Assassin's Creed Brotherhood, what are you looking forward to the most?

[ArturiusRex8]

Hello GitP forum-users!
I am a fan of the Assassin's Creed series by Ubisoft. I am looking forward to the release of AC: Brotherhood (midnight Nov. 16). I'd like to see what other people who are going to get the game think looks the coolest in the game. Personally, I lilke the idea of the weapon combos (i.e., stab one enemy through the chest with your sword and shoot another in the face with your hidden gun). Anyone else have a different opinion? Or even if you have the same opinion, I'd love to hear it!

[Fri]

Huh, surprisingly, I have none. Assassin's creed 2 is one of my favourite game ever and now I can't think anything to add to it (though I know there must be something, I know I thought of something when I played it).

It's near perfect game for me already. Maybe... more gadgets? Like grappling hook or something. Then... stylish ranged takedown? You don't really use ranged weapons much in that game.

[Comet]

Rome! It's definitely what I'm looking forward to the most. Kicking in the enemy's front door, delivering brutal justice on their very doorstep and so on. It's going to be epic.

Also, Rome should make for some awesome parkour action. Great, massive architecture all around, practically begging to be scaled by Ezio and his band of rebels and cutthroats.

[arguskos]

The completion of the Subject 16 plot, and meeting the man behind the glyphs at long last. :smallamused:

[Temotei]

awesome parkour action

To be picky, I think Ezio is a free-runner, which is slightly different.


The completion of the Subject 16 plot, and meeting the man behind the glyphs at long last. :smallamused:

This.

I could stand for more gun action, though. Love that thing. :smallcool:

[BRC]

I'm hoping they do something interesting with the whole "Brotherhood" aspect of the game. In the single player trailer, all the other Assassins looked rather generic, I'm hoping they're actual characters instead of "Do quest. TA-DA, the Brotherhood has gained 2 Archers!"
Rome, if it's anything like what they did with Florence and Venice will be Amazing. Really, even if it's just "More AC2", I'd be happy. AC2 was an awesome game.
Also, am I the only one who thinks the French Revolution (Start in 1789, end at Waterloo) would make an excellent setting for AC3? Eventually they will need to bring the franchise to an age of firearms. The Muskets and Bayonets era will be a good chance to try out ideas, while still having good old fashioned Melee combat to fall back on as people reload/you get too close for them to use their muskets.

[arguskos]

I could stand for more gun action, though. Love that thing. :smallcool:
You'll get it (it's back), and there's been confirmed to be a Crossbow and Poison Darts! Because the Poison Blade wasn't good enough, now you can cause dudes to go crazy and fall over from a long distance. :smallbiggrin:

I loved the Poison Blade so damn much.

[Comet]

To be picky, I think Ezio is a free-runner, which is slightly different.


I never really thought about the difference, actually, but now you got me interested.

Wikipedia, which is my number one easy reference for maximum credibility, offers this:


While Freerunning and parkour share many common techniques, they have a fundamental difference in philosophy and intention. The main aim of parkour is the ability to quickly access areas that would otherwise be inaccessible and the ability to escape pursuers, which means the main intention is to clear their objects as efficiently as they can, while Freerunning emphasizes self development by "following your way"


So, going by that, freerunning would be basically be doing tricks and vaults and such just for the heck of it, while parkour is goal-oriented movement from A to B. Ezio definitely starts as a freerunner, in that case, but I'd still maintain that his assasin persona is very much a parkour man.
I'm no expert though, so whatevs. It still looks cool :smalltongue:

[Falgorn]

I'm looking forward to the multiplayer.

No, really, I am. I think it looks...great.

[ArturiusRex8]

You don't really use ranged weapons much in that game.

As someone posted earlier, they will have a wider variety of ranged weapons to choose from, whether it's crossbow (AC1 wants its weapon back!), hidden gun/poison darts (those are supposedly the same mechanism, like you shoot bullets out of it, then change to darts, or something), and the ubiquitous (no pun intended, Ubisoft) throwing knives.

Personally, I don't see what you're talking about. AC1 and AC2 I used throwing knives/ranged weapons all the time. I love standing 20 feet away from a group of enemies, and ten seconds later they're all dead with knives sticking out of their chests (they're there, I'm sure, maybe extradimensionally?). And then, if some enemies are still alive and charging me, I drop a smoke bomb and instantly assassinate them (sure, AC2 only, but still).

[arguskos]

Man, I loved the Poison Blade. It was always too entertaining to walk up near a guard, stick him, and watch him wail on his buddies in a drunken stupor, then just fall over dead. Better yet to do it to three of them at the same time! :smallbiggrin:

God I need a PS3 so I can actually get Brotherhood. :smallsigh:

[Rustic Dude]

I am more about slaughtering Bad Guys on rooftops with a simple, elegant, sword. Even better if I can throw them all to the street.

But the Crossbow sounds nice too. And enhanced mounted combat sounds promising.

[VanBuren]

I'm hoping they do something interesting with the whole "Brotherhood" aspect of the game. In the single player trailer, all the other Assassins looked rather generic, I'm hoping they're actual characters instead of "Do quest. TA-DA, the Brotherhood has gained 2 Archers!"
Rome, if it's anything like what they did with Florence and Venice will be Amazing. Really, even if it's just "More AC2", I'd be happy. AC2 was an awesome game.
Also, am I the only one who thinks the French Revolution (Start in 1789, end at Waterloo) would make an excellent setting for AC3? Eventually they will need to bring the franchise to an age of firearms. The Muskets and Bayonets era will be a good chance to try out ideas, while still having good old fashioned Melee combat to fall back on as people reload/you get too close for them to use their muskets.

I feel like AC3 is set to take place in present. We've loaded Desmond up with assassin skills for a reason, and no amount of mucking around in the past is going to end the war and fix the big problem in the present.

[BRC]

I feel like AC3 is set to take place in present. We've loaded Desmond up with assassin skills for a reason, and no amount of mucking around in the past is going to end the war and fix the big problem in the present.
They'll find some reason. I don't know, I just love the Historical Aspect of Assassins Creed, I know that eventually Desmond will get out of the Animus, but I don't really like that. Too much of the game is wrapped up in the Animus (like Synchronization), and combat would have to change fairly drastically to fit a world of modern firearms. Plus, the Parkour/Freerunning aspects of the game work great in crowded pedestrian cities with few buildings above two or three stories, but if you set AC in a world of Cars and Skyscrapers it wouldn't work nearly as well.

[Brother Oni]

They'll find some reason. I don't know, I just love the Historical Aspect of Assassins Creed, I know that eventually Desmond will get out of the Animus, but I don't really like that. Too much of the game is wrapped up in the Animus (like Synchronization), and combat would have to change fairly drastically to fit a world of modern firearms. Plus, the Parkour/Freerunning aspects of the game work great in crowded pedestrian cities with few buildings above two or three stories, but if you set AC in a world of Cars and Skyscrapers it wouldn't work nearly as well.

Judging from the amount of Parkour/freerunning you can do in Mirror's Edge, I don't think setting AC in the modern age would be an issue.

I do agree that combat needs to be drastically changed - at the end of AC2 where the Templar rentacops rush out of the truck armed with nothing but batons pretty much broke the story for me.
That said, updating the combat engine to be something closer like Alpha Protocol or Splinter Cell would be acceptable.

However I would love some historical setting for AC3, simply because wandering around a Medieval/Renaissance city mapped in loving detail never gets old (I've been to Venice before and I swear I've been down some of those streets and bridges, and Ezio wasn't joking about the smell).

[ArturiusRex8]

I do agree that combat needs to be drastically changed - at the end of AC2 where the Templar rentacops rush out of the truck armed with nothing but batons pretty much broke the story for me.


Well, you know the reason that the aspect of the story you do not like is there, right? It's so that the Abstergo people can attempt to recapture Desmond and Lucy. They don't want to kill them yet, because they may still be of some value. Who knows what they have in their 'memories'?

[Destro_Yersul]

I'm hoping they do something interesting with the whole "Brotherhood" aspect of the game. In the single player trailer, all the other Assassins looked rather generic, I'm hoping they're actual characters instead of "Do quest. TA-DA, the Brotherhood has gained 2 Archers!"
Rome, if it's anything like what they did with Florence and Venice will be Amazing. Really, even if it's just "More AC2", I'd be happy. AC2 was an awesome game.
Also, am I the only one who thinks the French Revolution (Start in 1789, end at Waterloo) would make an excellent setting for AC3? Eventually they will need to bring the franchise to an age of firearms. The Muskets and Bayonets era will be a good chance to try out ideas, while still having good old fashioned Melee combat to fall back on as people reload/you get too close for them to use their muskets.

That would be cool. American Civil War, or something of that sort, might also work. Or something in London. Not sure what era. Industrial Revolution, maybe? Jack the Ripper? London is too cool to NOT visit.

[Brother Oni]

Well, you know the reason that the aspect of the story you do not like is there, right? It's so that the Abstergo people can attempt to recapture Desmond and Lucy. They don't want to kill them yet, because they may still be of some value. Who knows what they have in their 'memories'?

There are various non-lethal methods I can think of to subdue Desmond and Lucy. Off the top of my head, you have the classic game tranquiliser rounds ranging down to the more realistic netguns, rubber baton/beanbag rounds and tasers.

I can just about buy the Templars not having enough time to mobilise all their specialised troops, so they send all the rentacop guards they have, but the abseiling soldiers prior to the main assault, kills that theory dead.

I understand the point of the scene is to demonstrate how much Desmond has learnt from Ezio, plus the cool 'whoa' factor when Lucy gives Desmond the gauntlet, but from a 'global secret organisation launching a raid' point of view, you'd expect them to send in properly armed troops.

[BRC]

That would be cool. American Civil War, or something of that sort, might also work. Or something in London. Not sure what era. Industrial Revolution, maybe? Jack the Ripper? London is too cool to NOT visit.
I was thinking French Revolution simply because it's such a fascinating era of history. You start out under the Bourbons, imagine your character inciting the crowd to storm the Bastille so you can assassinate a prisoner kept within. Run around Paris dodging agents of the Committee of Public safety during the Terror. Live through Napoleon's rise to power and the hundred days. Maybe the game ends as you sneak onto the island of Saint Helena to assassinate the Emperor himself.

Something in the Muskets stage of history is definitely the best option, let the series ease into an age of firearms.

[ArturiusRex8]

There are various non-lethal methods I can think of to subdue Desmond and Lucy. Off the top of my head, you have the classic game tranquiliser rounds ranging down to the more realistic netguns, rubber baton/beanbag rounds and tasers.

I can just about buy the Templars not having enough time to mobilise all their specialised troops, so they send all the rentacop guards they have, but the abseiling soldiers prior to the main assault, kills that theory dead.

I understand the point of the scene is to demonstrate how much Desmond has learnt from Ezio, plus the cool 'whoa' factor when Lucy gives Desmond the gauntlet, but from a 'global secret organisation launching a raid' point of view, you'd expect them to send in properly armed troops.

What if they don't think they need those kinds of things? Look at it this way, unless they are trying to capture an Assassin (active or lapsed like Desmond) or some other person for their Animus program, they don't need any non-lethal weapons. They. Just. Kill. Them. You hear the gunfire and such in AC1 when the Assassins try to rescue you. They clearly have lethal weapons, and they're prepared to use them. And when they are capturing someone, they try to use stealth and the element of surprise as much as possible (they've certainly learned that much from the Assassins). They might even just slip a sleeping pill into a drink or something. The 'Subject' wakes up several hours later, with no recollection of how they got where they are. So that's a fairly easy way to explain why they wouldn't have the items you mentioned before the escape. As to why they didn't have them afterwards, it is only a day or two, maybe three tops, before they catch up to Desmond and Lucy in AC2. Maybe they are too lazy to get those items, so used to procedure they don't, or even the very unlikely option: they don't have enough money to get them! Putting satellites into space isn't cheap, and they have all sorts of other things to take care of (like maintenance on those new Animi), so maybe they just don't have the budget for stun guns, tasers, etc. Anyway, that's one way I can see the devs explaining the 'unpreparedness' of a "global secret organization launching a raid." I apologize for the long post, but this topic interests me. And I'm kinda trying to be the devil's advocate, because it's nice to have a reasonable discussion about holes in games (plot or otherwise).
And yeah, I think part of it was just the devs saying, "Okay, now, let's show them Desmond has all the moves Exio does!"
P.S.-what do you mean by 'abseiling' soldiers? I'm not familiar with that word.

[Brother Oni]

What if they don't think they need those kinds of things? Look at it this way, unless they are trying to capture an Assassin (active or lapsed like Desmond) or some other person for their Animus program, they don't need any non-lethal weapons. They. Just. Kill. Them. You hear the gunfire and such in AC1 when the Assassins try to rescue you. They clearly have lethal weapons, and they're prepared to use them. And when they are capturing someone, they try to use stealth and the element of surprise as much as possible (they've certainly learned that much from the Assassins). They might even just slip a sleeping pill into a drink or something. The 'Subject' wakes up several hours later, with no recollection of how they got where they are. So that's a fairly easy way to explain why they wouldn't have the items you mentioned before the escape. As to why they didn't have them afterwards, it is only a day or two, maybe three tops, before they catch up to Desmond and Lucy in AC2. Maybe they are too lazy to get those items, so used to procedure they don't, or even the very unlikely option: they don't have enough money to get them! Putting satellites into space isn't cheap, and they have all sorts of other things to take care of (like maintenance on those new Animi), so maybe they just don't have the budget for stun guns, tasers, etc. Anyway, that's one way I can see the devs explaining the 'unpreparedness' of a "global secret organization launching a raid." I apologize for the long post, but this topic interests me. And I'm kinda trying to be the devil's advocate, because it's nice to have a reasonable discussion about holes in games (plot or otherwise).
And yeah, I think part of it was just the devs saying, "Okay, now, let's show them Desmond has all the moves Exio does!"
P.S.-what do you mean by 'abseiling' soldiers? I'm not familiar with that word.


Hang on, you're changing your argument.

First you say that Abstergo charge in with baton equipped guards so that they can capture Desmond and Lucy.
I say that baton equipped guards are stupid and they should have sent in properly equipped troops.
You then say that they don't need non-lethal weapons because they would normally just kill Assassins.

Which is it?


It's highly unlikely that the Templars wouldn't have access to all types of military and police equipment, if simply from the fact that they probably make such equipment in the first place.
We know they have riot control equipped squads simply because that's what they needed once they triggered the Apple's mind control effect, to stop sections of the population who didn't respond well from rioting out of control.

Abseiling (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abseiling). My mistake - I thought they had soldiers jumping in on the upper levels of the warehouse during the end credits fight, but I must be mistaking it with a different game.

[BRC]

Hang on, you're changing your argument.

First you say that Abstergo charge in with baton equipped guards so that they can capture Desmond and Lucy.
I say that baton equipped guards are stupid and they should have sent in properly equipped troops.
You then say that they don't need non-lethal weapons because they would normally just kill Assassins.

Which is it?


It's highly unlikely that the Templars wouldn't have access to all types of military and police equipment, if simply from the fact that they probably make such equipment in the first place.
We know they have riot control equipped squads simply because that's what they needed once they triggered the Apple's mind control effect, to stop sections of the population who didn't respond well from rioting out of control.

Abseiling (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abseiling). My mistake - I thought they had soldiers jumping in on the upper levels of the warehouse during the end credits fight, but I must be mistaking it with a different game.

Of course, we all know the real reason: Desmond wouldn't have stood a chance if those guards were armed with Guns or Tasers. Also, Ubisoft would have needed to design new fight mechanics and animations, rather than simply reskinning, and the point was to show off Desmond's Mad Skillz.
Of course, there is always another option, it was a trick. Remember, at the end of AC 1 Lucy convinced Doctor Whatshisname not to kill Desmond once they had the information they needed from him, in case they "needed something else" from him. However, considering that they were perfectly willing to kill him before she said "Wait, he might still be useful", that means they don't technically need him alive anymore.
Maybe the intent wasn't to Capture or Kill, the intent was to drive the Assassins out of their safehouse so they could be followed with the hope they would lead Abstergo to more assassins.
Another option is simple Hubris/a lack of time, they didn't know they'd be going up against a Desmond Miles who had been imbuned with the talents of one of the greatest assassins of all time, they thought it'd be Lucy, a pair of tech geeks, and a bartender. So they show up, wave their nightsticks around. The information on British Guy's computer/In the Assassin's heads is more valuable than anything else. Once they found the Assassins hideout they probably just said "Alright, get all the rent-a-cops into vans and drive here before they pack up and leave."

Finally, you have to remember, Doctor Whatshisface was apparently in charge of the operation, not any sort of paramilitary or security guy. He might say "Take their guns away so they don't kill my prisoners, just beat them with sticks if they resist", the idea of using tasers, net guns, or tear gas may never have even occurred to him. He's a scientist, as he sees it there is no way the assassins could win unless they get away before his band of goons show up. Every moment spent handing out Tranq Guns is another moment the assassins could be escaping!.

[Brother Oni]

Of course, we all know the real reason: Desmond wouldn't have stood a chance if those guards were armed with Guns or Tasers. Also, Ubisoft would have needed to design new fight mechanics and animations, rather than simply reskinning, and the point was to show off Desmond's Mad Skillz.
Of course, there is always another option, it was a trick. Remember, at the end of AC 1 Lucy convinced Doctor Whatshisname not to kill Desmond once they had the information they needed from him, in case they "needed something else" from him. However, considering that they were perfectly willing to kill him before she said "Wait, he might still be useful", that means they don't technically need him alive anymore.
Maybe the intent wasn't to Capture or Kill, the intent was to drive the Assassins out of their safehouse so they could be followed with the hope they would lead Abstergo to more assassins.
Another option is simple Hubris/a lack of time, they didn't know they'd be going up against a Desmond Miles who had been imbuned with the talents of one of the greatest assassins of all time, they thought it'd be Lucy, a pair of tech geeks, and a bartender. So they show up, wave their nightsticks around. The information on British Guy's computer/In the Assassin's heads is more valuable than anything else. Once they found the Assassins hideout they probably just said "Alright, get all the rent-a-cops into vans and drive here before they pack up and leave."

Finally, you have to remember, Doctor Whatshisface was apparently in charge of the operation, not any sort of paramilitary or security guy. He might say "Take their guns away so they don't kill my prisoners, just beat them with sticks if they resist", the idea of using tasers, net guns, or tear gas may never have even occurred to him. He's a scientist, as he sees it there is no way the assassins could win unless they get away before his band of goons show up. Every moment spent handing out Tranq Guns is another moment the assassins could be escaping!.


Dammit, that's 5 excellent rebuttals, to which I have no counter argument.

I'm sold. :smalltongue:

[Ranielle]

Drama about the DRM scheme of course!

[BRC]

Dammit, that's 5 excellent rebuttals, to which I have no counter argument.

I'm sold. :smalltongue:
All in a days work for Retroactive Justification Man!

[Lycan 01]

I'm hoping they do something interesting with the whole "Brotherhood" aspect of the game. In the single player trailer, all the other Assassins looked rather generic, I'm hoping they're actual characters instead of "Do quest. TA-DA, the Brotherhood has gained 2 Archers!"


Rejoice, then. All the assassins you recruit into the brotherhood are real characters who you can actually level up and customize as you progress through the game. You actually have to find them in the game in order to recruit them, with one preview I saw showing Ezio rescuing a pickpocket from guards and offering him a spot in the brotherhood. You can send them off to other cities to do missions, and watch their progress. As they gain XP from these missions, you can give them new skills, stats, or weapons. But here's the really cool part...

According to a preview I read, when one of your assassins is killed, he isn't directly slain right-out. Instead, he or she is left severely wounded and on the brink of death. Once the fight is over, you have the opportunity to go over and interact with them. This activates a "last goodbye" mini-scene which culminates in Ezio putting them out of their misery.

So yeah, they're actually trying to add some depth and attachment to the assassins, rather than them just being mooks with crossbows and kung fu.



Also, French Revolution would rock.

[BRC]

Rejoice, then. All the assassins you recruit into the brotherhood are real characters who you can actually level up and customize as you progress through the game. You actually have to find them in the game in order to recruit them, with one preview I saw showing Ezio rescuing a pickpocket from guards and offering him a spot in the brotherhood. You can send them off to other cities to do missions, and watch their progress. As they gain XP from these missions, you can give them new skills, stats, or weapons. But here's the really cool part...

According to a preview I read, when one of your assassins is killed, he isn't directly slain right-out. Instead, he or she is left severely wounded and on the brink of death. Once the fight is over, you have the opportunity to go over and interact with them. This activates a "last goodbye" mini-scene which culminates in Ezio putting them out of their misery.

So yeah, they're actually trying to add some depth and attachment to the assassins, rather than them just being mooks with crossbows and kung fu.



Also, French Revolution would rock.
I am now Rejoicing, and wishing I had an Xbox to play this on (I have a friend who has one, but I'd need to spend all day squatting in his room playing it, and I already have a friend who does that.)

[Brother Oni]

According to a preview I read, when one of your assassins is killed, he isn't directly slain right-out. Instead, he or she is left severely wounded and on the brink of death. Once the fight is over, you have the opportunity to go over and interact with them. This activates a "last goodbye" mini-scene which culminates in Ezio putting them out of their misery.

If this turns out to be true, then I'm getting a next gen console and Brotherhood with my next paycheck.

Who needs piddly things like rent, food and heating?

[Lycan 01]

Found where I read that. Its in the newest Game Informer, which has a huge preview for Brotherhood.


But be careful - if they die in combat, they won't come back. At least the game allows you to say goodbye; you can visit your fallen allies, and in a short scene, mourn them and send them on their way. To replace your fallen assassin you must spend the time to find and train another recruit.

Oh, here's a rather important line I missed.


As Brotherhood progresses, players can train up to 12 unique individuals, each with his or her own equipment, costumes, and names.


Also, to paraphrase, the missions you send your assassins on across Europe are based off of real historical events. The assassinations they are sent on (though they can also perform thefts, incite riots, gather intel, get blackmail, and other covert ops) really happened, and in some cases had far-reaching effects. One example the preview mentions is a mission where the assassins can be sent to kill somebody in Moscow. Moscow. Your little buddies get to kill people all over Europe! :smallbiggrin:

BUT, it isn't easy. Some missions, which all occur off camera of course, have a high chance of failure. The number of assassins you send, and the level of skill they possess, affects their ability to succeed. The Moscow assassination, for example, only has a 40% chance of success for a level 6 assassin. Adding a couple of lower level assassins, though, increases the chance for success and helps the lower level guys gain more XP to level up.

[VanBuren]

Judging from the amount of Parkour/freerunning you can do in Mirror's Edge, I don't think setting AC in the modern age would be an issue.

I do agree that combat needs to be drastically changed - at the end of AC2 where the Templar rentacops rush out of the truck armed with nothing but batons pretty much broke the story for me.
That said, updating the combat engine to be something closer like Alpha Protocol or Splinter Cell would be acceptable.

However I would love some historical setting for AC3, simply because wandering around a Medieval/Renaissance city mapped in loving detail never gets old (I've been to Venice before and I swear I've been down some of those streets and bridges, and Ezio wasn't joking about the smell).

Ew, no. ACII's gameplay was excellent, I see no reason to downgrade it to Alpha Protocol's version.

[Fri]

Rejoice, then. All the assassins you recruit into the brotherhood are real characters who you can actually level up and customize as you progress through the game. You actually have to find them in the game in order to recruit them, with one preview I saw showing Ezio rescuing a pickpocket from guards and offering him a spot in the brotherhood. You can send them off to other cities to do missions, and watch their progress. As they gain XP from these missions, you can give them new skills, stats, or weapons. But here's the really cool part...

According to a preview I read, when one of your assassins is killed, he isn't directly slain right-out. Instead, he or she is left severely wounded and on the brink of death. Once the fight is over, you have the opportunity to go over and interact with them. This activates a "last goodbye" mini-scene which culminates in Ezio putting them out of their misery.

So yeah, they're actually trying to add some depth and attachment to the assassins, rather than them just being mooks with crossbows and kung fu.



Also, French Revolution would rock.

that's... that's beautiful...

[Brother Oni]

Ew, no. ACII's gameplay was excellent, I see no reason to downgrade it to Alpha Protocol's version.

Then how would you adapt AC2's combat mechanics for modern automatic weaponry?

While charging a group of entrenched soldiers with M16s armed only with your gauntlet would be cool, it'd break suspension of disbelief far too much. Even Neo in the Matrix used guns.

[BRC]

Then how would you adapt AC2's combat mechanics for modern automatic weaponry?

While charging a group of entrenched soldiers with M16s armed only with your gauntlet would be cool, it'd break suspension of disbelief far too much. Even Neo in the Matrix used guns.
They could do something like the "Predator Mode" in Batman Arkham Asylum. Enemies with guns will rip you to shreds, so the focus becomes on stealthily taking them out one-by-one, then hiding before the others notice. You wait until one gets near the hiding spot, jump out, take him down, then run.
However, that only worked because it was inter spaced with lots of beat-em-up brawls. I don't think you could base an entire game around that, since it would boil down to "They saw you, you're dead" or "They didn't see you, you win", every single combat.
They could also do something with crowds. Enemies will generally be unwilling to fire into crowds, so even if they spot you and pull out their guns you can duck and weave through crowds of people and they won't fire, allowing you to get close and take them out hand-to-hand. They could preserve that classic AC experience, being chased by guards through city streets and across rooftops. Also, assuming most of the guards don't have automatic weapons, they could just have bad aim. You keep moving, put cover between you and the guards, duck around corners so they get a good shot off. Maybe replace Haystacks with Dumpsters. Bustops join Benches as good places to vanish. Maybe let Desmond wear multiple, easily discardable layers of clothing to help fool pursuit. The police spot him wearing a red Jacket, he turns a corner, you push a button, he takes off the jacket revealing his signature hoodie. If the Cops find you again, break LoS, toss the hoodie in a trash can, and you're just some guy in a T-shirt.

Edit: In this case, the chases could develop an additional sense of urgency, since the longer you go before becoming anonymous, the more things will escalate. First it's just a few officers with batons, next squad cars will show up, then helicopters, then the S.W.A.T team shows up. As the chase goes on people panic and run, giving you less crowds to hide in, and I need to stop editing this post and study economics.

[ArturiusRex8]

Hang on, you're changing your argument.

First you say that Abstergo charge in with baton equipped guards so that they can capture Desmond and Lucy.
I say that baton equipped guards are stupid and they should have sent in properly equipped troops.
You then say that they don't need non-lethal weapons because they would normally just kill Assassins.



Maybe I wasn't clear, if so, that's my fault.
I meant, normally, when they encounter Assassins they kill them. Say the Assassins have a member named John Smith. Abstergo finds out he's an Assassin. They kill him, because they have no need for him. Desmond and Lucy, however, might have knowledge Abstergo wants, or thinks it might want. Thus, they don't want to kill those two, even if they normally kill Assassins. Did that make my point any clearer?

[BRC]

So This is happening (http://www.dccomics.com/wildstorm/comics/?cm=16109).

[Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll]

Sound pretty cool. If the cover is any indication, interesting style too.

[Psyren]

I too thought the lack of guns in the finale was rather silly.

As for me, I'm looking forward to learning more about the Pieces of Eden.

[Brother Oni]

I too thought the lack of guns in the finale was rather silly.

BRC has retroactively fixed all complaints I had with the ending. :smalltongue: