For anyone who has played or viewed someone playing or, at the very least, has heard about the gist of the first two Assassin's Creed games there is has been an expectation for an "Assassin's Creed III". Why? Well, because most game developers, much like the cinema nowadays, are making trilogies, not stand-alone games (or movies). Apparently, Ubisoft, the masterminds behind the Assassin's Creed franchise, are no different. They're looking to bank on that as well. Sadly, their banking has perhaps brought about the slow death of interest in Desmond Miles and his exploits through his lineage's dark history.
To quickly sum up, Assassin's Creed (2007) was the first game in the overall story. We were introduced to Desmond Miles who has been kidnapped by Abstergo, an evil corporate entity (seriously, is there ever a loner bad guy fighting a good guy corporation?) with ties to the Templars looking towards world domination, and forced to lay on his ass all day while the Animus, a machine that accesses memories of long dead relatives, makes him live out the memories of his ancestor, Altair ibn La-Ahad, an assassin from the 12th century, which he has somehow genetically inherited. These memories hold the key for Abstergo to gain a powerful artifact known as the "Apple", a piece of Eden. In the Animus, Desmond controls Altair, learning the ways of the Assassin, etc etc. Eventually, the Apple is found, but shit goes down, Desmond wakes up to an attack on Abstergo, flees with the assistant Lucy (an Assassin all along) and leads off into number 2.
Assassin's Creed II (2009) is more of the same (story wise). A hacked Abstergo machine (similar to that of the Matrix hacking machinces) gives Desmond access to the memories of another ancestor, Ezio Auditore da Firenze, an assassin in Renaissance Italy (late 15th century). Again, Desmond is trying to learn more about the Apple and where it is. More assassinating and roof-jumping occur, but in better format, which gains more praise to Ubisoft. Game ends and leaves it open for the third game. Were surprised? No. The surprise came when Ubisoft decided to take a turn towards financial stimulation rather than linear story building by releasing Assassin's Creed Brotherhood (2010).
It starts immediately after the conclusion of ACII and continues the story of Ezio. While that decision did put a lot of fans on edge of anger concerning the overall story, it didn't disappoint as it played well, gave a nice continuation of the overall story and, for the first time in the series, included.... multiplayer!! Stabbing computer controlled enemies wasn't enough. Now we have to do it to each other. Fun! I honestly couldn't complain. I did enjoy hunting someone who was hunting me, too.
That game ended and left the AC Series faithful with a question of when Assassin's Creed III was going to release. Then I started to see hints on the web about upcoming information concerning the next Assassin's Creed. "Ubisoft will tell us where we're headed to next!!"
Sweet! Was it, Russia, like in the recent comic book? Would it be in America? Would it be World War II Britain or Germany? WHERE?! We're all anxious to see how it all ends!!
Constantinople. And it's not titled Assassin's Creed III. Nope, it's Assassin's Creed Revelations. So who would you guess to be the leading Assassino? Yep, good old, worn out, over used Ezio. Again. Ubisoft loves him... or at least their wallets do.
Forgive my lack of enthusiasm, but I'm growing very tired of the corporate machine that video games are turning into and this lack of consideration for the fans. Seriously, I'd be really surprised by anyone enjoying yet another Ezio story line. We liked ACII because it was a new and more interesting place to roam around and kill in than Jerusalem was in the original AC. That became the draw for the overarching series, "where will we go next? What time period? What place? What character?" All those questions are still floating in the air 2 years later as we see that Ezio still reigns supreme in the AC series as we head into 2011.
It says to me that it (the gaming industry) has become more about the money than it is about making something that wows the audience and makes them happy. Ubisoft is showing that. They're keeping around a tired character so that they can keep the series alive longer and make more money rather than complete the overall story of Assassin's Creed and give the answers that everyone is looking for. Instead, with all these branch off games we're asking more questions and still getting no answers to them. Gah!
Can you imagine BioWare doing something like that with Mass Effect? They'd be shooting themselves in the foot if they did spin-offs based on the characters you've saved before they released Mass Effect 3. Madness, I tell you.
Hopefully, I'm wrong about how this will play out. I'm certain that I'll play Assassin's Creed Revelations when it releases and I'm sure that the gameplay will rock just as much as the first three did. But I'm still worried that the story is what's going to be crushed and people will start to lash out for something a little more fresh in terms of the Assassin's Creed storyline. I really hope that I'm wrong.
No comments:
Post a Comment