Assassin's Creed: Revelations - Discussion Thread

Gannu

Gannu

Unbanned
ex-Mod
The next title in the Assassin's Creed series starring Altair was supposedly leaked on their Facebook link before Ubi managed to take down the Revelations part and Altair's name in Arabic script from the flash file in their Facebook link.

[youtube]HSmRhNbmtWM[/youtube]
capture9yhp.jpg


Source - http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=428872

Ubi's expected to announce the game at the E3 this year. :p
 
My arabic is a little rusty but I'm atleast 90% sure it doesn't say altair.It says "ha al nabi rayatala" or something.May be it means altair in someway.Anyway the video doesn't show us anything interesting.I'm just exited altair is returning.He was one bad ass assassin:eek:hyeah:.Ezio was a little too nice sometimes...
 
It will be Altair IMO because somewhere i read that Ubisoft had stated that each numbered title in the franchise will introduce a new lead character and a new setting like Assassins Creed 2 or ACIII but as the new titles says revelations then it will not be having a new protagonist. So i think it is Altair.
 
I hated Altair in AC1 initially, but by the end of it he redeems himself. Also, will this have the same cities as in AC1? That would be really cool. I really liked that setting in AC1.
 
The real problem with Altair, was his character development. His past wasn't explored properly. We have no clue how he was recruited into the Assassin's guild. Ubisoft could develop a good back-story and that could perhaps help us appreciate his character a bit more.

Ezio, on the other hand, was a more refined character. Half of his family was executed and his mother was in complete state of shock. His sister and Uncle Mario, were his only true support left. Exploring his younger days to the time he became a full fledged Assassin was a proper way of building up his character. Hence, his character was propogated in Brotherhood.

Even though, both these characters have got their purpose in a different manner, their end result is always assassination.
 
Altair was not boring. AC1 became boring due to the same old repetitive missions and a serious background with no humour at all.
ACII has everything.As a character point of view Altair was good.It is not always important to show the background of the character.The proceedings should atleast make some sense or interesting.In other words AC1 was a slow paced short game with a lack of variety.
 
Its not just that AC was a slow paced game if you notice the voice actor also was quite weak, compared to Ezio who is of flamboyance character.
 
comp@ddict said:
They have milked the Assassin's Creed brand.
Click to expand...
True that. Ubi has their next COD series lined up. They better wrap this up with this title lest it becomes boring. Or better still have a completely new storyline with a different plot, setting and characters.
 
It can be a game totally based on Desmond with no ancestor, searching for the other pieces of eden? I hope it is and we get to play with guns, bike's and all. :D
 
Tarcxy said:
Altair was the greatest of them all. But, nowhere does it mention Altair :p except the Arabic pointing it may be him..
Click to expand...
For those who read my previous post.The Arabic script does say altair.It says "altair ibn la-ahad" written from left to right(its supposed to be written from left to right btw).So its definitely altair.
 
quan chi said:
It is not always important to show the background of the character.
Click to expand...

It wouldn't matter, if you have a protagonist that you wouldn't give a rats-ass about. But if you have a character driven storyline, then you would definitely like to know about his/her past and why he/she are the way they are and do the things they do. It helps create a different level of immersion in a character's storyline. For example, I loved Kane & Lynch: Dead Men. I would like a prequel explaining Kane's history with The7 and Lynch's side of the story too. None of these are properly explored in the first game, nor the second one. If I would have played Devil May Cry, without playing DMC3, I would have had no idea who Dante was (apart from being a Demon Hunter), who was Nelo Angelo, the essence of Eva's amulet, Why was Dante's shop called 'Devil May Cry' etc. This is where Capcom gets brownie points for explaining, exploring and giving a new dimension to Dante's character by giving us Devil May Cry 3.

This is exactly the reason why I found Ezio to be a more like-able character compared to Altair. In the first game, right from the very first cut-scene, we were just thrown in as Altair and led onto Assassinate one person after another. Whereas, the second game (literally) gave birth to Ezio and led the player to take over his role right from his birth. Every detail of his life was depicted and hence people actually grew to like his character, both as; A witty and charming person & as a trained Assassin. See what happened here. There was a connection established with the character. His missions were crafted, in accordance with the way the events of his life unfolded. It was like watching a beautiful movie. This is why the second game was praised and Ubisoft had got everything right in this game, which wasn't present in the first game. Of course, I'm taking into account the re-vamped gameplay as well. ;)
 
Ethan_Hunt said:
It wouldn't matter, if you have a protagonist that you wouldn't give a rats-ass about. But if you have a character driven storyline, then you would definitely like to know about his/her past and why he/she are the way they are and do the things they do. It helps create a different level of immersion in a character's storyline. For example, I loved Kane & Lynch: Dead Men. I would like a prequel explaining Kane's history with The7 and Lynch's side of the story too. None of these are properly explored in the first game, nor the second one. If I would have played Devil May Cry, without playing DMC3, I would have had no idea who Dante was (apart from being a Demon Hunter), who was Nelo Angelo, the essence of Eva's amulet, Why was Dante's shop called 'Devil May Cry' etc. This is where Capcom gets brownie points for explaining, exploring and giving a new dimension to Dante's character by giving us Devil May Cry 3.

This is exactly the reason why I found Ezio to be a more like-able character compared to Altair. In the first game, right from the very first cut-scene, we were just thrown in as Altair and led onto Assassinate one person after another. Whereas, the second game (literally) gave birth to Ezio and led the player to take over his role right from his birth. Every detail of his life was depicted and hence people actually grew to like his character, both as; A witty and charming person & as a trained Assassin. See what happened here. There was a connection established with the character. His missions were crafted, in accordance with the way the events of his life unfolded. It was like watching a beautiful movie. This is why the second game was praised and Ubisoft had got everything right in this game, which wasn't present in the first game. Of course, I'm taking into account the re-vamped gameplay as well. ;)
Click to expand...

anyways you almost mentioned everything similar to what i had mentioned.

Well as far as the character background is concerned you yourself has given the answer.
I played dmc 4 first and still liked the game where i knew nothing about dante.But after playing it.It kind of compelled or dragged me to play dmc3.

Now the point is why people who havent played any dmc still liked dmc4.Heck we still dont know anything about nero.The answer is your first sentence.:)

well i agree that ubisoft wanted to make AC1 as a Character driven storyline but didnt succeed that much.But it could have been neglected if they had made the game a bit more fluid and with varieties both in story and gameplay.
 
^I agree with Quan chi here. One does not need to know everything about a character to like them. Not knowing or knowing very less about the past of a character adds to the mystique of that character.
 
Back
Top