NEW assasins creed III trailer :)

[Bernzz]

*snip*

Maybe after the Assassin's Creed games wandering around Europe and the Middle East, they thought, "You know, the American kids who don't know much about world history might have trouble appreciating all what's going on here. Let's bring it back to somewhere they do understand reasonably well... America!"

And I know I'm probably just ruining it by saying this, but when you hear the big inspirational speech with the line, "The time is now near at hand which must determine whether Americans are to be free men, or slaves", I couldn't help thinking to myself "Slaves eh? Interesting choice of words, but I wonder whether they would do much to inspire the millions of actual slaves living in America who wouldn't gain their freedom until a century later."

Still, the free-running in tree branches was pretty cool.

Oh, definitely, the tree-running (HAH! Get it?) was awesome.

The main thing I'm concerned about is as I said, it seems to be going pro-America from the looks of the trailer. I'd rather varying shades of grey rather than a black and white conflict, with Connor's perspective not seeing either side of the revolution in a good light.

 

[exp. 99]

I'm inclined to agree. Given the series' theme of freedom/self-determination vs. totalitarianism/control from above, it makes some sense to have the birth of democracy pitted against imperial control. On the other hand, making America "the good guys," would be a cartoonish over-simplification a la Mel Gibson in the Patriot.

This is my point exactly. As much as I would love to agree with the pro-America outlook of the British being bad, I can't because it just wasn't that simple. The men fighting for independence were a minority in their own country, and a lot of the redcoats were Americans that sided with Britain. Equally, the Americans were throwing a fit over laws and taxes that were grossly reduced compared to what the British citizens in London were dealing with. What the colonists were doing was basically attempted tax evasion. They fought a war using British men and weapons, then refused to pay their share of the bill when it was presented. So the whole AMERICA GOOD BRITAIN BAD thing hurts my inner lover of history.

I don't mind the British being portrayed as housing the Templar, and framing the antagonists of the game. I really don't. It fits the plotline well, and it certainly is an easy way to set them up. The difference really is setting up the British as the bad guy versus setting up a few people working THROUGH the British as the bad guys. That way instead of turning the redcoats into stormtroopers, you've got guys who are fighting for their own country and their beliefs that are being used by people they don't yet comprehend. Immediately the story is far less oversimplified and cliche, and far better for it. It's very similar to how AC1 didn't set the entire crusader force as bad, nor the Saracens. It was a smaller conflict within both sides that was to blame.

Also, I would find it sorely fitting to take some of the Hamiltonian minded men in the Revolutionary camp and pin them as Templar agents as well, looking to make use of the new territory for their own gains. That and some of the French officers, also no doubt under the Templar thumb until the revolution reaches European soil...

Also, the French Revolution would make an AMAZING AC game. That, and the Bolshevik Revolution.

 

[Captain Anon]

epic just epic

 

[Chairman Miaow]

This will clearly be a fair and accurate portrayal of the reveloution and won't be biased at all.

 

[Offworlder_v1legacy]

Looks awesome, and the setting surprised me, absolutely blindsided me.

 

[launchpadmcqwak]

kinda disappointed that your exclusively on the yank's side...i don't think our native friend knows that they were the one's taking all his land.

 

[Seraj]

It doesn't make sense that Connor would only be killing brits, hes a native after all, the americans aren't exactly kind to his people.

I suspect as mentioned above this was just a marketing move for our american friends. (Why on earth it was the UK reveal trailer beats me)

AC games have a general trend of fighting both sides for peace.

 

[nokori3byo]

So...how do we know this dude's name? And do we no for sure that he's completely indigenous American? It would seem to fit more easily within the Assassin bloodline if he were half inidigenous and half European. His garb seems to represent a mix of cultures as well.

 

[Mandalore_15]

I was all up for getting this game after Revelations, but now that I've seen the setting I'm going to give it a miss. I simply have no interest in pre-revolution American history, and just how they're going to set up a native American character as a descendant of Ezio (an Italian) is beyond me... This is what happens when you give your fans the vote on where to set the game: dumb-ass patriotism wins out over believable plot.

 

[steevee]

English were the bad guys?

Depends on your viewpoint. Just remember, for the average British soldier that was not true. For the average Briton, these Americans rebelling were the dregs of society and disgruntled settlers refusing to pay their tax like everyone else has to, and taking up arms against King and country.

Come now, there are always shades of grey. It's not like those very settlers didn't have ahand in the violent supression of the natives and various other issues. Let's not make it Good vs Bad, I have higher expectations of you Escapees.

Plus. Irony much? 'Americans' complaining they were slaves, whilst owning and relying on slaves!

 

[steevee]

I'm inclined to agree. Given the series' theme of freedom/self-determination vs. totalitarianism/control from above, it makes some sense to have the birth of democracy pitted against imperial control. On the other hand, making America "the good guys," would be a cartoonish over-simplification a la Mel Gibson in the Patriot.

This is my point exactly. As much as I would love to agree with the pro-America outlook of the British being bad, I can't because it just wasn't that simple. The men fighting for independence were a minority in their own country, and a lot of the redcoats were Americans that sided with Britain. Equally, the Americans were throwing a fit over laws and taxes that were grossly reduced compared to what the British citizens in London were dealing with. What the colonists were doing was basically attempted tax evasion. They fought a war using British men and weapons, then refused to pay their share of the bill when it was presented. So the whole AMERICA GOOD BRITAIN BAD thing hurts my inner lover of history.

I don't mind the British being portrayed as housing the Templar, and framing the antagonists of the game. I really don't. It fits the plotline well, and it certainly is an easy way to set them up. The difference really is setting up the British as the bad guy versus setting up a few people working THROUGH the British as the bad guys. That way instead of turning the redcoats into stormtroopers, you've got guys who are fighting for their own country and their beliefs that are being used by people they don't yet comprehend. Immediately the story is far less oversimplified and cliche, and far better for it. It's very similar to how AC1 didn't set the entire crusader force as bad, nor the Saracens. It was a smaller conflict within both sides that was to blame.

Also, I would find it sorely fitting to take some of the Hamiltonian minded men in the Revolutionary camp and pin them as Templar agents as well, looking to make use of the new territory for their own gains. That and some of the French officers, also no doubt under the Templar thumb until the revolution reaches European soil...

Also, the French Revolution would make an AMAZING AC game. That, and the Bolshevik Revolution.

Bolshevik is a bit late though? I mean, we're talking an age of storming palaces with rifles and cannons, not muskets and swords.

 

[exp. 99]

Arguable. It means more than ever you'll need to be a sneaky bastard to get to the bad man and deal with him unseen. Guns don't stop knives if the gunman doesn't know he needs the weapon, and cannons are good against block infantry and buildings, not so much so against fast, single targets. That, and if you kill a man silently you won't have all of his buddies with their guns going "oh god, what was that?" and rushing to his aid. It would require a bit of fine tuning to the AI, admittedly, but they are promising a new engine with ACIII, so maybe, just maybe they could pull it off well.

Another semi-modern setting I would love, on a side note, is the Irish Independence Movement and the founding of the IRA. That would be glorious.

 

[imnot]

As good as it was, It's never a good sign when it feels like 'revelations' traielr came out only a few weeks ago.

 

[Seraj]

As good as it was, It's never a good sign when it feels like 'revelations' traielr came out only a few weeks ago.

To be fair, they have been working on this for the past 2-3 years, apparently brotherhood and revelation were just time fillers. I mean, I doubt they could've created a whole new engine for the game since the release of Revelations...

 

[imnot]

As good as it was, It's never a good sign when it feels like 'revelations' traielr came out only a few weeks ago.

To be fair, they have been working on this for the past 2-3 years, apparently brotherhood and revelation were just time fillers. I mean, I doubt they could've created a whole new engine for the game since the release of Revelations...

Oh if thats the case then fair enough , I'm not really a massive AC fan, so I'm not really up to date with that sort of thing :3

 

[Hides His Eyes]

Thanks for posting the video! I wonder if this game will be more open forest and less time in cities.
I would really love the change from cities to forests. That could open some fun gameplay changes.

I don't think there were really any cities in North America at at time, so it should be quite radically different from the previous games in that sense. I'm looking forward to it a lot. I think it's a great choice of setting and I very much doubt Ubisoft's take on the revolutionary war will be anything but original and interesting, so the people going "WTF IT'S GONNA BE LIKE THAT SHIT MEL GIBSON FILM!!" can be quiet.

I'll just read a story synopsis of those pointless glorified expansion packs to the second game, I think, rather than waste my time playing them

 

[shiroyukinohime]

I was all up for getting this game after Revelations, but now that I've seen the setting I'm going to give it a miss. I simply have no interest in pre-revolution American history, and just how they're going to set up a native American character as a descendant of Ezio (an Italian) is beyond me... This is what happens when you give your fans the vote on where to set the game: dumb-ass patriotism wins out over believable plot.

He's half-Mohawk (mother), half-English (father). And where did you get the idea that he's Ezio's descendant? Desmond is the convergence of multiple special bloodlines - it's more probably that Connor is another one of those special bloodlines. After all, Altair and Ezio weren't related.

 

[Marik2]

What do you guys make of it?

Oooooh tree running

I am looking forward to it cuz it looks much more ambush style and not just running around killing guards out in the open field of a town square