PDA

View Full Version : So the consensus seems to be the story is the game's weak point.... (small spoilers)



killzab
12-08-2013, 06:57 PM
After reading many reviews ( french and english ones ) plus various boards, it seems like the story is where Black Flag kinda failed.

So, I'd like to debate on the reasons why it is considered underwhelming. What in your opinion could have been better ?

To me, the game's plot was a little irrelevant. It was a nice side-story with a likeable protagonist... but that's it. It wasn't epic, there were no stakes at all. I often forgot about the story altogether because I was busy playing the game's awesome side activities.

Though it was better presented than ACIII's plot and much easier to follow, the story was a lot less dense in comparison. ACIII was just massive. There was so much to take in ( too much probaby). But in hindsight, I feel ACIII was deeper, less manichean and more intriguing.

ACIV was a nice and fun entry, nothing more nothing less.

For all the ranting the two Ezio sequels suffered for being unnecessary and basically fillers, I kinda feel like ACIV is the most spin-off-like of ALL the games in the series.

Again, I'm only talking about the story and not gameplay.

Also, it's obvious some cuts had to be done, Darby even admitted it. Like when Edward says to El TIburo that he became a warrior thanks to him.... WTF ?

Some characters felt badly under-developed ( Rackham for example).

What do you think should've been better?

silvermercy
12-08-2013, 07:00 PM
I think AC3 had the biggest complexity of all games (even though people will argue on how well this story was executed). Perhaps it made sense to follow a simpler route with AC4 as a change so as it doesn't get in the way of gameplay and other activities.

SixKeys
12-08-2013, 07:27 PM
Yeah, I was really confused by the El Tiburon part. Edward only met him once before and they never even spoke to one another, WTF? How was this dude important in any way, shape or form to his life?

The main problem with the overall story was the underdevelopment of most characters. Edward himself was great, but apart from him, the only somewhat interesting character was Anne Read. And maybe Charles Vane, but sadly he didn't get enough screentime.

The whole problem is that they did so little with all these iconic pirates. Obviously they wanted us to feel like we started out as one big family, having fun while causing mayhem, until things eventually go south. But we barely got to interact with any of these characters. It made me laugh when
Blackbeard's death was given the ol' slo-mo, Darth Vader "Nnnooooo!!!" treatment, as if we were supposed to feel this huge sense of loss. But before that mission, we only spoke to him two or three times! None of those conversations were especially deep, just Blackbeard telling Edward where to go next and what to do. He didn't come off as a father figure or even a close friend. One moment he's sitting on a beach drinking some beer and not saying much, the next he's telling Edward to go dive for some medicine, and then he's already retiring.

I felt this same detachment from all the other characters, save for Mary Read. All of these iconic figures that were supposedly blood-brothers and dedicated to a "merry life and a short one", but we never actually did anything together as a group. Not even missions where we had to protect each other (save for maybe one). There should have been this sense of camaraderie and fun at the beginning to offset the tragedy when Edward starts to realize a pirate's life isn't all it's cracked up to be. But really, Edward was just doing things on his own all the time, barely even coming into contact with his pirate friends unless it was absolutely necessary. So there was no emotional connection there.

If I'm thinking about what made some of the characters in AC2 so memorable, it's that we got to spend extended periods of time with most of them and figure out their personalities. We kept going back to meet Leonardo multiple times during the story, so we got to know his excitable, somewhat naïve character and watch Ezio's reactions. (Think of the finger-cutting scene.) When we first meet Uncle Mario, he has long discussions with Ezio about the deterioration of Monteriggioni and his struggle to keep it up, the philosophy of the assassins and his relationship with Ezio's father. We see his fiery temper as he storms off after Ezio first refuses to join the assassins, and then see their bond strengthen after Ezio rejoins them and Mario teaches him to respect his fallen enemies.

There are no such extended scenes between Edward and any of the other pirates in AC4, to really give you a sense of their personality and how Edward feels about them. Meeting them is just like checking off a list, like: "Okay, Charles Vane was a famous pirate, I guess we gotta throw him in there somewhere. And Blackbeard, check. Stede Bonnet, check. Anne Bonny, check." There was more context to them than some of the more Forrest Gump-y moments in AC3, but it still feels like they sacrificed character development for the sake of including every historical character from the time period.

silvermercy
12-08-2013, 07:41 PM
...but it still feels like they sacrificed character development for the sake of including every historical character from the time period.
This is indeed a valid issue, I think in games in general. In films or books it is more straightforward when it comes to deciding which character needs more-screen time for example. With games it's more difficult, especially when you try to fit both historical events/figures and enjoyable gameplay.

So in the end it comes to decide what it is better to sacrifice for more screen time. Sometimes it is easier to get the balance right, but sometimes it is not.

lothario-da-be
12-08-2013, 07:59 PM
I liked the story, a lot. The sage part was a bit silly imo. But i thought the characters were done pretty well for the most part. Blackbeard was underused though. Especialy considdering he got a statue and Adewale doesn't. And Ade had somewhat the same amount of screen time + a whole dlc.

SixKeys
12-08-2013, 08:04 PM
Regarding Adewale:

The whole thing about him leaving his position as Edward's quartermaster to become an assassin felt a bit...I dunno, oddly placed? They either should have done it earlier or state that he became an assassin after Edward retired. It just wasn't the same with Anne on board. She didn't have much of a personality and her voice wasn't strong enough to be shouting orders. I was constantly struggling to hear what she was saying, and I was right next to her! Imagine being a crew member at the far end of the ship during a storm.

MIA SILENT
12-08-2013, 08:36 PM
Character development could have been better. Save for a few encounters, we never really spent enough time with Blackbeard and the rest of our so called mates. It's a shame because the characters themselves were very well written and voice acted - so I don't think the writer is at fault here. Maybe just due to time restrictions. Maybe if Ubisoft stopped insisting on 2-3 sequences of glorified tutorials, we might get a bit more meat from the story telling. And Adewale - even though he was our quartermaster - didn't feel very present during missions and such. We got a little bit of back story on him; where he's from and how he was oppressed. He was also shown to be quite wise and thoughtful when it came to the Jackdaw and its crew - but he was underused.

And don't get me started on the criminally underdeveloped Templar cast. Pfffffft. AC3 blows them out the water.

SixKeys
12-08-2013, 08:53 PM
They probably skimped on telling us more about Adewale because of the upcoming DLC.

And yes, the Templars were all boring this time around. The Grandmaster was a joke.

Shahkulu101
12-08-2013, 09:04 PM
They probably skimped on telling us more about Adewale because of the upcoming DLC.

And yes, the Templars were all boring this time around. The Grandmaster was a joke.

I thought Woodes Rogers was pretty good, he was the only one I felt was characterized properly. Apart from that I agree. YAWN.

Landruner
12-08-2013, 09:05 PM
Where's Wally? that is meanly the problem of the story of AC4 - it is just a Pirate remake of that kid's book.- Honestly check it again and try to compare the 2 and you will see what I try to meant by writings this. They were so many ways the story could have been outstanding and so many lost opportunity there that I can't even list them there - I write stuff for a leaving, and I am blown that such screenplay(s) come(s) and story development could be accepted by the executives for such IP. I understand that is a video game there and perhaps the story expectation are not the same standard than the one for a movie or a TV show, but still if you don't challenge yourself as a author and writer, you fall quickly into the linearity, and falling into that one way trap gets your show being cancelled or your books, screenplays and stories being shelled into dusty archives.

For AC3 I would say that the story could have been one of the most interesting idea made for a video game, and it was one that could have raised a lot of questions, controversies and reflections as well...You know the type of story that people refer to and still talk years after it had been made.
Unfortunately, the technical issues, the lack of direction and poor execution of this IP did not support the story in order to offer all its potential or even making the characters memorable and interesting like it could have been. Very quickly the story fell into an incommensurable shore, and it is actually sad since if it will have been done the correct ways with a better attention, it would have been in the annals of one of the best story ever written for a video game.

silvermercy
12-08-2013, 09:15 PM
...it would have been in the annals of one of the best story ever written for a video game.
Indeed. The story had one of the biggest potentials. I think it would be great for a movie. Think of The Patriot.

(Actually, all AC stories have the film potential).

DarktheMagister
12-08-2013, 09:36 PM
I liked the story this go around, it wasn't super complicated and carried an air of adventure while still tossing in the Assassin/Templar conflict. If anything I feel that a lot of potential for character development was lost because they focused SO much on open world and free range.

I liked the Templars though...but I guess that's because I liked that they went back to "guys who have long dramatic talking scenes after you stab them but before they die."

Also the Templars felt like the perfect villains for an Indiana Jones movie, an intelligent elderly aristocrat with a silent strong-arm bodyguard, a temperamental somewhat disfigured military man, and a suave smooth smuggler who exists to make ladies swoon.

ze_topazio
12-08-2013, 10:02 PM
I liked the Templars, they had a clear and reasonable objective and they all seemed genuinely well intentioned people who avoid using extreme methods.

guardian_titan
12-08-2013, 10:06 PM
Perhaps what they should've done was have optional conversations like in AC3. You only talked to Ben Franklin once as Haytham and could then never see him again, but if you found him at the general store, you got the conversation regarding women. Same with the Davenport homesteaders, Washington, and Lafayette. Why didn't Ubisoft throw in optional conversations with the various pirates at different locations in the game depending on the sequence? That would've made exploring and traveling around more than just collecting boring chests and fragments, and then we could've seen more of their personalities as well as see what they were up to at various points. Things then possibly wouldn't have felt so disjointed at times. Bonnet suddenly ending up under Blackbeard and then by himself was just too abrupt. No mention of Blackbeard actually serving under Hornigold at any point in the game, either, which could've been an optional conversation. Perhaps the novel makes more sense of things, but requiring people read a book to understand a game is rather unfair and just a money grab, especially since there's debate over what's canon and what's not in the material outside of the games. I'm aware cuts have to be made for time, but at least put in something to fill in those gaps within the game itself. Animus entries, optional conversations, something. The El Tiburon scene made flat out no sense and should've just had the line altered.

The game has it's points, but yeah, once you get into the story, it's very easy to poke holes in it. Too much was removed, left for the novel to explain, or left for fans to speculate about. The story really focuses too much on what Edward already knows and fails to explain things if the player doesn't know it. That's like throwing a kindergartner who doesn't know basic addition into the 6th grade and expect them to pick up algebra. We enter the game seeing Edward already knows all these people but no explanation is really given as to how. Rhona Dinsmore really got me. Edward's conversation with her is so out in left field I'm still trying to figure out what went on. No evidence of her before the Templar Hunt quest, and then BAM, there she is with Edward talking with her like they're old friends. Optional conversations with her prior to the Templar Hunt quest would've smoothed out Edward knowing her previously.
The game just jumps so rapidly from point A to point B to point C it forgets to breathe and explain things a bit for the slower players. It trips over itself. You only really understand the game if you already know who most of the characters are and what happened in the time frame before you play because so much related to it is just left out. The other games did a far better job setting things up and explaining who someone is. AC4 just throws so many characters at you and then doesn't develop them before they bite the dust. Funny thing is, I think AC4 has fewer characters in it than previous games yet seems to have the worst characterization. The game is over a shorter time frame than AC2 and AC3 so there's not much of an excuse as to why the other characters felt so flat. If anything, you'd think AC2 and AC3 would've suffered from terrible characterization due to time jumps, yet by the end, you know who everyone was and things flowed fairly well. Even with the perspective jump (Haytham to Connor) in AC3, characters had more personality than in AC4. Only thing that caught me offguard was Haytham's relationship with Achilles and then Achilles with Ziio. Those seemed so off in left field since there's nothing in the game really going into either relationship. Even Forsaken didn't touch on Achilles which I found a bit odd.
Bit off topic, but for ACB fans who liked Lucrezia Borgia and get the SyFy channel, on Wednesday, SyFy is airing a show called Killer Contract where a team of ghost hunters is investigating her. So might be something of interest for those that liked Lucrezia and like paranormal stuff. :p Show just premiered last week with Jack the Ripper.

Landruner
12-08-2013, 10:29 PM
Indeed. The story had one of the biggest potentials. I think it would be great for a movie. Think of The Patriot.

(Actually, all AC stories have the film potential).

I was not even thinking about the patriot for AC3 I was mainly thinking to all that potential regarding the humanity and all what human being really are, they have wasted and turned the all into the human boring reflection. Like you said it was complex and it is too. Now, perhaps AC3 should have been just a movie instead of a game, perhaps it would have been better?

silvermercy
12-08-2013, 10:36 PM
I was not even thinking about the patriot for AC3 I was mainly thinking to all that potential regarding the humanity and all what human being really are, they have wasted and turned the all into the human boring reflection. Like you said it was complex and it is too. Now, perhaps AC3 should have been just a movie instead of a game, perhaps it would have been better?
That's what I was thinking. I still loved AC3 as it is, faults and all, but it's true story potential would unlock in a 2+ hour movie. Maybe 3. Something like 'Dances with Wolves' perhaps.

pacmanate
12-08-2013, 10:45 PM
Its because AC4 was about the character rather than the "bigger picture", in this case the modern day implications.

AC4 to me seemed more about a character story than the whole modern day aspect in past games, thus why it may be judged as "week" in comparison, cause its different.

AC4 has a great character story, but this is not something I want to see again. It just allows Ubisoft to continue to churn out games that are stories about individuals rather than about the Assassin/Templar war.

SixKeys
12-08-2013, 11:14 PM
What was AC3's story even, in a nutshell? Seriously, I can summarize all of the other games' main stories in a few words, but AC3's was just all over the place.

AC1: Arrogant guy gets demoted and has to earn back his peers' respect.
AC2: Spoiled rich kid seeks vengeance against those who killed his family.
ACB: Ezio learns he can't do everything by himself and starts building a brotherhood.
ACR: Closure to Ezio and Altaïr's stories.
AC3: ?
AC4: Selfish pirate learns that money isn't everything.

Obviously if you really dig deeper, AC3 does have a story, it's just not as clear as the other ones. I mean, with all the other assassins their motives were clear from the start. With Connor, you'd think his motive was revenge after he witnesses his village burned, but then we find out it's actually this message he gets from a mystical spirit animal (Juno). Then he starts training with Achilles and his motive somehow shifts to justice for all, regardless of their background. At the same time, he's still kind of on a quest for vengeance as he keeps chasing Lee, while simultaneously working for the Patriots while claiming he's not taking sides, and then he meets his Templar dad and suddenly they're working together for complicated reasons, and...I don't know.

I'm honestly not trying to bash here, and I'm not saying the story is inherently bad. Just that I really think it was overly complicated. I can't even see it working as a movie because of the aforementioned difficulties in summing up the plot in a quick, easy way.

SixKeys
12-08-2013, 11:15 PM
Perhaps I should add that I'm obviously looking at this from a character perspective rather than purely plot. I honestly couldn't tell you what ACR's plot was, either, storywise.

Megas_Doux
12-08-2013, 11:18 PM
AC IV´s story and templars, to me, are not in the same league as AC I and AC III, but ACR´´s. However I find it better than the cliche AC II and the uber cartoonish, scooby doo driven easy peasy approach seen in ACB.

Landruner
12-08-2013, 11:20 PM
That's what I was thinking. I still loved AC3 as it is, faults and all, but it's true story potential would unlock in a 2+ hour movie. Maybe 3. Something like 'Dances with Wolves' perhaps.

Connor does not dances with wolves, he skins them:p - LOL!!! Yep you are right!

silvermercy
12-08-2013, 11:22 PM
What was I can't even see it working as a movie because of the aforementioned difficulties in summing up the plot in a quick, easy way.
Most movie plots can be summarised in a couple of lines.
Well... even seconds... lol


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OuSdU8tbcHY

All I'm saying is the same plot story could have been expanded much more if this was a film or movie. Obviously with some major alterations to fit a film or book's storrytelling format. The most similar examples I could think of were The Patriot and Dances with Wolves. With the appropriate alterations in formatting scenes and dialogue it could even expand further than the ending scene we saw.

Anyway. Too late now. lol


Connor does not dances with wolves, he skins them:p - LOL!!! Yep you are right!

haha! Indeed!! lol

SixKeys
12-08-2013, 11:25 PM
So how would you summarize AC3's story in less than 10 words, Silver?

Megas_Doux
12-08-2013, 11:28 PM
AC III´s story in a few words:

The guy is screwed.......

DarktheMagister
12-08-2013, 11:29 PM
Perhaps I should add that I'm obviously looking at this from a character perspective rather than purely plot. I honestly couldn't tell you what ACR's plot was, either, storywise.

While seeking answers to the mysterious greater purpose of his life in a foreign land Ezio becomes embroiled in a conflict that threatens to topple the local brotherhood.

SixKeys
12-08-2013, 11:34 PM
While seeking answers to the mysterious greater purpose of his life in a foreign land Ezio becomes embroiled in a conflict that threatens to topple the local brotherhood.

Did it? I don't recall there being any sense of threat to the brotherhood. It could be just me though. The whole thing seemed to be more about politics than anything else, even more than AC2.

silvermercy
12-08-2013, 11:34 PM
So how would you summarize AC3's story in less than 10 words, Silver?
hmm... Something like: "In the middle of the American Revolutionary War, a half-Mohawk Assassin fights the Templars' attempts to gain control of the colonies. But he is also fighting his own battle".
Ok that's more than 10 words, I cheated.

Shahkulu101
12-08-2013, 11:36 PM
Rising from the embers of revolution, one man seeks freedom and justice for all.

What about 13 sixkeys?

SixKeys
12-08-2013, 11:37 PM
hmm... Something like: "In the middle of the American Revolutionary War, a half-Mohawk Assassin fights the Templars' attempts to gain control of the colonies. But he is also fighting his own battle".
Ok that's more than 10 words, I cheated.

Yeah, exactly. The whole reason I placed the limit was because AC3's problem, IMO, is that it's too complicated compared to the other games.

Edit: Shahkulu, that's better. But the "freedom and justice for all" applies to all the assassins too (except Edward, and Ezio in AC2), so it doesn't really set AC3 apart. I'm trying to think about what themes really define it.

Shahkulu101
12-08-2013, 11:43 PM
Yeah, exactly. The whole reason I placed the limit was because AC3's problem, IMO, is that it's too complicated compared to the other games.

Edit: Shahkulu, that's better. But the "freedom and justice for all" applies to all the assassins too (except Edward, and Ezio in AC2), so it doesn't really set AC3 apart. I'm trying to think about what themes really define it.

loss, persistence despite loss, compromise, (naive yet endearing) idealism.

DarktheMagister
12-08-2013, 11:44 PM
The story of AC3:

A young native boy looses his mother at an impressionable age and after receiving a prophetic vision starts out on a journey that embroils him in both the revolution and an ancient battle between secret societies that has gone on for ages.

SixKeys
12-08-2013, 11:45 PM
Like, if I'm thinking about each of the games in terms of one single, overriding theme, I would categorize them like this:

AC1 = Respect/Humility
AC2 = Revenge
ACB = Brotherhood
ACR = Closure
AC3 = ?
AC4 = Also ?

AC3's theme could be "justice" but it's hard to define it like that when the main character keeps flip-flopping between personal revenge and siding with one party during a civil war.

AC4 is also kind of difficult to define in terms of a clear theme. It's like it wants to be about Freedom vs. Responsibility, what with the piracy setting and all, but Edward really doesn't start learning anything about until the last 2 or 3 sequences.

DarktheMagister
12-08-2013, 11:46 PM
Did it? I don't recall there being any sense of threat to the brotherhood. It could be just me though. The whole thing seemed to be more about politics than anything else, even more than AC2.

You could be right... I haven't played ACR in a while.

Perhaps: While seeking answers to the mysterious greater purpose of his life in a foreign land Ezio becomes embroiled in a conflict that threatens to topple the current regime.

SixKeys
12-08-2013, 11:48 PM
People, I said less than 10 words for a reason. I can summarize AC3's story in a long paragraph too, if I wanted to, but I've heard it said that if you want to sell a movie/book/whatever successfully, you have to be able to summarize its main point in just a few words. The other AC games have (mostly) stories that are very much character-driven and easily defined for non-fans. Ezio's story is about revenge. Altaïr's is about respect and humility. What is Connor's story about, in just a few words?

DarktheMagister
12-08-2013, 11:48 PM
Like, if I'm thinking about each of the games in terms of one single, overriding theme, I would categorize them like this:

AC1 = Respect/Humility
AC2 = Revenge
ACB = Brotherhood
ACR = Closure
AC3 = ?
AC4 = Also ?

AC3's theme could be "justice" but it's hard to define it like that when the main character keeps flip-flopping between personal revenge and siding with one party during a civil war.

AC4 is also kind of difficult to define in terms of a clear theme. It's like it wants to be about Freedom vs. Responsibility, what with the piracy setting and all, but Edward really doesn't start learning anything about until the last 2 or 3 sequences.

Maybe:

AC1 = Respect/Humility
AC2 = Revenge
ACB = Brotherhood
ACR = Closure
AC3 = Justice
AC4 = Loss/Growth

LoyalACFan
12-08-2013, 11:49 PM
IMO the story did its job, and for once we actually got proper closure for the protagonist. The legendary pirates were underdeveloped, but I'd rather have it that way than making them too much of a focal point. AC3 suffered from that. Washington and historical events took up entirely too much of the story. I'm glad they focused mostly on Edward.

Regarding El Tiburon, I agree it was odd that Edward acted like he was a huge part of his life, but he did get bested by him in Sequence 2, and that was the only fight he ever lost. I just assumed he was still bitter about that incident. And it was a nice little piece of character development; when El Tiburon beat Edward after discovering he wasn't Duncan, Edward acted all immature and snarky, but when he finally killed El Tiburon, he was respectful. Reminded me of Ezio killing Jacopo, and how much he changed since killing Vieri.

adventurewomen
12-08-2013, 11:52 PM
That's what I was thinking. I still loved AC3 as it is, faults and all, but it's true story potential would unlock in a 2+ hour movie. Maybe 3. Something like 'Dances with Wolves' perhaps.
Agreed!


Connor does not dances with wolves, he skins them:p - LOL!!! Yep you are right!
Only during ToKW, for his wolf hood, when Ratonhnhaké:ton was a skin-walker then.


Most movie plots can be summarised in a couple of lines.
Well... even seconds... lol

All I'm saying is the same plot story could have been expanded much more if this was a film or movie. Obviously with some major alterations to fit a film or book's storrytelling format. The most similar examples I could think of were The Patriot and Dances with Wolves. With the appropriate alterations in formatting scenes and dialogue it could even expand further than the ending scene we saw.

Anyway. Too late now. lol
Agreed!


Yeah, exactly. The whole reason I placed the limit was because AC3's problem, IMO, is that it's too complicated compared to the other games.
AC3 has so much potential to be expanded upon especially Connor's story so much potential that should be explored in the future.

killzab
12-08-2013, 11:52 PM
IMO the story did its job, and for once we actually got proper closure for the protagonist. The legendary pirates were underdeveloped, but I'd rather have it that way than making them too much of a focal point. AC3 suffered from that. Washington and historical events took up entirely too much of the story. I'm glad they focused mostly on Edward.

Regarding El Tiburon, I agree it was odd that Edward acted like he was a huge part of his life, but he did get bested by him in Sequence 2, and that was the only fight he ever lost. I just assumed he was still bitter about that incident. And it was a nice little piece of character development; when El Tiburon beat Edward after discovering he wasn't Duncan, Edward acted all immature and snarky, but when he finally killed El Tiburon, he was respectful. Reminded me of Ezio killing Jacopo, and how much he changed since killing Vieri.


Yeah right, except Vieri was properly developped and you could see the rivalry between him and Ezio.

SixKeys
12-08-2013, 11:53 PM
Maybe:

AC1 = Respect/Humility
AC2 = Revenge
ACB = Brotherhood
ACR = Closure
AC3 = Justice
AC4 = Loss.

Actually, now that you mentioned "Loss", I think I might go with that for AC3's characterizing theme. AC3 is basically all about counting the ways in which Connor gets screwed over. He loses his mother, his best friend, his mentor/father figure, his real father, and ultimately his entire people.

Still not sure what AC4's defining theme would be, though.

Shahkulu101
12-08-2013, 11:55 PM
IMO the story did its job, and for once we actually got proper closure for the protagonist. The legendary pirates were underdeveloped, but I'd rather have it that way than making them too much of a focal point. AC3 suffered from that. Washington and historical events took up entirely too much of the story. I'm glad they focused mostly on Edward.

Regarding El Tiburon, I agree it was odd that Edward acted like he was a huge part of his life, but he did get bested by him in Sequence 2, and that was the only fight he ever lost. I just assumed he was still bitter about that incident. And it was a nice little piece of character development; when El Tiburon beat Edward after discovering he wasn't Duncan, Edward acted all immature and snarky, but when he finally killed El Tiburon, he was respectful. Reminded me of Ezio killing Jacopo, and how much he changed since killing Vieri.

You were supposed to have a bossfight with El Tiburon which you couldn't win. It was cut because it messed up the gameplay - it would have added a little context to Edwards words after his death. It's just one little punch in the final game, I hardly remembered it.

SixKeys
12-08-2013, 11:56 PM
Regarding El Tiburon, I agree it was odd that Edward acted like he was a huge part of his life, but he did get bested by him in Sequence 2, and that was the only fight he ever lost. I just assumed he was still bitter about that incident. And it was a nice little piece of character development; when El Tiburon beat Edward after discovering he wasn't Duncan, Edward acted all immature and snarky, but when he finally killed El Tiburon, he was respectful. Reminded me of Ezio killing Jacopo, and how much he changed since killing Vieri.

I honestly didn't even remember they fought earlier in the game. Guess I'll have to play through the story again. I just remember thinking the whole time that El Tiburon's design was so cool that I really wanted to see him developed and have an epic fight with Edward. Then when it happened it was just....weird.

SixKeys
12-08-2013, 11:57 PM
You were supposed to have a bossfight with El Tiburon which you couldn't win. It was cut because it messed up the gameplay - it would have added a little context to Edwards words after his death. It's just one little punch in the final game, I hardly remembered it.

Where did you hear/read this?

Shahkulu101
12-08-2013, 11:57 PM
actually, now that you mentioned "loss", i think i might go with that for ac3's characterizing theme. Ac3 is basically all about counting the ways in which connor gets screwed over. He loses his mother, his best friend, his mentor/father figure, his real father, and ultimately his entire people.

Still not sure what ac4's defining theme would be, though.

booty

silvermercy
12-08-2013, 11:57 PM
The AC3 theme for me would be "Loss" and "Struggle"

Or this LOL: http://meltedcoffeecup.tumblr.com/post/55623915417/connor-is-basically-bad-luck-brian

Yes, AC4 would be booty. I agree. XD haha

Shahkulu101
12-08-2013, 11:58 PM
Where did you hear/read this?

Darby said so on twitter.

LoyalACFan
12-09-2013, 12:00 AM
You were supposed to have a bossfight with El Tiburon which you couldn't win. It was cut because it messed up the gameplay - it would have added a little context to Edwards words after his death. It's just one little punch in the final game, I hardly remembered it.

Yeah, I know, and I'm not arguing that it was perfectly executed, but I at least understood where he was coming from in the final death speech. It wasn't a huge issue for me. In terms of cut content, it was a pretty minor offense compared to the huge chunks they cut out of AC3.

killzab
12-09-2013, 12:03 AM
Yeah, I know, and I'm not arguing that it was perfectly executed, but I at least understood where he was coming from in the final death speech. It wasn't a huge issue for me. In terms of cut content, it was a pretty minor offense compared to the huge chunks they cut out of AC3.

Except Darby said a lot was cut in regards to Mary Read, Anne Bonny and Calico Jack.

DarktheMagister
12-09-2013, 12:05 AM
Actually, now that you mentioned "Loss", I think I might go with that for AC3's characterizing theme. AC3 is basically all about counting the ways in which Connor gets screwed over. He loses his mother, his best friend, his mentor/father figure, his real father, and ultimately his entire people.

Still not sure what AC4's defining theme would be, though.

Growth?

BoBwUzHeRe1138
12-09-2013, 12:06 AM
Without reading any other posts out of fear of spoilers/// I will say, I don't think people disliked the Ezio sequels because they felt like spin-offs but because they didn't really add anything to the formula, were smaller than AC2 with shorter plots, etc. Most of the changes that occurred were allowing us to command Assassins and then smaller things dealing with combat as well as needless things such as Den Defense. That said... I enjoyed the Ezio sequels and felt they were solid games. I'm not sure if they were quite 60 dollar games but at the time, I got them as gifts so that part didn't affect me personally. However, I agree with AC4, at least from an outside perspective, seems to be the most spin-off like of the series. First of all, we have the ACTUAL spin off handheld games... then we have Brotherhood which I don't really consider a spin-off so much as an epilogue and finale to AC2's plot (same enemies, it picks up immediately where AC2 ended, etc.). Revelations on the other hand DOES feel a bit more like a spin off because well, the subtitle implies it -- as a general rule, the "main" games should be numbered while spin offs should have subtitles. But it didn't feel quite like a direct continuation of AC2/ACB but was still good as it helped flesh out and tie up Altair and Ezio's stories. AC4 however has, from the get go, felt like nothing more than a "Brotherhood/Revelations" game that was promoted to being the fourth numbered game of the series.

Seriously. The subtitle seems almost, to me at least, like they were originally going to make the game "Assassin's Creed: Black Flag" in a similar vein to "Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood." They were going to utilize another Kenway, Edward, father of Haytham as a way to connect it to AC3 in a way that Brotherhood and Revelations were connected to Ezio by, well, having Ezio. But somewhere during development, execs at Ubisoft decided they wanted the 4th numbered entry of the franchise to be released in time for the launch of next-gen. So, they quickly threw in the IV but kept the subtitle anyway because, yknow, sure. I understand that the world is large, much larger with more to do than any previous subtitled entry but it still seems more like a spin off because of these reasons. could be wrong, deeeaaaad wrong but it seems like it. Besides, the world might have been smaller at the start before they decided to make it the next full sequel -- Havana strikes me as being underdeveloped or utilized, at least according to most... the plot doesn't do much with it for example. Perhaps, originally, the spin off "Black Flag" would have just been some islands, Kingston, etc. but once it became "IV: Black Flag," they decided to throw in Havana to appease fans. Seriously...this isn't the first time an AC game has come out a year after a previous one...nope that's been happening since 2009. However... a numbered sequel has always been given much more time to be made in between (and yes, I know it was being worked on during III but still).

From what I gather about the plot is that it more or less could have just been a pirate game and that the Assassin v. Templar and requisite First Civilization stuff felt tacked on just to make it under the AC brand. It's apparently a good game but arguably a not-so-Assassiny game. I say arguably because I've seen many a debate about whether it's "true" to AC or not.

I don't know what to think yet, I'm waiting til I get my hands on a next gen console (which'll be awhile from now" before getting it.

LoyalACFan
12-09-2013, 12:08 AM
Except Darby said a lot was cut in regards to Mary Read, Anne Bonny and Calico Jack.

Out of the three, Anne Bonny is the only one I felt was underdeveloped. Mary got plenty of screen time, enough that I was genuinely sad when she died, and Calico Jack served his purpose as a random drunk troublemaker. I see him as basically the Duccio figure of AC4; he's there for a laugh, but he's not a deep enough character to justify being a huge part of the game.

DarktheMagister
12-09-2013, 12:08 AM
It felt like AC to me.

adventurewomen
12-09-2013, 12:11 AM
The AC3 theme for me would be "Loss" and "Struggle"

Or this LOL: http://meltedcoffeecup.tumblr.com/post/55623915417/connor-is-basically-bad-luck-brian
Pretty much that Tumblr link! My poor baby Ratonhnhaké:ton :'(

killzab
12-09-2013, 12:20 AM
Out of the three, Anne Bonny is the only one I felt was underdeveloped. Mary got plenty of screen time, enough that I was genuinely sad when she died, and Calico Jack served his purpose as a random drunk troublemaker. I see him as basically the Duccio figure of AC4; he's there for a laugh, but he's not a deep enough character to justify being a huge part of the game.

They didn't develop her time as a pirate, as the famous Mary Read you know ?

Their time pirating all three together is barely mentioned in the game.

Shahkulu101
12-09-2013, 12:24 AM
They didn't develop her time as a pirate, as the famous Mary Read you know ?

Their time pirating all three together is barely mentioned in the game.

They cut a whole sequence with Mary, Jack and Anne. Another twitter revelation.

Shahkulu101
12-09-2013, 12:25 AM
Pretty much that Tumblr link! My poor baby Ratonhnhaké:ton :'(

....

All units please escort the mentally disturbed subject away from the building.

SixKeys
12-09-2013, 12:27 AM
Out of the three, Anne Bonny is the only one I felt was underdeveloped. Mary got plenty of screen time, enough that I was genuinely sad when she died, and Calico Jack served his purpose as a random drunk troublemaker. I see him as basically the Duccio figure of AC4; he's there for a laugh, but he's not a deep enough character to justify being a huge part of the game.

I thought Mary was the only of the three to have proper development. Anne and Jack were both pretty boring. Maybe Jack was meant to be a bit player, but the trailers misleadingly portrayed his role as bigger than it was meant to be.

SixKeys
12-09-2013, 12:29 AM
They cut a whole sequence with Mary, Jack and Anne. Another twitter revelation.

Ugh, why do cuts always have to happen at the expense of character development? I'd rather they'd have spent more time on the story and maybe give us a few less underwater segments or other fluff.

adventurewomen
12-09-2013, 12:30 AM
....

All units please escort the mentally disturbed subject away from the building.
Haha! Absertgo can't take me away!

This is just proof that their Animus' at Absergo are wired wrongly..

:p

Shahkulu101
12-09-2013, 12:34 AM
Ugh, why do cuts always have to happen at the expense of character development? I'd rather they'd have spent more time on the story and maybe give us a few less underwater segments or other fluff.

Yeah, Darby's just as disappointed as we are - things are always cut by the higher ups or whatever. it does always seem to be things that are needed as well - very strange.

adventurewomen
12-09-2013, 12:40 AM
Ugh, why do cuts always have to happen at the expense of character development? I'd rather they'd have spent more time on the story and maybe give us a few less underwater segments or other fluff.
If only AC wasn't an annual release title, then they would all have more time to adequately work of character development and a better story arc for all games.

DarktheMagister
12-09-2013, 12:44 AM
If only AC wasn't an annual release title, then they would all have more time to adequately work of character development and a better story arc for all games.

You know each game is in individual development by a specific Ubi team for like 2 or 3 years right?

adventurewomen
12-09-2013, 12:47 AM
You know each game is in individual development by a specific Ubi team for like 2 or 3 years right?
Yes I am aware of that. It seems like story elements aren't finalized until well into the production stage so half-way to final stages of the development of AC.

DarktheMagister
12-09-2013, 12:51 AM
Yes I am aware of that. It seems like story elements aren't finalized until well into the production stage so half-way to final stages of the development of AC.

Probably stuff corporate does.

ACfan443
12-09-2013, 01:41 AM
You know each game is in individual development by a specific Ubi team for like 2 or 3 years right?

Yeah but with annual releases comes fixed release dates which allow no room for delays. It's obligatory for the game to be shipped at a particular time no matter what state it's in in order to maintain a consistent one game per annum, meeting these strict deadlines is often at the expense of quality and coherence of the narrative (AC3 even with its three years of development was evident of this). Delays could have allowed these things to be developed properly and thus satisfactory for inclusion in the final product.

flamesium
12-09-2013, 01:50 AM
Black Flag has some great characters, but yeah, the story was pretty weak. It suffered from having too many different threads (Caroline, Nassau, Observatory, the present day story) but none of them individually were fleshed out into something satisfying.

The Nassau thread basically had no beginning and went nowhere. The Caroline thread was fine but only ever intended as bookends to frame Edward's arc. The Observatory / Sage / Present Day story was just absurd even by AC standards.

Landruner
12-09-2013, 02:04 AM
Yeah but with annual releases comes fixed release dates which allow no room for delays. It's obligatory for the game to be shipped at a particular time no matter what state it's in in order to maintain a consistent one game per annum, meeting these strict deadlines is often at the expense of quality and coherence of the narrative (AC3 even with its three years of development was evident of this). Delays could have allowed these things to be developed properly and thus satisfactory for inclusion in the final product.

you are right with the date being fixed which make the all development very tied - Also someone told me that technically they in fact have just 13 to 16 months for a title before the goes to factory for distribution. Since I know that my source is reliable I am sure that is true and it seems that it is even worse that we previously though.

DarktheMagister
12-09-2013, 02:18 AM
Black Flag has some great characters, but yeah, the story was pretty weak. It suffered from having too many different threads (Caroline, Nassau, Observatory, the present day story) but none of them individually were fleshed out into something satisfying.

The Nassau thread basically had no beginning and went nowhere. The Caroline thread was fine but only ever intended as bookends to frame Edward's arc. The Observatory / Sage / Present Day story was just absurd even by AC standards.

nassau wasnt a thread...it was just historical backdrop.

flamesium
12-09-2013, 02:57 AM
nassau wasnt a thread...it was just historical backdrop.

No, it was a story thread about you and Thatch and that other dude trying (but not very hard) to build a republic. There are several story missions devoted to it (capturing the Man of War for harbour defence, which is then never mentioned again, ~3 missions trying to find medicine, which is then never mentioned again), but Edward's only motivation for going along with any of this seems to be that he thinks Thatch is a pretty cool guy or something. Edward doesn't personally seem interested in the fate of Nassau at any point.

SixKeys
12-09-2013, 04:36 AM
No, it was a story thread about you and Thatch and that other dude trying (but not very hard) to build a republic. There are several story missions devoted to it (capturing the Man of War for harbour defence, which is then never mentioned again, ~3 missions trying to find medicine, which is then never mentioned again), but Edward's only motivation for going along with any of this seems to be that he thinks Thatch is a pretty cool guy or something. Edward doesn't personally seem interested in the fate of Nassau at any point.

^^ This. So hard. The whole pirate republic and its inhabitants were the biggest disappointment about the story. I loved the detail that when Nassau was in dire need of medicine, there were lots of sick and dying and weeping NPCs all over the place, even at your hideout. (If you go there during the plague, the brothel which is normally filled with happy sailors and dancing girls is empty and mournful, with doctors working on patients lying on a stretcher.) But as soon as the sequence is over, the plague is never mentioned again, everything returns to normal and Nassau becomes pretty redundant.

DarktheMagister
12-09-2013, 05:58 AM
No, it was a story thread about you and Thatch and that other dude trying (but not very hard) to build a republic. There are several story missions devoted to it (capturing the Man of War for harbour defence, which is then never mentioned again, ~3 missions trying to find medicine, which is then never mentioned again), but Edward's only motivation for going along with any of this seems to be that he thinks Thatch is a pretty cool guy or something. Edward doesn't personally seem interested in the fate of Nassau at any point.

Yeah but what I mean is it wasn't really "the story" it was just more history of the time. Everything that happened in those cutscenes happened...the warship, the plague, the treaty, the explosive escape... like things were never going to get better for Nassau because of what history dictates. So it was less of a plot point and more of you being led through these establishing events.

STDlyMcStudpants
12-09-2013, 05:59 AM
If I'm being 100% honest NONE of the Assassin's Creed games had a good story besides the modern day.
What drew me to the series is its religious ties.
How it tried to tell you religion rules the world and there was always a mystery about origins - this is what the modern day brought to us.
It was one giant conspiracy puzzle to figure out.
In AC IV its about producing product
The Assassin's Creed Story was the present day and its missing here.
Pound for pound AC3 had the best story - horrible character development but best non present day story none the less.
I anticipate releases for the modern day but I buy them to breathe history's air not live its story.
(I'm probably minority here or I'm just one of the few that took a step back and see what the true reason they enjoy the game is)

pacmanate
12-09-2013, 08:29 AM
Connur.
Such potential.
Many History.
Wow.

Farlander1991
12-09-2013, 08:34 AM
AC4 doesn't have Templars as sympathetic as AC3's.
AC4's philosophy is not as deep as AC1's.
And AC4's scope is not as huge as AC2's.

But at the same time, I feel this is the best crafted story yet. However, now that I'm actually playing the game, with one caveat: its much more suited to a linear game and some things (like the incredibly tight pacing) can be lost when put into an open world game.

Before the PC release, I couldn't resist and watched a part of the console walkthrough. But I got so into the story that I just watched the whole damn thing.

When speaking of it as a linear story, I don't feel as any of the characters is under-utilized or under-characterized, or under-developed for the purposes that they were going for. Everybody got pretty much exactly the amount of time they needed. I don't feel as there's a gump factor element is present - due to the story being much more character driven, the interaction with historical characters and presence in historical events feels much more natural. More than that, I feel that since all the pirates have sailed at pretty much approximately the same time, I feel that they have successfully avoided the trapping of trying to put everything in the story (something AC3 did).

The Templars are a mix between ACR and AC1 in terms of their philosophy, goals, and means to do so, but Hornigold (and to extent Burgess and Cockram too) adds the very personal AC3 Templar element that works really well in the context of the story. Basically, I've already listed my thoughts on the story here (http://forums.ubi.com/showthread.php/804359-What-I-think-of-AC4-story-(a-k-a-I-lost-self-constraint)-Non-specific-Spoilers) after I watched the walkthrough, so I'll just link to it and won't repeat myself.

That being said. Since AC4 is not a linear game but an open-world one, there are two things that happen, mainly:
a) Since you can sail pretty much anywhere you want anytime you want, the pacing may get broken and some details that work in a linear story may get lost or forgotten
b) The character interaction is much more spread out (again, since you can sail anywhere you want anytime you want) and because of that it feels that there's not enough of it.

I think that two things could've helped that:
1. Dialogs outside of story mode, like in AC3, where you could go back to the village and talk to your people, or talk to your assassins in taverns, or stuff like that. Just go and have one extra conversation with Thatch if you want, or try to endure some of Jack's antics.
2. Side-missions with pirate characters. Like, two or three per character, something along the lines of Templar Hunt.

shobhit7777777
12-09-2013, 08:57 AM
Story had no momentum and Edward's metamorphosis was rushed.

They tried to intertwine the AvT premise with the Pirate narrative....it was frankly, a cluster****.

Edward was an OK character. Initially likeable, but as the story went on....his motivations just seemed paper thin. Like I said, it lacked momentum. I have to say that Edward was definitely one of the most aimless characters I've ever played as. Which kinda sorta worked for the gameplay....but didn't do the narrative any favours.

I really really really hope that the next game focuses on a more personal story and puts the whole piece-of-eden-templar-treasure plot point in the backseat. 2-3 SOLID cast of characters and done. Stop shoving in so many characters...I forgot most of them.

One of the reasons I enjoyed ACII was because it's narrative was so personal...and intertwined the Assassin v Templar storyline well. When the franchise focuses on the people in the story I enjoy it - Haytham and Connor, Connor and Achilles, Ezio's journey, Altair's penance.

The moment it becomes a hunt for some artefact or you chuck in too many characters....I quickly lose interest and the narrative loses steam.

I'd like something like this:

You play as an Assassin, tasked with hunting down a turncoat - your best friend since childhood and an ex-Assassin. Apparently he has sided with the Templars. Your search should require the dismantling of the Templar network in order to prevent the spreading of the secrets that your friend may have disclosed. Thats it.
In the end it turns out that your BFF was part of neither order.....and calls into question the principles and ideals of BOTH groups Assassin's and Templars...leaving the player with some food for thought.

No artefacts, a personal tale focusing on two people....with 9 targets in between.

Sushiglutton
12-09-2013, 02:51 PM
I have read some reviews and watched a couple of videos and I think the opinions on the story are mixed. However there is a consensus that the combat doesn't cut it.

luckyto
12-09-2013, 04:08 PM
The secondary characters could be improved, but I felt they are better than given credit for. How many ACII characters are truly memorable? Da Vinci. Rodrigo. Arguably, the characters in Black Flag have just as much screen time as the ones in AC2 --- characters like Calico Jack's idiocy, Charles Vane and his insanity from desertion, Blackbeard's mentoring, or even Anne Bonney's heartfelt discussion after being rescued are all intriguing. The villains like the Governor and James Woodes and the Sage are all fantastic villains as well.

Did I feel Adewale was a bit under-utilized? Yes. Would I have like a little more Blackbeard and Hornigold? Yes. A little more Tiburon? Yes. These are some weak spots. But compared to past AC's -- secondary characters were well done, and even compared to any story, they had personality. They were memorable. Brotherhood had some of the weakest villains ever, and every character in it stood on the shoulders of ACII. Tomb Raider's secondary characters, by contrast, were horrendous cliches (and I love that game.) While this is no Uncharted - which has some of the best secondary characters of any video game ever --- it is, by no means, poor.

I personally think the criticisms against the story are kind of bogus. I like to think I'm pretty critical of story --- and I've played all of the Naughty Dog games and many of the titles which are praised as "excellent stories." ACIV had a fantastic story and some very deep and mature themes. Themes about knowing the difference between what we want and what we need --- about maturing. Not the kind of growing up that happens from 10-18, but the kind of growing up that happens from 25-35. It had excellent villains, some great plot twists and a few WTH moments. The only real negatives that I can find is some poor pacing about the beginning of the Second Act (Sequence 3-5) and that Blackbeard and Adewale needed a little more screen time or a sympathetic hook. Either way, the story was as good as Tomb Raider's and definitely on par with Uncharted or Last of Us.


------------------

This aimlessness you guys speak of --- he's a pirate. His motivation is paper-thin on the surface (money), but we all know he really wants something "more." Two, the aimlessness serves the open-ended nature of the world. If you try free-roaming in ACIII or ACR for extended periods, there is a definite disconnect. I feel like the story in Black Flag serves that exploration well.

The key to "Edward" is that he wants a greater life. His paper-thin motivation, the motivation of a young naive man, is money and wealth. His journey is discovering that wealth isn't the same as purpose, it isn't the same as respect, or the same as happiness. It's the journey of understanding who you are from a young adult to an adult. It's the story of finding purpose. It is a slow process for Edward --- but one that he realizes within the context of one game. A true character arc. It's deep. It's not stated outright by the script, it's sublime but absolute --- and that's what makes it powerful.

Altair is the ONLY other Assassin in the series with an arc that deep in one game. It takes Ezio three games. And Connor - well - he has no arc because he was good and selfless from the start. Edward goes from totally naive narcissist to fully understanding the Creed and living selflessly. I don't really understand the criticism except to think it's from people who haven't experienced that stage of their life yet.

AssassinHMS
12-09-2013, 04:23 PM
If I'm being 100% honest NONE of the Assassin's Creed games had a good story besides the modern day.

Not even AC1? I mean, AC1’s story did so many things right:
- It portrayed the Assassin/Templar conflict quite well;
- It presented both sides of the same coin while showing that not everything is what it seems;
- It was deep, interesting, mysterious and realistic;
- It didn’t focus solely on the protagonist’s life (as the others mostly do, just like every other action movie out there). While it portrayed Altair’s evolution (both as an assassin and as an individual) it always focused on the big picture and it never destroyed the sense of mystery and novelty around the Assassin.

In my opinion, AC1’s story is a role model for any AC game. While others kept slapping the Assassin’s face on the screen, AC1 kept Altair’s face under the hood, it never allowed that sense of familiarity, it always kept an invisible wall between the protagonist and the spectator and it displayed the whole picture.

AssassinHMS
12-09-2013, 05:01 PM
I really really really hope that the next game focuses on a more personal story and puts the whole piece-of-eden-templar-treasure plot point in the backseat. 2-3 SOLID cast of characters and done. Stop shoving in so many characters...I forgot most of them.

One of the reasons I enjoyed ACII was because it's narrative was so personal...and intertwined the Assassin v Templar storyline well. When the franchise focuses on the people in the story I enjoy it - Haytham and Connor, Connor and Achilles, Ezio's journey, Altair's penance.

The moment it becomes a hunt for some artefact or you chuck in too many characters....I quickly lose interest and the narrative loses steam.

I'd like something like this:

You play as an Assassin, tasked with hunting down a turncoat - your best friend since childhood and an ex-Assassin. Apparently he has sided with the Templars. Your search should require the dismantling of the Templar network in order to prevent the spreading of the secrets that your friend may have disclosed. Thats it.
In the end it turns out that your BFF was part of neither order.....and calls into question the principles and ideals of BOTH groups Assassin's and Templars...leaving the player with some food for thought.

No artefacts, a personal tale focusing on two people....with 9 targets in between.

I’d actually like that. But only as long as the story focuses more on the Assassin part than on the personal level. I would also like if the story didn’t always emphasize the feelings (given they were friends once) but instead, had a sense of progression where the characters appear to be increasingly distant and “colder” (sort of like Altair). In other words, the emotions would be portrayed in a more subtle way such as resulting in repercussions on their roles as Assassins or Templars. Anyway, the story must never lose focus of the bigger picture (Assassins and Templars instead of this guy and that guy) and avoid a sense of familiarity in order to maintain the mystery and novelty around the protagonist(s).

shobhit7777777
12-09-2013, 05:51 PM
I’d actually like that. But only as long as the story focuses more on the Assassin part than on the personal level. I would also like if the story didn’t always emphasize the feelings (given they were friends once) but instead, had a sense of progression where the characters appear to be increasingly distant and “colder” (sort of like Altair). In other words, the emotions would be portrayed in a more subtle way such as resulting in repercussions on their roles as Assassins or Templars. Anyway, the story must never lose focus of the bigger picture (Assassins and Templars instead of this guy and that guy) and avoid a sense of familiarity in order to maintain the mystery and novelty around the protagonist(s).

Yeah...No

After 6 games of AvT I'm tired of it. Its not interesting anymore. The person IS the assassin. The story is made up of characters...not a kooky plot between warring sects....not anymore anyway.

AssassinHMS
12-09-2013, 06:14 PM
Yeah...No

After 6 games of AvT I'm tired of it. Its not interesting anymore. The person IS the assassin. The story is made up of characters...not a kooky plot between warring sects....not anymore anyway.

How can you explore the Assassin's Creed if you don't put it against the Templars' ideology? I'm not saying it is a simple Assassin VS Templars or a good VS bad cliché., but if the game doesn't explore both ideologies and focus on the big picture, then will this melodrama feel like AC?
After 5 games of self-centered stories I’d like to see AC back to a more interesting focus (such as the development of an entire society or mindset), about something bigger than a single person's feelings. Actually, that is one of the reasons why I like Altair, because there is none of this sense of familiarity, because he feels mysterious and distant. However, if the game explores the character in every angle, like in a soap opera, you will feel like you know him/her and the interest will drop severely.

Conspiracies and ideologies are what drives AC, not characters.

DarktheMagister
12-09-2013, 06:30 PM
5 things are always sure about any assassins creed story.

1. There WILL be a Assassin's vs Templars plot.
2. It WILL involve Abstergo Inc. and the Animus machine.
3. It will ALWAYS involve a historical setting.
4. There WILL be a Piece of Eden or Those Who Came Before site involved.
5. You will be able to judge how close you are to the end of the story by counting how many people you have met that are still breathing.

Expecting anything else is folly.

SixKeys
12-09-2013, 06:38 PM
Either way, the story was as good as Tomb Raider's and definitely on par with Uncharted or Last of Us.

Tomb Raider's story was s***.

Uncharted - yes, I can see that. A simplistic Indiana Jones ripoff, in a good way.

On par with The Last of Us? Lol no.


Did I feel Adewale was a bit under-utilized? Yes. Would I have like a little more Blackbeard and Hornigold? Yes. A little more Tiburon? Yes. These are some weak spots. But compared to past AC's -- secondary characters were well done, and even compared to any story, they had personality. They were memorable.

Here's where we disagree. I didn't feel any of AC4's secondary characters were very memorable apart from Anne Read and Charles Vane. All the others you named had potential, but were ultimately wasted. I really wanted Edward and Adewale to develop a close relationship and find out more about Ade, but it almost seems like they purposefully held back on developing his character because they knew they wanted to make a DLC out of him. In which case the main story suffered because Ubisoft wanted to make more money with side content - again. (Just like ACR and The Lost Archive.)

What you see as "some weak spots" I see as major drawbacks. Character interaction can make or break a story. The reason AC2 is still so loved by many is because the characters and their interactions are memorable. I wanted that type of emotion and connection from AC4's characters. I really wanted to like Blackbeard, but he only ever talked to Edward like 3 times. If any relationship should have been developed more in this game, I think it should have been Blackbeard and Edward's. It seems like Thatch was an inspiration for Edward and he wanted to believe in Nassau because of him. Like Thatch was an idealist whose early ideas inspired something in Edward. That's why he was so disappointed when Thatch decided to retire and give up on Nassau. Edward's disappointment in pirates ultimately came from both seeing Thatch give up on something they both believed in and from the backstabbing and general cynicism that arose in the rest of the group. Thatch's death should have been the main catalyst for Edward's eventual change of heart, similar to how Uncle Mario's death was the catalyst for Ezio in ACB. As it was handled in the game, though, it came off as over-dramatized because we weren't given enough time to develop a connection to Thatch.


I don't really understand the criticism except to think it's from people who haven't experienced that stage of their life yet.

Opinions are one thing, but please don't act like the people who don't share your views are just so much less mature and enlightened than you. :rolleyes:

STDlyMcStudpants
12-09-2013, 06:39 PM
Not even AC1? I mean, AC1’s story did so many things right:
- It portrayed the Assassin/Templar conflict quite well;
- It presented both sides of the same coin while showing that not everything is what it seems;
- It was deep, interesting, mysterious and realistic;
- It didn’t focus solely on the protagonist’s life (as the others mostly do, just like every other action movie out there). While it portrayed Altair’s evolution (both as an assassin and as an individual) it always focused on the big picture and it never destroyed the sense of mystery and novelty around the Assassin.

In my opinion, AC1’s story is a role model for any AC game. While others kept slapping the Assassin’s face on the screen, AC1 kept Altair’s face under the hood, it never allowed that sense of familiarity, it always kept an invisible wall between the protagonist and the spectator and it displayed the whole picture.

TBH no. The story didnt interest me at all.
What kept me going were
1. the assassination sequences. They were all so different. I enjoyed listening to our targets speak and listen to what they had to say when i killed them.
But neither Altair nor the Assassins Order were interesting enough for me to finish the game. It was all the Assassination mission Design and words of wisdom.
and 2. I wanted to know Desmonds Story. Assassins Creed Revelations Was my first. Ac1 was 2nd and AC3 was my 3rd....
I ONLY went back and played ACB and AC2 because I wanted to know what happened in between with DESMOND I didnt care about Ezios story. I wanted to know Desmonds story,

AssassinHMS
12-09-2013, 06:46 PM
5 things are always sure about any assassins creed story.

1. There WILL be a Assassin's vs Templars plot.
2. It WILL involve Abstergo Inc. and the Animus machine.
3. It will ALWAYS involve a historical setting.
4. There WILL be a Piece of Eden or Those Who Came Before site involved.
5. You will be able to judge how close you are to the end of the story by counting how many people you have met that are still breathing.

Expecting anything else is folly.

Which is just the way I like it (depending on the dosages of those points). Although I have to say, I'd rather if there was no "The Ones Who Came Before" plot. I like mystery (a lot) and a certain mysticism but this whole thing just seems too goofy and too unrealistic, it's almost immersion breaking for me in a way.

Shahkulu101
12-09-2013, 07:00 PM
luckyto? You are a madman - on par with The Last of Us? A bold statement... A false statement.

STDlyMcStudpants
12-09-2013, 07:12 PM
God of War Series has the best story ever :D
Besides the Desmond Miles Saga ;)

pacmanate
12-09-2013, 07:13 PM
God of War Series has the best story ever :D
Besides the Desmond Miles Saga ;)

https://scontent-a-lhr.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/s261x260/1450064_713631571981275_719628802_n.jpg

shobhit7777777
12-09-2013, 07:30 PM
How can you explore the Assassin's Creed if you don't put it against the Templars' ideology? I'm not saying it is a simple Assassin VS Templars or a good VS bad cliché., but if the game doesn't explore both ideologies and focus on the big picture, then will this melodrama feel like AC?
After 5 games of self-centered stories I’d like to see AC back to a more interesting focus (such as the development of an entire society or mindset), about something bigger than a single person's feelings. Actually, that is one of the reasons why I like Altair, because there is none of this sense of familiarity, because he feels mysterious and distant. However, if the game explores the character in every angle, like in a soap opera, you will feel like you know him/her and the interest will drop severely.

Conspiracies and ideologies are what drives AC, not characters.

Couldn't disagree more.

Ideologies are nothing without interesting characters - people. Ideologies are nothing without a lot of introspection, questioning and curiosity - all traits hinging on a character. Humans are the most important factor because THEY are the foundation of ideals, principles and tenets...without them they are just words. In a narrative they are the vessel through which you explore these concepts.
Assassin's Creed..THE creed as a concept is nothing that mind blowing. The AvT war itself is a joke. These are two extremist groups. I'd prefer a narrative which actually questions both the group's motivations.

The AvT and the Creed has been beaten oft enough AC1, ACR, ACIV. The other half has had the modern day nonsense and piece of eden BS mess things. I pray for a game which actually makes a soulful story this time....something more in line with ACII.

ze_topazio
12-09-2013, 07:39 PM
God of War Series has the best story ever :D

The God of War series story, while simple, is pretty well done actually, a typical Greek tragedy, except 3, i didn't liked the story of 3 that much.

DarktheMagister
12-09-2013, 07:46 PM
Which is just the way I like it (depending on the dosages of those points). Although I have to say, I'd rather if there was no "The Ones Who Came Before" plot. I like mystery (a lot) and a certain mysticism but this whole thing just seems too goofy and too unrealistic, it's almost immersion breaking for me in a way.

Yeah I get where you would be coming from. But I have a fascination with the concept of Historical Mystery and Precursor Societies (like Atlantis) that makes things like AC and the Uncharted games super interesting and engaging to me.

lothario-da-be
12-09-2013, 07:55 PM
God of War Series has the best story ever :D
Besides the Desmond Miles Saga ;)
I would like to add Call of duty to that list,

egriffin09
12-09-2013, 08:02 PM
AC 4's story was good. It was just a straight forward pirate story. They should have done more with the observatory portion of the game. I feel they didn't go as deep into it as they could have.

AssassinHMS
12-09-2013, 08:02 PM
Couldn't disagree more.

Ideologies are nothing without interesting characters - people. Ideologies are nothing without a lot of introspection, questioning and curiosity - all traits hinging on a character. Humans are the most important factor because THEY are the foundation of ideals, principles and tenets...without them they are just words. In a narrative they are the vessel through which you explore these concepts.
Assassin's Creed..THE creed as a concept is nothing that mind blowing. The AvT war itself is a joke. These are two extremist groups. I'd prefer a narrative which actually questions both the group's motivations.

The AvT and the Creed has been beaten oft enough AC1, ACR, ACIV. The other half has had the modern day nonsense and piece of eden BS mess things. I pray for a game which actually makes a soulful story this time....something more in line with ACII.

I didn’t say ideologies were alone in the game. It should be obvious that, such ideologies required thought, introspection and questioning to be created in the first place. That is why ideologies are interesting, because right or wrong (which we never really know), they are answers to life.
By focusing solely on the characters and on their relationships and feelings, you don’t get to explore ideologies which doesn’t go well with an Assassin’s Creed game.

Ideologies and conspiracies are what drives the story and the characters are simply caught in the middle. It used to be when AC was like this, instead of being the protagonist to carry the story on his shoulders. We’ve seen his childhood, now it’s time to see his youth and then, after he joins the Assassins, we’ll see how different he is (if he is). I’m tired of this formula. I don’t want to find out everything about the protagonist. I only care about the protagonist as an assassin. I don’t care about the personal stuff unless it has repercussions on his assassin side (like AC1’s story). This is why I’m ok when an assassin questions the creed. Although it is personal, it influences his life as an assassin. On the other hand, I can question these ideologies myself, which is why I would like an AC game where we are the protagonist, where the game allows the player to make choices according to our views, morals and ideologies.

Like I said, the ideologies and the subsequent conspiracies are what takes hold of the story. Yes, the protagonist is there, making questions and whatnot, but in the end, he is nothing but a piece, a pawn in a bigger game. I don’t want AC games to focus too much on the pawn, I want them to show the pawn but focus on the whole game. These stories are, sometimes, so self-centered that they almost make it look as if the pawn was the actual game.

luckyto
12-09-2013, 08:11 PM
Tomb Raider's story was s***.

Uncharted - yes, I can see that. A simplistic Indiana Jones ripoff, in a good way.

On par with The Last of Us? Lol no.

Bah. Last of Us is the compilation of every zombie survivalist post-apocalypse piece ever done. I AM LEGEND. WORLD WAR Z. THE BOOK OF ELI. MAD MAX. You could see everything coming from a mile away.
Ellie had been bitten and was the "cure." Done before and predictable (CHILDREN OF MEN.) People break into gangs and hunt and kill each other and government becomes militaristic. Done before. Mad Max, World War Z, etc, etc. Man's kid killed at beginning, done before. Meet strangers and eventually one of them gets bitten, causing the other to go into violent confrontation with the rest of the group. Every zombie movie ever. Main character is mortally wounded --- (the only surprise here was that he was healed and Eli didn't continue on her own.) Ellie needs to be cut open to find the cure --- duh.


There's really not a surprise in that game other than someone can travel a few thousand miles and not learn to swim. The only part that got remotely dark and surprising was the character of David. Even Joel's supposedly controversial decision at the end was a no-brainer. Any parent would do the same thing. Any parent.

It's nicely done - mainly the relationship between Ellie and Joel and the constant banter. But it's not War and Peace.


. I really wanted Edward and Adewale to develop a close relationship and find out more about Ade, but it almost seems like they purposefully held back on developing his character because they knew they wanted to make a DLC out of him. In which case the main story suffered because Ubisoft wanted to make more money with side content - again. (Just like ACR and The Lost Archive.)

What you see as "some weak spots" I see as major drawbacks. Character interaction can make or break a story. The reason AC2 is still so loved by many is because the characters and their interactions are memorable. I wanted that type of emotion and connection from AC4's characters. I really wanted to like Blackbeard, but he only ever talked to Edward like 3 times. If any relationship should have been developed more in this game, I think it should have been Blackbeard and Edward's.

I agree. I just don't think it destroys the story. It's just... weaker. But personally, I felt closer to Blackbeard than Mario. I do agree that the story definitely needs much more of both characters.


Opinions are one thing, but please don't act like the people who don't share your views are just so much less mature and enlightened than you. :rolleyes:

In regards to referencing Edward's motivations and arc as flat, yeah. I do think it takes someone who is older to appreciate that change. I'm not saying that only I get it, but I do think that his story makes much more sense to people in their 30's and older than a young person who literally has no concept of that stage of life. That's just common sense. People under 21 think they know the world, they think they understand change; they really have no comprehension of what big world problems and changes are. Edward begins the story with that mentality, and ends the story with a sense of maturity. And for that reason, the story will make more sense to people who have lived through that same type of change.

Our own personal experience and growth alters the way we interpret and react to story-telling. It's not snobbery, it's reality. We are all victims of it. No matter how hard I try, I cannot fully relate to the story of a person in their retirement or of old age. I simply haven't lived it. And anyone who thinks that they can is foolish and naive. I can empathize with it, but not fully grasp nor appreciate it. Such is the limits of the conscious mind. Wisdom isn't all about recognizing what you know, it's a great deal about recognizing that which you don't know.

Thus the basis for Edward's arc. He begins as someone who thinks he knows. And ends by understanding that knowledge is limited, and changing... nothing is true. And the only right course is to value things which are greater, unchanging, or ideals: family, love, freedom, etc; and place those above what is "known" - the material world. From naive to experience. He finds his way, from wanting worldly treasure to valuing the real treasure in life.

SixKeys
12-09-2013, 08:36 PM
Bah. Last of Us is the compilation of every zombie survivalist post-apocalypse piece ever done. I AM LEGEND. WORLD WAR Z. THE BOOK OF ELI. MAD MAX. You could see everything coming from a mile away.


It's not about where the story draws its inspiration from, it's what you do with it. There's no such thing as an original story. It's also interesting that you're bringing up examples of movies vs. other video games. I suspect it's because there aren't that many video games as well written as Naughty Dog's. What other games have tackled mature issues like father-daughter relationships, children dying on-screen, pedophilia etc.?


There's really not a surprise in that game other than someone can travel a few thousand miles and not learn to swim. The only part that got remotely dark and surprising was the character of David. Even Joel's supposedly controversial decision at the end was a no-brainer. Any parent would do the same thing. Any parent.

I guess his decision is controversial to anyone who is not a parent, then. Just because a parent might choose to do the same doesn't mean it wasn't wrong. That's what was so interesting about the story. It turns out Joel was actually an anti-hero. A villain, even. He doomed mankind with his selfish actions. I can't imagine Ubisoft ever doing something so bold with their hero characters. (Haytham was an exception because he was a secondary character.) It would actually have been interesting had they done this when Desmond was given the choice to go with either Minerva's or Juno's plan. But of course, that choice wasn't left up to the players.


In regards to referencing Edward's motivations and arc as flat, yeah. I do think it takes someone who is older to appreciate that change. I'm not saying that only I get it, but I do think that his story makes much more sense to people in their 30's and older than a young person who literally has no concept of that stage of life. That's just common sense. People under 21 think they know the world, they think they understand change; they really have no comprehension of what big world problems and changes are. Edward begins the story with that mentality, and ends the story with a sense of maturity. And for that reason, the story will make more sense to people who have lived through that same type of change.

Just for the record, I'm 30 and I didn't think the story showed the kind of maturity you're talking about. It had the potential to, and probably the intention as well, but too much was glossed over or cut out. Edward's maturing is really no deeper than Altaïr's arc in AC1, which was also just a bit rushed and sudden. It was still more gradual than Edward's, though.


Thus the basis for Edward's arc. He begins as someone who thinks he knows. And ends by understanding that knowledge is limited, and changing... nothing is true. And the only right course is to value things which are greater, unchanging, or ideals: family, love, freedom, etc; and place those above what is "known" - the material world. From naive to experience. He finds his way, from wanting worldly treasure to valuing the real treasure in life.

I find it ironic that you criticize TLoU for being predictable and cliché yet praise AC4's story for basically having all the ingredients of every Christmas special ever made. "Now I realize what a fool I've been all along - money doesn't matter, family does! God bless us, everyone!" :rolleyes: Like I said, it's not about the story being original, it's characterization that truly sets a story apart. AC4's characters didn't really do that, IMO.

killzab
12-09-2013, 08:48 PM
Bah. Last of Us is the compilation of every zombie survivalist post-apocalypse piece ever done. I AM LEGEND. WORLD WAR Z. THE BOOK OF ELI. MAD MAX. You could see everything coming from a mile away.
Ellie had been bitten and was the "cure." Done before and predictable (CHILDREN OF MEN.) People break into gangs and hunt and kill each other and government becomes militaristic. Done before. Mad Max, World War Z, etc, etc. Man's kid killed at beginning, done before. Meet strangers and eventually one of them gets bitten, causing the other to go into violent confrontation with the rest of the group. Every zombie movie ever. Main character is mortally wounded --- (the only surprise here was that he was healed and Eli didn't continue on her own.) Ellie needs to be cut open to find the cure --- duh.



There's really not a surprise in that game other than someone can travel a few thousand miles and not learn to swim. The only part that got remotely dark and surprising was the character of David. Even Joel's supposedly controversial decision at the end was a no-brainer. Any parent would do the same thing. Any parent.

It's nicely done - mainly the relationship between Ellie and Joel and the constant banter. But it's not War and Peace.



I agree. I just don't think it destroys the story. It's just... weaker. But personally, I felt closer to Blackbeard than Mario. I do agree that the story definitely needs much more of both characters.



In regards to referencing Edward's motivations and arc as flat, yeah. I do think it takes someone who is older to appreciate that change. I'm not saying that only I get it, but I do think that his story makes much more sense to people in their 30's and older than a young person who literally has no concept of that stage of life. That's just common sense. People under 21 think they know the world, they think they understand change; they really have no comprehension of what big world problems and changes are. Edward begins the story with that mentality, and ends the story with a sense of maturity. And for that reason, the story will make more sense to people who have lived through that same type of change.

Our own personal experience and growth alters the way we interpret and react to story-telling. It's not snobbery, it's reality. We are all victims of it. No matter how hard I try, I cannot fully relate to the story of a person in their retirement or of old age. I simply haven't lived it. And anyone who thinks that they can is foolish and naive. I can empathize with it, but not fully grasp nor appreciate it. Such is the limits of the conscious mind. Wisdom isn't all about recognizing what you know, it's a great deal about recognizing that which you don't know.

Thus the basis for Edward's arc. He begins as someone who thinks he knows. And ends by understanding that knowledge is limited, and changing... nothing is true. And the only right course is to value things which are greater, unchanging, or ideals: family, love, freedom, etc; and place those above what is "known" - the material world. From naive to experience. He finds his way, from wanting worldly treasure to valuing the real treasure in life.

If I follow your logic then every story ever told can only be appreciated by someone who went through the same thing ?

I guess not many people understood Connor then... Or even Ezio actually.

But still you sound extremely condescending .

"That's just common sense. People under 21 think they know the world, they think they understand change; they really have no comprehension of what big world problems and changes are"

Ok well I'm 23 but I still feel insulted. And don't underestimate people's intelligence and stop generalizing.

Some teenagers are extremely mature and some people in their forties can be dimwit.

luckyto
12-09-2013, 09:10 PM
^^^^^^^^^ You can't understand what it's like to be a parent until you are a parent. Or to go into the working world and find your way until you've done it. You can either accept that, or not. It has nothing to do with intelligence, and everything to do with experience. It's not meant to be insulting nor is it directed at any one person, it simply is. I cannot possibly pretend to understand what it's like to be a woman, because I am not a woman. Nor can I understand what it's like to be an african-american in the South, because I am not one. Nor I can pretend to understand what it's like to be an old person, because I am not one. Nor a veteran, because I have never fought in a war and seen friends die beside me. I respect that which I do not know. It's not a matter of intelligence, it's a matter of experience - and recognizing that not everyone has the same. I can empathize with such emotions, feel for them, be moved by them - but I cannot possibly understand those emotions in the same way as someone who has lived them.


---------------
I enjoyed TLOU's story. I just don't think that it is the Holy Grail that many people hold it up to be. My main point is that they are on similar footing, and I concede - The Last of Us excelled at developing a relationship which is something Black Flag struggled to do. Especially with the characters of Blackbeard and Adewale. But I'm not really condemning TLOU, just pointing out that Black Flag has it's own set of mature themes, often more sublime; and both have a heavy dose of influences. They are in the same league so to speak, and TLOU isn't the masterpiece of original fiction. It's not laughable to compare them at all.

for TLOU... Red Dead tackled what a parent will do for his family. David was an interesting and dark subject.

But the more sublime piece of story-telling comes with the Giraffes. The giraffes do symbolize that nature will heal itself. That the world will move on, and recover. It already has. And this them is reinforced at the very end when they look down on the camp. Civilization is being reborn. Normal life, the new normal, exists. It doesn't hit you on the head with the message; but it's there.

As to his decision, yes, it was a no-brainer to a parent. One, there are serious doubts whether cutting her brain open would find a cure. He didn't doom mankind at all. He just saved that girl from being guinea pigs in a crackpot lab with barely functioning equipment. The game provided hints throughout that the Fireflies continually failed to find a cure. "I've heard that before," Joel says early on. There is no guarantee - and even a very low possibility - that they would find a cure. And why? Is mankind doomed? Not all. That's what the giraffes and the encampment is telling you at the end --- that life will go on.

Controversial would have been letting her die. Because as a parent, I simply cannot imagine anyone making that decision. That's not heroic at all. And daresay, only believable to people who aren't parents. Naughty Dog actually picked the safe choice in that story decision. Rockstar was much braver when they killed John Marston.

I think Edward did show that maturity.
It began with Blackbeard's death and progressed slowly but surely, until, he finally spoke with true conviction. "Your new philosophy suits you." He grew into it. The story is much more sublime about it, and never does it stop to say, "Hey, look audience, he's maturing." It's shown in how he speaks and his actions. At one point, he wouldn't take responsibility for his actions (not grabbing the sugar), and yet, over time he does. He at first takes his hideout, but then gives it away to a greater cause; just as he takes an Assassin outfit that he's not deserving of; but in the end, deserved it more than the man who wore it. When given the choice to live free and wealthy and remain a pirate, he gives it up to be a family man. Those are real choices - giving up the self for others and an existence more meaningful. That's maturity.

Sushiglutton
12-09-2013, 09:15 PM
I feel AC3 was a very story driven game, but AC4 was way more gameplay driven. In AC4 there was much more focus on the systemic sandbox content. In the campaign there was tons of open assassination missions. This means Darby was trapped by the old game-story issue, namely his job as a writer was primarily to just present different characters to kill. And LOTS of them. It's a pretty ****ty premise to be fair.

That is not to say I prefer the story/gameplay balance in AC3, on the contrary I much prefer how it was done in AC3. All I'm saying is that Darby had a fairly tough job. I think he executed it really well with great dialog and characters like Edward and James Kidd.

Shahkulu101
12-09-2013, 09:17 PM
I find one of the problems with AC2 is that it sometimes just like it's saying "looky here audience - character development". Like when he's sitting on the bench with Rosa and he's like "20 years ago family died bla bla bla" and I'm like yeah, I know mate.

SixKeys
12-09-2013, 09:26 PM
I find one of the problems with AC2 is that it sometimes just like it's saying "looky here audience - character development". Like when he's sitting on the bench with Rosa and he's like "20 years ago family died bla bla bla" and I'm like yeah, I know mate.

I don't know, I liked that AC2 was subtle about it. They didn't make that scene some huge tantrum out of nowhere or a long, impassioned speech. Just him sitting on a bench, lonely on his birthday, wondering if he had accomplished anything in all the years he had been chasing his targets. The only time that ever felt out-of-left-field in AC2 was in the end when he suddenly decided to let Rodrigo live as if doing that would prove he was a better man, when he had absolutely no qualms about killing any of his other targets. Of course, the only reason that happened was because killing Rodrigo in AC2 would have been historically inaccurate.

Shahkulu101
12-09-2013, 09:35 PM
I don't know, I liked that AC2 was subtle about it. They didn't make that scene some huge tantrum out of nowhere or a long, impassioned speech. Just him sitting on a bench, lonely on his birthday, wondering if he had accomplished anything in all the years he had been chasing his targets. The only time that ever felt out-of-left-field in AC2 was in the end when he suddenly decided to let Rodrigo live as if doing that would prove he was a better man, when he had absolutely no qualms about killing any of his other targets. Of course, the only reason that happened was because killing Rodrigo in AC2 would have been historically inaccurate.

But we couldn't already interpret how he felt throughout the story, it wasn't really needed. As I said it was screaming out to the audience "Look guys - character development!"

Bastiaen
12-09-2013, 09:41 PM
Why is being able to summarize a story in only a few words necessarily a good thing?
Try it with Bioshock Infinite.
Or with Remember Me.
Dragon Age?
Mass Effect?
Simplicity is, in my opinion, a poor indicator of a good story. That's not to say that the ability to quickly summarize a character's motivations is indicative of a poor story.

SixKeys
12-09-2013, 09:42 PM
It never bothered me personally. Maybe it felt necessary to me because in AC2 it was difficult to keep up with the passage of time considering the character models didn't change. Ezio still looked 17 by the end of the game even though decades had passed. I guess for me it helped that he would sometimes mention "oh yeah, this thing happened like 10 years ago", to remind me he was actually much older and more experienced at this point in the story.

luckyto
12-09-2013, 09:46 PM
Ezio didn't really progress until Revelations. And pretty much the whole game of Revelations was one big monologue and reflective speech.

SixKeys
12-09-2013, 09:47 PM
Why is being able to summarize a story in only a few words necessarily a good thing?

It's not necessarily, but there are such things as universal themes that appeal to most people. If I want to get a friend of mine interested in AC when they ask "What's it about?", I think it's much more likely they will pick it up if I simply say "It's about being an assassin in historical settings". I think they would back off slowly if I started to explain: "Well, it's about this guy called Desmond who can see things that glow in red and yellow because he has magic alien DNA from an ancient civilization, you see. But it's not only about him, it's really about these two warring factions that have been fighting since Biblical times, one group are basically anarchists, but their philosophy is actually much more complicated than that. Anyway, they have to spy on this guy's DNA in 2012 to watch him play as his assassin ancestor because they're looking for these alien mind-control devices and....wait, where are you going?"

SixKeys
12-09-2013, 09:50 PM
Ezio didn't really progress until Revelations. And pretty much the whole game of Revelations was one big monologue and reflective speech.

Considering AC2 was originally planned to be his only game, I think his arc was complete enough by the end of it. If AC3 had been the next game to be announced after AC2, without Brotherhood and Revelations inbetween, I would have been perfectly satisfied with Ezio's story.

UKassassinsfan
12-10-2013, 12:47 AM
If I'm being 100% honest NONE of the Assassin's Creed games had a good story besides the modern day.
What drew me to the series is its religious ties.
How it tried to tell you religion rules the world and there was always a mystery about origins - this is what the modern day brought to us.
It was one giant conspiracy puzzle to figure out.
In AC IV its about producing product
The Assassin's Creed Story was the present day and its missing here.
Pound for pound AC3 had the best story - horrible character development but best non present day story none the less.
I anticipate releases for the modern day but I buy them to breathe history's air not live its story.
(I'm probably minority here or I'm just one of the few that took a step back and see what the true reason they enjoy the game is)

I agree with this a lot, I was always hooked by the modern story. We are in the minority but I liked how in previous titles the modern story, religion, assssins and Templars and story all fitted so well together, it feels forced now

wheelhouse413
12-10-2013, 03:59 AM
Not having read the thread (well, I read it before work, but that was 7 hours ago, so a few new pages are here now), I hope I'm not repeating too much of what others have said, but I definitely agree that the STORY was easily the weakest part of AC 4.

That being said, I loved my overall experience in AC 4 quite a bit (I have the game platinum, and I never got a plat on my PS3 or got EVERY achievement on any game on my 360), so clearly something was (for me) definitely RIGHT about AC 4. But the story was NOT it.

I actually found myself laughing AT the story quite a bit, especially the "serious" parts. There's not really a single side character from the game that I felt anything for (at their death or at my last seeing of them alive), except for perhaps the gentleman pirate (who's name escapes me). And from what I could tell, his story ended off-screen.

I think a lot of my thinking of the story being bad has all to do with the story not remotely fitting in an open-world game. At all. The pacing ends up simply awful.

For example - when I got the "take a fort" tutorial mission, I already had taken 4 forts. When I got the brief on how to do the stelae, I'd already gotten 3 or 4. At least for the shipwrecks they were unavailable areas until the story called for them, but that's just the same problem, only opposite. The story simply was not one that fit in an open world setting.

When I got to the part where the Republic stuff "failed", it was right after I'd yellowed 3/4 of the map, nearly fully upgraded my ship, totally upgraded Kenway, and had taken down 1 of the legendary ships. I had been moving along at a very swift clip just destroying everything in my path, and suddenly the story dictated that the Nassau thing "fails", so it does - regardless of how the game had been going (game meaning the whole thing combined - not just the story part of the game). This was actually when I started really laughing at the story - when it started simply not meshing with my own personal experiences.

I just felt that the story was filled with pointless deaths and pointless betrayals, and none of them really meant much, because they were either incredibly poorly explained (most of them), or didn't make sense in the world of AC 4 (Blackbeard's). Blackbeard is supposedly a badass (more than Kenway) and yet he dies taking a ship? The easiest thing in the game to do? Really? That one in particular felt so scripted and eye-rolling bad to me that, again, I laughed AT the story (or the writers - not sure).

Now all that being said, the voice acting was really good (for a video game). Better than most games I've played. And for comparison, Binary Domain just went free on PS +, so I'm playing that on PS3, and..wow...that's a good example of some bad voice acting (main character and Bo specifically). And despite thinking the story was pretty weak in AC 4, the game was WELL WORTH THE PURCHASE PRICE. So much so that I didn't feel bad spending $9.99 for MP purple credits to hit 55 just that much faster (platinum).

The most interesting (to me - someone who's not every played AC 2 or AC 3, and only about 10 hours of AC 1 before stopping due to boredom) story bits were the modern day voice recordings from Subject 0 and 1 (mostly the woman doctor who was going under herself). The only drawback was that I never found a way to listen to those while walking around, so re-listens are out of the question.

pirate1802
12-10-2013, 05:23 AM
AC4 doesn't have Templars as sympathetic as AC3's.
AC4's philosophy is not as deep as AC1's.
And AC4's scope is not as huge as AC2's.

But at the same time, I feel this is the best crafted story yet. However, now that I'm actually playing the game, with one caveat: its much more suited to a linear game and some things (like the incredibly tight pacing) can be lost when put into an open world game.

Before the PC release, I couldn't resist and watched a part of the console walkthrough. But I got so into the story that I just watched the whole damn thing.

When speaking of it as a linear story, I don't feel as any of the characters is under-utilized or under-characterized, or under-developed for the purposes that they were going for. Everybody got pretty much exactly the amount of time they needed. I don't feel as there's a gump factor element is present - due to the story being much more character driven, the interaction with historical characters and presence in historical events feels much more natural. More than that, I feel that since all the pirates have sailed at pretty much approximately the same time, I feel that they have successfully avoided the trapping of trying to put everything in the story (something AC3 did).

The Templars are a mix between ACR and AC1 in terms of their philosophy, goals, and means to do so, but Hornigold (and to extent Burgess and Cockram too) adds the very personal AC3 Templar element that works really well in the context of the story. Basically, I've already listed my thoughts on the story here (http://forums.ubi.com/showthread.php/804359-What-I-think-of-AC4-story-(a-k-a-I-lost-self-constraint)-Non-specific-Spoilers) after I watched the walkthrough, so I'll just link to it and won't repeat myself.

That being said. Since AC4 is not a linear game but an open-world one, there are two things that happen, mainly:
a) Since you can sail pretty much anywhere you want anytime you want, the pacing may get broken and some details that work in a linear story may get lost or forgotten
b) The character interaction is much more spread out (again, since you can sail anywhere you want anytime you want) and because of that it feels that there's not enough of it.

I think that two things could've helped that:
1. Dialogs outside of story mode, like in AC3, where you could go back to the village and talk to your people, or talk to your assassins in taverns, or stuff like that. Just go and have one extra conversation with Thatch if you want, or try to endure some of Jack's antics.
2. Side-missions with pirate characters. Like, two or three per character, something along the lines of Templar Hunt.

Can't agree more. AC4 had probably the best story in the series, in my fairly uneducated opinion. So I don't belong to the said consensus. Because of a simple fact, that I played this game's main story almost back-to-back. Never did that in any AC story before. The pacing was tight, the side characters memorable and with enough screentime, none of them felt forced or just there to tick off a checklist. The villains.. while not on AC1/AC3-level, were definitely far from the cartoony AC2/ACB level. It was more in the middle - ACR level. Edward was great, His quest could be likened to that of Walter White. Both got into it initially to provide for their family, but later got so drawn into it that they kept going just for the thrill of it. Someone said Edward's motivations felt paper-thin later on, and I thought that was intentional, to see how thin is the ice he's walking on. So that when it finally breaks and he falls, we'd see he always had it coming.

Also I agree with some of Farlander's other points.. that the pacing is more suited for a linear game and can feel broken if the player spends too much time away from it. And because its conversations are so spread out, it can at times feel that there's not enough conversations with side characters. I too, was hoping for more missions with the pirates, like the Templar Hunt missions, but I guess they were scaared off by the "Pirate Creed" crowd to go that way.



For example - when I got the "take a fort" tutorial mission, I already had taken 4 forts. When I got the brief on how to do the stelae, I'd already gotten 3 or 4. At least for the shipwrecks they were unavailable areas until the story called for them, but that's just the same problem, only opposite. The story simply was not one that fit in an open world setting.

That's a good thing that the game opens everything up for you early on. Remember when we cried because how AC3 locked its content until way late in the game? This is an answer to that. And I think its a good decision. While it may feel out of place, like I did half the assassination contracts before it was explained to me, atleast you have no shackles placed on you. The world is truly open and you don't have to depend on the game to dictate when you can do this and when you can't.


When I got to the part where the Republic stuff "failed", it was right after I'd yellowed 3/4 of the map, nearly fully upgraded my ship, totally upgraded Kenway, and had taken down 1 of the legendary ships. I had been moving along at a very swift clip just destroying everything in my path, and suddenly the story dictated that the Nassau thing "fails", so it does - regardless of how the game had been going (game meaning the whole thing combined - not just the story part of the game). This was actually when I started really laughing at the story - when it started simply not meshing with my own personal experiences.

There is literally no game in existence that can do what you are asking, No game can account for the amount of level ups and wealth you have amassed between its story missions. Still, think of it. Would you be happy if all the legendary ships and elite upgrades were locked off till you left Nassau? I think not.


I just felt that the story was filled with pointless deaths and pointless betrayals, and none of them really meant much, because they were either incredibly poorly explained (most of them), or didn't make sense in the world of AC 4 (Blackbeard's). Blackbeard is supposedly a badass (more than Kenway) and yet he dies taking a ship? The easiest thing in the game to do? Really? That one in particular felt so scripted and eye-rolling bad to me that, again, I laughed AT the story (or the writers - not sure).

That's exactly how Blackbeard died in real. Supposedly he was no so much a badass as he perpetuated his myth to have you believe. He was just another man with a lot of hot air blowing around him, and his death showed that.

wheelhouse413
12-10-2013, 06:01 AM
Pirate - I don't necessarily disagree that you are wrong when you say " No game can account for the amount of level ups and wealth you have amassed between its story missions. Still, think of it. Would you be happy if all the legendary ships and elite upgrades were locked off till you left Nassau? I think not."

But I think, at least for me, the story they told does not fit AT ALL with an open world game. I've not played any other AC games, so I can't comment on past AC games, but I look at games such as the Mass Effect games (which, to me, until the last 20 minutes of ME 3, were great), and I think they do a pretty good job of telling a decent story and the rest of the game doesn't get in the way of it. But they're also not open world games.

For open world games I'd look to Bethesda. While I don't think their stories are amazing, they DO fit well into an open world.

In AC 4 it just felt to me that the story was at odds with what was happening in the game part (the open world) and, at least for me, since I was having so much fun in the open world game, the story was just an obstacle to enjoying the game because it didn't mesh with the fun, and so few side characters had any development to them that I didn't really care about any of them. I think it could have been a good story in a different type of game, but not this one. Maybe it suffered from having too many real life characters in it (that I know very little about), I don't know. But none of them seemed important to me, so none of the deaths had any impact on me (except one that seemingly happened off-screen).

Like I said - I don't disagree with what you said - but for me, this story needs more fleshing out and to be the main focus of a pretty on-rails game to have impact. Stuck in an open world (that was really fun to play in) and it just felt like it was getting in the way. For example, the last stelae (from all I can tell) is behind a story location, so I was down to needing one left to get the Mayan armor (looks pretty good, btw). I'm in the story mission and get the stelae, and as the mission ends, I'm excited to fast travel over and get my armor. But I can't, because the next mission takes place immediately after, and I MUST do it to get back to the world.

I'd prefer a story-driven game like the ME games (sans awful ending of ME 3) where there's an appearance of freedom, but either there really isn't, or the things you can do are also very specific and tied directly to the story, or an open world game like the Elder Scrolls games which have stories that fit into an open world really well (although not what I would consider 'great' stories).

This game's story just doesn't fit, and I felt like Edward a lot of the time - not really caring one way or the other about the Templars or the Assassins - just let me get back to my boat so I can make money.

pirate1802
12-10-2013, 07:14 AM
Well my ship wasn't that strong at that point as to take on a full fleet, so that moment didn't feel odd to me :p But well, then any story can't fit into this type of open world game, a game that gives you complete freedom to do whatever you want with your ship, then it will be at odds with certain points of the plot. Regarding underdeveloped side characters, I feel the addictive nature of the open world sometimes work detrimentally with the story, because like Farlander said, and this is what I experienced as well, is that I'll do one story mission, meet a few guys, then be off to the sea and be totally lost in doing side activities. When I'll return I'd have forgotten most of the things about the last mission I finished. This happened to me when after finishing sequence 5, I sailed like two days straight. And when I returned I had to read up the recap of the last sequence to remember. So if you actually look at the amount of content for each side character, ther are not less, but that there are breaks between them and you sail so much inbetween, makes you forget about the interactions with them.

Btw who died offscreen? Are you referring to Bonnet?

DarktheMagister
12-10-2013, 09:08 AM
It seems like the reason the story felt "weak" for some of you was because you went off gallivanting around the Caribbean when the story wanted you to press on; hence you leveled up past it and make the tutorials redundant.

Yeah... maybe they SHOULD have locked in some of that stuff till it was introduced (Heck at least Assassination Contracts!)

But they were trying to sell the whole "open world" concept to the market that was more interested in "playing pirates" so I can see why they left all that available even though some of it doesn't make sense.

Farlander1991
12-10-2013, 09:31 AM
Reading some of the posts regarding AC2... I simply don't agree that it handles side-characters better. Well, Leonardo is great, but he and Blackbeard have approximately the same amount of meaningful screen time. There are literally seven instances in the whole game of talking with Leo that are more than 'Aha! You've found another one!': first meeting, hidden blade creation, telling about La Volpe, going to Venice, making the flying machine fly, telling about Teodora, looking at the apple in the Villa. Sure, you can say that there's enough to properly characterize Leo and his relationship with Ezio, and I agree, but so is the case with Blackbeard and Edward.

And other side-characters... You really don't talk with Mario after Sequence 3 until almost the end of the game. Claudia doesn't do anything at all beyond Sequence 3. Rosa suddenly disappears and is never mentioned again. All the assassins (with exception of Antonio) appear for less than a sequence and then are never heard of about again until suddenly they're all Assassins. Ironically enough one of the few people with proper set-up and resolution is Lorenzo. AC4 has proper set-ups, interactions, and resolutions for absolutely every pirate character, even as not widely used as Jack Rackham. Even though sometimes it's in form of an eavesdropped dialogue like the case with Bonnet's fate (though, I must say, that personally, considering how the last personal talk went, it works better that way), but it's there, it's continuous, things aren't suddenly forgotten and then suddenly brought back, it's all very continuous. Even Burgess and Cockram don't appear out of nowhere in Nassau when Rogers appears, we see them with Hornigold on his ship, and to be honest they as targets meant much more to me and Edward's character development than 50% of Ezio's targets in AC2.

I also don't understand why "10 years I've been hunting the people responsible, but don't know what any of it was for" is fine (one of my favourite lines in AC2, btw) while Edward's final realization while talking to Adewale that "I'm no wiser than before" is not. That's both pretty short self-reflective thoughts that the characters reveal to people who are fairly close to them.

... Crap, now rooster will swoop in saying that all I'm trying to do is discredit AC2 again >_< But I just can't agree with AC2 comparisons, because I really think AC4 is structured better.

ANGEL AZRAEL PT
12-10-2013, 01:51 PM
Please, guys, just to starters, "this" Kenway is not even an Assassin during gameplay, and when we know he is, the game ends? Come on!!!!

DarktheMagister
12-10-2013, 02:02 PM
Thats what they said they were doing though. A game about a pirate caught up in the struggle.

pirate1802
12-10-2013, 02:12 PM
Please, guys, just to starters, "this" Kenway is not even an Assassin during gameplay, and when we know he is, the game ends? Come on!!!!

That automatically makes it a poor story?

Hans684
12-10-2013, 03:25 PM
That automatically makes it a poor story?

I guess.... the word you are looking for is narrow minded.

luckyto
12-10-2013, 03:39 PM
wheellock, I didn't nearly progress as far as you. I certainly kept a good mix between free roaming and story, and while my character was leveled probably more than average, it wasn't a problem from me. I had even captured a fort before the story mission for one, it just wan't nearly so jarring to me. the dialogue didn't mismatch. i was actually kind of impressed that the scenes were written "safely"

but in your incident, I do see what you are saying. if you progressed that far, then there would certainly be a disconnect. maybe some things should be kept off limits, maybe not... i thought it struck a pretty good balance, but perhaps it was too open ---


Please, guys, just to starters, "this" Kenway is not even an Assassin during gameplay, and when we know he is, the game ends? Come on!!!!

But he is, he just doesn't know it yet. That IS the story of Edward Kenway.

MIA SILENT
12-10-2013, 03:55 PM
But he is, he just doesn't know it yet. That IS the story of Edward Kenway.

Strange that he had all the tropes of an Assassin before even meeting them. He didn't even train as one. And didn't become one until late in the story when he eventually got over his greed.

SixKeys
12-10-2013, 04:06 PM
I also don't understand why "10 years I've been hunting the people responsible, but don't know what any of it was for" is fine (one of my favourite lines in AC2, btw) while Edward's final realization while talking to Adewale that "I'm no wiser than before" is not. That's both pretty short self-reflective thoughts that the characters reveal to people who are fairly close to them.

I don't know if this was directed at me, but I didn't have a problem with that line from Edward you mentioned. At that point his transformation was already underway. What I found jarring was the mission with Roberts when you take over the Portuguese ship and eventually find the Observatory, and suddenly for the first time ever, Edward is all concerned with Roberts killing innocent people. He had been doing that himself all the way up until that point in the game. Why did he suddenly grow a conscience in that particular mission?

pirate1802
12-10-2013, 04:19 PM
Strange that he had all the tropes of an Assassin before even meeting them. He didn't even train as one. And didn't become one until late in the story when he eventually got over his greed.

Not strange at all. He wore a hood because he wanted to hide his face from the authorities. He was a good climber because he had fingers like fish hooks from sailin'. He used stealth because he had the common sense not to rush headlong into hundreds of brutes. Or alternatively, he could fight well because he was a seasoned pirate.

You see these "Assassin tropes" are not something alien which only Assassins can have and no one else. The assassins started using them out of some practical necessity. Hiding you face, staying away from attention, avoiding enemies etc. Situation quite similar to what Edward finds himself in. So no wonder he adopts similar ways.

luckyto
12-10-2013, 04:20 PM
^ yeah SixKeys, that was a bit left-field


Strange that he had all the tropes of an Assassin before even meeting them. He didn't even train as one. And didn't become one until late in the story when he eventually got over his greed.

The skills he had were from being a privateer (climbing masts, sword play, stealth for stealing and robbing etc.) Those are all natural skill sets for a pirate, in the same way that climbing trees and such were natural skills for Connor. And he was born with, as Mary Read puts it, the "sense." Being an Assassin is more than those skill sets --- it's the mentality, or philosophy. The minute he came to understand the Creed and live it, is when he embraced who he was meant to be. That's when he became a true Assassin. And that's why the story focuses so heavily on that character development from Sequence 3 onward.

Farlander1991
12-10-2013, 04:38 PM
I don't know if this was directed at me, but I didn't have a problem with that line from Edward you mentioned. At that point his transformation was already underway. What I found jarring was the mission with Roberts when you take over the Portuguese ship and eventually find the Observatory, and suddenly for the first time ever, Edward is all concerned with Roberts killing innocent people. He had been doing that himself all the way up until that point in the game. Why did he suddenly grow a conscience in that particular mission?

I don't think it was directed at you, but somebody else. Regarding the spoiler, though.

Roberts didn't kill innocent people, he killed members of his own crew. Maybe even Edward's crew, I'm not exactly sure. Regardless - pirates, a.k.a. Edwards homies :p And we know that Edward always was loyal to his kind. That is if you mean the incident near the Observatory. And if you mean Edward's "How many more men do we need to kill for a simple prize?!" on the Portugese ship, I don't see the problem. We know that Edward doesn't kill more than deems necessary. Heck, the whole boarding mechanic is based on it - kill a certain amount of people, all the others surrender and are left alive, some even join the crew. So I don't really see anything particularly out of the ordinary for him to wonder if deaths, especially those of captive sailors (and Edward never kills such people, he even berated Vain for doing so) are necessary.

SixKeys
12-10-2013, 04:48 PM
I don't think it was directed at you, but somebody else. Regarding the spoiler, though.

Roberts didn't kill innocent people, he killed members of his own crew. Maybe even Edward's crew, I'm not exactly sure. Regardless - pirates, a.k.a. Edwards homies :p And we know that Edward always was loyal to his kind. That is if you mean the incident near the Observatory. And if you mean Edward's "How many more men do we need to kill for a simple prize?!" on the Portugese ship, I don't see the problem. We know that Edward doesn't kill more than deems necessary. Heck, the whole boarding mechanic is based on it - kill a certain amount of people, all the others surrender and are left alive, some even join the crew. So I don't really see anything particularly out of the ordinary for him to wonder if deaths, especially those of captive sailors (and Edward never kills such people, he even berated Vain for doing so) are out of place.

The boarding mechanic is exactly why it feels so jarring. "How many more do we need to kill for a simple prize?" I dunno, you seem perfectly content to kill 15 people for a few barrels of rum and some sugar all the time. You literally cannot even complete boarding until you've killed the required amount of crew members.

I'm not saying it's a bad mechanic, obviously, but they definitely could have tried harder to make the story gel better with the mayhem you are forced to cause in freeroam.

Farlander1991
12-10-2013, 04:54 PM
The boarding mechanic is exactly why it feels so jarring. "How many more do we need to kill for a simple prize?" I dunno, you seem perfectly content to kill 15 people for a few barrels of rum and some sugar all the time. You literally cannot even complete boarding until you've killed the required amount of crew members.

I'm not saying it's a bad mechanic, obviously, but they definitely could have tried harder to make the story gel better with the mayhem you are forced to cause in freeroam.

Well, Hornigold calls out Edward on the mayhem. I still don't see though why you consider the phrase in question jarring - it was caused by the death of a captive sailor, it was established Edward doesn't do that (not to mention Edward all this time is pretty irritated by Roberts' attitude).

Besides, it's not like they're just looting a single ship for the prize - there's the crew of the captive soldier which is most likely dead, there's the outposts, and then there's the portugese flagship itself - it's disproportional to the usual prizes Edward takes (not to mention that he doesn't know the value of the blood vials at all, so its' value in his eyes is much lower than that of Sugar and Rum which he can sell for a big price)

SixKeys
12-10-2013, 05:02 PM
Perhaps I would have liked it more if it had been more subtle. As it was, the line seemed a bit dramatic which made it seem more hypocritical coming from Edward. It would have been better if he had simply given Roberts a dirty look and said "There was no need for that". Edward was clearly too curious for his own good, it was his curiosity and greed that kept him tied to Roberts, while at the same time he was clearly intimidated by the man. A more subtle approach would have communicated that Edward was uncomfortable with the sailor's death and that he wouldn't have done the same, but also that he felt he had come too far to mess things up by angering Roberts. Then when Roberts goes even further at the Observatory, Edward's sudden explosion of shock and anger would have been justified. Like once was bad enough, but he didn't have enough courage to speak up about it, and only realizes what a mess he's gotten himself into when he realizes Roberts really doesn't give a crap even about his own crew.

Farlander1991
12-10-2013, 05:08 PM
As it was, the line seemed a bit dramatic which made it seem more hypocritical coming from Edward.

And you want to say that Edward's not a hypocrite? O_o

SixKeys
12-10-2013, 05:15 PM
And you want to say that Edward's not a hypocrite? O_o

Well, yes, because they gave him lines that made him a hypocrite even in scenes where I don't think that was the intended effect. That's always a problem when creating characters. If you're going to give them unlikable features while portraying them as a hero, someone else in the story should at least point out that this characteristic is a flaw. Otherwise it just looks like the writers didn't realize they just made their character sound like a d**k in a scene where he perhaps wasn't supposed to.

SixKeys
12-10-2013, 05:19 PM
Example: Ezio is a creepy stalker and a sexual assaulter, as evidenced by the Cristina memories in ACB. Sadly, this fact tends to get overlooked by most people because the writers played it off as a tragic love story rather than the story of an obsessive ex-boyfriend. Nobody in the story ever mentions to Ezio: "Hey, you know it's not cool to stalk girls, right? You were being kind of a d**k there", hence we are left with the impression that the writers actually approved of this character trait.

Farlander1991
12-10-2013, 06:45 PM
Well, if we start analyzing that particular moment, then Edward wouldn't say anything that outright defies Black Bart or implies that Bart might be wrong or made a mistake, so there would be nothing of sorts like 'That wasn't necessary' or 'There was no need for that' - as that implies challenging Bart's authority and judgement, which, as you pointed out, Edward was too intimidated to do. "How many more do we have to kill" is something that plays safe - it shows Edward's discontent, but doesn't challenge Black Bart's actions. Even though it may paint him as a hypocrite.

But, we all have hypocritical moments, though in terms of writing I guess you could say that admitting that in works of fiction means 'giving the writers a free pass for some inconsistency'. But it's a good thing then that Edward has shown some hypocritical qualities from the get go: starting with the very reason we play as him in the game - staying in the Caribbean because he wants to under the disguise that it's all for his family at home (which I suppose he himself believed), leaving Stede's sugar behind, and a bunch of other times when Edward judged others by different standards than he judged himself. (You can argue that it's more selfishness than hypocrisy, but I don't see anything preventing those two from overlapping). He never was supposed to be an outright a**, but he always was supposed to be somewhat of a d**k anyway, with some innate good qualities that are dug up and put at the forefront as the story goes.

ANGEL AZRAEL PT
12-13-2013, 01:13 PM
IMO, Edward was, in all the AC titles, the charecter with less...huh...character. Even RatonWhateverHisNameWas had more personality. Dont get me wrong, I enjoyed the story, just pointed that the game is called Assassin's Creed and not "One story of a hypocritical/inconsistent/messed up man before it turns an Assassin".
As I said, thats my opinion (and my wife's too, btw...)

Farlander1991
12-13-2013, 01:41 PM
Well, if you use "the game is called Assassin's Creed" as the logic, then I don't see the problem - AC4 story is very much about the Assassin's Creed, even though the character who is used to explore the Creed is not an Assassin most of the story.

Shahkulu101
12-13-2013, 01:56 PM
Well, if you use "the game is called Assassin's Creed" as the logic, then I don't see the problem - AC4 story is very much about the Assassin's Creed, even though the character who is used to explore the Creed is not an Assassin most of the story.

Don't expect him to comprehend something so 'complex'.

pirate1802
12-13-2013, 02:01 PM
Well, I dont mean to be condescending but I do find that the people who complain about Pirate's Creed!! have a very narrow definition of what it means to be an Assassins Creed game.

Farlander1991
12-13-2013, 02:02 PM
And, heck, it's not just about THE Assassin's Creed. It's about the Templar's philosophy, the pirate republic philosophy, personal philosophies, and finding what philosophy suits you. From Bart Roberts' "A merry life and a short one" to Hornigold's disillusion with the pirate democratic philosophy and desire for order and discipline to Stede Bonnet's dreams of adventure - the theme of being a part of some Creed, a family, sense of belonging, goes throughout the entire narrative and can be seen in one way or another in almost all the characters.

Shahkulu101
12-13-2013, 02:04 PM
Well, I dont mean to be condescending but I do find that the people who complain about Pirate's Creed!! have a very narrow definition of what it means to be an Assassins Creed game.

Which, ironically, clashes with the AC ideology itself.

killzab
12-13-2013, 02:07 PM
Don't expect him to comprehend something so 'complex'.

No need to be condescending and insulting

pacmanate
12-13-2013, 02:09 PM
There was more Creed in this than AC:B and AC3.

Shahkulu101
12-13-2013, 02:11 PM
No need to be condescending and insulting

:rolleyes:...

roostersrule2
12-13-2013, 02:12 PM
There was more Creed in this than AC:B and AC3.No way, ACB had the most creed out of all the games.

Vittoria agli Assassini!!!!

Farlander1991
12-13-2013, 02:15 PM
Well... AC:B had the Creed stated the most times (mostly due to ceremonies that promoted recruits to Assassins), but it didn't explore it in any way, shape or form.

So far I think the most Creed-exploratory AC games are AC1 and AC4.

pirate1802
12-13-2013, 02:21 PM
In AC4 you see a far wider variety of Assassins than any other AC game. How each of them is fighting for his own battle. You have a central organized headquarter like Masayf. The Creed in all its glorious variety is present here more than other games. And they actually seem like a powerful entity instead of a rogue band of thieves and wenches. How can people still say its Pirate's Creed? :confused:

Heck, some day they can make an AC game where you play as a Templar and tasked to kill nine Assassin targets in nine cities, leading nine different lifestyles and following nine subsets of the Creed, and in following and killing them you learn about their believes and histories and I'll consider that game more Creedy than some of the older AC ones.

Farlander1991
12-13-2013, 02:34 PM
Heck, some day they can make an AC game where you play as a Templar

Which brings a good point, btw, a game where you fully play from Templar's side doesn't suddenly have to become a "Templar's Creed" franchise. Just as exploring the philosophy of the Templars from the Assassin PoV was very important to understanding the Creed in AC1, for example, playing as the opposing force itself leads to a better understanding of that same Creed as well - but from another PoV.

pirate1802
12-13-2013, 02:41 PM
^Exactly.

Another thing that came to my mind. Edward is initially like.. hehe if everything is permitted why not be the kings of the world? And throughout the game he understands the true meaning of what that phrase means. Like Ezio said in ACR, it means that we only are responsible fo our actions and their consequences. So did Edward learn. And later when he returns to the mentor he says those words, and even Ah Tabai is surprised by his wisdom.

The more I look into it, the more I come to see that this game's story is a beautiful demonstration of the Creed's principles in action. :/

ANGEL AZRAEL PT
12-13-2013, 02:47 PM
"Don't expect him to comprehend something so 'complex'."

Hey, ShakaZulu, you may be a vip in this forum when I just arrived, but that does NOT grant you the rigth to assume my background (in both terms, History and AC history) is the same as your idea of personal insult.
I started by stating that it was my opinion and I did NOT disrespect no one or anyone's oppinion, so I DO expect the same from you, clear?

On topic, to play as a Templar would be interesting. I 've seen that done in Halo 2 we you get to play as the Arbiter (a ennemy) and it did work just fine...

FrankieSatt
12-13-2013, 02:51 PM
To me, the game's plot was a little irrelevant. It was a nice side-story with a likeable protagonist... but that's it. It wasn't epic, there were no stakes at all. I often forgot about the story altogether because I was busy playing the game's awesome side activities.

That is one of the major reasons why Black Flag FAILED as an Assassin's Creed game. Everything else in the game, the Pirate stuff, overshadowed the very little bit of "Assassin's Creed" that was in the game, no just game play but story as well.

The focus of the game, and the story, should have been on "Assassin's Creed" and then sprinkle in the Pirate Stuff to add some flair and some things to do AFTER the game was complete.

Dev_Anj
12-13-2013, 06:25 PM
No way, ACB had the most creed out of all the games.

Vittoria agli Assassini!!!!

Oh really? You mean, with one powerful leader forming a small group of people to take revenge over a corrupt ruler for invading his hometown? Sure, they did have the Assassin ceremony, but beyond that the actual defining principles of the Creed were never explored, outisde of a few talks with Machiavelli.

pirate1802
12-13-2013, 06:31 PM
Oh really? You mean, with one powerful leader forming a small group of people to take revenge over a corrupt ruler for invading his hometown? Sure, they did have the Assassin ceremony, but beyond that the actual defining principles of the Creed were never explored, outisde of a few talks with Machiavelli.

That was a joke, Shepard.

SixKeys
12-13-2013, 06:37 PM
I'm amused by how many people seem to forget that AC2, the game that is still praised as one of, if not THE best entry in the franchise, was one of the lightest on actual Creed content. Ezio wasn't a real assassin until about 89% into the story, just a dude who dressed up in his father's robes and killed people with weapons he got from his inventor friend. He didn't learn the Creed until his official initiation into the brotherhood. (Mario never talked about it, he only told Ezio to respect his fallen enemies.) All the stuff about blending was borne out of necessity, not adherence to assassin ideals. Ezio was a wanted man in Florence as a teenager, so Paola simply taught him how to survive. She didn't mention anything about the assassins or the Creed.

Sushiglutton
12-13-2013, 07:03 PM
The title of this thread really bothers me for some reason. I guess I just don't like the "consesus" part as I don't think that is anywhere near the truth. And stuff like this tend to stick. So in a couple people will say stuff "AC4's story sucked" without having any idea of why they're thinking this. I dunno, it's just unfair and tough for the creators to defend themselves against. Oh, well.

pirate1802
12-13-2013, 07:06 PM
The title of this thread really bothers me for some reason. I guess I just don't like the "consesus" part as I don't think that is anywhere near the truth. And stuff like this tend to stick. So in a couple people will say stuff "AC4's story sucked" without having any idea of why they're thinking this. I dunno, it's just unfair and tough for the creators to defend themselves against. Oh, well.

Exactly what I pointed out to OP in another thread. A better title would have been something like.. "Did AC4's story suck?" instead of Oh we've already decided it sucked, we're merely here to discuss why it sucked. I didnt like the Consensus part as well.

killzab
12-13-2013, 07:14 PM
In hindsight I'd like to change the title, but I was only referring to the fact that criticisms about the story seem to be the ones that come back the most. That's why I said "seems to be" as I wasn't sure.

I didn't say " the consensus IS".

Sushiglutton
12-13-2013, 07:19 PM
In hindsight I'd like to change the title, but I was only referring to the fact that criticisms about the story seem to be the ones that come back the most. That's why I said "seems to be" as I wasn't sure.

I didn't say " the consensus IS".

Technically true, but it kind of implies fairly strongly what the consensus is anyway. I have given more unfair criticism than this before and this isn't exactly the Academics. No hard feelings from my part, it's just a bit unfortunate, that's all.

DarktheMagister
12-13-2013, 09:41 PM
In hindsight I'd like to change the title, but I was only referring to the fact that criticisms about the story seem to be the ones that come back the most. That's why I said "seems to be" as I wasn't sure.

I didn't say " the consensus IS".

Disgruntled voices are always the loudest. So I can see why you got that idea.