View Full Version : Assassin's Creed and how it was destroyed before me (spoiler warning)

01-14-2015, 09:55 AM
As I look back on the former Assassin's creed games I feel happy and sad. Happy that I had such a great time playing the first through revelations and sad that a story with such great potential could be ruined like so. I guess I'll start out with what I see wrong in my eyes. Main character why isn't there one? (besides the ancestors) it seems like the story now is just feeding off of what little plot is left after the team leaders and story writer though it would be a good idea in AC3 to kill of the main character Desmond Miles, the man we had worked so hard to use the bleeding effect in order to make a master assassin to die in some foolish way. That's when assassins creed was truly ruined for me, because they not only killed the main character but the story with it. With-ought a modern day playable character there is no story, no progression, nothing to tie the ancestors to the real world. Killing Desmond off was quite possibly the stupidest thing they could have done and it shames me to say I lost almost all interest in the games after that.

Now I'd like to remember the past AC1, some people loved it some hated it. I can understand both sides but honestly in my opinion it was one of the greatest games of all times. That story was just so amazing so appealing I finished the game so early because I couldn't stay away I was just so mesmerized its like every word in the game every action was just meant to be. It flowed like butter and was so exquisite. On the other hand the most complaints I heard were that it was too repetitive which I can understand because it truly was BUT I didn't even care at the time I cared about the story I cared about Altair and most of all I cared about Desmond and Abstergo and the Templars. The best word I can use to describe the game is solid. Then came AC2 which blew my mind when I saw it. They say that sequels are never as good as the original but I absolutey disagree because AC2 blew me away again I loved every second the story might not have been the absolute same but I still loved it the game play was even better. It was a true masterpiece of its time. I loved the fact that Desmond escaped and progressed as a character and I loved Ezio's path I mean what a great character I never knew I could be so attracted to games This stuff was gold to me I loved it. more games passed such as brotherhood which I thought was really good but wasn't as good as AC1/AC2 but still great it really tied into the story and made my love for the game deeper, again you progressed as Desmond did and the anticipation for Desmond to become something grew and grew even throughout ACR.

After all that is said and done let me go ahead and talk about how it fell downhill (for me). As I said before when Desmond died my mind blew and I thought they had killed it right there. No main character no progression in the real world. When I played blackflag I felt angry when I was just some intern boy who was working for the most evil company in exsistance and they were a freaking movie type industry. I saw some evil in abstergo at time but it doesn't feel the same. ESPECIALLY in united it feels so bad. It's like you're some guy watching TV and all of the sudden "Assassin's" tell you to go as Arno and find where the sage has died. Just to play a very broken story and in the end the very end have it explain nothign or progress nowhere you found where he died thats it. SO SO SO many unanswered questions its just pure insanity. In the first game it was about finding the pieces of Eden. In ACU you found the great sword of Eden and simply keep it as a new weapon like its nothing but a Toy nothing was explain about what it was Arno didn't even know they never explained it. Also did he join the Assassins again? that was never explained either...., to add to that after everything it just ends with no ties its so lazy and disappointing.

They have destroyed everything that Assassin's creed has stood for. Killing Desmond did it for me. Theres so many more things I could say but I think i'm done.

The point im trying to make Ubisoft is please just reintroduce a main character and stop stalling because you are making things worse I'm not totally flaming you obviously because I just wrote like a whole story about loving you and what you have done until you made huge mistakes you Can fix this easily all you have to do is take a break for a couple years really and i mean REALLY think about it reintroduce a main character and pick the story up in the modern day and stop dancing around ancestors. The only reason for ancestors in the first place was to build Desmond until he was ready to take the fight to the Templars.

Reintroduce a main character, make the game about the modern world, make the Templars evil again, Make stopping the templars the goal, make the pieces of Eden actually important again, take a breather for a while and take a 3-4 years (as you did in AC2) and BAM you might just have a masterpiece again. It's not just about money guys it's about bringing back that joy most of us felt.

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion this is mine I have so many more words running through my mind. So many more things i could say but I feel as if this is all that needs to be said.

Thank you Ubisoft for the fine work you have done I love some of the things you have created and the early Assassin's creed games were my favorite games I have ever had the privilege to play for that I thank you.

01-14-2015, 10:28 AM
I, in a way feel the same. I didn't mind so much Desmond dying a little after the fact. ACIV I thought was great and I enjoyed the modern day as a sort of show us what's up now. But I feel like we need a new modern day protagonist. A female even maybe.

I was VERY into the series when Desmond was around. Was still very into it even though ti felt like something was missing. A bit of it's soul maybe?

Unity again I find great but the story is lacking and there is NO modern story which is SERIOUSLY lacking. Bishop isn't Rebecca is she? No modern story, only meh ancestor story this time around and lack of ancestor on the loading screens really hurt the soul of the new game for me.

Still utterly love the games and it's still my favorite serious but I see your points.

My cousin whom I grew up with... We're both 27 now and game together quite a bit. He would always race out to get these games. When he seen the beginning of AC2 he rushed out. He rushed out for AC3 also. Why? To see Desmond become the badass he was meant to be. That sort of fell flat. My cousin didn't play IV and I even gave him my PS3 copy once I got the PS4 version.

Now he hasn't played Unity even though I've begged him for the co-op. Nope, killing Desmond killed his interest.

01-14-2015, 02:47 PM
I feel the same way, but unfortunately AC is a prime example which shows that you should never try to please both sides. Why do you think Desmond died? Why do you think the story died? Greed. and countless of people who DEMANDED Desmond and the modern day to die. Patrice left, the series lost its focus, now it just feeds off of brand recognition. It's not Assassin's Creed anymore, Assassin's Creed has been dead for a long time. All it is now is an action adventure game set in some setting in the past while you occasionally get thrown back into the "modern day" without being able to actually do anything.

This series is a shadow of its former self. You know what I PERSONNALY would like? I want the game that Patrice develops to absolutely crush and kill Assassin's Creed. To have Watch_Dogs take the flagship role of Ubisoft (it has potential if you ask me, remember AC started out the same way) and Prince of Persia to finally come back.

I can't believe I'm saying these words. But I, as a former huge fan of this franchise, want it to die.

01-14-2015, 03:19 PM
AC was planned, if successful, as a trilogy with different settings, and thus ancestors. However greed got the best out of Ubisoft┤s executives so an episodic DLC became a full $60 game - ACB- and a Nintendo 3DS sequel turned into another $60 game -ACRevelations-.

Yet AC III was in the horizon as a closure for Desmond -we all know what happened- and the thing is developers now have no idea and more importantly, dont have the time not only for the modern day, but also the "historical" story and even the mechanics......

01-14-2015, 03:53 PM
make the Templars evil again


01-14-2015, 04:17 PM
I believe Desmond was not killed out of fan claims but as he was planned for a trilogy in the very beginning draging his story would have made him just worst. I really enjoyed the modern day story on AC1 and spend a lot of time snooping in the computer and looking for things to do. It was so misterious yet interesting. After that it all went downhill to the point that I wish they just rid of the MD story, cause right now that thing were the lady talks to you and tella you what to do is annoying

01-14-2015, 06:15 PM
I have to agree with the previous posts. The sacrifice of Desmond to save the world from impending doom was in and of itself a rather good ending. Maybe UBI should have called it a day back then.

At least in AC IV:BF we had a glimpse of the now freed Juno. The introduction of sages had quite some promise. I could see a plot of a loving husband traveling through time and space to ultimately be once again united (ironic with respect to the Title of the newest game) with his one true love.

As a side note; I would have loved BF without the added Assassins vs. Templar back story for being a great pirate game, but I digress.

What became of Juno? What's the matter with Germain? Should he not be aware of him being a reincarnation of A´ta? Should he not strive to be reunited with Juno? Are simpleton Arno, or Germain for that matter, even aware of the precursor Civilization? Do they not wonder about lightning coming out of the sword?

Since ACIII I've been waiting for the Juno story line to unfold in modern day AC. I had presumed that Abstergo would become agents of Junos will to enslave humanity. That a new modern day Assassin, someone in Desmonds footsteps, would be tasked with new challenges in the animus, to somehow figure out how to prevail over Juno and her henchmen. And wasn't that somehow Desmonds promise from AC III, when he shortly before he sacrificed himself told Minerva: "Whatever Juno's planning - however terrible it might seem today - we'll find a way to stop it. But the alternative, what you want ... There's no hope there."?

Instead of literally a new hope, we received Arno on a personal mission to avenge the murdered Grandmaster of the knights Templar. Isn't it ironic? A supposed Assassin avenging the Templars Grandmaster? Lucky the murderer was a Templar himself, right? I can only assume he would have willingly killed anyone, Assassin, Templar or whatever in order to avenge Monsieur de la Serre.

This is certainly not the AC I once loved. And that's all besides the innumerable amount of technical bugs and glitches that have riddled this particular piece of software since day one. There's little hope that Victory will remedy any of these shortcomings.

01-14-2015, 06:58 PM
I can't believe I'm saying these words. But I, as a former huge fan of this franchise, want it to die.

It's like a beloved pet. You'd rather have it put down than see it suffer. I can relate to this feeling.

As for your other point of WD taking the flagship role. I can imagine that merging both franchises would have some merit and could in fact save AC from impending death. You could have WD be the modern day AC part. It would be rather conclusive with Blume/Abstergo merging and/or cooperating (alluded to in AC IV:BF) as the main antagonist. AC would then probably become the historic background for modern day conflict between Blume/Abstergo and a group of, in fact, freedom fighters.

In many ways both franchises could complement each other and it would give UBI time to develop more refined software. With two teams releasing one game a year alternating between WD and AC. Intertwining both storylines. Possibly they could keep it so that you could even play one or the other without really missing anything. If you prefer gunfights and driving WD would be for you, you want melee fighting? Covered by AC. You want the whole story? Play both! I'm afraid though, this would not be profitable enough for the juggernaut that is Ubisoft.

Or maybe, just maybe, what UBI is really doing behind closed doors is making a giant MMO with Watch Dogs and Assassins Creed components. Where you can switch back and forth. I personally wouldn't commit to such a thing, but hey Blizzard showed the way to making the big $$.

01-14-2015, 07:16 PM
AC was planned, if successful, as a trilogy with different settings, and thus ancestors. However greed got the best out of Ubisoft┤s executives so an episodic DLC became a full $60 game - ACB- and a Nintendo 3DS sequel turned into another $60 game -ACRevelations-.

Yet AC III was in the horizon as a closure for Desmond -we all know what happened- and the thing is developers now have no idea and more importantly, dont have the time not only for the modern day, but also the "historical" story and even the mechanics......

Well according to Darby McDevitt, there was a lot of ideas in the air about what AC should be. Initially Assassin's Creed II was to have an equal portion in Modern Day to accompany the historical section but the number of assets needed to be created was too much, so it became entirely historical, with the modern day reduced to a sliver.

Regarding Modern Day, the main thing you have to consider is that there were elements in the First Three Desmond games that became less prominent by the time you come to REVELATIONS and AC3.

1) "The bleeding effect", like the Animus could actually drive you Mad and you have visions of the past in the present.
2) The general paranoia, Assassins on the Run, Subject 16, the messages from the First Civilization ending with Lucy's death).
3) Desmond to be the big hope of the Assassins by consolidating Altair and Ezio's memories

I think Patrice Desilets was interested in trying to find ways to bring the Past and Present together or at least that was what he wanted but either he couldn't make it work himself or that the Franchise folks wanted a fixed stable formula with little room for experimentation. I highly doubt in any case that Desilets ever planned a full present day AC game. By the time of Revelations, the Present Day is background and that game removed a lot of the subplots, Lucy was a Traitor, the bleeding effect is cured. Once that stuff was removed, and we had a sane, stable, guilt-free Desmond who's become a good Assassin(where before he was ambivalent and out-of-place with what was initially called "the Scooby Gang"), the drama of the first games is gone so there was no sense in keeping Desmond around for any longer.

I like the MD in Black Flag where it's essentially providing an intellectual metaphor and commentory on the game itself as a product. In any case, I never cared for the Modern Day a great deal, to me AC is primarily a historical game and while the Modern Day was poorly handled in UNITY, for me if the historical part was correct than I wouldn't have bothered.

01-14-2015, 10:46 PM
One glaring inconsistency I always wondered about is the fact that in AC2 Minerva keeps the hunt going and then finally in ACR Jupiter effectively leads Desmond to the New York Vault to save mankind. Given he finishes with a warning about how he doesn't know how things will end either in his time or in ours.

At least Minerva changed her mind at some point in time between AC2 and AC3.

01-17-2015, 04:50 AM

I feel like my comment is a valid comment although they are evil throughout the series it has changed now for some reason. They have decided that Templars aren't so bad take Elise for example she had basically no quarrel with the Assassins neither did the order until the sage decided to do what he did, but in other games the Templars were the evil not only for assassins but for everyone. they were the plague and the Assassins were the ones who sought justice that's what I miss.

01-17-2015, 08:16 AM
I feel like my comment is a valid comment although they are evil throughout the series

I favor the word "corrupted" more than evil.

And it's only been two games in which they were corrupted. ( AC2 & ACB)

Every other game has showed them in either a neutral or good light.

it has changed now for some reason.

It's a little thing called greyness, friend. :rolleyes:

i take Elise for example she had basically no quarrel with the Assassins

Mostly because of Arno.

If push comes to shove, I doubt she would've hesitated in fighting them.

Though she died before we truly could know if she would so... :rolleyes:

neither did the order

Because of some peace treaty they never really explained... :confused:

the Templars were the evil not only for assassins but for everyone. they were the plague and the Assassins were the ones who sought justice that's what I miss.

Riiight...and the Assassins imposing their ideals of "free will" is just as fair?

They're just as much of a plague as the Templars.

So in the end you basically want things to revert back to:

Assassin: "What you're doing is wrong, what I'm doing is right. You're wrong about this conflict, I am right about this conflict. You like red? Well you're wrong because I like blue."
Templar: "I-I wanted power..."
Assassin: "Rest in peace."

01-17-2015, 08:27 AM
Make the templars evil again? No. Im no templar lover, but i dont care much for the assassins anymore either. I think they should introduce another faction to represent the extreme end of the assassins. IMO Juno is the extreme representation of the Templars. So the Assassins should have someone/something to represent their extreme side. Then get the templars and assassins to join forces together to stop both Juno and this other faction, which would force Ubisoft to make a new modern day protagonist, Male/Female, don't really care, just want a new modern day protagonist.