PDA

View Full Version : Why Embers didn't give 100% closure, and Connor hasn't either



CoachAssassin
08-10-2014, 09:10 PM
I'm pretty sure that they would love to keep Ezio's story as a backup plan if things don't go so well in the upcoming years. Obviously the whole ''he got killed or not'' thing is just an open end Darby liked to give, but I'm pretty sure that the box is something we should hear more from, someday. But you can't set up a cool shocker for lets say the 10th anniversary of AC, unless you give it time. But honestly, if we would commemorate assassins creed existing 10 years and therefore have a game with some past influence, it could only be about Ezio, none of the main characters have been as defining as he was. I'm pretty sure it's the same with Connor, who will probably end up being the last last-gen protagonist, it would have a poetic beauty to it won't you agree?

I'm still calling it, Assassins Creed: Dynasty with some sort of flashback story towards Ezio and how he did stuff. I mean, it makes sense the Assassins would do look at him intensively as some sort of patron, even we see him as the patron of Assassins Creed, and with we I mean me and the voices in my head.


I seriously hope that these upcoming two games atleast give us 100% closure on Haytham, Achilles and Adewale. Even though they weren't main characters, they still stood for some stuff people like to connect themselves with, and they deserve closure on that end.


Off topic question, since I'm not really well known with the people here (yet), but are there people who are cool concept artists who are willing to draw out some stuff for my 10th Anniversary's Assassins Creed X: Dynasty, as well as story writers who like to discuss stuff? I'm obviously willing to compensate artists. Let me know, and let me know also if it's illegal for asking!

pacmanate
08-10-2014, 09:13 PM
I find it kinda weird how Assassin's in the future look to Ezio as some sort of super Assassin. All he did was remove templar influence from Italy, with help. I am sure other assassins did the same.

I think Ezio could easily return. For instance, that box at the end of Embers was given to shao, could also be the same one that Adewale. We still don't know what it is and it originates back to Ezio.

CoachAssassin
08-10-2014, 09:17 PM
I find it kinda weird how Assassin's in the future look to Ezio as some sort of super Assassin. All he did was remove templar influence from Italy, with help. I am sure other assassins did the same.

I think Ezio could easily return. For instance, that box at the end of Embers was given to shao, could also be the same one that Adewale. We still don't know what it is and it originates back to Ezio.

Your first point is a valid one aye, but they would most likely remember him as that guy who revived the brotherhood, defied the friggin pope, and had met with TWCB multiple times. He's not seen as important as Altaïr is I suppose.

LoyalACFan
08-10-2014, 09:18 PM
I find it kinda weird how Assassin's in the future look to Ezio as some sort of super Assassin. All he did was remove templar influence from Italy, with help. I am sure other assassins did the same.

I think Ezio could easily return. For instance, that box at the end of Embers was given to shao, could also be the same one that Adewale. We still don't know what it is and it originates back to Ezio.

He was the first to publicly make contact with the First Civilization. That was a pretty massive discovery, even if he did just stumble onto it. Achilles mentioned that he was the one to "uncork the bottle" so to speak, and the First Civ had been troubling them ever since.

Sesheenku
08-10-2014, 09:19 PM
To be fair while Ezio did a lot for the creed he also carelessly allowed innocent civilians to be killed by his actions, twice in Revelations alone.

Throughout his life he always kept a bit of his brash and aggressive personality. In the beginning of Revelations when he kills the captain he even throws him aside and calls him a bastard.

If anyone is most important to the creed it's going to be Altair, who rebuilt the brotherhood and Connor who restored the assassins in America after they had been utterly decimated.

Then of course there's the other assassins that are present as statues in the sanctuary.

pacmanate
08-10-2014, 09:22 PM
I think Revelations ruined Ezios character with all the stupid things he did

Shahkulu101
08-10-2014, 09:24 PM
I think Revelations ruined Ezios character with all the stupid things he did

Nah just made him a little more controversial and made us question his morality - made him a little more human.

He was pretty much God before then.

CoachAssassin
08-10-2014, 09:24 PM
I think Revelations ruined Ezios character with all the stupid things he did

They did that I think to show us an Ezio that is starting to get fed up with the ******** around him, and eventually becoming very uncaring about some of the little stuff. I'm pretty sure he noticed himself aswell, and that's why he quit after that big revelation.

pacmanate
08-10-2014, 09:27 PM
Nah just made him a little more controversial and made us question his morality - made him a little more human.

He was pretty much God before then.

I wouldnt call him God. He wasnt perfect before but he just had a complete tone shift in revelations


They did that I think to show us an Ezio that is starting to get fed up with the ******** around him, and eventually becoming very uncaring about some of the little stuff. I'm pretty sure he noticed himself aswell, and that's why he quit after that big revelation.

Probably but imo it just seemed too weird

Shahkulu101
08-10-2014, 09:31 PM
He was still Ezio, you could see that in his interactions with Sofia. Still devilishly charming and all that.

Revelations was his most serious chapter, so of course the tone would shift. It was his final journey, more of the same power fantasy stuff we already had would be pointless.

Assassin_M
08-10-2014, 09:33 PM
I wouldnt call him God. He wasnt perfect before but he just had a complete tone shift in revelations
He was pretty much god in Brotherhood, that's the sudden shift...from dumb and incompetent, to the best leader, philosopher and military strategist. EVERY historical character who had any special quality about them was downgraded to make Ezio shine as this savior. The writer gave him the qualities of the historical characters that surrounded him from Cesare to Niccolo to Bartolomeo.

rprkjj
08-10-2014, 10:07 PM
He was pretty much god in Brotherhood, that's the sudden shift...from dumb and incompetent, to the best leader, philosopher and military strategist. EVERY historical character who had any special quality about them was downgraded to make Ezio shine as this savior. The writer gave him the qualities of the historical characters that surrounded him from Cesare to Niccolo to Bartolomeo.

I think the main change was that he was wiser, which I don't think is unrealistic or makes him god. Just a bamf.

Assassin_M
08-10-2014, 10:14 PM
I think the main change was that he was wiser, which I don't think is unrealistic or makes him god. Just a bamf.
Which made no sense. Ezio was never wise in AC II, how did he suddenly and out of no where become this sage Ezio who--quite conveniently--now possess the intelligent qualities of all the historical characters around him who have been reduced to stumbling idiots?

It'd far more organic and realistic if he showed any signs of wisdom in AC II but he really didn't.

killzab
08-10-2014, 10:17 PM
Which made no sense. Ezio was never wise in AC II, how did he suddenly and out of no where become this sage Ezio who--quite conveniently--now possess the intelligent qualities of all the historical characters around him who have been reduced to stumbling idiots?

It'd far more organic and realistic if he showed any signs of wisdom in AC II but he really didn't.

What about sparing Rodrigo, compared to how he disrespected Vieri's death? that's called character development.

I-Like-Pie45
08-10-2014, 10:17 PM
but AssM

i spare mah dangerous enemy who still threat to da Assassins n me cuz i outgrow wevenge

dats deep

rprkjj
08-10-2014, 10:20 PM
Which made no sense. Ezio was never wise in AC II, how did he suddenly and out of no where become this sage Ezio who--quite conveniently--now possess the intelligent qualities of all the historical characters around him who have been reduced to stumbling idiots?

It'd far more organic and realistic if he showed any signs of wisdom in AC II but he really didn't.

I think wisdom comes with age, and I would consider his speech in Bonfire of the Vanities as wise.

Namikaze_17
08-10-2014, 10:23 PM
He was pretty much god in Brotherhood, that's the sudden shift...from dumb and incompetent, to the best leader, philosopher and military strategist. EVERY historical character who had any special quality about them was downgraded to make Ezio shine as this savior. The writer gave him the qualities of the historical characters that surrounded him from Cesare to Niccolo to Bartolomeo.

Tell me about it......they downgraded Niccolo to a mere "follower" that seemed just a step behind of Ezio because EVERY decision/plan he made in ACB magically turned out fine with little to no consequences. Cesare was made to appear like a spoiled little brat that would throw a fit if things didn't go his way, again, another person they made Ezio appear better and wiser than......ACB Cesare WAS NOT the type of man that Niccolo admired. And any other historical figure was either a "follower" of Ezio that did little to no arguments or contradictions of himself or his decisions/ place in the brotherhood or someone who had to be WATERED DOWN like hell to make Ezio "Shine."

Hopefully, Ezio doesn't get ANOTHER game......( Lord knows he's had enough) but if anything, another Assassin definitely NEEDS an ending.


I'm not gonna say to avoid any arguments/ Debates.

Shahkulu101
08-10-2014, 10:24 PM
What about sparing Rodrigo, compared to how he disrespected Vieri's death? that's called character development.

Sparing Rodrigo was the opposite of wise though, it showed how he respected his targets but so what? It was just selfish, "Oh in so grown up I don't need to kill THE BIGGEST THREAT TO THE ASSASSIN'S". He spared him for his own vanity.

Assassin_M
08-10-2014, 10:26 PM
I think wisdom comes with age, and I would consider his speech in Bonfire of the Vanities as wise.
You can age without wisdom, it's not necessary and it shouldn't be taken at face value when the guy was dumb as bricks in the previous game. It's not wise, he just explained what happened to him. It's the climax of his character development that Ubisoft "wisely" relegated to DLC, it's not necessarily wise at all.


but AssM

i spare mah dangerous enemy who still threat to da Assassins n me cuz i outgrow wevenge

dats deep
such deep, wow


What about sparing Rodrigo, compared to how he disrespected Vieri's death? that's called character development.
Sparing Rodrigo is not wisdom lol, it led to the destruction of the Brotherhood and the death of its leader, Mario. That's not character development, that's contrived writing to suit the plot.

killzab
08-10-2014, 10:27 PM
You can age without wisdom, it's not necessary and it shouldn't be taken at face value when the guy was dumb as bricks in the previous game. It's not wise, he just explained what happened to him. It's the climax of his character development that Ubisoft wisely relegated to DLC, it's not necessarily wise at all.


such deep, wow


Sparing Rodrigo is not wisdom lol, it led to the destruction of the Brotherhood and the death of its leader, Mario. That's not character development, that's contrived writing to suit the plot.
Except it was all Cesare's doing, Rodrigo didn't want to attack the villa so it would've happened anyway

SixKeys
08-10-2014, 10:38 PM
Which made no sense. Ezio was never wise in AC II, how did he suddenly and out of no where become this sage Ezio who--quite conveniently--now possess the intelligent qualities of all the historical characters around him who have been reduced to stumbling idiots?

It'd far more organic and realistic if he showed any signs of wisdom in AC II but he really didn't.

I didn't think the shift from AC2 to ACB was unrealistic. Not killing Rodrigo came back to haunt him in a big way and he learned from that. I think the events at the Villa made him more cold and cynical. He was controlling and condescending towards Claudia because he hadn't realized how much he had neglected her growing up. When she proved to him that she could hold her own, he had to admit he could be wrong sometimes. His relationship with Caterina in AC2 was just casual flirting, but by ACB he had come to hope she would become someone he could settle down with. When she turned him down and admitted she had only feigned interest to further her own goals, you could hear the suppressed hurt and embarrassment in his voice when he said "oh, strictly business, I understand". He learned then that he may not have been as irresistible to all women as he thought, and that when he WAS seriously interested, his feelings would not always be reciprocated. His relationship with Cristina was all kinds of ****ed up: he started as a creepy stalker, they were serious for a while, then he abandoned her on a whim like it was his decision to make, then sexually assaulted her years later in Venice when she had moved on, and finally she died in his arms after years of no contact.

ACB wasn't just a power fantasy, it was the start of darker Ezio, which would continue in ACR. The only problem is that none of the games ever addressed his worst flaws. In ACR he was more ruthless and colder than ever, but none of the other characters ever took him to task for things like blowing up innocent people in Cappadocia. Embers was the only chapter where both Ezio and another character (Shao Jun) pointed out to the audience that he had made a lot of mistakes in his life.

rprkjj
08-10-2014, 10:38 PM
You can age without wisdom, it's not necessary and it shouldn't be taken at face value when the guy was dumb as bricks in the previous game. It's not wise, he just explained what happened to him. It's the climax of his character development that Ubisoft "wisely" relegated to DLC, it's not necessarily wise at all.


such deep, wow


Sparing Rodrigo is not wisdom lol, it led to the destruction of the Brotherhood and the death of its leader, Mario. That's not character development, that's contrived writing to suit the plot.

I don't think he was dumb as bricks, I think he was young and naive but not more so than any other protag. And I get you can age without wisdom, but experience usually helps.

Assassin_M
08-10-2014, 10:46 PM
I don't think he was dumb as bricks, I think he was young and naive but not more so than any other protag. And I get you can age without wisdom, but experience usually helps.
How long can someone be young and Naive? His idiotic moments with Leonardo (his unwillingness to be open minded to inventions, his insulting and berating of his best friend, his dismissal of the invention) occurred when he was 27 years old.


I didn't think the shift from AC2 to ACB was unrealistic. Not killing Rodrigo came back to haunt him in a big way and he learned from that. I think the events at the Villa made him more cold and cynical. He was controlling and condescending towards Claudia because he hadn't realized how much he had neglected her growing up. When she proved to him that she could hold her own, he had to admit he could be wrong sometimes. His relationship with Caterina in AC2 was just casual flirting, but by ACB he had come to hope she would become someone he could settle down with. When she turned him down and admitted she had only feigned interest to further her own goals, you could hear the suppressed hurt and embarrassment in his voice when he said "oh, strictly business, I understand". He learned then that he may not have been as irresistible to all women as he thought, and that when he WAS seriously interested, his feelings would not always be reciprocated. His relationship with Cristina was all kinds of ****ed up: he started as a creepy stalker, they were serious for a while, then he abandoned her on a whim like it was his decision to make, then sexually assaulted her years later in Venice when she had moved on, and finally she died in his arms after years of no contact.

ACB wasn't just a power fantasy, it was the start of darker Ezio, which would continue in ACR. The only problem is that none of the games ever addressed his worst flaws. In ACR he was more ruthless and colder than ever, but none of the other characters ever took him to task for things like blowing up innocent people in Cappadocia. Embers was the only chapter where both Ezio and another character (Shao Jun) pointed out to the audience that he had made a lot of mistakes in his life.
I agree with this whole paragraph but you'v shown me nothing to explain why the shift from AC II to ACB was organic or realistic.

Assassin_M
08-10-2014, 10:49 PM
Except it was all Cesare's doing, Rodrigo didn't want to attack the villa so it would've happened anyway
No, it wouldn't have. Cesare only had power because of Rodrigo's position. He had access to the Papal armies and ALL the funding because of his father's position, nothing more--this was very evident in ACB's sequence 9--when Rodrigo died, every inch of power Cesare had crumbled...he no longer had the city guard on his side, he no longer had the support of the Vatican and his egenral status was taken from him...he only had all these because of his father.

had Ezio killed Rodrigo in the vault, Cesare would never be in the position he was to attack the Villa.

rprkjj
08-10-2014, 11:00 PM
How long can someone be young and Naive? His idiotic moments with Leonardo (his unwillingness to be open minded to inventions, his insulting and berating of his best friend, his dismissal of the invention) occurred when he was 27 years old.


I agree with this whole paragraph but you'v shown me nothing to explain why the shift from AC II to ACB was organic or realistic.

Isn't Connor in his late 20's by the end of AC3? I think he was just as naive as Ezio at that age, but I do think Ezio was probably more careless. But I don't remember any scene where Ezio was really mean to Leonardo. I think he was more forward and energetic if anything.

SixKeys
08-10-2014, 11:01 PM
I agree with this whole paragraph but you'v shown me nothing to explain why the shift from AC II to ACB was organic or realistic.

Realistic? Not a chance. I don't look to AC for realism, not since AC1. I do think it's a logical progression, though. Ezio showed signs of wisdom in AC2 when he gave that speech after killing Savonarola.

SixKeys
08-10-2014, 11:02 PM
Isn't Connor in his late 20's by the end of AC3? I think he was just as naive as Ezio at that age, but I do think Ezio was probably more careless. But I don't remember any scene where Ezio was really mean to Leonardo. I think he was more forward and energetic if anything.

He did call the flying machine a "piece of ****", but I think that was more out of frustration than genuine anger. It did almost get him killed when he crashed, after all. :p

Assassin_M
08-10-2014, 11:13 PM
Isn't Connor in his late 20's by the end of AC3? I think he was just as naive as Ezio at that age
Yeah he is but not really..by that age, Connor had matured quite a bit and his idealism and naivete had subsided quite a lot. For one, he was no longer fighting for a personal vendetta (and the evolution of that made sense) and he understood the value of his father's words about huamnity and them being flawed but retained hope that one day, they'll learn peace by themselves. By that point, he not only wanted freedom and peace for his people but for everyone else as well...Colonists, Britons, everyone.


But I don't remember any scene where Ezio was really mean to Leonardo. I think he was more forward and energetic if anything.
"I have discovered, how to make a man fly"
"Ehehehehe" (i.e, yeah yeah very funny)

"This is leonardo, the "master inventor" who built this piece of ****"


He did call the flying machine a "piece of ****", but I think that was more out of frustration than genuine anger. It did almost get him killed when he crashed, after all. :p
Didnt see Connor come up to Lance and call it a piece of **** when he crashed too..


Realistic? Not a chance. I don't look to AC for realism, not since AC1. I do think it's a logical progression, though. Ezio showed signs of wisdom in AC2 when he gave that speech after killing Savonarola.
It's basic story telling, progression from point A to point B should feel organic and not contrived or forced to suit something. I don't see what's wise about that speech...

SixKeys
08-10-2014, 11:19 PM
Didnt see Connor come up to Lance and call it a piece of **** when he crashed too..

No, he just claimed Achilles had never done anything to help after Achilles personally trained him, gave him all his equipment, gave him a place to stay etc. Not to mention basically threatened to kick his *** after a minor disagreement. ("Is that so, old man? Or perhaps we should step outside? I will gladly demonstrate how easily I could trounce y-")

Jexx21
08-10-2014, 11:22 PM
Ezio's smartness is something I'm gonna struggle with when I write my Ezio!Iron Man fic. If I ever get around to it anyway.

rprkjj
08-10-2014, 11:25 PM
Yeah he is but not really..by that age, Connor had matured quite a bit and his idealism and naivete had subsided quite a lot. For one, he was no longer fighting for a personal vendetta (and the evolution of that made sense) and he understood the value of his father's words about huamnity and them being flawed but retained hope that one day, they'll learn peace by themselves. By that point, he not only wanted freedom and peace for his people but for everyone else as well...Colonists, Britons, everyone.


"I have discovered, how to make a man fly"
"Ehehehehe" (i.e, yeah yeah very funny)

"This is leonardo, the "master inventor" who built this piece of ****"


Didnt see Connor come up to Lance and call it a piece of **** when he crashed too..


It's basic story telling, progression from point A to point B should feel organic and not contrived or forced to suit something. I don't see what's wise about that speech...

Really, as a man living in the renaissance how could you not laugh at that? That's probably the most friendly way of going about expressing his doubt. Yes, the second line is probably rude, but you could attribute that to Ezio being disappointed. I mean, he could have died.

RinoTheBouncer
08-10-2014, 11:28 PM
1) Ezio was the first man to get in touch with a First Civilization member.
2) He was a prophet to a message that saved the world 500+ years later.
3) He removed the Templar influence from Italy and ended the reign of the corrupt Borgia.

Those are 3 very important things he did, not to mention how he became an influence, a spark and a burning flame for the Assassins over the course of the following centuries.

I believe the box he gave to Shao Jun is extremely interesting and I really hope they touch that subject. I mean going back in time to the 1500s, to China/Japan, play as a female, Shao Jun and experience a whole different era, combat mechanics and atmosphere is something every fan of the AC franchise would go crazy about and I’m sure the next generation is more than capable of doing that. The adventure could start before Embers, showing how she escaped and what she faced along the way and then picks up where Embers left off, so in that case we could see a cameo of the amazing Ezio in addition to a whole new experience.

Assassin_M
08-10-2014, 11:29 PM
No, he just claimed Achilles had never done anything to help after Achilles personally trained him, gave him all his equipment, gave him a place to stay etc. Not to mention basically threatened to kick his *** after a minor disagreement. ("Is that so, old man? Or perhaps we should step outside? I will gladly demonstrate how easily I could trounce y-")
Then he apologized...

That whole trounce bit is like me and my dad arguing about fencing.
*Dad trains me everyday*
Dad: Stop fencing, you're never gonna get anywhere
Dad: It's pointless, just stop
*repeat a lot over the years*
*I enter a tournament and win*
Dad: Hmm...you're doing well.
Me: Well, how encouraging..now do you see?
Dad: No, I think you're still gonna lose but i'm proud
Me: why should I give you credit?
Dad: Don't then but return the sword, the garb and all the training i gave you.
Me: Or you could just admit that you were wrong.
Dad: Oh please, you only won one tournament..you're gonna have to do more to impress me
Me: Oh really? then why don't you suit up, old man? i'll gladly demonstrate how I can trounce you in a game of fencing.

it wasnt meant to be overly dark, it was a light banter between father and son

Shahkulu101
08-10-2014, 11:30 PM
I don't see a problem with characters being rude at times - unless that is a defining characteristic which it isn't for Connor or Ezio - it doesn't really matter.

Plus M, laughing at someone claiming they have discovered how to make a man fly is normal? Like how is that rude? Especially considering the time.

Assassin_M
08-10-2014, 11:30 PM
Really, as a man living in the renaissance how could you not laugh at that? That's probably the most friendly way of going about expressing his doubt.
I wouldn't laugh at my best friend's face if he confided in me about something radical he was working on. Leonardo was a renaissance man too and Connor was a colonial man but he never laughed at Lance either.


Yes, the second line is probably rude, but you could attribute that to Ezio being disappointed. I mean, he could have died.
So could have Connor.. and Ezio knew the risks, Leonardo told him the risks and told him that it was a prototype and that it would be dangerous...Ezio agreed.


I don't see a problem with characters being rude at times - unless that is a defining characteristic which it isn't for Connor or Ezio - it doesn't really matter.
I'm bringing it up because of the double standard. People call Connor rude even when he apologized when Ezio was too and didnt even apologize.


Plus M, laughing at someone claiming they have discovered how to make a man fly is normal? Like how is that rude? Especially considering the time.
Connor didnt laugh...would you laugh at your best friend if he was inventing something radical? sayyyyy, an instant travel machine?

SixKeys
08-10-2014, 11:32 PM
Then he apologized...

That whole trounce bit is like me and my dad arguing about fencing.
*Dad trains me everyday*
Dad: Stop fencing, you're never gonna get anywhere
Dad: It's pointless, just stop
*repeat a lot over the years*
*I enter a tournament and win*
Dad: Hmm...you're doing well.
Me: Well, how encouraging..now do you see?
Dad: No, I think you're still gonna lose but i'm proud
Me: why should I give you credit?
Dad: Don't then but return the sword, the garb and all the training i gave you.
Me: Or you could just admit that you were wrong.
Dad: Oh please, you only won one tournament..you're gonna have to do more to impress me
Me: Oh really? then why don't you suit up, old man? i'll gladly demonstrate how I can trounce you in a game of fencing.

it wasnt meant to be overly dark, it was a light banter between father and son

I never said I didn't like that scene. It was cute. Doesn't change the fact that Connor was being a jerk in it. Ezio and Leonardo's friendship obviously never suffered any lasting traumas because of that one insult, either.

Assassin_M
08-10-2014, 11:36 PM
I never said I didn't like that scene. It was cute. Doesn't change the fact that Connor was being a jerk in it.
I would argue that not really--Read my comparison again about me and my dad and fencing..who do you feel is the jerk here? I'm being slightly ungrateful, sure but years of discouragement can really make someone break.


Ezio and Leonardo's friendship obviously never suffered any lasting traumas because of that one insult, either.
Never said it did.

Namikaze_17
08-10-2014, 11:36 PM
@Six.
But that was only when Achilles basically belittled him saying that all of Connor's progress was an act of pride for Himself.
"I can't help but feel a sense of pride in your success."

Place yourself in Connor's shoes, you are trying your hardest to fix things out of your control with little to no help behind you, and your MASTER of all people instead of offering support, only insults and criticizes you even more.

Connor wasn't immature or childish in that argument, he was merely fed up with everyone's ****.

SixKeys
08-10-2014, 11:37 PM
I wouldn't laugh at my best friend's face if he confided in me about something radical he was working on. Leonardo was a renaissance man too and Connor was a colonial man but he never laughed at Lance either.

People laugh for lots of reasons. Sometimes out of confusion, sometimes embarrassment, sometimes out of excitement, sometimes because they're uncomfortable..... I always took Ezio's laugh in that scene, coupled with his body language, to mean "you crazy SOB, what have you cooked up this time?". As in, he knew Leonardo was always inventing things totally unheard of, and might be the only person crazy enough to try to make them a reality.

Connor probably didn't laugh at Lance because Lance prefaced it by saying his plans came from a famous master inventor, so Connor had no reason to doubt him.

SixKeys
08-10-2014, 11:39 PM
I would argue that not really--Read my comparison again about me and my dad and fencing..who do you feel is the jerk here? I'm being slightly ungrateful, sure but years of discouragement can really make someone break.

Sorry, but if your dad was an old man walking with a cane and you - a healthy, 20-something bag of muscles - challenged him to a punchup, I would still think you're being the bigger jerk.

I-Like-Pie45
08-10-2014, 11:42 PM
SixKeys, I demand pics of you making cookies :)

Jexx21
08-10-2014, 11:42 PM
Yea, I don't think Ezio was really being a jerk in that scene either.

I was referring to his interaction with other characters at other times.

Sort of like how he goes around beating up cheating husbands for their wives even though he doesn't know any of them personally. And how he delivers letters that say some rude or immoral things for money. Oh, and not to mention how he was essentially Lorenzo's lapdog, always killing people that are a risk to Lorenzo, and Lorenzo himself wasn't exactly the best ruler.

Assassin_M
08-10-2014, 11:45 PM
People laugh for lots of reasons. Sometimes out of confusion, sometimes embarrassment, sometimes out of excitement, sometimes because they're uncomfortable..... I always took Ezio's laugh in that scene, coupled with his body language, to mean "you crazy SOB, what have you cooked up this time?". As in, he knew Leonardo was always inventing things totally unheard of, and might be the only person crazy enough to try to make them a reality.
Didnt feel that way to me, it felt like he was scoffing him off as in "Only angels fly, homie" it felt discouraging.


Connor probably didn't laugh at Lance because Lance prefaced it by saying his plans came from a famous master inventor, so Connor had no reason to doubt him.
"Hey, Connor i built this flying machine made by Leonardo Da Vinci"
"and it works?"
"of course it does, Leonardo was a genius, the best thinker of his time and a master inventor, you can be certain that it works, you'll be able to soar like an eagle"
*tries it and crashes"

I dunno about you, but my first reaction would be "**** him and **** you, Lance"


Sorry, but if your dad was an old man walking with a cane and you - a healthy, 20-something bag of muscles - challenged him to a punchup, I would still think you're being the bigger jerk.
Well, I don't think Connor would beat the crap out of him anyway...it felt more like a child crying to their dad that they can prove them wrong and impress them. I think that's all Connor really wanted to do...after years of discouragement, he wanted to impress Achilles.

Namikaze_17
08-10-2014, 11:48 PM
Sorry, but if your dad was an old man walking with a cane and you - a healthy, 20-something bag of muscles - challenged him to a punchup, I would still think you're being the bigger jerk.


But once again, that argument didn't go without reason for both of them. Connor was wrong for talking ****, and Achilles was wrong for belittling Connor along the way.

Shahkulu101
08-10-2014, 11:52 PM
I don't think Connor was being literal when he challenged him to that fight...and his heart would be too big to beat an old man up anyway.

Unless the old man is a Templar. ;)

Namikaze_17
08-11-2014, 12:04 AM
I don't think Connor would even beat up an old man Templar....he has too much respect to do that. That is, if the man is dangerous. ( i.e shay)

Megas_Doux
08-11-2014, 12:10 AM
Altair was a jerk during the first part of the game, Ezio never seems like he did not care sometimes and Connor was a jerk to Achilles........

SixKeys
08-11-2014, 12:12 AM
Sort of like how he goes around beating up cheating husbands for their wives even though he doesn't know any of them personally. And how he delivers letters that say some rude or immoral things for money. Oh, and not to mention how he was essentially Lorenzo's lapdog, always killing people that are a risk to Lorenzo, and Lorenzo himself wasn't exactly the best ruler.

Yeah, that stuff was questionable. I chalk up the Lorenzo stuff to Ezio blindly trusting him because of how nice Lorenzo was to him (just like Machiavelli, who was pretty ruthless IRL too). Delivering the letters wasn't the questionable part though, but rather reading them. I always wondered why none of the people ever got mad at Ezio for opening their mail.

SixKeys
08-11-2014, 12:17 AM
Didnt feel that way to me, it felt like he was scoffing him off as in "Only angels fly, homie" it felt discouraging.


"Hey, Connor i built this flying machine made by Leonardo Da Vinci"
"and it works?"
"of course it does, Leonardo was a genius, the best thinker of his time and a master inventor, you can be certain that it works, you'll be able to soar like an eagle"
*tries it and crashes"

I dunno about you, but my first reaction would be "**** him and **** you, Lance"


Well, I don't think Connor would beat the crap out of him anyway...it felt more like a child crying to their dad that they can prove them wrong and impress them. I think that's all Connor really wanted to do...after years of discouragement, he wanted to impress Achilles.

I think all this stuff is objective and hence not really worth arguing over. It's all about how one player interprets the characters vs. another player's interpretation. I always figured Connor was too nice to shout at Lance, even though he would have been within his rights to do so. You don't think Ezio being frustrated is an excuse to insult his best friend, but you do give Connor a pass for insulting his mentor/father figure because "he probs didn't mean it". So, like I said, subjective.

Assassin_M
08-11-2014, 12:25 AM
You don't think Ezio being frustrated is an excuse to insult his best friend, but you do give Connor a pass for insulting his mentor/father figure because "he probs didn't mean it". So, like I said, subjective.
Why would he be frustrated? Leonardo warned him--told him it was a prototype, an idea, that it wasn't ready yet and that trying it would be too dangerous but Ezio said bring it anyway:p...

Ah, I didn't say Connor didnt mean it..he probably did--What I said is that the whole argument from Connor is sightly justified while he does seem mostly ungrateful and that the challenge to a fight was to try and impress Achilles not break his back and make him humble.

Jexx21
08-11-2014, 12:28 AM
Yeah, that stuff was questionable. I chalk up the Lorenzo stuff to Ezio blindly trusting him because of how nice Lorenzo was to him (just like Machiavelli, who was pretty ruthless IRL too). Delivering the letters wasn't the questionable part though, but rather reading them. I always wondered why none of the people ever got mad at Ezio for opening their mail.

Eh, I dunno, some of the letters I don't understand why Ezio would deliver after reading them. Specifically the one about the guy telling the father to reprimand his daughter for scaring away all the suitors by being a strong woman.

LoyalACFan
08-11-2014, 12:40 AM
Eh, I dunno, some of the letters I don't understand why Ezio would deliver after reading them. Specifically the one about the guy telling the father to reprimand his daughter for scaring away all the suitors by being a strong woman.

Because he was making fat stacks of cash for doing it

Jexx21
08-11-2014, 12:45 AM
I think he made more money from killing people for Lorenzo.

Oh, and Ezio also stole money from a bunch of random people all the time. "OOH SHINY CHEST! STEAL STEAL STEAL!" Although frankly, I don't consider that canon, so...

Xstantin
08-11-2014, 12:49 AM
^Didn't Connor do the same?

LoyalACFan
08-11-2014, 12:57 AM
No, it wouldn't have. Cesare only had power because of Rodrigo's position. He had access to the Papal armies and ALL the funding because of his father's position, nothing more--this was very evident in ACB's sequence 9--when Rodrigo died, every inch of power Cesare had crumbled...he no longer had the city guard on his side, he no longer had the support of the Vatican and his egenral status was taken from him...he only had all these because of his father.

had Ezio killed Rodrigo in the vault, Cesare would never be in the position he was to attack the Villa.

His power was gone because Ezio had been cutting away his resources throughout the entire game, not because Rodrigo died. He freaking killed Rodrigo himself :p If Rodrigo had died before the Assassins had done what they did between 1500-1503, Cesare still would have had his French allies and his cousin to fund him, not to mention his own personal Templar death squad in the MP characters. Had Rodrigo died in the Vault, Cesare still would have been the most powerful man in Italy. He still would have been the Captain General too, just under a new Pope.

Anyway, Ezio sparing Rodrigo wasn't supposed show that he had learned to be wise, IMO, simply merciful. He really didn't pose a threat anymore; it was clear enough in the early chapters of ACB that Cesare was out of Rodrigo's control.

LoyalACFan
08-11-2014, 12:59 AM
I think he made more money from killing people for Lorenzo.

Oh, and Ezio also stole money from a bunch of random people all the time. "OOH SHINY CHEST! STEAL STEAL STEAL!" Although frankly, I don't consider that canon, so...

Yeah, I don't necessarily think the chests are supposed to be taken as canon at face value. Although it was a little fishy that the chests were hidden in random alleys and rooftops... Probably drug money. See, Ezio's a hero, he was just confiscating it... :rolleyes:

Jexx21
08-11-2014, 01:02 AM
^Didn't Connor do the same?

Yup.

Edward too. But Edward was a pirate, he was supposed to be a jerk.

Assassin_M
08-11-2014, 01:18 AM
His power was gone because Ezio had been cutting away his resources throughout the entire game, not because Rodrigo died. He freaking killed Rodrigo himself :p If Rodrigo had died before the Assassins had done what they did between 1500-1503, Cesare still would have had his French allies and his cousin to fund him, not to mention his own personal Templar death squad in the MP characters. Had Rodrigo died in the Vault, Cesare still would have been the most powerful man in Italy. He still would have been the Captain General too, just under a new Pope.
Not really...Cesare's power clearly crumbled when Rodrigo died. If we apply what you're saying about his French allies and cousin, then Ezio cutting away his resources would'v done nothing since he could just enlist the aid of his cousin and his french allies (but they don't really care about him...just his position and power) but what ACTUALLY made the difference was Rodrigo's death, there's no other way around it, really. Just another reason why I think Cesare was an idiot in ACB, he was basically his own worst enemy and he caused his own downfall.

Cesare's french troops were nothing compared to the Papal armies, that was where his main power was. if Cesare, an idiot as he was, attacked the Villa with just the french troops, then he would have lost and asking for the aid of his cousin would have done nothing either since like I said, most of his power was focused in the Papal armies, not his cousin nor the french allies and I wouldn't even bet on the french if Rodrigo died earlier...the french would be FAR less inclined to help Cesare if he was a no body...which is basically what he was after Rodrigo's death.


Anyway, Ezio sparing Rodrigo wasn't supposed show that he had learned to be wise, IMO, simply merciful. He really didn't pose a threat anymore; it was clear enough in the early chapters of ACB that Cesare was out of Rodrigo's control.
out of his control but Cesare maintained favor with his father because he knew it benefited him, judging by how he told his buddies to play along for now

LoyalACFan
08-11-2014, 01:51 AM
Not really...Cesare's power clearly crumbled when Rodrigo died. If we apply what you're saying about his French allies and cousin, then Ezio cutting away his resources would'v done nothing since he could just enlist the aid of his cousin and his french allies (but they don't really care about him...just his position and power) but what ACTUALLY made the difference was Rodrigo's death, there's no other way around it, really. Just another reason why I think Cesare was an idiot in ACB, he was basically his own worst enemy and he caused his own downfall.

Cesare's french troops were nothing compared to the Papal armies, that was where his main power was. if Cesare, an idiot as he was, attacked the Villa with just the french troops, then he would have lost and asking for the aid of his cousin would have done nothing either since like I said, most of his power was focused in the Papal armies, not his cousin nor the french allies and I wouldn't even bet on the french if Rodrigo died earlier...the french would be FAR less inclined to help Cesare if he was a no body...which is basically what he was after Rodrigo's death.


out of his control but Cesare maintained favor with his father because he knew it benefited him, judging by how he told his buddies to play along for now

Cesare killed Rodrigo without fully realizing how much damage the Assassins had done. They had completely discredited the Borgia while he was away. If Rodrigo had died three years earlier, the family still would have been at the peak of their power and very highly feared/respected. I thought that much was pretty clear from the scenes where he was trying to find somebody to help him out in Sequence 8. Everybody used to be afraid of the Borgia; in the recent years that fear had waned. Rodrigo was essentially a lame duck by the time Cesare killed him.

Anyway, if Rodrigo really posed any threat or was helping Cesare stay in power in any significant fashion, why wouldn't Ezio (or at least Machiavelli, who was his most vocal critic and apparently had enough access to the Vatican to plant explosives) have taken him out at some point in those three years? I know ACB was fairly badly written, but that's kind of a gaping plot hole. I still maintain that Rodrigo's position wasn't a huge asset to Cesare by the time Ezio got to Rome. He uses it to some extent, yes, but he says it himself, the day was drawing near when he wouldn't have any use for the Vatican whatsoever. But then Ezio whittled away his power while he was gone, and he returned to a Rome where the Borgia name was mud.

Assassin_M
08-11-2014, 01:54 AM
Cesare killed Rodrigo without fully realizing how much damage the Assassins had done. They had completely discredited the Borgia while he was away. If Rodrigo had died three years earlier, the family still would have been at the peak of their power and very highly feared/respected. I thought that much was pretty clear from the scenes where he was trying to find somebody to help him out in Sequence 8. Everybody used to be afraid of the Borgia; in the recent years that fear had waned. Rodrigo was essentially a lame duck by the time Cesare killed him.

Anyway, if Rodrigo really posed any threat or was helping Cesare stay in power in any significant fashion, why wouldn't Ezio (or at least Machiavelli, who was his most vocal critic and apparently had enough access to the Vatican to plant explosives) have taken him out at some point in those three years? I know ACB was fairly badly written, but that's kind of a gaping plot hole. I still maintain that Rodrigo's position wasn't a huge asset to Cesare by the time Ezio got to Rome. He uses it to some extent, yes, but he says it himself, the day was drawing near when he wouldn't have any use for the Vatican whatsoever. But then Ezio whittled away his power while he was gone, and he returned to a Rome where the Borgia name was mud.
If Rodrigo wasn't a huge asset to Cesare, why would Cesare tell his buddies to play along for now? to obey the Vatican and remain under its thumb? Why would Cesare himself try and stay in favor with Rodrigo?

Landruner
08-11-2014, 02:01 AM
I find it kinda weird how Assassin's in the future look to Ezio as some sort of super Assassin. All he did was remove templar influence from Italy, with help. I am sure other assassins did the same.

I think Ezio could easily return. For instance, that box at the end of Embers was given to shao, could also be the same one that Adewale. We still don't know what it is and it originates back to Ezio.

I know that I will make a lot angry with this and I apologize for writing this, but "you" like him or not (?) Ezio had something iconic in that franchise. Something more than just being an assassin, something than the most majority of players could easily rely on. Something new and a new concept since no one saw in the video gaming history following any games character from its nirth up to its death, we saw him aging via the games and that concept was interesting and never done before.

Even some people that barely know the AC franchise have heard of him the same way it could be said from Master chief, and Lara Croft. Altair started the all, but for a lot of people they got it right with Ezio more than with its successors. Furthermore: with 3 short movies and 3 game his own Ezio got more attention than the other one(s).

To me Ezio was assassinated at the end of Ember but I do not know by whom? Assassin ? Templar? and under the order of whom I do not know and his death a mysterious and leave a lot of interrogation, and like you mentioned about the box, we still don't know much, but perhaps it is the best like this...? .
I do not think it will be another game with Ezio and I hope I am wrong because i will enjoy replay him once again in some new adventures
I honestly hope that someday they remake AC1 and give this time more dimension to Altair and I sincerely wish the same to Connor.

\

Jexx21
08-11-2014, 02:08 AM
ezio wasn't killed he just died of that lung disease that he had

LoyalACFan
08-11-2014, 02:12 AM
ezio wasn't killed he just died of that lung disease that he had

Pretty sure it was a heart attack.

LoyalACFan
08-11-2014, 02:14 AM
If Rodrigo wasn't a huge asset to Cesare, why would Cesare tell his buddies to play along for now? to obey the Vatican and remain under its thumb? Why would Cesare himself try and stay in favor with Rodrigo?

Because the Vatican was still strategically useful, but his father's position wasn't the be-all end-all as you suggest. And Cesare wasn't trying too hard to stay in Rodrigo's favor TBH, he strayed from his guidance more than once and was disrespecting his wishes publicly at the banker's party.

Namikaze_17
08-11-2014, 02:21 AM
I can really understand/ respect why alot of fans love Ezio as they do.....even though some on other places are annoying, fans of him here really like him for legitimate and understandable reasons which I like and respect. But if I had to be honest, it's that I've personally had ENOUGH of Ezio and his story....it's done......though interesting, I just personally think we've seen enough of his life that we could write a damn biography about him. I'm just saying that for a 10th anniversary, they should give the one who started it all a remake of his game......Altair. Not to mention, there are still other characters that STILL need that Closure......way more Ezio does is all I'm saying.

Assassin_M
08-11-2014, 02:22 AM
Because the Vatican was still strategically useful, but his father's position wasn't the be-all end-all as you suggest. And Cesare wasn't trying too hard to stay in Rodrigo's favor TBH, he strayed from his guidance more than once and was disrespecting his wishes publicly at the banker's party.
He was in the position he was in BECAUSE of the Vatican. He's commander of the PAPAL forces because his father was the pope, How can his MAIN army not be his most important asset? how can all that being taken away not be be-all and end-all? it IS the be-all and end-all. It's why he murdered his brother in the first place--to become captain general..it's only by becoming captain general was he powerful AND it was only because Rodrigo was pope did he maintain that power--Even historically, after Rodrigo's death, Cesare did not maintain power for long...All of his power was gone.

It can't be a coincidence that when his father died, Cesare crumbled...if it really wasn't about Rodrigo being Pope then Cesare would have recovered just fine after Rodrigo's death but he never did. His funding came from the Papacy, his armies came from the papacy...there's just no other convincing way around it.

He wasn't disrespecting at the Banker's party either...He told him to just relax and leave the fighting to his captain general.

phoenix-force411
08-11-2014, 02:58 AM
Ezio in Revelations showed more to his character and it didn't make him all god-like and nice. Many still question his decision to kill hundreds of people within the Cappadocia when he set the gunpowder on fire.

LoyalACFan
08-11-2014, 03:40 AM
He was in the position he was in BECAUSE of the Vatican. He's commander of the PAPAL forces because his father was the pope, How can his MAIN army not be his most important asset? how can all that being taken away not be be-all and end-all? it IS the be-all and end-all. It's why he murdered his brother in the first place--to become captain general..it's only by becoming captain general was he powerful AND it was only because Rodrigo was pope did he maintain that power

He wouldn't have stopped being the Captain General after Rodrigo's death, though. Rodrigo appointed him, yes, but he would have continued on in the position under the new Pope. He kept Rodrigo in the loop presumably because it was easier to just play along than openly defy him.


It can't be a coincidence that when his father died, Cesare crumbled...if it really wasn't about Rodrigo being Pope then Cesare would have recovered just fine after Rodrigo's death but he never did. His funding came from the Papacy, his armies came from the papacy...there's just no other convincing way around it.

Rodrigo's death was the first time Cesare been in Rome for years, and the first time Ezio's sabotage was revealed. Had he not killed Rodrigo, his career would have been in shambles just the same. His supply lines were gone, his French reinforcements were gone, and now everybody knew it. He was ruined.

But he was able to cling onto power for several months after his father died. Long enough for a few more battles, surely. And we seem to be forgetting Rodrigo's most important contribution in his later years; keeping the Apple away from Cesare. So, what if Rodrigo had died in the Vault? Cesare would have mounted the attack on the Villa in revenge to reclaim the Apple, just as he did anyway, except then he wouldn't have Rodrigo's voice in his ear convincing him to let him keep it safe in the Vatican. Cesare would have gone on the warpath, except this time with an Apple of Eden in his control. There's no way Ezio could have foreseen that, but as it was, letting Rodrigo live panned out pretty well in the long run. There could have been an awesome way to approach this considering Rodrigo was ironically actually helping Ezio quite a bit between 1500 and 1503, but the story fumbled with it.

Assassin_M
08-11-2014, 05:40 AM
He wouldn't have stopped being the Captain General after Rodrigo's death, though. Rodrigo appointed him, yes, but he would have continued on in the position under the new Pope. He kept Rodrigo in the loop presumably because it was easier to just play along than openly defy him.
He actually would have since he ACTUALLY did after Rodrigo died and a new Pope was elected. There was no indication that he would have remained captain general under anyone else after Rodrigo. That's a pretty unlikely assumption since the conversation goes in a direction that implies that the Vatican still has a say on what Cesare can and can't do, which Cesare would GLADLY throw away if he can but he doesn't do it...and tells everyone to play along. The Vatican was important, Cesare himself says that Roma is what keeps their entire enterprise afloat.


Rodrigo's death was the first time Cesare been in Rome for years, and the first time Ezio's sabotage was revealed. Had he not killed Rodrigo, his career would have been in shambles just the same. His supply lines were gone, his French reinforcements were gone, and now everybody knew it. He was ruined.
Actually, no...Cesare returned to Rome in August 1503 and he seems fine and we actually see that--it was before Rodrigo's death, when we're pursuing Micheletto...we were pretty much done with cutting away at Cesare's empire but everything seemed fine.
It's because Rodrigo refused to help his son that he was in shambles, had he agreed to help him with more funds, he would have been just fine...his funds were from the Vatican and his french alliance was because of his position in the Vatican. It all poured back into his father's position as pope, why did you think he murdered his own brother to control the Papal armies? He could'v had all the supplies and alliances without the papacy but he couldn't.


he was able to cling onto power for several months after his father died. Long enough for a few more battles, surely.
What power? NO ONE was willing to help him, those few months basically showed the opposite..that he has no power anymore.


And we seem to be forgetting Rodrigo's most important contribution in his later years; keeping the Apple away from Cesare. So, what if Rodrigo had died in the Vault? Cesare would have mounted the attack on the Villa in revenge to reclaim the Apple, just as he did anyway, except then he wouldn't have Rodrigo's voice in his ear convincing him to let him keep it safe in the Vatican.
mount an attack with what? He attacked the Villa with his Papal forces..had Rodrigo died, that would've vanished. There's no reason to assume that Cesare would have retained ANY power after his father's death since the game AND history show the opposite.


There could have been an awesome way to approach this considering Rodrigo was ironically actually helping Ezio quite a bit between 1500 and 1503, but the story fumbled with it.
That would have actually made me like ACB' story...

rickprog
08-11-2014, 05:45 AM
What are you people even discussing? Ezio was the first person in history to suggest adding milk to coffee and to talk about gravity. Of course he was the greatest of all Assassins!

poptartz20
08-11-2014, 07:30 AM
I just can't play another Ezio's Creed game. He had his time.. we saw everything about him from birth til death. I don't see how much more we could really fill in with that. Do we need to see mundane things as well?

Press X to clean assassin den

LoyalACFan
08-11-2014, 07:35 AM
What are you people even discussing? Ezio was the first person in history to suggest adding milk to coffee!

Greatest human ever.

LoyalACFan
08-11-2014, 08:05 AM
He actually would have since he ACTUALLY did after Rodrigo died and a new Pope was elected. There was no indication that he would have remained captain general under anyone else after Rodrigo. That's a pretty unlikely assumption since the conversation goes in a direction that implies that the Vatican still has a say on what Cesare can and can't do, which Cesare would GLADLY throw away if he can but he doesn't do it...and tells everyone to play along. The Vatican was important, Cesare himself says that Roma is what keeps their entire enterprise afloat.

I mean, why wouldn't he have kept the job? He was exceptionally good at it. I see no reason to think that he would have been fired simply because Rodrigo died. Especially since the family had a stranglehold on Vatican politics; Rodrigo would have likely been replaced with Juan as Pope.


Actually, no...Cesare returned to Rome in August 1503 and he seems fine and we actually see that--it was before Rodrigo's death, when we're pursuing Micheletto...we were pretty much done with cutting away at Cesare's empire but everything seemed fine.

Eh... I don't really think that counts. That mission took place like ten feet from the city gate. I always assumed Cesare just slipped in to deal with Troche and slipped back out. He was there to murder a man in cold blood, after all. In any case, he didn't go back to the Vatican, he was only within the city walls for a few minutes.


It's because Rodrigo refused to help his son that he was in shambles, had he agreed to help him with more funds, he would have been just fine...his funds were from the Vatican and his french alliance was because of his position in the Vatican. It all poured back into his father's position as pope, why did you think he murdered his own brother to control the Papal armies? He could'v had all the supplies and alliances without the papacy but he couldn't.

But don't you remember the conversation they had when he first returned right before killing him? Yeah, if Rodrigo had given him money at that particular time he would have been OK, but before that he was doing fine without Rodrigo until the Assassins cut off all his resources and killed his allies. Plus, as I said, Rodrigo was the only thing standing between him and the Apple.

Cesare: What has happened here?
Rodrigo: I do not know what you mean?
Cesare: My funds, my troops. Gone.
Rodrigo: Financial difficulties strike all of us, even those with an army.
Cesare: You intend to give me money?
Rodrigo: No, I do not.
Cesare: Then I will use the Piece of Eden to get what I want. Your help is not necessary.

Cesare picked up an apple from the bowl on the table nearby, taking a large bite from it.

Rodrigo: That has been made abundantly clear to me. Are you aware that the Baron de Valois is dead?
Cesare: No. Did you–
Rodrigo: What reason could I possibly have to kill him? Was he plotting against me with my "brilliant," traitorous, Captain General?
Cesare: I do not have to stand for this.
Rodrigo: The Assassins murdered him.
Cesare: Why did you not stop them?
Rodrigo: As if I could. It was not my decision to attack Monteriggioni, it was yours! It is high time you took responsibility for your actions.


What power? NO ONE was willing to help him, those few months basically showed the opposite..that he has no power anymore. mount an attack with what? He attacked the Villa with his Papal forces..had Rodrigo died, that would've vanished. There's no reason to assume that Cesare would have retained ANY power after his father's death since the game AND history show the opposite.

His soldiers were still loyal (and his precious GUAAARDS to boot). Ezio massacred a ton of them during that stupid, godawful "vittoria agli assassini" scene with the Apple. Just the ones Ezio killed with the Apple in that sequence probably number in the hundreds. And that was all after Rodrigo was dead AND Ezio had done almost four years' worth of sabotage.


That would have actually made me like ACB' story...

I know, right?

Anyway, I think we're basically down to the point where we're arguing over the gaps in the story that don't give us enough information to really fill them in. I took it one way, you took it the other. I just don't think Rodrigo dying would have made that much difference to Cesare, at least within the AC lore since he was a Templar; remember, the French connection was a Templar connection, not just a political one in AC. And if Rodrigo's death really would have ruined Cesare at any point in time, why the HELL didn't they just kill the old bastard instead of screwing with the liberation of Rome for four friggin years? That's too big a plot hole to be missed by the writers IMO.

Fatal-Feit
08-11-2014, 08:20 AM
AC:2, AC:B, and somewhat of AC:R's story had some really cool concepts, and a lot of substance to go on as well. Unfortunately, however, they were too rhetorical (I mean, I guess we're suppose to assume Ezio's developed and understands the Creed(?) I guess most of these assassinations were stealthy even though almost all of them ended up in a chase sequence(?) And I guess we're suppose to assume Cesare and Machiavelli were geniuses, supposedly(?)) and left a lot of plot-holes.

As for OP, I don't want another Ezio game. Or an HD remake since the PC version is already that. I'd much rather have a Bloodline or AC:1 remake. Those games had some amazing stories (Not sure about Bloodline since I've yet to play it.) and I'm sure a ton of people would much rather have a homage to Altair than a 4th Ezio title.

Assassin_M
08-11-2014, 08:27 AM
I mean, why wouldn't he have kept the job? He was exceptionally good at it. I see no reason to think that he would have been fired simply because Rodrigo died. Especially since the family had a stranglehold on Vatican politics; Rodrigo would have likely been replaced with Juan as Pope.
Why did he not keep it after Rodrigo's death? if he was so exceptionally good at it and there was no reason to remove him, why WAS he removed? The family had a stranglehold on politics because of Rodrigo, really. Didn't Cesare kill Juan?


Eh... I don't really think that counts. That mission took place like ten feet from the city gate. I always assumed Cesare just slipped in to deal with Troche and slipped back out. He was there to murder a man in cold blood, after all. In any case, he didn't go back to the Vatican, he was only within the city walls for a few minutes.
It happened just a few days before he eventually killed Rodrigo, where would he go and come back in a few days? :p




But don't you remember the conversation they had when he first returned right before killing him? Yeah, if Rodrigo had given him money at that particular time he would have been OK, but before that he was doing fine without Rodrigo until the Assassins cut off all his resources and killed his allies. Plus, as I said, Rodrigo was the only thing standing between him and the Apple.

Cesare: What has happened here?
Rodrigo: I do not know what you mean?
Cesare: My funds, my troops. Gone.
Rodrigo: Financial difficulties strike all of us, even those with an army.
Cesare: You intend to give me money?
Rodrigo: No, I do not.
Cesare: Then I will use the Piece of Eden to get what I want. Your help is not necessary.

Cesare picked up an apple from the bowl on the table nearby, taking a large bite from it.

Rodrigo: That has been made abundantly clear to me. Are you aware that the Baron de Valois is dead?
Cesare: No. Did you–
Rodrigo: What reason could I possibly have to kill him? Was he plotting against me with my "brilliant," traitorous, Captain General?
Cesare: I do not have to stand for this.
Rodrigo: The Assassins murdered him.
Cesare: Why did you not stop them?
Rodrigo: As if I could. It was not my decision to attack Monteriggioni, it was yours! It is high time you took responsibility for your actions.
But it was Rodrigo who funded him, that's why he was fine before..I still hold on to the belief that had Rodrigo been killed, the Apple would still remain in Auditore hands.


His soldiers were still loyal (and his precious GUAAARDS to boot). Ezio massacred a ton of them during that stupid, godawful "vittoria agli assassini" scene with the Apple. Just the ones Ezio killed with the Apple in that sequence probably number in the hundreds. And that was all after Rodrigo was dead AND Ezio had done almost four years' worth of sabotage.
Cesare had supporters, sure...hundreds of them? i'll swallow it...20 something Assassins and an apple manage to take them down...it was a skeleton group of mercenaries, nothing amounting to the power Cesare had...wait....why the **** didnt Ezio use the Apple to destroy Cesare's army that was attacking the Villa?


why the HELL didn't they just kill the old bastard instead of screwing with the liberation of Rome for four friggin years? That's too big a plot hole to be missed by the writers IMO.
Same reason Ezio never used the Apple to destroy Cesare's army during the Villa attack:p...another plot hole.

ze_topazio
08-11-2014, 03:35 PM
I mean, why wouldn't he have kept the job? He was exceptionally good at it. I see no reason to think that he would have been fired simply because Rodrigo died. Especially since the family had a stranglehold on Vatican politics; Rodrigo would have likely been replaced with Juan as Pope.

Historically, and in the game as well, everybody hated the Borgia, Cesare's abuse of the Vatican resources for his own private projects was excuse enough to arrest him like it actually happened once the Pope died.



Anyway, I think we're basically down to the point where we're arguing over the gaps in the story that don't give us enough information to really fill them in. I took it one way, you took it the other. I just don't think Rodrigo dying would have made that much difference to Cesare, at least within the AC lore since he was a Templar; remember, the French connection was a Templar connection, not just a political one in AC. And if Rodrigo's death really would have ruined Cesare at any point in time, why the HELL didn't they just kill the old bastard instead of screwing with the liberation of Rome for four friggin years? That's too big a plot hole to be missed by the writers IMO.

Because the game would have been pretty short.

The excuse was that Ezio wanted to destroy their legend before killing them.


We don't need Ezio again, but we can have the next best thing, Marcelo and Flavia, or maybe Ezio Jr, his grandson, Ezio's grandfather also seemed like an interesting fellow.

CoachAssassin
08-11-2014, 09:13 PM
I never opted for another Ezio game, just a game for like the 10th anniversary that would have some references to Ezio, or something that has a connection with him. I posted this a while back:


We need to move away from the 18th century and the whole revolutionary principal, to be honest after these 2 games I had enough.



It's early 16th century (1542) and we are located in Ningbo, a Portuguese trading area in China. The local Portuguese authorities have been corrupted (Templars?) and allow their people to freely pillage and steal from nearby Chinese villages. The Ming Dynasty army is fed up and decide to show the Portuguese how they deal with thieves and arrogant Europeans. The European brotherhood is located in Ningbo and gets obliterated by the army, despite desperate attempt of the Chinese brotherhood to intervene. The entirety of Ningbo gets massacred, leaving the Chinese and southern european brotherhood in a miserable state in China. 2 Master assassins are sent to China to aid the Assassin leader there to rebuilt the brotherhood and make sure the grip of the templars on the trading and chinese army is removed.


We are talking about 2 playable main characters here, each with a slightly different view on the story. We play as the 2 master assassins who came by boat to China. It can be a 2 player storymode I suppose, but it's completely SP-playable. There is a woman and a man as main character and they pack quite a shock. We are aiming at a 10th anniversary shocker here, so it should give us something that also reminds us of the glory of the past days of Assassins Creed. Templars will no doubt be situated within the chinese factions, as well within the european faction. This game tackles the issue between ''the west'' and ''the east'' which is extremely well reflected in that time period. It's a nice setup to introduce people to an eastern dominated game, while still keeping the european feel people tend to enjoy in AC games. If the eastern parts of the game go well with the audience, They might go the oriental route later on.

Character development:

Well obviously Shao Jun will make her appearance in the game, but not as a playable character for me, you can disagree and state how you would like to see her role, but for me she is the chinese contact of the chinese brotherhood, who is the link with the european brotherhood. So far all brotherhoods have been very nice to eachother, but it could quite well be that they disagree a lot. Shao Jun is the missing link for me there.

The main characters?


*flash forward to cgi announcement shocker* 10th anniversary ubisoft logo pops up and epic music plays as we we see the streets of Ningbo, completely filled with blood and dead people. There are assassins and knights fighting the chinese army and in the distance we see a ship on the horizon, with the famous logo . We see it anchor while the chinese army surrounds it. We catch a glimp of a chinese assassin very epicly dropping smoke bombs distracting the army, we are amazed by the look of the chinese assassin and then she takes her hood off and we see she looks very much like that girl from AC Embers. We all anticipate she is going to be the main character, but suddenly from the mast of the ship 2 assassins jump down and air assassinate some people. They make their way to the commander of that force and corner him, with Shao Jun behind them. He jells at the 2 master assassins and insults them and curses their parents into hell or whatever. They nodd and the female assassin kills the man with her hidden blade. The male Assassin bends down next to the body, closes his eyes and comes up. They take off hoods and have black hair and dark eyes. The boy has a cut on his lip. He whispers the usual resquiescat in pace (that voice sounds highly recognizable!!) *screen goes black* we hear a small silence and then: ''Bastardo''. Bam!

Assassins Creed: Dynasty

Spoiler:
Confirmed main characters: Flavia and Marcello Auditore



Should I turn this into a fanfic or submit it to ubi ?

lothario-da-be
08-11-2014, 09:19 PM
Embers was not closure? What should they do next, a movie about Sofia cleaning his grave? Embers was a perfect ending for Ezio.

CoachAssassin
08-11-2014, 09:34 PM
Embers was not closure? What should they do next, a movie about Sofia cleaning his grave? Embers was a perfect ending for Ezio.

Ezio's story is closed, I'm not saying it isn't, however that storyline isn't because we don't know what is in that box. You can feel satisfied all you want but that is still an open ending, not a closed one.

Namikaze_17
08-11-2014, 10:02 PM
If anything, Connor needs an Embers Ending. :rolleyes:

killzab
08-11-2014, 10:05 PM
If anything, Connor needs an Embers Ending. :rolleyes:

Agreed or a lengthy DLC like Freedom Cry

Namikaze_17
08-11-2014, 10:16 PM
@Kill.

Agreed.

LoyalACFan
08-11-2014, 11:33 PM
Why did he not keep it after Rodrigo's death? if he was so exceptionally good at it and there was no reason to remove him, why WAS he removed? The family had a stranglehold on politics because of Rodrigo, really. Didn't Cesare kill Juan?

I was talking about Juan the banker, not Juan his dead brother. He was an extremely wealthy, powerful cardinal in his own right, plus Rodrigo had a few other relatives in the Vatican too. I feel like one of them (probably Juan) would have taken Rodrigo's place had he died in the Vault, but by the time Rodrigo did die in 1503 most of them were dead. And Cesare was removed because the Borgia name had been toxified by years of sabotage. Had Rodrigo died at the height of the family's power, I'm convinced that Cesare would have kept his position because Borgia influence was still strong in the Vatican (speaking strictly about AC lore here, not historically). I guess that's just a fundamental point we'll have to agree to disagree on, because I feel like we're talking in circles on this one :p Maybe we can just chalk it up to ACB's story sucking.



It happened just a few days before he eventually killed Rodrigo, where would he go and come back in a few days? :p

Oh. Well, in that case, the scene with Troche happened immediately after he returned, and then he promptly went to the Vatican and killed Rodrigo in a rage when he saw how far Rome had fallen. I don't see any issue there.


Cesare had supporters, sure...hundreds of them? i'll swallow it...20 something Assassins and an apple manage to take them down...it was a skeleton group of mercenaries, nothing amounting to the power Cesare had...wait....why the **** didnt Ezio use the Apple to destroy Cesare's army that was attacking the Villa?

Same reason Ezio never used the Apple to destroy Cesare's army during the Villa attack:p...another plot hole.

To be fair he did ask Mario for it, but Mario didn't hand it over. If it's anyone's fault that the Apple was lost that day, it's Mario's, for running out to face the enemy hopelessly outnumbered with a critically important asset on his person :rolleyes: I'm not sure Mario could have used it though; he and Machiavelli were damn near crippled by it when Ezio set it off in Leonardo's workshop.

Assassin_M
08-12-2014, 12:59 AM
I was talking about Juan the banker, not Juan his dead brother. He was an extremely wealthy, powerful cardinal in his own right, plus Rodrigo had a few other relatives in the Vatican too. I feel like one of them (probably Juan) would have taken Rodrigo's place had he died in the Vault, but by the time Rodrigo did die in 1503 most of them were dead. And Cesare was removed because the Borgia name had been toxified by years of sabotage. Had Rodrigo died at the height of the family's power, I'm convinced that Cesare would have kept his position because Borgia influence was still strong in the Vatican (speaking strictly about AC lore here, not historically). I guess that's just a fundamental point we'll have to agree to disagree on, because I feel like we're talking in circles on this one :p Maybe we can just chalk it up to ACB's story sucking.
The Borgia name was pretty tainted in 1499...you can't convince me that their name was ONLY tainted in 1503...just 4 years after it supposedly not being tainted, I mean...He was in power since 1491...that's 8 years of corruption and taint but yes, sure...ACB's story sucked:p


Oh. Well, in that case, the scene with Troche happened immediately after he returned, and then he promptly went to the Vatican and killed Rodrigo in a rage when he saw how far Rome had fallen. I don't see any issue there.
So no one told him when he arrived? if I just lost ALL of my money an assets and returned home, the first thing ANYONE who meets me would tell me is that I lost all of these things not have me pre-occupied with my sister whom I'm having an incestuous relationship and is seeing someone else. if Cesare knew about Lucrezia AND Egidio sending to Venice, i'm pretty sure he'd have known by that time that his empire was in shambles...Ezio wasn't exactly subtle.


To be fair he did ask Mario for it, but Mario didn't hand it over. If it's anyone's fault that the Apple was lost that day, it's Mario's, for running out to face the enemy hopelessly outnumbered with a critically important asset on his person :rolleyes: I'm not sure Mario could have used it though; he and Machiavelli were damn near crippled by it when Ezio set it off in Leonardo's workshop.
That's not what I got from the scene, to be honest. Ezio just asked "Do you have it?" and so Mario replies with "I am keeping it safe" didn't feel like Ezio asking for it nor Mario refusing to give it. Yeah, I still never understood why Mario was crippled even though he's a part of the Auditore line and Giovanni's brother...unless Maria was a descendant of twcb as well and thus making Giovanni's kids more resistant to the darn things.

LoyalACFan
08-12-2014, 03:34 AM
The Borgia name was pretty tainted in 1499...you can't convince me that their name was ONLY tainted in 1503...just 4 years after it supposedly not being tainted, I mean...He was in power since 1491...that's 8 years of corruption and taint but yes, sure...ACB's story sucked:p

Maybe tainted isn't the right word... Nobody LIKED the Borgia even before Ezio got to Rome, but they were feared, and the name itself meant something. Then over the next three or four years so much damage was done to the family that the name "Borgia" no longer carried the fearsome weight it used to. They were kind of a bad joke by the time Cesare got back.


So no one told him when he arrived? if I just lost ALL of my money an assets and returned home, the first thing ANYONE who meets me would tell me is that I lost all of these things not have me pre-occupied with my sister whom I'm having an incestuous relationship and is seeing someone else. if Cesare knew about Lucrezia AND Egidio sending to Venice, i'm pretty sure he'd have known by that time that his empire was in shambles...Ezio wasn't exactly subtle

He had no idea what had happened while he was gone, and while I agree that it's painfully stupid that he went so long without realizing what had been done right under his nose, he did ask Rodrigo point-blank WTF had happened as soon as he met with him. He didn't even know Baron Frenchy von Mustache was dead. It's... pretty dumb.


That's not what I got from the scene, to be honest. Ezio just asked "Do you have it?" and so Mario replies with "I am keeping it safe" didn't feel like Ezio asking for it nor Mario refusing to give it. Yeah, I still never understood why Mario was crippled even though he's a part of the Auditore line and Giovanni's brother...unless Maria was a descendant of twcb as well and thus making Giovanni's kids more resistant to the darn things.

Oh, I interpreted that as Mario keeping it from him. Again, pretty contrived.

Assassin_M
08-12-2014, 03:51 AM
Maybe tainted isn't the right word... Nobody LIKED the Borgia even before Ezio got to Rome, but they were feared, and the name itself meant something. Then over the next three or four years so much damage was done to the family that the name "Borgia" no longer carried the fearsome weight it used to. They were kind of a bad joke by the time Cesare got back.
So shouldn't that mean that the moment their strongest man goes down, they'd try to them out altogether? I don't think Cesare got arrested and disowned because his name meant nothing, it was because he committed crimes and was dangerous.



He had no idea what had happened while he was gone, and while I agree that it's painfully stupid that he went so long without realizing what had been done right under his nose, he did ask Rodrigo point-blank WTF had happened as soon as he met with him. He didn't even know Baron Frenchy von Mustache was dead. It's... pretty dumb.
So it IS dumb, that's what i'm talking about the whole time...this whole thing is pretty dumb:p



Oh, I interpreted that as Mario keeping it from him. Again, pretty contrived.
Anything negative about ACB is fine with me.

LoyalACFan
08-12-2014, 04:04 AM
So shouldn't that mean that the moment their strongest man goes down, they'd try to them out altogether? I don't think Cesare got arrested and disowned because his name meant nothing, it was because he committed crimes and was dangerous.

Rodrigo was their strongest man, yeah, but he wasn't their only strong player in the Vatican. I still think there would have been a strong enough Borgia influence in Rome to keep Cesare in power had Rodrigo died in 1499, but I guess we'll never know.


So it IS dumb, that's what i'm talking about the whole time...this whole thing is pretty dumb:p

Oh yeah, it's super dumb. But I think at some level the idea behind it was good. I think the major point of the game was that Ezio was right to spare Rodrigo because he actually indirectly became their best ally by keeping the Apple away from Cesare. I really think that was the message they were trying to get across; Ezio's mercy was painted as favorable to Machiavelli's absolutism. But the story was so weak and dumb that it didn't really get it across as well as it should have. That's why I've been making the case that killing Rodrigo wouldn't have solved anything; I know deep down that's the point they tried to make in the game, but didn't do so effectively because it just sucked, really.

Landruner
08-12-2014, 04:25 AM
Agreed or a lengthy DLC like Freedom Cry

Yes, Connor deserves it!!! Que diable!!!

Assassin_M
08-12-2014, 06:43 AM
Rodrigo was their strongest man, yeah, but he wasn't their only strong player in the Vatican. I still think there would have been a strong enough Borgia influence in Rome to keep Cesare in power had Rodrigo died in 1499, but I guess we'll never know.
But he was their main player, that's what i'm saying...the moment Rodrigo died, they disowned and arrested the second most powerful Borgia, I highly doubt they wouldn't be able to do this to some cardinal. it's like a sequence. When the strongest falls, there wont be any other reason for those below him in the command chain to remain because they were working under him, they reveled in his corruption, not to mention that at that time, just carrying a tainted family's name meant certain doom, just look at the Pazzi.


Oh yeah, it's super dumb. But I think at some level the idea behind it was good. I think the major point of the game was that Ezio was right to spare Rodrigo because he actually indirectly became their best ally by keeping the Apple away from Cesare. I really think that was the message they were trying to get across; Ezio's mercy was painted as favorable to Machiavelli's absolutism. But the story was so weak and dumb that it didn't really get it across as well as it should have. That's why I've been making the case that killing Rodrigo wouldn't have solved anything; I know deep down that's the point they tried to make in the game, but didn't do so effectively because it just sucked, really.
They tried and they failed, to me it only seemed like Rodrigo's death would have just benefited everyone had it been done sooner.