Go to the official assassinscreed.com website

Future Stories and Games

Everytime I listen to a video or read content on Ubisoft and the decisions on which direction they want to go with AC it seems like they are having such a hard time deciding? Personally i dont understand this. All the formulas needed for good future games is right there in front of them. Let me first say I love the way they have intertwined the games with the books, lore, and actual history of the Assassins. For example lets take Jacob and Evie Frye, the twins from the British brotherhood. They got a full game on them but there father Ethan was in the "Brahman" book with Arbaz Mir. Then in the book "Underworld" you have the son of Arbaz "jayadeep" who was Ethans student, who was also in the game Syndicate, who also falls for Evie. Now in the game Syndicate they also follow Lydia Frye who is the grandaughter of Jacob etc etc. Now my point is this, Just from this little paragraph I wrote on some of the history and lore of AC they could go in 2 or 3 directions with a new game and it would be good as far as the story goes. You have others like the other Chronicles assassins like Shao Jun who have an interesting background. Her ancestor was even in the AC Movie. I would love to see a game on her. Well anyway hope this makes for interesting thoughts and conversation so this can hopefully fall on the ears of someone at Ubisoft. AC Forever!!!!
  • hadron5510
    hadron5510

    I think you ask a very good question. I do think however you have to be somewhat realistic though. Most media content I have seen on our Ubisoft overlords and on what they intended to do with the 'Assassin's Creed' franchise has less to do with direction but more with on how they intend to deliver their product to us, the consumer. I can understand how Ubisoft might find this difficult. Things change, tastes evolve and really, it is a risky adventure to attempt to keep trying to ply the same old formulaic material. If you do this and keep relying on same old formulaic approach even in different settings you do run the risk of creating a vacuum where no real content exists and any interest just dies a slow malingering death. As Aristotle said 'Nature abhors a vacuum' and I do not think even incessant DLC's of further formulaic material would help to much if at all in such a case. This why I think to some extent Assassin's Creed: Origins was a step in the right direction. I would however like to qualify one thing though while I think Origins was a great game visually with excellent production values (character portrayals etc) going in the right direction, story wise I thought it was quite poor. It was less about the Templar's v Assassins (booo!), it was even less about Abstergo. I think you are right that Ubisoft have many choices to chose from in regards to stories and relevant time periods but they should NOT forget that what made Assassin's Creed what it is, is a story arc of two sides locked in a war to try and achieve the same thing but by much different methods. When you move to remove or deconstruct either side of this story, you change it from a complex, deep and multi layered experience to simple bubble gum for the diabetic mind. May the Father of Understanding guide you.

  • hadron5510
    hadron5510

    I think you ask a very good question. I do think however you have to be somewhat realistic though. Most media content I have seen on our Ubisoft overlords and on what they intended to do with the 'Assassin's Creed' franchise has less to do with direction but more with on how they intend to deliver their product to us, the consumer. I can understand how Ubisoft might find this difficult. Things change, tastes evolve and really, it is a risky adventure to attempt to keep trying to ply the same old formulaic material. If you do this and keep relying on same old formulaic approach even in different settings you do run the risk of creating a vacuum where no real content exists and any interest just dies a slow malingering death. As Aristotle said 'Nature abhors a vacuum' and I do not think even incessant DLC's of further formulaic material would help to much if at all in such a case. This why I think to some extent Assassin's Creed: Origins was a step in the right direction. I would however like to qualify one thing though while I think Origins was a great game visually with excellent production values (character portrayals etc) going in the right direction, story wise I thought it was quite poor. It was less about the Templar's v Assassins (booo!), it was even less about Abstergo. I think you are right that Ubisoft have many choices to chose from in regards to stories and relevant time periods but they should NOT forget that what made Assassin's Creed what it is, is a story arc of two sides locked in a war to try and achieve the same thing but by much different methods. When you move to remove or deconstruct either side of this story, you change it from a complex, deep and multi layered experience to simple bubble gum for the diabetic mind. May the Father of Understanding guide you.

Privacy and Cookies

Ubisoft uses cookies to ensure that you get the best experience on our websites. By continuing to use this site you agree to accept these cookies.

More info on our privacy.