Image of Assassins Creed III's main character leaked

[JoesshittyOs]

That outfit is a horrid abomination. I mean absolutely shitty. Trying to mix the original outfit with revolution era buckles, just wrong wrong wrong. Go one way or the other.

I don't think it's really shitty, more so that it looks the exact same as the last few, and extremely out of place for the time period.

The last two outfits were sort of supposed to blend in with a crowd of half blind people. Altair sorta looked like a Monk, Ezio just seemed like a rich person.

This is just a tad bit too flamboyant.

But at the same time, I'm glad they chose this. No matter what time period they would have chosen, people would have bitched. That's the price that the series finally trying something new had to take. The American Revolution is a perfect time period. No game like this has been done there. And Native American? Even extra bad ass. (though I'm a little curious as to how he's somehow gonna be related to Ezio and Altair if he's a "Native American". And where did he get that outfit?

Really, what is it everyone has against him?

Nobody has anything against Ezio. It's just that his story was already overdone in the Brotherhood sequel. A game that literally can choose nearly any point in History as it's setting and it keeps rehashing the same time period over and over again, it's gonna get called out.

Edit: Wait a minute! Who ever said it was the American Revolution though? Just spitballing, but it could be during the war of 1812. It would make a tad bit more sense and I think by that time the cities would have evolved enough to make sense for the Assassin's Creed gameplay.

Just a thought.

 

[JoesshittyOs]

Oh, and the American Revolution is not an interesting time period. Here's what happened: America was sick of the high british taxation rate and, instead of just complaining, or sending a guy, they sank a British ship. The war started then, but the Brits really weren't all that into it. They didn't really want to hold on to the colonies, they just fought as a matter of principle. Then the French joined in, siding with the Yanks, and Britain pulled out because America was far more trouble than it was worth.

In other words: Shame on you Ubisoft for abandoning whatever awesome idea you had come up with in favour of this blatant pandering to the American market. I hope you realise that now the only people who will uy this game are Yanks, now, right?

Dude... That was three hundred years ago.

Let it go.

 

[JasonBurnout16]

I want this now!!

 

[predatorpulse7]

The American Revolution is a perfect time period.

How is it perfect when there are many other periods that have much more potential?

And just what are we gonna climb in colonial america?

 

[Scrustle]

Oh bloody hell they listened to all the idiots saying it should be set in America? God damn it I hope this is fake.

 

[TheCaptain]

The American Revolution is a perfect time period.

How is it perfect when there are many other periods that have much more potential?

And just what are we gonna climb in colonial america?

There's probably trees. Also rocks.

 

[Proverbial Jon]

Being one of the few people that's going to genuinely miss Ezio kind of irks me though... Really, what is it everyone has against him?

Nothing, nothing at all. I liked Ezio in AC2, I enjoyed his storyline. It was alright to see him in Brotherhood as well, to see how he had grown after becoming an Assassin. But honestly, I didn't need him again in Revelations.

As everyone has been saying, Ubisoft could take this franchise to ANY time period in ANY location and yet they keep picking Ezio as a protagonist which means they have to stay within a reasonably tight time period in order for him to still be alive. Ezio's continued presence restricts the games in an overall sense. So I don't think the character is the problem, merely what he represents, which is less variety and a seemingly regular cash grab on Ubisoft's part.

 

[predatorpulse7]

Oh bloody hell they listened to all the idiots saying it should be set in America? God damn it I hope this is fake.

It's not.

It's confirmed.

If this choice of location was by survey(didn't Ubi have a survey of sorts?!) and whatnot, I find this suspicious to say the least since almost everybody in the comments section of the big gaming websites wanted either french revolution, victorian london or feudal japan/ancient egypt. The American Revolution choice was in the minority to say the least.

I think Ubisoft did this to pander the american gamers(the FLAG is on the freaking cover, if that is a cover at all) - large gaming market - and to make it easier to research(since the teams building the games had to go at the actual sites - in italy, istanbul etc.), a trip from Montreal down to the States would maybe be easier for them.

Either way, I'm not too hyped about this new setting. Will comment more once more details come out about the game. One thing I do hope for is that we have multiple locations(but well developed, not cappadocia style) like in AC2.

 

[predatorpulse7]

The American Revolution is a perfect time period.

How is it perfect when there are many other periods that have much more potential?

And just what are we gonna climb in colonial america?

There's probably trees. Also rocks.

But isn't the norm to climb BUILDINGS in an urban, historical setting?

 

[JoesshittyOs]

The American Revolution is a perfect time period.

How is it perfect when there are many other periods that have much more potential?

And just what are we gonna climb in colonial america?

Colonial shit? I don't fucking know. Philadelphia was pretty well developed. Cities weren't quite as big as places like Rome, but as long as they get liberal with the city design it'll work out fine.

And I really don't think any other time period has any more potential than another. Most of the backlash here is regrettably just Anti-American mumbo jumbo, like that idiot who posted above. What it lacks in environment, it more than makes up for in setting and characters. The Industrial Period really doesn't have anything on the development of the US.

And in all honesty, the fact that they're doing this period which seems impossible is what is so exciting to me. Because it's Ubisoft, they aren't gonna change their formula worth shit. So they have to make it work. That's more than worth paying attention too.

 

[JoesshittyOs]

Oh bloody hell they listened to all the idiots saying it should be set in America? God damn it I hope this is fake.

It's not.

It's confirmed.

If this choice of location was by survey(didn't Ubi have a survey of sorts?!) and whatnot, I find this suspicious to say the least since almost everybody in the comments section of the big gaming websites wanted either french revolution, victorian london or feudal japan/ancient egypt. The American Revolution choice was in the minority to say the least.

Of we're supposed to believe them, that survey they put it wasn't for this game. They stated that was for whatever game was after this.

 

[TilMorrow]

Maybe, just maybe the game may not be set during just the American Revolution. Maybe it'll be set throughout various periods in time! Fat chance I know, but a gamer can dream...

 

[Snowalker]

I'm sick of everyone saying the fucking revolution, all I see is an American Flag, could be the civil war, or better yet, the trail of fucking tears. That'd make for an interesting game. Trail of tears specifically, we could climb the grand canyon folks.

 

[AshuraSpeaks]

Good lord Ubisoft, you're almost becoming as bad Activision with these games. Who wants to buy a new Assassin's Creed every year?

Um, this guy.

AC 1 was so enthralling, both in style and form, that people literally did not mind watching me play. AC2 built upon this with a main character who was utterly, completely engaging. Ezio is both sympathetic, and so completely well-developed, that it was not hard to have an arc - and Brotherhood was peerless. Everything was tight, yet also very open. You ran around in Rome, re-establishing the Assassins, and taking them back up to a formidable level.

Revelations was, inherently, a game about finishing up every single thread possible. Sixteen, Ezio, Altair, the Brotherhood, the Apple - nothing was left to dangle. It stopped immediately when both Altair and Ezio died, before they had a level where Altair's bones rolled around in a grave (Full Sync: Spin every time your name is desecrated).

New direction? Good. How can you bring it modern without jumping directly to Desmond? Revolution.

Do I personally love the French Revolution? Good god yes. The storming of the Bastille, and the arming of really angry French peasants, plus the crazy guillotine madness that happened, would be amazing to go through.

But the American Revolution is a deceptive name, and it would better to call it the British Colonial Revolution because of the HUGE impact that both Britain AND France had - speaking of which, the first head on the chopping block was also the same king who helped fund the colonials in founding the new world. So Assassin's Creed: Bastille Day is not impossible, you bunch of whiners. WAIT and SEE!

 

[natster43]

I was really hoping for a modern day game. Since I am pretty sure Ubisoft said this would be Desmonds last game (please correct me if I am wrong.) Either way I am excited to hear more about it.

 

[Xerosch]

Oh bloody hell they listened to all the idiots saying it should be set in America? God damn it I hope this is fake.

I thought the same. Of all the time periods they could have chosen it's this one??? What a disappointment. What's wrong with Victorian England, the French Revolution or Feudal Japan for example? Hell, I'd even take the Great Depression over the actual time period.

 

[zombieshark6666]

Just another AssCreed. Costume looks dumb. Cool idea, though.

 

[Spacewolf]

13 stars i would guess its the war of independence then, which means it will be mustache twirling british villians commiting attrocitys that never happened and are based on what the Nazis did. While at the same time having the founders being apple pie eating never lieing saints.