1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Spoilers Assassin's Creed 3 ending (spoilers)

Discussion in 'Action' started by JudgeGreg, Nov 14, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. omega12596

    omega12596 Supreme Member

    Messages:
    875
    Trophy Points:
    318
    Thomas is absolutely right. In the same way we can be bummed about a crappy ending to a movie or book, Assassins Creed is a linear story we're playing through. Not an interactive story we're affecting as we play. The player knows s/he is playing someone else's story - in fact, they know they are playing a game. It's an action-adventure/stealth game where in the player has to do certain actions to move onto the next level of gameplay. There's no NPC's to pick up, load out, gear up, get to know, get on the players side through particular actions/choices, etc, etc, etc. Okay, I know there's some sort of village building aspect in this installment, but the people who settle Homestead don't care if Connor is a nice guy or not. In fact, Connor is a pre-defined character that the player has no influence over, thus creating the necessary separation between gamer and game so that, when the end (dark and dismal though it may be) happens, the player can treat it like a sad movie/book end - if the rest of the content was good, the sad ending doesn't ruin it. The player isn't as invested in a pre-defined story/Character as they are in a character they build and create from the ground up, as it were.

    IMO, FWIW.
  2. Noelemahc

    Noelemahc Le Unfun Terrible Staff Member HTL Champion

    Messages:
    10,446
    Trophy Points:
    1,098
    That was my point precisely. Any insane crappy horrible ending would not be out of place in the AC series because they've already pulled many fast ones.

    In other news, I've only completed AssCreedRev yesterday =)
  3. JudgeGreg

    JudgeGreg The Law Staff Member HTL Champion

    Messages:
    1,125
    Trophy Points:
    903
    I see the points here. Being bad, and being a betrayal of the audience have varying shades of gray between them.
  4. AxelssonOnFire

    AxelssonOnFire Supreme Member

    Messages:
    781
    Trophy Points:
    453
    Honestly I didn't find Assassin's Creed in its entirety to be very well written at all. There were moments where I thought the plot really tightened up (like the Haytham reveal, cooperation with the templars, etc), but it was always cut off in a major anti-climax. You could really see the downfall of the writing process, as you drew closer to the end (the whole "I need to kill Charles Lee!"-section was poorly, poorly executed), but almost the entire game felt like it didn't know what the devs wanted it to be. Great mechanics, great world - very questionable character development and story.

    As for the ending itself, I wouldn't compare how I felt after playing it to how destroyed I felt after ME3. AC3 made me feel disconnected from pretty much every character - inside and outside the Animus. The time skips in colonial America made me feel completely disconnected from Connor's story, and I couldn't help but feel like a confused bystander when he progressed his journey, rather than the almost friendship-like relationship I developed with Ezio (hell, Altaïr too). The obvious content cuts left out so much that would otherwise help give an understandable context, but the potential of the Connor/Haytham cooperation was dropped to the ground. I couldn't sympathise with the father's attachment to Lee's policies and terroristic ways. Everything felt way too convoluted and complicated. I tried - really tried - to see the light of it, but too much didn't make any sense at all.

    Desmond's story in AC3 wasn't any better. I don't really have much against Desmond as a character, nor the developers' choice to center him in the plot. That's a good thing. Religious hints or not, he felt like a reasonable protagonist. It was - once again - the execution that failed. His power source missions felt like cheap fan fiction, and the transitions between Animus core and mission were abrupt and disconnecting. On a side note, what the hell was the point of Cross? If anything he felt like a less successful Kai Leng. Just a broken and uninteresting plot device, with a Russian accent.

    The ancient civilization plot felt promising. After Revelations I had really high hopes for what might unfold, but I had no idea how badly it would be revealed in AC3. Nothing in the ending made sense, and by how it stands now I do think that the solar flare plot just doesn't fit whatsoever. Especially not if you're gonna make Desmond the new Space-Jesus. There's so much more I can complain about (the details of everything surrounding the ending, especially), but I think I've made the most basic points that I sought to get of my chest.

    EA and Ubisoft have successfully ass raped their two most quality filled franchises. Good job.
    Show Spoiler

    [​IMG]
  5. Blindsnake

    Blindsnake Supreme Member

    Messages:
    1,520
    Trophy Points:
    368
    You should only read this thread if you already finished AC3 or if you don't intend to play it.:shy:

    Again: I don´t say this in the responses but in the threads I like to say I´m sorry for any problems with my English.

    It's my second thread, I hope that this type of comparisons is not breaking any rule.:oops:



    Ok, I finished Assassin's Creed 3 in the past week. I heard and read in a couple of forums that the endings were similar to ME3, this thread is to understand if you people feel the same.

    First I´m need to say that I love both series. I believe that both of them are very interesting stories but with different dimensions and orientations. In this point I'm not referring to the obvious differences (different universes).

    Both games have controversial endings, with fans having a negative reaction. (there is not even possible comparison, ME3 has a much more negative feedback)

    In the end of AC3 the main protagonist dies, and by the threat of extinction release an old entity, this entity is established as a great threat for the future. The people who have played this game knows that the end is much more than what I have stated...But my main objective is the logic behind the writing, and the feelings that provide us...;)

    So, why do I think that the endings of these two games are very different?

    The similarities: Both main characters die in the end of the game. Ok, it's over.:D

    The differences:

    ME3 Shepard has 4 ways to die, 3 by submitting to the Old Entity and one by making a defiance. There is no hope whatsoever, the feeling of defeat is all around us, and the only possible victory is only moral.ME is a game of choice, and as a game of choice the variations of the endings should have been an obligation.ME2 do not follow the events of ME1 objectively but never broke the universe and the story. ME3 endings are a shot in the head, and I´m not defending the IT by saying this.
    :cautious:


    AC3 In AC we are playing a story, we are never the main character, we never make decisions because the decisions are made for us. I know ME could be cataloged in the same category but still there are diferences... Desmond dies, yes, Desmond submits himself and the world, yes... But, there is different ways of submission...I can't recall the exact words, but in the last conversation Desmond says something like this... But we will find a way...In other words, we will find a solution to our problems, by our means and on our terms. We submit now to fight another day....
    :bored:

    We can't forget that AC is not over yet, that is very important obviously, but what I mean is that hope is a beautiful thing. It is not the dead of the main character that defines the feeling is the how it is delivered.

    That's how I see it both ends:

    AC3: Defiance brings strength through valorization.

    ME3: Submission brings defeat through sacrifice.



    I´m ok in how AC3 has ended, not the way I was expected but acceptable, ME3 endings are still in my throat, I can play AC every time I want, ME I can´t.

    What do you people think?

    Blindsnake Out
  6. Noelemahc

    Noelemahc Le Unfun Terrible Staff Member HTL Champion

    Messages:
    10,446
    Trophy Points:
    1,098
    I think we already chewed this subject to the death in the main AC3 ending discussion thread, This thread has been merged into the main AC3 ending discussion thread, so I'll be brief:

    AC3's ending was foreshadowed in everything that happened in the series from way back in AC1 the first time you've read an e-mail about the oncoming end of the world (and solidifed once the Bleeding Effect let you use Eagle Vision in the real world). The machine god enemy was revealed to us as early as AC2 and fully established as antagonistic in ACB. Moreover, it talks to us throughout the entirety of AC3.

    ME3's ending was poorly foreshadowed and only by the final quarter of the third game of the trilogy, most of it's logic being a self-fulfilling prophecy. The machine god enemy was revealed to us in the ending and never fully established as anything. The closest to Juno and her weird interactions with Desmond the MEverse? Harbinger, but he gets no lines and virtually no role beyond lip service in ME3.

    Oh, and there's also the endings themselves.

    AC3's sets up a new Grand Conflict and potential for new games. The universe fluff has also set up a secondary conflict that even with Vidic and his cronies dead, Abstergo controls most of the world and uniting it to oppose Juno is going to be one bitch of a task.

    ME3 claims it prevents any further conflicts of any nature and slaughters any capacity for new games in the same continuity. The universe fluff is rendered non-relevant since it went off the rails prior to ME3's release and in part actively contributed to ME3 following suit.

    The prosecution rests, your honor.
  7. Cattoc_C

    Cattoc_C Active Member

    Messages:
    169
    Trophy Points:
    33
    I didn't play AC3, nor do I plan on soon. But I did play AC1, in which, well... you see your actual character like 5% of the game, the rest of the game is him tripping trough his memories (or should I say repeating same 4 missions for 3 times). Not sure how much of Desmond do you get to see in AC2 and 3, but... I kinda doubt anyone cares about him if that remained the same, as I suspect it did. Everyone connected with Altair, Ezio and Connor, was it ? Since they play them trough out most of the game, while the Desmond parts are like a rude awakening, like: oh yeah, right... this is the actual character.

    So I can imagine I wouldn't care about Desmond dying either, but wait, AC3 ends with a cliff-hanger ?

    As for the 3 assassins you play, they're dead by the time you first meet them, since you play trough the past.
    But this is the first time I hear about AC3 ending, didn't know people were unhappy with it.

    From what you said, I agree with you, it does sound like it's less of a problem then me3 ending was.
  8. Noelemahc

    Noelemahc Le Unfun Terrible Staff Member HTL Champion

    Messages:
    10,446
    Trophy Points:
    1,098
    You see little of Desmond in AC1 because he's a nobody then. Due to the Bleeding Effect (which you'd know about if you'd played AC2), he slowly accumulates the skills of the Assassins whose memories he's been reliving and you get to play more as him in AC2 and ACB (but not ACR, he spends it in a coma, though you do get to experience his life prior to being captured by Abstergo in the lead-up to AC1) culminating in his role in AC3 taking up almost as much screen time as Connor's central-plot missions.

    Basically, if you do not feel for Desmond by AC3's beginning, you either didn't play any of the prior games, or you're a robot. Possibly both.
  9. JudgeGreg

    JudgeGreg The Law Staff Member HTL Champion

    Messages:
    1,125
    Trophy Points:
    903
    FYI, the two threads are now merged.
  10. Blindsnake

    Blindsnake Supreme Member

    Messages:
    1,520
    Trophy Points:
    368
    Thanks, and I´m sorry...

    Blindsnake Out
  11. Blindsnake

    Blindsnake Supreme Member

    Messages:
    1,520
    Trophy Points:
    368
    I just finished AC3 and i remembered this discussion in BSN. I thought it was a little stupid association, that´s all. Regarding the rest of your post, I will wait and see, while I agree with most things you said about the game there is still hope. And I believe in the imagination of some devs.But is going to be hard pull this out in a clean way.:D

    Oh, but I do care about Desmond dead. He had a sad life, as Shepard, and I personally believe he deserved a better ending. Also the main story of both games is weaker than the previous ones. Maybe because I´m Portuguese and the Mediterranean culture is more appealing to me... I don´t know... Also, I like Italy, never been there, but it looks a wonderful country.

    And yes, is not even close the problem that ME3 is...

    Blindsnake Out
  12. Noelemahc

    Noelemahc Le Unfun Terrible Staff Member HTL Champion

    Messages:
    10,446
    Trophy Points:
    1,098
    Probably, as the American and British portions of the fanbase of the games are apparently rabid with joy at the level of detail AC3 demonstrates in making both sides of the Revolution look like the total dicks they were by making Connor someone that would have issues with both sides of the conflict.

    My situation is opposite to yours: from how crappily researched the Russian history part of the setting is (looking at the comics and books), I'm glad the games didn't go there.
  13. JudgeGreg

    JudgeGreg The Law Staff Member HTL Champion

    Messages:
    1,125
    Trophy Points:
    903
    Not a problem.
  14. Vernon Tuitt III

    Vernon Tuitt III HTL Staff Staff Member HTL Champion

    Messages:
    783
    Trophy Points:
    283
    I got AC3 in the mail, and something doesn't feel right. I just got off the ship and I'm really uninterested in what's happening. I think it's because the entire ad campaign advertised Connor as the main assassin, but we play as Haytham for four chapters of the game.

    That, and the fact that from the cutscenes I've seen, Connor is quite unlikeable. I care more about Haytham and his exploits than Connor and his revenge story. I understand that Haytham returns as a twist later in the game, but it bothers me that the advertising and previews didn't just tell us that in the first place. Also, I'm a bit turned off from Assassin's Creed now that we're on the fifth game and the series isn't over, especially since we averted the whole end-of-the-world disaster.
  15. Noelemahc

    Noelemahc Le Unfun Terrible Staff Member HTL Champion

    Messages:
    10,446
    Trophy Points:
    1,098
    Three, and they're the three shortest chapters EVER in the history of the series. SRSLY.

    YMMV on that, I'm enjoying him so far.
    You can view it as an ending of one series and beginning of another, especially since it's still not clear what role Erudito plays in relation to the Assassins and who the new main protagonist will be now that the series WILL have to move to being modern-timed.
  16. Trexasle

    Trexasle Elite Member

    Messages:
    871
    Trophy Points:
    248

    Actually you nail it right on the head, just got the reasoning wrong in my opinion. Because The Story of AC3 is Linear (Though saying that a predetermined character separates the player's personal feelings, from the story is completely untrue. Megaman X and RDR Comes to mind.) There is more of a sense that you are playing through a story instead of building it. Also, Unlike The Mass Effect Series (Three Specifically but two is a good candidate for this issue as well.), The storytelling style stayed completely consistent throughout the series, Linear character, pre-determined, looking at the story experiences WITH the character, and not AS Him (Like Shepard in ME1, and parts of ME2.)

    Basically Assassins Creed 3 didn't change any rules, when it came to the storytelling of the series. Players got exactly what they were expecting storytelling wise. So unlike Me3 it's understandable in that sense, you weren't cheated out of anything because AC3 played by the rules the series established.
  17. Blindsnake

    Blindsnake Supreme Member

    Messages:
    1,520
    Trophy Points:
    368
    This is the most accurate truth about the comparison between the two games.

    The respect for the legacy at hands it's the difference between the two games.

    Blindsnake Out
  18. omega12596

    omega12596 Supreme Member

    Messages:
    875
    Trophy Points:
    318
    The reasoning is wrong, in your opinion, but unless I'm mistaken you just said the same thing I did. Maybe you're getting caught up on my use of 'investment'. I didn't mean to imply players aren't invested in the AC story/game, so my bad there if I wasn't clear. They're invested in a different fashion - playing through a game with a character, as you said, instead of building a game as a character. Different investment, but still invested.

    But yeah, totally right, AC3 didn't change up the rule book at the eleventh hour. So while players may have been disappointed to see characters go, the tale stuck to it's lore, it's style, and it's presentation which seems to have left most consumers satisfied with the game on the whole.
  19. Blindsnake

    Blindsnake Supreme Member

    Messages:
    1,520
    Trophy Points:
    368
    Both of you are completely right. ;)

    You were the first being right.:D

    Blindsnake Out
  20. Vernon Tuitt III

    Vernon Tuitt III HTL Staff Staff Member HTL Champion

    Messages:
    783
    Trophy Points:
    283
    Blindsnake and Noelemahc like this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page