I, for one, am interested in seeing where the Assassin's Creed series is going

[Asita]

I maintain that the games could still use one good setting, which could be Feudal Japan (Edo period might be the most profitable since you get both your ninjas and your samurais here, the period features many "pop culture" characters to interact with and you're close enough to modernity to allow more glaring anachronisms like say guns).

As for the modern-day framing device, I've only played the first two games, know where the rest of the series is headed and I'm distintictly underwhelmed by Demons's arc and everything that follows after. It's useless, useless, useless. The series could've been vastly improved if they had teared down that stupid framing narrative from the get go. All it does is disrupt the actual storytelling every now and then with bleak cliffhangers and exposition.

So, you want an Assassins Creed game that takes place before the founding of the assassin order and more or less on the other side of the planet. I'm sorry but that game wouldn't be Assassins Creed. You may as well have a Fallout game take place in Europe.

Um, the Edo period of Japan started in the middle of the European renaissance (you know, a century after Ezio died) and lasted until around the time of the American Civil War. That's hardly an off-limits timeframe. What's more, the games have made it explicit that the Assassin Brotherhood and Templar Order had existed for millennia in at least some form. The series even ties them both to figures such as Julius Caesar and Cleopatra, and dates the Chinese branch of the Assassins at least as far back as 210 BCE, and the Persian Brotherhood at least as far back as the fifth century BCE (The series claims Darius as an Assassin who killed the Templar supported King Xerxes). All things considered, I'm not certain 'too early in history' is a concept that truly applies to the Assassin's Creed series.

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

I maintain that the games could still use one good setting, which could be Feudal Japan (Edo period might be the most profitable since you get both your ninjas and your samurais here, the period features many "pop culture" characters to interact with and you're close enough to modernity to allow more glaring anachronisms like say guns).

As for the modern-day framing device, I've only played the first two games, know where the rest of the series is headed and I'm distintictly underwhelmed by Demons's arc and everything that follows after. It's useless, useless, useless. The series could've been vastly improved if they had teared down that stupid framing narrative from the get go. All it does is disrupt the actual storytelling every now and then with bleak cliffhangers and exposition.

So, you want an Assassins Creed game that takes place before the founding of the assassin order and more or less on the other side of the planet. I'm sorry but that game wouldn't be Assassins Creed. You may as well have a Fallout game take place in Europe.

Feudal Japan goes from 1185 to 1603, for the most part well after the founding of the Assassin's Creed. Edo even goes from 1603 to 1868.

 

[Darks63]

I maintain that the games could still use one good setting, which could be Feudal Japan (Edo period might be the most profitable since you get both your ninjas and your samurais here, the period features many "pop culture" characters to interact with and you're close enough to modernity to allow more glaring anachronisms like say guns).

The Edo Period? You sure you don't mean the Sengoku(warring states) period?

OT: In regards to a modern day setting i'm not sure how that could be pulled off since in the modern day, it seems to me at least, that the assassins are a operating as a terrorist group. It would be hard to justify selling a game like that even if their cause is legit.

Overall I'm not sure about the direction of the series, but if Ass creed 4 has a 2 hour plus tutorial section like 3 i'm done with the series.

 

[Diablo1099_v1legacy]

Whatever they do with the series, I can honestly say this:

So long as they stay the hell away from going all FPS in a bid to chase the COD crowd, I'm happy

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

I maintain that the games could still use one good setting, which could be Feudal Japan (Edo period might be the most profitable since you get both your ninjas and your samurais here, the period features many "pop culture" characters to interact with and you're close enough to modernity to allow more glaring anachronisms like say guns).

The Edo Period? You sure you don't mean the Sengoku(warring states) period?

It's possible I'm getting the periods confused. I know Heian would be interesting because of the courtesan lifestyle and all the interesting architecture, I imagine lots of palaces and temples would be up to infiltration. And before that (Nara and earlier) it might also be interesting because it would allow devs to deal with the more mythical aspects of Japanese history, like Queen Himiko, the creation of the Kojiki, etc. Ninjas, kunoichis, all that stuff, together with samurai, are a little trickier to pin since they span many centuries and periods under several names. Sengoku and Bakumatsu would be interesting as periods of deep political tumult though. Or my favorite by way of Samurai Champloo and Rourouni Kenshin (which takes place in Meiji but features numerous flashbacks and plot points back to Edo/Tokugawa), Edo Period. Something like the Shimabara Rebellion (involving peasant uprising and the controversial christian missionaries) makes for an interesting rich setting too.

 

[Amaror]

Honestly? I think that if they want the series to go anywhere they have to be willing to step away from the animus.

This.
The Ubisoft has to take the big boy step and stop using the animus as a central plotline. The modern world has little to no essence in AC.

But then it begs the question, Do people simply like the interface that is offered by the animus or would people prefer a different interface? (Perhaps something to do with the setting?}

In my opinion they should just threw that entire present - plot out of the window. Then shoot with a few atomic bombs, just to make sure it's really gone.
The plot is boring, uninterresting and all it does is throw me out of the lovely time i've been having and force some stupid cutscenes, about characters i don't care about, and minigames down my throat.
Just stop it, Ubisoft!

 

[rcs619]

The sad part is, it isn't actually ever going anywhere. Probably. Ubisoft has said that there are no plans to ever bring Assassin's Creed's story into the modern age. And, considering how they've been pumping them out, it would very much surprise me if there were a long-term plan for the series at all. My impression is that it started with a cool idea, but now it's just in full-on money-milking mode. Which is a shame, because it is kind of a neat idea with a lot of potential if it were ever given proper focus and handled carefully.

In order for this series to actually go anywhere, and have any real meaning, Ubisoft actually has to take the step of admitting that it has an ultimate goal and end for the series. You can't just asspull a new maguffin and plot for each game as you go. Well, you can, but that usually turns a story into kind of a mess. But, doing that would also force Ubisoft to eventually retire one of its only popular franchises, and eventually, make something besides Assassin's Creed games.

 

[The Night Shade]

Don't really care for the storyline, i play the games for the gameplay,the historical settings and the new things they add every game.
I love AC4,AC3 was meh,AC1 long and boring with cool ideas thrown in,Ezios trilogy was fun revelations is kinda boring but brotherhood's pretty good.

 

[JayWalker]

Guys, something you should know about the lore before you keep saying we can't have an Assassin's Creed game before the Crusades. The Assassin Order existed from the very beginning of humanity's rebuilding, according to the "The Truth" video Adam and Eve were Assassins. Check the Wiki, or play the game. You'll find it either way.

Back on-topic, until the modern-day plot starts going, I really can't see the main plot happening any time soon. Right now it's really just showing what happened to the Pieces of Eden and showcasing all of Desmond's ancestors. In AC3 it really seemed like they were trying to pick up the main plot more, with the attack on Abstergo, the tower climbing sequence etc. But in the end while they have two plots running simultaneously, it's not going anywhere. The series will continue to thrive, but I can't see the plot itself going anywhere until they make the Animus the sub-plot.

 

[teebeeohh]

at this point the series is just something that delivers a major title per year for ubisoft without the need to innovate gameplay. the gameplay hasn't changed since 2, every installment just gives us a new setting that looks pretty and bends over backwards to incorporate the core mechanics(parkour and installkill sword combat). they can probably milk ten more years of sequels out of this before people get tired and they will never get rid of the animus as a framing device because it allows them to jump around all over the place and explains the interface and why everybody speaks English. you could develop other systems for that but that would take money they rather spend on more trailers.

 

[Something Amyss]

I'm not sure what being a history major has to do with enjoyment of the AC series, especially since most of the historicity is in starfucking. I think the series would drive my dad nuts, and not because he's from another generation.

Personally, I think we have seen what they can do with Assassin's Creed. Realistically, anyway. It once seemed like a platform to do all sorts of amazing stuff. Now? not so much.

 

[absulute]

You want to know where it's going?

Ubisoft's bank account.

 

[King Billi]

I actually have to disagree with that sentiment. I was interested in the Assassin's Creed story after one and two. I wanted to see where it was going, but by the time we got around to Revelations it was clear it wasn't really going anywhere interesting anytime soon, it just kind of fizzled.

I'm presuming that by story you're referring to the future plot with Desmond and Abstergo since that was the only part which carried on from game to game right? The overarching plot? It was always rubbish... same as Mass Effect it's only purpose was to provide an "epic" backdrop for the series and to keep people roped in by ending each game with a cliffhanger. Like you I lost interest and saw through it around the end of Assassins Creed 2 but that didn't mean there wasn't anything else in the games to keep me invested, the overarching story if you can call it that was always the least concern to me.

Sure, you can use the series to visit all kinds of time periods, but playing essentially the same game over and over but with a different setting gets stale. And when they're releasing games yearly it gets stale really fast.

If you say so... I don't agree.

So why do we need AC to bring us historical settings? We could have much cooler and more varied games at this point if they were built up as new series in various time periods. But the only reason to keep slapping AC on the cover is because Ubisoft is convinced anything that isn't a yearly series or potential yearly series isn't worthwhile. So instead we get the occasional glimpse of something great being held back by the legacy of something that wore out its welcome. This isn't a good thing for we, the customers. On pretty much any level.

The Assassins Creed series thus far has covered: The Crusades, The Renaissance, The American Revolution and now the Age of Piracy... Firstly I would say that's quite an impressivly diverse range of settings for a series everyone keeps insisting is stale and "not going anywhere". The series seems to have made a point of utilising settings and historical periods which aren't utilised very much in games currently. I think thats true as I can't think of many examples of games which use these settings and none really which have done them better than AC has.
I don't doubt that the title "Assassins Creed" is used primarily as a selling point nowadays because of the profitability of the series, Black Flag even moreso than the previous games but in all honesty I don't have a problem with that. The games in my opinion have always been fun to play and as I mentioned before they seem to try and use setting which are not used as often in modern big budget games.

 

[Vivi22]

The Assassins Creed series thus far has covered: The Crusades, The Renaissance, The American Revolution and now the Age of Piracy... Firstly I would say that's quite an impressivly diverse range of settings for a series everyone keeps insisting is stale and "not going anywhere".

Firstly, the overarching plot is going nowhere as you yourself admitted. Second, a setting on it's own doesn't make another game interesting. Assassin's Creed was a mediocre game at best and it's setting was probably the least interesting of them all (which is funny since it probably had the most potential). The Ezio games were basically a case of play the AC2 three times with slightly different settings. AC3 was basically more of the same. Even if the settings were changing, they were still just a backdrop for the same game over and over again. And nothing about the conflict between the Templar and Assassin's in any time period actually matters if the overall plot isn't going anywhere. So you end up with a new setting, but the same gameplay and setup, and being bogged down by the same general setup and premise that is never going to actually pay off.

In other words, attach interesting settings to an uninteresting story and keep churning out the same gameplay over and over. That's not a good thing on any level.

And now we have AC4, which probably has the best actual gameplay the series has had since 2 and the first original ideas and implementation in that regard since 2 as well, but it's still got the damn Templar and Assassin bullshit that's gotten old in every other game, as well as the same old Assassination gameplay tacked on. It'd be a much more interesting game if it kept the setting and the piracy and tossed everything else in favour of an original story and new exploration and melee combat. There's a great game in there, but it's actually made worse by being tied to the Assassin's Creed franchise and the baggage that comes with it. It would have had a lot more potential if it had been a new IP.

A different setting alone isn't enough to sell me on a game. Not nearly enough. It doesn't take long for most people to see behind the curtain and realize that the developers are just selling the same game over and over but with a change of clothes each time. It's a terrible way to develop games as it wastes good settings on games which are inherently not creative.

 

[Darks63]

I maintain that the games could still use one good setting, which could be Feudal Japan (Edo period might be the most profitable since you get both your ninjas and your samurais here, the period features many "pop culture" characters to interact with and you're close enough to modernity to allow more glaring anachronisms like say guns).

The Edo Period? You sure you don't mean the Sengoku(warring states) period?

It's possible I'm getting the periods confused. I know Heian would be interesting because of the courtesan lifestyle and all the interesting architecture, I imagine lots of palaces and temples would be up to infiltration. And before that (Nara and earlier) it might also be interesting because it would allow devs to deal with the more mythical aspects of Japanese history, like Queen Himiko, the creation of the Kojiki, etc. Ninjas, kunoichis, all that stuff, together with samurai, are a little trickier to pin since they span many centuries and periods under several names. Sengoku and Bakumatsu would be interesting as periods of deep political tumult though. Or my favorite by way of Samurai Champloo and Rourouni Kenshin (which takes place in Meiji but features numerous flashbacks and plot points back to Edo/Tokugawa), Edo Period. Something like the Shimabara Rebellion (involving peasant uprising and the controversial christian missionaries) makes for an interesting rich setting too.

The Main issue with Edo is that Tokugawa's first acts as shogun were to outlaw Christianity and expel foreign interests/foreigners from Japan and start a long period of total isolation only broken by the arrival of the Admiral Perry's task force ie "The Black Ships".

As for Meiji it could be doable especially if set during the Boshin war. The complete 180 the imperial faction pulled on the expulsion of foreign influence after they won could be narratively explained to be caused by Templar influence.

 

[Grach]

Well if they're going for "historical accuracy" as they always seem to be striving for, then there won't be anything taking place before the Crusades. As a history major, you should probably already know that the Assassins were an actual faction - just like the Templars were an actual faction - that formed during the Crusades, which is when the first game takes place. Any time before then and it wouldn't be Assassin's Creed, since the faction didn't exist.

The Assassin Order in the franchise was founded way before the crusades, with statues of an ancient egyptian assassin in Ezio's basement. In fact, I remember reading somewhere (TvTropes, I think) that the Templars were founded by Cain, of all people.

 

[Crazy Zaul]

I'm wondering how long it will be till Assassins Creed becomes a kart racer.

But really they should spin of Black Flag as a separate IP and make the next game just called Black Flag 2 and also still make AC games for people who like slowing walking up to a guy for 20 mins, 2 seconds stabbing him then 10 mins running away and jumping into a box of hay.

 

[King Billi]

Firstly, the overarching plot is going nowhere as you yourself admitted. Second, a setting on it's own doesn't make another game interesting. Assassin's Creed was a mediocre game at best and it's setting was probably the least interesting of them all (which is funny since it probably had the most potential). The Ezio games were basically a case of play the AC2 three times with slightly different settings. AC3 was basically more of the same. Even if the settings were changing, they were still just a backdrop for the same game over and over again. And nothing about the conflict between the Templar and Assassin's in any time period actually matters if the overall plot isn't going anywhere. So you end up with a new setting, but the same gameplay and setup, and being bogged down by the same general setup and premise that is never going to actually pay off.

In other words, attach interesting settings to an uninteresting story and keep churning out the same gameplay over and over. That's not a good thing on any level.

Have I given the impression that I actually don't like Assassins Creed and am in fact only defending it because I like the setting and nothing else? I'm sorry but I feel I need to make it clear that I don't actually hate the Assassins Creed formula, far from it.

The whole framing story set in the future may be rubbish but theres still the stories of the actual Assassins set in the past which make up what? 90% of each given game and they've have always been interesting in my opinion(even AC3 had a decent enough story that was just presented horribly) One reason I feel they're so good is because they all try and utilise the setting and specific historical events of each time period making each of them more than just a "backdrop".

I also like seeing the whole Templar vs Assassins conflict as it plays out in each game, even in Black Flag. It's fun to see them try and tie every famous historical figure and event they can into this ridiculous uber-conspiracy they've made. I like to imagine someone has a chart somewhere keeping track of this whole thing.

I can only surmise that I just see alot more variety and innovation in each successive AC game than you do and that there's still alot that makes the series appealing and worthwhile for me. In fact the more I argue about it the more I realise that I must be a bigger fan of this series than I initially thought.

You could probably write me off as just another obessive fan in that case but the point is that I want to see more from this series in spite of those who think it's already past it's prime, the basic concept has more potential than most and I'd like to see more done with it.