Hardcore Gamer: The Animus is being wasted and it’s taking the entire Assassin’s Creed series down with it.
Seriously, this series doesn't even make sense anymore.
We got fed this whole thing about the first people and the 2012 thing however <SPOILERS> when that story came to a close at the end of AC3 they decided to add a new plot they could continue from...Juno. She became free and made it clear she was going to try and take control of the world. At this point it was obvious the next games would focus on the present day team to stop Juno from taking over the world. Maybe Desmonds father or mother would take over so their sons sacrifice wouldn't go to waste but no...they didn't do that. With AC4 it's like they didn't even bother, we had a small glimpse of her "trying" to return to full power but hardly anything was said about her. People moaned on that Desmond sections were boring and dull yet what we got in AC4 was even worse...an unnamed character working for a GAMES STUDIO who is making a Pirate game, basically a game within a game replicating Ubisoft and AC4: Black Flag AND the worse part was the whole thing was in first person. I did think the first people plot was getting a little silly by Assassins Creed Revelations but it was still interesting however what bugs me is that they had their chance to end it in AC3 yet they adding an even bigger plot they are just wasting now. The best thing they could of done before AC4 was to "reboot" the franchise by ending the present day story in AC3 and everything past "Desmonds trilogy" would focus on just the different time eras. Next gen...new focus, it would of been better but it's only now, at AC5 (odd choice) that they are dropping the numbers and going on a new path. It's like they don't know what they are doing. In my opinion I feel like they messed stuff up in AC3, things past codex pages told us, about George Washington for example they changed in AC3.
It is possible that the PS4/XB1 exclusive, Unity, will focus on continuing the Juno storyline. A separate but related story arch to the previous one with Desmond. After all, I feel it is kind of a dick move to go "want to find out the ending of this arch? Spend $460" rather than just starting a new arch in a relatively self-contained way on the new consoles. Though, it still could have been done on AC4.
I have mixed feelings about the modern element in AC IV. It was really bad for them to use a silent protagonist (old game design here) and that June part was more confusing and anti climatic than anything else. But everything else about it worked quite well. The biggest issue isn't going to be Templar against Assassin but Templar working with the Assassin's (hence Unity) to take on those people who believe they are the true Templar. I think that could work.
I actually agree with this article. I'm playing Liberation HD now, and it's so incredibly boring; far too similar to AC3. Unity might change things a fair amount, but Rogue just looks dull. Why not take us to Ancient Athens? The Roman Empire? Alexander the Great could even be a significant Templar/Assassin. East Asia of course is a natural choice, be it Sengoku Japan, Han Dynasty or Warring States China. Medieval India was also quite impressive. Not to mention that we never had pre-Renaissance Medieval Europe (10th-14th centuries). I've resisted in the past, but now I agree with the view of the author. Ubisoft need to do something new.
The idea of revisiting similar locations is so they can use similar assets. Plain and simple, Rouge is a money grab. Same with AC IV. The problem is Ubisoft wants to stretch out the assets they make for as long as possible
This is exactly right, I don't even know how people can't see this. Copy and paying buildings and such is the reason why they can release 3 assassins creed games on one year. It's a cheap practise, but unfortunately a very real one
I couldn't agree more with this article. I'm so tired of sneaking around brick houses killing men in tricorner hats carrying flintlock pistols. I brought this up fairly recently and was reminded that the French Revolution was a very exciting time in history. This is true but then so was the American Civil war and we all know how that worked out as a game, Black Flag's differing locales were nice but it still amounted to sneaking around fairly similar areas killing the exact same town cryer looking fellows we killed in the game before it. It has to be remembered that a difference of fifty years or so in that period was equivalent to a difference of three to five years today. It really is silly that the strength of the series was based around the ability to experience any point in human history and the creators are so reluctant to try new eras. To think of the things they could have us experience if we weren't stuck playing the pirate/highwayman/scarlet pimpernel. It's like creating a game about a person who has the ability to teleport to any single point in the Universe and uses it to travel exclusively between Boston and Chicago.
I think what killed the war of independence era was the nonsensical plot and boring characters. It could have been an interesting time period but Ubisoft destroyed that themselves. Also another issue is pre population boom America isn't densely compact enough. We saw it in AC 3 where free running made things slower because the buildings were so far apart.
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.