PDA

View Full Version : Wild West era



cell01
02-13-2014, 10:31 PM
Do you think there should be a game set in the wild west era, and what event would you want it to be on?

stetsonaw
02-13-2014, 10:39 PM
call me a purist, or whatever you want (as long as it isn't late for dinner), but personally i think any AC game taking place after swords weren't really used in combat anymore, wouldn't be a lot of fun. The swordplay is one of the most fun things in the games (don't get me wrong, shooting people is fun in game), but just guns (and assassin blade of course) would take a lot of fun out of the game.

ze_topazio
02-13-2014, 10:45 PM
http://static1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20131116020515/legomessageboards/images/b/bd/No.gif

LoyalACFan
02-13-2014, 11:34 PM
http://static1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20131116020515/legomessageboards/images/b/bd/No.gif

Lol, this.

I love Westerns for their lonely, barren, man vs. wild vibe. Red Dead nailed that. In a game about climbing stuff and blending in crowds, that wouldn't work at all. Not to mention it would be cheesy as hell.

"This town ain't big enough fer the both of us, ya Templar greenhorn"

ACLexter
02-14-2014, 06:54 AM
I don't like the idea of wild west either.
I agree that Assassin's Creed should be more or sword or stealth or any Assassin type weapon etc.
Pirate type became acceptable since they just explain the Kenway family bloodline wherein the outcome became realistic enough to think.

frodrigues55
02-14-2014, 11:24 AM
I'm gonna forget that I hate anything western related and give an honest unbiased answer: no

City parkour would be non existant with those wild *** streets, combat would be swordless, it would be set in... a desert ew, and everything and everyone is so dirty looking. Plus, horses would be back and they are just ugly an glitchy now.

Farlander1991
02-14-2014, 11:39 AM
Wild West doesn't mean just untamed Frontiers, though (but they can be part of it, just like the Frontier was a part of AC3). For example, this is 19th century San Francisco:
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/10/01/article-2211439-154BC989000005DC-275_634x385.jpg

It could be set during the Gold Rush, when San Francisco grew population from 1,000 people to 25,000 in a year (and then relatively quickly got to 200,000s - in 10 years). We could have a dynamically changing city from a sparsely populated one to a greatly populated one with ****tons of construction and cool freerunning places (not to mention get a greater use of the dynamic world feature in the new AnvilNext engine). Plus Gold Rush is a perfect base for a search for a first civ McGuffin.

adventurewomen
02-14-2014, 01:12 PM
AC game taking place after swords weren't really used in combat anymore, wouldn't be a lot of fun.
All AC games so far had swords..

Sushiglutton
02-14-2014, 01:16 PM
If you play as a native american I think it could work. Otherwise you can't ignore the gunslinger thing which would disrupt the core gameplay. For that there is Call of Juarez gunslinger which is awesome!

ACLexter
02-14-2014, 02:25 PM
I'm imagining 4-6 enemies being shot by you gun with less than 2 secs.

frodrigues55
02-14-2014, 03:30 PM
Wild West doesn't mean just untamed Frontiers, though (but they can be part of it, just like the Frontier was a part of AC3). For example, this is 19th century San Francisco:
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/10/01/article-2211439-154BC989000005DC-275_634x385.jpg

It could be set during the Gold Rush, when San Francisco grew population from 1,000 people to 25,000 in a year (and then relatively quickly got to 200,000s - in 10 years). We could have a dynamically changing city from a sparsely populated one to a greatly populated one with ****tons of construction and cool freerunning places (not to mention get a greater use of the dynamic world feature in the new AnvilNext engine). Plus Gold Rush is a perfect base for a search for a first civ McGuffin.

Must say that was interesting. Surely another point of view from the wild west we usually picture.:o

However, that looks just like AC3's cities, which aren't exactly popular :p

Farlander1991
02-14-2014, 04:10 PM
Must say that was interesting. Surely another point of view from the wild west we usually picture.:o

However, that looks just like AC3's cities, which aren't exactly popular :p

I wouldn't say that it looks exactly like AC3 cities, but at any rate I'm proposing San Francisco during Gold Rush when there would be quite a ton of construction sites (this picture is of San Francisco closer to the end of its 'boom growth' period, and I've already mentioned how fast it went from a small settlement to 200,000 people) providing much more interesting visuals that we haven't really seen before (all cities in AC games are already established) and navigational routes that aren't limited to the style of the city, but can have many layers and levels to it.

stetsonaw
02-14-2014, 06:31 PM
All AC games so far had swords..
That was my point. An AC game without them would be no fun.

Hans684
02-14-2014, 08:52 PM
Would at least have them try it, we have ACIVBF with the ships, pirates and all that. So a Wild West era game might be just as successful, it would change the gameplay and mission design. And the stealth can be revamped, guns does not mean run and gun(unless they take a aprotch like COD, GOW ect...). With guns the stealth would be kinda like Hitman or Splinter Cell but that part has for the most part something to do with the vision, the ambition and the imagination of the team developing the game and of course how the story is written.


That was my point. An AC game without them would be no fun.

If we are only going to play in settings with swords, then the future of this series will be more or less the same in term of gameplay and mission design.

SquareToShoot
02-14-2014, 11:20 PM
Wild West era. AWWWW HELL NAW.

I'd take Victorian England though, ala Jack the Ripper era. Or ancient Japan. Or China even.

Consus_E
02-15-2014, 06:02 AM
If they do go to the 19th century I'd rather they choose a different setting...

ACLexter
02-15-2014, 06:39 AM
Would at least have them try it, we have ACIVBF with the ships, pirates and all that. So a Wild West era game might be just as successful, it would change the gameplay and mission design. And the stealth can be revamped, guns does not mean run and gun(unless they take a aprotch like COD, GOW ect...). With guns the stealth would be kinda like Hitman or Splinter Cell but that part has for the most part something to do with the vision, the ambition and the imagination of the team developing the game and of course how the story is written.



If we are only going to play in settings with swords, then the future of this series will be more or less the same in term of gameplay and mission design.

I'm sorry, but for me, the Wild west /cowboy doesn't fit already to the title Assassin's Creed

Hans684
02-15-2014, 11:00 AM
I'm sorry, but for me, the Wild west /cowboy doesn't fit already to the title Assassin's Creed

I respect that.

GunnerGalactico
02-15-2014, 01:26 PM
Cowboy assassins?.. no thank you.
It just won't work.. feeling bored?
just play Red Dead Redemption

http://uk.playstation.com/media/Va1D4kXt/RedDeadRedemptionHero.JPG

playlisting
02-15-2014, 05:09 PM
Would at least have them try it, we have ACIVBF with the ships, pirates and all that. So a Wild West era game might be just as successful, it would change the gameplay and mission design. And the stealth can be revamped, guns does not mean run and gun(unless they take a aprotch like COD, GOW ect...). With guns the stealth would be kinda like Hitman or Splinter Cell but that part has for the most part something to do with the vision, the ambition and the imagination of the team developing the game and of course how the story is written.



If we are only going to play in settings with swords, then the future of this series will be more or less the same in term of gameplay and mission design.

Yes, and if we want a game that has stealth like Splinter Cell... then the best thing to do would be play Splinter Cell. Assassin's Creed is it's own game. It has fun combat (might be a little easy though) and blades are a lot more fun than guns. Flintlock pistols and muskets are as advanced as the weaponry should get in my opinion. If we start seeing a game where we can just pop in a magazine and start firing then that would kill AC for me. Wild West is to modern for AC.

Hans684
02-15-2014, 05:47 PM
Yes, and if we want a game that has stealth like Splinter Cell... then the best thing to do would be play Splinter Cell. Assassin's Creed is it's own game. It has fun combat (might be a little easy though) and blades are a lot more fun than guns. Flintlock pistols and muskets are as advanced as the weaponry should get in my opinion. If we start seeing a game where we can just pop in a magazine and start firing then that would kill AC for me. Wild West is to modern for AC.

Opinion

Right? Guns = instant shooter. I don't gett it, just becouse someone give you a gun does not mean stealth suddenly become non-existent. If not a game, then perhaps an AC comic or book in Wild West?

GamerKate
02-15-2014, 07:22 PM
Red Dead's Creed?

dbzk1999
02-15-2014, 08:04 PM
opinion

right? Guns = instant shooter. I don't gett it, just becouse someone give you a gun does not mean stealth suddenly becouse non-existent. If not a game, then perhaps an ac comic or book in wild west?

this

playlisting
02-15-2014, 08:14 PM
Opinion

Right? Guns = instant shooter. I don't gett it, just becouse someone give you a gun does not mean stealth suddenly becouse non-existent. If not a game, then perhaps an AC comic or book in Wild West?

I haven't read any books or comics regarding AC so I don't know. If you're going to go stealthy with a gun then you'd need a silencer on it which would bring us into modern times which they said they're not going to do, which is a good thing. A modern AC would run into all sorts of problems. If you're going to be stealthy on AC then guns aren't an option. I can't understand from your post whether you agree or disagree with my point, so can you clarify?

yankeegamergirl
02-15-2014, 08:22 PM
No thanks not for an AC game. Too modern, it makes me think of lots of guns which is a problem for me because we get guns in enough games as it is. Also the Wild West era didn't last very long and wasn't that interesting historically in my humble opinion.

Hans684
02-15-2014, 09:05 PM
I haven't read any books or comics regarding AC so I don't know. If you're going to go stealthy with a gun then you'd need a silencer on it which would bring us into modern times which they said they're not going to do, which is a good thing. A modern AC would run into all sorts of problems. If you're going to be stealthy on AC then guns aren't an option. I can't understand from your post whether you agree or disagree with my point, so can you clarify?

Link to all books and comics: http://assassinscreed.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Real_world_books_and_comics

My point was not to be stealthy with a gun but that guns can "force" the developers & writers to use more stealth(social or ghost) in mission desing and open word. Sure blowing the head of everyone can be an option but you gett my point. And if we gett a game there, then we would still have Hidden Blades and they are useful for stealth either typical or social

playlisting
02-15-2014, 10:04 PM
My point was not to be stealthy with a gun but that guns can "force" the developers & writers to use more stealth(social or ghost) in mission design and open world. Sure blowing the head of everyone can be an option but you get my point. And if we get a game there, then we would still have Hidden Blades and they are useful for stealth either typical or social

How would guns force the writers/developers to use more stealth? I don't know whether I'm stupid but I'm struggling to see your point here. Are you saying that they'd need to include more stealth because if there was guns and we were seen, then it'd be more difficult to survive than if it were just swords/bows and arrows? That's what I think you're saying but I'm not sure. I don't think AC is about ghosting though. I think it's more about blending in with the crowd... hiding in plain sight... seen but unseen... I think you get my point.

Hans684
02-15-2014, 10:17 PM
How would guns force the writers/developers to use more stealth? I don't know whether I'm stupid but I'm struggling to see your point here. Are you saying that they'd need to include more stealth because if there was guns and we were seen, then it'd be more difficult to survive than if it were just swords/bows and arrows? That's what I think you're saying but I'm not sure. I don't think AC is about ghosting though. I think it's more about blending in with the crowd... hiding in plain sight... seen but unseen... I think you get my point.

-_- That's why I had Hitman as an example to begin with, guns does not mean instant shooter. Look at Hitman, every point is there.

playlisting
02-16-2014, 12:04 AM
-_- That's why I had Hitman as an example to begin with, guns does not mean instant shooter. Look at Hitman, every point is there.

Including guns so heavily into AC would not work well. I know that you're saying that guns doesn't automatically mean shooter. In a game like AC fair enough we might have to be a little more stealthy and not use guns much, however what happens when we get caught? A big shoot out. That's just boring. Who wants to have a big shoot out as soon as they're caught? I know that it if I was caught and started having a shoot out with the guards/enemies, I'd just reset it to the nearest checkpoint in the mission and I'm probably not the only one. However with the swords, it's actually a lot more fun to stand your ground and fight. The use of guns in AC now is basically to take out the enemies in high positions such as the riflemen. Making it into the primary way to kill an enemy would be taking it too far.

gnosis_guyver1
02-16-2014, 02:07 AM
I think it could for free running go to the eastern US the "civilized" part for horses and and cowboy stuff the west its dumb to say it wouldn't work cause i can see it working remember assassin had to adapt to methods of combat of the era anything obsolete or unnecessary they dropped like the hidden gun which became obsolete with guns getting more compact and numerous.and the original custom of giving dual hidden blades to only most skilled members that was dropped Edward kenways time

Close range weapons like swords will also become obsolete. so gun combat will be the way to go in that era.

dbzk1999
02-16-2014, 02:52 AM
Including guns so heavily into AC would not work well. I know that you're saying that guns doesn't automatically mean shooter. In a game like AC fair enough we might have to be a little more stealthy and not use guns much, however what happens when we get caught? A big shoot out. That's just boring. Who wants to have a big shoot out as soon as they're caught? I know that it if I was caught and started having a shoot out with the guards/enemies, I'd just reset it to the nearest checkpoint in the mission and I'm probably not the only one. However with the swords, it's actually a lot more fun to stand your ground and fight. The use of guns in AC now is basically to take out the enemies in high positions such as the riflemen. Making it into the primary way to kill an enemy would be taking it too far.
And who said it'll erupt into a shoot out
It may be set in the old west but back then until the Great War there weren't any guns we use today
Heck we could use the same set that nikola once us

Hans684
02-16-2014, 09:41 AM
Including guns so heavily into AC would not work well.

And how do you know that? They havn't tried it... Yet.


I know that you're saying that guns doesn't automatically mean shooter.

Thank you. It also have something to do with the teams vision, their ambition and imagination of an AC in Wild West.


In a game like AC fair enough we might have to be a little more stealthy and not use guns much, however what happens when we get caught? A big shoot out. That's just boring. Who wants to have a big shoot out as soon as they're caught? I know that it if I was caught and started having a shoot out with the guards/enemies, I'd just reset it to the nearest checkpoint in the mission and I'm probably not the only one. However with the swords, it's actually a lot more fun to stand your ground and fight. The use of guns in AC now is basically to take out the enemies in high positions such as the riflemen. Making it into the primary way to kill an enemy would be taking it too far.

Opinion

What happens if you don't get caught? A clean assassination.
Who says you have to shoot you way out? Nobody, were you caught? Yes, is there a horse there? Yes, then there is no problem. Escape.
Isn't there a horse there? No, can you run away? Yes, then there is no problem. Escape.
Isn't there a horse there? No, are you in a city? Yes, can you run away? Yes, then there is no problem. Escape.
You don't have to shoot you way out. Just becouse someone is shooting after you does not mean you have to shoot back if the possibility of escaping is there or as you said reset to the last checkpoint. The way you can use guns now in AC is: If you fire a gun from a place you know you are not gonna get you detected will make the guards seach around the place, a nice distraction. Or in the middle of combat(bording or on land), a nice way to take out guards. If you are detected in a plantation and the guard runs for the alarm, then shoot him and every other guards trying, a nice way to still gett the no alarm triggerd bonus if you are skilled enough. To take out riflemen, not the best way unless you are bording. ect... You get the point. There is no "too far", it's your standard for what you consider make AC what it is

AherasSTRG
02-16-2014, 01:12 PM
I would love to see an AC game set in the Wild West. Remember the from-horse-to-horse assassinations in AC3? Did you know that enemies react to your shots according to the part of the body you shoot them at in AC4? These and other mechanics could make an AC in the Wild West one of the best ACs to date.

playlisting
02-16-2014, 04:39 PM
What happens if you don't get caught? A clean assassination.
Who says you have to shoot you way out? Nobody, were you caught? Yes, is there a horse there? Yes, then there is no problem. Escape.
Isn't there a horse there? No, can you run away? Yes, then there is no problem. Escape.
Isn't there a horse there? No, are you in a city? Yes, can you run away? Yes, then there is no problem. Escape.

I'm going to be honest here, I never really considered the escaping side of things. I made a mistake and when you put it the way you just have with the clean assassination, it makes a lot more sense. I suppose it can still work it will probably just leave less room for error during your missions which isn't a bad thing. I hope they don't do it in the wild west though unless they can find a nice looking city with plenty of high buildings. Guns might be okay but I personally wouldn't want them to become your main weapon. It might be okay but for me, I'd rather they picked an earlier period.

Farlander1991
02-16-2014, 04:46 PM
I'd want an earlier period just for the change of pace, honestly. I mean, just like after three/four medieval games people really wanted something more modern (i.e. French Revolution, though a lot of people wanted American one too and we got it), so after two/three more modern games I would like something less modern (possibly even less modern than the medieval ones).

DumbGamerTag94
02-16-2014, 09:07 PM
The Wild West was not just desert as a lot of people seem to think but everything from the Mississippi River to the mountains of Wyoming and Montana to the hills and forests of California. There are also plenty of cities to those that think there's no urban parkour capabilities. Cites like St. Louis, San Francisco, Denver, chyanne Wyoming, and for a more stereotypical desert city there's always Santa Fe, Yuma, or tombstone. Some of these would be better as small towns in a frontier like open world but San Fran and St. Louis were fairly large cities. The entire west is also a very diverse area that would feel fresh moving from place to place throughout the story. Instead of the same old forests. Also many historical figures to find. Billy the Kid. Jessie James. John Wesley Hardin. Wyatt Earp. Not to mention non fighting figures like Mark Twain. And as for the guns assassins need to adapt to the times they lived. And as others mentioned earlier focusing on stealth and clean kills with hidden blades would avoid gun fights and maybe providing the player incentive to do this with achievements or reward money for taking out enemies would help this. The swords will fade away but stealth never will and it's debatable that guns would in fact create a greater need for stealth

Fatal-Feit
02-17-2014, 10:12 AM
Come on guys, AC shouldn't be hindered to climbing high architectures and tall buildings. I want the developers to push themselves with whichever setting they feel fit to immerse us in. I LOVE the fact that AC:3 and AC:IV have done something completely different. Exploring the sea for the Kenway Saga was new, innovative and brilliant. I mean, isn't exploring different things the main point of these games? In AC:1, we've explored high architectures. In the Ezio Trilogy, we've explored hidden midieval catacombs. In the Kenway Saga, we've explored both the wilderness and the sea. All of which have been beautifully done. A Wild West sequel doesn't have to base itself around high architectures and crowds. The developers can always improvise and innovate. The midieval times with swords and knights are all cool and dandy but we will grow bored if the setting and premise are always the same.


ANYWAAAAAY... One of my idea for a Wild West sequel was to make horses a secondary character like the Jackdaw in AC:IV. Mainstream the horse so it can carry your weapons, tools, and resources. Have pouches as an upgrade. Have more abilities with horses such as being able to restock like in AC:3, free-aim on the horse like in AC:IV, or perform Assassinations and stunts like in AC:B. Allow the players to call on the horse or tell it to wait like with factions.

LoyalACFan
02-17-2014, 05:36 PM
You know, upon further reflection, I think the Wild West is actually the one setting that would make me actively avoid the game. I wouldn't want a game set much past 1800 anyway, but hell, I'd probably buy one if it came out. But Assassin cowboys... my heart would sink. The pirate thing worked because there was sort of a pirate "brotherhood" mentality that dovetailed nicely with the Assassin ideology, but the Wild West was just a bunch of rowdy characters, often with loose morals and very little law and order. They could tackle the urbanization and industrialization theme, but Red Dead already did that, and unless AC5 has been in hardcore development mode for the past SEVERAL years, there's no way it would even come close to that caliber, as they would have to rebuild gameplay from the ground up.

Bottom line, OP should be waiting for RDR3, not Cowboy's Creed.

I-Like-Pie45
02-17-2014, 06:33 PM
Japan is the setting that would make me avoid the game

Megas_Doux
02-17-2014, 06:39 PM
You know, upon further reflection, I think the Wild West is actually the one setting that would make me actively avoid the game. I wouldn't want a game set much past 1800 anyway, but hell, I'd probably buy one if it came out. But Assassin cowboys... my heart would sink. The pirate thing worked because there was sort of a pirate "brotherhood" mentality that dovetailed nicely with the Assassin ideology, but the Wild West was just a bunch of rowdy characters, often with loose morals and very little law and order. They could tackle the urbanization and industrialization theme, but Red Dead already did that, and unless AC5 has been in hardcore development mode for the past SEVERAL years, there's no way it would even come close to that caliber, as they would have to rebuild gameplay from the ground up.

Bottom line, OP should be waiting for RDR3, not Cowboy's Creed.

Agree, I am pretty open minded in terms of settings, but not this one.

DumbGamerTag94
02-17-2014, 07:22 PM
You know, upon further reflection, I think the Wild West is actually the one setting that would make me actively avoid the game. I wouldn't want a game set much past 1800 anyway, but hell, I'd probably buy one if it came out. But Assassin cowboys... my heart would sink. The pirate thing worked because there was sort of a pirate "brotherhood" mentality that dovetailed nicely with the Assassin ideology, but the Wild West was just a bunch of rowdy characters, often with loose morals and very little law and order. They could tackle the urbanization and industrialization theme, but Red Dead already did that, and unless AC5 has been in hardcore development mode for the past SEVERAL years, there's no way it would even come close to that caliber, as they would have to rebuild gameplay from the ground up.

Bottom line, OP should be waiting for RDR3, not Cowboy's Creed.


As you mentioned people said the same thing about pirates. And the actual western figures were almost exactly parallel to pirates. Contrary to movie figures like Clint Eastwood and John Wayne most of the westerners traveled with posies and gangs (like their crew) and most of the major criminals and lawmen worked together not just goin in alone shooting up everything (like Blackbeard kenway n hornigold worked together). It would be good to see an accurate western game like this because everything that already exists only perpetuates the "lone wolf" west myth when realistically these people were more like the mafia or pirates than lone gunslingers. They planed their attacks n spent more time robbing banks n trains than shoot outs.

The time also has plenty of room for the creed and moral ambiguity. Rampant corruption of government and the railroad industry. Are Indians violent or protecting their way of life. Are the outlaws evil or Robin Hood hero types?

While I don't see the west as a first choice for me I would not be disappointed if it happened it would be a beautiful setting with potential for an awesome story.
My first choices would be the French rev. Or American civil war. Japan wouldn't hold my interest in any way

Farlander1991
02-17-2014, 07:35 PM
What I really don't get is... okay, well, I guess I do get it... it's just when anybody mentions Wild West everybody's like, 'Cowboy Assassin' or 'Red Dead Redemption', which is certainly what a Wild West CAN be, but not everything that it is.

I'm not an expert on Wild West history, that period has never really interested me that much (and, heck, the only reason why I know about the California Gold Rush is because of the old Sierra adventure by the name of... well, Gold Rush), but quick googling shows that there's a potential for a lot, not just 'cowboy creed' or 'Red Dead Redemption knock-off' or 'A classic western adventure' with some kind of 'sheriff that protects the town' or 'lone outlaw' or whatever that comes first to mind when the phrase 'Wild West' is heard, so it really surprises me when people say, 'Oh, I can take any setting, but not this one!'. I just find it weird.

DumbGamerTag94
02-17-2014, 07:46 PM
What I really don't get is... okay, well, I guess I do get it... it's just when anybody mentions Wild West everybody's like, 'Cowboy Assassin' or 'Red Dead Redemption', which is certainly what a Wild West CAN be, but not everything that it is.

I'm not an expert on Wild West history, that period has never really interested me that much (and, heck, the only reason why I know about the California Gold Rush is because of the old Sierra adventure by the name of... well, Gold Rush), but quick googling shows that there's a potential for a lot, not just 'cowboy creed' or 'Red Dead Redemption knock-off' or 'A classic western adventure' with some kind of 'sheriff that protects the town' or 'lone outlaw' or whatever that comes first to mind when the phrase 'Wild West' is heard, so it really surprises me when people say, 'Oh, I can take any setting, but not this one!'. I just find it weird.

I agree 100%. I think it's because people don't know about the real west. It's been distorted so much over 100 years of cheesy movies n books to make everyone just think desert, tumbleweeds, high noon shoot outs, lawlessness, and lone bandits are what the west was. When none of those are true. In fact most violence in the west was as a result of the law trying to stop gangs from robbing banks and trains. Not people just randomly shooting each other willy nilly with corny catch phrases and a piece of straw In their teeth.

Hans684
02-17-2014, 09:58 PM
As you mentioned people said the same thing about pirates. And the actual western figures were almost exactly parallel to pirates. Contrary to movie figures like Clint Eastwood and John Wayne most of the westerners traveled with posies and gangs (like their crew) and most of the major criminals and lawmen worked together not just goin in alone shooting up everything (like Blackbeard kenway n hornigold worked together). It would be good to see an accurate western game like this because everything that already exists only perpetuates the "lone wolf" west myth when realistically these people were more like the mafia or pirates than lone gunslingers. They planed their attacks n spent more time robbing banks n trains than shoot outs.

The time also has plenty of room for the creed and moral ambiguity. Rampant corruption of government and the railroad industry. Are Indians violent or protecting their way of life. Are the outlaws evil or Robin Hood hero types?

While I don't see the west as a first choice for me I would not be disappointed if it happened it would be a beautiful setting with potential for an awesome story.
My first choices would be the French rev. Or American civil war. Japan wouldn't hold my interest in any way

Some of the reasons the Wild West has potential, it might be better than RDR(long shot, didn't like it myself), AC2(Most loved AC, not my favorite anymore) or ACIVBF(second most loved AC, one of my favorites). Every setting has potential, consider Ubisoft want to show the real deal(stereotype pirates(PotC) vs historical pirates(ACIVBF)). They have a gold mine of operturnities.

Rugterwyper32
02-17-2014, 10:41 PM
In my opinion, if the series ever went to the Old West, I think northern California/Oregon would do. In fact, I'm thinking that for cities San Francisco and Sacramento would do, maybe Portland if they decided to go into making things different than they really were and make it bigger than it was at the time, closer to how it was about 20 years later in the 1870s.

San Francisco:

http://www.sanfranciscosentinel.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/san-francisco-1860.jpg

Sacramento:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/af/Birds-eye_view_of_Sacramento_1857.jpg

Portland:

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-N3HnirMrcYM/T-3Y9qS1WwI/AAAAAAAACeQ/fJ_PlYuJ54E/s1600/Portland%2BOregon%2B1870s.jpg

Would it be the best possible choice? I don't think so. Would it be good? Maybe, I'd give it a shot. You never know until you try, after all.

DumbGamerTag94
02-18-2014, 12:08 AM
Would it be good? Maybe, I'd give it a shot. You never know until you try, after all.

That's exactly my feelings on this! I think it would only be a good addition to the series if it was a sequel to a possible American Civil War game(which I REALLY would love to see). After all the very existence of the wild west was a product of the Civil War. Not to mention so many western figures served in that war so the story lines could flow together. Jesse James and his brother Frank fought for the confederacy, and many others were veterans. There's also non outlaw western figures like General George Custer(before is infamous last stand with the Indians he was one of the Union's best cavalry generals and fought at battles such as Gettysburg).

I don't think only the costal states would be good though because that limits you only to the Gold Rush which actually was before the Civil War and long before the Golden days of the Wild West. But I agree San Fran should be a major city. Most of the "Wild West" was in the area between the Mississippi river and the Rocky mountains. I think a Wild West game should reflect that with diverse areas representing the Entire Western US. Obviously not to scale but at least representative regions. Desert, Plains, Mountains, and West Coast with a major city for each. St. Louis for the Mid West, Yuma, Santa Fe, or Tombstone for Desert states, Denver or Cheyanne for the Mountains, and I agree San Francisco for the West Coast.

The story has more room for play that way. Kind of a sub plot to challenge morals in each region. Everything from Die hard Confederate guerilla fighters trying to fight the war they lost in the mid west( the futility of blind faith), to infamous encounters like the OK Corral in the Desert(Passionate pursuit of Justice and Revenge). Train Robberies, and Indian wars in the Mountains showing the Corruption of the Government and Corporate Rail Roads at the time(Corruption, Racism, Greed, Sad fate of the Natives) and for the West Coast a theme of (Global Trade, Gold, Shanghi-ing(kidnappings resulting in being shipped to Asia) Feuds, and An end to the frontier) Possibly creating a Lead in to a future Asian Game with the Shanghi-ing sub theme. Maybe a later game following set in Japan during the period where the Emperor overtook the Samurai and the Shogun (c. 1870-1890s) or maybe the Boxer Rebellion in China (c. 1910s) I think it would be an interesting way to bring the series to Asia in a less publicized more modern time period that has impacts today even.

the more I think about a Western Game the more I like the idea. But only on condition we get A Civil War game first, and then Transition to a new place in the world.

LoyalACFan
02-18-2014, 01:24 AM
As you mentioned people said the same thing about pirates. And the actual western figures were almost exactly parallel to pirates. Contrary to movie figures like Clint Eastwood and John Wayne most of the westerners traveled with posies and gangs (like their crew) and most of the major criminals and lawmen worked together not just goin in alone shooting up everything (like Blackbeard kenway n hornigold worked together). It would be good to see an accurate western game like this because everything that already exists only perpetuates the "lone wolf" west myth when realistically these people were more like the mafia or pirates than lone gunslingers. They planed their attacks n spent more time robbing banks n trains than shoot outs.

The time also has plenty of room for the creed and moral ambiguity. Rampant corruption of government and the railroad industry. Are Indians violent or protecting their way of life. Are the outlaws evil or Robin Hood hero types?

While I don't see the west as a first choice for me I would not be disappointed if it happened it would be a beautiful setting with potential for an awesome story.
My first choices would be the French rev. Or American civil war. Japan wouldn't hold my interest in any way

Pirates wanted to form their own independent government where all men would be free from the grip of empires. They had an ideology. Whereas bandits in the Old West were just murderous thugs who wanted money. The popular notion of Jesse James and his ilk as these noble Robin Hood figures is total BS, a production of 20th century romanticizing. If there was an AC based on an altruistic cowboy gang, I'd roll my eyes so hard I'd probably break the ceiling. That would not be an "accurate" Western game by any means.

But let's pretend for a moment that the story and characters aren't an issue. Let's just assume that they somehow miraculously pulled off an incredible story and were able to tie it into the AC experience as a whole. What about the gameplay? You're talking about a franchise that's already strained to push out games with similar mechanics and incremental improvements year after year. You want them to try and revamp the ENTIRE gameplay experience in such a short dev cycle? Assassin's Creed has fantastic parkour, combat based entirely on melee, godawful horses, and weak shooting mechanics. You're suggesting they make a game with little or no room for parkour, no melee, absolutely pivotal focus on horses, and a primary focus on gunfighting? What the hell? It's almost like you're begging for a faceplant.

dbzk1999
02-18-2014, 01:46 AM
Pirates wanted to form their own independent government where all men would be free from the grip of empires. They had an ideology. Whereas bandits in the Old West were just murderous thugs who wanted money. The popular notion of Jesse James and his ilk as these noble Robin Hood figures is total BS, a production of 20th century romanticizing. If there was an AC based on an altruistic cowboy gang, I'd roll my eyes so hard I'd probably break the ceiling. That would not be an "accurate" Western game by any means.

But let's pretend for a moment that the story and characters aren't an issue. Let's just assume that they somehow miraculously pulled off an incredible story and were able to tie it into the AC experience as a whole. What about the gameplay? You're talking about a franchise that's already strained to push out games with similar mechanics and incremental improvements year after year. You want them to try and revamp the ENTIRE gameplay experience in such a short dev cycle? Assassin's Creed has fantastic parkour, combat based entirely on melee, godawful horses, and weak shooting mechanics. You're suggesting they make a game with little or no room for parkour, no melee, absolutely pivotal focus on horses, and a primary focus on gunfighting? What the hell? It's almost like you're begging for a faceplant.

Sorry man didn't realize you lived in the old west how was it
Either that or you went into the future to see IF they released a Wild West game and played it

DumbGamerTag94
02-18-2014, 02:04 AM
Pirates wanted to form their own independent government where all men would be free from the grip of empires. They had an ideology. Whereas bandits in the Old West were just murderous thugs who wanted money. The popular notion of Jesse James and his ilk as these noble Robin Hood figures is total BS, a production of 20th century romanticizing. If there was an AC based on an altruistic cowboy gang, I'd roll my eyes so hard I'd probably break the ceiling. That would not be an "accurate" Western game by any means.

But let's pretend for a moment that the story and characters aren't an issue. Let's just assume that they somehow miraculously pulled off an incredible story and were able to tie it into the AC experience as a whole. What about the gameplay? You're talking about a franchise that's already strained to push out games with similar mechanics and incremental improvements year after year. You want them to try and revamp the ENTIRE gameplay experience in such a short dev cycle? Assassin's Creed has fantastic parkour, combat based entirely on melee, godawful horses, and weak shooting mechanics. You're suggesting they make a game with little or no room for parkour, no melee, absolutely pivotal focus on horses, and a primary focus on gunfighting? What the hell? It's almost like you're begging for a faceplant.

Ok first off the pirates weren't trying to create a government but more of a safe haven where there is no government at all and everyone has a say and can "do as they please" more of an anarchist paradise than a separate government. Anarchy and shared plunder?(among the gang not public)(the pirates never gave back to the general public either just their ilk on Nassau)? Sounds a little like the Wild West to me.

Now about the story line I wasn't saying at all that the James gang was a Robin Hood type figure(in fact quite the opposite) I was suggesting a story by which the bandits themselves and maybe the main character would believe they are righteous heroes because they are stealing from corrupt corporations and government, but over time the hero would become disillusioned with this as he encounters contradictions, brutality, and hypocrisies through his travels in the west. In a sense becoming lost in the world and learning he cant trust bandits or the government (Nothing is True). The game would focus on debunking the glorified west and show that just about everything was corrupted and flawed at the time and using any means to take out your target be it guns or a bow or hidden blade or a fist fight even if you once called them friend(Everything is Permitted) I have a list of some other possible sub plots in an earlier post. And as for Parkour I have mentioned in several posts on this thread cities that would work for parkour and not to mention climbing the trees and cliffs of the rocky mountains, the canyons and rock formations of the desert and the multiple large cities ive mentioned befor like San Francisco and St. Louis. So I strongly disagree with you on impossibility of parkour or a fantastic story for the west. And as for your hatred of guns? What are we supposed to skip the past 200 years of human history just cuz swords stopped being cool? Like the assassins just packed up at 1800 and said "well guys I guess the Templars win. The world stopped using guns so I guess we are done here. This sucks...just wait till light sabers are invented and we'll be back". Please we cant abandon time periods just so Anime/renaissance fair fanboys can have their precious swords in every single game. Its eventually going to happen or people will just get bored with the same old **** coming out of the assassins franchise it does go on to present day after all they will eventually have to fill that gap.

And as for development. We know that this kind of thing isn't beyond the range of a game company to make mechanics for. As many people have referenced Red Dead that game has many of these features and was able to be made. Its not impossible. Add parkour features and hidden blades. I also think a bow would be a good weapon to include and it would not be out of place for the time. And I understand that AC in a yearly release however so is a game like Call of Duty for instance, but they are made by two separate studios over 2 year dev. cycles and released yearly by a different studio every other year. A similar set up should be applied to AC to allow for longer dev. cycles which would allow for better quality AC games, stories, and features and fewer glitches. In short its not an impossible thing and I almost wish it wasn't a yearly release so ubi could focus on quality rather than quantity.

And I think if done right it could be far better than Red Dead. That game was a social satire of what the Wild West is depicted as thus why we see so many off the wall characters ie: Seth, That Cocaine using doctor in Blackwater, The old gunslinger dude in Mexico. Everything in Red Dead is meant to be a satire like its GTA counterparts, but AC would be very different a fictional story based on how the west really was. Disillusioning the public to the legends and showing us how that era was. Where the Civil War was the fight for America's soul The wild west was America trying to find itself after decent into the darkness and devastation of Civil War. As ive said before it needs to be coupled with a Civil War game creating an American Trilogy. Revolution(High Ideals unfulfilled) Civil War(Freedom Equality and decent into Darkness) Western(Finding Self and Disillusionment). Then America needs to be left for AC forever after those three eras are covered. The Civil War and West could be the same Assassin.

Megas_Doux
02-18-2014, 02:09 AM
My main concern is the possible lack of swordplay and the excesive gunslinger action......

DumbGamerTag94
02-18-2014, 02:19 AM
My main concern is the possible lack of swordplay and the excesive gunslinger action......

Very understandable fear. But look at the world realistically. If lets say you needed to steal something or take someone out but there were people literally around every corner with guns would you just run in and get your head blown off or would you try to sneak around without being seen? This could be put at ease by making it much easier to be killed by bullets than we see in AC 3 or 4. Its not realistic to just stand there like a juggernaut mowing everyone down with 2 six shooters. Also only 2 six shooters or a Winchester rifle if these were given accurate reload rates you wouldn't have the firepower to want to get into gunfights all the time and it would encourage stealth. If your surrounded by 20 bad guys n you only have 12 shots before you need to reload for 30secs. the math isn't in your favor. And I feel prequiling a western with a setting like the civil war would help ease off the dependence on swords getting players used to the idea. since swords were still used in the 1860s but were beginning to become obsolete it would wean The AC franchise off of swords and into a more modern style of assassin order. Things change with time and I think the Assassin order needs to reflect that.

LoyalACFan
02-18-2014, 03:54 AM
Ok first off the pirates weren't trying to create a government but more of a safe haven where there is no government at all and everyone has a say and can "do as they please" more of an anarchist paradise than a separate government. Anarchy and shared plunder?(among the gang not public)(the pirates never gave back to the general public either just their ilk on Nassau)? Sounds a little like the Wild West to me.

They set up Nassau as their form of "giving back." They had goals and ideals beyond just getting money. Frontier outlaws didn't. There was no "outlaw code" like the pirate code.


Now about the story line I wasn't saying at all that the James gang was a Robin Hood type figure(in fact quite the opposite) I was suggesting a story by which the bandits themselves and maybe the main character would believe they are righteous heroes because they are stealing from corrupt corporations and government, but over time the hero would become disillusioned with this as he encounters contradictions, brutality, and hypocrisies through his travels in the west. In a sense becoming lost in the world and learning he cant trust bandits or the government (Nothing is True). The game would focus on debunking the glorified west and show that just about everything was corrupted and flawed at the time and using any means to take out your target be it guns or a bow or hidden blade or a fist fight even if you once called them friend(Everything is Permitted).

... do you even realize how much this sounds like Red Dead?


So I strongly disagree with you on impossibility of parkour or a fantastic story for the west. And as for your hatred of guns? What are we supposed to skip the past 200 years of human history just cuz swords stopped being cool? Like the assassins just packed up at 1800 and said "well guys I guess the Templars win. The world stopped using guns so I guess we are done here. This sucks...just wait till light sabers are invented and we'll be back". Please we cant abandon time periods just so Anime/renaissance fair fanboys can have their precious swords in every single game. Its eventually going to happen or people will just get bored with the same old **** coming out of the assassins franchise it does go on to present day after all they will eventually have to fill that gap.

We have other media for AC stories. Nikolai's story was set in the 1900s. It's not like they can't explore times with guns, but yeah, they should avoid them in the games. The gameplay would have to be completely turned on its head. I have no idea why people think this is a simple thing that can be done in a short AC dev cycle. As for parkour... why do you disagree? There's nothing to climb on in the Western frontier but rocks with nothing on top of them, and a couple of two-story buildings. Believe me, I've been there. And if it's San Fran or St Louis you're talking about, then it's going to be just as dull as AC3's cities.


And as for development. We know that this kind of thing isn't beyond the range of a game company to make mechanics for. As many people have referenced Red Dead that game has many of these features and was able to be made. Its not impossible. Add parkour features and hidden blades. I also think a bow would be a good weapon to include and it would not be out of place for the time. And I understand that AC in a yearly release however so is a game like Call of Duty for instance, but they are made by two separate studios over 2 year dev. cycles and released yearly by a different studio every other year. A similar set up should be applied to AC to allow for longer dev. cycles which would allow for better quality AC games, stories, and features and fewer glitches. In short its not an impossible thing and I almost wish it wasn't a yearly release so ubi could focus on quality rather than quantity.

Red Dead took over half a decade to make. Yeah, it's obviously within the realm of possibility for a company to create features like you're talking about, but not from scratch in two years.


And I think if done right it could be far better than Red Dead. That game was a social satire of what the Wild West is depicted as thus why we see so many off the wall characters ie: Seth, That Cocaine using doctor in Blackwater, The old gunslinger dude in Mexico. Everything in Red Dead is meant to be a satire like its GTA counterparts, but AC would be very different a fictional story based on how the west really was. Disillusioning the public to the legends and showing us how that era was. Where the Civil War was the fight for America's soul The wild west was America trying to find itself after decent into the darkness and devastation of Civil War. As ive said before it needs to be coupled with a Civil War game creating an American Trilogy. Revolution(High Ideals unfulfilled) Civil War(Freedom Equality and decent into Darkness) Western(Finding Self and Disillusionment). Then America needs to be left for AC forever after those three eras are covered. The Civil War and West could be the same Assassin.

I'm already tired of the Americas TBH. I liked the old pre-2012 AC's for all of their ancient conspiracies and machinations, and while the New World thing was cool as a change of pace in AC3 and 4, I think AC works better when it's centered in locations with deeply entrenched cultures and architecture as opposed to the frontier that's only been settled for a few decades (obviously the Native Americans were there centuries before but you know what I mean).


Sorry man didn't realize you lived in the old west how was it
Either that or you went into the future to see IF they released a Wild West game and played it

Dude, I'm speaking from a historical standpoint, don't pull that "were you there?" BS on me. You sound like a freaking Young Earth creationist. Black Flag represented pirates in a relatively faithful recreation of actual events. What YOU are advocating is pure fantasy. Robin Hood gunslingers? Lol OK.

DumbGamerTag94
02-18-2014, 04:35 AM
They set up Nassau as their form of "giving back." They had goals and ideals beyond just getting money. Frontier outlaws didn't. There was no "outlaw code" like the pirate code.



... do you even realize how much this sounds like Red Dead?



We have other media for AC stories. Nikolai's story was set in the 1900s. It's not like they can't explore times with guns, but yeah, they should avoid them in the games. The gameplay would have to be completely turned on its head. I have no idea why people think this is a simple thing that can be done in a short AC dev cycle. As for parkour... why do you disagree? There's nothing to climb on in the Western frontier but rocks with nothing on top of them, and a couple of two-story buildings. Believe me, I've been there. And if it's San Fran or St Louis you're talking about, then it's going to be just as dull as AC3's cities.



Red Dead took over half a decade to make. Yeah, it's obviously within the realm of possibility for a company to create features like you're talking about, but not from scratch in two years.



I'm already tired of the Americas TBH. I liked the old pre-2012 AC's for all of their ancient conspiracies and machinations, and while the New World thing was cool as a change of pace in AC3 and 4, I think AC works better when it's centered in locations with deeply entrenched cultures and architecture as opposed to the frontier that's only been settled for a few decades (obviously the Native Americans were there centuries before but you know what I mean).



Dude, I'm speaking from a historical standpoint, don't pull that "were you there?" BS on me. You sound like a freaking Young Earth creationist. Black Flag represented pirates in a relatively faithful recreation of actual events. What YOU are advocating is pure fantasy. Robin Hood gunslingers? Lol OK.

I already said that its not based on fantasy I want the figures to be represented accurately I already said why the robin hood myth would not be the case if you would have taken the time to read instead of just instantly being negative. It seems you wouldn't really be happy no matter what happens with the series.

As for your comment about different forms of media....are you serious? Nobody wants that that's like having a favorite TV show and it just leaves stuff out and says "you can find out what happens on Pay per view. Screw that I just wont watch the show anymore. And the plot needs to advance for those of us that follow the story based off of the games. I'm all for going back in time again and trying different settings but it will get old if they don't spice it up with a more modern entry once and a while. You don't want the series to get so attached to something like swordplay that it doesn't allow change and becomes stale to everyone.

They also wouldn't be making anything completely from scratch in two years they could recycle features from previous AC games that aren't broken like the parkour to speed the process along maybe not 2 years but 3 maybe and I wouldn't care about dev. times if ubi makes quality games

And what are you talking about sick of Americans? There's only one game set in the US and that wasn't very good. 2 games if you count liberation which also kind of sucked and wasn't a main console game. The Carribean has nothing to do with "Americans" that's all Slave colonies, European Loyalists ie Spain and Britain, and South American Natives. Not anything to do with America, and not to mention North and South America are far more geographically diverse as far as scenery and terrain than other places in the series like Europe and the Middle east. They are literally 100% temperate climate and desert respectively. I would however be open to Asia or Africa as little is covered there in games just lord please no feudal japan it will literally just be a rehash of AC1 but with more xylophones and wind chime music and more colorful cities.

Like I said red dead was a satire. And while it did touch on similar topics it perpetuated the same old garbage myths and you never encounter any actual figures or real cities...Blackwater in that game is the biggest and its only like four streets wide..simply ridiculous since most of the major cities of the time were far larger than that. There would be bigger cities that wouldn't be like AC3 because Victorian architecture is far more ornate and detailed than the plain brick or wood of colonial houses. granted the desert and rural towns would be more plain but you need to think of a broader west than just dusty wooden one street towns like in John Wayne movies, and there would be opportunity for parkour because of the diversity of areas the Wilderness of the rockey mountains is full of cliffs and trees, theres the redwood forests of California and the cities on the coast, the desert and plains wouldn't be much for parkour but theres always caves, canyons and small boom towns to parkour in.

I'm not saying its the greatest place for an Assassin's game but I will say it would make a pretty good one it wouldn't hurt the series to go a little more modern(and robbing banks or trains like you can plunder ships in ac 4 would be cool. I already explained how realistic health and reloading of guns would encourage more stealth in an earlier post but it seems you are negative to anything new anyway. I'll agree to disagree with you

dbzk1999
02-18-2014, 05:11 AM
They set up Nassau as their form of "giving back." They had goals and ideals beyond just getting money. Frontier outlaws didn't. There was no "outlaw code" like the pirate code.



... do you even realize how much this sounds like Red Dead?



We have other media for AC stories. Nikolai's story was set in the 1900s. It's not like they can't explore times with guns, but yeah, they should avoid them in the games. The gameplay would have to be completely turned on its head. I have no idea why people think this is a simple thing that can be done in a short AC dev cycle. As for parkour... why do you disagree? There's nothing to climb on in the Western frontier but rocks with nothing on top of them, and a couple of two-story buildings. Believe me, I've been there. And if it's San Fran or St Louis you're talking about, then it's going to be just as dull as AC3's cities.



Red Dead took over half a decade to make. Yeah, it's obviously within the realm of possibility for a company to create features like you're talking about, but not from scratch in two years.



I'm already tired of the Americas TBH. I liked the old pre-2012 AC's for all of their ancient conspiracies and machinations, and while the New World thing was cool as a change of pace in AC3 and 4, I think AC works better when it's centered in locations with deeply entrenched cultures and architecture as opposed to the frontier that's only been settled for a few decades (obviously the Native Americans were there centuries before but you know what I mean).



Dude, I'm speaking from a historical standpoint, don't pull that "were you there?" BS on me. You sound like a freaking Young Earth creationist. Black Flag represented pirates in a relatively faithful recreation of actual events. What YOU are advocating is pure fantasy. Robin Hood gunslingers? Lol OK.
Oh I'm sorry I forgot the part where I said I agreed with a Robin Hood gunslinger AC
Oh please remind me where I said that ubisoft didn't do a faithful recreation of pirates where is it
You make it seem as if it's impossible but in case you haven't noticed it's still BASED which means things would be changed to fit the story
I'd also appreciate if u didn't use that term as I don't like people who sound as if they're mocking my religion
Sheesh and by the way I'm not saying it should be Wild West I'm just saying I wouldn't mind it

LoyalACFan
02-18-2014, 07:08 AM
Oh I'm sorry I forgot the part where I said I agreed with a Robin Hood gunslinger AC
Oh please remind me where I said that ubisoft didn't do a faithful recreation of pirates where is it
You make it seem as if it's impossible but in case you haven't noticed it's still BASED which means things would be changed to fit the story
I'd also appreciate if u didn't use that term as I don't like people who sound as if they're mocking my religion
Sheesh and by the way I'm not saying it should be Wild West I'm just saying I wouldn't mind it

Oh yeah, somewhere in your snarky pointless post I must have overlooked the part where you did anything but act like a fool. Sorry. How was I supposed to know your opinion when all you did was say "hurr you weren't there so you don't know?"

Zafar1981
02-18-2014, 07:13 AM
To be honest I love wild west era. I love red dead redemption. I am eagerly waiting for new RDR game. But I won't like AC in this era because it doesn't suit AC franchise. I can say that the open world gameplay( outside the cities) would be as similer to RDR but not the era. I want the area outside the cities look as natural like in RDR especially the draw distance. Random events or stranger quests would be added like in RDR.
Fact is that an AC game with out sword look less attractive and in wild west era Colt 79 and Repeater is so common that use of sword would be absent. I even didn't like the muscat in the game and powerful guns like Colt and Repeater would definitely make it less fun to play.
For AC series I can only say that:
No Fun with Gun :cool:.
I think they should cap the series up to 18th century.

LoyalACFan
02-18-2014, 07:25 AM
I already said that its not based on fantasy I want the figures to be represented accurately I already said why the robin hood myth would not be the case if you would have taken the time to read instead of just instantly being negative. It seems you wouldn't really be happy no matter what happens with the series.

Disagreeing with your opinion =/= not being happy with anything that happens. I'm game for many, many settings, including Imperial China, Feudal Japan, ancient Rome, Tudor England, ancient Sumeria, Egypt, the list goes on. The one you're arguing for is not one of them, nor are many past 1800, or any past 1850.


As for your comment about different forms of media....are you serious? Nobody wants that that's like having a favorite TV show and it just leaves stuff out and says "you can find out what happens on Pay per view. Screw that I just wont watch the show anymore. And the plot needs to advance for those of us that follow the story based off of the games. I'm all for going back in time again and trying different settings but it will get old if they don't spice it up with a more modern entry once and a while. You don't want the series to get so attached to something like swordplay that it doesn't allow change and becomes stale to everyone.

The series is already like that. Nikolai Orlelov and Arbaaz Mir are proof of that. I didn't make it that way, but it's what we've got. I would have preferred it to remain just a game series, but if they're going to use a setting that would require a fundamental departure from AC gameplay, I'd rather they do it in a novel, film or comic.


They also wouldn't be making anything completely from scratch in two years they could recycle features from previous AC games that aren't broken like the parkour to speed the process along maybe not 2 years but 3 maybe and I wouldn't care about dev. times if ubi makes quality games

They WOULD be making things from scratch though. You'd be turning AC into a cover-based shooter. Which wouldn't necessarily be a horrible thing as a one-off, but the way they're milking the series and ever-decreasing the dev time, I don't want them to go off on a wild hare and make a game that falls on its face. AC3 was less revolutionary than what you're proposing, and it was a mess.


And what are you talking about sick of Americans? There's only one game set in the US and that wasn't very good. 2 games if you count liberation which also kind of sucked and wasn't a main console game. The Carribean has nothing to do with "Americans" that's all Slave colonies, European Loyalists ie Spain and Britain, and South American Natives. Not anything to do with America, and not to mention North and South America are far more geographically diverse as far as scenery and terrain than other places in the series like Europe and the Middle east. They are literally 100% temperate climate and desert respectively. I would however be open to Asia or Africa as little is covered there in games just lord please no feudal japan it will literally just be a rehash of AC1 but with more xylophones and wind chime music and more colorful cities.

I said the Americas, not Americans. As in the New World in general. European colonies in the New World have been done to death in AC3, AC4, and Liberation. I'm ready for something fresh.


Like I said red dead was a satire. And while it did touch on similar topics it perpetuated the same old garbage myths and you never encounter any actual figures or real cities...Blackwater in that game is the biggest and its only like four streets wide..simply ridiculous since most of the major cities of the time were far larger than that. There would be bigger cities that wouldn't be like AC3 because Victorian architecture is far more ornate and detailed than the plain brick or wood of colonial houses. granted the desert and rural towns would be more plain but you need to think of a broader west than just dusty wooden one street towns like in John Wayne movies, and there would be opportunity for parkour because of the diversity of areas the Wilderness of the rockey mountains is full of cliffs and trees, theres the redwood forests of California and the cities on the coast, the desert and plains wouldn't be much for parkour but theres always caves, canyons and small boom towns to parkour in.

RDR wasn't exclusively a satire, and it did way more than "touch" on those themes you mentioned. The whole game was about disillusionment with a gang that was supposed to be altruistic, which culminated in the deaths of people you once called friends. That sounds exactly like what you're describing. I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree about the parkour, because I still feel it would be a bad setting for it. Sure there were big towns like San Fran, but they looked like this

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/46/SanFranciscoharbor1851c_sharp.jpg/800px-SanFranciscoharbor1851c_sharp.jpg

Far too similar to Boston, IMO...


it seems you are negative to anything new anyway

:rolleyes:

dbzk1999
02-18-2014, 12:14 PM
Oh yeah, somewhere in your snarky pointless post I must have overlooked the part where you did anything but act like a fool. Sorry. How was I supposed to know your opinion when all you did was say "hurr you weren't there so you don't know?"

How about you not just assume things I wasn't saying it was a stupid opinion and sorry if you took it that way I'm just saying that it if they did do the Wild West we wouldn't know what part of it it'll take place in

RinoTheBouncer
02-18-2014, 02:23 PM
He makes a great assassin ;)

http://lets-have-a-beer.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/cowboy3.jpg

DumbGamerTag94
02-18-2014, 06:10 PM
Disagreeing with your opinion =/= not being happy with anything that happens. I'm game for many, many settings, including Imperial China, Feudal Japan, ancient Rome, Tudor England, ancient Sumeria, Egypt, the list goes on. The one you're arguing for is not one of them, nor are many past 1800, or any past 1850.



The series is already like that. Nikolai Orlelov and Arbaaz Mir are proof of that. I didn't make it that way, but it's what we've got. I would have preferred it to remain just a game series, but if they're going to use a setting that would require a fundamental departure from AC gameplay, I'd rather they do it in a novel, film or comic.



They WOULD be making things from scratch though. You'd be turning AC into a cover-based shooter. Which wouldn't necessarily be a horrible thing as a one-off, but the way they're milking the series and ever-decreasing the dev time, I don't want them to go off on a wild hare and make a game that falls on its face. AC3 was less revolutionary than what you're proposing, and it was a mess.



I said the Americas, not Americans. As in the New World in general. European colonies in the New World have been done to death in AC3, AC4, and Liberation. I'm ready for something fresh.



RDR wasn't exclusively a satire, and it did way more than "touch" on those themes you mentioned. The whole game was about disillusionment with a gang that was supposed to be altruistic, which culminated in the deaths of people you once called friends. That sounds exactly like what you're describing. I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree about the parkour, because I still feel it would be a bad setting for it. Sure there were big towns like San Fran, but they looked like this

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/46/SanFranciscoharbor1851c_sharp.jpg/800px-SanFranciscoharbor1851c_sharp.jpg

Far too similar to Boston, IMO...



:rolleyes:
I don't mean you're not open to any new setting I'm saying you're not open to change. Everything you mentioned is a time period that has either been covered or would be very similar to another. For example Tudor London was part of the Northern stage of the renaissance much of the same technologies and themes from the Ezio trilogy would end up being addressed in a setting like this. Not to mention early London would be a very dreary setting based on the architecture, climate, etc. You thought Boston was dreary and boring? Tudor London would be a foggy combination of Acre and Boston Buildings would all be the same (white plaster with wooden supports thatched roofs) Even the Globe theater had that same look and color sceme Everything will be wood grey and white. Only changed up by the churches, castles and parliament building all still with very dull colors. Not to pick on any setting specifically because there is good potential for a story there, but my point is that American cities aren't the only boring ones. Damascus for example was just an unending blob of brown. As an American from the north east myself I thought AC3 was a very accurate representation of Colonial America. But our architecture changed heavily after the Civil war and we departed from the brick look of colonial cities and became focused on more of a Victorian style with bright color, advertising, gas/electric lighting etc. the photo you have based on the style of buildings and the lack of steam ships in the background is from the Boom town period of 1840s and 50s. I suggested a later San Fran 1870+ just look up San Francisco 1880s and look at the pictures of the Victorian homes of the hills district, down town, city hall, banks, churches. Far nicer than the shack boom town of the gold rush especially if you see the colorized photos with advertisements and trolly cars.

I also don't think the game would become a "cover based shooter" the emphasis would still be on stealth guns only an option(not to mention you couldn't exactly take on the entire world on your own with a gun until roughly 1920 and automatic guns. After that point there should not be an assassins game) I explain the gun issue in an earlier post on this thread, you wouldn't shoot your way in and out of every place. And the Assassins series is NOT based on sword combat. It is based on stealth, parkour, deep stories, and history(spanning more than just sword eras). As long as these aspects remain in tact it would still be an assassins creed game at its core. Besides that AC4 threw stealth out the window except for story missions. Everything you do in that game outside of the main story or a plantation heist is as notorious as you can get.

My point is that I too am open to just about any setting im not saying we need to do the west im trying to get the point across that its not impossible or sacrilegious to make more modern installments of the series. It would be a good change of pace and they could always go back and forth to make the sword lovers happy and I myself would hope they would do that because more recent times would eventually become tired too so they should go back when it starts getting too familiar.

Every setting and period has its draw backs but AC is about history and stealth and no other mechanic is something that should be set in stone if they want to base the series off of "history" they will have to depart from technologies and customs that limit them to a narrow time frame or else risk becoming repetitive as we have felt with repeats in the 1700s and multiple renaissance.

Main point= Assassins Creed isn't Swordsman's Creed. Open your mind to all of history and not dwell on sword play. If stealth didn't exist past 1800 we wouldn't have spies, assassinations, or secret societies today. And putting these types of time periods in a comic misses the VAST very vast majority of AC fans and limits the creativity and scope of the franchise. That's my position. AC is not a hack and slash button masher its a STORY DRIVEN series.

LoyalACFan
02-18-2014, 07:09 PM
I don't mean you're not open to any new setting I'm saying you're not open to change. Everything you mentioned is a time period that has either been covered or would be very similar to another. For example Tudor London was part of the Northern stage of the renaissance much of the same technologies and themes from the Ezio trilogy would end up being addressed in a setting like this.

What about China, Sumeria, Egypt, Roman Empire...?


my point is that American cities aren't the only boring ones. Damascus for example was just an unending blob of brown. As an American from the north east myself I thought AC3 was a very accurate representation of Colonial America. But our architecture changed heavily after the Civil war and we departed from the brick look of colonial cities and became focused on more of a Victorian style with bright color, advertising, gas/electric lighting etc. the photo you have based on the style of buildings and the lack of steam ships in the background is from the Boom town period of 1840s and 50s. I suggested a later San Fran 1870+ just look up San Francisco 1880s and look at the pictures of the Victorian homes of the hills district, down town, city hall, banks, churches. Far nicer than the shack boom town of the gold rush especially if you see the colorized photos with advertisements and trolly cars.

Alright. I misunderstood what era you were speaking of specifically. Agreed, San Francisco post-1880 would be far more interesting architecturally, but on the other hand, then it wouldn't really be a Wild West game :p That's why I was a bit confused, I thought you were speaking about the traditional definition of the Wild West as defined by lawlessness (hence "Wild" West). A well-developed San Francisco would be interesting as a setting, but you'd be forsaking the Wild West vibe in the process. That era was pretty much dead by the time San Fran was a metropolis. That's one thing that really bugged me about Red Dead; it was supposed to be about the death of the West, but it took place decades after it should have. 1880 would have been closer to the truth.


I also don't think the game would become a "cover based shooter" the emphasis would still be on stealth guns only an option(not to mention you couldn't exactly take on the entire world on your own with a gun until roughly 1920 and automatic guns. After that point there should not be an assassins game) I explain the gun issue in an earlier post on this thread, you wouldn't shoot your way in and out of every place. And the Assassins series is NOT based on sword combat. It is based on stealth, parkour, deep stories, and history(spanning more than just sword eras). As long as these aspects remain in tact it would still be an assassins creed game at its core. Besides that AC4 threw stealth out the window except for story missions. Everything you do in that game outside of the main story or a plantation heist is as notorious as you can get.

I really disagree that AC4 disregarded stealth, but that's another story. I just can't reconcile multi-shot guns with AC gameplay. I believe you mentioned dual six-shooters previously? That's twelve shots from very accurate guns that take less than five seconds to reload, and that's not even counting if you have a rifle too. Yeah, you COULD still rely on stealth, but my point is... why would you? We all know AC games are very, very easy, and that's not about to change since they're still trying to attract casual fans. Stealth would be obsolete and forced.

Farlander1991
02-18-2014, 07:20 PM
Just for the sake of clarification, Wild West, at least historically from some material that I've read, refers to the period of approx 1800 to 1912, and is not defined by "lawlesness" (which reminds me, aren't there like only 8 or something recorded bank heists in the wild west?) but by colonization and moving of the American frontier border in the area of the western 13 states, and creating a habitable environment in the wild (hence why it's "wild" west) until they got to the point where the Frontier border couldn't be moved anymore (since they reached the coast all around) and the important settlements were all well-established.

So everything happening in the period of around 1800 to 1912 in the territory of the western 13 states (which includes the Califronia Gold Rush and the San Francisco city boom which I keep pushing in this thread :p and not because of how it will look like when it's completed, but because tons of construction is an interesting way to go when designing a city) is Wild West, and 1910-1914 (IIRC the period RDR takes place) IS the death of the Wild West since there's no new land to tame or explore.

LoyalACFan
02-18-2014, 07:41 PM
Just for the sake of clarification, Wild West, at least historically from some material that I've read, refers to the period of approx 1800 to 1912, and is not defined by "lawlesness" (which reminds me, aren't there like only 8 or something recorded bank heists in the wild west?) but by colonization and moving of the American frontier border in the area of the western 13 states, and creating a habitable environment in the wild (hence why it's "wild" west) until they got to the point where the Frontier border couldn't be moved anymore (since they reached the coast) and the important settlements were all well-established.

So everything happening in the period of around 1800 to 1912 in the territory of the western 13 states (which includes the Califronia Gold Rush and the San Francisco city boom which I keep pushing in this thread :p ) is Wild West.

Ehhh... There's no universal agreement on the duration of the "Wild West" period since it wasn't necessarily an important era in world history (a lot of the interest surrounding it being manufactured by movies and dime novels) but 1912 is an EXTREMELY late estimate by anyone's standard. It was certainly well after the "cowboy" era that defines popular understanding of the old West, and all of the gunslingers and criminals that made the West famous were dead or retired. Hell, Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid were the last famous ones (they were killed in like 1905 I think) and for the last several years of their career they had to relocate to Argentina because the outlaw game in the American West was long since dead. The West was pretty much "tamed" by the end of the 1880s. European settlers were everywhere, Native American society was in shambles, and most of the outlaw gangs had been killed off. Anything post-1885, and especially post-1890, would not really be a Wild West game if AC stays true to history. I mentioned my frustration with Red Dead's dating before, but it wasn't a huge deal since they didn't deal with specific historical events... something AC is known for.

Farlander1991
02-18-2014, 07:51 PM
The West was pretty much "tamed" by the end of the 1880s.

Well, in terms of the overall settlers movement, maybe, but (again, as far as I understand from what I've read, I am not a Wild West expert and never studied it like I've studied the Crusades or the Caribbean piracy eras) in terms of the 'well-establishment' (which I've mentioned in the first post) - not so much, which is why the period ends in early 1900s.

EDIT: I guess it's just the difference between the 'romantic' part of the period popularized in culture and the 'boring concrete historical' one :D

DumbGamerTag94
02-18-2014, 08:04 PM
What about China, Sumeria, Egypt, Roman Empire...?



Alright. I misunderstood what era you were speaking of specifically. Agreed, San Francisco post-1880 would be far more interesting architecturally, but on the other hand, then it wouldn't really be a Wild West game :p That's why I was a bit confused, I thought you were speaking about the traditional definition of the Wild West as defined by lawlessness (hence "Wild" West). A well-developed San Francisco would be interesting as a setting, but you'd be forsaking the Wild West vibe in the process. That era was pretty much dead by the time San Fran was a metropolis. That's one thing that really bugged me about Red Dead; it was supposed to be about the death of the West, but it took place decades after it should have. 1880 would have been closer to the truth.



I really disagree that AC4 disregarded stealth, but that's another story. I just can't reconcile multi-shot guns with AC gameplay. I believe you mentioned dual six-shooters previously? That's twelve shots from very accurate guns that take less than five seconds to reload, and that's not even counting if you have a rifle too. Yeah, you COULD still rely on stealth, but my point is... why would you? We all know AC games are very, very easy, and that's not about to change since they're still trying to attract casual fans. Stealth would be obsolete and forced.

You are misunderstood about the Wild West era entirely I am an avid student of history. Specifically American. The west had not in fact died until just before the first world war. Thus why red dead choose their time period(even though there are a great deal many flaws in how they executed it, great story but no accurate) but at least you see that red dead is not what we would call the Golden Age of the Wild West. The gold rush is what your thinking of and that was a small burst in West Coast population only around the 1850s everything between there and the Mississippi river was basically empty until after the Civil War(for a great deal of reasons I wont go in depth on to save time and because Legal/Political history is rather dull). The coice of the time period of 1865 to roughly the 1890s or 1914ish is the most accurate description of the west.

The point is the west exploded after 1865 as people left the east either for easy money, or because their home was destroyed in the war. This was the rise of the "Cowboy"(now outlaws but people that hearded cows for money to major cities for sale). Railroads were built Ex: the Transcontinental and many others to connect the newly populated regions. Most of the major western figures we all know Billy the Kid, John Wesley Hardin, Jesse James were all the most active mostly in the period of 1870-1889. and some others such as Butch Kassidy and the Sundance Kid and their "Wild Bunch" as they were called went far longer into either the late 1880s or 1890s if I remember correctly, and then they weren't all brought to justice until the early 1900s. Thus why the west dies around that time cuz all the bad guys were dead. This more than fits the time period I was referring to and the major cities of the West would be "metropolises" by then.

Finally, I personally have used a colt 45 single action revolver my cousin owns and I can tell you it takes more than 5 seconds to reload a minimum of one second per bullet, so 6 seconds plus you have to lock the little guard that stops them from falling out in place so one more second roughly 7 seconds per gun and if the character carries 2 that's a 14 second reload time. Not exactly like your enemies are going to stop shooting for that long. easier to run away. Same with a lever action rifle like the Wincheser they have a tubular magazine similar to a shot gun and only hold like 12 rounds and need to be reloaded individually that's like a 12 second reload time. My point is that guns do not equal just abandoning stealth. There's only so much a gun can do until you run out of ammo.

I can see where you are apprehensive about guns but it could work, sort of along the lines of splinter cell or metal gear, yet with far less shooting than those and more focus on using hidden blades, bowie knives, bow and arrow, or tomahawk/hatchet to perform quiet kills so you don't start a gunfight.(I thought the amount of shooting they have in those games was a little absurd myself. Red Dead included on that list(that game lets you carry like 20 guns and do not have realistic reload rates at all))

LoyalACFan
02-18-2014, 09:08 PM
I guess it's just the difference between the 'romantic' part of the period popularized in culture and the 'boring concrete historical' one :D

This is basically what I'm getting at, and @Bmark this is a response to you as well. The "frontiersy" aspect of the West continued on into the 20th century (and you could even make the case for it today, as the Western states are generally very sparsely populated and undeveloped) but the heart of it... the gold rush, bank robbers, gunslingers, buffalo soldiers, cowboys versus Indians... That stuff ended a very long time ago, certainly well before 1900. Sure, it's been blown out of proportion by romanticized media, but they can't very well make a Western game and disregard it, can they? It's instantly recognizable. They CAN'T leave that stuff out, for the same reason they couldn't leave Blackbeard out of their pirate game. Yeah, the early 1900s could still technically be considered the Wild West, but what would the game be about? The outlaw gangs that were already dead? The Indian wars that were already over? You could make a case for the Mexican Civil War, I guess, but we already did the whole "failed revolution" thing in AC3.

Bottom line, they have to connect the game to the popular imagination if it's going to be a success, and there's a very slim time period where they could make that fit with the historical record. They don't have to have quick-draw duels at high noon any more than they had to have talking parrots in AC4, but they WOULD need to make it relevant to the extremely well-established Wild West mythos. People want Billy the Kid, Wyatt Earp, and Jesse James, not a bunch of turn-of-the-century San Francisco politicians they've never heard of. I mean, they made Ezio's BFF freaking Leonardo da Vinci, not somebody obscure like Benozzo Gozzoli. They made Connor's primary contact George Washington, not Otho Williams.

DumbGamerTag94
02-18-2014, 09:52 PM
This is basically what I'm getting at, and @Bmark this is a response to you as well. The "frontiersy" aspect of the West continued on into the 20th century (and you could even make the case for it today, as the Western states are generally very sparsely populated and undeveloped) but the heart of it... the gold rush, bank robbers, gunslingers, buffalo soldiers, cowboys versus Indians... That stuff ended a very long time ago, certainly well before 1900. Sure, it's been blown out of proportion by romanticized media, but they can't very well make a Western game and disregard it, can they? It's instantly recognizable. They CAN'T leave that stuff out, for the same reason they couldn't leave Blackbeard out of their pirate game. Yeah, the early 1900s could still technically be considered the Wild West, but what would the game be about? The outlaw gangs that were already dead? The Indian wars that were already over? You could make a case for the Mexican Civil War, I guess, but we already did the whole "failed revolution" thing in AC3.

Bottom line, they have to connect the game to the popular imagination if it's going to be a success, and there's a very slim time period where they could make that fit with the historical record. They don't have to have quick-draw duels at high noon any more than they had to have talking parrots in AC4, but they WOULD need to make it relevant to the extremely well-established Wild West mythos. People want Billy the Kid, Wyatt Earp, and Jesse James, not a bunch of turn-of-the-century San Francisco politicians they've never heard of. I mean, they made Ezio's BFF freaking Leonardo da Vinci, not somebody obscure like Benozzo Gozzoli. They made Connor's primary contact George Washington, not Otho Williams.

Firstly I don't see how 1870-1890. 20 years mind you is some how slimmer and more narrowly focused than the 1715-1720 roughly 5-10 year long "golden age of piracy". There are far more than just the outlaws to deal with too. There's the aspect of the systematic MURDER of natives by the military under figures like General George Custer and the massive battles involved like Little Big Horn and Wounded Knee(the Indian wars went on until the late 1880s 1890s), political scandals that include people like presidents Ulysses S. Grant(Major American figure and Civil War Hero) and Rutherford Hayes, major figures like the author Mark Twain, Thomas Edison(mostly an Eastern figure but did travel to display inventions etc), Railroad magnates like Cornelius Vanderbilt(Responsible for commissioning Grand Central station in New York owned railroads all over), Oil corruption/ stealing land and killing the frontier with oil barons like John Rockefeller. There was a rise of outlaw southern sympathizers fighting a guerilla war under former Civil War General Nathan Bedford Forrest which was hunted down by the US military and were what would become the KKK(nothing really more evil than that). There was the abuse of Asians in The California area for the railroads etc(this could be a lead in for an Asian setting...) This is just some of the major figures with interests in the region and major issues of the time period 1865-1890. None of them are what you would refer to as "never heard of"

If you really think the period was uneventful and full of unknown and unpopular figures you're insane! There's far more than just dirty outlaws wearing duster coats in the desert, there's corporate, political, military, social corruption and some group like the Assassins could help cleanse it.

If you need more to persuade you that this is a very eventful era and full of action and adventure consider this. Google image search The 1876 Chicago Worlds fair and then The Battle of Little Big Horn, They were occurring at the same time(roughly) both 1876. This demonstrates architecture, technology, diversity, intrigue, and the vast scope of plot aspects available in a western game if people would just get their minds out of the rut of only focusing on outlaws.

Point is that Modern settings and areas where there is not an all out war going on like in AC1 or AC3 does not mean it wouldn't suit the series or that nothing is happening. One could argue nothing really happened during the renaissance but AC2, Brotherhood and Revelations proved that is not true.

DumbGamerTag94
02-18-2014, 11:30 PM
Here is a list of some major western figures their life span and years active.

Wyatt Earp b.1848-d.1929(Los Angeles CA)
Years Active: 1865-1898

Billy the Kid b.1859-d.1881(New Mexico)
Years Active: Unspecified <1881

John Wesly Hardin b.1853-d.1895(El Paso TX)
Years Active: roughly 1875-1895

Wild Bill Hic**** b. 1837-d.1876(Deadwood Dakota Territory)
Years Active: 1858-1876
Civil war vet

Doc Holiday b. 1851-d. 1887(Glenwood Springs Colorado)
Years Active: 1880-1887

Jesse James b. 1847- d. 1882(Missouri)
Years Active: 1866-1876Heavily 1876-1882Still Active but more on the run
Civil War vet

Butch Cassidy b.1866-d.1908(Bolivia)(Crimes in Western US)
Years Active: 1880-1901(America)1905-1908(Bolivia)


This should suffice just wanted to show exactly what window the Wild West outlaws operated in on average around 1865-1890s

SquareToShoot
02-25-2014, 11:21 PM
That's settled then. Glad to see we've all agreed on Victorian England. Victorian England it is :D

LoyalACFan
02-25-2014, 11:23 PM
That's settled then. Glad to see we've all agreed on Victorian England. Victorian England it is :D

Think you might have the wrong thread ;)

DumbGamerTag94
02-25-2014, 11:34 PM
Plot Twist: Samuel Fey fails at being a businessman in AC5 is forced to immigrate to the US during the civil war(some gangs of New York **** goes down cuz fey is probably Irish) Meet abe linclon and the whole shebang ends up balls deep in the civil war, then tries to become a successful businessman agan in the west by trying to drill for oil but encounters outlaws who do something horrible to him and he seeks revenge spending the latter part of his life hunting down his enemies in the Wild west until the 1890s. This would be awesome and would star Daniel Day Lewis as everyone! haha

stetsonaw
02-26-2014, 06:22 PM
Wild Bill Hic**** b. 1837-d.1876(Deadwood Dakota Territory)
Years Active: 1858-1876
Civil war vet

Wild Bill Hickok... profanity filter shouldn't kill it if it's spelled correctly ;)