PDA

View Full Version : Shay comes off as a fool and a psycho (Spoilers)



GreatBeyonder
12-05-2014, 10:59 PM
The story of Rogue focuses on an earnest, thoughtful young man who decides that lives are more precious than ideals.

The gameplay of Rogue focuses on a professional killer who is fine killing anyone on the street in his way.

:confused: How did this happen? I understand the Templars allow a bit more leeway with civilian lives, but even Majd Addin wasn't so blaise about murdering anyone he liked. And why would Shay, who moreso than any other protagonist thus far values life, run around like a loon in New York killing civilians? It;s Assassin's Creed, not Grand Theft Auto.

SixKeys
12-05-2014, 11:09 PM
The story of Rogue focuses on an earnest, thoughtful young man who decides that lives are more precious than ideals.

The gameplay of Rogue focuses on a professional killer who is fine killing anyone on the street in his way.

:confused: How did this happen? I understand the Templars allow a bit more leeway with civilian lives, but even Majd Addin wasn't so blaise about murdering anyone he liked. And why would Shay, who moreso than any other protagonist thus far values life, run around like a loon in New York killing civilians? It;s Assassin's Creed, not Grand Theft Auto.

TBH this has always been a ludonarrative dissonance in the AC games. AC4 handled it the best so far (although not perfect, but then, no game is), since Edward started off as a devil-may-care pirate without regard for anyone standing in his way.

Hans684
12-05-2014, 11:12 PM
You can kill civilians in any game expect Unity(have not tried) but he did kill civilians(once). He started the Lisbon earthquake. Don't take every gameplay opportunity like this Canon(as in that you can kill civilians after the earthquake), as said. He values lives whether civilian, Assassin(he don't want to kill but they want to search for more of those dangerous places, so they have to be stopped) or the Templars at the begging.

Farlander1991
12-05-2014, 11:12 PM
TBH this has always been a ludonarrative dissonance in the AC games.

Is it, though? The first game pretty much after every battle says 'resynchronizing with ancestor's memories', basically saying that, 'yeah, Altair didn't actually kill all those guys you just killed'. Games after don't focus on that so much (they don't focus at it at all, really), but the same principles stay: just because we can kill lots of people doesn't necessarily mean that the ancestor has killed lots of people. This being, after all, a simulation.

SixKeys
12-05-2014, 11:29 PM
Is it, though? The first game pretty much after every battle says 'resynchronizing with ancestor's memories', basically saying that, 'yeah, Altair didn't actually kill all those guys you just killed'. Games after don't focus on that so much (they don't focus at it at all, really), but the same principles stay: just because we can kill lots of people doesn't necessarily mean that the ancestor has killed lots of people. This being, after all, a simulation.

The first game is different from the others in that it actually allows you to freely kill civilians after you finish the main campaign. I don't know why they removed that in the later games.

It also depends on who you consider "innocents" in these games. Why are we not allowed to kill civilians but are allowed to kill innocent guards even when they're not being a threat to us? They're just doing their jobs. Most players just want to go crazy from time to time and cause mayhem, even if it doesn't fit the narrative. And the game allows for it. That's where the dissonance comes from. Are you telling me Alta´r could walk around killing every single cop in Damascus just because he was bored and it didn't "count" as breaking the Creed?

Farlander1991
12-05-2014, 11:38 PM
Are you telling me Alta´r could walk around killing every single cop in Damascus just because he was bored and it didn't "count" as breaking the Creed?

No, I'm saying that if we go around killing every single cop in Damascus that doesn't mean Altair has actually done anything of the sorts at all. Because, well, in short - Animus simulation and all that stuff.

And when it comes to 'innocents', we never get a message 'the ancestor never killed innocents', we get a message 'the ancestor never killed civilians'. The ancestor killed guards, when necessary, it's just that the simulation doesn't check when it's appropriate to kill guards.

AC1 has established that the things that, are like 100% definitively what happened are cutscenes. Everything in gameplay is a gray area - if we kill 100 guards while infiltrating something, doesn't mean the ancestor killed them, he might've killed 1, 2, or not a single one. ACB introduced the optional objective thing to 'do things the way the ancestor has done it to increase synch', but it doesn't change the basic principle - that we essentially just wiggle our way through from synchronization point to synchronization point (i.e. from cutscene to cutscene).

SixKeys
12-05-2014, 11:46 PM
No, I'm saying that if we go around killing every single cop in Damascus that doesn't mean Altair has actually done anything of the sorts at all. Because, well, in short - Animus simulation and all that stuff.

And when it comes to 'innocents', we never get a message 'the ancestor never killed innocents', we get a message 'the ancestor never killed civilians'. The ancestor killed guards, when necessary, it's just that the simulation doesn't check when it's appropriate to kill guards.

AC1 has established that the things that, are like 100% definitively what happened are cutscenes. Everything in gameplay is a gray area - if we kill 100 guards while infiltrating something, doesn't mean the ancestor killed them, he might've killed 1, 2, or not a single one. ACB introduced the optional objective thing to 'do things the way the ancestor has done it to increase synch', but it doesn't change the basic principle - that we essentially just wiggle our way through from synchronization point to synchronization point (i.e. from cutscene to cutscene).

The whole 100% sync thing AC has always done makes it complicated to explain away inconsistencies. Sync is supposedly not the same thing as health. Yet it's sync you lose when you jump off a building that's too high or when the assassin gets hit in combat. Killing civilians also results in lost sync, meaning that's something the assassin never did. Full sync means you are doing things exactly the way the ancestor did them. Does that mean the assassin never actually got hit in battle or jumped from too high?

Farlander1991
12-05-2014, 11:52 PM
Full sync means you are doing things exactly the way the ancestor did them. Does that mean the assassin never actually got hit in battle or jumped from too high?

Well, yeah. This is why your Assassin can get hit in battle in gameplay 100 times and still feel fine, yet when he's wounded in a cutscene he starts limping or losing consciousness, or, well, showing signs of being wounded - because that's when he ACTUALLY was wounded.

Although this also kinda paints Ezio as a painkiller junkey, lol :D

king-hailz
12-06-2014, 12:21 AM
Lol that is weird...but I thought you were going to mention his character problems... Their are problems with his character that affect me more than being able to kill civills.

LoyalACFan
12-06-2014, 02:19 AM
TBH I just found him dull, he didn't come across as a bad guy, just not really that interesting to me. And Dear God, that freaking "I make my own luck" catchphrase got on my nerves so much. Note to the writers; a catchphrase is only cool if it's used in moderation.

Fatal-Feit
12-06-2014, 03:02 AM
TBH I just found him dull, he didn't come across as a bad guy, just not really that interesting to me. And Dear God, that freaking "I make my own luck" catchphrase got on my nerves so much. Note to the writers; a catchphrase is only cool if it's used in moderation.

lul

And that long conversation with Liam about women in different regions. Like, WDF?

We get it, Ubisoft, you're trying to make protags appeal to us with the charismatic lady's man persona blah blah blah blah blah garb. JUST STAHP. YUR TRYING TOO HARD.

Shay's still my 2nd fav character, though.

DA SHIZZLE IG
12-06-2014, 03:20 AM
After what happened, you probably would snap too. I seriously did not see that coming.

VestigialLlama4
12-06-2014, 03:21 AM
The story of Rogue focuses on an earnest, thoughtful young man who decides that lives are more precious than ideals.

The gameplay of Rogue focuses on a professional killer who is fine killing anyone on the street in his way.

:confused: How did this happen? I understand the Templars allow a bit more leeway with civilian lives, but even Majd Addin wasn't so blaise about murdering anyone he liked. And why would Shay, who moreso than any other protagonist thus far values life, run around like a loon in New York killing civilians? It;s Assassin's Creed, not Grand Theft Auto.

You know I actually think they planned to make a darker game with Shay, like they would have him actually do the Templar stuff in the game, but they didn't have time to work around it, so the killing civilians part is a leftover from that. The point is playing as a Templar means indulging in the occassional war crime and for me, Shay isn't really a real Templar until he gets his hands dirty, like destroy a single village to find one lone Assassin dirty. In the game they mention that one of the Templars was a guy called James Wardrop who committed atrocities against Native American tribes and he's a valued member of the same "Enlightened" crew that Haytham commands and I was hoping that we'd see some of the darker moments in the French and Indian War.

MakimotoJin
12-06-2014, 07:45 AM
Wait,are you talking about difference between story and gameplay?
Using a smoke bomb to kill Adewale was something that bothered me...