PDA

View Full Version : Missed potential and opportunities throughout AC series..*last of us and AC spoilers*



Assassin_M
07-11-2013, 07:49 AM
Since we`re all a bunch of happy people, I thought we`d discuss this...lets keep it strictly story-wise; things like characters, plot points..etc..here`re mine:

AC I:

The Abbas story line:That first time I met Abbas in Masyaf, I really anticipated a face-off or some kind of branching part of the plot, but that never happened. we only meet this guy once throughout the game and he seems extremely interesting, but he`s thrown away until the 4th game in the series and that didn't do him enough justice either.

Culture: If it wasn't for the great sound effects and perfect visuals, I would`v probably loathed this time period. we weren't submerged in the culture of this place. there was just this place with so many discrepancies..no history ...the script tries to work around this just a bit with the occasional mention of the conflict, but that`s it...we have an empty portrait of the time period. there was no colors, no lines...just static white...things that are there.

AC II:

Ezio`s development: Yeah it was terrible imo. we never really went deeper with this character at all. He starts as a playboy noble, becomes angry a bit, then back to square one. throughout the rest of the game he`s the same 17 year old teen. we never see another layer to his character. Ezio only really changes and grows up in the last 15 minutes of the game.

Character cast: it was bland, plain and simple. either that, or their screen time is like 4 minutes long. there`s too many characters who serve no purpose, but to drag the story on. I would`v much rather had more Machiavelli, Volpe and Leonardo face time replace Bartolomeo, Antonio and Teodora. these 3 characters` roles and interactions are already present in Mario, Volpe and Paola respectively...except Mario, Volpe and Paola personify these characters so much better.

Desmond: We see Desmond for a total of 40 minutes...nuff said...if any game terribly underused Desmond, it`s this imo

ACB:

Storyline: Lack of ambiguity is jarring. it`s obviously attempted with silly, random lines from Lucrezia about how Lorenzo wiped the Pazzi off the map and that Ezio is a Hypocrite....and not 5 minutes before she was ruthlessly disciplining the citizens of Rome by showing Caterina as an example of anyone opposing the Borgia...y-yeah, that`s really convincing...not

Brotherhood: This gang...this street gang that operates openly with Uniforms like Repomen. It was jarring, because CLEARLY Altair wanted this to stop, the assassins were spread and integrated into society and it`s there in AC II and it seemed like that would be the template, but alas no..the Brotherhood became a "secretive gang". which is stupid.

many characters and interesting plot points(Claudia and Bartolomeo): I specifically mention these 2, because they were criminally used. they had enough screen time, but it was HOW they were used. I`ll start with Claudia. The scene where she kills all the guards. this is a girl of 20 years of social exile. she`s never really killed anyone, but instantly she`s "ready to do it to do it again"......what? this could`v been an amazing moment for her and Ezio to re-bond together, this should`v been a traumatic experience, something that significantly moves Claudia (Yes, the last of us still rings in my head) and it would open so many doors for Ezio`s character as well.

And now Bartolomeo. this guy was a military strategist. he was capable and well respected, but he`s reduced to an idiotic buffoon..those generic, cliche and overused big guy = stupid archetypes...that`s all I`ll say.

Cesare was touted as this equal, respectful adversary to Ezio. I thought there`d be mutual respect between these 2. Cesare is a whiny brat, incapable of besting Ezio and has an inferiority complex....extinguished was a chance of this being one of the best rivalries ever.

The interaction between the modern team of Assassins was cringe worthy. they were turned into Scooby Doo, sure...it has it`s shining moments, but it was average at best and at worst....it was plain ugly.

ACR:

Brotherhood: see above.

Yusuf: he`s instantly friendly to Ezio. there`s no progression in the relationship between the two. Ezio is gruff, more quite and all over tired, but that never shows with Yusuf. he doesn't flail his leadership at Yusuf for example, nope...Yusuf always jokes around and sometimes his jokes are jabs at Ezio, but Ezio doesn't seem to react AT ALL. they`re instant high school buds..I would want that, but I wanted to see it dynamically evolve, not instantly thrown at my face.

Altair: What can I say?? this guy was killed for me, apart from the final Abbas confrontation, this whole thing was terrible. Altair was out of character and his VA was terrible. it wasn't Altair..just some guy. as far as i`m concerned, Altair died After AC I...

Culture: it generally does it so much better than AC I, with the Athan and better implementation of the culture in the script and plot, but I still felt like It wasn't enough. the tour with Yusuf could`v been used to fill that void a bit, but he and Ezio only briefly talk about the city at the beginning.

Revelation: don`t really need to speak about this.

AC III:

Connor: the only protagonist to get less than 3 quarters of HIS game. he takes a back seat to his dad, which is fine, but what`s preposterous is that he later takes a back seat to ONE CONFLICT in the time period which has about 3 conflicts and this leaves Connor with so much to be desired and so many missed opportunities. one plot point I would`v loved to see is his resolve to spare GW...we`re instead given the battle of Chesapeake that adds NOTHING to Connor that was not already there...all in all, I could`v done away with so many battles for a personal journey with Connor. something that defines him...something that does not include riding on a damm horse, something that ADDS to the character.

John Pitcairn: I thought he was underused. would`v loved to see more of him.

Cross and Vidic: Cross was reduced to a punching bag with no worth and Vidic became QTE assassination number 5..that`s it

Desmond`s ending: No problem with the ending itself, just the way it was executed and how Minerva appeared.it was unnecessary i thought, would`v been so much better as a surprise...and William panics or something...I dunno...just something that`s not what we got...something else.

Charles Lee`s choking scene: it felt so out of place, considering that Lee had a Mohawk wife....an actual Mohawk wife...he was formally married to a native, which was rare, but for some reason, he`s just like every racist ***** in the game. a desperate attempt to show the Templars as evil....it was an insult to the very work they`v built earlier that the Templars are not bad people.

Spider_Sith9
07-11-2013, 08:30 AM
AC1's issue that it had no history is a good thing. I didn't like how AC2 made everyone all Gump Factored.


IMO it's anything involving Shao Jun. MAKE A SHAO JUN GAME NAO.

avk111
07-11-2013, 09:21 AM
Well personally speaking,

I would have focused in AC3 on Connor's development in his goals. As prebecoming an Assassin he was a gung-ho Native warrior with a lets kill Colonists and outsiders, after ascending to becoming an Assassin he becamse wary of everyones requirement for assistance, whether it was the colonists , his people or the partiots im not sure though if it was the creed itself that gave him that realization or was it just his internal character to begin with.

Thus if they showed a few lectures from Achillies would have played out nicely and fans would have appreciated him more.

Thanks .

Assassin_M
01-20-2014, 06:42 PM
Why did no one post more here? You lazy louts.

killzab
01-20-2014, 09:00 PM
Why did no one post more here? You lazy louts.

Because you weren't trolling.

Assassin_M
01-20-2014, 09:08 PM
Because you weren't trolling.
Dang it >_>

Fatal-Feit
01-20-2014, 09:39 PM
2much2read4me :(

Assassin_M
01-20-2014, 09:49 PM
2much2read4me :(
That's what a forum is D:

Consus_E
01-20-2014, 09:52 PM
Dang it >_>

What about AC4? AC:L HD? Freedom Cry? come on man!

Assassin_M
01-20-2014, 09:52 PM
What about AC4? AC:L HD? Freedom Cry? come on man!
This is an old thread, I swear D:

SixKeys
01-20-2014, 09:55 PM
AC1:

-The traitor outside Masyaf. It still bugs me that I can see him in red in Eagle Vision, but if I kill him, everyone starts attacking me. I wish they hadn't cut this mission from the story.

-The other bureau leaders. I loved the interaction between Malik and Alta´r because they had a history. There was also the leader in Damascus who was funny with his snide remarks, and the old leader in Acre who thought Alta´r was conceited. I would have liked more interactions with them apart from pre-mission briefings.

AC2:

-The mercenaries and thieves stuff was rushed over a bit. I would have liked to see more interaction between Rosa and Ezio, but she never had as big of a role as I would have liked. Bartolomeo was a great character, but going around freeing mercenaries felt like repetition from the early parts of the game.

-Ezio's mother. It was nice that we got to see her awaken from her state after getting all the feathers, but it would have been nice to see a more gradual recovery related to our other actions. Like maybe see Claudia walking with her in the improved gardens sometimes or admiring the art in your gallery.

ACB:

-Agreed on Bartolomeo. He, Machiavelli and La Volpe were written as fools just to make Ezio look better by comparison.

-Villains. In AC2 we had a few dramatic scenes where Ezio spied upon the group of Templars from the shadows and through their interactions established they were in on the conspiracy. In ACB, the only time we saw all the targets together was in the background during the attack at the Villa. They're easy to miss if you're not paying attention, so on my first playthrough I was confused how Ezio knew who his targets were. Unlike AC2, there was no grand conspiracy either, just a lazy bunch who work for Cesare because they're his cousins or whatever.

ACR:

-Agreed on Yusuf.

-Ezio's instant acceptance of the different culture and ways of the Ottoman assassins. As an old man, you would expect him to be resistant to change, going "in my days we didn't need these fancy hookblades or new-fangled bombs!", but he embraces everything new without any hesitation whatsoever. From a gameplay perspective it makes sense, but storywise he should have been more gruff and old-fashioned.

-Likewise, the brotherhood's instant acceptance of Ezio as their mentor, with no hesitation about this old man from an entirely different culture coming to be their boss and order them around.

-Sofia. God, what a bland, boring character. Ezio kept describing her as "passionate" in his letters when she was anything but. I would have been okay with Ezio wanting to settle down with someone who is the opposite of the fiery women he liked in his youth, but they didn't seem to know how to portray Sofia. Was she supposed to be passionate and that's what attracted Ezio in the first place, or was she supposed to be calm and mature and that's what appealed to him? There was a jarring inconsistency between her voice-acting and her in-game description.

-Agreed on Alta´r. He felt like a different person and I couldn't even pretend I was playing as the real Alta´r in parts where he didn't speak, as his climbing and fighting controlled exactly the same as Ezio. Alta´r's climbing should be slower and his fighting style less choreographed.

-Lucy/Subject 16. What a letdown. Instead of meeting the mysterious, crazy guy who so urgently seemed like he wanted to talk to us in the glyphs, we met a guy with the coolness of a surfer dude with nothing important to tell us. "Oh, you stabbed your girlfriend? Well, don't feel bad about it, you only did it because....You know what, it's not important right now. I'll tell you about it in the paid DLC."

AC3:

-Connor. The trailers suggested his native background and traumatic experiences made him feel like an outsider, but in the game only a couple of people ever showed hostility towards him because of his background. All the Homestead people, couriers, children and pretty much the entire bluecoat army instantly accepted him and never made jabs about his native side. Connor himself never acted like he was impartial either. He was surprisingly forgiving towards the people who killed his mother and even risked alienation from his own people because he would rather risk the lives of his fellow villagers than those of Washington's men. There should have been a moment in the game when Connor truly questioned his loyalties. Maybe he would have gotten so much abuse from white people and Achilles that he would have had a moment of anger where he decided to go back to his people and fight with them against the invaders, but after cooling down he would have realized it would not bring peace and returned to the assassins. He was never truly treated as an outsider and from a storytelling perspective, that was a huge missed opportunity.

-Daniel Cross and Vidic. I wouldn't have minded the Desmond segments if only the payoff had been better. But Cross ended up being a whiny baby who would rather run away than face you in a proper fight, and Vidic....just thinking about him makes me sad.

-The ending, for both Connor and Desmond. Connor coming back to find his village abandoned should have happened before the credits, not after. And the whole Minerva/Juno argument was just silly and Desmond's death was rushed. Also hated how there were no proper goodbyes with the other assassins. Just "go, now!" and they obey.

SixKeys
01-20-2014, 09:59 PM
Forgot about AC4:

-Anne Bonny. She was really boring in the game when historically she was badass.

-Blackbeard. Edward's slo-mo "nnnooooo!!" reaction to his death is almost comical considering we only saw them interact two or three times. Nothing between them suggested any sort of deep bond of friendship. Same goes for all the pirates in the game save for Mary Read, perhaps.

-Adewale. Maybe they didn't want to expand upon him too much because they had a DLC to sell, but again, there was definitely a lack of connection between him and Edward. I didn't really feel anything when he told me he was leaving when it should have been a painful moment for Edward.

Shahkulu101
01-20-2014, 10:00 PM
I read it, M. I just don't have much to say other than I agree.

Although I don't care about the culture thing as much, it doesn't need to be represented that profoundly in my opinion. I do love the piratey dialogue in Black Flag though but the Caribbean had a myriad of different cultures and the Island natives were wasted potential. The Guardian's thing at the observatory seems racist quite frankly.

Assassin_M
01-20-2014, 10:20 PM
I read it, M. I just don't have much to say other than I agree.

Although I don't care about the culture thing as much, it doesn't need to be represented that profoundly in my opinion. I do love the piratey dialogue in Black Flag though but the Caribbean had a myriad of different cultures and the Island natives were wasted potential. The Guardian's thing at the observatory seems racist quite frankly.
don't you have anything to add?? or make ones for AC IV or any of the DLCs? or just talk about characters, events..etc



-The ending, for both Connor and Desmond. Connor coming back to find his village abandoned should have happened before the credits, not after.
The scene where he finds the ball and asks "why would they leave this behind?" was actually supposed to be after the scene where he meets the old traveler on the stump when he enters his Village, I have no idea why they switched it and made the traveler scene a part of the epilogue. It made Connor look so dumb, because he already KNEW that his Village was empty BEFORE he met the man, yet he seems so surprised.

and thank you for posting D:

Shahkulu101
01-20-2014, 10:43 PM
don't you have anything to add?? or make ones for AC IV or any of the DLCs? or just talk about characters, events..etc


The scene where he finds the ball and asks "why would they leave this behind?" was actually supposed to be after the scene where he meets the old traveler on the stump when he enters his Village, I have no idea why they switched it and made the traveler scene a part of the epilogue. It made Connor look so dumb, because he already KNEW that his Village was empty BEFORE he met the man, yet he seems so surprised.

and thank you for posting D:

Freedom Cry:

Mission design was restrictive again. We were forced to do things with aplomb rather than subtlety i.e the governor's assassination mission. Acquiring the Experto Crede was also frustrating when I could just as easily sneak past the guards and kill everyone on board I was forced to blow up towers for some reason. I sighed at my screen when I should have been loving playing as the badass Ade.

No sea shanties or any music on the ship. I would have loved some of the tradition Haitan stuff to be sung whilst roaming the sea.

Liberating slaves should have had more weight. Instead, they were practically everywhere every second and started feeling like chores. I wasn't saving them for Adewale's personal justice, I was grinding through tedium to unlock gear.

The Islands were laughable. Where AC4 would have simply labelled them Uncharted, tiny little swathes of sand were deceivingly labled as locations. Fewer bigger, meatier locations was the way I would have liked them to go.

The relationship with Adewale and Bastienne is well done, but I was disssapointed that she abandoned the Templar's so easily. What caused her to join an order against freedom when her people are enslaved? Why did she ever have faith in the governor? I felt these questions should have been asked and answered, or at least implied. Maybe I'm missing something, my memory's not so fresh. Her and Ade clashed ever so slightly but their opposing ideologies didn't create enough friction between the two. Gah, I'm moaning too much - not like it was a full game.

Fatal-Feit
01-20-2014, 10:54 PM
The scene where he finds the ball and asks "why would they leave this behind?" was actually supposed to be after the scene where he meets the old traveler on the stump when he enters his Village.

I'm pretty sure that old traveler was *Boone. Or am I wrong?

Bozosaurus76
01-21-2014, 01:45 AM
I think it was disappointing that in Altair's ACR flashbacks Malik/Malek (the amputee) doesn't make an appearance. The end of AC1 makes it seem like he's going to play an instrumental part in helping Altair rebuild the order. Also, I really didn't like that Altair's voice didn't have a Middle Eastern accent to begin with in AC1, it just broke the immersion so much for me.

The whole "find Eve in Eden" thing seems like a dropped plot point as well, unless they have more surprises for us?...

AC2 and AC4 suffer from the fact that there are too many complementary characters with too little screen time and development. To be honest, I could have gone without the Blackbeard missions in Charlestown and had more focus on Edward's relationship with Adewale. Maybe as we progress throughout the game, when we plunder islands or forts, Adewale can begin to voice his displeasure with Edward's aimless lifestye more and more. The jackdaw's crew members were waaaay too generic as well. Maybe if you had 5-6 pirate recruitment missions witth their own mini-storyline where you got crew members with different backgrounds/looks.. idk

Assassin_M
01-21-2014, 01:48 AM
I'm pretty sure that old traveler was *Boone. Or am I wrong?
Nah, Boone was the one who told Connor of the myths. he looks different. similar outfit is all.

pacmanate
01-21-2014, 01:59 AM
http://www.narutoforums.com/images/smilies/series2/899e1ad6.gif

Megas_Doux
01-21-2014, 02:03 AM
Cesare Borgia!

guardian_titan
01-21-2014, 02:46 AM
Repost of my Charles Lee thoughts:
Was doing some work on my own family tree and found some Lees (General Robert E. Lee included) so decided to go look into Charles Lee's family to see if maybe there's a relation to Robert E. Lee and myself. Ran into something interesting. Bit of a missed opportunity for Charles in AC3 or at least Forsaken. Such a shame the books and games tend to be focused more on one character resulting in the rest being rather flat. Perhaps Ubisoft should consider a short story mini series that fleshes out side characters. I know Ubisoft writers do a lot of research into the time frame for each game, but apparently research into the real characters' family trees is not part of it. At any rate, this tidbit I've never seen mentioned anywhere else so seems few ever seem to look at family trees.

A long post, but I'm not doing a TLDR.

Spoiler tags so it doesn't look so daunting to read:
While looking into Charles's tree, I found he had a sister named Sidney who he gave the majority of his fortune to upon his death. Sidney was unmarried, likely never came to America, and died 6 years after Charles did in Cheshire, England (1788). She left her estate to her cousin Susan (or Susannah) Townshend who apparently lived in nearby Wales. Susan had a brother named Robert who also died at Braddock's expedition. Record I found said he died in 1756 but also states he died during the expedition which was July 9, 1755. So likely someone just rounded up. If Sidney knew Susan, it stands to reason Charles also knew Robert. No birth year for Robert is known, but would seem he was born roughly around 1734 making him about 2 years younger than Charles. Possible Charles saw Robert as a younger brother. We know Charles was also at Braddock's Expedition as was George Washington. George Washington was the one who organized the retreat when Braddock fell. Seems possible Robert fell during the retreat and Charles laid the blame on Washington for a poor retreat. Would explain why Charles constantly stated Washington was a terrible leader.

At roughly this same time, Charles Lee was known to have a Mohawk wife and twins. Since there's so little known about them, I believe the marriage was incredibly short lived (likely less than a year) and the twins died young. Since he left the majority of his fortune to his sister Sidney, that further proves the twins died young. Given George Washington's habit of torching native villages at the time, possibly Charles Lee lost his wife and twins either directly or indirectly due to Washington. Or he lost them coincidentally close to the time of their village being burned, and Charles put two and two together without considering maybe they died of an illness such as smallpox or pneumonia. People often want to lay blame and find reason in what happened. Charles likely would've already been irritated with Washington over Robert's death, so wouldn't be much of a jump for him to also blame Washington for the death of his wife and children even if he had nothing to do with it.

There was also another Lee (Edward Lee) who died April 5, 1759 in Philadelphia who was the brother-in-law to Robert Townshend and the 2nd cousin to Charles. It's rather interesting that this Lee also died in Philadelphia much like Charles does later and had to of known not only Robert but also Charles. The trio possibly came to America at roughly the same time (maybe even together since they were all military), and Edward's death was the straw that broke the camel's back explaining why Charles left America.

When the French and Indian War ended in America, Charles went to Europe to enlist in the Portuguese military which further solidifies the loss of his wife and twins by this point. The loss of his cousin, Edward, wife, and twins so close together might be the reason why Charles left America. Charles's mother (Isabel or Isabella Bunbury) also died at roughly this time (1750) in England. Charles was the baby of the family (no children are listed after him from what I found) so was likely fairly attached to his mother. This also feeds into Charles potentially seeing Robert as a younger brother. His mother's death might have sparked his interest in going to America. His only motivation for anything he did couldn't have only been military advancement. Grief likely spurred many of his decisions.

Comes the question why Charles Lee returned to America in the early 1770s and bought his estate in West Virginia (Prato Rio). He could've just returned to England and retired to his sister's estate, but something brought him back to America. Possible he just liked America better than England, and despite his losses, he wanted to return there. Kind of suggests he was a bit sentimental in his later years. Charles could've defected to the British much like Benedict Arnold did but something kept him with the Americans. I'm aware there were documents discovered after Charles's death that suggests he was working with the British, but since he remained in America despite everything that happened, it seems he wasn't too into helping the British. He possibly did it out of obligation or duress (he was being held captive by the British at the time) and maybe to try to sabotage Washington, but still felt America was his home so was stuck between a rock and a hard place. Granted, being threatened with being hanged in England likely didn't make him want to return there so he was probably praying no one discovered he had helped the British even if he was possibly forced to help them. We really don't know if Charles wrote those plans of his own free will or if he had a gun to his head the whole time. Although we do know the man who captured Charles was an old military friend, but friendships often have a habit of turning sour in war.

Family tree links:
Charles Lee: http://histfam.familysearch.org/getperson.php?personID=I98640&tree=Welsh
Sidney Lee: http://histfam.familysearch.org/getperson.php?personID=I251894&tree=Welsh
Robert Townshend: http://histfam.familysearch.org/getperson.php?personID=I251828&tree=Welsh
Edward Lee: http://histfam.familysearch.org/getperson.php?personID=I251902&tree=Welsh
Trying to trace people in a family tree can be a bit of a pain, especially when people share the same name (such as Frances Lee ... or John). One mistake and two people suddenly become one or one person looks to be two. Names also often have variant spellings like Susan vs Suannah, Henry vs Harry, Frances vs Francis, etc.

Also, food for thought, figured out the average family size of the era was around 6 surviving kids (http://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/historyonline/us3.cfm). If each one had 6 kids and this continued to at least 1960, a guy from 1750 might have over 600,000 descendants by today ... maybe even a million. Take into account declining family sizes, value might be closer to 100,000. The US has over 300 million people so kind of suggests there's around 300-3,000 common ancestors such as George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Daniel Boone, etc and chances are many people have several of those common ancestors in their tree, not just 1. Makes you think. Don't think any other country fairs any better. Smaller the community, the more likely you're related. Does make you realize that if you go family tree hunting, the further back you go, the more cousins you have. Go back to the 1400s, you might have 5 million or better cousins today. Go back to the 1000s, a person might have 10 million descendants today.

Taking that into consideration, Desmond's likely not the only one in the world to have bloodlines from Altair, Ezio, and Edward/Haytham/Connor. It's technically impossible to think Desmond's the only one. Only way he'd be the only one is if the family had a 1 child policy ... which seems to be what Ubisoft likes doing. They might have 2 kids (Altair, Ezio, Edward), but seems only 1 actually has kids themselves. Altair's eldest son seems to have never had children. Possible Ezio's son died young or failed to have children. Jenny had no children. We don't know if Haytham had another child before or after Connor. We don't know if Connor had more than 1 child. Think Ubisoft's stuck on the rule of 2 and only 1 may descend. :p Guess it's safe to assume with that theme, Connor had 1-2 kids, and if he had 2, then 1 never had kids. Well, Ezio did have another child that we know Clay is descended from, but that still doesn't deviate much from the 2 rule they seem to have.

Ubisoft really needs to spice up the trees. They've gotten predictable. Average family size for the 1700s-1800s in America was like 6 surviving kids, not 2. And again, that's surviving. Many families had 10+ kids.
In relation to AC3:
Connor lost his mother to George Washington but he laid the blame on Charles Lee without considering that someone else could've been the culprit. Possibly Charles Lee blames the death of his cousin, wife, and twins (and maybe Edward) on George Washington when their deaths were also caused by someone/something else. Both also harbor hatred toward the (possible) wrong man for years. The two are fairly similar and their hatred of each other only seems to be a misunderstanding. Makes you wonder how the story could've changed if Connor was aware he had something in common with Lee. George Washington would've ended up the "bad guy" by circumstance. Then it would've been a story of Connor fighting between getting revenge on the man who killed his mother (Washington) or dealing with the Templars.
It's possible George Washington was partially behind Robert's death explaining why Washington tries so hard to befriend Charles later. Giving Charles such a high position in the American military, paying him visits at Prato Rio, etc shows that he might have had some remorse for Robert's death and/or Charles Lee's wife and children. Washington could've had Charles hanged for treason or something after the Monmouth retreat but yet didn't. Stands to reason Washington tries to butter up Connor in much the same way, especially around the time he becomes President and after. With the war with the native tribes going on in the Northwest Territory at the time, Washington would've likely wanted Connor as a mediator to help him curb the fighting. Connor appears to forgive him by 1788 (Tyranny of King Washington). If anything more was done on Connor, I think it'd be an interesting story to have him try to be a mediator and not a killer. Someone who actually tries to see both sides of the story and chose the better path rather than jumping on conclusions and murdering the wrong man. Might be interesting to see him try to show mercy rather than just killing every target he happens upon. There's other ways to end conflicts that don't result in someone's death. Kind of why I would suspect Edward would show sympathy toward Woodes Rogers and help get him out of debtor's prison only for him to return to the Caribbean and be killed by the Assassins there because they didn't get the memo about Edward helping him. Granted, he returned to the slave trade so guy deserved it anyway. I know the series is Assassin's Creed, but not everything has to end with someone dying. Sometimes mercy may be the better path.

Would be an interesting story to have an Assassin who actually tries to avoid killing and regrets it when they do it. In Connor's case, he held so much anger for so many years that he enjoyed the assassinations he did. The only one he regretted was Kanen'to:kon. Would be interesting to see him take a 180 and try to be the peacekeeper, only resorting to assassinating when he has to. No assassin really seems to even show sympathy toward their enemies. Altair didn't seem to care who he killed outside of maybe Al Mualim nor did it really effect him emotionally. Maria's death doesn't count. Her death wasn't intentional. Ezio also didn't appear to be effected and I don't recall any he really regretted. At most, he regretted not getting Rodrigo or Cesere sooner. Connor eventually figured out Charles Lee wasn't behind his mother's death but still chases Charles for it. Would be possible that Connor starts to look more into the truth of what happened to his mother after AC3 ended and start to wonder if he made the right decision, then potentially set him on a path to think first before he acts. Possible he confronted Washington in 1788 about it after spending years fighting with himself, Washington openly admits to it causing Connor to leave, and then Washington chases after him with the Apple leading into ToKW. Showing Connor the Apple after the two get into a big fight might be Washington trying to show Connor he can be trusted.
Kind of makes you wonder what else hides in family trees of various real characters. There's always a reason behind someone's madness even if it's something as simple as genetics. With Charles Lee's case, seems his story was similar to Connor's. Much of his problem stems from loss of those close to him. In another story, the two could've possibly been friends. It's an interesting insight into the real Charles Lee and makes you wonder what could've been.

Assassin's Creed 3 certainly still remains my favorite of the series, but with such a missed opportunity with Charles makes me wonder what other missed opportunities there have been. Seriously, Ubisoft needs to do a short story series showcasing a particular side character. Announce a character for a game, a month later release a short story related to them. Then release short stories for unannounced characters after the game's released for the next 6 months to a year to keep interest in the game. Would help promote the game and fill in plot holes in both the game and books. And it's also more than just DLC which may not expand upon the story at all and thus not fill in massive plot holes.

Figured I'd post this since it is a rather interesting insight into a character that was featured in one of the games. :) Really makes you consider more why something is.
On natives marrying colonials being rare, it actually wasn't. I found for the Cherokee that if a Cherokee woman married a European, he was allowed to become a limited member of the tribe. If a Cherokee man married a European woman, he was kicked out. Not sure if any other tribes had the same rule. I was looking up native names for various reasons (family tree, my AC3 fan game, etc) and found quite a few natives, especially around Virginia, had European names. Europeans (mostly the Scots) had been intermarrying with the natives since the 1500s. Pocahontas was one of the earlier ones. Those in the Northwest Territory were also intermarrying with the British and French. If those in the south and northwest (at the time) were intermarrying, makes me wonder if the northern tribes did so as well. Then Charles Lee marrying a Mohawk wouldn't have actually been unusual. So makes me wonder if Ziio's father wasn't a European, too, making Connor actually only a quarter Mohawk. Never see the guy nor is he mentioned so really makes you wonder. Ziio vaguely mentions the tribe being weary of Connor to start and then they accept him. Seems rather pointless to mention that if it wasn't really going to play into anything. So makes me wonder if more was intended with that and cut.

On another train of thought, considering rewriting ToKW to put in the Templars. Probably be something I do later although I am thinking about it, especially after my Charles Lee find. Got the entire script for ToKW due to taking a million screenshots of my last playthrough so wouldn't take much to rewrite parts to replace someone with a Templar. Like I can see Johnson replacing Franklin with Hickey helping him out, Pitcairn trying to take out Arnold and Putnam only to get executed, and Lee and Haytham in New York. Kanen'to:kon, Adams, Franklin, and Jefferson I can still see having a role, just different from what's in the actual DLCs. An alternate story of the alternate story of ToKW. :p Such a missed opportunity to not have them in the story and Haytham only getting a picture flashback.

LoyalACFan
01-21-2014, 03:34 AM
AC1

-Altair's progression. I saw your critique of Ezio's progression and I agree it wasn't accentuated as much as it should have been, but it didn't bother me nearly as much as Altair's uber-predictable "cocky to humble" transformation. I loved AC1's philosophy and gameplay, but the story and Altair's character presentation (VA and all) were just bungled beyond belief IMO.

-No Saladin. Boo. Not saying they should have gone the "shoehorn you into every event" route they did later on in the franchise, but we were already at the Battle of Arsuf anyway, and we got to see boring Richard I. Saladin seemed like a no-brainer.

AC2

-Bonfire of the Vanities. First of all, Cristina's death was already established in the Renaissance novel released concurrently with AC2, so it seems like something that should have been included in Bonfire. Second, it's a shame it was cut and released as DLC. Cristina's death combined with the speech at the end would have been a HUGE step toward proper Ezio development.

-La Volpe was easily the coolest of the "secret" Assassins you met, but he didn't get enough screen time.

ACB & ACR

-Should've been one big game with equal Ezio and Altair content that wrapped up both of their stories.

AC3

-Too many to list individually, but Connor's story being overshadowed by Haytham and the Revolution, Charles Lee's Mohawk liaisons, George Washington plot twist, and a whole heap of other story issues were botched.

AC4

-Charles Vane and Anne Bonny. Would have liked to see much more of both of them, for completely different reasons. Vane was hilarious and he could have been used more, while Bonny was just kind of "there," but she didn't really get a fair chance, as few scenes as she had.

-No connection to the crew. I was expecting to feel a bit of camaraderie between Edward and the crew, but aside from that one scene before you kill Du Casse and steal his hideout, he didn't even really interact with them. He might as well have had a crew of trained monkeys. Part of the problem was that we didn't have any "permanent" crewmen aside from Adewale (and even he was underutilized). It was just Edward, Ade, and forty redshirts.

SixKeys
01-21-2014, 03:49 AM
In relation to AC3:
Connor lost his mother to George Washington but he laid the blame on Charles Lee without considering that someone else could've been the culprit. Possibly Charles Lee blames the death of his cousin, wife, and twins (and maybe Edward) on George Washington when their deaths were also caused by someone/something else. Both also harbor hatred toward the (possible) wrong man for years. The two are fairly similar and their hatred of each other only seems to be a misunderstanding. Makes you wonder how the story could've changed if Connor was aware he had something in common with Lee. George Washington would've ended up the "bad guy" by circumstance. Then it would've been a story of Connor fighting between getting revenge on the man who killed his mother (Washington) or dealing with the Templars.


This sounds so much better than what we ultimately got. I also felt Lee was a missed opportunity, mostly because he seemed to undergo such a drastic change from the nice gentleman we saw in Haytham's memories to the racist savage in Connor's. It does raise the interesting question if an ancestor's personal perception of events affects the memories themselves (Haytham saw Lee one way, Connor saw him another way), but that's another topic. But the things you brought up definitely make Lee sound more human and complex than he was in the game, and would have made for great drama between him and Connor.

AdamPearce
01-21-2014, 04:14 AM
Something I hated in AC3 is how they've turned Connor from this Cold Distanced guy to a Sad Cute Teddy Bear. I was really looking for him to become kind of Altair 2.0, a killer, stone-blood killer. I really was disapointed when Tiio announced that everyone received him well and blablabla. I would've like Connor being rejected, and when his mother died, that no one helps him. I mean, the guy is lonely for the whole game, why not push that to the extreme and use it at 100%. Especially how they presented him:

A part of wants to repall all outsiders, the other part of me, is the outsider

omg sooo fkn badasss *-* > me watching the trailer.

LoyalACFan
01-21-2014, 04:19 AM
Something I hated in AC3 is how they've turned Connor from this Cold Distanced guy to a Sad Cute Teddy Bear.

Oh, this... so much.

14 y/o Connor: "We have to fight off the colonists to save our land and people!"

Achilles: "Your struggle is the colonists' struggle!"

17 y/o Connor: "Even though everything I've seen proves that this isn't true, OK! I'll fight for them!"

Me: "............ wat"

AdamPearce
01-21-2014, 04:34 AM
Oh, this... so much.

14 y/o Connor: "We have to fight off the colonists to save our land and people!"

Achilles: "Your struggle is the colonists' struggle!"

17 y/o Connor: "Even though everything I've seen proves that this isn't true, OK! I'll fight for them!"

Me: "............ wat"

And also, when in precense of his people, Connor is really cold, just remember the beginning with Kanientho:kon, he's almost disgusted of him. Then he meets the White Mans (black in this case) and becomes this dummy naive teenager. Where the f is the super badass Connor from 1 hour ago ?

LoyalACFan
01-21-2014, 04:38 AM
And also, when in precense of his people, Connor is really cold, just remember the beginning with Kanientho:kon, he's almost disgusted of him. Then he meets the White Mans (black in this case) and becomes this dummy naive teenager. Where the f is the super badass Connor from 1 hour ago ?

Yep, totally agree. I can understand some naivete in his first experience in colonial society, but it was like he had a complete 180 change in his character that lasted throughout almost the entire game after reaching Boston.

pacmanate
01-21-2014, 11:49 AM
This is an old thread, I swear D:
Now who's lazy?!

Landruner
01-21-2014, 03:28 PM
That is a good thread - actually it is.... Well, I understand what you mentioned back in time, but we have to consider 2 things.
The AC games are not build as some RPGs, but they imply a lot of back stories, alas I am not sure that the development and the design can leave the authors and the developers the time to develop more than what we see in game.
Clearly AC market is not obviously made for people that want to play a game for more than 20 hours. Some can be longer than others, but clearly Ubisoft is not looking for this type of market for that series. I know that the authors of some other games of the same type of market can get that character development faster and smarter, but the authors have more time as well.
The second point is that they reserve the character development and some other scenarios and back stories for the Books.

I agree that some did not see that this way, Ezio appear as the more developed of the all series mostly because he got 3 games to get that achievement, Connor had been the least respected of the time period heroes in that series - in getting only 22 memory blocks as an adult and all the side activities proposed did not help him neither -a shame, since I felt that Connor could have been the more instinctive and focused Assassin is the Series, and he is not.... Altair got his redeem of development in Revelation, but not the way we were all expecting.

As long as Desmond, I prefer not even mentioning anything since I never really understood the way Desmond had been developed all along the games I never neither really understood his need in this series and i never really understood the easy hate from gamer(s) against him - especially unfair hate since he was just being an under developed and under achieved character ever made in a video game.The story of Desmond always felt like a huge trial and error from his authors before becoming some trademark features post ACB.
I just know that Ubisoft screwed up with Desmond and the modern days and tuned into a pointless maze what could have been one of a nicest piece of science fiction ever made in a video game. Congratulation Ubisoft you just bow it up!

On the other hands, if you happen to read the books (novels), well ,there you see more and paradoxically and honestly start wishing that the games could be adapted from the novels which got inspired by them in the first place. Paradox isn't?

dbzk1999
01-21-2014, 08:58 PM
That is a good thread - actually it is.... Well, I understand what you mentioned back in time, but we have to consider 2 things.
The AC games are not build as some RPGs, but they imply a lot of back stories, alas I am not sure that the development and the design can leave the authors and the developers the time to develop more than what we see in game.
Clearly AC market is not obviously made for people that want to play a game for more than 20 hours. Some can be longer than others, but clearly Ubisoft is not looking for this type of market for that series. I know that the authors of some other games of the same type of market can get that character development faster and smarter, but the authors have more time as well.
The second point is that they reserve the character development and some other scenarios and back stories for the Books.

I agree that some did not see that this way, Ezio appear as the more developed of the all series mostly because he got 3 games to get that achievement, Connor had been the least respected of the time period heroes in that series - in getting only 22 memory blocks as an adult and all the side activities proposed did not help him neither -a shame, since I felt that Connor could have been the more instinctive and focused Assassin is the Series, and he is not.... Altair got his redeem of development in Revelation, but not the way we were all expecting.

As long as Desmond, I prefer not even mentioning anything since I never really understood the way Desmond had been developed all along the games I never neither really understood his need in this series and i never really understood the easy hate from gamer(s) against him - especially unfair hate since he was just being an under developed and under achieved character ever made in a video game.The story of Desmond always felt like a huge trial and error from his authors before becoming some trademark features post ACB.
I just know that Ubisoft screwed up with Desmond and the modern days and tuned into a pointless maze what could have been one of a nicest piece of science fiction ever made in a video game. Congratulation Ubisoft you just bow it up!

On the other hands, if you happen to read the books (novels), well ,there you see more and paradoxically and honestly start wishing that the games could be adapted from the novels which got inspired by them in the first place. Paradox isn't?
What people hate about Desmond is probably the fact that u kill multiple men and pull off epic assassinations then ur pulled out for. Awhile when all u want to do is get back inside

SixKeys
01-21-2014, 09:17 PM
What people hate about Desmond is probably the fact that u kill multiple men and pull off epic assassinations then ur pulled out for. Awhile when all u want to do is get back inside

Some of us loved the Desmond bits. I liked being pulled out now and then to find out what had changed in the environment while I was in the Animus. I liked hacking into people's e-mails and quarreling with my teammates. In fact, the only reason I was able to trudge through AC3 all the way to the end was to see how Desmond's story would end. Every time a Connor sequence ended, I was hoping to wake up as Desmond to find out what Juno was up to.

dxsxhxcx
01-21-2014, 09:35 PM
In fact, the only reason I was able to trudge through AC3 all the way to the end was to see how Desmond's story would end. Every time a Connor sequence ended, I was hoping to wake up as Desmond to find out what Juno was up to.

same here...

dbzk1999
01-21-2014, 09:58 PM
Some of us loved the Desmond bits. I liked being pulled out now and then to find out what had changed in the environment while I was in the Animus. I liked hacking into people's e-mails and quarreling with my teammates. In fact, the only reason I was able to trudge through AC3 all the way to the end was to see how Desmond's story would end. Every time a Connor sequence ended, I was hoping to wake up as Desmond to find out what Juno was up to.

I'm not saying I didn't love the bits

Megas_Doux
01-22-2014, 01:56 AM
AC IV 's lack of proper tombs/platforming levels is a HUUGEEEEEEEE missed chance. The setting is full of possibilities: Tons of mayan ruins, pre mayan caves in Cuba and Jamaica, spanish mines, etc etc.

http://24.media.tumblr.com/5db9327ca4b0ce438f900cda32aa6da9/tumblr_mqcsv9LCdM1qfh2bxo2_500.png

Why not instead of the many bottles and mayan fragments, combine the storyline of the mayan armor and the sages into one? Looking for their tombs/treasures in the caribbean????
:(


I know is very cliche, but why not something that inspired the legends of the bermuda triangle???? :(