Assassin's Creed III Could be set in World War II

[Styphax]

How about Assassin's Creed, Mongolian Empire. You could work for Genghis Kahn, and spread fear through Russia, China, and really the rest of Eurasia. The game's story would have a little less depth, and moral ambiguity than what might be expected of AC, but hell. Brutal Murders used to cause cities to surrender without a fight would be a lot of fun. Any of the Brutal Empires could do this, Assyria, the Huns. Even Babylon to some degree.

 

[PsykoDragon]

The Industrial Revolution would be my cup of tea. Add a bit of steampunk into that & suddenly you stop playing AssCreed & start EATING AssCreed.

 

[feversk]

I was thinking about the possible setting of AC3 and I think that colonial America would be a great setting. With all those Freemason conspiracies, it would be very interesting.

I've got no problems playing a lady, as long as she is a lady, and not a whore.
Furthermore, I'd expect her to have the body of someone who's used to athletic activity, not Tomb Raider.

You mean someone like Faith in Mirror's Edge?

And are you suggesting that big breasts make a female character look like a whore?

What game lets you play as a whore, anyway? I'm asking out of pure curiosity, of course... Of course.

 

[Gardenia]

How about we get to play as Jack the Ripper instead of yet another WW2 game? I for one am sick of WW2. Especially as seen through the eyes of an american super-patriot.

 

[Kingsman]

Hee hee hee... Ass Creed.

Seriously, though, World War 2 is a terrible idea. It's been done, done, done. Hell, even World War ONE would've been better-

Oh wait, we don't have a master race of bastards as our enemies in World War One, do we? And that means someone might take up offense. Can't have that, no sir.

 

[paragon1]

Seems to me that the Era of Exploration would be the next logical step after the Renaissance. You've got the beginnings of colonialism, exposure to all sorts of new culture (exposure usually meaning enslavement, rape, murder, and skull-fucking in that order), and all sorts of technological and cultural developments.

 

[paragon1]

Hee hee hee... Ass Creed.

Seriously, though, World War 2 is a terrible idea. It's been done, done, done. Hell, even World War ONE would've been better-

Oh wait, we don't have a master race of bastards as our enemies in World War One, do we? And that means someone might take up offense. Can't have that, no sir.

Well, Ubisoft has already proven that they could set their games during a "controversial" conflict without stepping on anyone's overly-sensitive toes. If you can set a game during the Crusades with an atheist as your protagonist without anybody getting upset, then you could probably pull off WWI as well. In fact, if its done right, then you could probably set it during any conflict you want (which was probably the idea from the get-go). So don't count out WWI just yet.
Actually, an even better one would be Europe between those two, don't you think?

 

[Flying Dagger]

I liked the idea someone had of setting the third game in modern times, and you being Desmond.
though this would make the game a lot more stealth orientated, you cant just repeatedly use counter against bullets.

 

[The Hairminator]

A spy in the cold war?

 

[stabnex]

well good, now they don't need to make modern warfare 3 because we don't need anymore WW2 games!!!

 

[Kingsman]

Well, Ubisoft has already proven that they could set their games during a "controversial" conflict without stepping on anyone's overly-sensitive toes. If you can set a game during the Crusades with an atheist as your protagonist without anybody getting upset, then you could probably pull off WWI as well. In fact, if its done right, then you could probably set it during any conflict you want (which was probably the idea from the get-go). So don't count out WWI just yet.
Actually, an even better one would be Europe between those two, don't you think?

...Shit, you're right about the controversy thing. Don't quite know what a spy would do in the in-between years, though...

 

[AVATAR_RAGE]

i like the idea of being in the past tbh but jumping from renasonse (dunno if i spelt that right) era to WWII is a bit of a leap

esspecially because of the sheer number of different era that could be explored before it

 

[paragon1]

Well, Ubisoft has already proven that they could set their games during a "controversial" conflict without stepping on anyone's overly-sensitive toes. If you can set a game during the Crusades with an atheist as your protagonist without anybody getting upset, then you could probably pull off WWI as well. In fact, if its done right, then you could probably set it during any conflict you want (which was probably the idea from the get-go). So don't count out WWI just yet.
Actually, an even better one would be Europe between those two, don't you think?

...Shit, you're right about the controversy thing. Don't quite know what a spy would do in the in-between years, though...

Try to stop the rise of fascism, or maybe something to do with the Templars being involved in the Great Depression?

 

[Anarchy In Detroit]

well good, now they don't need to make modern warfare 3 because we don't need anymore WW2 games!!!

...What? Modern Warfare takes place now, not in WW2. Hence the word MODERN.

i like the idea of being in the past tbh but jumping from renasonse (dunno if i spelt that right) era to WWII is a bit of a leap

yeah they would skip about 400 very important years.

esspecially because of the sheer number of different era that could be explored before it

Right o

Well, Ubisoft has already proven that they could set their games during a "controversial" conflict without stepping on anyone's overly-sensitive toes. If you can set a game during the Crusades with an atheist as your protagonist without anybody getting upset, then you could probably pull off WWI as well. In fact, if its done right, then you could probably set it during any conflict you want (which was probably the idea from the get-go). So don't count out WWI just yet.
Actually, an even better one would be Europe between those two, don't you think?

...Shit, you're right about the controversy thing. Don't quite know what a spy would do in the in-between years, though...

Try to stop the rise of fascism, or maybe something to do with the Templars being involved in the Great Depression?

Yeah I posted about it already... I think Weimar Germany would be the best path. There were many factions, pro-government, pro-communist, pro-fascist etc all working against one another. You would fight Frei Korps WW1 veterans (look it up if you don't know) and the thugs from various parties (such as Nazis, remember they were street fighters first).

It also occurred to me that Colonial India could be a good setting.

 

[Dalisclock]

So,apparently the Illumanti has so few resources that they are going to just keeping strapping Desmond into the Animus machine?

Illuminati 1: We found a door we can't open.
Illuminati 2: Okay, let's strap Desmond into the animus machine again and see if one of his ancestors knows how to open the door.
Illuminati 1: Or we could just blow a hole in the door with some explosives.
Illuminati 2: *Sigh* That's not how to do things in the Illuminati.

I'd kind of like to see them set it in the "Present", or just drop the framing device altogether if they can't properly use it.

 

[The Atomic Irishman]

Where the last 350 or so years...? Did they take a break from backstabbing?

 

[Iskenator67]

I'd like one set in the Civil War. with a mission where you kill John Wilks Booth. WWII seems interesting too.

 

[bushwhacker2k]

I imagine this is probably bull, if they are going to make one in WW2 then they should be shut down nao.

 

[theshadavid]

Why not the English Civil War? That could honestly rock quite hard.

That's not a good idea, most people have heard of the Templars and almost everyone knows of the Renaissance but there are very few Americans that know England had a civil war. I had no clue personally.

All the more reason to do it. It's a scenario that hasn't been used before at all.

But one of the things that made the first 95 percent of the story in the first AC was the cynical look at a time most of us had a basic understanding of. Most of the people we killed in the first were real historical people such as William D'Monfferat (not spelled correctly). That's why the Renaissance works so well, there are even more people we are aware of such as Da Vinci and the pope (who, coincidently, was assassinated around the time the game takes place.)

It's no fun to manipulate history in a time few people know nothing about.