Overthinking Videogames 001: Assassin's Creed III Developer Diary

Killing all the dudes.

Hi guys. I recently watched a trailer for the upcoming game "Assassin's Creed 3". I had heard this developer diary was about the in-game animation.  The Assassin's Creed series has always had an interesting approach to animation for locomotion, fighting, and even the ambient activities of townspeople.

Anyway, the video turned out to have very little to say on the subject... except for how totally brutal it is! Herein lies the problem: this trailer makes the game look worse as it goes on.

Hit the jump for the video and my reaction to it.



http://pc.gamespy.com/pc/assassins-creed-2012/1226061p1.html

 I do not feel that this game will be as bankrupt of substance as this dev diary implies. The Assassin's Creed series has done a very good job with historical accuracy and a richness of environment, so why do they spend half this video talking about how unstoppable this lone wolf, half-blood assassin is? Why would I even want to play as a character who is so overwhelming that the lives of individual soldiers are barely a blip on his radar?

This guy is a fallible human being. We like him.

I certainly would appreciate the capacity to grow into that role (that role being 'unstoppable demigod') as I did with Ezio, but this dev diary paints the picture of a game where I am a badass, all Americans are badass (especially George Washington), British soldiers may as well not exist, and the world of the American revolution is an easy to understand ball of climbing walls and blood. Haven't we grown past morally black and white, unambiguous game worlds where the unfettered slaughter of bad-dudes (read: redcoats) is the solution to all the world's problems? It's ridiculous to assume this is what all players want.

I don't even feel like the game depicted in the trailer is what AC3 will be. I think (and hope) that when Corey May (lead writer) says "when [Connor] begins his journey, he has a very clear sense of what is right and what is wrong," and they show Connor murdering two redcoats; I hope that what they mean to say next is that Connor will discover that the world is grayer and more ambiguous than he assumed in the beginning of the game. Maybe the extermination of British soldiers is not the ideal, or even morally "right" reaction to the situation in which Connor finds himself (which would be an unusual and honorable way to depict the American War of Independence.)

...but they never get to that part. They only talk about how super-mega-ultra-badass the American founding fathers are. And then they talk about how Connor is more of a walking pile of blades than a vulnerable and invested human being.

It just makes me disappointed in the Ubisoft marketing department, for making the brutality of the hero be the main selling point and focus of a developer diary. It also makes me sad that we gamers seem to eat it up so readily. Again, I truly think that the final game will be more complex and interesting than the one presented in this video, and I feel like we should hold game makers and advertisers to a higher level of literary intent and integrity than we currently do.

Call it what you will, but this shit isn't simple.