the_mighty_monarch

@Vegetable_Side_Dish: Oh hell yes.

@Vegetable_Side_Dish: Point taken, but nowadays its no longer the case. Or at the very least, its no longer the case in pretty much any area where people would be choosing whether or not to buy the game.

I was mostly just using that as a point to jump in and speak my mind anyways XD

@Vegetable_Side_Dish: Religion is absolutely a choice. I was raised very specifically Christian. Went to church every Sunday, and Sunday School quite frequently. It wasn't shoved down my throat by my parents, but it was taken for granted my entire life. It was completely an integral part of my upbringing.

Which doesn't change the fact that I drifted from it. It was a belief, but the idea of 'faith' wasn't enough to fill the gaps in questions it couldn't answer. So I found something different.

If religion wasn't a choice, Scientology wouldn't be such a potent force. Sexuality is something inherent, but religion, like morality, is something that needs to be taught.

With all of this said, I don't think people have a right to suggest something offensive simply shouldn't exist. I vehemently disagree with things like, I don't know, Neo-Nazi's and the KKK and such, but if they simply sit around believing what they say and not actually harassing or murdering anyone, then they have the right to think the way they do. It offends me as a person, but I can choose to not agree with them and leave it at that if they aren't hurting anyone. (Though those extreme cases usually do.)

Should we ban crosses from all public areas because it might offend those who aren't Christian? Do we ban books that discuss atheism because it's blasphemous? NO! That would just be stupid. Let people think whatever the hell they want as long as they're not hurting you physically. With a video game it's the least debatable to exist. You have to CHOOSE to play it. You might hate a game that has you going around murdering gay people or Christians for no reason. But you'd probably love a game that has you murdering the people who would murder gays or Christians for no reason. But then those people would be offended. But if both of you stuck to your own game, you both get to be happy and nobody's getting hurt. It's exactly the same as letting people believe in what they choose to believe in.

-

But despite ALL THAT. Nintendo has every right to deny release. I personally might think its stupid, but it comes back to letting people have their own beliefs. I actually think its really stupid, because they only make the system, if they don't actually work on the game, they have no liability. Though I guess people might be mad at them for not blocking it, but again, that only causes backlash from the people who think things that offend them shouldn't exist, which is ludicrous because if everything that was offensive to at least someone was banned, the world would need to cease to exist to appease everyone. And then there'd be no one to offend anyways.

@MordeaniisChaos: AR glasses would be close to my third proposed option, a gimmick to make it believable. But they released box art for ACIII and it looke like they're going with my second option. Using the animus to drive the story somehow. Because we know ACIII is supposed to wrap up Desmond's story, but the box art clearly shows someone in the American Revolution and no Desmond. Thus, the game concluding Desmond's story is not a Desmond-centric game because, as I predicted, a fully Desmond-centric game is impossible with the limitations they built into the atmosphere of the game.

Not that this is really a bad thing, just an observation. A Desmond-centric game is almost impossible to make, and thus they aren't making one.

Ok, a Desmond exclusive game is going to be hard to make. In fact, it's almost impossible. Why? Because there can't be any HUD. Assassin's Creed has built their entire series out of justifying the HUD, with the Animus. It feels like a video game because FOR DESMOND IT IS. You're experiencing exactly what Desmond is, but when you control Desmond, you get none of that. It's why you only play as Desmond in short snippets. Now imagine the ridiculous difficulty if they built a game exactly the same as the other Assassin's Creed games WITHOUT THE HUD. The difficulty would be ludicrous. No interactive maps, no health bar, indication of ammuniton, objective, ABSOLUTELY NOTHING.

If they used a HUD for a Desmond exclusive game, they would be completely dismantling everything their series has been built around, selling out to appease the crowd who only care about being able to play a game instead of the overall experience, and when it comes to the overall experience, Assassin's Creed is one of the best. I'm really nervous to see if they'll sell out and ruin everything, never make a truly Desmond exclusive game and work around using the animus to drive the plot again, or come up with some other interesting gimmick to make a Desmond game playable.