i can see some people preffering altair over ezio, even though i don't feel that way. for one, ezio doesn't act really like an assassin, he acts like james bond. he sleeps with every woman and has funny one liners. altair was more a straight assassin. he's more cold and unforgiving. we also get the sense he's very much involved in his work, whereas ezio clearly has life outside of the assassin's guild.
ezio is just better fleshed out and he has a much larger cast of supporting characters that give him some good dialouge opportunities. altair didn't, in fact i'm glad we're going back to then so we can get a bit more of his story after AC1.
What do you suppose they'll do about Altair's voice? He had an American accent in the first game, I assume because a middle eastern accent might be jarring or hard to relate to for English speaking players. This could be explained in the story due to Abstergo having better translation software (as is mentioned breifly in a side conversation in AC2), but what do you think they will do for this game?
What do you suppose they'll do about Altair's voice? He had an American accent in the first game, I assume because a middle eastern accent might be jarring or hard to relate to for English speaking players. This could be explained in the story due to Abstergo having better translation software (as is mentioned breifly in a side conversation in AC2), but what do you think they will do for this game?
First fight in the game, Altair gets his throat cut.
What do you suppose they'll do about Altair's voice? He had an American accent in the first game, I assume because a middle eastern accent might be jarring or hard to relate to for English speaking players. This could be explained in the story due to Abstergo having better translation software (as is mentioned breifly in a side conversation in AC2), but what do you think they will do for this game?
First fight in the game, Altair gets his throat cut.
Mute for the rest of the game.
Hah, the more I think about that, the more I'm ok with that.
Decoy on
0
MongerI got the ham stink.Dallas, TXRegistered Userregular
What do you suppose they'll do about Altair's voice? He had an American accent in the first game, I assume because a middle eastern accent might be jarring or hard to relate to for English speaking players. This could be explained in the story due to Abstergo having better translation software (as is mentioned breifly in a side conversation in AC2), but what do you think they will do for this game?
Also hope they get a new voice actor for Altair, or force the original guy to shape up. Especially after the amazing job Roger Craig Smith did as Ezio. Considering Altair comes across as WAY more interesting in the codex versus AC1, here's to hoping they beef up his character too.
They replaced Altair's voice actor with a properly accented one for that PSP game. The one that no one played because it was on the PSP. I assume they'll be using that guy.
Also, Altair is an asshole. I mean, he gets better about it, but still.
In fact, I would argue that he is much more impressive as a character in the lore, and during the first game, than Ezio is during the second and Brotherhood.
Well, I'd be interested in hearing that argument, because I also thought that Altair wasn't much more than a cypher. What characterisation was there felt tacked on and much less an integral part of the character or the storytelling than is the case with Ezio.
Well, basic character comparison.
Altair starts out as a pompous jackass. A highly skilled assassin who let his ability go to his head, and starts imagining he's so awesome, nothing can stop him. Gets his shit ruined in less than five minutes of the opening of the game, and then has to go back to his master with his tail between his legs. Malik upstages him by bringing back the focal point of the game, the Eden piece, and as Altair is still attempting to mouth off, he gets stripped of everything and has to start all over again.
Now, certainly, gameplay elements. This was the equivalent to the amnesia syndrome from other games. But using the characterization element to drive this player-related element was quite a nice move.
Continuing on, Altair bitches and moans at every turn during the first round of assassinations at how he's hampered by this reductionist move by Al Mualim, and how he deserves so much better.
Eventually, as he starts killing all these men with prejudice and little understanding, he starts figuring out not only that something is amiss in the grand scheme of things, but also his actions allow him to be introspective and realize that his douchebaggery isn't really helping him all that much, in fact, with every assassination he completes, he realizes that his world view isn't really true at all.
One of the best things about the first game is the storytelling through the mouths of the dying. They cut that out as a gameplay element for the second and third game because ultimately, the largest purchasing demographic neither has the patience nor the understanding to withstand the barrage of carefully and timely doled out plot (though arguably, those death-dialogs should have had a *skip* button).
Altair by the end eats quite a lot of humble pie, and actually fosters brotherhood with Malik, the man who's brother he was responsible for killing due to acting like a jackass. As Altair changes, so the game does as well, and by the end, he's able to see things clearly (in more ways than one) as he discovers that there were 10 templars, and that he's been sent to kill the other 9 for two distinct and overlapping contradictory reasons.
In the end he prevails, yet isn't able to fully make true on his promise (to destroy the device), as he is only "human", and I use that term here to mean both "fallible" as well as "lol aliencreation".
tl;dr He's a fully fleshed out character that fits in like a Tetris piece into the world and lore that surrounds him, and acts accordingly. His personal as well as overarching arcs are well written, and well executed. It's a story worth telling.
On the other hand we have Ezio. Ezio was given a redundant characterization and plot, in order for the audience to more easily identify with him and see the reason behind his actions (and thus as players, have a more clear motivation for wanting to guide the actor (Ezio) through the paces of the game).
Ezio is a carefree youth, doing what any wealthy (spoiled) youth does, having rivalries with other unruly youths and trying to have sex with anything that has a vagina.
Lo' and behold, his father, Batman, gets set up and dies, and thus Ezio goes on a journey of revenge, and much as Alice in Wonderland, as he kills the people responsible for his father's and brothers' deaths, he uncovers a greater plot and follows it through, devoting his entire life to it.
Certainly, AC2 and Brotherhood were well done games. Ezio's story and the games are great. I love them personally. But if we're going to pass critique they're a little too easy, and a little too derivative. I've read, seen and played many revenge stories like AC2. It's that coming of age story where a boy must become a man through unfavorable circumstances, and while very easy to pick up, it is far from original, but also far from allowing a breadth in storytelling that is multi-faceted.
Hence, why my favorite part of AC2 and Brotherhood, is where they actually underline that, yes, even though Ezio's destiny is to be the Godfather, the life that he had led is really tragic in a sense. And they show that through the Christina Vespucci missions, which as I've said, is my favorite bit of lore from Ezio's story. It's where they compound the tragedy in very few and very short and simple pieces of lore, thus giving Ezio and his actions quite a bit more depth, of which initially he's severely lacking due to "revenge story" syndrome.
Altair goes through a personal transformation that has both inward and outward threads which tangle and overlap. For him, in the first game, it is all connected and intertwined, and he is changed by his actions and other individuals as he "touches" (kills) them. He sort of, willfully, goes through the transition. Ezio is at every turned "forced" into taking the fight up against the Templars (by emotion and rage initially, and then later by Mario). Surely, therein lies his tragedy, as he would never have much of a choice at living his life in any other way than just going after Templars and continuing a fight someone else started many many years ago. Though, that makes his journey all the more linear and simpler, which is one of my main gripes with it.
I mean, this is splitting hairs in the end. They're both very nice characters. But I prefer Altair because of the depth and disposition as well as having had the superior story.
Ezio's is ultimately arranged in such a way that it's bound to fizzle, which it does in both AC2 and Brotherhood.
The ending to AC2 is largely anticlimactic because it attempts to trade in meaning, which admittedly it does well, but at the cost of overarching sense. When he doesn't kill Rodrigo, after such a long line of assassinations and so many years of revenge seeking, he certainly gains in the "I say when it ends, and it ends here" department, when he attempts to take control of his own destiny and quit. But the entire buildup to the story fizzles as a result.
Same thing in Brotherhood. He ousts Cesare, thus accomplishing his goal, but due to some nebulous reasons (whether they're kept such intentionally is irrelevant - when they detach from the story, it's a big minus no matter how you flip it) the game skips in time, and you as a player are more or less forced to "go through the motions" in getting Ezio to Cesare, and then killing him for no practical or rational reason whatsoever. "Hurr durr, Cesare was a big threat, the crystal ball told me so" isn't much of a rationale, regardless of how ridiculous the game's overarching story is.
Anyway, as long winded as the above may seem, that's actually the short of it for me. Altair has the benefit of some other nice features, like the fact that he eventually got together with that Templar lady as well as the overall lore regarding the Codex, leading the Assassins etc. He's pretty well rounded overall, and the first game is a really really strong foundation for his character.
I think the death sequences were more necessary in AC1 because Altair only had them, Al Mualim, and the three bureaus to talk to, while Ezio has family, friends, and extensive contacts.
-Tal on
0
MongerI got the ham stink.Dallas, TXRegistered Userregular
edited May 2011
Malik is great. He completes his mission despite losing his arm because of Altair's dipshittery.
I prefer Ezio largely due to the world he inhabits. If AC1 had been given a structure more like AC2s, it may be a different story, but as it stands, Ezio's journey is much more compelling because it consists of more than sitting on benches listening to random people.
In AC1, this was a huge issue for me. For the first few kills, I wasn't doing all of the side missions--I just did enough to activate the assassination. However, if you do it this way, you miss a ton, and the game doesn't help you here--all of a sudden Altair will know something, that he supposedly learned from a side mission you never did, and then its like.. "Bwah?"
The best thing AC2 did, in my opinion, was link everything in with the story. That made it so much better, and really pulled you along with Ezio.
My only issue is that they did a poor job with the time skips, because, all of a sudden, Ezio is sitting there saying its been 13 years or whatever, and you're like "Really? Sure doesn't feel like it."
So, overall I'm excited to get ahold of Altair in a way that will hopefully be similar to AC2/ACB.
InkSplat on
Origin for Dragon Age: Inquisition Shenanigans: Inksplat776
Malik is great. He completes his mission despite losing his arm because of Altair's dipshittery.
Dude is a badass.
Altair gives Malik a robot arm using the apple and then you play as him the whole time
Ubisoft must make this happen. I don't even care how, they must do it. Bionic commando and Assassin's Creed combined to... wait, that's basically what Spiderman 2 was.... never mind then. but more/deeper character development appears to be the obvious thing everyone wants.
Malik is great. He completes his mission despite losing his arm because of Altair's dipshittery.
Dude is a badass.
Altair gives Malik a robot arm using the apple and then you play as him the whole time
Ubisoft must make this happen. I don't even care how, they must do it. Bionic commando and Assassin's Creed combined to... wait, that's basically what Spiderman 2 was.... never mind then. but more/deeper character development appears to be the obvious thing everyone wants.
Fuck that. Altair should make himself a mech. The whole game could be like Zone of the Enders.
Drez on
Switch: SW-7690-2320-9238Steam/PSN/Xbox: Drezdar
0
MongerI got the ham stink.Dallas, TXRegistered Userregular
Malik is great. He completes his mission despite losing his arm because of Altair's dipshittery.
Dude is a badass.
Altair gives Malik a robot arm using the apple and then you play as him the whole time
Ubisoft must make this happen. I don't even care how, they must do it. Bionic commando and Assassin's Creed combined to... wait, that's basically what Spiderman 2 was.... never mind then. but more/deeper character development appears to be the obvious thing everyone wants.
Fuck that. Altair should make himself a mech. The whole game could be like Zone of the Enders.
Assassin's Creed already crossed over with Metal Gear. If you want more Zone of the Enders, you'll have to find another Ubisoft property to mooch off of.
Pretty well written argument by Blackdove, though I just want to comment on the ends to AC2 and AC:B.
The reasons for Ezio not killing Rodrigo Borgia at the end of AC2 and not killing Cesare Borgia until another timeskip in AC:B have more to do with historical reasons than anything. Basically Ubisoft had to line up their deaths with actual history. Maybe they could have written it better, but that is one of the downsides of writing historical fiction. Things like death have to line up with actual history.
I also want to say, as cliche has the revenge story can be for Ezio, I don't see Altair's story as all that unique either. Arrogant man gets humbled by events and learns the error of his ways isn't exactly unheard of in storytelling either. So really I personally tend to like Ezio as a character better than Altair because he has more of an actual personality to me. THat said, I do look forward to seeing how Altair's character might be fleshed out a bit more in Revelations.
I really like that Ezio was questioning the assassin's methods by the end of AC2, because he was just an independent agent and hadn't actually been part of the order. He took that one step too far by letting Rodrigo go, and learned his lesson the hard way. I don't think he wanted to make the same mistake with Cesare, even if he wasn't really a threat anymore.
THat said, I do look forward to seeing how Altair's character might be fleshed out a bit more in Revelations.
If they go the same route with fleshing him out with only half as much effort as they did with him in the Codex in AC2, it'll be a vast improvement over his characterization in the first game. Codex Altair was seriously one of the most compelling characters in AC2. To the point where I did a 180 on him and pretty much forgave him for being so much of a dick that he straight-up kills an old man for shits and giggles within the first 5 minutes of AC1.
I wonder if they'll include Malik and Maria in Altair's portions of Revelations. They seemed to be the only ones able to relate to Altair as an equal, especially Malik.
sphinx81 on
0
Triple BBastard of the NorthMARegistered Userregular
edited May 2011
Consider me part of the "if they can continue improving them, I'm okay with them being released annually" crowd. I'd hate to see the AC franchise go the way of Call of Duty myself, but I simply cannot argue with the following:
1) I really, really liked AC1.
2) AC2 was a vast improvement.
3) Brotherhood managed to be a vast improvement over the previous vast improvement.
This brand is fucking brilliant (IMO, one of the most fresh IPs to come along in ages), and if they can keep producing masterpieces like this, then bring 'em on.
Also: Regarding Altair's previous acts of merciless slaughter simply for kicks...I want that kind of freedom. The one thing I hate about the AC series and where it's gone is that I fail the game if I kill random people. That seems like a majorly unnecessary cockblock to me, and if I had my way, Revelations would revert back to the old ways in terms of who I'm allowed to kill.
Triple B on
Steam/XBL/PSN: FiveAgainst1
0
Dusdais ashamed of this postSLC, UTRegistered Userregular
edited May 2011
I never did find a translation for the line from the end of AC1:
When Al Mualim is dying and Altair quotes something in another language, and Al Mualim says "So it would seem..."
Ah, its "Nothing is true, everything is permitted". That makes sense.
a lot of those random guards are probably good men with families who just legitimately want to protect the city, and they aren't really threatening you
a lot of those random guards are probably good men with families who just legitimately want to protect the city, and they aren't really threatening you
no, wait, they're all corrupt assholes
Guard dialogue would be a good way to increase the difficulty on some missions, you can kill the guards but make it so you don't want to (unless there's a really difficult one to get around, so he can be an arsehole).
Etzio was all cool, had women chasing him, slept around and was adored by many.
I play games to escape my every day life, so I preferred Altair.
(In honesty it probably had less to do with the character and more to do with the era and cities, I found AC2 and AC:B pretty flat by comparison, or at least more geared towards being historically accurate and less towards being fun to leap about. I had the same issue with GTA3 and Vice City. Vice City has loads of improvements but I still preferred GTA3 due to the city).
::edit:: though in AC2 no-one said "THIEF! I'll have your hands for this!", that was a blessing.
I'm sure there's a story buried there somewhere in Altair, but "exposition through talky, unskippable cutscenes, presented in a flat American accent with zero inflection whatsoever" made for really bland exposition.
Not only do I like Ezio's character better, but the design choices in AC2 went to far greater lengths to flesh him out with style.
I feel as though Altair encapsulates the more 'enigmatic' side of the assassin. I am not sure what was driving the developers when they designed him, but I felt like his mysteriousness was deliberate. Ezio was a serious 180 from that -- our first glimpse of him was as an infant.
I like them both equally, but I find myself more intrigued by what I don't know about Altair than what I do know about Ezio.
Is it true what they say about the first game pretty much being unplayable after coming into contact with the others?
I'm tempted to rebuy it before getting to 2. I recall it being pretty short anyway.
The problem is AC1 has a middle part that is just boring, boring slog. Doing the missions to get to the parts you care about, which is the killing. AC2 just has far more mission variety and better pacing
I haven't read the entire thread to know if this has been discussed to death, but the promo tagline of "Altair, son of nobody" confuses and intrigues me. In AC1, Vidic was after the specific map memory from Altair, which I assume he knew was there from outside sources referencing that knowledge. I wonder if the Animus is unable to go any further back than Altair.
If he truly has no ancestors, then my assumption that Altair/Ezio's eagle vision and partial immunity to Pieces of Eden comes from a hybrid lineage is suddenly on shaky ground. Maybe that tag isn't intended to be taken literally.
I want to replay AC to get a better feel for Altair. When I was playing it the first time I was more about the novelty of it and less about the intricate storyline. I always thought of Altair as more ruthless than Ezio, but maybe that's because he was less of a son/brother/lover/leader than our Italian hero.
I think this would also be a good opportunity to flesh out the setting around Altair. Part of what makes Ezio's story great is the landscape and architecture. The original game, while beautiful, had a lot of repetitive environments and wasn't as grandiose as Ezio's Italian set. The cities as characters lent well to AC2 and ACB, so plunking Altair down in his own interactive environment would be a fun idea, and probably give more dimension to the character.
I haven't read the entire thread to know if this has been discussed to death, but the promo tagline of "Altair, son of nobody" confuses and intrigues me.
Altair's full name is "Altair Ibn-La'Ahad".
Which literally translates to "Flying one, son of no one".
Just decided to replay AC2, because of this thread, and the disc is scratched somewhere that doesnt make the game unplayable, but creates a horrible clicking noise when I play it coming from the tray.
and it wont rip to the hard drive. Stops at 44% everytime.
I just want to stab faces!
mxmarks on
PSN: mxmarks - WiiU: mxmarks - twitter: @ MikesPS4 - twitch.tv/mxmarks - "Yes, mxmarks is the King of Queens" - Unbreakable Vow
Just decided to replay AC2, because of this thread, and the disc is scratched somewhere that doesnt make the game unplayable, but creates a horrible clicking noise when I play it coming from the tray.
and it wont rip to the hard drive. Stops at 44% everytime.
Is it true what they say about the first game pretty much being unplayable after coming into contact with the others?
I'm tempted to rebuy it before getting to 2. I recall it being pretty short anyway.
The problem is AC1 has a middle part that is just boring, boring slog. Doing the missions to get to the parts you care about, which is the killing. AC2 just has far more mission variety and better pacing
I can't replay AC1. I tried, when I bought the PC version, but I just can't.
It suffers the same fate as Mass Effect. AC1/ME1 are awesome prior to the release of their sequels, which raised the bar just enough that the originals seem dull and uninteresting in so many ways.
While Assassin's Creen 2 was a vastly better game than the original (and one of my favorites of the entire generation, still playing Brotherhood), I do think the actual assassinations were better handled in the original game. AC2 has Ezio doing all sorts of stuff, while AC1 is a far more focused game. Gather intel about your target, then go after him. While the missions themselves sucked, I liked that you had the ability to do additional ones to get more information and make your approach easier. I definitely used the information from those to plan my attack. Also the assassinations served as the major setpieces of the first game, and it showed. They were considerably more intricate and your targets most interesting, and the conversations with them while they lay dying did a good job at showing who they were and some of why they made their choices. And I absolutely LOVED the mad dash back to the assassin's bureau when literally the entire city was actively searching for you.
Otherwise I think AC2 did almost everything better, but it is fair to point out what the first did right.
Sudden idea, a cool story mechanic would be switching back and forth between Altair in old Constantinople, and Etzio in the less old Constantinople. For example, you play as Altair going through some building trying to hide some cool stuff, and then you play as Etzio trying to get that cool stuff years later when the area has changed a bit.
Also, if they don't have some sort of joke or achievement about the Istanbul Constantinople song, I will die a little inside.
Posts
ezio is just better fleshed out and he has a much larger cast of supporting characters that give him some good dialouge opportunities. altair didn't, in fact i'm glad we're going back to then so we can get a bit more of his story after AC1.
I should really get around to that so I can read spoilers and whatnot.
First fight in the game, Altair gets his throat cut.
Mute for the rest of the game.
I'm tempted to rebuy it before getting to 2. I recall it being pretty short anyway.
Steam - Wildschwein | The Backlog
Grappling Hook Showdown - Tumblr
Hah, the more I think about that, the more I'm ok with that.
Also, Altair is an asshole. I mean, he gets better about it, but still.
Not if you're me. I still like the first game at least as much as the second. It does things that the rest of the series doesn't do, and I miss that.
All right, people. It is not a gerbil. It is not a hamster. It is not a guinea pig. It is a death rabbit. Death. Rabbit. Say it with me, now.
Well, basic character comparison.
Now, certainly, gameplay elements. This was the equivalent to the amnesia syndrome from other games. But using the characterization element to drive this player-related element was quite a nice move.
Continuing on, Altair bitches and moans at every turn during the first round of assassinations at how he's hampered by this reductionist move by Al Mualim, and how he deserves so much better.
Eventually, as he starts killing all these men with prejudice and little understanding, he starts figuring out not only that something is amiss in the grand scheme of things, but also his actions allow him to be introspective and realize that his douchebaggery isn't really helping him all that much, in fact, with every assassination he completes, he realizes that his world view isn't really true at all.
One of the best things about the first game is the storytelling through the mouths of the dying. They cut that out as a gameplay element for the second and third game because ultimately, the largest purchasing demographic neither has the patience nor the understanding to withstand the barrage of carefully and timely doled out plot (though arguably, those death-dialogs should have had a *skip* button).
Altair by the end eats quite a lot of humble pie, and actually fosters brotherhood with Malik, the man who's brother he was responsible for killing due to acting like a jackass. As Altair changes, so the game does as well, and by the end, he's able to see things clearly (in more ways than one) as he discovers that there were 10 templars, and that he's been sent to kill the other 9 for two distinct and overlapping contradictory reasons.
In the end he prevails, yet isn't able to fully make true on his promise (to destroy the device), as he is only "human", and I use that term here to mean both "fallible" as well as "lol aliencreation".
tl;dr He's a fully fleshed out character that fits in like a Tetris piece into the world and lore that surrounds him, and acts accordingly. His personal as well as overarching arcs are well written, and well executed. It's a story worth telling.
On the other hand we have Ezio. Ezio was given a redundant characterization and plot, in order for the audience to more easily identify with him and see the reason behind his actions (and thus as players, have a more clear motivation for wanting to guide the actor (Ezio) through the paces of the game).
Ezio is a carefree youth, doing what any wealthy (spoiled) youth does, having rivalries with other unruly youths and trying to have sex with anything that has a vagina.
Lo' and behold, his father, Batman, gets set up and dies, and thus Ezio goes on a journey of revenge, and much as Alice in Wonderland, as he kills the people responsible for his father's and brothers' deaths, he uncovers a greater plot and follows it through, devoting his entire life to it.
Certainly, AC2 and Brotherhood were well done games. Ezio's story and the games are great. I love them personally. But if we're going to pass critique they're a little too easy, and a little too derivative. I've read, seen and played many revenge stories like AC2. It's that coming of age story where a boy must become a man through unfavorable circumstances, and while very easy to pick up, it is far from original, but also far from allowing a breadth in storytelling that is multi-faceted.
Hence, why my favorite part of AC2 and Brotherhood, is where they actually underline that, yes, even though Ezio's destiny is to be the Godfather, the life that he had led is really tragic in a sense. And they show that through the Christina Vespucci missions, which as I've said, is my favorite bit of lore from Ezio's story. It's where they compound the tragedy in very few and very short and simple pieces of lore, thus giving Ezio and his actions quite a bit more depth, of which initially he's severely lacking due to "revenge story" syndrome.
Altair goes through a personal transformation that has both inward and outward threads which tangle and overlap. For him, in the first game, it is all connected and intertwined, and he is changed by his actions and other individuals as he "touches" (kills) them. He sort of, willfully, goes through the transition. Ezio is at every turned "forced" into taking the fight up against the Templars (by emotion and rage initially, and then later by Mario). Surely, therein lies his tragedy, as he would never have much of a choice at living his life in any other way than just going after Templars and continuing a fight someone else started many many years ago. Though, that makes his journey all the more linear and simpler, which is one of my main gripes with it.
I mean, this is splitting hairs in the end. They're both very nice characters. But I prefer Altair because of the depth and disposition as well as having had the superior story.
Ezio's is ultimately arranged in such a way that it's bound to fizzle, which it does in both AC2 and Brotherhood.
The ending to AC2 is largely anticlimactic because it attempts to trade in meaning, which admittedly it does well, but at the cost of overarching sense. When he doesn't kill Rodrigo, after such a long line of assassinations and so many years of revenge seeking, he certainly gains in the "I say when it ends, and it ends here" department, when he attempts to take control of his own destiny and quit. But the entire buildup to the story fizzles as a result.
Same thing in Brotherhood. He ousts Cesare, thus accomplishing his goal, but due to some nebulous reasons (whether they're kept such intentionally is irrelevant - when they detach from the story, it's a big minus no matter how you flip it) the game skips in time, and you as a player are more or less forced to "go through the motions" in getting Ezio to Cesare, and then killing him for no practical or rational reason whatsoever. "Hurr durr, Cesare was a big threat, the crystal ball told me so" isn't much of a rationale, regardless of how ridiculous the game's overarching story is.
Anyway, as long winded as the above may seem, that's actually the short of it for me. Altair has the benefit of some other nice features, like the fact that he eventually got together with that Templar lady as well as the overall lore regarding the Codex, leading the Assassins etc. He's pretty well rounded overall, and the first game is a really really strong foundation for his character.
I really missed the death sequences of AC1, cause I thought they were really interesting to hear.
Dude is a badass.
All right, people. It is not a gerbil. It is not a hamster. It is not a guinea pig. It is a death rabbit. Death. Rabbit. Say it with me, now.
In AC1, this was a huge issue for me. For the first few kills, I wasn't doing all of the side missions--I just did enough to activate the assassination. However, if you do it this way, you miss a ton, and the game doesn't help you here--all of a sudden Altair will know something, that he supposedly learned from a side mission you never did, and then its like.. "Bwah?"
The best thing AC2 did, in my opinion, was link everything in with the story. That made it so much better, and really pulled you along with Ezio.
My only issue is that they did a poor job with the time skips, because, all of a sudden, Ezio is sitting there saying its been 13 years or whatever, and you're like "Really? Sure doesn't feel like it."
So, overall I'm excited to get ahold of Altair in a way that will hopefully be similar to AC2/ACB.
Altair gives Malik a robot arm using the apple and then you play as him the whole time
Ubisoft must make this happen. I don't even care how, they must do it. Bionic commando and Assassin's Creed combined to... wait, that's basically what Spiderman 2 was.... never mind then. but more/deeper character development appears to be the obvious thing everyone wants.
Fuck that. Altair should make himself a mech. The whole game could be like Zone of the Enders.
I suggest Imagine: Mechz.
All right, people. It is not a gerbil. It is not a hamster. It is not a guinea pig. It is a death rabbit. Death. Rabbit. Say it with me, now.
I also want to say, as cliche has the revenge story can be for Ezio, I don't see Altair's story as all that unique either. Arrogant man gets humbled by events and learns the error of his ways isn't exactly unheard of in storytelling either. So really I personally tend to like Ezio as a character better than Altair because he has more of an actual personality to me. THat said, I do look forward to seeing how Altair's character might be fleshed out a bit more in Revelations.
If they go the same route with fleshing him out with only half as much effort as they did with him in the Codex in AC2, it'll be a vast improvement over his characterization in the first game. Codex Altair was seriously one of the most compelling characters in AC2. To the point where I did a 180 on him and pretty much forgave him for being so much of a dick that he straight-up kills an old man for shits and giggles within the first 5 minutes of AC1.
I wonder if they'll include Malik and Maria in Altair's portions of Revelations. They seemed to be the only ones able to relate to Altair as an equal, especially Malik.
1) I really, really liked AC1.
2) AC2 was a vast improvement.
3) Brotherhood managed to be a vast improvement over the previous vast improvement.
This brand is fucking brilliant (IMO, one of the most fresh IPs to come along in ages), and if they can keep producing masterpieces like this, then bring 'em on.
Also: Regarding Altair's previous acts of merciless slaughter simply for kicks...I want that kind of freedom. The one thing I hate about the AC series and where it's gone is that I fail the game if I kill random people. That seems like a majorly unnecessary cockblock to me, and if I had my way, Revelations would revert back to the old ways in terms of who I'm allowed to kill.
Ah, its "Nothing is true, everything is permitted". That makes sense.
It probably had something to do with food.
a lot of those random guards are probably good men with families who just legitimately want to protect the city, and they aren't really threatening you
no, wait, they're all corrupt assholes
Guard dialogue would be a good way to increase the difficulty on some missions, you can kill the guards but make it so you don't want to (unless there's a really difficult one to get around, so he can be an arsehole).
I play games to escape my every day life, so I preferred Altair.
(In honesty it probably had less to do with the character and more to do with the era and cities, I found AC2 and AC:B pretty flat by comparison, or at least more geared towards being historically accurate and less towards being fun to leap about. I had the same issue with GTA3 and Vice City. Vice City has loads of improvements but I still preferred GTA3 due to the city).
::edit:: though in AC2 no-one said "THIEF! I'll have your hands for this!", that was a blessing.
PSN: SirGrinchX
Oculus Rift: Sir_Grinch
Not only do I like Ezio's character better, but the design choices in AC2 went to far greater lengths to flesh him out with style.
3DS Friend Code: 2165-6448-8348 www.Twitch.TV/cooljammer00
Battle.Net: JohnDarc#1203 Origin/UPlay: CoolJammer00
I like them both equally, but I find myself more intrigued by what I don't know about Altair than what I do know about Ezio.
The problem is AC1 has a middle part that is just boring, boring slog. Doing the missions to get to the parts you care about, which is the killing. AC2 just has far more mission variety and better pacing
http://www.gamesindustry.biz/
I write about video games and stuff. It is fun. Sometimes.
If he truly has no ancestors, then my assumption that Altair/Ezio's eagle vision and partial immunity to Pieces of Eden comes from a hybrid lineage is suddenly on shaky ground. Maybe that tag isn't intended to be taken literally.
Or at the very least, make him more bad ass than Ezio.
Steam Profile
I think this would also be a good opportunity to flesh out the setting around Altair. Part of what makes Ezio's story great is the landscape and architecture. The original game, while beautiful, had a lot of repetitive environments and wasn't as grandiose as Ezio's Italian set. The cities as characters lent well to AC2 and ACB, so plunking Altair down in his own interactive environment would be a fun idea, and probably give more dimension to the character.
Altair's full name is "Altair Ibn-La'Ahad".
Which literally translates to "Flying one, son of no one".
Even then he was a grumpy old fucker who could never figure out his place in life, and died after giving in to the call of the Apple.
He's hardly the most heroic character in the series.
3DS Friend Code: 2165-6448-8348 www.Twitch.TV/cooljammer00
Battle.Net: JohnDarc#1203 Origin/UPlay: CoolJammer00
Just decided to replay AC2, because of this thread, and the disc is scratched somewhere that doesnt make the game unplayable, but creates a horrible clicking noise when I play it coming from the tray.
and it wont rip to the hard drive. Stops at 44% everytime.
I just want to stab faces!
AC2 is what killed my Xbox 360 in February 2010.
I can't replay AC1. I tried, when I bought the PC version, but I just can't.
It suffers the same fate as Mass Effect. AC1/ME1 are awesome prior to the release of their sequels, which raised the bar just enough that the originals seem dull and uninteresting in so many ways.
Otherwise I think AC2 did almost everything better, but it is fair to point out what the first did right.
Also, if they don't have some sort of joke or achievement about the Istanbul Constantinople song, I will die a little inside.