Actually the release date is in October.DC_Josh said:
I like the idea and the new setting, but I kinda wish they's try to make the new guy look a bit more unique. Right now he looks almost exactly like Ezio.
Image of Assassins Creed III's main character leaked
- Thread starter superdelux
- Start date
I like the idea and the new setting, but I kinda wish they's try to make the new guy look a bit more unique. Right now he looks almost exactly like Ezio.
I'm a little surprised people are shocked about the game being set in the American Revolution. Looking at the AC world the games would have to tackle this era in history. First, Desmond's family line has to cross the pond at some point since that is where Desmond is from (references to being from the Dakotas in AC1 and Revelations). That his ancestor appears to be Native American is a little surprising to me but I'm interested to see if he is not a full-blooded Native American (and I'm not leaving out the possibility he could be so far down a line of desendants from whoever crossed the ocean after Ezio's time) that the character is torn between two worlds that want nothing to do with him. That very idea could be what gets this individual involved with the Assassin's if he isn't born into it like Altair and Ezio. The second reason I can think of as to why the games had to show this time period is that it is going to establish the Templar's rooting in American government and keep control of it after becoming Abstergo, this might even be the game that shows us how the Templar's hid themselves in normal society after knights in armor weren't accepted anymore. My guess is that it will show the Freemasons as the body of the Templars (I shake my head when thinking this, it's a group that gets too much of a bad rap for no good reason) since so many Founding Fatherrs were Maasons. Third, and this goes towards the people who would like to see the games go to the French Revolution, Russian Revolution or one of the World Wars, those games can still happen since they are further in the big book of history. Though I will admit the French Revolution is highly unlikely at this point since they occur so close together, but maybe this game will have sequels like AC2 that could go to France and handle things there. I do agree that one of these games should have a female protagonist, I was hoping for tone this time around myself because I thought it would be really cool, not just for the diversity aspect, but for the man in a woman's body aspect we would get from Desmond seeing the world through a female ancestor.
hate to break it to you but we are on assassin's creed 4 already, waiting on 5. (creed 1,2,brotherhood,revelations)so yeah, it's 99.9% fake. (that and ubisoft said the next one is all about desmond and "wrapping up" the story.)
18th century. You had Boston, New York, Philadelphia, maybe New Haven? Granted, they're not on the same scale as Rome or Constantinople(or weren't at that time), but you do get more of them to even it out a bit.Gabanuka said:
I'll admit, I'm disappointed by this setting. The American Revolution is probably one of the periods in history I have the least interest in, and I'm going to find it hard to work up enthusiasm for this one. I had hoped for Feudal Japan or perhaps Victorian England (which would have made for a great gothic/steampunk kind of feel). That, and I've never really been a big fan of American architecture, and let's face it, you spend enough time crawling up the stuff for that to be an important factor in an AC game.
That said, I'm not yet convinced that this is going to be a 100% patriotic appeal to Americans. I'm thinking that the series has more integrity than that. I won't be surprised if the new protagonist has targets on both sides of the conflict.
That said, I'm not yet convinced that this is going to be a 100% patriotic appeal to Americans. I'm thinking that the series has more integrity than that. I won't be surprised if the new protagonist has targets on both sides of the conflict.
It's been 100% confirmed [http://ie.xbox360.ign.com/articles/121/1219789p1.html]ranger12116 said:
Right, 18th, sorry.BlackStar42 said:
I guess it depends on if they keep it to the one city style of Brotherhood and Revelations or go back to 2 or 3 from the first two games.
Also why is an Assassin whose clearly Native American fighting against the English? Again: not great on American history but weren't they mainly focused in the west/center of the country miles away from the Colonies?
Bummer, I was hoping it would be set in the victorian england, just so we could have fake british accents like the fake italian accents in ACII.
I'm afraid I don't know about that, but it would be really good if it wasn't just "Boo! Brits bad!" What I'd really like to see is him doing some work against both sides, maybe play one off against the other. We might even get the involvement of another European faction like France. I mean, if he is Native American, he's got no real reason to care about either side much.Gabanuka said:
Well, considering the guy's going to be a native American, the perspective is probably going to be more along the lines of watching 2 different sides tear the country to pieces with neither realising that it wasn't even their country to fuck up in the first place, not exactly what I'd call "AMERICA YEAH!" It's looks like the same sort of deal as the first game, ie. neutral on the main conflict and focusing on getting rid of the morally corrupt members of both sides.The Madman said:
OT: I'm glad that we're leaving the Renaissance now, as much as I loved it at the time. I just hope they've still got some of the sparkle when it comes to characterisation of this new guy and that he can compare to Ezio and friends. I also hope that they'll be scaling back on the weaponry a bit (although it doesn't seem to look like it). Yes, having a lot of options is nice, but in Revelations Ezio was so armed to the teeth it just stopped being believable, and many of the weapons seemed to have very little reason to be there. The hidden gun, for example, was louder, shorter range, held less ammo and took longer to reload than the crossbow, so why the hell would you ever use the hidden gun?
That could easily be the flag of the Union and be set in the American Civil war.superdelux said:
It appears that the next game in the series will take place during the American revolution and will star a Native American ancestor this time around.
However, while I would greatly prefer the latter I doubt it will be the case.
The box art was released a bit ago apparently...
Personally, I'm looking forward to this. I'm eager to see if this mean some changes in gameplay like using forest or swamplands, as well as the figures that are going to pop up.
Personally, I'm looking forward to this. I'm eager to see if this mean some changes in gameplay like using forest or swamplands, as well as the figures that are going to pop up.
Alright, so, the setting seems like it would be alright.
I mean, the proliferation of guns could really change some aspects of the gameplay.
You could get good climbing spots, if they select the right area.
The aesthetics will probably clash a bit.
Given that the templars somehow had rifles in the 15th century, I'm left wondering if they'll still have technically anachronistic weapons in this game as well.
I'm not going to touch the plot controversy with a ten foot pole though.
I mean, the proliferation of guns could really change some aspects of the gameplay.
You could get good climbing spots, if they select the right area.
The aesthetics will probably clash a bit.
Given that the templars somehow had rifles in the 15th century, I'm left wondering if they'll still have technically anachronistic weapons in this game as well.
I'm not going to touch the plot controversy with a ten foot pole though.
