Assassin's Creed IV: Black Flag Sets Sail for the Caribbean

[Storm Dragon]

You're promising me a game like Wind Waker here, Ubisoft. You'd better be able to deliver.

 

[SirDeadly]

So this is now Assassin Pirates Creed... I am perfectly fine with this. Hell, with my love of pirates I'm going to name this game of the year already.

 

[Mouse One]

This could be great. I loved Sid Meir's Pirates (both of them-- thanks Good Old Games for the first ) ACIII was a snore, but honestly it just had to do with it's perplexingly boring choices for setting and character. The Age of Piracy, on the other hand, was rife with real adventure and over the top personalities. And lots and lots of grey morality. Done right, this could be like a videogame version of On Stranger Tides.

 

[The]

My main problems with AC3 were the boring main character, the samey-looking environments, a shit-ton of useless mechanics and boring mission structure. So far it looks good for the first two. If the last two are fixed, I'm sold.

 

[SteewpidZombie]

Assassin's Creed is becoming a cheap experience that's being shoved down our throats. I LOVED the first two, but after the whole "Let's make 2 sequels to the second game, that don't add much aside from Multiplayer" really put me into a negative opinion of the series.

 

[Infernai]

Pirates you say? Carribean you say? I think i have a song that will fit the tone well then.

 

[II2]

They REALLY out to cast Henry Rollins as the future guy, acknowledging his real world work in the game up till the point he get's Atimus-ed to go be a pirate, or whatever the hell the future-ribo-memory-sim is named.

 

[MrGalactus]

They REALLY out to cast Henry Rollins as the future guy, acknowledging his real world work in the game up till the point he get's Atimus-ed to go be a pirate, or whatever the hell the future-ribo-memory-sim is named.

Seriously, if the tag line to this game isn't Rise Above, and your ship isn't called the H.M.S. Damaged, I will be very disapointed.

Spoiler: Rise Above

 

[Nami nom noms]

called it!

I thought they'd do pirates for AC3, but I still fecking called it!

 

[Epic Fail 1977]

Didn't AC3 only come out five minutes ago or am I getting older faster than I realised?

 

[HBaskerville]

Another missed opportunity to have a female protagonist.

 

[Ascarus]

first off, does anyone else see the irony in Ubisoft moving towards piracy?

Isn't Assassin's Creed supposed to be about, I don't know, ASSASSINATING?
I wasn't interested in Assassin's Creed III because it had huge ships. In fact, without any monolithic megastructures and satisfying shanking, I wasn't interested in AC3 at all. I plowed through the game completely ignoring the side missions because I just wanted to wrap up Desmond's story so I could move on to a more engaging game.
And now that I have, and the new Assassin's Creed looks set to completely shelve what I liked about the early games, I don't even intend to acknowledge the existence of this title beyond telling everyone why I don't intend to acknowledge the existence of this title.

pretty much this. as i have said a few times, i am tired of my assassin being thrust into every conceivable profession (ship captain, animal hunter, match maker, town builder, field marshal, etc.) when all i really want to do is, you know, assassinate people. there was virtually none of that in AC3 -- the assassination contracts were embarrassingly laughable and two of the primary AC3 antagonists were killed in fucking cut scenes. one of those antagonists has been around since the first game!

not to mention i wasn't a fan of the ship fights. i found maneuvering those lumbering beasts aggravating and tiresome. if i wanted a sailing simulator i would go buy one.

Another missed opportunity to have a female protagonist.

this would have been really interesting to me as well.

(a few added edits)

 

[TheLion]

I'm somewhat conflicted about this. On one hand, there's no doubt that this game will be fun as all hell since it revolves around Naval combat, the one and only unanimously good thing about AC3. On the other hand, judging by the marketing tactics, I'm afraid that Ubisoft is going to drop the ball when it comes to the colonial politics and the social/racial caste system of the 18th century Caribbean. Assassin's Creed has performed as a great vehicle for tangental learning, and the Colonial Caribbean isn't talked about much in The States (I imagine the same can be said across the pond. . . and the other pond.) Personally, I find the social commentary and historical authenticity central to the AC formula, and it would be a shame if it's ignored altogether for a shallow escapist fantasy on the high seas.

 

[Buizel91]

Yeah... I don't care about this game. I will likely never buy it.
AC3 was terrible, and I just don't see the story going anywhere I care to explore. Ubisoft's overextension of the series and the money-grubbing ways it's been doled out (excised game parts sold as expansions, "what if" DLC being put out in pay-per-episode format, etc) have just killed any goodwill I have left for the series.

And frankly, as fun as the naval missions were, there should be MORE of them, not a game ABOUT them. Either the series trademark assassinations will suffer, or the ships stuff will become monotonous, like the Great Sea in Wind Waker.

That's the thing...the story isn't going anywhere, it ended with AC3. This is a new story, with a new character, no Desmond.

No Desmond holding the story back, and no modern day character. Which is what this game has needed for a LONG time.

You mean, an abandonment of the series framing device which drove the greater narrative forward? How does that help the series? The story in Screed 2, Brotherhood, and 3 was GARBAGE. The only narrative worth exploring in those games WAS desmond's and the only reason this was a series, instead of pointless stabbity adventures

Ezio is a terrible human being who learns nothing through his games, until suddenly in Revelations he is a Wise Mentor.
Connor is a self-absorbed pissant who learns LESS than nothing: Unlike Ezio who counted his revenge and Assassin goals separately, Connor instead decides his personal vengeance is RIGHTEOUS, and becomes more entitled as the game continues. with the minor exception of Revelations, which polished Ezio's gameplay and had a decent story, the assassin's creed sequels have been exceptionally poor, either from design, story, or both (AC3).

It's a bullshit series with two good games out of THIRTEEN. It had promise, and squandered it.

Ezio, Altair and Connor in my opinion much more interesting, i played the games for them...not for Desmond...

Without him in the picture, the Assassin we play as now can be more developed...and not just being a secondary character which we play 90% of the game of.

 

[userwhoquitthesite]

Ezio, Altair and Connor in my opinion much more interesting, i played the games for them...not for Desmond...

Without him in the picture, the Assassin we play as now can be more developed...and not just being a secondary character which we play 90% of the game of.

What? That makes no sense. None. Having Desmond NEVER affected how well developed the character was, because Desmond still went through their whole arc. You also need to learn what secondary character means. The assassin was always the protagonist, desmond is a framing device DISGUISED as a protagonist.
As such, yes, the main characters are more interesting as characters, but their narratives are lacking.

Assassin's Creed was perfect as far as storytelling goes, only suffering in actual gameplay (which, despite its flaws, is still more rewarding than the later games). Altair's personal arc and his plotline are engaging. Desmond serves as a way to break up the action and breathe, and provides a compelling frame for the main game, leading the player to want to learn what's going on, and thus purchasing the second game.

screed 2 is a story about an entitled little prick who learns that everything in life will go his way, and that he can do as he wishes with no consequence. But it still advance the world plot, and promised a more complex narrative to follow.

brotherhood... Ezio continues to be an entitled prick who learns nothing except that vengeance is AWESOME. gameplay is slightly better than 2. But hey, maybe somethings actually about to happen, major events come up in the frame!

Revelations... frame device does nothing, but at least Ezio isn't a raging toolbox, and HOLY SHIT AN ACTUAL COMPELLING PLOT THAT ALMOST HAS TO DO WITH TEMPLARS AGAIN!

screed 3 is the final nail in the slow death of the framing device, the main game plays like shit, and the story is worse than the gameplay.

screed 4: KEEP PLAYING A SERIES THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH ITS OWN IDEAS BECAUSE OMG HISTORICAL COSTUMES YOO GAIZ ISNT PIRATES SO COOLS?!

yeah. fuck screed

 

[kortin]

Ezio, Altair and Connor in my opinion much more interesting, i played the games for them...not for Desmond...

Without him in the picture, the Assassin we play as now can be more developed...and not just being a secondary character which we play 90% of the game of.

What? That makes no sense. None. Having Desmond NEVER affected how well developed the character was, because Desmond still went through their whole arc. You also need to learn what secondary character means. The assassin was always the protagonist, desmond is a framing device DISGUISED as a protagonist.
As such, yes, the main characters are more interesting as characters, but their narratives are lacking.

Assassin's Creed was perfect as far as storytelling goes, only suffering in actual gameplay (which, despite its flaws, is still more rewarding than the later games). Altair's personal arc and his plotline are engaging. Desmond serves as a way to break up the action and breathe, and provides a compelling frame for the main game, leading the player to want to learn what's going on, and thus purchasing the second game.

screed 2 is a story about an entitled little prick who learns that everything in life will go his way, and that he can do as he wishes with no consequence. But it still advance the world plot, and promised a more complex narrative to follow.

brotherhood... Ezio continues to be an entitled prick who learns nothing except that vengeance is AWESOME. gameplay is slightly better than 2. But hey, maybe somethings actually about to happen, major events come up in the frame!

Revelations... frame device does nothing, but at least Ezio isn't a raging toolbox, and HOLY SHIT AN ACTUAL COMPELLING PLOT THAT ALMOST HAS TO DO WITH TEMPLARS AGAIN!

screed 3 is the final nail in the slow death of the framing device, the main game plays like shit, and the story is worse than the gameplay.

screed 4: KEEP PLAYING A SERIES THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH ITS OWN IDEAS BECAUSE OMG HISTORICAL COSTUMES YOO GAIZ ISNT PIRATES SO COOLS?!

yeah. fuck screed

I feel like we played different games.

Unless you're not serious, in which case 10/10, you really had me going there for a bit. I almost believed you were actually serious.


OT: This game intrigues me. If only because Pirates.

 

[immortalfrieza]

So instead of hay, will there be piles of gold laying around that I can dive into like Scrooge McDuck?

First thing I thought of when I read this.


DAMN YOU FAMILY GUY! You stole my childhood!

Isn't Assassin's Creed supposed to be about, I don't know, ASSASSINATING?

Exactly. Hunting down targets and assassinating them is precisely what the AC games are supposed to be about, and never anything more than that, the rest of the plot is supposed to be there to provide context for the assassinations, not overtake the assassinations pretty much entirely. The series are drifted more and more from it's main point from game to game, and that's why they've started to suck.

Ezio, Altair and Connor in my opinion much more interesting, i played the games for them...not for Desmond...

Without him in the picture, the Assassin we play as now can be more developed...and not just being a secondary character which we play 90% of the game of.

What? That makes no sense. None. Having Desmond NEVER affected how well developed the character was, because Desmond still went through their whole arc. You also need to learn what secondary character means. The assassin was always the protagonist, desmond is a framing device DISGUISED as a protagonist.
As such, yes, the main characters are more interesting as characters, but their narratives are lacking.

Assassin's Creed was perfect as far as storytelling goes, only suffering in actual gameplay (which, despite its flaws, is still more rewarding than the later games). Altair's personal arc and his plotline are engaging. Desmond serves as a way to break up the action and breathe, and provides a compelling frame for the main game, leading the player to want to learn what's going on, and thus purchasing the second game.

screed 2 is a story about an entitled little prick who learns that everything in life will go his way, and that he can do as he wishes with no consequence. But it still advance the world plot, and promised a more complex narrative to follow.

brotherhood... Ezio continues to be an entitled prick who learns nothing except that vengeance is AWESOME. gameplay is slightly better than 2. But hey, maybe somethings actually about to happen, major events come up in the frame!

Revelations... frame device does nothing, but at least Ezio isn't a raging toolbox, and HOLY SHIT AN ACTUAL COMPELLING PLOT THAT ALMOST HAS TO DO WITH TEMPLARS AGAIN!

screed 3 is the final nail in the slow death of the framing device, the main game plays like shit, and the story is worse than the gameplay.

screed 4: KEEP PLAYING A SERIES THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH ITS OWN IDEAS BECAUSE OMG HISTORICAL COSTUMES YOO GAIZ ISNT PIRATES SO COOLS?!

yeah. fuck screed

Desmond and the Animus exist solely so that the AC writers can be lazy, so that when things happen in the games that don't make any sense, they can just point at the thing and scream "THE ANIMUS DID IT!!!" As the matter of fact, Desmond and the Animus could have never existed and the series could have been just about an ancient order of assassins and the plot would have changed very little, if at all, but they would have had to bother to write the plot to actually make sense.

 

[Buizel91]

Ezio, Altair and Connor in my opinion much more interesting, i played the games for them...not for Desmond...

Without him in the picture, the Assassin we play as now can be more developed...and not just being a secondary character which we play 90% of the game of.

What? That makes no sense. None. Having Desmond NEVER affected how well developed the character was, because Desmond still went through their whole arc. You also need to learn what secondary character means. The assassin was always the protagonist, desmond is a framing device DISGUISED as a protagonist.
As such, yes, the main characters are more interesting as characters, but their narratives are lacking.

Assassin's Creed was perfect as far as storytelling goes, only suffering in actual gameplay (which, despite its flaws, is still more rewarding than the later games). Altair's personal arc and his plotline are engaging. Desmond serves as a way to break up the action and breathe, and provides a compelling frame for the main game, leading the player to want to learn what's going on, and thus purchasing the second game.

screed 2 is a story about an entitled little prick who learns that everything in life will go his way, and that he can do as he wishes with no consequence. But it still advance the world plot, and promised a more complex narrative to follow.

brotherhood... Ezio continues to be an entitled prick who learns nothing except that vengeance is AWESOME. gameplay is slightly better than 2. But hey, maybe somethings actually about to happen, major events come up in the frame!

Revelations... frame device does nothing, but at least Ezio isn't a raging toolbox, and HOLY SHIT AN ACTUAL COMPELLING PLOT THAT ALMOST HAS TO DO WITH TEMPLARS AGAIN!

screed 3 is the final nail in the slow death of the framing device, the main game plays like shit, and the story is worse than the gameplay.

screed 4: KEEP PLAYING A SERIES THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH ITS OWN IDEAS BECAUSE OMG HISTORICAL COSTUMES YOO GAIZ ISNT PIRATES SO COOLS?!

yeah. fuck screed

I'd give you a paragraph on how wrong you are, but someone has done that for me.

Now instead of jumping from awesome assassin in the Holy Land/Italy/and the early days of America to going to modern day assassin who does this that and the other and kills himself, we get to stay as playing an awesome assassin without the the modern day crap.

Now...why is the rum, always gone?

 

[userwhoquitthesite]

Desmond and the Animus exist solely so that the AC writers can be lazy, so that when things happen in the games that don't make any sense, they can just point at the thing and scream "THE ANIMUS DID IT!!!" As the matter of fact, Desmond and the Animus could have never existed and the series could have been just about an ancient order of assassins and the plot would have changed very little, if at all, but they would have had to bother to write the plot to actually make sense.

I'm sorry, what?

Desmond and the Animus could have never existed and... the plot would have changed very little, if at all

This is an entirely false statement. Without Framing Device Desmond, the series HAS no plot. The individual games do, yes, but the series does not.

As for your complaint about "animus did it"... huh? the animus never disguised plot, only gave an in-universe reason for videogame rules.
And the "writing the plot to make sense", well, it DID make sense, up until the end.

 

[userwhoquitthesite]

I'd give you a paragraph on how wrong you are, but someone has done that for me.

Now instead of jumping from awesome assassin in the Holy Land/Italy/and the early days of America to going to modern day assassin who does this that and the other and kills himself, we get to stay as playing an awesome assassin without the the modern day crap.

Now...why is the rum, always gone?

Actually, no, no one has, so why don't you?