Adam Jensen said:
Maybe you should look past your blind hatred for a fictional character. You're so obsessed, you even created a senseless theory trying to justify that hatred. And it doesn't make any sense. You don't experience someone's subjective interpretation of memories, because that's not a memory. You experience their memories. That's it. You even get points for perfect sync. It's really that simple. You're basically creating a theory in order to justify another theory to feel better about yourself. Why do you feel the need to do that unless you're a fanboy?
And for the record, Borgias actually were were pretty evil. And a lot of their evil deeds have been documented. That's why they were perfect for the role of the Templars. They're responsible for the portrayal of Jesus as a white dude. It's actually Cesare's face that they used. So they did what the Templars want to do. They tried to control people and what they believe in.
And FYI, Connor and Haytham don't have character arcs. Once again, you don't know the meaning of the terminology. Connor is the same guy from start to finish. He's no different as adult than he was as a kid. He doesn't evolve at all. Not even after he meets Achilles and learns about Assassins and Templars. Which is exactly where his character ark was supposed to jump forward. But nope. Another example of bad writing. Probably caused by all the mess with gazillion studios working on the game. Something had to go wrong. More than one thing did, apparently.
Haytham can be forgiven because he's introduced to us as a 40-something year old man. He's already a fully developed character. And he's not the main character. So he doesn't have an ark and doesn't need one. As a villain with a specific purpose, it would be weird if he had one.
Edward has a character arc. A pretty typical one, but it's a good one that works well. It's actually my favorite because they managed to accomplish it in one game.
Your post is pretty inaccurate because you have not payed attention to AC III. Connor had an actual character arc and so did Haytham but his was a little more vague than Connor's but as I was saying, Connor goes through a full character arc. He starts with a strong sense of right and wrong, which at first he applies only to his people but eventually (due to Assassin influence) extends to everybody, and by the end discovers that the world doesn't work that way. Some might say that his soliloquy is needed, but I've always felt Connor's emotions in the epilogue tomahawk sequence are enough. But it's a finished character arc. He started one person, went through an ordeal, and emerged another person.
Speaking of Ordeals. AC really likes to use the Hero's Journey paradigm (well, Vogler's version, which is essentially a bit more generalized Campbell's but all the important elements still remain the same), and Connor's Hero's Journey is unique in a sense that, a) as an archetype, Connor is the only Hero of the AC series so far (Altair, Ezio and Edward are all anti-heroes, at least at the beginning of their journeys), and b) it's a subversion of the Hero's journey as it applies to the real world. In short, the Hero's Journey sets out a person on an adventure, makes him go through things to emerge a different person at the end of that Journey, and it's a story paradigm that can frequently be seen almost everywhere, as it runs back to the myths that have inspired people generations before us.
Let's see how Connor's story applies to the Hero's Journey. Now, I'll be short here for the sake of, well, not writing too much, so some details may be omitted but it doesn't mean that they don't matter.
1. Ordinary World - Connor living in his village.
2. Call to Adventure - Juno speaks to Connor and tells to seek the Assassins.
3. Refusal of the Call - usually the heroes are a bit reluctant to accept the call, not Connor though, so this step is absent from his journey.
4. Meeting the Mentor - Connor meets Achilles who's going to help him throughout the Journey.
5. Crossing the First Threshold - the step where the Hero shows commitment to the Journey and fully leaves the Ordinary World. In AC3, this is a bit of a long-lasting step rather than a single event, beginning with Boston Massacre (Connor's first visit into the Special World), which also acts as the Threshold Guardian I suppose (Connor's need of training is a Threshold Guardian of its own I think) and is set in stone with Connor receiving the robe and being officially inducted in the Order. He has left his Ordinary World. Now an Assassin.
6. Tests, Allies, Enemies - This is the biggest step of the Hero's Journey, which is in essence most of the adventures that lead up the character to the main goal. In Connor's case, this is where the subversion starts as his journey is going to get much more tragic, he is betrayed, forced to kill his friend, and all that crappy stuff.
7. Approach to the Inner Cave - basically, Inner Cave is the place where the character has to stop ignoring an inner conflict and face it head on, to reflect on their journey and find the courage to continue. In this case, it's Fort George - where Connor has to face his Templar father.
8. The Ordeal - confronting death or darkest fear in order to survive and for the world of the character to continue to exist. Fight with Haytham, essentially.
Now, usually, here comes the Reward/Seizing the Sword gained by the Ordeal, but since the Reward is the key that Haytham gives to Charles, the steps are changed up a bit. But, hey, this is a paradigm, not a strict rule set that has to be followed.
9. The Road Back - to bring the reward from the Special World back to the Ordinary World, Connor, now changed, sets up to kill Charles Lee and end his Journey.
10. The Ressurection - the point where the character shows his new colors, and determination, in myths it's literally be death and resurrection, but here it's by Charles shooting Connor but Connor being determined to finish his goal for the greater cause. And in the case of AC3, this is also where...
11. The Reward. Already explained. The key.
12. Return with the Elixir. The final part of the character's journey where they, already transformed, return home with the treasure. Only in Connor's case it's kind of tragic, as the treasure he found hasn't helped to achieve his desires, but he still went through a full Journey.
and lol, I don't understand why it's so unbelievable that I don't think Ezio is the best thing ever since sliced bread. I like Ezio, he's cool--you're in so much disbelief that you're trying so hard to implicate me with obbsession and being a fanboy, it's so hilarious.
Connor was a child. a normal child. He lived his life as he should--playing, learning and growing. You feel the Innocence which is something that was absent from Ezio, because you`re quickly thrown in with the line "Your sister seemed quite satisfied with the handling I gave her earlier". I never expected another Ezio and I`m glad that I was not disappointed. Connor`s Innocence is quickly stolen by the ensuing events. He grows into a humble, powerful young man that seemingly has no weaknesses but his Naivete.
In a way, Connor is still a child. His reactions to some of the actions of others` make any one laugh, but he simply finds it disgusting--moments such as his arguing for going to the authorities and claiming his innocence. His solutions to very complicated matters is pure. "i`ll tell them I`m Innocent". His view of the world made him unable to comprehend the racial prejudice that Achilles suffered from but in time, he grows and learns the world's ugly truths.
His Gestures when Talking to people is what drew me to like him. Call me dumb or "scratching at the bottom of a barrel" but it's subtleties like these that are missing from video games these days in my opinion--standing and holding his 2 hands together when talking to Homesteaders politely, labeling them as his friends and not his townsfolk, BUT THEN he just barges into a certain character`s house, shoving that certain character`s arm away, not once, but thrice--it was Hilarious. The contrast was brilliant. He is somewhat like his father, in a way that those he deemed friends would get the best out of him, but those he deemed unimportant or viewed them in a somewhat negative light would be shrugged off. Connor's unfriendliness towards Patriots like Revere is understandable because he doesn't trust them and he's wary of them since they did drag him around on more than one occasion not to mention his native american culture, that disallows strangers from touching him--that point, though is used in Connor's interaction with Haytham...The only people Connor allows to touch him in the story are Achilles and Kanentokon, other than that...nope but a subtle little relationship progression nudge between him and Haytham in NY when Connor steals the mercenary outfit to enter the brewery was awesome--Connor let Haytham touch him without a look of disdain or discomfort.
The thing is that Connor possesses noble qualities, but is not a noble. He`s just so humble and respectful that you cannot help but like him and enjoy his conversations. He has respect to every man and believes that every man is equal and that everyone is entitled respect.
With Connor, I actually tried hard NOT to kill people and coincidentally, it was revealed that he dislikes excessive or unnecessary killing (given some of the optional sync objectives that command limiting deaths and his own regret at killing Johnson). He values rights Immensely that so many moments of anger might seem light to us, but I think he was entitled to every bit of rage he showed at the real world he was thrust into.
The only Emotional face I saw with Ezio, was when Cristina died--Ezio never really shows sorrow too much in AC II but with Connor, I saw that so many times. It connected emotionally with me and every time I just saw that face and those sorrowful eyes, I actually felt it. I hear talk about him being unemotional but I just can't help but feel that people simply played a different game than I did...he showed a lot of emotion on his face and in his voice. When he was angry, it showed--when he was annoyed, it showed--when he was being a calm and collected badass, it showed--when he was being concerned, it showed--when he was being sarcastic, it showed--when he was being happy and/or joyful, it showed--when he was in awe, it showed so really, the complaint about him being unemotional is just non-existent to me.
Connor's sense of humor was dry like his parents'. He'd use witty one liners and sarcastic remarks to sometimes make a point like when he talks to Adams and he tells Connor about people taking a stand against injustice, Connor replies with "says the man who owns a...slave".
Connor's progression as a character centered around his romanticized view of the Assassin order and his mission. He started out believing that white-men like Lee are encroaching on his land, then Achilles tells him that these white-men are called Templars and that they seek to control everyone--Connor then makes it his mission to stop the Templars by any means necessary and with that, he'd have saved the world and granted freedom and peace for all of humanity but he soon realizes that life is not so black and white and that he alone cannot solve all of the world's problems--that the Assassin-Templar war WILL go on FAR after his death.
His initial quest was to protect his people, only his people but then he saw that the colonists were also being oppressed and terrorized so as an Assassin, he includes the colonists in his mission of freedom and peace for all and thus aids the Patriots in their bid for freedom.
Some people say that Connor's decisions and choices throughout the story made him out to be dumb and unintelligent but I don't see that--People argue that everything Haytham said was true, that Johnson wanted to keep the land safe, that Pitcairn wanted to encourage diplomacy but really, if you look at it...what were the Templars actually doing? When the natives refused to sell their lands, Johnson raised his muskets--when Pitcairn wanted to reach Sam Adams, he created a massacre in Lexington and Concord. Connor's decisions were not ideal but the Templars are not saints--their methods are cruel and brutal and ensure only a soulless haven. Connor's choices ending up driving his people west but if you think about it, it was a FAR better fate than what befell other Mohawk tribes and Iroquois nations..they're away but they're alive and that's what Connor ensured..and he accepted the fact that it's only inevitable for his people to never be safe.
He grows and learns from experiences. He at first assists the Patriots in Lexington and Concord instead of focusing on his true target but then in Bunker Hill, he's focused on Pitcairn and lets nothing get in his way.
In a lot of ways, Connor personifies the Assassins Creed--The Creed's center lies in hope in humanity, that they'll one day overcome their differences and find peace through free will. Even though the Patriots betrayed him, he still maintained hope that they'll forge something new that was better than what came before--even though his people left, he still fought the Templars till the last one, why? because no one else will and during Haytham's funeral, Charles' makes a speech afterwards where he describes the Assassins as a vermin that strikes from the shadows--that they're a disease that takes life without mercy and that they're demons who'd go so far as to murder their own fathers--Connor did not putting up a fight. That was a gesture from Connor saying "here I am, you old liar...here I am, right in front of you..no sneaking and no stabbing from the shadows" He instantly proved Charles wrong and salvaged his pride in his allegiance to the Assassins.
Some people might look at those things as Connor being "dumb" but I look at it as determination and fieriness. He was not content with silencing Charles Lee and proving him right but he wanted to send a message and in the end, he managed to kill Lee as well.
His entire mission was selfless--never did he fight for a goal that was for himself, he was even prepared to let go of his revenge against Charles Lee for a chance at unity with the Templars and when it was shown that GW was the one who murdered his mother, he was put in an impossible situation--murder Washington and risk Charles Lee taking the helm of commander in chief thus negating all the work he was doing? or spare GW for the greater good and to preserve his work? I will admit that the game did not do a good job of showing this struggle but I think that's how the situation was to be honest.
In the end, in terms of Connor, you find yourself killing your best friend in the same site you played hide and seek in and it proves for nothing. He is Imperfect, he made mistakes, he has flaws, he does not Joke, he is a jerk to some, but as soft as a teddy bear to others. he rages and sorrows. He made me ask questions, HE asked questions. and THAT is what makes this character such an awesome vessel to play as.
I really adored the story of AC III because of its complex layers, subtlety and recurring themes with Connor's character being the fine topping, I will admit it has faults with missed opportunities and the gump factor but all in all, I think it was an emotional tale of loss, tragedy and then silent, bitter victory.
Soxafloppin said:
Its been a while from I've played an AC game, AC3 was my last so I may be wrong. BUT towards the end of ACII isn't there like a 10 year time skip? Pretty sure thats pretty ample time for Ezio to Mature.
Also Ezio is one of my favourite gaming characters from last gen. Its over the course of three games and short film we see him literally be born, grow up as young man, to middle age, to being an old fart, and we see his last days and finally his death.
R.I.P Ezio Auditore da Firenze.
Except he didnt really mature nor change from 1488 till 1499. He's the same guy--he's still being babysat by his friends, he was still not beyond revenge (i thought i was beyond this but i'm not) and he's not even a proper dedicated Assassin. He was the same guy from beginning to end.
RJ 17 said:
The answer is really quite simple...it's a little thing called maturity. He starts out as a carefree aristocrat who knows nothing of templars or assassins...which is why he's babysat by the rest of the assassins. He's the newbie, the fresh blood, the pup. All he wants is revenge for his family's murder and the Assassins are teaching him the skills needed to do that. Fast-forward to Brotherhood and now he's older and wiser. No longer the boyish rogue of his youth, he's become a Master Assassin. He has learned from his experiences and is now much more worldly.
Sooooo, yeah...in ACII he was a young whelp, in ACB he's much more of an adult because, you know...he kinda got older.
I look back at my time with AC II's story....confusedly, to say the least. I wonder aloud, what happened? what the hell happened with Ezio and his story? it starts well enough untillllll.....sequence 6...barely--nice setup, cool historical conspiracies but then I realize that from the antagonists to the motivation of the hero, there really isn't much....there. The antagonists are a bunch of empty vessels at best and cartoonish, mustache twirling villains at worst. they had no redeeming value--They were cruel, power hungry, dishonorable, corrupt and brutal and that completely removed the grey area in the conflict that made AC I's narrative so great and engaging. AC I made us question our side and our motives because it showed us the other side (templars) talk about their motivations and goals..in AC II, that whole layer was gone..completely gone.
About Ezio, our revenge is finished with the death of Uberto, which is all well and good-- Ezio continues to join the fight because the Pazzi were his enemies and they had a personal hand in his father's death; cool but then earlier he and Mario discuss Giovanni's work and Ezio "takes it up" with no reason or explanation as to why he's suddenly so willing to take responsibility when 5 minutes ago he was going to escape Italy with the remainder of his family.
Going back to Ezio's unexplained sudden "maturity", Ezio really has no reason to fight the Templars in Venice...or Templars at all, for that matter since he makes it pretty clear that he's only after revenge by pursuing Rodrigo. The quest is thus minimized to a list of names on a sheet of paper that Ezio has to eliminate....uhhh why? because his uncle told him so although AGAIN, it was shown that Ezio never really cared for the dribble that his uncle talked about in the office about the Codex pages and Giovanni's work. We are then left with a story of a repoman....except instead of taking your stuff, he stabs you in the face. It's literally nothing more, Ezio said it himself to Salviati who questions why he wants to kill him--Ezio says "Sorry, friend...you are on my list...that seals your fate" That's all there is to it.
Ezio's motivations are also another point of frustration. He joins the Assassins and becomes fully dedicated to eradicating Templar tyranny--which FINALLY brings his actions in sync with his motivations after 5 sequences of aimlessness--No more revenge "Revenge would have consumed me but i'm fine now" GREAT, man...great.
Do you remember Altair's conversation with Richard in Arsuf after killing Robert? when Richard asks why Altair came this far to kill one man? Altair's entire motivations, progression and goals were summarized in that bit. Richard erroneously thinks Altair was here for revenge--and he would have been correct if it was in the beginning of the game--but Altair corrects him and tells him that it was rather justice, than revenge. BOOM, full circle.
Now, with Ezio...he shifts and jumps in the last 5 minutes of the game...we're under the impression that Ezio is only pursuing Rodrigo because he's a dangerous Templar with access to the vault which houses a powerful weapon and the staff of Eden in his hands...no more revenge because he's totally over it, right? No..."I thought i was beyond this but i'm not" is what Ezio says when he reaches Rodrigo. oh....okay then, so...you're still kinda finding your place in the dedication to the Creed, yeah? okay, mate...kill him, one less Templar for the Creed but then..."killing you wont bring my family back, i'm done"--WHAT? so you're not over revenge but wait you're over it and you're a dedicated assassin but wait, you're not because you're...over revenge? how does this make any sense? He's as dumb and carefree as ever, heck even in ACB when he reaches the villa--he considers his battles over and goes to relax...he let the leader of the Templars live and he's acting like all the trouble is gone.
Why was Bartolomeo reduced from an intelligent military tactician to an ogre headed buffoon? How did this happen? when did it happen? He was the one making plans in AC II for Ezio to infiltrate the Arsenal in Venice but now he's an idiot...a complete idiot--He was the cliche Hollywood movie big dumb caveman and it was infuriating because AC is better than Hollywood.
EVERYBODY is toned down so that they could be out-shined by Ezio...La Volpe's cunning, Machiavelli's intelligence, Bartolomeo's genius and Cesare's leadership...all given to Ezio while the others were just put in the background to play catch up. The cast of characters in ACB was LITERALLY there to make Ezio look good, nothing more. Characters are supposed to have qualities that the reader/player/watcher likes..casts should be colorful with lots of these special qualities for their characters, not strip them of all of it and give it to the protagonist, it made any interaction or chemistry with said characters bland, predictable and uninspiring.
This brings me to the cast of villains...they're nothing but mustache twirling vermins...what happened to the ambiguity? to the grey area of AC I? the part where we question our allegiance and actions? none of it was there...the TV show, the Borgias was a lot more ambiguous than AC. it had an amazing depiction of the Borgia family. they were evil, true but the show showed their sympathetic side...AC had that in AC I and lost it in AC II...sympathy with the antagonist but nope--ACB's villains were cartoonish clowns that appeal to 8 year olds.
I just knew this would happen--please, guys..look beyond your fanboyism and be rational and don't try to delude yourselves that there's some sort of "obsession" from me--i'm just a normal guy presenting a theory I thought of.