E3 2014: Assassin's Creed Unity E3 Poster Shows Four Characters

<< LINK REMOVED >><< LINK REMOVED >> So, what WAS it about?

<< LINK REMOVED >><< LINK REMOVED >> Here good sirs take my like. But you are right Sun. To me Creed started to decline after Revelations. I had high hopes for three but it wasn't what was promised, and was so full of bugs. Four is full of more bugs, continuity problems, and holes. Used to be a time they took their time with these games, now they release them back to back. I expected more from Ubisoft and there used to be a time they could do no wrong with me. Unfortunately now I can no longer call myself a Creed fan but rather I speculate from afar. Hard lesson learned.

<< LINK REMOVED >><< LINK REMOVED >> I don't know. I felt that Edward was pretty clearly supposed to be a sort of villain in the story.

(warning, some vague spoilers ahead)

I felt like Edwards' story was supposed to sort of define the line between two forms of anarchy -- in one (that which the "Assassin's Creed" refers to, and to which characters like Edward Teach essentially follows) there are no laws; but human solidarity and a shared ethical vocabulary allow free, ungoverned individuals to achieve greatness and facilitate a free and safe society.

The other (form of anarchy), is one where one follows their base instincts -- like greed and a lust for vengeance -- while disregarding society at large. The fact that Edward (Kenway) follows this path for a majority of the story leads to the deaths of most of the people he cared for, though in the end he attempts to "redeem" himself -- his first step towards said redemption is joining the Assassin Order, reuniting with his family (both manifestations of rejoining society), and scaling down (or stopping) his piracy.

Many of the other pirates that Edward (Kenway) meets in the game -- especially the ones who practice the 2nd kind of anarchy -- meet their ends either dead, rotting in jail, or abandoned on an uninhabited island.

In the end, to me Edwards' story was that of enlightenment, he starts (and for most of the game continues to be) as a bad guy, but in the end he makes an attempt to redeem himself (an attempt which is none too successful).

I always felt that Assassin's Creed is a series that meditates heavily on Liberty -- AC2/Brotherhood were meditations on freedom from the church, and scientific progress; whereas AC3 (and seemingly Unity) focus on liberty through violence.

At the conclusion of Black Flag, all but a few of the Pirates are dead, it's a meditation on the end of (total) freedom, and (in a way continuing themes from AC3) a story about compromise, and the best ways to maintain liberty.

I know you will say I am reading way too much into a game -- but that's what literary criticism is all about. ^_^

<< LINK REMOVED >><< LINK REMOVED >> play Blag Flag first before commenting :) It was the best AC game till date, and that coming from someone thats played every single AC since 1, including Bloodlines on the PSP.

<< LINK REMOVED >>

No. They took some liberties with the historical events taking place in each game, but time travel in the Animus? Not that it's not possible, it's the Animus, not actual reality, but that would just prove that everything that happens in the Animus can't actually be taken seriously, and then why would Abstergo even bother anymore? No, if we're starting this debate and start explaining AC games, then we're the ones taking tha games seriously. The characters look nothing like Ezio or Altair or Edward. Plus, they obviously said the main character's name is Arno or something.