The Next Assassin’s Creed Won’t Star Connor

Another one hops on the COD cho cho train.

Haytham game, plz.

The first AC showed so much promise but made me want to punch the shit out of my TV, for some reason I found it frustrating...not the difficulty, but the pacing.

But I'm tired of hearing people bitching about Ubisoft..."milking the franchise dry," etc...from morons who just seem to copy/paste arguments they read somewhere else. The series got exponentially better, anyone who just likes the first one is...just wrong.

And while ACIII was a little disappointing, it's hard not to admire the direction they took, and the story-telling was and has always been top-notch as far as games go, probably among the best storylines of any game, while I'm the kind of person who doesn't give a damn about whatever goes on in a game as long as it's fun to play.

I forgot my point...oh yeah...I agree with Patrick, I really liked Connor as a character, he wasn't one of the drawbacks in the game. As badass as Ezio is, it was time to move on from him, and I liked starting out as a stubborn kid who came from nothing, had all odds against him, etc. It was a refreshing change of pace after playing as Ezio, basically the Bruce Wayne of the Renaissance, for three games straight (although three amazing games).

But to hell with the first game, ACIII was certainly disappointing but definitely not a bad game and still light years beyond AC 1.

After 5 games in 5 years, I think that's enough. I took a year off from the franchise with Revelations to come back with III and realized I just couldn't do it anymore. Looking forward to the next big Ubisotft franchise (Watchdogs?)

Fuck that shit. I was mislead by Ubisoft into thinking the plot would be resolved in 3, what with the 2012 shit they had been hyping for so long.

Well guess what? It's 20 fucking 13 and I don't give a shit about Assassin's Creed anymore. You had your chance to end it, now we're physically past the time point where your story is even relevant. The world ended, Desmond failed. So what the 4th game is going to take place over a year in the past by the time in comes out?

Playing AC3 now, not loving it, barely liking it. Shaking the dice & rolling again may be a good thing.

@Nikz said:

Sadly I'm one of the (seemingly few) people that LOVED AC3 and Ratohnhaké:ton as a character. I loved the wilderness and climbing in 1700's Boston. I loved hunting animals and climbing trees and cliff sides. Spent hours exploring the wilds and wanted more.

I would love to see more of this setting, its unique and interesting. Japan or China would be really boring. Maybe take it to Central/South America? Aztecs or Inca. BEFORE any Europeans came.

I loved the wilderness in 3! I don't know what wilderness they could put for Brazil, but I'd sure love it!

Sadly I'm one of the (seemingly few) people that LOVED AC3 and Ratohnhaké:ton as a character. I loved the wilderness and climbing in 1700's Boston. I loved hunting animals and climbing trees and cliff sides. Spent hours exploring the wilds and wanted more.

I would love to see more of this setting, its unique and interesting. Japan or China would be really boring. Maybe take it to Central/South America? Aztecs or Inca. BEFORE any Europeans came.

Or.....we turn the dial on the Animus all the way back.

Back to the First Civ.

To be fair to Ubisoft.....Ezio is possibly my favorite character in gaming this entire generation. I'm naturally going to be biased against a new protagonist.

One more thing: SET THE GAME IN ONE GODDAMN CITY. THIS IS WHAT MADE BROTHERHOOD SO GREAT.

The Frontier nonsense in AC3 killed the pacing and flow of that game stone dead. Simplify (or eliminate) the economy, focus on actually intresting side quests (Tombs, Da Vinci Machines, Subject 16 puzzles, Naval combat) and you can do no wrong.

I still think that a French Revolution Assassin's Creed would be amazing.

@LotusPrince said:

Civil War Assassin's Creed game. Basically Django Unchained, but with like stealth and shit. And just for fun, you play as a woman, bam. GAME OF THE FUCKING YEAR!

Southern Belle assassin = Yes

Okay, I'm a hardcore fan of the Assassins Creed series, and I was really disappointed in how AC3 ended. That said, it sounds like Ubi Soft is moving on from both Desmond and Conner, and I have to say I'm very happy about that. We're finally getting a new character and possibly a new setting that hasn't been explored in video games yet. I'm looking forward to learning more about this game, so we can see how it turns out.

One thing, though. I would really appreciate it if Ubi Soft would take it's time on the game, and not release it until next year. It would feel too rushed if it comes out this year, since they just announced it.

@Encephalon said:

@Hailinel said:

@jerseyscum said:

No Japan. That would be silly and boring.

How so?

Given Ubisoft's stated ambition of visiting time periods unexplored by video games, a game set in, say, Feudal Japan doesn't really fit that bill. That's not to say that there are actually feudal Japan-set games clogging up the shelves, but rather that the fetishization of that element of Japanese history is so ubiquitous in gaming culture that it comes to the same thing.

Nah, Feudal Japan wouldn't work as well as the Bakumatsu. Whether it is the actual feudal setting, or a 1800s one, or something mythical like Okami, a Japan-centric Assassin's Creed game is something people have wanted since AC1. Not saying it is the only good setting, but one of them could be great, as could a laundry list of many others.

Anyway, though I really liked AC3 and Connor in general, it makes perfect sense why he won't be the main character in the next one, since it will probably be set in the French Revolution, seeing as how the next "thing" in history that would be big enough for an AC game in the USA is the Civil War, that would be a pretty long time for ol' Rathtahthreh:ton.

@sprode said:

Connor looked boring, but he isn't the main problem with this series. Maybe it's time to stop calling it "Assassin's" Creed.

Yeah, time to call it Hitman's List of Unbreakable Rules.

Connor looked boring, but he isn't the main problem with this series. Maybe it's time to stop calling it "Assassin's" Creed.

Civil War Assassin's Creed game. Basically Django Unchained, but with like stealth and shit. And just for fun, you play as a woman, bam. GAME OF THE FUCKING YEAR!

Alright, no I don't want a Japanese Assassin's Creed. It just reminds me of the GTA IV rumors, back then. Nah. Egypt, might be alright though, Russia.

@Hailinel said:

@jerseyscum said:

No Japan. That would be silly and boring.

How so?

Given Ubisoft's stated ambition of visiting time periods unexplored by video games, a game set in, say, Feudal Japan doesn't really fit that bill. That's not to say that there are actually feudal Japan-set games clogging up the shelves, but rather that the fetishization of that element of Japanese history is so ubiquitous in gaming culture that it comes to the same thing.

@chilipeppersman: Good to hear you played the worst in the series and completely gave up on it.

But can anyone give me a reason to care about this franchise anymore? Anyone? Please?

Assassin's Creed set in the first Moon city please.

They announced there would be a new protagonist and setting in an earnings call? Is there at least a quote or something?

While Connor was no Ezio, I still liked him. Even so, I'm not sure where they could have taken his story if they were to make a sequel to AC3.

Just please, no Japan. It's so overdone. There are so many other possible avenues to take the franchise. I really hope they get creative.

@jerseyscum said:

No Japan. That would be silly and boring.

Victorian-Era London or the 1917 Russian revolution would be an AMAZING setting for an Assassin's Creed game.

This.

I also think the French Revolution would have been more interesting than the American Revolution, but as the French say, c'est la vie.

Overall, I enjoyed AC3 enough to finish it, but the main character wasn't interesting at all, especially after you've gotten use to playing as the cool Templar guy at the beginning. Most people agree, he should have been the main character. And the way they wrapped up Desmond's story was also very disappointing. They need to comeback strong with this next AC or the series may die.

Sadly, we do live in a "What have you done for me lately?" society.

Move things forward to Cold War Germany after the wall went up. I Don't think it would happen since Ubi seems to like their history pre-eighteenth century, but one can hope.

@jerseyscum said:

No Japan. That would be silly and boring.

How so?

Played the first, loved it (Altair is still my favorite assassin), played ACII and Brotherhood, liked them too. But I just couldn't play more then 4-5 hours of Revelations (tired of Ezio). I want to complete ACIII but I just don't have fun playing it, it feels like a chore.

@chilipeppersman: I agree with you. It is very much like Call of Duty. Every game doesn't evolve the formula and doesn't give you a good reason to come back to it once you have experienced it once already.

But you haven't experienced it. You played the first game, which is significantly worse than the follow ups. Assassins Creed 2 was a gigantic leap forward from the first game in almost every single way, while its sequels have been just Assassins Creed 2, but with a new coat of paint.

Look, I hate what the series has become and its dead to me as it stands, but that doesn't stop me from recommending someone play (and only) Assassins Creed 2. I don't get the reasoning of writing off an entire series when you haven't even tried one of the games in it that was actually praised.

In my eyes, it's kind of like writing off the entire Call of Duty franchise, even though Modern Warfare is considered an outstanding title of this generation, because you didn't like a PS1 Medal of Honour game.

If the Assassins Creed games just aren't your thing, then fine. Not saying everyone has to play them or will enjoy them. But don't write off the games in the past by how the series is treated in the present.

Ya, my problems with the game weren't with Connor but I can't say he'll be missed either. 
Weird choice, though. To do that instead of, you know, write him better.

@jerseyscum said:

@Video_Game_King said:

@Hailinel said:

@jerseyscum said:

No Japan. That would be silly and boring.

How so?

Last time somebody tried to mix Japan and assassins, it didn't work out so well.

Ouch!

Non sequiturs don't answer the question.

@Video_Game_King said:

@Hailinel said:

@jerseyscum said:

No Japan. That would be silly and boring.

How so?

Last time somebody tried to mix Japan and assassins, it didn't work out so well.

Ouch!

@Ett said:

Assassins Creed 1666.

Diablo 4?

@Hailinel said:

@jerseyscum said:

No Japan. That would be silly and boring.

How so?

Last time somebody tried to mix Japan and assassins, it didn't work out so well.

Connor wasn't THAT bad, he was just outshined by Haytham and Ezio.

@jerseyscum said:

No Japan. That would be silly and boring.

How so?

Praise the lord. No more Mr. Boring Slab

No Japan. That would be silly and boring.

Victorian-Era London or the 1917 Russian revolution would be an AMAZING setting for an Assassin's Creed game.

i dont think Connor was a bad character, he was just a meh character. his best character moments were in those stupid homestead side missions.

i think feudal japan would be perfect for th e next one though. (except the protagonist assassin ISNT a ninja WHAT A TWIST).

though i dont think i'll be playing anymore assassins creed games unless they finally stop using that blinding white loading/transition screen that pops up every 2 seconds. its so distracting and annoying, especially once you're aware of it. (sorry if i ruined AC games for you now) but its a REALLY bad design choice i hate it.

So who the hell are they going to put in the animus?

@WeaponBoy said:

Connor was just...boring. He just lacked that certain charm that made you like him despite how much of a douche he could be. Connor was just kind of a douche in general.

Fair warning, I'm going to make a comparison that some people might be grumpy about and I'm honestly not trying to start a flame war, this is just my opinion.

I liken Connor vs. Ezio to DmC's Dante vs. DMC3/4's Dante. They're both idiotic power fantasies, but I just found new Dante to be kind of insufferably cocky rather than entertainingly cocky. Kind of like Nero was in DMC4, but Nero's melodrama was balanced out by Dante being around to act as a foil.

Well, you could also liken Nero to the current Dante with the whole teenage angst angle. Like playing as Nero though in terms of combat but didn't like him as a character. I liked his dad better (even though it's only alluded to and I'm not sure if it has been confirmed).

@GaspoweR said:

It doesn't seem surprising with what happened to Assassin's Creed 3 when I found out that the current Creative Director of Assassin's Creed was also the guy who spear headed the last Army of Two game prior to joining Ubisoft. He also doesn't really think that feudal Japan is a good setting and has also made some other dumb comments .

Well he's right about boring settings, at least.

Hear me out. You start the new game as Desmond (very, very briefly) , with the early twist being that you are someone in the Animus reliving Desmond's experiences as an assassin. You then do all sorts of neat future assassin stuff.

Good. I disliked Conner and the time period. Glad they are leaving it in the dust. Though after this game I think I'm kind of done with the series for a bit. Or at least until the next one goes on a super sale.

Yea this series peaked at AC2. Ive been lukewarm at best with the every game after that. With 3 kinda sucking Im done with AC.

It doesn't seem surprising with what happened to Assassin's Creed 3 when I found out that the current Creative Director of Assassin's Creed was also the guy who spear headed the last Army of Two game prior to joining Ubisoft. Also, he thinks that fans give boring suggestions and that feudal Japan is not a good setting and has also made some other dumb comments .

@Efesell: To be honest, I'd trust them a whole lot more than reviewers.

With reviewers being as high score giving as they are, I've gotten better gaming purchases listening to the gaming community, by that I mean excluding "videogame critics".

@Reddy1124 said:

@mlarrabee said:

Good to know this franchise will be milked dry.

Did people honestly think that Ubisoft was not going to milk AC for all its worth? Hopefully they don't annualize Far Cry too.

If they can make the next far cry as good as FC3 then I have no godamned problem with that.

Assasins creed however, after the way they fucked the story up in the last game. It looks like there is no more Desmon or Connor or Ezio, or the irrelevant guy.

I hope that it never goes to Japan.

If nothing else I want to keep the relatively unique settings. Visit places that games don't visit all of the damn time.

@Efesell said:

@sephirm87 said:

Hear me out. You start the new game as Desmond (very, very briefly) , with the early twist being that you are someone in the Animus reliving Desmond's experiences as an assassin. You then do all sorts of neat future assassin stuff.

That's the premise of the next generation graphical updates. You play as a guy reliving Desmonds reliving of all his ancestors.

Oh, so you mean like a dream within a dream?

That's novel.

Bring on Japan already! The thing I really missed in AC3 was the local language option, was really immersive in AC2,