The Problems with Assassin's Creed

I’ve mentioned in another article how I felt betrayed by Assassin’s Creed II, where two story sections were “locked” until purchased via DLC, and that was the last game of the series I played. However, it wasn’t the last one that I bought, as my wife absolutely loves the games. Before I get into it as a bit of an outsider to the series, let me make it clear: I have watched my wife play six Assassin’s Creed titles to death, spread across the Xbox 360 and PS3. She hasn’t played Unity yet, but has finished up Rogue without too much trouble.

When I played the original Assassin’s Creed, I thought the Animus was a great idea. Completely sci-fi technology, allowing gamers to experience history. It’s fictionalised, but I like a bit of historical fiction - comics do it all the time. The first game takes place during the Crusades, which was interesting - the sequel fast-forwarding to the Italian Renaissance.

It then went through two sequels that were still in the Renaissance, featuring the same protagonist - the fourth title confusingly bearing the title “Assassin’s Creed III”. I reasoned that they chose to do this because the previous three had the same protagonist, and they were using the same graphics engine - like Fallout 3 and Fallout New Vegas had. That can’t be the case, given Assassin’s Creed: Unity, but the graphics may account for Assassin’s Creed: Rogue. But the Assassin’s Creed III was actually the one where they jumped the shark. Spoilers follow.

The main storyline for the first four was that Desmond Miles, living in present day America, was unknowingly an assassin, who was part of the Brotherhood. Their grand design was to protect the world from the Templars. Abstergo Industries developed the Animus to find the Pieces of Eden - a powerful device created by an ancient civilisation - as the company was founded by the Templars. Desmond is kidnapped and all but forced to use the Animus to plumb the memories of his Assassin ancestors and find out where the Pieces of Eden are. He’s saved by other Assassins who want to also find them and stop the Templars from destroying the world. Desmond learns how to be a master Assassin and he does wind up finding a Piece of Eden. He also gets spoken to by a hologram that actually speaks to him through the memories of his ancestor Ezio.

Then in the third game, when he has discovered that he’s related to a Syrian, an Italian and a Native American, Desmond sacrifices himself to save the world. He’s spent the better part of four years (each game stated it was the current year) in the Animus, only to die right after learning how to captain a pirate ship. As far as anticlimaxes go, this was a biggy.

So when my wife started up Assassin’s Creed IV: Black Flag, I was somewhat confused that the character-driven story from the previous games was replaced by a silent protagonist in a first-person office. Abstergo Entertainment, your brand new employer, hired you to get into an Animus and test the games they were putting out. Yes, the first generation of Animus which required a person’s DNA to be accessed, was simplified enough for the home market to put out videogames based on the Assassins, in only four years.

Whilst wandering around Abstergo Entertainment, you encounter two of the Assassins that Desmond worked with. This gave me great hope for the twist at the end of the game. That never came… I had hoped that this voiceless being would actually turn out to be a clone of Desmond, which was why these two Assassin’s were risking entering a Templar-run facility to have a chat with them. But no, it’s “you” who are working for Abstergo, but with the aid of the deceased Desmond’s DNA, Abstergo have perfected the device and put you to work on the Welshman-sailor-turned Assassin Edward Kenway.

Kenway is the Native American ancestor Connor’s grandfather. It confuses me to this day, as to why Connor would captain a ship in Assassin’s Creed III, but for the fact Ubisoft already had the sailing mechanics written for Assassin’s Creed IV and just wanted to get their money’s worth. At least in Assassin’s Creed IV it makes sense that Kenway would captain a ship - he’s a sailor in the very first cutscene. But why have it in the previous title as well as the sequel? In Assassin’s Creed: Rogue, you captain a ship again! And you’re still a faceless, voiceless videogame tester in the modern era sections.

Ubisoft have been accused of making all of their games similar. Open worlds with areas you have to climb to unlock the map, with areas of enemies you need to conquer. Far Cry, Watch_Dogs, Assassin’s Creed… I’m fine with that, really. It’s something that works. But making the same thing three times with a different storyline is lazy - it’s reality television.

Now, Assassin’s Creed: Unity is again a game I haven’t yet seen. But it appears to be a return to what the Assassin’s Creed games should be - a city to parkour around while killing people. I have little knowledge of the modern-day sections, but from what I understand there’s almost nothing. This is the final thing Ubisoft need to remedy.

I mentioned before that the games should be character-focused. That doesn’t just apply to the main storyline. What worked well for the first four titles was the overarching storyline held together by Desmond Miles. Making the main character ‘you’ is only beneficial in videogames that need true immersion such as horror games. My wife got very irritated with being called ‘numbskull’ by one of the characters in Assassin’s Creed: Rogue - something that happens many times throughout the game. If it was a character named Erica or Tom that was being called a numbskull, then she would have probably enjoyed exploring the modern day setting whilst the character was continually insulted.

Once they have those things remedied, I’m sure I can be convinced to return to the series. Well, and once they stop charging for the main storyline.