Desmond Miles May Leave Assassin's Creed Soon

 Pages 1 2 NEXT
 

Desmond Miles May Leave Assassin's Creed Soon

image

Ubisoft thinks the protagonist of the first two Assassin's Creed games "needs to end."

Modern-day Assassin's Creed character Desmond Miles has been part of the series since the first game, also appearing in Assassin's Creed II, Brotherhood, and Revelations. He's been the player's main conduit into the different settings of the main games, being the background force behind ancestors Altaïr and Ezio. While Miles is coming back for the third numbered game, now set during the American Revolutionary War, he might not be with gamers for much longer. Speaking at a Ubisoft press event, Creative Lead Alex Hutchinson said that "Desmond needs to end."

Hutchinson characterized Miles as a wrapper that introduces the stories of Assassin's Creed, comparing his role to that of the narrator in the classic TV show The Twilight Zone. But, he said, there's other ways to frame the story, and in Miles' case, "we eventually do have to wrap it up." He explained the Miles can't stay with the series forever because "things that go on too long lack resonance. We're asking people to remember seven years worth of story." A backlog of four games to get the full story is a lot to ask of someone who is just getting into the franchise, and the best way to eliminate that hurdle is to eliminate Miles.

Miles' absence won't be a huge loss for the series, though. The universe and tone of Assassin's Creed, rather than a specific character, is what ultimately ties all the games together. This is most noticeable in the upcoming Assassin's Creed III, which is "90% a new game," according to Hutchinson. He noted that the new setting, new Assassin, and even new mechanics - did someone say, 'boat warfare?' - make the game almost a new IP. Without Miles, "we could have called it anything else," Hutchinson said. "It's just we like the wrapper of being an assassin and being in this continuing war against Templars. There's huge value in that."

Source: Polygon

Permalink

Nobody will mourn his departure. And I know ill be pushing the boat off the pier.

I hope Desmond becomes a Assassin in ACIII and finally stop Vidic and Templar and save the world from the solar flare(or explosion) and figure out more of first civilization who created us humans with 5 senses instead of 6 like them.

gigastar:

Nobody will mourn his departure. And I know ill be pushing the boat off the pier.

Yes. Precisely this. Seriously, Desmond was so 2D and boring constantly it was hard to care about his plight. He didn't even seem real, just lacking any form of personality or anything of that kind.

I personally never minded Desmond's story, since i enjoy most conspiracy, scientific, actiony...things. But i certainly wouldn't object to them finishing his story, as I would honestly prefer the games to just be set in these historic times and end it at that.

As much as I love the look of AC3 (and believe me, I cannot wait for this game to come out) I'd have liked for them to have wrapped up the series by setting it in modern day. I know there were always small segments for Desmond, but nothing meaty like with the Ancestors. And it always felt like that's where the series was heading anyway.

I guess we'll see what happens when AC3 comes out. I hate hyping myself up for games, but I'm a complete fanboy when it comes to this series.

I doubt anyone will be sticking their neck out for him.

I expect he'll be replaced by an equally generic and uninteresting character.

or they could just stop making a new game every year and take the time to make his story more interesting

I absolutely loathe the framing-device of the series. It's probably why I never took it seriously.

So the only reason they're all this an Assassin's Creed game is because piggy-backing on the franchise name is gonna make them more money. Glorious

Problem with Desmond is that he himself has character development... but it's not presented right. We get wrapped up in Ezio and Altair that we forget he even exists till the writers are like 'OH YEAH we got to do that'. And then we're shoved back into modern day era with a character who's growth comes from him being a cypher for his ancestor. His growth isn't really readily apparent because we've ignored him for so long in the story that the fact he's now doing things that the PC ancestor has been doing for four plus hours causes the impact to be utterly lost because we're just like 'OF course your doing that what's the big deal?' Further more his entire supporting cast is made up of a group of Captain Expositions, which means Desmond gets told what's happening around him, who the templars are, and whats the details we've learned from the last animus mission of the story instead of witnessing it for himself which is where normal character growth occurs. That is until the end, where the writers, need to tie everything together, so they'll finally give him something to do because modern day era is why we're in the animus to begin with. SO we get a finale that happens in the real world that falls flat because it's lead character SEEMS stagnate and because the ending only acts as a framing device for the next game and not in anyway conclude anything.

My point is Desmond doesn't suffer from being a bad character so much as bad writing. If they gave him more time to do things, gave him an antagonist or some personal drama that seemed actually as important as what's happening to his ancestors then he could be alot more then merely prologue, chorus, and epilogue to his own story.

They've already drawn this out far enough with him. Hopefully, his character arc will be finished in ACIII.

Not only have I never minded Desmond but I've always thought that the sci-fi elements of the plot were far cooler then any of the historical stuff. As far as anyone knows AC3 is supposed to be the end of the current plot arc, so I'll be really interested to see how they decide to explore the the Animus after that. I think there's a lot of ground still left to cover with the idea and hopefully that's what they decide to focus on.

Desmond would not have been nearly as stale and silly had you NOT made Revelations and Brotherhood (and killed Lucy)

Desmond...Who is this Desmond? He Sounds like someone I would want to beat up.

Oh Unskippable, how you amuse me....

JPArbiter:
Desmond would not have been nearly as stale and silly had you NOT made Revelations and Brotherhood (and killed Lucy)

Spoilers dude.

OT: Desmond has never bothered me, I won't exactly be sad to see him go, but I also wouldn't care if he was to stay. I just hope they wrap up his story properly.

Small bits of a character throughout up until now 5 main games - bad, has to end.

Three entire games dedicated to one character over and over again - let's keep doing it, but cover it up as DLC.

I really, reeeeaaally don't get Ubisoft these days.

Well, it makes sense at least that the story with Desmond has to end eventually. There's undoubtedly other Assassins in the world that can be "DNA read" for memories of the past other than Desmond.

Couldn't they just, y'know, end the series?

It's had a good run, but an IP won't last forever.

But in business terms, that's UNTHINKABLE.

kitsuta:
A backlog of four games to get the full story is a lot to ask of someone who is just getting into the franchise...

Boo! Appealing to a "wider audience" again...

and the best way to eliminate that hurdle is to eliminate Miles.

Yay!

Although, that said, we wouldn't have this problem if Ubisoft had actually done something with his character when they had the damn chance.

"Things that go on too long lack resonance."

Yeah... like Assassin's Creed, which has already gone on two games too long.

The whole "animus" angle is just so extraneous and doesn't impact the plot of the individual games at all, at least until the end where it ties into a convoluted conspiracy.

We were told that this game (ACIII) would be Desmond's last huzzah ages ago, either ubisoft are dragging out the character or this is just half arsed publicity for the new game

Sounds less like a story based decision as it does one based solely around profits. If you drop Desmond half way through his story of being the one the ancient gods have been talking to all this time, what the hell was the point of them talking to him, instead of letting some other twat talk to them? And what, it's that damn hard to get into the games at go? They are all available on each major system, and it's as easy as a drunk frat boy to get them now. Don't dress up the decision that has no impact. Desmond is a plot device, and barely anything more. Keeping track of a story over seven years? Easily done. Even easier in this case, because there's almost no story going on in seven years. The biggest bits were in Brotherhood. By all means, change your plot device. Just wrap his story up properly, ffs.

mrm5561:
or they could just stop making a new game every year and take the time to make his story more interesting

No can do, really. The ingame plot has to be resolved before some time near the end of 2012.
Who's going to believe a game set in the past?

So he's completed the transformation into Adam Sandler, and now we will be playing as him? It'd make about as much sense as the story thus far.

Also, wasn't he supposed to be one of the few people who could use the Apple? The thing they've been saying will end the war pretty much? Or are they just going to play it off that 'oops, it wasn't Desmond all this time, it was Rebecca!'?

I still think he should finish his training, open up the double doors of whatever facility he is in, stride out on to the street in an unknown city, ready to do battle with the Templar's. And get run over by a tram.

It took you FIVE games to figure this out? NOBODY LIKED FUTURE DESMOND. We been saying that from day ONE, everybody else in the series was more interesting then the main character, nobody cared about Mr. bland face boring man.

Mike Richards:
Not only have I never minded Desmond but I've always thought that the sci-fi elements of the plot were far cooler then any of the historical stuff. As far as anyone knows AC3 is supposed to be the end of the current plot arc, so I'll be really interested to see how they decide to explore the the Animus after that. I think there's a lot of ground still left to cover with the idea and hopefully that's what they decide to focus on.

This. I never really understood the bile people threw at Desmond.

While Revelations as a game kind of sank under the weight of itself, I really enjoyed learning more about Desmond's backstory. And his parts in the previous games were very interesting to me, even though they didn't detail him all that much. Seeing how the team communicated, coped and developed.

Why do game developers think the third installment in a trilogy is the one to "Reach out to a bigger audience"? They should stick with Desmond until his story's completed, as bland as his character is. We've had to put up with him this long... please give him closure so that annoyance isn't spent on "Nothing". If new players REALLY need to know the story behind him, there's always Wikipedia.

And now I get the awful cognitive dissonance that Ubisoft know what they're doing and they make good games, but I refuse to give them any money because of their DRM....

Oh well, keep boycotting it is.

Fuck no!

I am of the few persons who adores Desmond as character. It's a shame to see him go. Still, he had enough screen time and I suppose it's time to let it go.

Still, I'm gonna miss that derpy face and his baggy clothes. T_T

Eh, I won't mind him taking off. He never really seemed like the driving force behind the games, not as much as he was supposed to be anyway.

It's about time.
Ask anyone who's played the series what the worst part of them is and you'll consistently get the same answer: The "present day" storyline with Desmond.

Mike Richards:
Not only have I never minded Desmond but I've always thought that the sci-fi elements of the plot were far cooler then any of the historical stuff. As far as anyone knows AC3 is supposed to be the end of the current plot arc, so I'll be really interested to see how they decide to explore the the Animus after that. I think there's a lot of ground still left to cover with the idea and hopefully that's what they decide to focus on.

I have to agree. Everyone seems to hate Desmond and the cheesy, sci-fi animus narrative device, but I liked it. Whilst I certainly wouldn't mind just playing the games as straight up historical adventures, I quite like the way in which they are bridged together (and justified) by a common thread.

Whilst I'm at it, I also like the concept of every historical leader being involved in an endless battle behind the scenes. That kind of goofy, conspiracy theory plot comes up in a few of games (like Deus Ex) and I like the way it lends a lighter, game-ish, tone to them. It also serves as a quick way of helping the player suspend their disbelief, by informing them "this is going to be a slightly silly adventure, don't take it too seriously."

 Pages 1 2 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here