Poll: Assassin's Creed III : Will there be butthurt ?

[Senor Smoke21]

I don't like how this game seems to be picking a side. The box art shows in the foreground, the assassin fucking up a Redcoat and displayed prominantly behind him is the American flag. Combine that with the trailer and I got a very AMERICA feeling from the thing. Not that I'm some anti-american, that doesn't bother me, it's just the whole taking a side thing. In none of the other games have the assassins really taken a side. They may ally with someone for a bit, but they generally remain neutral, playing the sides off of each other in their quest to end the Templars.
I do like the look of the running through trees though. That shit is the bomb.

 

[Something Amyss]

There was bound to be butthurt no matter what and where they did.

 

[JoesshittyOs]

Honestly I'm more worried about the environments. I always figured AC games being really urban games, with gameplay that excels in cities. But now we'll see small colonial towns and forest. I'd rather had them set it a century later during the Civil War. New York during that era would've been perfect for Assassin's Creed.

Well, like they said, it's taking a new direction.

Boston and other cities like New York they are planning to set it in were very developed at this time, in the vein of the previous games.

The "Frontier" which is what people are worried about will have the same free running elements mixed with bases to assassinate generals and the likes.

The same basic elements are there. If what they've said is true, this game has been in development longer than the last two games, which were apparently made by separate studios as 1 and 2.

And honestly, the last thing Assassin's Creed needs after the previous two games is anything with the word "same" in front of it.

 

[Buzz Killington_v1legacy]

Why is this even a question? Of course there will be butthurt. There's always butthurt with a new release, no matter its quality or provenance.

 

[The Last Nomad]

Will there be butthurt? Of course, is there ever not butthurt upon release of a sequel. Personally I think it might be the best of the series, although a lot different, which will certainly cause butthurt among people who just want more of number 2, 2.5 and 2.75 (or Brotherhood and Revelations as they were actually called).

And I don't see how pissing off Americans would bother Ubisoft. In the AC universe, they've already called bullshit on Christianity, which is a lot bigger percentage of the world than Americans.

 

[FateOrFatality]

and exploring Native Americans is also a good idea

...what? This and the thread title make me very concerned about what ideas you have for AC3, OP.

OT: Some people will be frustrated with every game, because everyone wants different things and one game cannot fulfill all those desires. It is inevitable that this will result in some people enjoying it whilst others hate it.

 

[IKSA]

Yes there will be. I would be very suprised if there wouldn't be US is very patriotic country and if someone insults their beloved country, ancestors etc. They will get up in the arms in matter of seconds.

 

[IckleMissMayhem]

that alone will cause fox news to go into rampage mode. (if they ever had switched off this mode in the first place)

I thought Fox news only had different levels of outrage, ranging from "Rabid over-reaction" to "Here, have a bucket of insta-sunshine"

 

[waj9876]

Some non-Americans of all nationalities are already offended that it's set in America.

I'm just surprised there aren't already a ton of people here at the escapist already ranting and frothing at the mouth about this. If you do what I did before joining, that is lurking a whole bunch to see what the community is like, you'll find a lot of people whose only outlook on the United States is "America is the scum of the earth, and we're going to ignore all our nation's problems in favor of saying we're perfect and hold a fictitious moral high ground over all you American pigs. We hate you for things you do that don't affect us." Been toned down lately, but it's still around.

 

[Cowabungaa]

Yeah, but the problem with that setting is that it ceases to be a sandbox 3P actioner and becomes more of a shooter-sneaker...

Sneaker yes, most definitely, that's why I want that setting, I'd like AC to become a bit more sneaky. Shooter, I don't see why. Many people were too poor for guns, bladed weapons were everywhere and the cramped, tight city blocks (especially the poorer areas) make for ideal ambush and stealth-kill locations. Just watch Gangs of New York, that's why I want my American AC set right there.

Well, like they said, it's taking a new direction.

Boston and other cities like New York they are planning to set it in were very developed at this time, in the vein of the previous games.

The "Frontier" which is what people are worried about will have the same free running elements mixed with bases to assassinate generals and the likes.

The same basic elements are there. If what they've said is true, this game has been in development longer than the last two games, which were apparently made by separate studios as 1 and 2.

And honestly, the last thing Assassin's Creed needs after the previous two games is anything with the word "same" in front of it.

Really? I always thought they were quite small, or at least not nearly as sprawling as Rome, Florence and Jerusalem.

But yes, there is a lot of "same" in your post, and that's what I fear too. Even if those cities were more developed than I thought, I doubt they'd play that differently. Hence why I'd set it a century later, cities like New York were reaching a bursting point, I believe it could provide fresh gameplay, something the AC series really needs.

 

[BlackStar42]

Oh yes, most definitely. For me, as long as they don't take a leaf out of Mel Gibson's book (seriously, fuck Mel Gibson) I'll be happy.

 

[JohnDoey]

Alright first off no one gives a crap about Fox News. If at any point in time they did I can only hope the Mass Effect trouble a few years ago convinced them Fox is full of idiots. Anyway, of course it will get butthurt. Everything gets butthurt. Hell it will get butthurt up until release day, then continue getting more even if it's the most perfect thing ever (which I'm of course not saying it will be, just making a point). That's what the cool kids do nowadays.

I'm looking forward to it personally, and actually that's because of the new environment type. I heard the cities are going to be New York and Boston so there will still be some building climbing, but I'm really looking forward a good use of environment, like tree climbing, swinging along trees like a monkey (come on you want to), rock climbing, ect.

Whether or not they do "GO AMERICA!" or not I have no idea, but I'm going to offer another theory to the pot of ideas; they make it seem like America would have lost without the assassin (Connor I think?). I doubt (read: hope) that they won't do Americans good vs Evil Brits, because they have done better than that up to this point.

P.S. It wouldn't piss off Americans, that's getting pretty old. Almost everyone I know doesn't say "FUCK YEAH we won the Revolution all by ourselves against the evil empire!" Fox News is NOT representative of Americans. We really need to find something new because the American "FUCK YEAH!" stereotype is getting really old.

Thank you so much for this post, yes it may surprise you but most of us Americans aren't brain dead and we don't spend the majority of the day singing about how awesome the country is and how would a game set during the revolution offend anyone it was 200 years ago.

 

[JohnDoey]

=Snip=

The butthurt will inevitably occur, but my own feeling is that it's going to stem from the americans being portrayed as shiny-teethed superheroic messiahs who automatically gain the moral high ground in every conflict, with the british and everyone else (including, i suspect, the native americans) being portrayed as vicious baby eating savages. They are going to have to be so careful to avoid pissing an awful lot of people off with this setting....

it's weird, really. they got away with the whole religious thing in the first game relatively easily, but pissing about with nationalism could very well blow up in their faces.

The difference really is that the Crusaders were undeniably evil bastards and are completely removed from modern day christians, but the revolution is a LOT more complicated than that. They are going to have to be careful. Make the British evil, piss off British gamers, make Americans any less than those superheroes that people are often taught that the founding fathers were and you will probably piss off a lot of American gamers.

One of the key facts that people aren't bringing in to consideration is that the main character Connor, is half American, half British. As a general rule of thumb, the Assassins in the games tend to sit in the middle of these conflicts. Take the original game. Altair had a Christian mother and a Muslim father (or vice versa, I can never remember) and he didn't take a side in the Crusades.

The AC games are usually pretty well researched. I mean they made Richard the Lionheart French, which I don't think I've seen in any other film or game. It's that level of attention to detail that gives me hope for AC3 being well balanced.

But to answer the OP question, yes, of course people will be annoyed. That's what people do.

Conner's half Native American, half British.

 

[LavaLampBamboo]

=Snip=

The butthurt will inevitably occur, but my own feeling is that it's going to stem from the americans being portrayed as shiny-teethed superheroic messiahs who automatically gain the moral high ground in every conflict, with the british and everyone else (including, i suspect, the native americans) being portrayed as vicious baby eating savages. They are going to have to be so careful to avoid pissing an awful lot of people off with this setting....

it's weird, really. they got away with the whole religious thing in the first game relatively easily, but pissing about with nationalism could very well blow up in their faces.

The difference really is that the Crusaders were undeniably evil bastards and are completely removed from modern day christians, but the revolution is a LOT more complicated than that. They are going to have to be careful. Make the British evil, piss off British gamers, make Americans any less than those superheroes that people are often taught that the founding fathers were and you will probably piss off a lot of American gamers.

One of the key facts that people aren't bringing in to consideration is that the main character Connor, is half American, half British. As a general rule of thumb, the Assassins in the games tend to sit in the middle of these conflicts. Take the original game. Altair had a Christian mother and a Muslim father (or vice versa, I can never remember) and he didn't take a side in the Crusades.

The AC games are usually pretty well researched. I mean they made Richard the Lionheart French, which I don't think I've seen in any other film or game. It's that level of attention to detail that gives me hope for AC3 being well balanced.

But to answer the OP question, yes, of course people will be annoyed. That's what people do.

Conner's half Native American, half British.

Totally what I meant, must have forgot the Native part, which is quite a big distinction =) Thanks for pointing it out =)

 

[Woodsey]

The press release and the first trailer has left me... well, dubious.

Assassin's Creed had Templars spread between the two factions, and AC2's came from all over the place. They've most certainly not shown anything that seems to be that impartial so far.

But, to be fair, they haven't shown or said much yet.

 

[Kriptonite]

So my question is : If George Washington and other historical figures important to American history are portrayed as anything else then paragons of human virtue do you think Americans will throw a tantrum media wise, will FOX News be bashing this game like it's the Anti-Christ?

You're most likely right here. People tend to idealize people like George Washington and such to the point where reality will disappoint them or, more likely, this being America after all (where I'm writing from anyway), anger them.
Don't worry about FOX 'News'. No one with a functional brain pays attention to them, for realsies anyway.

 

[Charli]

Fox news have a roulette, I think it just lands on X video game, and all the X Y and Z's are just replaced with the names of popular +15 rated games at the time.

It might be downplayed enough to scoot under the radar. Orr, some stupid kid with a switch blade will loose his shit and happened to play the game at one point in his life.
INSTANT HEADLINE GENERATOR HO.


But yeah, seriously, sometimes I think it's potluck... I'm still tapping my fingers wating for Fox to pounce on Mass Effect 3. I think if the gaming community actually expects it and waves the content at them like a dog treat they sit on their little stool like a child and proclaim, "well we just don't want to now." It's not fun for them if we expect it.

They'll find digs at gaming in some creatively obscure way soon enough and it might or might not be Assassins Creed 3.

 

[CD-R]

Damn we're going to have to remember those Subject 27 snippets to get any idea of what might happen. The only thing I remember is Tesla invented the Internet. This game is probably going to mark the change in the Templars tactics from trying to use religion to control the world to using capitalism.