Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Johnfalcon99977]

The game had been reveled recent, so I thought it fit to make a thread because I know there are others here who like the AC series

Reveal Trailer

From what I gather, the game is set in the American Revolution, and you play as a Mohawk Indian who got his everything burned down by white people. Your also apparently bros with Washington this time, even though I thought he was a Templar.

I have to say I am a bit disappointed with the time frame, but then again that's likely just because I'm bored to death with American History. However, AC has a track record when it comes to historical accuracy, so it may be more interesting to see how the colonies and the Leaders of the American Revolution were REALLY like. Although, if they do take that path, I can almost guarantee that your'll be hearing from a VERY CERTAIN news station when it shows some of the less... flattering... parts of the American Founding Fathers, especially so close to election year over here.

[nenjin]

Not wild about the setting either. But the American Revolution doesn't get seen a lot in video games.

I'm interested to see if Ubi knows how to do an open world, after all the years of Assassin's Creed. The tree-limb jumping looked pretty cool.

Only downside to me is that they really shoehorned the Assassin's garb into an Indian theme. It barely works for me. If you took the leggings and the tomahawk out of it, you'd barely be able to tell the new guy from Ezio.

[adwarf]

Not wild about the setting either. But the American Revolution doesn't get seen a lot in video games.

I'm interested to see if Ubi knows how to do an open world, after all the years of Assassin's Creed. The tree-limb jumping looked pretty cool.

Only downside to me is that they really shoehorned the Assassin's garb into an Indian theme. It barely works for me. If you took the leggings and the tomahawk out of it, you'd barely be able to tell the new guy from Ezio.

Well the Assassin's garb hasn't changed very much, heck if you look at Desmond that freaking hoodie of his is just about the same thing if he'd put the hood of it over his face. You also got to remember that all of these people are related (Though very distantly I'd say)

[nenjin]

It just seemed like "Native American-lite." Maybe because they were obligated to make him a half-breed so they can keep the genetic continuity thing going. Either way, it's a token look and it just kind of bugs me a little. Like all you need to do to make someone Native American is slap some leggings on them and hand them an axe.

I'm sure it will get a real treatment in the game though, from the sounds of how the story will play out.

[Catastrophic lolcats]

I'm not crazy about this though I've never really been crazy about the whole Ass Creed series due to Ubisoft (yuck).

First off a disclamer. I'm terribly bias when it comes to American history, like Australian history it just doesn't appeal to me and it bores me (so many more interesting time periods, like the Cossacks or Dark Age Europe).
I find that while the American Revoultion (outside of strategy games) isn't really over done. Yet I don't think the conflict is something that can be easily forced into gameplay mechanics. The war (for me) often came across as very "static" and showed elements of very early trench warfare.
To me this "static" type of warfare doesn't really gel all that well with games considering that the main cause of death was usually attrition and/or disease, not exactly the most fun or interesting way to die/kill someone in a game.

Personally I find the setting a very odd place to go. Colonial America had pretty much no major cities or buildings of any real size which sort of elimates the stealthy/jumpy city sections ass creed core gameplay. While I find it refreshing to see the gameplay go in a new direction I find it werid to pick such a setting where guns and encampment is so ingrained.
Personally if I was going for a "jump around the trees and slay enemies stealthly" I would have pick meso-america in the Aztec jungles or something. It has the dense tree cover to jump around in and even cities to go to later with combat based around melee and poorly accurate and _fairly_ non leathal slings and pipes.

Watching the trailer I can see this is going to be another demonise the British storyline ala The Patriot. Personally I find it fairly  ridiculous to make the British seem like the undeniable badguys when the relationship/politics between GB and the Colonials we're the most interesting part of the conflict (imo).
I suppose this is trying to pander directly to the American Auidence which I've had way too much of in pretty much any other medium known to man. So much for French Art. 

The whole Native American thing seem like a cope-out to me. As far as I know most of the native Americans were fighting on the side of the British since they saw an Indepedent America was seen as a greater threat to their survival, guess they were still sore about the whole small pox blankets thing.
The charactor design just seems aweful to me. Tearing out the charactor design of the older games and trying to transplant it into that era just seems stupid. The main charactor couldn't stand out anymore and would likely be shot on sight by either side on fear of hm being some kind of spy.

I can see how the core-changes in gameplay can be interesting and could be good, but the setting just seems to be the strangest and (again imo) possibly biggest mistake in the game.

[nenjin]

To me this "static" type of warfare doesn't really gel all that well with games considering that the main cause of death was usually attrition and/or disease, not exactly the most fun or interesting way to die/kill someone in a game.

I see it differently. Large encampments of troops among civilians is perfect for an Assassin. They aren't going anywhere.

What will be at odds is all the "You in the thick of major battles!"

I know there's fantasy precedent for stuff like that, and they probably want to show off Dynasty Warriors-esqe levels of putting enemies on the screen. But it seems at odds with what the game has been about before. I can see myself stalking through British encampments or killing patrolling soldiers. Fighting through 500 British soldiers with George Washington? Yeah....not getting it.

Personally I find the setting a very odd place to go. Colonial America had pretty much no major cities or buildings of any real size which sort of elimates the stealthy/jumpy city sections ass creed core gameplay. While I find it refreshing to see the gameplay go in a new direction I find it werid to pick such a setting where guns and encampment is so ingrained.

Boston would disagree with you. It won't be the Cathedrals of Italy, for sure. But probably a lot of 2nd story roof top stuff. And of course the classic Colonial Church is going to be everywhere. Those got fairly tall.

I think this is really their response to fans of the game going "Seriously, I'm bored of climbing squares." So they're taking the open area lessons of the previous AC games and putting together an open world. Consider what an "open world" was in AC1. They've come a long way and they're iterating. Best of luck to them.

Watching the trailer I can see this is going to be another demonise the British storyline ala The Patriot. Personally I find it fairly  ridiculous to make the British seem like the undeniable badguys when the relationship/politics between GB and the Colonials we're the most interesting part of the conflict (imo).

The AC storyline has, at least for the most part, tried to give the bad guys believable reasons for doing stuff. I thought it was less so than in AC1 (I haven't played since 2.) Hopefully they'll take it seriously. But it sounds like you're prejudging it a little.

I suppose this is trying to pander directly to the American Auidence which I've had way too much of in pretty much any other medium known to man. So much for French Art.

So the first one is Crusader times, the second and third is Renaissance Italy, the third is Near East....and so they try and go with an under-represented era...and it's pandering? I don't think that's quite fair. There ARE plenty of other interesting and non-American eras they could have gone with....but I suspect the series is going to start getting asynchronous at some point.

[Catastrophic lolcats]

I am perhaps prejudging it a little early, I am basing it all on the trailer I saw.

I guess one of the main reasons I'm uninterested in the American Revoultion is just how common it is in other mediums. I can turn on the history channel and it will be hours of either World War 2 or the American Revoultion. I guess I'm sick of "common history".

I guess I should go a little more in-depth with the whole "pandering" thing. The trailer is extremely dretched with American nationalist imagery (which is to be expected) however we have none of the British imagery at all.
We've got the American bold eagle at the start flying, we've got the pro-nationalist speech against the Brits and we've got the flag standard lead into battle. All of which are extremely proud and postive.
Now we've got the British imagery all of which are negative. The flag deserted and lost in the snow, the dead Recoats getting eaten by wolves, the Redcoats getting killed in the most hapless ways, and even in the big battle vista we have the British army breaking rank [On second thoughts judging by the cannon fire I'm guess that's the Colonials].

I guess I could be looking way too much into a simple trailer but it just looks extremely bias to me.

[nenjin]

I agree that it's different than previous games. They haven't clearly sided with any of the historical factions up to this point. It's all cover for the Assassin/Templar conflict.

Which is why I think the way the trailer presented itself is purely for show. Propaganda, if you will. For all we know Washington is a Templar. (And frankly, Washington as Templar is way more interesting to me on a lot of levels than Washington as an Assassin.)

If they're really sugar-coating it this time, I'll be pretty disappointed. But I suspect that's not entirely the case. I thought the conflicts presented in AC1, between different viewpoints of how the world should work, was really well thought out. It's gotten less so to me and the moral ambiguity is getting replaced by badassery as a Raison d'être, and villainy for villainy's sake. But I haven't stayed with the series (something I'm planning to rectify soon) so I can't comment on whether it's gotten more or less so.

Just to reiterate though, I don't disagree the trailer was one-sided. The fact it was so obvious though makes me think that was deliberate. If it turns out Washington is a Templar....that's the kind of moral quandary and alternative history that I really enjoyed from AC1.

And just for the record, early colonial history and the Revolutionary War bores the shit out of me too. Last of the Mohicans would have sucked without the Mohicans. But since I think that's largely a product of, you know, boring ass American civics lessons, I'm trying to keep an open mind.

[NobodyPro]

Why not revolutionary France!

They've already got murderous, assassin-garbed women! (Theroigne de Mericort)

[Microcline]

Do we have confirmation that the main character is a Native American?  From the trailer I assumed he was a Natty Bumppo-type frontiersman.

That said, it does seem to be a bizarre choice for setting.  I'd have sent the series to Imperial China myself, but in the end it all depends on the execution.

edit: Thanks for linking the article.  I had only seen the trailer.

[nenjin]

http://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/showthread.php?t=76301&page=2

Go through the images on that page of the thread (i'm not taking the time to link 'em all here.) His father was white, his mother was Native American.

[lavenders2]

Look, I found something!
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=465195
It is spoiler free (spoilers are blacked out if you don't want to read them) so that is good. The information presented on the site is a bit of an insight to what will be in AC3. It was taken from a magazine, and there is a lot of info. Some of the best things I have found so far (also spoiler free):
-Uses a new version of the Anvil engine that can "depict thousands of troops engaged in bloody battle" along with highly detailed face close-ups. They later imply that if they used version numbers, they would be like going from Anvil 1.0 -> Anvil 2.0 or something of that nature.
-Judging by the images, the faces really are quite good.
-Combat is focused on putting you on the offensive and based on speed/momentum.
-The main character has thousands of new and unique animations (no carry over from other titles) to support the new combat system.
-Connor is in the heart of major battles, and they can now have a couple thousand guys on screen, whereas before it was capped at about 100.
-Not all the Colonists will be cast as good people, and not all the British will be cast as evil oppressors.
-There will be all sorts of wilderness in the game referred to as the Frontier.
-The map of the Frontier is 1.5 times bigger than the entire map of Brotherhood.
-Don't expect more tower defense.
-They're aiming for accuracy by having historical dialog consultants and actual Native American actors.
-This game has the longest development cycle since AC1, and has twice the production capacity (in terms of work hours) and budget of Revelations.
-Full synchronization returns, but with major tweaks. Missions have checkpoints, You also get significant rewards for doing these tasks instead of a 100%. "Imagine a leveling system in an RPG, except there's a finite amount of XP to find. The more in-sync you get, the more you fill your sync bar. Within each mission, each activity you complete has a value". You can replay everything to increase your score.
-There will be more platforming levels.

[Tilla]

I'm in. Especially if they have some more wilderness survivaly stuff tossed in somehow. The huge map should get some use right?

[Johnfalcon99977]

I would like to point out that the spoilers in there for the most part are extremely minor spoilers that we could've inferred from, so don't be afraid to look at them.

Edit: To give an example, one of the spoilers is, no shit: is still centered around the Assassins versus the Templars

Edit2: Althought, I did light up greatly when I saw this: -Not all the Colonists will be cast as good people, and not all the British will be cast as evil oppressors. They're trying to focus on how both the Assassins and Templars viewpoints exist in a gray morality as the Templars really believe they're saving the world.
I love gray morality, I love it to death. So I think I'm already sold.

[lordcooper]

LET ME KILL THAT WASHINGTON TRAITOR

*ahem*

Looks cool.