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

[Someonetookmyname]

So Sid Meyers Pirates! only more fun and assasins? Why not, it's not as if I had better things to do with my time.

 

[Tharwen]

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.

I agree with the Assassinating part. Each game in the series has moved further and further from core aspect of the first game.

It might have been the intended focus of the first game, but everyone who actually played it spent most of their time running around rooftops and pushing people off buildings. I think it's good of them to have realised that and tried (despite often failing) to embrace it.

 

[Stillgard]

Well who knew Haytham Kenway had that in his ancestors. My only theories at the moment remains that Shauns curiosity must have gotten the better of him. Either that or they actually found a living subject with Kenway's DNA sequencers. Almost makes you wonder what took the Templars so long to recruit the man. Seriously though Blackbeard? Leonardo Da'Vinci was pushing it with Ezio. Though they made that work spectacularly. But take a good long look at Haytham at the beginning of AC3. You don't really expect the man to be the soildering type. In fact he looks almost like he belongs at the helm of a Naval vessel. That and that deal with Captain Kidd might have been a good tip as to what was coming.

A solid choice though for a new Anti Hero. Maybe now well learn how they turned Haytham to begin with.

 

[Deathlyphil]

I agree with the Assassinating part. Each game in the series has moved further and further from core aspect of the first game.

It might have been the intended focus of the first game, but everyone who actually played it spent most of their time running around rooftops and pushing people off buildings. I think it's good of them to have realised that and tried (despite often failing) to embrace it.

If that's what they believe, then change the name. To paraphrase Yahtzee:

"What is it with you and stabbing people?" - Ubisoft
"What is it with you and NOT stabbing people?" - Yahtzee

If it's the name of the game, then it should be an actual feature of the game. Not something brushed off like they are embarrassed by it.

 

[Buizel91]

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.

Actually it does, AC 2, Brotherhood, and Revelations could of easily just been the story about Ezio, instead of having the Desmond sections, flush out Ezio's story a bit more, why the hell not? AC3 could of just been about Connor, and him getting his revenge. Why can't the games be about an Order of Assassins that lived hundreds of years ago? why do we need an Animus to go back there? Seriously get rid of the Animus and you have a much better game, the games wouldn't skip so much in time and would probably flow a lot better instead of:
"Yey I killed this dude now lets figure out who killed Ezio's family...Ooh now i am Desmond -.- Great now i have to run about a warehouse and press fucking buttons! Ooh look I'm having visions (Because hey...THE ANIMUS) oo i passed out and i am Altair again having sex on a tower. (for no reason what so ever) Finally back to Ezio again...now what was i doing...?" -.-

And to answer your quote to me, the post i was talking about was the one you quoted here...

 

[userwhoquitthesite]

Actually it does, AC 2, Brotherhood, and Revelations could of easily just been the story about Ezio, instead of having the Desmond sections, flush out Ezio's story a bit more, why the hell not?

because Ezio's an unrelenting dickwad?

AC3 could of just been about Connor, and him getting his revenge.

Connor is WORSE than Ezio! NOTHING in screed 3 is worth playing, Desmond's sections included. Connor is a bag of dicks who learns to be an ARROGANT bag of dicks, no one in the game has any motivation that makes sense (except achilles, and we'll get to him), knowledge is gained offscreen with nothing to explain it, and most importantly CONNOR IS THE BAD GUY HERE. Maybe that's not the intent, but everything in the game suggests that Hatham's plans would have been better for everyone! As for achilles, his motivations are understandable, but reveal him as a terrible human being. "Oh, little native boy, you wanna learn to kill people well i guess i better train you as a pretext to keep you around to deal with my lonliness, oh and hey i've decided to ignore your own humanity and pretend you are my dead son, Connor. The real one" FUCK achilles.

Why can't the games be about an Order of Assassins that lived hundreds of years ago?

because there's practically no link between the games, and because most of the games start with no Order due to some past mismanagement?

why do we need an Animus to go back there?

Because they chose to have a framing device, and time machines are retarded.

Seriously get rid of the Animus and you have a much better game, the games wouldn't skip so much in time and would probably flow a lot better instead of:
"Yey I killed this dude now lets figure out who killed Ezio's family...Ooh now i am Desmond -.- Great now i have to run about a warehouse and press fucking buttons! Ooh look I'm having visions (Because hey...THE ANIMUS) oo i passed out and i am Altair again having sex on a tower. (for no reason what so ever) Finally back to Ezio again...now what was i doing...?" -.-

First off, no, getting rid of the animus wouldn't change the gameplay. Nor would it change the time-skipping. Ubisoft isn't writing around desmond, dude. Desmond is their excuse to not HAVE the middle sections. And I have to add, if you lost the plot in the time it takes to do desmond's stuff, you have some severe problems with your attention span that, while likely debilitating, also might explain why you don't see the excruciating flaws in the series. As for Altair having sex on a tower, that's pure plot advancement, buddy. It sets up: Knowledge of where the family trees branch (which allows the writing staff to develop other characters), lets the player know that things are NOT okay with desmond (which is yet another example of the writing going wrong, since they set up a major conflict, then failed to pay it off in any real way), and give the other characters in the game reason to worry about what's going to happen (and maybe even not trust him after he killed lucy. but no, they dropped that plotline too)

And to answer your quote to me, the post i was talking about was the one you quoted here...

Look, I'm not disagreeing with you that Desmond's story was crap. I'm just saying that it wasn't always crap, and linked together the other crap in an increasingly crappy series.
Between the shitty writing, advancing gameplay decay, abandonment of several major premises of the series, and abhorrent business strategy, I no longer have an interest in the series, and will not be purchasing screed4

Now, I have an official from-game reason not to, by the way. "I'm blackbeard, and if you think I'm bad, you should see this Kenway guy, he'd totally kick my ass!"

nopenopenope

 

[Roofstone]

It'll take a lot to get me into Assassins Creed after Revelations and III, both of which were so severely disappointing I lack any will to finish them. I'm going to just make a educated guess and say it'll not be much good, but I suppose I'll keep a half-eye on it just in case it surprises me.

So all in all, "Meh".

This is how I have had it lately. I am gonna buy it, but I will be disappointed. I just buy it because I feel like I have to, I played all the others after all.

But yeah, unless they do something really, really cool. I will probably be disappointed.

 

[Gatx]

It amazes me that the series has gone on this long without acknowledging the real world subplot in any of its trailers. You have to wonder why they even bothered to have it in the first place - the historical Assassin stuff is enough to build a game around.