What if Assasins Creed wasn't Assasins Creed but totally was Assasins Creed...

I remember overdosing on the first Assasins Creed game many years ago. I am completely imune to its smoke and mirrors.I know I don't want anything to do with it that's for sure, but watching the recent trailer for Syndicate made me think why I'm overlooking this entire series.

It's because it's called Assasins Creed and I've already formed my opinion on that brand but what if it wasn't called Assasins Creed?

If the game was just called Syndicate without the Assasins Creed brand name attached would we all be talking about it? Perhaps drueling over its shiny graphics and high production values?

At what point does attaching a well established brand name to your product start to negatively impact its performance at retail?

I feel Watchdogs was a great example. Release a piece of shit game with shiny graphics and seemingly high production values then laugh at you struggle to find space for all the cash that's been thrown at you.

If Watchdogs was called Assasins Creed Watchdogs do you think it would have been pre ordered so heavily or anticipated so highly that it warranted an instant purchase on release?

I think UBI are missing a trick here. There's so many more people they could be screwing!

It would still be a Ubisoft open-world game.

What if we called it...Assassin's Creed V?

Anyway, more seriously, isn't this essentially why Square didn't slap the Final Fantasy brand on Bravely Default? I mean I think BD was made by different folks, but Square is still listed as a developer and it's arguably more of an FF game than recent FF games, just not called that so it doesn't have the same baggage.

Bravely Default was developed by Silicon Studios, and was designed to be a new IP from the beginning.