Poll: What do you think of Connor Kenway, protagonist of Assassin's Creed 3?

 Pages 1 2 NEXT
 

What was your impression of our third Assassin in the main Assassin's Creed series? Was he a badass? Was he boring? Was he everyone's bitch who made poor decisions? Was he a humble warrior who fought passionately for what he believed in? Please give me your opinion on this divisive Assassin.

Personally? Without any pretense towards objectivity? I loved the guy. I always saw him as a complex and troubled man, who had a depth lacking in Ezio or Altair. I liked his quiet nature, as it accentuated his inner rage when fighting, and highlighted how uncomfortable he was being the outsider in the colonies whose freedom he was fighting for. I thought the tragedies and betrayals he suffered made for some compelling character development and his commitment to the cause of the Assassins and freedom throughout this sadness made him truly inspirational without being shallow or one-note. I liked his tense but respectful relationship with Achilles, I liked how his usual stoicism made his brief moments of anger or joy noteworthy and significant. I liked how he went from taking orders from people he believed in to organizing the siege of Fort George and chasing down Charles Lee independently.

I don't get how people criticized him for being boring just because he was not as charismatic and womanizing as Ezio. Ezio was like a chocolate bar if you will excuse the metaphor: He holds the attention while playing the game, but upon reflection, he was a simple cliche. He was a typical likable playboy who had a typical revenge motivation, and upon further thought, there was nothing memorable or unique about him. Whereas Connor, despite not being a typical white extroverted smartass, had so many aspects and nuances about him that he still occupies my thoughts over a year later.

But this is about your thoughts, so please feel free to post and to disagree with me as much as humanly possible :-). My only caveat is that I would ask you to please post an explanation for your point of view instead of just posting yes or no.

P.S. Is it just me or does Connor seem to be a very polarizing character? Everyone either loves him or hates him, I haven't seen much middle ground online.

Who?
Oh, Chops McAnimusPuppet.
Yeah, he wasn't all that memorable. I found Altaïr and Ezio to be much more compelling, and even Desmond I had a standing interest in by 'sCreed III.

If Ubisoft wants to add to the lineup, they better try hard to write compelling characters first, then tie them into the setting. If you want to write

I am not going to care. I am going to be laughing because Haytham Kenway was much more endearing to me in the (not) short (enough) time I played with him, and I have an opposing interest already established in the aforementioned white settlers.

What else did he have going for him? Being the calm one only gets you so far when basically every other character in the setting expresses the same amount of emotion. Call yourself back to Brotherhood, where Rodrigo Borgia was a power-hungry (and after II, rightfully paranoid) old man, and Cesare Borgia was an excitable shouting mess caught up in his own conquests and screaming at something every other scene. Ezio, who we know had a hard start after a joyful life as a womanizer and playboy (having a supporting mother and sister regardless), gets hit hard when the male half of his family ends prematurely at the noose. Even moreso, Ezio watches the betrayal unfurl by a two-bit character who seemed trustworthy, instead of just being informed about it.

After that, he has to man up and begin an increasingly sobor quest to hone his skills and end the men who wronged him. By the time of Brotherhood, you know where his stoicism came from, and you can see it starkly contrast with the man of the hour: Cesare. It was a good story with good presentation. And all the while, Ezio is charismatic as heck.

I just kinda glaze over Revelations, because Old Man Ezio's quest for knowledge was the only real driving point for me in that game.

Altaïr may have been a simple learn-from-your-mistakes kinda guy, but he gets the admittedly biased "I did it first" bonus from me. But hey: opinions are always biased.

Connor?
Eh, I can only care so much.
The "much" sits close to zero.

I actually found him reasonably likeable. The side missions on the frontier where he helps out his friends with various tasks shows him to be a caring/sentimental character at least. And his interactions with Haytham were entertaining. He's not pompous like Altair, charming like Ezio, or a total blandy mcbland like Desmond. If anything he's just underdeveloped, much like most of Asscreed 3. They created half-finished storytelling bits that mostly ended up going nowhere.

Uhh...

He was, well... umm, he...

He was there. I can definitely remember that much. Kinda gets a bit fuzzy beyond that though.

I just found him rather blank. Lacking much of anything, be it personality, charisma, depth, definition, you name it and probably didn't have it.

I've yet to be remotely impressed by a single Assassin's Creed character thus far. The only time I felt anything for anyone was the bits in Revelations where you play as old Altair.

He was ok. Nothing really more, nothing less. I thought rather than being deep, he and his motivations were more needlessly obtuse, and far too prone to change given next-to-no provocation. During the main story, he comes across as bland and erratic. In my opinion, it's not until you start playing the side missions, mainly the Homestead missions, where he starts to have actual characterisation, finally expressing a range of real and believable emotions - his awkwardness around women is adorable especially give he's a big badass Master Assassin, his endearing sincerity in wanting to help his friends, his acceptance of the people he allows to settle there and his overarching need to protect his settlement in those missions. All of these make him a better character and I just wish they'd found a way to make him express some of these in the main game because without the side missions I think he's just dull.

Zhukov:
Uhh...

He was, well... umm, he...

He was there. I can definitely remember that much. Kinda gets a bit fuzzy beyond that though.

I just found him rather blank. Lacking much of anything, be it personality, charisma, depth, definition, you name it and probably didn't have it.

I've yet to be remotely impressed by a single Assassin's Creed character thus far. The only time I felt anything for anyone was the bits in Revelations where you play as old Altair.

Not even Haytham?IMO he should've been the main character instead of Connor.

I wouldn't even say he was the protagonist. He was just some dude killing people for a while.

I know him by another name. Blandy Blandson, King of Blandland and ruler of all Blandom. You could also replace the word bland with moron. I know he was ment to be naive at the begining but he never seemed to stop being naive and thus seemed like a complete moron.

Case and ponit MINI SPOILER! The part where he is chasing the templar money counterfit guy and they get stopped by the soldiers. At this point in the game King Blandson has already seen the power the templars have, how they hold positions of power within the governments so does he run away? NO! He stops and starts trying to explain what was really going on to the soldiers who promptly knock him out and throw him in jail. MORON!

P912:
Personally? Without any pretense towards objectivity? I loved the guy. I always saw him as a complex and troubled man, who had a depth lacking in Ezio or Altair. I liked his quiet nature, as it accentuated his inner rage when fighting, and highlighted how uncomfortable he was being the outsider in the colonies whose freedom he was fighting for. I thought the tragedies and betrayals he suffered made for some compelling character development and his commitment to the cause of the Assassins and freedom throughout this sadness made him truly inspirational without being shallow or one-note. I liked his tense but respectful relationship with Achilles, I liked how his usual stoicism made his brief moments of anger or joy noteworthy and significant. I liked how he went from taking orders from people he believed in to organizing the siege of Fort George and chasing down Charles Lee independently.

Apparently we were playing two completely different games with completely different characters, because to me he was extremely boring and one-note. I don't quite see where you were able to find all this depth of character considering he has a one-track mind: "They done gone and burned down my village, I'm going to make those sons'a'bitches pay!"

Seriously, I saw a man who didn't give a damn about the Assassin's, their code of conduct, or any of their beliefs, values, or traditions. This was a man who wanted the power to get revenge on the ones who wronged him and the entire game is him whining about "I wanna go kill them right now!" You've got the wise old geezer holding him back and trying to teach him that a bit of finesse is required to handle things appropriately. He's fighting against the ideals of the Templars, the way the Assassins always have. The fact that all the people that Connor wants revenge against just happen to be a group of Templars is just a happy coincidence. Connor was literally nothing more than a weapon for his mentor to use against his enemies. It's more of a "The Enemy Of My Enemy Is My Friend" situation and less of an actual mentor-pupil relationship...at least from Connor's end. I'm sure the old man would have very much liked to raise Connor into a right proper Assassin to carry on the order. But I get the feeling that Connor really doesn't give a damn what color the fancy clothes he's wearing are, he's just a disgruntled man out for revenge.

Quite simply: there's a LOT of scenes where it comes out that he doesn't care about the political or greater ramifications of his actions. He doesn't care about the freedom of the nation that's trying to be birthed. He's got a hit list and he wants to cross off all the names on it. The old man sends him off to do something and all Connor cares about is "How will this get me any closer to taking out one of the bastards that burned down my village?"

He was incredibly boring, the game was incredibly boring, the story was incredibly boring and the the setting was incredibly boring.

The whole game was just a stew of blandness and boredom, on top of being glitchy and shallow.

ACIV fixed some of those issues: Edward was a lot more interesting because he wasn't an assassin, but still part of that special Ibn La Ahad/Auditore/Kenway/Miles bloodline so he could do parkour without becoming one right up until the end when he becomes an assassin and loses all personality, the story was somewhat better, but not that better, it feels unimportant and pointless really, the setting is nicer: both looks and feels better, even if there aren't any richly detailed areas like Florence/Venice in ACII.

However, the game is still shallow not as much as III, but besides hunting for materials(which you don't need) to make upgrades, hunting for chests, sea shanties and the three legendary ships, there is nothing to do.

Once I defeated the legendary ship with the impenetrable armour, I lost all interest in the game, as there was no challenge left: hunting for chests is pointless, as after getting the elite hull, cannons and swivel guns, the upgrades are largely meaningless.

Not to mention that the game was poorly optimised for PC, the game was still glitchy in terms of detection, and that it was still shallow, though not as much as ACIII.

The series has devolved into nothing more than a set of tech demos, (even the trailers show off the tech behind the game, and less so what you can do in the sequel) speaking as a fan(I preordered all of the games after ACI, I even have a collector's edition of Revelations on PC mind) it is a damn shame.

/rant

I really didn't think he was all that great, dude needs to take a serious chill pill sometimes.

For the most part I agree with you OP, I quite enjoyed Connor's character and story and am fairly dissapointed that we more then likely won't get another Connor game due to the backlash against his character from people unwilling or unable to read between the lines and not have every single aspect of a character laid out on a dish for them up to and including having the character wear their hearts upon their sleeves (for those that don't understand, it means that they all but openly describe whatever their current emotional state is to everyone in the general area).

Also, lol at the people criticizing Connor for having joined the Assassins with revenge as his primary motivation in spite of the fact that he joined because a (as far as he knew) flat-out legitimate goddess informed him that he was the destined guardian of his people and that the Assassins were his best chance at accomplishing said goal and he felt obligated to obey her word for the sake of his tribe. Connor's primary motivation was the protection of his people and the land they lived on, Charles Lee turning out to have been an assassination target was a happy coincidence and his eagerness to kill the fuck out of the guy should be perfectly understandable all things considered.

In fact, just to remind people, it was Ezio that joined the Assassins with revenge as his single largest motivating factor, remember that he damn well wanted to leave Italy with his mother and sister until Mario informed him that Francesco and Vieri de Pazzi would be assassination targets? It wasn't until Brotherhood rolled around that his motivation changed from "because fuck those guys that killed my family" to "because freedom and fuck the Templars."

Connor could have recieved just as much development as Ezio did, but because everybody who liked Ezio seemingly forgot that he started off just as "bad" as Connor, albeit in a different way, we more then likely won't get to see that development.

I hated him. Hated him. That game killed the franchise for me I detested it so bad. Connor was a big part of that, he was not only boring, he was just plain unlikable. "You will train me!" - no he shouldn't because your a idiotic, angry, annoying asshole Connor. Just because you want something doesn't mean you will get it.

Granted I stopped playing when I got to the upgrading your base section so he could have improved, but by that stage I was thoroughly sick of the game and Connor. I was hoping it would improve but running into the worst part of the series at that point made me so angry I just turned it off. I tried to play it a couple months later, but the terrible bow controls pushed me away again.

I liked him more than Ezio, but less than Altair.

I paid attention to most of the cut scenes and played the homestead missions so I got a pretty good understanding of who he was. I got why he was angry, I understood why he joined the assassin's, and his general attitude made sense given the world he was in. I liked the fact that he was the complete opposite of Ezio because Ezio was getting old, literally and figuratively. That's not to say I didn't like Ezio, he was pretty awesome, but Altair, Ezio and Connor are not related to each other and are in hugely different time periods. The man Altair was suited the Third Crusade, Ezio being flamboyant and charismatic suited the renaissance period, and Connor being stoic and somewhat off putting made sense seeing as how he was a half native half British man in a country that fought oppression yet kept slaves and viewed non white folk as lesser. It's even stated that his mother was no longer eligible for being the head of their people due to her fling with Haytham, some of that stigma must have stuck with Connor. He grew up in a world where his heritage did him no favour with either peoples and his naive idealism along with his anger is what drew Connor to the Assassins.

I don't think everyone should like him, I think Connor is supposed to be polarizing because of all the characters of the AC games he is the most diverse. Hell, in AC4 they make videos of Altair, Ezio and Connor and they bring up some fine points on all the characters showing how they all have quite large flaws. Altair was raised an Assassin, he was basically indoctrinated into a cult and knew only what his master (a corrupt man) allowed him to know. Ezio was a pampered brat who had his life violently shaken when his father and brothers were hung, blinded by the need for revenge he trained with a group that used him to accomplish their tasks, and after years of being with them and being given the ability to seek those he deemed responsible he truly believed the Assassin's were completely good and their ends justified their means. Connor was naive, and living in a world where every thought he was trash, after loosing his mother and being told to go on a quest he did not want to take on he met a man whom he could relate to and begun training with him, yet unlike Ezio who began training at 17, Connor was merely 13, the sudden influx of power he'd gained mixed with his youthful angst, bravado and anger led him to become cocky, and by the time he was a man he had lost his father figure, friends and had his faith in people heavily tested, leading him to cling to the only thing he had left, an ancient creed of idealism.

So yeah, I thought Connor was pretty good, but I don't expect him to be loved by all.

Within the main storyline, he is a fairly generic revenge driven orphan, native vs evil imperialist/capitalist cliche. He also turns his allegiance on a dime half the time to suit whatever historical setpiece the writers have for the chapter.

He comes off a bite more humanized in the homestead missions, but the homestead was a rather bland (And utterly pointless) side exercise that was already pigeonholed into "chore for the platinum trophy" zone.

He was alright. Definitely my least favourite out of all the main protagonists in the AC Series.

My list of them would be:
1. Ezio
2. Edward Kenway (It was close between him and Ezio. Very close)
3. Altair
4. Connor Kenway

Ugh..that's my answer. I hated Connor with a passion, but since I bought the game I was rather "forced" to finish the game to justify my purchase.

Ezio was my favorite followed by Edward Kenway. The rest were meh.

I remember he had a really big face, and a voice that sounded surprisingly similar to that of a log. If you've ever heard a log speak, you'll know what I'm talking about.

I guess his authentic nattive American depiction prevented him from being emotive. That generally seems to be the case with "indian" characters.

I might be in the minority here but I preferred him to Edward. In fact Edward is probably my least favourite protagonist out of the entire series.

Altair - I could get behind his mission to redeem himself.

Ezio - I could sympathise with his loss and wanted revenge for him.

Connor - Saving your people is a nobble thing and I could respect his principles.

Edward - I WANT GOLD LOADS AND LOADS OF GOLD!!!!! AND I WANT IT ALL NOW!

Yeah how appealing....

Wow, lots of passionate and well explained disagreements. Before I launch into my rebuttals, thank you for contributing significantly. Now then...

RJ 17:
I don't quite see where you were able to find all this depth of character considering he has a one-track mind: "They done gone and burned down my village, I'm going to make those sons'a'bitches pay!"

There was that side to his character. Then he let the most marginalized citizens of the colonies start a new life in the Homestead, such as an abused wife and her frightened daughter, and a black couple being harassed by the British for not giving up their produce for the army. Then he supported the ideals of freedom forwarded by the Assassins and Patriots, as shown in his post-assassination conversations, particularly him telling Pitcairn "The strings should be severed! All should be free!". Then he wanted to protect his people, as we saw in his dealings with William Johnson's attempts to obtain native land, and in his assassination of the Patriots who were to attack his tribe. Then he wanted to reconcile with his father and end the Assassin-Templar war, which was the idea of his teaming up with Haytham. Then there was his cultural identity crisis, being torn between his tribe, the Patriots, and the Assassin's. And then getting betrayed by the Patriots, being forced to kill his old friend, finding that his tribe has moved on without him, and having Achilles pass away, leaving him alone but more sure in his purpose. Then he stuck true to the Assassin's Creed, seen in his concern at the slave market seen in the epilogue, and his monologue at Achilles' grave.

So there's all of that. A lot of which was seen in the main story. I mean, its obvious in retrospect that the Homestead missions gave him a lot of character development that shouldn't have been left in the side missions, but there's still a lot to dissect.

C F:
If Ubisoft wants to add to the lineup, they better try hard to write compelling characters first, then tie them into the setting. If you want to write

I am not going to care.

Yeah see above for most of my response.

Casual Shinji:
I guess his authentic nattive American depiction prevented him from being emotive. That generally seems to be the case with "indian" characters.

That's a pretty interesting point: Maybe Native Americans liked this character more, and other players experienced a bit of a culture shock? To be honest, I didn't think he was totally unemotive (that's probably not a word), he was just more controlled and subtle. You could tell what he was thinking, it just wasn't obvious. You could see his respect for Achilles, his hesitant bonding with Haytham, his trust in Washington, and his joy and pride in the Homestead and his Assassins. And I suspect a lot of players half watched the cutscenes while eating dinner or texting, if not outright skipping them, and lacking this context wrote him off as dull. Not pointing fingers at anyone on this forum, but I have seen less sensible arguments elsewhere.

BakaSmurf:
For the most part I agree with you OP, I quite enjoyed Connor's character and story and am fairly dissapointed that we more then likely won't get another Connor game due to the backlash against his character from people unwilling or unable to read between the lines and not have every single aspect of a character laid out on a dish for them up to and including having the character wear their hearts upon their sleeves (for those that don't understand, it means that they all but openly describe whatever their current emotional state is to everyone in the general area).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yuedZ1Y_dU4
Yeah I get what you mean about him not returning. There's so much they can build on: his relationship with the residents of the Homestead e.g. how they feel about his "work", his expansion of the Assassin Order and him deciding what they should focus on, or even just him running around freeing slaves.

While I'm here I think I'll throw up a few links that I feel are relevant. Spoilers abound, though the game is relatively old:

Achilles death: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N-2THKhPOaI
God this was a great piece of post-game content. Even the way it starts: Connor gives his usual, slightly rude "Old man", and then says "Achilles?" and you can hear the sudden concern in his voice. The way he speaks with Father Timothy just screams grief and possibly regret of how he treated his second father.

Connor's epilogue (taken out of main game): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g59vyPocZQQ
Well this is Connor's journey in a nutshell. Comes from the Forsaken novel and was cut out of the main game.

Templar deaths: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rsK0bnkTAiI
This is where a lot of the classic "Freedom Vs. Control" philosophy comes into the game, and also how we see Connor's belief in the former, even after what he suffers throughout his life.

Norris and Myriam wedding: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S5IdKDYg-co
This was a great mission for Connor's character. For all his seriousness throughout the main story, it is a joy to see him smile, and to see that there is something in his life that he is both proud of and has brought him happiness.

More general points: 1: Connor is too serious and stoic.
I don't buy this one. People love Batman and Master Chief, yet they seem to hate Connor for never making any quips about the quality of vaginas as outlets. I think this is just a case of "They changed it, therefore it sucks", the same people who are terrified of Batfleck: They changed it (he's not Christian Bale and he's not being directed by Chris Nolan) therefore it sucks. Connor's voice actor even said that comparing him to Ezio is like comparing coffee to 7-Up (or Sprite or whatever lemon and lime soft drink they have where you live). They are different people telling different stories.

2: The game is too serious.
While I appreciated the lighthearted fun of AC4, I think the Assassin's Creed franchise should be something more. At its core, it is about killing people in the belief that it will stop them killing more people and bring freedom to the world. That's a relatively sober theme, which is why I believe they pretty much ignored the Creed in 4: they wanted something lighter. Also, I think a lot of people disliked the game for its linearity and all the trading BS, and that this resentment poured over into its Assassin.

3: I'm just bitter that we might never see Connor again.
NO I'M NOT BITTER SHUT UP NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ;-D

P912:
Snip.

As I said, I just didn't see it. But as with most things of this nature it's purely open to interpretation. I've reached a point where I really don't mind what other people see in games even if I heavily disagree with them on a given topic. If you liked Connor and the game, good for you. Truly, I'm happy for your enjoyment. Personally, though, ACIII was the game that made me lose interest in the series to the point that I promised myself I wouldn't buy ACIV. I found the story to be paced far too sluggishly, overrun by tedious minigames and side-quests, and the protagonist was an arrogant, hot-headed twat who cared little to nothing for the war (other than the obvious "He's the good guy so of course he supports freedom" sentiments he should have) and tried to make the story as much about his personal revenge as it was about any of the other themes being worked with. He might spout out about the ideals of freedom, but above all else all he cared about was his own vengeance. This, of course, just being my experience of the game.

I'm all for flawed characters. Humans are naturally flawed, after all. Having said that, Connor is a bit... bland. I like that he fails but he didn't really engage me like, say, Ezio did.

I found him a bit bi-polar. One minute he's helping people around the homestead all kind and calm and I really like him. The next he's blowing up in Achilles' face for no real good reason. Achilles had the patience of a saint.

From Connor to the environment everything about Assassins Creed 3 was down right terrible apart from Kenway. I feel the writers got far to into the usual buzz words of 'dark', 'grey', 'mature' and 'atmospheric' and applied it to a series known for beautiful vistas and locales with disasterous results.

Connor to me symbolised a lot of what is wrong with modern gaming characters, this stoic betrayed by the world 'hey kids you like the batman movies?' protagonist that lacks any sort of personality, a misguided attempt to make a character seem deep.

I was very happy 4 gave me a money loving cheeky pirate, and an environment with colours! Sweet beautiful colours beyond shades of grey and brown.

Magix:
I wouldn't even say he was the protagonist. He was just some dude killing people for a while.

didn't you just describe most video game protagonists?

I hated him he was a brick and a Forest Gump the whole game. What little personality he did show was primarily anger and most of it wasn't justified next to my glitching horse who could arrive in all colors and states including apocalypse ribcage peaking out and redeyed his personality was equally as bi-polar whenever it made its appearance. The most forgettable of the AC leading men and his characterization is actually worse then brick male shep from his ME days.

Look wise was worse not to mention how in every AC game it magically changes Desmond who in this game looked like a caveman Conner ended up looking like a brick house nothing I could dress him in look right he seem like a constant bouncer I wish they would've kept his teen form because I can go along with that smaller frame work when he's moving through trees adult Conner just seems like he should be breaking any branch he tries to balance on.

trollnystan:
Achilles had the patience of a saint.

Ten saints.

Connor was a horrible man and the scum of the earth, he treated his friends like dirt and demanded what he want like a toddle. I really disliked him..

I'll admit he had his good moments, but overall? Yeah, he is fairly bad.

P912:
So there's all of that. A lot of which was seen in the main story. I mean, its obvious in retrospect that the Homestead missions gave him a lot of character development that shouldn't have been left in the side missions, but there's still a lot to dissect.

Ah, oops. Shouldn't have avoided those like the plague then.
But I did. Sort of because I didn't like him from the outset. If you follow that logic, it's quite the vicious cycle of apathy I'm afraid.

Glad to hear he might possibly have some redeeming qualities I didn't get to see as I played through his story.

...Huh. This whole post sounds horribly sarcastic, but it's actually not? I'm not quite sure.
On the one hand, I really do feel bad for Connor on a sort-of meta level because he's not presented as a character I like, his whole Assassin's quest for freedom is lost to me in the shadow of the setting's exact same historical imperative (and as an American I find it incredibly boring and over-done already), and as such he's resigned to a small cell in the back of my memory for crimes of circumstance he couldn't help.
But on the other hand, I don't find Assassin's Creed III sandbox and controls fun enough to go back and play those missions, so I guess he's going to stay that way? I elect to drop the whole issue because the underlying line is still "I don't care." His father/antagonist counterpart did more for me in the first hour of the game than the remainder of III could live up to.

Connor and the story in AC3 in general left me pretty much indifferent but I did really like the game itself though. Exploration was awesome and it did gave me a feel about how life on the Frontier must have been like. And it introduced naval combat! My favorite element of the entire game which more than made up for the somewhat clumsy combat and lackustre story/characters. AC4 is my favorite AC game by far but this game probably wouldn't exist without AC3 as a stepping stone. For that alone it deserves some credit.

As a character he was...okay, I guess, but I really didn't like his game.

Like so much in that game, Ratonhnhaké:ton felt...disjointed. Really, it seemed more like he was being molded to the needs of the story rather than letting the story fit him. "The audience already knows about his relationship to Haytham! Let's make it common knowledge and taken as a given by both Achilles and Ratonhnhaké:ton at their first meeting!" "We need conflict! Quick let's make the now adult (and assassin for years) Ratonhnhaké:ton act like an angsting 14 year old boy and insist that Achilles had done nothing for him!" "You know what, we should make him want peace between the Assassins and Templars...despite his belief that the Templars knowingly torched his village providing the bulk of his drive" And then of course there was the reaction to Washington's letter...I mean really, Ratonhnhaké:ton's story was not well written, and the apparent 'central' characterization of him as a patient, understanding man didn't fit particularly well with his character development and seemed to be abandoned and reinforced at the oddest moments.

I found him to be pretty dull, much preferred playing as his grandfather in 4.

Jamieson 90:

Edward - I WANT GOLD LOADS AND LOADS OF GOLD!!!!! AND I WANT IT ALL NOW!

Yeah how appealing....

That was sort of the point, honestly. It was the beginning of character development on his part: eventually he realizes that his greed has only led to his friends getting killed and he starts acting with a little bit more altruism. Which is more than I could say for Connor's character arc, which, if I remember correctly went something like: "Where is Charles Lee? Where is Charles Lee? WHERE IS CHARLES LEE?" Seriously, I can't remember dick about what Connor even did, beyond getting angry for no reason.

I think he was a whiner. Yeah, I get the revenge story but the way he went about it... Only ever serving his own purpose like that. He was a whiner of Anakin Skywalker proportions. "You underestimate my power!"

Yeesh...

debtcollector:

Jamieson 90:

Edward - I WANT GOLD LOADS AND LOADS OF GOLD!!!!! AND I WANT IT ALL NOW!

Yeah how appealing....

That was sort of the point, honestly. It was the beginning of character development on his part: eventually he realizes that his greed has only led to his friends getting killed and he starts acting with a little bit more altruism. Which is more than I could say for Connor's character arc, which, if I remember correctly went something like: "Where is Charles Lee? Where is Charles Lee? WHERE IS CHARLES LEE?" Seriously, I can't remember dick about what Connor even did, beyond getting angry for no reason.

You mean this?

But in all seriousness there's more to Connor's character than just revenge, it's just more subtle and between the lines; I think you learn more from the homestead missions for example, and anyway, how is Connor wanting revenge any different than Ezio who's catch line was "I'll kill you for this!"

 Pages 1 2 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked