Assassin’s Creed games are known for a lot of things: Historical shenanigans, stabbing, inconsistent controls, carts of hay. They’re also known for having unsatisfying, bewildering, even downright annoying endings.
Today, Assassin’s Creed IV lead writer Darby McDevitt took to Twitter to answer fan questions via the official Assassin’s Creed Twitter account. He was very sure to say that the ending of the new game will be “satisfying”.
.@OnlyAster1 AC4BF will definitely have a satisfying ending, but we always leave room for more. So yes, expect at least a small cliff ha-
— Assassin’s Creed (@assassinscreed) July 18, 2013
.@bas3dbradley Hope so! But with a sense of satisfaction too.
— Assassin’s Creed (@assassinscreed) July 18, 2013
As I’ve said before, I was disappointed enough with Assassin’s Creed III that I’m taking everything about the next game with a heap of grains of salt. That said, it’s nice to see that the man writing the game is confident in its ending. Particularly since he’s the guy who wrote Revelations, which had easily the strongest ending of all of the main AC games.
Comments
8 responses to “Assassin’s Creed IV Might Finally Avoid An Annoying Ending”
They said the same thing for the last 3 games. I’ll still play the game but won’t give a shit about the endings unless Altair transports to the real world Ace Lightning style.
People really hated AC3 and Revelations but after AC2 those were my favorite games in the series. Couldn’t stand the bloated busy work mess that was Brotherhood and the first one was borderline repetitive boring (though it was unique and had heaps of potential)
AC3 was amazing, not everything, the combat was too simple and too many bugs but I loved the wilderness areas and the hunting missions and the story and Conner’s dad, the naval battles and just the crazy ambition of the whole thing. Just don’t understand the hate.
Did people really hate AC3? I have heard nothing but praise, except for some people not liking Connor.
It was a great evolution of the franchise.
The biggest problem with AC3 was that as an Australian, I didn’t know anything about American History. In the other games, they explained people, who they were, why they were important, what they’re role in history was, in AC3 is was just “Ooh! Look! Sam Addams! This other guy! Some other guy that signed some thing! Look at all these important people we have in our game and all these important history changing events you’re part of” and I’m just sitting there going “Nice mechanics, but what the fuck is going on?”
Same here.
Wasnt sure to buy AC3 because of the Critics reviews.
But I got AC3 and loved it.
AC1 and 2 were good games but by Brotherhood, I would finish the game and that was it. The side activities were boring.
AC3 has tonnes of content, the Wilderness is an anazing addition.
Even after finishing the main quest, Im still playing it. The Homestead is fantastic and fun. Hunting is perfect. The crafting system is great.
The city designs are interesting.
The only downside is the combat system is more simple.
But I have no doubt, AC4 will be a fantastic game.
Plus AC3 sold 10 million copies, so the Public liked the game obviosly.
All AC games have crap endings. AC 2 was probably the best… but they are all meh. I just hope its better than AC3… that game was a disaster. I have no idea what people saw in that. I finished it, like all the others, but it was by far the worst in the series. The 7hr tutorial still leaves a bad taste in my mouth.
To be fair, Assassins Creed 2 was brilliant from start to finish. Such a great game, no complaints with its ending either. 3 on the other hand was an all round disappointment. Why begin a game with us controlling a character who is infinately more interesting than the main protagonist? It just makes the rest of the game feel second rate…
I won an AC4 shirt at PAX yesterday, am wearing it now whilst being delayed for 3 hours at Avalon airport 😀