Google+

We Recommend By ZergNet

44 comments

  • Fetalspray - March 26, 2012 1:59 p.m.

    Sounds awesome, but I'm still not convinced its not going to be "AMERICUUR FUCK YEAH! WE HAVE GOT TO KILL THE REDCOATS!!! AMERICUUR FUCK YEAH! THE BRITISH ARE THE EVIL TEMPLARS!!!", even after reading the the last few paragraphs.
  • BladedFalcon - March 26, 2012 2:29 p.m.

    ...Why do people keep thinking this when ubisoft is a FRENCH company, and not an American one? Yes, the AC series has take some extremes in the past by glorifying not so noble figures, and demonizing others.But I have never gotten the impression they have taken the side of any one nation. Heck, if anything, the franchise has not pulled any punches in attacking prominent American figures such as Ford and Edison. So people pre-emtively accusing or worrying that the game will be shamelesly pro-american are kinda ignorant, really...
  • bebl09 - March 26, 2012 3:10 p.m.

    @BladedFalcon: http://www.gamesradar.com/assassins-creed-iii-special-editions-detailed-new-trailer-released/ Two of the special editions are the 'Freedom Edition' and the 'Join or Die Edition', both of which are basically "AMERICUHH, FUCK YEAH!" editions.
  • BladedFalcon - March 26, 2012 4:16 p.m.

    Considering the American revolution is where the USA was basically was born, it's kinda obvious that most forms of media entertainment are going to portray the revolutionaries in a favorable light, this is not specific to this one game. However, viewing the event that marked the birth of a nation in a favorable light, does not actually make it a "FUCK YEAH SHAMELESS PATRIOTISM" story, specially since it's going to use the setting more as a backdrop for the AC's universe than anything else. Furthermore, in my opinion, the game would only come across as shamelessly patriotic if they portrayed all the revolutionaries as supermen without flaws, or dabbled in cheesy inspiring speeches. Simply using the revolution as a backdrop doesn't automatically make it a "AMERICUHH, FUCK YEAH" story. Besides, what exactly do the bashers expect? that they would portray the redcoats and the British as the heroes? or as misunderstood? it's as if people watched a movie about India's independence, and expected to see Gandhi portrayed as the villain >_> Basically, what I'm trying to say is that it's honestly hard to objectively accuse the game of anything until it actually comes out, and we see for ourselves is the story is shameless American pandering or not. And again, considering that the publisher is French, the director is Australian, and that the series hasn't shied out on attacking any side or nation when they see fit. I honestly doubt it will turn out that way.
  • bebl09 - March 26, 2012 4:41 p.m.

    I'm not saying they can't portray one side favourably, I just found it slightly ironic that they specifically said that they won't be all in favour of the revolutionaries but then used names like that for the special editions lol. No one should be portrayed as heroes or anything, it should just be objective, as it's only a backdrop to the narrative focusing on the Assassins and the Templars. Not that I'm accusing them of not being objective, I'm in no way jumping to conclusions about the story, I just found the names for the special editions ironic. I wasn't making any judgements about the story itself, although the guy who originally commented kinda was haha.
  • BladedFalcon - March 26, 2012 5:11 p.m.

    Ahh, fair enough, yeah, in that case, i do not disagree with your statement. Since those names for the special editions DO sound at odds with what the director said XD Then again, like another commenter said, such is the business of marketing...
  • bebl09 - March 26, 2012 6:32 p.m.

    Haha yeah I'm sure it's all marketing. It's aimed at the kind of people who actually called them 'freedom fries' :P
  • BladedFalcon - March 26, 2012 8:15 p.m.

    ...Lmao, people did that? XD *Facepalms* ...On second thought, of course people did that... Far more retarded things are done in a daily basis >>;
  • bebl09 - March 26, 2012 8:35 p.m.

    Haha yep, when America got pissed off at France cause they wouldn't join their illegal war in Iraq, they renamed everything with the word 'French' in the title to 'freedom' instead, ie freedom fries, freedom toast...
  • BladedFalcon - March 26, 2012 10:24 p.m.

    *groans* -.- Stupid, stupid rednecks and senseless patriots >_>; I have always noticed a very palpable animosity between USA citizens and the French ever since that whole thing, but I never thought it reached such retarded levels >>;;;;
  • bebl09 - March 29, 2012 5:08 p.m.

    Funnily enough it was implemented by the government, not just a load of idiotic rednecks (although you could say the government at the time were idiotic rednecks lol).
  • BladedFalcon - March 29, 2012 5:35 p.m.

    *Glances at Dubya* Yeeeep....
  • fattoler - March 27, 2012 3:03 a.m.

    Well, you could argue that in the same way certain "heroes" are seen as "laying down the law" on people who when you think about it are just trying to feed themselves because they were born into poverty or fell on hard times that the British could be seen as 'misunderstood'. Heck, Confederates are often portrayed in a better light than the British are... However alternate interpretations are a pretty rare thing in videogames.
  • BladedFalcon - March 27, 2012 8:42 a.m.

    And when they are done, they aren't usually pretty good >>; (saboteur comes to mind... And while Freedom fighters was good... yeah, that one definitely counts as an "AMERICUUH FUCK YEAH!" alternate interpretation >>;)
  • fattoler - March 27, 2012 4:53 p.m.

    Well the Resistance series was pretty good, then again it didn't dwell into politics...
  • Fiirestorm21 - March 27, 2012 5:53 p.m.

    Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the whole point of the Assassins-Templars conflict that provides the larger backdrop of the series one of freedom versus control (with the Assassins favoring freedom), and of "us-or-them" moralistic mentality (at least as far as the two factions themselves go)? That would see pretty good justification in itself.
  • Fiirestorm21 - March 27, 2012 5:55 p.m.

    I mean, the choice of wording I'm sure was influenced by the setting and the politics of the time, but that doesn't mean that Ubi's motivation behind them was one of pro-Americanism.
  • BladedFalcon - March 26, 2012 12:22 p.m.

    Yeah... I really feel like playing this game now. thought it's gonna be annoying to catch up of whatever worthy story chunks happened in Brotherhood and revelations, both which I refused to play.
  • samsneeze - March 26, 2012 1 p.m.

    You honestly didn't miss much of anything. Well, Brotherhood's ending had a pretty big plot point at the end, but Revelations was more Ezio and Altair's story than anything and nothing happened outside the animus except for a glimpse at a pre-rendered cutscene in random location land.
  • BladedFalcon - March 26, 2012 2:43 p.m.

    well, that's good to know. So I'll focus on catching up with the brotherhood ending, well, and i Am curious to see how Ezio ended up, since he was pretty awesome in AC2.
  • samsneeze - March 26, 2012 3:14 p.m.

    I'm sure Ezio is the main reason I could pull through Brotherhood and Revelations. Revelations more so since you could feel the age catching up to him and the things he regretted in his life. The two middle games are stand stills as far as the overall plot and gameplay goes, but they still do a good job at telling a story.
  • BladedFalcon - March 26, 2012 4:21 p.m.

    The fact that they were obviously stand ins is what kept me from even touching them, even though I liked Ezio. I mean, I really liked AC2, but got pretty bored and annoyed at the repetitiveness of AC1, so the core gameplay is a formula that I enjoy sparsely. holding off on playing those two games is still a decision I don't regret, because now having a 3 years rest from the formula, I do feel genuinely excited for this game. otherwise I would probably have felt a "Ugh, again?" reaction from this game.
  • Ironarm - March 26, 2012 8:06 p.m.

    Brotherhood was quite good, IMHO. Desmond's story actually seemed to matter and the ending had a pretty big impact on the series. Revelation's though...bleh. It was bleh. Though it was cool to see old man Ezio kicking Templar ass, it really felt like a rushed game. Plus Desmond's story was kind of stupid. And they saved a HUGE FRICKING reveal that is so utterly important to the series for Revelation's DLC that was nothing but puzzles. My point is that I would pick up Brotherhood on the cheap and skip Revelations. Just read a synopsis or something online.
  • BladedFalcon - March 26, 2012 8:13 p.m.

    Yeah, I do seem to get that's the consensus, but wouldn't be just easier (And cheaper) to just read a summary and watch the important parts in video? My main turn off with Brotherhood is that I didn't feel it really added enough to the gameplay to justify it's existence. (Yes, i know it introduces the calling of allies to help you and such, but I'd hardly call that a game changer or an exciting innovation. And I don't really care about anything concerning the MP:)
  • Evanesco - March 26, 2012 noon

    So, in multiple interviews before this was published, including one I JUST watched on IGN, Hutchinson says Franklin is NOT being used analogously to Leonardo DaVinci. So, what the hell are you guys talking about?
  • GamesRadarMikelReparaz - March 26, 2012 2:05 p.m.

    What Hutchinson had said was that Franklin was "a challenge" and won't be "1:1" with Da Vinci, although listening to the recording again, the way he talks about Da Vinci in connection to Franklin does seem to lean more toward them not being analogous. So thanks for bringing that to my attention.
  • Darkhawk - March 26, 2012 11:24 a.m.

    Yes, very excited. Also very proud to see another Canadian developer at the top of its game :D I hope there's at least passing reference to the "other" colonies.
  • patbateman17 - March 26, 2012 10:47 a.m.

    "and despite early appearances, it’s a war that unfolds on both sides of the Revolution, meaning Connor is likely to be brought into conflict with the Patriots at some point." Ugh finally - Tom Brady gets his.
  • FlyinHawaiian13 - March 26, 2012 12:56 p.m.

    Losing the Super Bowl to the Giants twice wasn't enough?

Showing 21-40 of 44 comments

Join the Discussion
Add a comment (HTML tags are not allowed.)
Characters remaining: 5000

OR…

Connect with Facebook

Log in using Facebook to share comments, games, status update and other activity easily with your Facebook feed.