Poll: Assassin's Creed 3, Future, Past

[orangeapples]

I don't think Assassin's Creed could be set in the future. the Animus only shows the actions of Desmond's ancestors, right? So how could it show the actions of his descendants?

Well here's a crazy thought, HE could run around being awesome for a change. Seriously..

NO Desmond is not allowed to be awesome. I don't even think he should be allowed to run

 

[Space Spoons]

Trolling moron, is trolling moron.

Voicing an unpopular opinion isn't trolling, my friend. For goodness sake, you'd think I was hurling personal insults your way or something.

Guys, this conversation has strayed too far away from the original topic. If you would like to continue it, please do it in PMs. Also, I fail to see how one could have four hours worth of playtime into a game which I think gives achievements at the end of each story mission, and yet still not have any achievements. If you would like to respond to that, please use a PM.

I don't have the achievements because I don't own the game, and probably never will. I played it with a friend who'd bought it. How else am I supposed to try the game before buying it? Is this really such a foreign concept?

Anyway, you're right, this is starting to stray.

On topic, I think it'd be interesting to start playing the role of a modern day assassin. So, future. ACIII should take place in the future. That is, relative to the past. Modern day.

 

[Snowalker]

I think the WW2 setting could actually be lots of fun. But I would love a French Revolution Era one

Why do games always have to be in trilogies?

Because no one likes saying "quadrilogy"

I thougtht after three its called a saga.

 

[garfoldsomeoneelse]

I think Ubisoft Montreal should focus on making sure the inevitable sequel doesn't feel like as much of a giant chore as the first two, first of all.

Good thing your opinion is informed, or I might question it's validity.

[HEADING=1]OH, SHIT![/HEADING]

OT: Here's a thought: why not have it set in Feudal China or Feudal Japan? My only stipulation is that it maintains a respectful distance from all things ninja-related, in order to maintain some of its mystique (as opposed to becoming a community mod for Assassin's Creed where Altair and his weapons are re-skinned to be ninja-like, all the NPCs are given slanty eyes while speaking like George Takei, and all the buildings look like pagodas).

It's still in a relatively non-advanced era, technologically, so the core gameplay elements could be kept intact without being horribly arbitrary (i.e. "you can't use the guns the cyber-soldiers are carrying because of DNA imprinting on the weapons", a la MGS4). Just a thought.

tl;dr keep it in the past.

 

[MetalBaird]

Ok. Looks like there's some cleaning to do:

I think Ubisoft Montreal should focus on making sure the inevitable sequel doesn't feel like as much of a giant chore as the first two, first of all.

Good thing your opinion is informed, or I might question it's validity.

I don't own the game because it's a rehash of the original. Do you see how that works?

I point to my original comment, which inferred that not having played the game your comments can hardly be considered a reasonable assessment of what the game offers.

Do you see how that works?

I personally found AC2 to be quite fresh, with several great improvements in the gameplay and storytelling compared to the original.
But if you want to stand by your "I haven't played it but still know everything about it" position, who am I to stop you?

Not owning the game doesn't mean I've never played it. I played the first, and found it mildly entertaining, if a bit repetitive. The sequel warranted my attention, but I wasn't impressed enough by the original to purchase it immediately, so I figured it'd be prudent to try the game out before dropping $60 on it.

I tried it. In about four hours of playtime, I found nothing but more of the same. Hence, I think it's a rehash, and therefore not worth purchasing.

I have my doubts about your claims. The new blending system, the changes to the weapons and combat, the way you complete your assassinations, the additional abilities... based on your gamerscore for AC1 and your claim to have spent four hours with AC2 tells me you've spent more time with AC2 than you did with AC1. Unless you spent a few hours with AC1, decided to buy it anyway, then stopped playing it.
Maybe that's why you don't see the difference. However, I personally (once again, based on achievements) have spent less time with AC1 than you, (although I did watch my wife complete the bulk of it) and even I felt it was a distinct improvement.

AC1 was one of the first 360 games I purchased. I'd followed the development history of it, thought it sounded really interesting, and determined that if I ever bought a "next-gen" console, I'd play it. And so, I did.

You're correct, I still haven't finished it. To be honest, every time I play it, I end up getting distracted with murdering rooftop guards and starting fistfights in the streets. It's a bit like a medieval Grand Theft Auto for me. That, and I wasn't eager to resume playing as Desmond in "the real world", since I found it really boring.

I wouldn't say I spent more actual time with ACII, though I certainly made more progress. I didn't spend nearly as much time "messing around" with it as I did with the original, because I was eager to get to "the good stuff". You know, Da Vinci's Flying machines, the Spanish Inquisition, stuff like that. Such moments were few and far between, I'm afraid.

As I said, the changes to scenery and weaponry were interesting, but in my opinion, minor; it just wasn't enough to warrant the purchase.

Guys, this conversation has strayed too far away from the original topic. If you would like to continue it, please do it in PMs. Also, I fail to see how one could have four hours worth of playtime into a game which I think gives achievements at the end of each story mission, and yet still not have any achievements. If you would like to respond to that, please use a PM.

From now on, please refere Assassins Creed II, too, Ass Creed 2. For comic effect.
Thank you

Sounding good fella's?

That seems a tad immature and unfunny to me, not to mention off-topic. Please try to add to the discussion with your posts. Also, don't bump your posts by quoting them, as that's just rude.

you can have sword/blade kills in the present as bullets are traceable. also desmond is in the future idiot, its based in like 2020

Assassin's Creed is set in the not-too-distant future. AC2 explores the idea of a bleed effect, in which Desmond can gain the abilities of an assassin by reliving his ancestor's memories.

I meant the character Desmond relives cannot be placed in the future...

Alright, there seems to be a bit of misunderstanding here. I believe what the people you have quoted, orangeapples, are trying to say is that in Assassin's Creed 3, you could take control of Desmond, as he has learned Assassin skills via the bleeding effect in the Animus. Remember at the end of AC1 when

Spoiler

Desmond learns eagle vision from the animus?

That's how it would work.

OT: I'd like to see Desmond taking the fight to Abstergo in AC3, though of course with more depth to the plot than that. Obviously placing a stealth game in modern times/the future isn't too difficult (Metal Gear Solid, Hitman, Batman: Arkham Asylum), but the game would need to maintain an Assassin's Creed feel somehow. I'm not quite sure how to pull this off, but I think it can be done.

Achoo!
It was meant to be unfunny, thats the kind of humour i go for.
I have stated several times that the topic of this post has staryed wildly from the original point. You would have known that.
IF YOU BOTHERED TO READ THE POST BEFORE COMMENTING ON ONLY A FEW SEVERAL POINTS.
And ALSO
I kept mentioning "Ass Creed" because the discussion was looking like it would take a hostile turn and that is not how the Escapist Magazine works. Nothing is hostile about Ass Creed.

 

[ButtonedDownParadox]

For those of you who unlocked "The Truth" in Ass Creed II

Spoiler

How about playing in Eden? It'd make sense to look for information there and really you could do whatever you want as far as weapons, technology, and architecture. It's also implied at the end of the game that the humans took down the, "Gods" sooo...

 

[Radelaide]

As my friend said, it should be set in London during the Industrial revolution.

I said the same thing to my boyfriend the other day. In keeping with the time line of Assassins Creed, jumping straight to a world war would be a bad move, not only because as I've said time and time again, war games are over-done and over-rated, it skips some of the most interesting times during history, the Industrial Revolution being one of them.

 

[JoeKickAzz]

Didn't Ubisoft say AC3 will maybe take place during WWII?

just a rumor, not confirmed

If anyone watched The Truth video i think it answers this. not sure tho

I'm about 70% of the way through unlocking the truth... but it's all jumbled up. I'm sure once I finish all of the truths that the vids will fall into sequence, but as it stands it's fragments aren't placed in any consequentional or set order, so it's hard to make out.

its a great video, but its very confusing

even once pieced together?

yes, when all put together in order, still confusing

 

[snakevin]

I would like to see one in the Communist Revolution, and you could help overthrow the monarchy and lead the communist leaders to victory.

 

[MetalBaird]

As my friend said, it should be set in London during the Industrial revolution.

I said the same thing to my boyfriend the other day. In keeping with the time line of Assassins Creed, jumping straight to a world war would be a bad move, not only because as I've said time and time again, war games are over-done and over-rated, it skips some of the most interesting times during history, the Industrial Revolution being one of them.

I never thought of that, that would be pretty amazing visually!
All the diff lights and smoke effects, the minimalistic guns during that age as well. That would be sweet!

 

[ObsessiveSketch]

I'd be fine if they went through 5 games, or more. I'd be excited to see a more gradual change in the times, like what they're doing from 1 -> 2

 

[snakevin]

Yuo could use makeshift weapons during the Revolution, and kill important figures, like Anastasia and Rasputin (longest kill mission EVER!)

 

[Shamgarr]

Didn't Ubisoft say AC3 will maybe take place during WWII?

yes, but they give the development rights to Pandemic and they renamed it The Saboteur

 

[frank220]

i agree with whoever said industrial london. high tech muskets and prototype rifles and the like

 

[Littlee300]

Ok. Looks like there's some cleaning to do:

(insert pointless argument where one of you should stop responding to each other)


It was meant to be unfunny, thats the kind of humour i go for.
I have stated several times that the topic of this post has staryed wildly from the original point. You would have known that.
IF YOU BOTHERED TO READ THE POST BEFORE COMMENTING ON ONLY A FEW SEVERAL POINTS.
And ALSO
I kept mentioning "Ass Creed" because the discussion was looking like it would take a hostile turn and that is not how the Escapist Magazine works. Nothing is hostile about Ass Creed.

Yeah thats right humor that isnt funny... Yeah look all benefits you will have from that... Lets count it down
1. No friend, who wants to hang around with immature non-jokes
2. everyone wants to argue you on forums because you sound like a idiot
3. Probably the same above but instead getting picked on or punched
I applaud you sir
/sarcasm

 

[FallenJellyDoughnut]

Didn't Ubisoft say AC3 will maybe take place during WWII?

Holy fucking awesomecakes batman! That sounds like Velvet Assassin without the whole being completely fucking useless part!

 

[Bebosis]

Assassins creed 3 will most definately be set in the past. Since

Spoiler

In the end they escape the base and Desmond 'Pwnz' all there attackers with a hidden blade. Which seems odd in my eyes. So assassins creed 2 was bassically Desmond's training in becoming an assassin and ass creed 3 will most likely be centered around Desmond running on top of the giant rooftops of modernized society and busting threw windows assassinating people with his hidden blade of doom. Its gonna be wierd though, considering everyone has guns and i have a tiny dagger hidden in an 'unnoticable' metal gauntlet thing 'hidden' on top of my sweater.

EDIT: Well i just read some stuff and apparently ubisoft said something about it being in world war II. Kind of sad about that. It wouldve been fun to do some crazy matrix stuff as Desmond dodging bullets and stabbing peoples eyes out with a hidden blade.

 

[Nannernade]

If there was to be a WW2 AC game your role would actually be very limited, because well... only one role in military (Of the ones most people can name right off the bat) that fulfills the role of being an assassin is the sniper so you wouldn't have a big range of weaponry, plus all of your assassinations would just be a gun shot... ooh... ah... wow... haven't seen that before... But hell what do I know hmm?

 

[smithy1234]

I think Ubisoft Montreal should focus on making sure the inevitable sequel doesn't feel like as much of a giant chore as the first two, first of all.

Good thing your opinion is informed, or I might question it's validity.

I don't own the game because it's a rehash of the original. Do you see how that works?

I point to my original comment, which inferred that not having played the game your comments can hardly be considered a reasonable assessment of what the game offers.

Do you see how that works?

I personally found AC2 to be quite fresh, with several great improvements in the gameplay and storytelling compared to the original.
But if you want to stand by your "I haven't played it but still know everything about it" position, who am I to stop you?

Not owning the game doesn't mean I've never played it. I played the first, and found it mildly entertaining, if a bit repetitive. The sequel warranted my attention, but I wasn't impressed enough by the original to purchase it immediately, so I figured it'd be prudent to try the game out before dropping $60 on it.

I tried it. In about four hours of playtime, I found nothing but more of the same. Hence, I think it's a rehash, and therefore not worth purchasing.

I have my doubts about your claims. The new blending system, the changes to the weapons and combat, the way you complete your assassinations, the additional abilities... based on your gamerscore for AC1 and your claim to have spent four hours with AC2 tells me you've spent more time with AC2 than you did with AC1. Unless you spent a few hours with AC1, decided to buy it anyway, then stopped playing it.
Maybe that's why you don't see the difference. However, I personally (once again, based on achievements) have spent less time with AC1 than you, (although I did watch my wife complete the bulk of it) and even I felt it was a distinct improvement.

AC1 was one of the first 360 games I purchased. I'd followed the development history of it, thought it sounded really interesting, and determined that if I ever bought a "next-gen" console, I'd play it. And so, I did.

You're correct, I still haven't finished it. To be honest, every time I play it, I end up getting distracted with murdering rooftop guards and starting fistfights in the streets. It's a bit like a medieval Grand Theft Auto for me. That, and I wasn't eager to resume playing as Desmond in "the real world", since I found it really boring.

I wouldn't say I spent more actual time with ACII, though I certainly made more progress. I didn't spend nearly as much time "messing around" with it as I did with the original, because I was eager to get to "the good stuff". You know, Da Vinci's Flying machines, the Spanish Inquisition, stuff like that. Such moments were few and far between, I'm afraid.

As I said, the changes to scenery and weaponry were interesting, but in my opinion, minor; it just wasn't enough to warrant the purchase.

CAN'T YOU SEE THIS CONSTANT FIGHTING IS TEARING US APART?????!?!???!

 

[Jumplion]

I say it's time for Desmond to put all his skills that he's learned to action (I havn't finished the game, so no spoilers!).

It would be intriguing to have another ancestor in the Industrial Revolution or French Revolution, blah de blah blah, but I do think that a part of AC3 could spend a bit more time with Desmond getting some action instead of just walking around and going into the Animus. Flesh out the present world a bit more I say.