With Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood and Assassin's Creed: Revelations existing as something close to, but not quite fully proper sequels in the Assassin's Creed lineage, many have been wringing their hands in rapt anticipation over when, precisely, they would get their hands on something Assassin's Creed related with the word "three" in it, possibly represented by some kind of numeric character, either modern or using old timey Roman numerals. Now, Ubisoft has seen fit to tell you.
It turns out you'll be getting your grubby, stabby hands on Assassin's Creed III (Hah! Roman numerals! I was right!) on October 30, 2012.
The news came via Ubisoft's regularly scheduled investors call this morning, where Ubi boss Yves Guillemot proclaimed both that "Assassin's Creed III is the true next generation of both the Assassin's Creed brand and interactive entertainment/storytelling in general," and that it would be "the biggest launch in Ubisoft history."
Little is known about the plot of the next official sequel in the series, save but for the acknowledgment that it will revolve around adventures not featuring either Ezio nor Altair as the protagonist. Instead, a mysterious new assassin will enter the fray, presumably to tie up the story arc into a nice, neat trilogy, because that's just how things are done these days.
I'll just go ahead and call it that this will be the game where you play exclusively as Desmond. That could be a thing, right?
Neato
Money, money, money, must be funny. Ubisoft is a...
Always pumped for an Assassins Creed game. Excited to see where they take us and who we play as.
I wonder if they will end the trilogy with a trilogy.....
No more Ezio thank God. If anything thats a huge leap for me. I always assumed the AC series would be a new ancestor/setting per game and that was going great until they got hung up on Ezio. This was especially grating for me as I didn't like him as a character and I didn't like the setting or outfits.
Good, they're beating their December 21st, 2012 date. That game would be goofy as FUCK if it were coming out after that.
Call of Creed, Stabby Stabby instead of Shooty Shooty. Also only sells really well instead of insanely well.
said:
I'm just gunna remind everyone that, as far as I remember, they originally officially stated that at least one of the Assassin's Creed trilogy would be set entirely in the future.
So you may not be that far off Alex :P
They are going to have to change core elements, and really try to revamp the series to get me to care about it. Simply adding more stuff, isn't going to do it for me.
I lost interest in Brotherhood about half way through and haven't even thought about playing Revelations. I hope that this iteration will renew my interest in the series (I really enjoyed the first two games).
@msavo said:
2 and Brotherhood are worthwhile, Revelations and (I suspect) 3 aren't.
Assassins creed looses its THING if it doesent keep doing historic periods. I would expect more of the game being in 2012 but not all of it.
Brotherhood was already a step down from 2 in my opinion and I didn't get to play Revelations yet. Actually, I'm pretty burned out on AC.
Ok, I'm on board for another one. I just finished Revelations a month ago, though, so I'll have to pick up the new one later when it drops in price. I need a bit of a breather.
I'd be happy with an all-Desmond game. He explicitly says that he knows what he needs to do now, at the end of Revelations.
@ValiantGoat said:
yup. Assassin's Creed III-2 and -3
can't wait.
I'd like to see more real world Desmond stuff, but I think the in Animus field trip through ancient assassins is the strongest point of the series.