it. Other things such as Clay himself are not explored enough his appearance in Revelations explained very little considering what had happened in Brotherhood and what was learned in the Lost Archives. I think its just astounding they missed so much and have effectively expanded beyond the scope of a trilogy making a full sequel continuing the arc inevitable.

To someone such as myself who absolutely loves the lore and story of this franchise its just a slap in the face the writers seemed to forget what they'd done in the past.

Assassin_M
11-21-2012, 12:05 AM
He actually has made an extraordinarily simple and accurate point...
To you Perhaps..

Not to me I`m afraid..

pirate1802
11-21-2012, 04:37 AM
Funny how a post asking for clarification soon turned into an ending bashing thread. This is why I prefer not to seek answers here and find them myself.

shadowlord4001
11-21-2012, 06:16 AM
I asked a question about the eye and juno but now everyone is talking about other things

pirate1802
11-21-2012, 06:41 AM
I asked a question about the eye and juno but now everyone is talking about other things

Welcome :D

Assassin_M
11-21-2012, 08:51 AM
Welcome :D
Indeed...

ACfan443
11-21-2012, 09:51 AM
I asked a question about the eye and juno but now everyone is talking about other things

Well we can't really elaborate on a question which we don't know the answer of, since the game barely does a job of answering questions or giving any clarification

Assassin_M
11-21-2012, 12:43 PM
Well we can't really elaborate on a question which we don't know the answer of, since the game barely does a job of answering questions or giving any clarification
Really ? Hmm...I must be giving answers out of my *** then..

ACfan443
11-21-2012, 04:18 PM
Really ? Hmm...I must be giving answers out of my *** then..

You must be...