1. #1
    Bipolar Matt's Avatar Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    WI
    Posts
    311

    Playable Character Fates

    We're missing closure for a few characters we've gotten to play as:

    Altair: Passed away in his vault.
    Ezio: Passed away in Florence from a heart attack.
    Haytham: Killed by Connor.
    Edward: Killed in his home by Birch's mercenaries.
    Adewale: Killed by Shay.

    We still don't know ultimately what happened to:
    Connor: We need more details than his blonde wife took his children and left. When? Where? How old was he? What happened after that?
    Aveline: No idea beyond Patience Gibbs (I know many don't consider her a main character).
    Shay: No idea after he assassinated Charles Dorian and took back the Precursor Box.
    Arno: No idea beyond 1808 when he went into the Templar vault with Napoleon (age 40 or so).
    Jacob, Evie or Lydia Frye: All were alive as of World War I. Nothing more than that.

    It would be nice to get some endings for these characters. Find out what ultimately happened to them.
    Share this post

  2. #2
    Originally Posted by Bipolar Matt Go to original post
    We're missing closure for a few characters we've gotten to play as:

    Altair: Passed away in his vault.
    Ezio: Passed away in Florence from a heart attack.
    Haytham: Killed by Connor.
    Edward: Killed in his home by Birch's mercenaries.
    Adewale: Killed by Shay.

    We still don't know ultimately what happened to:
    Connor: We need more details than his blonde wife took his children and left. When? Where? How old was he? What happened after that?
    Aveline: No idea beyond Patience Gibbs (I know many don't consider her a main character).
    Shay: No idea after he assassinated Charles Dorian and took back the Precursor Box.
    Arno: No idea beyond 1808 when he went into the Templar vault with Napoleon (age 40 or so).
    Jacob, Evie or Lydia Frye: All were alive as of World War I. Nothing more than that.

    It would be nice to get some endings for these characters. Find out what ultimately happened to them.
    I would kindly say 4, seeing that the Frye twins had retired to the country side when WWI began. When we saw Lydia Frye in Syndicate, the memory took place in 1916. The Twins would be 69 years old by then. I don't think they would be doing much other than training other new Assassins. Unless Ubisoft gives them something big that they were working on, I don't think they were doing anything else of in the scale of the other 4.

    Oh and its Abstergo just talking twisted venom when mentioning Connor's family. He has a blonde white woman as a wife and kids, but that's the only substantial thing after that.
    Share this post

  3. #3
    cawatrooper9's Avatar AC Forum Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    A Bathtub with Caterina Sforza
    Posts
    5,967
    This discussion has popped up a few times before, and one thing that I generally agree with is that "closure" should not necessarily mean death. For instance, compare Shay with the twins. The twins are last seen running through a park in London, after happily defeating their Templar enemy and deciding to keep the POE hidden. Depending on what side missions or DLC you do, you may also see them working for the queen, or fighting Jack the Ripper years later. Either way, we know that they are doing Assassiny things still, but there are no specific Assassiny things that we know about that they were working on that haven't been wrapped up yet.

    Shay is a little different. He's a wildcard. He's out to kill Assassins and find the box- and as far as I know, we never see him get the box (and there are oh so many more Assassins to kill). We have pretty good reason to get closure on Shay, because there are still some HUGE questions regarding his storyline and progression.

    Connor is a little more of a controversial figure. While many (including myself, sometimes) think his character needs closure, some think that Connor's storyline is pretty well wrapped up by the end of the game. Again, I don't think that we need to necessarily see his death, but I wouldn't mind seeing his Brotherhood in a more complete form by the end of the game. I guess you get a little bit of this in the tunnels before the Fort George attack, but it might be cool to have some more traditionally Assassin-style missions specifically with your recruits, just to really get the feeling that Connor has truly rebuilt the brotherhood.
    Share this post

  4. #4
    Originally Posted by Bipolar Matt Go to original post
    It would be nice to get some endings for these characters. Find out what ultimately happened to them.
    It would be nice but it wouldn't be in ubisoft's interest.

    Ubisoft cares only about spinning and juggling many crystal balls in the air and then hoping that when it crashes on the floor, the glass doesn't fly into their eyes. They want to keep the Lore as "open" as possible...so my advice is don't get too attached.

    As for the Fryes, well I think the syndicate DLC gave us a good sense of their fate.
    Share this post

  5. #5
    Originally Posted by cawatrooper9 Go to original post
    This discussion has popped up a few times before, and one thing that I generally agree with is that "closure" should not necessarily mean death. For instance, compare Shay with the twins. The twins are last seen running through a park in London, after happily defeating their Templar enemy and deciding to keep the POE hidden. Depending on what side missions or DLC you do, you may also see them working for the queen, or fighting Jack the Ripper years later. Either way, we know that they are doing Assassiny things still, but there are no specific Assassiny things that we know about that they were working on that haven't been wrapped up yet.

    Shay is a little different. He's a wildcard. He's out to kill Assassins and find the box- and as far as I know, we never see him get the box (and there are oh so many more Assassins to kill). We have pretty good reason to get closure on Shay, because there are still some HUGE questions regarding his storyline and progression.

    Connor is a little more of a controversial figure. While many (including myself, sometimes) think his character needs closure, some think that Connor's storyline is pretty well wrapped up by the end of the game. Again, I don't think that we need to necessarily see his death, but I wouldn't mind seeing his Brotherhood in a more complete form by the end of the game. I guess you get a little bit of this in the tunnels before the Fort George attack, but it might be cool to have some more traditionally Assassin-style missions specifically with your recruits, just to really get the feeling that Connor has truly rebuilt the brotherhood.
    I can say that Syndicate is an actual "self contained" story, as it really told the life and closure of the Frye Twins really well. We know of their beginnings, their accomplishments throughout their adult life, they married to their respective husband/wife, had children which one of their descendants fought in WWI, and that they peacefully retired to the countryside. Not to mention that there is barely any loose ends to consider, other than the fact if Evie did have kids as well as if the marriage with Green was good or not, seeing as we were with her in 1888 at around her 40s. Isn't there debate if she is an ancestor to Monima Das?

    Also I think that with Shay around, I don't think Connor's story is wrapped up now that he has an Assassin Hunter as a potential Grand Master to deal with. Especially since Shay declared himself a member of the American Rite of Templars, in addition to full dedication to the cause, its another player to the game. Its these two rebuilding their respective powers and fighting to influence in the new country.


    Originally Posted by VestigialLlama4 Go to original post
    It would be nice but it wouldn't be in ubisoft's interest.

    Ubisoft cares only about spinning and juggling many crystal balls in the air and then hoping that when it crashes on the floor, the glass doesn't fly into their eyes. They want to keep the Lore as "open" as possible...so my advice is don't get too attached.
    Its this very decision that is gardening so much hate from many fans. Yet Ubisoft ponders why they get so much hate?
    Share this post

  6. #6
    Originally Posted by Mr.Black24 Go to original post
    Its this very decision that is gardening so much hate from many fans. Yet Ubisoft ponders why they get so much hate?
    "So much hate?"...we are a small minority. Most people like Syndicate and the Fryes. That's all ubisoft cares for. For them, the fans of AC3, a game released in 2012, is very much yesterday's news....considering that it was released 4 years back they have a point. AC is targeting "new fans" rather than established fandom.

    The thing about how Ubisoft works is that they have some long term plans but they leave a certain window for changes and shifts. If AC3 and Unity was popular across-the-board, Connor and Arno would have gotten a sequel or a saga. Instead of a wretched piece of trash like Rogue, we would have gotten a proper Connor's REVELATIONS. UNITY was intended to be a big breakthrough, and Arno was intended for future use. That game did not do what it was supposed to do and Syndicate is a salvage job, a no-drama low-stakes adventure.

    Basically, Ubisoft doesn't have some masterplan for its games, it's based on contingent plans, expectations, enthusiasm among fans and developers, marketing and so on. The initial plan was do a Desmond Trilogy of AC1-AC2-AC3. Then Ezio became popular and you had development creep...with Brotherhood going from DLC to full release, then Revelations and then AC3, annualization became a thing. You also have to understand that Ubisoft pretty much have to put out a big AC game every year. It has a huge company in Montreal for which it gets tax breaks and they have to put out products for their stockbrokers, keep their staff employed and justify their existence. This is business realities. In this reality, a bunch of fans who pine for some fictional character from a game that came back in 2012, that only a small bunch of online nerds (myself included) care about...we are so low on their priorities that we don't even qualify for the office rubbish bin. Stuff like Lore doesn't matter at all, MD not going anywhere, plot consistency, loose ends...forget it. From their perspective, given how the video game market changes, given how expensive AAA games are, all this makes sense.

    I am saying this for your sake. I think fans need to stop doing Ubisoft's job for them. Stop pining for their products, stop making theories for lore and all that. It's not written in mind with you at all. Yes if a game is written by Darby McDevitt and Corey May, maybe, possibly. But Darby doesn't run AC, he's just one of many writers...the rest of them talk at cross-purposes and do stuff without thinking, not that I blame them, but it's clearly a job for them. No single guy does, and he would most likely prefer to do his own IP and game than "run AC". Yes, ubisoft should care about consistency, they should care for storytelling values but then again if Ubisoft did care for that, it's likely Patrice Desilets would not have walked out to start with, nor would they have shelved 1666.
    Share this post

  7. #7
    I don't want conclusions to stories I've been burning out on, I want a new story that feels different. It seems like they're going to make the next game's protagonist stick around for a few games, so it's fine if they show more of his life, but the idea of everything in the series needing to be 'completed' is insane. It's like the worst possible extension of the mentality endless collectibles inspire. I want that mentality out of AC, the constant breadcrumbing and answers to every vague mystery. I want it to feel more like uncovering a history, and histories leave gaps and unclear situations.
    Share this post

  8. #8
    cawatrooper9's Avatar AC Forum Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    A Bathtub with Caterina Sforza
    Posts
    5,967
    Originally Posted by Mr.Black24 Go to original post
    I can say that Syndicate is an actual "self contained" story, as it really told the life and closure of the Frye Twins really well. We know of their beginnings, their accomplishments throughout their adult life, they married to their respective husband/wife, had children which one of their descendants fought in WWI, and that they peacefully retired to the countryside. Not to mention that there is barely any loose ends to consider, other than the fact if Evie did have kids as well as if the marriage with Green was good or not, seeing as we were with her in 1888 at around her 40s.
    Exactly my point- the Fryes' entire storyline was to kill Starrick and take back London. Not a

    Isn't there debate if she is an ancestor to Monima Das?
    It's certainly possible, given her Monima's connection to Abbraz.

    Also I think that with Shay around, I don't think Connor's story is wrapped up now that he has an Assassin Hunter as a potential Grand Master to deal with. Especially since Shay declared himself a member of the American Rite of Templars, in addition to full dedication to the cause, its another player to the game. Its these two rebuilding their respective powers and fighting to influence in the new country.
    That's very true. This is simply begging for a game to be made about it... but I think we all know how unlikely that is. Besides, they've made more than enough games for that time period and geographic setting for a quite a long time.


    Originally Posted by Civona Go to original post
    I don't want conclusions to stories I've been burning out on, I want a new story that feels different. It seems like they're going to make the next game's protagonist stick around for a few games, so it's fine if they show more of his life, but the idea of everything in the series needing to be 'completed' is insane. It's like the worst possible extension of the mentality endless collectibles inspire. I want that mentality out of AC, the constant breadcrumbing and answers to every vague mystery. I want it to feel more like uncovering a history, and histories leave gaps and unclear situations.
    Ohhhh man, I don't know about that. Like many here have said, if "completed" means knowing every detail of an Assassin's life unto death, then yeah, sure I agree with you. But, for the most part, I want things at least completed in the traditional sense- I'd prefer not to have non sequitur after non sequitur.
    Share this post

  9. #9
    Originally Posted by Civona Go to original post
    I don't want conclusions to stories I've been burning out on, I want a new story that feels different. It seems like they're going to make the next game's protagonist stick around for a few games, so it's fine if they show more of his life, but the idea of everything in the series needing to be 'completed' is insane.
    Understanding why ubisoft makes stories like that is one thing, condoning it is quite another.

    Fans absolutely have a right to expect closure to characters especially when the first two characters got that in their superior games and the nature of the Animus is such that we absolutely can know the past. Otherwise, Assassin's Creed is just like any superhero comic book with endless continuities and retcons, and even the Batman Arkham games are well liked because they provided closure across all three games, answering all details.

    I want that mentality out of AC, the constant breadcrumbing and answers to every vague mystery.
    You mean you don't want quality writing? You don't want details that are followed through and acknowledged, you don't want your immersion into the background to be rewarded. Okay...

    The thing is the way Ubisoft makes AC now is far less immersive than ever before. It can only be enjoyed on a surface level engagement and trying to grapple with it on a deeper level will only disappoint you. Which is why I say don't get too attached because in games like Unity and Syndicate, ''what you see is what you get''. This was not true of the games until Black Flag where the value system was different than the one that came with Unity which poisoned the well of the series.

    I want it to feel more like uncovering a history, and histories leave gaps and unclear situations.
    That's not remotely analogous to this situation at all. What fans want is conclusions, closures and something needing to be "completed", you get that in history all the time. Empires rise and fall, kings die, wars are won and lost...and all of them have consequences which matter. That's how history works, the roads you walk on, the buildings that surround you and the streets you lived in were planted and erected as a result of social and political consquences in the past 100 years, which is connected to something even further back.

    The point of the Animus is that we can know the past clearly. That is the hook since AC1, no room for subjectivity. The joke is that the MD characters, at Abstergo and possibly the MD Assassins know all about the historical characters. They know what happened to Connor, Arno and the Fryes. We are in a situation where in-universe protagonists know the backstory but fans are not told. That is awful serial storytelling and frustrating on every level. The fact that Ubisoft let this persist is an example of shocking incompetence and defending that in such pseudo terms is shameful.
    Share this post

  10. #10
    Bipolar Matt's Avatar Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    WI
    Posts
    311
    Originally Posted by VestigialLlama4 Go to original post
    "So much hate?"...we are a small minority. Most people like Syndicate and the Fryes. That's all ubisoft cares for. For them, the fans of AC3, a game released in 2012, is very much yesterday's news....considering that it was released 4 years back they have a point. AC is targeting "new fans" rather than established fandom.

    The thing about how Ubisoft works is that they have some long term plans but they leave a certain window for changes and shifts. If AC3 and Unity was popular across-the-board, Connor and Arno would have gotten a sequel or a saga. Instead of a wretched piece of trash like Rogue, we would have gotten a proper Connor's REVELATIONS. UNITY was intended to be a big breakthrough, and Arno was intended for future use. That game did not do what it was supposed to do and Syndicate is a salvage job, a no-drama low-stakes adventure.

    Basically, Ubisoft doesn't have some masterplan for its games, it's based on contingent plans, expectations, enthusiasm among fans and developers, marketing and so on. The initial plan was do a Desmond Trilogy of AC1-AC2-AC3. Then Ezio became popular and you had development creep...with Brotherhood going from DLC to full release, then Revelations and then AC3, annualization became a thing. You also have to understand that Ubisoft pretty much have to put out a big AC game every year. It has a huge company in Montreal for which it gets tax breaks and they have to put out products for their stockbrokers, keep their staff employed and justify their existence. This is business realities. In this reality, a bunch of fans who pine for some fictional character from a game that came back in 2012, that only a small bunch of online nerds (myself included) care about...we are so low on their priorities that we don't even qualify for the office rubbish bin. Stuff like Lore doesn't matter at all, MD not going anywhere, plot consistency, loose ends...forget it. From their perspective, given how the video game market changes, given how expensive AAA games are, all this makes sense.

    I am saying this for your sake. I think fans need to stop doing Ubisoft's job for them. Stop pining for their products, stop making theories for lore and all that. It's not written in mind with you at all. Yes if a game is written by Darby McDevitt and Corey May, maybe, possibly. But Darby doesn't run AC, he's just one of many writers...the rest of them talk at cross-purposes and do stuff without thinking, not that I blame them, but it's clearly a job for them. No single guy does, and he would most likely prefer to do his own IP and game than "run AC". Yes, ubisoft should care about consistency, they should care for storytelling values but then again if Ubisoft did care for that, it's likely Patrice Desilets would not have walked out to start with, nor would they have shelved 1666.
    Very well said, with one exception.

    I didn't think Rogue was a wretched piece of trash at all. It's actually in my top 4 AC games. I think you're entirely too harsh on the game, but I can respect different tastes.
    Share this post

Page 1 of 5 123 ... Last ►►