• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Assassin's Creed 3 Game Informer Details

Unfortunately that "focus" was not intentional at all. The team had spent almost the entire dev cycle coming up with the engine and animation system, building the world, and simply didn't have time to make an actual game.

I love the franchise, but AC1 is simply the most polished Alpha build of all time.

ACII is the finished product.

Half-truths.

Yes, they didn't get everything they wanted into the game, but team also stated that many of the gameplay elements put into AC2 (eg, all the extra bullshit on the side) because of specific complaints fans had about a lack of gameplay variety.

A 'Final' version of AC would have likely had the EXACT same structure, only the crowd-blending of AC2 would have been in there, along with the gangs to hire, and maybe an equivelant to the pigeon-coups for secondary assassinations (which, basically, were in the game, only they were handed out by dudes in white, and mostly involved killing guards to get them out of trouble).

The notion that AC2 is what AC would have been is laughable, given how different the scope and structure of the games are.


My favorite part of AC1 was the fact there was nothing to do, the main character was unlikeable in every way, and it had one of the worst boss fights/endings of all time.

Fantastic game.

Did people who cast Altair as unlikeabe actually finish the damn game? His personally shifts as he learns from his experiences and interactions throughout the game.

By the end of the game, he's a perfectly likeable guy.

Also, he's a cool counter-point to Ezio's passionate, revenge-fueled character. Altair is an assassin through and through, it's all about the job. Ezio is just a dude who happened to find himself in the middle of a secret war... it's not until Brotherhood and Revelations that he actually starts looking beyond his own personal motives.
 

Mindlog

Member
the only problem with semi-sequel = french revolution idea is that if they're trying to take the series into more open-world areas then it would be hard to reconcile that with...paris
That's exactly what I need from this series. An open countryside palette cleanser followed by a return to the more traditional setting. The consistency of the previous four titles is part of what burned me out.
 

Nibel

Member
I played all 4 games on PC. Never had a problem.

And just because you hadn't a problem with that crap launcher it doesn't mean that others had the same experience as you. I haven't bought a single Ubisoft game for PC for a long time - tried to play Brotherhood on 360, but it was quite boring.

Just because some have problems with DRM that doesn't make them pirates.
 

Blader

Member
I really enjoyed AC1 myself, in some ways more than 2. I never found the first game all that repetitive because I was constantly skipping/ignoring the tutorials, so every mission I ended up discovering something new that the game itself would have otherwise taught me. :lol
 

Fuu

Formerly Alaluef (not Aladuf)
So those were actual screens and not scans after all? Looks the same to me.
 

ReaperXL7

Member
damn, just saw a screen where the MC is stalking a group of red coats in the forest......I cannot wait to see this in motion. I'm curious how useful they are going to make the bow, considering the background of the MC it would be reasonable to assume being able to use it from horseback, it should also pretty useful overall.

Please don't go soft on this Ubi, lots of great things can come from treating this with some authenticity.
 

WinFonda

Member
-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.

Shades of gray... both sides do evil...

but he's killing a redcoat on the boxart!

And if the Templars believe they are saving the world... why not... you know... show them doing some good for a change?

Perhaps AC3 will flip the script and have you acting on behalf of the templars during crucial moments, because they were the lesser of the two evils at the time... That would be interesting.
 
D

Deleted member 30609

Unconfirmed Member
I was totally indifferent toward Brotherhood and Revelations, I still haven't played them, but this sounds amazing. It's nice to be excited for an Assassin's Creed game again.
 

Amir0x

Banned
Some good things, some things to be skeptical about. Was amazingly accurate with my prediction of cities used, frontier and Indian settlements. Good to hear they are greatly refining the climbing controls on natural elements like cliffs and trees: that will go a long way toward making country traversal interesting, provided the forests are as dense as they actually were in America at the time.

Most glad to hear they'll be going with some time before the American Revolution, so that's probably how we'll get to meet Benjamin Franklin.
 
N

NinjaFridge

Unconfirmed Member
Shades of gray... both sides do evil...

but he's killing a redcoat on the boxart!

And if the Templars believe they are saving the world... why not... you know... show them doing some good for a change?

Perhaps AC3 will flip the script and have you acting on behalf of the templars during crucial moments, because they were the lesser of the two evils at the time... That would be interesting.

They believe the way to save the world is to control the world even if that means they have to be forceful at times. Though it would be interesting to play from the Templars perspective.
 

Nirolak

Mrgrgr
I think you mistakenly combined the two features mentioned under the heading. The first feature is the Animus 3.0, which is supposed to mean that the GUI will have a new visual style. The second feature mentioned is the Animus Database, which is being "written" by Shaun Hastings, who will inject his snarky British perspective into the entries. (Shaun made the Database entries in AC2 and Brotherhood, Subject 16 made the entries in Revelations)

Whoops, my bad.
 

CrazyDude

Member
Some good things, some things to be skeptical about. Was amazingly accurate with my prediction of cities used, frontier and Indian settlements. Good to hear they are greatly refining the climbing controls on natural elements like cliffs and trees: that will go a long way toward making country traversal interesting, provided the forests are as dense as they actually were in America at the time.

Most glad to hear they'll be going with some time before the American Revolution, so that's probably how we'll get to meet Benjamin Franklin.

He is confirmed to be a character, they said not expect Ben Franklin to be a copy of Da Vinci.
 

Dennis

Banned
US market >>>>>> british market
They decided he has to kill someone on the cover, so they're pissing off the smaller group.

Shouldn't he have been killing a Native American then?

US market general >>>>>>>>>>>>>> British market >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Native American market
 
I don't think any of the additions sound bad. Everything sounds extremely ambitious and like a natural extension of the series. Assassin's Creed/Red Dead Redemption hybrid? Sign me the fuck up.
 

ReaperXL7

Member
Shouldn't he have been killing a Native American then?

US market general >>>>>>>>>>>>>> British market >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Native American market

Why would a Native American be killing one of his own? That would not even make sense.... Although as I said earlier the fact that he's killing a Brit is interesting aswell, since the majority of Natives sided with the Empire, not the settlers.
 

VariantX04

Loser slave of the system :(
If there is someone still looking for the screens GI released Gamespot posted them on their site:

Assassin's Creed III Screenshots

Looks really good.
r9q6y.gif


BioShock Infinite and AC3 in the same month. *salivates*
 
D

Deleted member 30609

Unconfirmed Member
I might have missed it in the OP, any word on a release date? The PC version?
 
Why would a Native American be killing one of his own? That would not even make sense.... Although as I said earlier the fact that he's killing a Brit is interesting aswell, since the majority of Natives sided with the Empire, not the settlers.
Excuse my ignorance but didn't the Native Americans teach the colonial soldiers guerilla warfare which is how they bested the British army?
 

Mr Cola

Brothas With Attitude / The Wrong Brotha to Fuck Wit / Die Brotha Die / Brothas in Paris
i hope they get Jason Isaacs to play a bloodthirsty tyrant redcoat i can hunt

I say this as an Englishman
 

WinFonda

Member
They believe the way to save the world is to control the world even if that means they have to be forceful at times. Though it would be interesting to play from the Templars perspective.
I understand that is their general MO, but the Assassin's are similar are they not? I mean, Assassinating people is a forceful method of control. Yet the agents of the Assassin's are imbued with empathetic and benevolent qualities. I'm saying it would be nice to see that (in at least a small capacity) from the Templar side too. It's just absurd to think an organization that requires human operatives to accomplish its goals would be so thoroughly callous and consistently evil.
 

ReaperXL7

Member
Why would an Englishman be killing one of his own?

Infighting between tribes was not as uncommon as anyone else, but during this point most attention shifted to fighting against the invaders. So Natives would have had little reason to fight each other, when the goal was to make the settlers leave.

Excuse my ignorance but didn't the Native Americans teach the colonial soldiers guerilla warfare which is how they bested the British army?

Like I said the Majority sided with the Empire, because the crown promised to protect the Natives and their lands against the invading settlers. However there were many Natives who did side with the Americans. The british had 4 out of 6 tribes of the Iroquois, the americans ended up with the other two. Of course the British where playing their own game with Natives aswell, so it's not like they were our best buddies either.
 

CrazyDude

Member
Why would a Native American be killing one of his own? That would not even make sense.... Although as I said earlier the fact that he's killing a Brit is interesting aswell, since the majority of Natives sided with the Empire, not the settlers.

Well there are more than one tribe. Some sided with the American while others side with the British. Of course the most powerful ones sided with the British. The Mohawk tribe, the same one that Conor was raised in, also sided with the British, so it should be interesting to figure out why he is helping the Americans.
 

Amir0x

Banned
He is confirmed to be a character, they said not expect Ben Franklin to be a copy of Da Vinci.

I know he's confirmed to be a character and that they said "not to expect a copy of Da Vinci." I was just saying before we thought the game would entirely take place during the American Revolution, and I was saying I doubt Benjamin Franklin will be able to be met considering where he was during the War and how old he was during the time.

Considering the expanded time frame, this gives plenty of opportunity for Benjamin Franklin to show up. Wonder if John Adams will show up? What about Thomas Jefferson? Can't wait to see how they handle these figures.

Amir0x I told you this shit would be the jam.

There's still plenty of problems I had with the concept that are not actually solved with the information provided.

It goes furthest to alleviate my problem with the country travel, but I still highly doubt this will be as interesting as traveling around genuinely great cities. From the sound of it, actually, they're basically admitting there is going to be a whole lot more ground travel, but they're trying to spice it up with sliding and more free running hijinks... which is neat, but is not in my estimation a good exchange for a properly dense city with huge lateral movement. We will have to see how it works in practice.

As an aside, they also didn't mention how slavery is being handled, which I am extremely curious about. I hate when period pieces of any kind try to skirt around these complex issues.

There is a lot to like too, however. I like the sound of the battle system they got going... it's going to be rad to wade around during huge iconic battles in the Revolutionary War. I like the time period they're utilizing. This allows for a huge array of key moments in early American history. I also love the changing seasons and in particular the key point "rivers and lakes will freeze during winter, giving you new traversal opportunities." That is a really novel approach.

mossoluk said:
But Benjamin Franklin as crazy inventor makes so much sense =(

It does, but I suspect it would have been a bad idea to make him a central inventor considering he is clearly going to disappear to France for most of the time of the Revolutionary War, which would make his role kind of difficult if you need to go back to him for upgrades :p
 
I understand that is their general MO, but the Assassin's are similar are they not? I mean, Assassinating people is a forceful method of control. Yet the agents of the Assassin's are imbued with empathetic and benevolent qualities. I'm saying it would be nice to see that from the Templar side too. It's just absurd to think an organization that requires human operatives to accomplish its goals would be so thoroughly and consistently evil.
After most assassinations, the Templar dudes always have something to say that makes you question your mission. I'm pretty sure by the end of the main trilogy, we'll see that both sides are wrong. Templars use force to acquire a means to control minds to protect the people while assassins use force to protect people from being mind controlled.
 
Just remember, unless they retcon the lore, George Washington was a Templar. I think Ubisoft will genuinely make things interesting.

One of the main reasons for the War of Independence was not just tax-related, but also because of Britain's Empire-focused trade policies restricted who they could trade with. The majority of the colonists owned land and saw themselves as economic trail-blazers. They wanted to expand westwards, which Britain had refused to allow them to, in order to avoid conflict with the natives. I'm Ubisoft wanted to get really deep with their history, you could see Templars supporting groups of the revolutionaries, with the stated aim of opening the Americas up for business.

Slavery could fit into the agenda this way as well.
 

Dennis

Banned
Just remember, unless they retcon the lore, George Washington was a Templar. I think Ubisoft will genuinely make things interesting.

One of the main reasons for the War of Independence was not just tax-related, but also because of Britain's Empire-focused trade policies restricted who they could trade with. The majority of the colonists owned land and saw themselves as economic trail-blazers. They wanted to expand westwards, which Britain had refused to allow them to, in order to avoid conflict with the natives. I'm Ubisoft wanted to get really deep with their history, you could see Templars supporting groups of the revolutionaries, with the stated aim of opening the Americas up for business.

From OP:

-George Washington: Interacting with Washington is one of the core relationships of the game.
 
Top Bottom