PDA

View Full Version : what could have been and retcon



RA503
09-07-2014, 09:32 AM
HI people, I replaying every game in the series and some things start to bother me, because of this, I have the idea to created this tread, to list the retcons and especulate how the plot could have been :

Assassins Creed 2 has zero foreshadowing of the fact that lucy is a templar, this history probably is only thought in brotherhood.

in AC 1 desmond don't know that abstergo is a templar company and thinks they is only crazy people, but the animus sequence 2 of revelations in a flashback, shows that willian explain everything about templars and abstergo to him when he was a kid.

darby said that desmond ending is always planned to be the way we know, only change a little bit I think is not hard to guess that lucy's death probably is planned as well since the beggining seeing that the series like to play tragic, I think that in the time of AC 1, the ending is more like ''both lucy and desmond sacrifice to stop the launching of the satellite''.

what you thoughs about this ?

Landruner
09-07-2014, 09:50 AM
To be honest with you - I do not think that the successive pull of writers of this series really followed the details of the different plots especiqlly regarding the modern days, Astergo and Desmond and Lucy.

Lucy had been tuned into a Templar and killed off in ACB because the actress was stopping playing lucy (officially that the reason unofficially I won't say....) and Desmond had been bouncing on an Ubisoft business yoyo post AC1.

I do not think that it was their original intend to kill Desmond and Lucy from the beginning, I do not think they planed to even attach anything to the failed pop cultural 2012 end of the world....I do not even think that the Jade or Patrice wanted the direction the modern days took.

Darby is not the original writer that started the story arc, but made his sauce since.

I am still surprised that some people try to make a sense of it.

doogsy91
09-07-2014, 09:53 AM
I think the story lost its way with Brotherhood. I felt they just dropped the ball with the mystery and the intrigue of the modern day element. Abstergo stopped being menacing and the whole first-civ thing started feeling overdone. The religious critiques stopped too, which was a shame.

I think what would've really helped is if they'd finished Ezio's story in ACII (as I believe was orginally intended), not insisted on making Brotherhood or Reveltions and consequently drivng Patrice away, and letting him make ACIII the way it should've been made, finishing Desmond's story off as a trilogy (again, the way it was originally intended).

Btw, Lucy did tell Desmond at some point in AC1 that Abstergo is Templar run.

Farlander1991
09-07-2014, 10:06 AM
I do not think that it was their original intend to kill Desmond and Lucy from the beginning, I do not think they planed to even attach anything to the failed pop cultural 2012 end of the world....I do not even think that the Jade or Patrice wanted the direction the modern days took.

AC1 had December 21st 2012 set as satellite launch date, not to mention lots of S16's blood writings referenced that date andd Mayan prophecy. It was clear from the very first game that AC3 would be released in 2012, although I didn't think at the time that it would be connected to a more 'literal' end of the world (I thought that they're just using the satellite as a representation of that).

Also, devs said that Lucy's betrayal was thought of during AC2 development. Which kinda explains why Abstergo escape was so easy and the security didn't try to use lethal measures at the end of the game.

One of the biggest retcons in the series is Altair's and Ezio's apple, to the point that they made a whole game to fix the inconsistency and even then it's not entirely convincing. We know that Altair's apple from AC1 was destroyed. Ezio's Apple in AC2, while not directly stated, is VERY HEAVILY implied to be Altair's apple (the plot of Bloodlines added to those implications as well). Then suddenly we find Ezio's apple in ACB. So in ACR they try to explain how, 'Oh, Altair's apple is a DIFFERENT apple and he asked to spread misinformation that the Apple was on Cyprus so it wouldn't be found', which leads to another implication - despite the misinformation, an Apple just happened to be on Cyprus for Rodrigo to find it? Wha?

RA503
09-07-2014, 10:13 AM
is good to know about this I don't know that kristen bell left ubsoft(maybe her contract only said about three games before the series became infinite after 2)I very curious to know if the american revolution is intended to be the setting of AC 3 since AC 2(also brotherhood foreshadowing french revolution) but probably we never know.

and the 2012 thing is in one of the glyph 16 left in the walls in AC 1 ending.

doogsy91
09-07-2014, 10:21 AM
I very curious to know if the american revolution is intended to be the setting of AC 3 since AC 2(also brotherhood foreshadowing french revolution) but probably we never know.
Apparently Patrice was involved with choosing of the American Revolution as the setting for AC3 before he left (or was driven away). AC4 was the first game to have had no input from him.

rob1990312
09-07-2014, 11:46 AM
A lot was retconned after ac2 to accommodate ac3 which started developement when ac2 released. Temples turned into one temple. Alex Hutchinson said in an interview that they decided to kill lucy off when their story didnt need her any more. I also think that the whole juno arc was never the original idea and that it was added in ac3 so that the md would still have a continual story. Also animus facial projection was introduced in acr to justify ac3 having a main charachter that didnt look like desmond

RinoTheBouncer
09-07-2014, 11:59 AM
I also agree with this. It reminds me of the Fringe T.V. series that I love so much. By the time Season 5 was made, we had some explanations for things that happened in season 1, 2 and 3 that were so obvious to be last minute ideas and not things planned since the 1st, 2nd or 3rd season. I think the case is a lot the same here, as well. They started off with something and then things changed, writers were replaced and the story was sadly altered and took a different direction to suit the various changes that took place.

It also saddens me how Lucy turned out to be a Templar in such a well-made scene but then nothing mentioned about that ever-since, unless for minor flashbacks or voice-overs. Same goes for Desmond’s death. It wasn’t only his fate that saddened me, but how the ending was badly directed that annoyed me the most. Both Lucy and Desmond could’ve had a much more theatrical conclusion whether in a happy or a sad ending.

rob1990312
09-07-2014, 12:15 PM
I think desmonds death was probably planned but it was terribbly presented and handled cinematialy. Desmond gets fried and the credits roll. I was so angry when i first played it. It was such an anti climax. Thank god black flag was good otherwise i wouldnt play ac anymore

CoachAssassin
09-07-2014, 02:11 PM
For me the biggest anti-climax on Desmond dying was that we didn't get a choice, even though it was presented as such. Also the fact that probably the most important thing in the modern day untill the end of this series was rushed beyond recognition... It was literally: Grats u has key, now u see revelations like cutscene and die baibai.