PDA

View Full Version : Why it doesn't matter if Edward's more of a pirate or assassin for AC4 to be AC



Farlander1991
10-26-2013, 03:13 PM
So, there has been a lot of arguing, ever since AC4 announcement (and some of the dev statements have been putting more fuel into the fire) in regards if this is more of a pirate game or assassin game, if Edward's more of a pirate or assassin, 'WHERE'S CHARL... uh,,, WHERE'S THE CREED?!?!' and 'WHERE'S THE ASSASSIN VS. TEMPLAR CONFLICT?!?!', and whether some of those things make AC4 a non-AC game. And you know, I've been thinking... this is all such ********.

Now, I haven't been active on these forums at the time of AC2 release, so I don't know what has been happening then and what people were talking about. But nowadays, AC2 is considered to be one of the (if not the) best AC games, Ezio's awesome, and the title truly deserves an AC moniker.

But, what's Ezio's motivation? Revenge. Revenge upon those responsible for killing his family. Those responsible JUST HAPPEN to be Templars (heck, I'm not even sure if all the conspirators are Templars, I wouldn't be surprised if half of them actually aren't... heck, when an AC game makes you think like that, what does that mean of the quality of the Assassin vs. Templar conflict in that game then?). And his family died because it JUST HAPPENED that they were Assassins. There's no Creed at stake for most of the game. It doesn't matter that the targets are Templars, it matters that they are part of the conspiracy responsible for Ezio's family's death. Not to mention that Ezio does not become part of the Assassin Order until almost the end of the game.

And, ironically enough, you know when Ezio actually starts to live by the Creed and Assassin ideology, when he starts to actually protect the freedom and free will of humanity, who his targets are? Savanarola and his lieutenants. Who are NOT Templars, and who do not have ANYTHING to do with the Assassin vs. Templar conflict at all. But that's when Ezio truly becomes an Assassin.

So, why does Edward get so much **** and Ezio is so revered? Edward, like Ezio, has his own goals, that we know. Edward, like Ezio, uses Assassin tools and methodologies to get to those goals (at first or for the most part, don't know yet). And Edward, like Ezio, is going to find his own way of living by the Creed. What's wrong with that? We already had an Assassin who all life has been one, we already had an Assassin who joined mostly because of his ancestral line, we already had an Assassin who joined out of his own will (you may say that Juno guided him, that's true, but Connor WANTED to do that), so why repeat? What's wrong with a reluctant Assassin? Basically, not calling AC4 an AC game because of Edward as a character is ********, because arguments against him can be used against Ezio, and for the most part people consider Ezio to be awesome and his games are AC games.

Now, you may say that it's the naval part that devolves AC4 from being an AC game. To which I say, also ********. Naval does not remove cities, assassinations, and all the other traditional elements that we know AC4 has got (and we know now not only because of the demos, but because of all the player feedback as well). Naval is not a separate mode, it incorporates AC elements into it, calling naval 'intruding' in case of AC4 is like calling horses 'intruding' in previous AC games. We have naval battles, we can approach ships silently if we want, and, I've been told that there's even stealth incorporated in naval thanks to fogs.

You may say that it's not naval, but the more 'pirate' activities like whale hunting and underwater treasure hunting. And you know, I agree, they are not traditional AC elements (even though underwater does incorporate stealth into it), and they are more pirate-themed by nature. As is the concept of boarding ships, looting ships, and other things (even though, as I mentioned earlier, traditional AC elements are incorporated into that) like treasure hunting based on maps (though, Ezio also searched for treasure, in tombs and such, so... yeah). There IS quite a lot of pirate in AC4, but it doesn't make it less of an AC game mechanically, nor does it make it less of an AC game story-wise, because this is a game about Edward, his journey, and who he is, and he DOES start out as a pirate. Makes sense that he'd do things that a pirate does. Buying paintings, renovating the villa, and all that other stuff is not what an Assassin would do, but it is what Ezio would do. And as we all know, AC2 is awesome and Ezio's awesome, so... (and yes, I know that paintings and renovation and all the non-assassiny stuff in AC2 is not the main focus of the game, but that doesn't counter-argument the point... besides, the cut and clear pirate activities are also not the main focus of AC4 either).

So, yeah. (I don't know with what summary end up my post with, because the post itself feels like a summary, so I'll just end it like this)

roostersrule2
10-26-2013, 03:26 PM
Well that was unnecessary.

Kinda seems like you wanted bash Ezio more then try and justify why Edward is more pirate then Assassin, especially when Conare wasn't even mentioned and he was the least Assassin like out of AC1-AC3 (maybe AC4).

Farlander1991
10-26-2013, 03:30 PM
Well that was unnecessary.

Kinda seems like you wanted bash Ezio more then try and justify why Edward is more pirate then Assassin, especially when Conare wasn't even mentioned and he was the least Assassin like out of AC1-AC3 (maybe AC4).

I'm sorry I sounded bashing, I guess it's because a conversation I had today kinda tipped me over the edge on the topic >_<

I'm not trying to bash Ezio, though, I like him a lot. It just seems to me that he also gets away with a lot what other Assassins are bashed for.

roostersrule2
10-26-2013, 03:34 PM
I'm sorry I sounded bashing, I guess it's because a conversation I had today kinda tipped me over the edge on the topic >_<

I'm not trying to bash Ezio, though, I like him a lot. It just seems to me that he also gets away with a lot what other Assassins are bashed for.Oh okay.

He doesn't though really, people are only complaining about Eddie because they see him more as a pirate and not as an Assassin, now even though Ezio wasn't an Assassin for most of AC2 he still acted like one and wore the robes of one. It's also because most people saw Ezio as an Assassin since he donned the robes. Now with Eduardo it's different because Ubisoft have come out and said he's a Pirate so people will complain about that because people are stupid.

pirate1802
10-26-2013, 04:26 PM
Now with Eduardo it's different because Ubisoft have come out and said he's a Pirate so people will complain about that because people are stupid.

Exactly.

I think, as a franchise AC has shown us time and again that there are no "good" sides. We should embrace this idea and not go down the ima-good-guy-iwont-play-as-the-badguy route. Its juvenile, especially considering what the series itself has taught us. Imo, the protagonist doesnt not have to be an Assassin for it to be an AC game, those who say so have a very narrow vision of what is an AC game. Heck, the starting parts of AC3 with Haytham had a more assassiny feel even though he was a Templar, than the later parts when we did play as an Assassin!

I-Like-Pie45
10-26-2013, 04:27 PM
because he's the greatest

he is the assassin superumano, eradicating templar evil people from face of a renasseance uerth to save hoomaneetity

Landruner
10-26-2013, 07:13 PM
Well, I understand what you are trying to say above, That is a bit the other side of the blade for that franchise since we change of Hero and time periods, it will be always comparison from one game to another not because of their quality or content, but also because stuff we like is not there. That is a mistake that sometime we wrongly take that for granted for items or gameplay style acquired from one game hoping that they could remain in the next installment of the franchise (Ex: If blow pipe is cool and people love, and it won't appears in the next one, some are going to regret it, and whine - The same for the Naval battles...and so one...(You know what I mean, we talked about that already) -

So, What if AC5 is in the Antic Rome with a new hero Roman soldier character? Trust me, you will have people who are going to say that the new hero sucks because he/she is more an antic Roman than a 17th century's pirate...? and then, people asking "where are the Naval battles that I loved so much in AC4?" Why they go back on time? Why the Roman guy has no guns? - Some will say "that new Roman soldier hero sucks because he is not like Edward, a pirate" - See my point?

FOR AC4 & EDWARD:

For what I saw so far, Edward is a great character & the game appears as an enjoyable & epic adventure - Now personally, I would say I will enjoy it the way it is without thinking about anything else that the game itself with its own word & contest and new Hero. (If he is more a pirate than an Assassin, well, it does not damage my feeling about it, since I forced myself to accept the changes for each new entries of that franchise). I liked Altair, Ezio, and even Connor, for the characters and personality they were with the situation and contest they have to deal with, and for the part of Edward I saw I like him very much and he is perfect for its world.


However: If later it comes more Assassin's activities, more assassin missions, more pieces of gear, assassin weapons and also more content by DLCs in order to get a more a more Assassin related approach, Well, I will enjoy them even more, but by what I saw so far, I think the game stands by itself - Assassin Creed or not.