Assassin's Creed

Connor will get to fight the wildlife and trade the resulting pelts. Ubisoft has said that the "quality" of your kill will affect how much stuff you get from it — that is, finishing it off with a single Assassination or Execution will get the best results, while beating it slowly to death with your fists or something will give you the least.

Again, I must point out that this is subjective. I found it entirely believable and reasonable on Desmond's part; he's trapped in an unfamiliar and bizarre situation with a threat of death looming over him. Of course he'll fixate on an attractive woman who sympathizes with him. What was weird was that Lucy seemed to be reciprocating. That's the part that didn't make sense, but became explained in "Lost Archive".

edited 8th Apr '12 5:39:35 AM by Fighteer

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"

what does it being reasonable and believable have to do with it not being annoying exactly?

being one does not exclude the romance from being the other.

Nothing really, but it doesn't change the fact that Fighteer's point still stands. It's all subjective.

Annoying is one of those things that's impossible to quantify. Be specific. Is it annoying because it's awkward (agreed and justified)? No romantic chemistry (maybe, see previous)? Shoved into the story for no apparent reason (false)? Because girls have cooties (grow up)? Because you're rooting for Desmond/Shaun or Desmond/Rebecca (I have nothing to say here)?

It annoys me that people spend so much time getting annoyed at relationships in games.

edited 8th Apr '12 6:35:34 AM by Fighteer

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"

I don't think that's going to change anytime soon.

Still Juno put a stop to it so nobody can really complain can they? Desmond is now free to find Eve.

Eve... hang on, what did I miss here? I know Juno made some cryptic references at the end of Brotherhood, but talk of "finding Eve" makes me think all kinds of crazy thoughts about what's going to happen on December 21, 2012. Like maybe the point isn't to save the world from the Second Apocalypse but to survive it...

edited 8th Apr '12 7:13:30 AM by Fighteer

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"

Desmond/Shaun is best ship

"Never let the truth get in the way of a good story." Twitter

I have a picture about that. It's humorus, but now I can't find it online to link to.

So have a picture of Shaun's first book.◊ :3

Very big Daydream Believer. "That's not knowledge, that's a crapshoot!" -Al Murray "Welcome to QI" -Stephen Fry

Shaun is the best.

People ship anything other than Shaun/Rebecca?

I didn't mind Lucy in the first two games. In the third she became weird (disappears for the most of the game) and the banter her and Desmond have is dreadful.

Juno/Sixteen talk about finding a woman then "the Sun, your son".

So, at a guess, I'd say Ubi has plans for a looooong series of games. First we'll have the trilogy set around this woman Desmond has to find and her adventures through the Animus (I'm hoping for her to be of Asian descent so we'll get Shao Jun, plus it'd give us another mixed-descent protagonist like Desmond), then we'll follow their son in the real world, probably taking down the Templars for good.

edited 8th Apr '12 7:09:19 PM by Medicus

It's not over. Not yet.

I doubt it, since III is meant to be the end of Desmond's story. Presumably he'll find this woman (if she's mentioned at all) and get into the New York Vault to save humanity from the solar flares.

"Steel wins battles. Gold wins wars."

They may continue to use Desmond even after Assassins Creed 3, who knows. We'll just have to wait and see.

edited 9th Apr '12 6:09:12 AM by HellmanSabian

AFAIK this isn't the conclusion of Desmond's story, just the 2012 plot.

The Assassin's Creed series will continue beyond III without a doubt, but whether it's Desmond or not is still up for debate.

It's not over. Not yet.

Is the 2012 plot supposed to conclude both the Sun subplot and the Templar Mass Mind Control subplot? Or just the former?

edited 9th Apr '12 8:23:37 AM by JotunofBoredom

Umbran Climax◊

Might be both...although we don't know when will the flare happen the satellite will launch on 2012 so...

Give me cute or give me...something?

As far I can remember, just The End of the World as We Know It one. That kinda takes priority right? The templar mind control one will probably be resolved in future games. Just theories right now, we'll have to wait and see.

edited 9th Apr '12 1:04:42 PM by HellmanSabian

As far as the storyline goes, both the Templars' mind control satellite launch and the solar flare will happen on December 21, 2012. How the one affects the other, I don't know — if whatever Desmond and company do to stop the flare doesn't actually prevent it from happening, but merely shields the planet somehow, it's entirely possible that the satellite will be destroyed anyway.

Or it's a Pyrrhic Victory and they emerge from the Grand Temple to witness a planet that's been saved from destruction but is now under the control of the Templars. Ubisoft is notorious for ending each game on a cliffhanger.

edited 9th Apr '12 1:08:00 PM by Fighteer

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"

Oh by the way Fighteer regarding the discussion of Eve earlier in the thread, I got it from "The Truth" and what Subject 16 says in Brotherhood. I can't remember what Juno says very well.

Ah, right. I did not go to an extreme effort to memorize all of that information, as I was more concerned with moving on to the next game(s). I'll have to go back and revisit it at some point.

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"

Or a mysterious robot will show up out of nowhere and offer you three choices, all of which result in Earth's destruction.

I dearly, dearly hope not.

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"

Oooh. That's good, Fighteer. I'm gonna use that as my personal for the ending III.

Mass Effect's ending could only have been improved if the Catalyst turned to the screen and starting talking to the player.

It's not over. Not yet.

I find it interesting to note how Assassin's Creed games and their endings seems to be the good form of mind screw for the audience while Mass Effect 3 just wasn't.

Just an observation on them both.

I think in the case of Assassin's Creed, what made the Mind Screwy ending was partially fourth-wall breaking, like you were in on the joke.

In Assassin's Creed II, Minerva looks directly at the camera and addresses Desmond. Ezio has no idea what's going on. "Who are you talking to? There's no one there!" But there is — us, the players.

And in Brotherhood, Juno forces Desmond to kill Lucy. But it's not a cutscene, it's interactive. We're forced to kill Lucy.

Mass Effect 3 doesn't have that. Or maybe it does — three decisions that only effect the most superficial change in the story.

edited 11th Apr '12 3:35:39 AM by Medicus

It's not over. Not yet.

I'd say it's that and the fact that after the rather disappointing but still mind screwy ending to the first game players were just used to being thrown off at the end of each AC.

I thought you were talking about the revelations about the Piece of Eden, but then I remembered the blood on the floor...

It's not over. Not yet.