Showing posts with label The Tyranny of George Washington. Show all posts
Showing posts with label The Tyranny of George Washington. Show all posts
Friday, March 1, 2013
Why Won't They Make These - Alternate Canon Games
Whenever I use the term 'alternate canon', people seem to have absolutely no idea what I'm talking about, even though it's sort of a self-explanatory concept. Perhaps I'm using the wrong term, or perhaps it's a symptom of what I'm expressing here tonight in that not enough games out there properly utilize the idea. Which, honestly kind of surprises me since not only is it a very versatile prospect by its own nature, but also because it allows creativity to sort of go wild since, well, if it goes off-rails "hey, it's not actually canon". Perhaps I'm simply under-estimating just how attached people can get to the established and the expectations that come with that, but at the same time, alternate canon is something that celebrates the first part, while also taking the second into consideration, in a sense.
I suppose I should explain just what I mean when I say "Alternate Canon", since it's going to be a thing I bring up a lot in the post here tonight. "Alternate Canon" is a game wherein it takes something established and drives it into a different direction than what you might expect. Not a reboot, not a re-imaging, not 'a spiritual successor' or any of those types of things. Just a story where something drastic happens that causes the established canon to forge a new route that is its own story and not necessarily that of the actual story on which it started from. Pictured above is Yakuza: Dead Souls which is the quintessential example that I can think of for this type of thing.
Yakuza: Dead Souls takes place a year after Yakuza 4 resolves (I believe, that's kind of Sega's thing with the Yakuza games) and introduces a zombie epidemic to the otherwise simple, crime-ridden streets of Kamurocho. It's all done in a way that, well, actually fits the series staples of story-telling and the already-established characters of the Yakuza 'world' as it were, react as only they could to the whole situation. It is, in every sense of the word, a continuation of the established canon except for the part where zombies destroy Kamurocho and everyone has to scramble because of it and a lot of people die. This is kind of obvious, but the existence of Yakuza 5 with a not-destroyed Kamurocho is proof enough that Yakuza still has an existing canon that runs directly into Yakuza 5, but Dead Souls sort of runs parallel along 5 now, as it is -also- a sequel to 4.
Let's take a look at Metal Gear Rising: REVENGEANCE. It is a direct continuation of Metal Gear Solid 4 which is a direct continuation of the rest of the Metal Gear games. Even though REVENGEANCE itself doesn't exactly take a lot from the rest of the series, what it does take is rather undeniable and it is, of course, canon. Let's all forget for a moment that we think we know what Metal Gear Solid 5 is going to be and pretend that Metal Gear Solid 5 takes place directly after 4. In it, we play as Raiden who has opted out of his cyborg enhancements to simple robot prosthetics that bind to a sneaking suit. In a return to form, this game would then be stealth-focused and take place in the events following 4's ending. Now, this will not happen, nor should it, but I introduced it as an idea for a very deliberate reason.
If the above played out, we would then have two established Raidens, basically, where they are both part of Metal Gear Solid canon. Being that the new game has '5' at the end, it would be labeled as official canon where REVENGEANCE would then be titled incorrectly as a spin-off. Only, in my little fantasy world, Metal Gear Rising 2: REVENGEANCE HARDER is also announced, continuing after the events of the REVENGEANCE which is, by extension, a continuation of Metal Gear Solid canon. Therefore, we now have two storylines. Alternate canon. This is the kind of thing I'm talking about and, aside from the fact that MGS5 will probably be a lot cooler than a game where you play Sneaking Raiden again, it's not a bad situation to imagine.
I am deliberately not using the word 'spin-off' here because spin-off has something of a negative connotation when you're talking about story-related matters. When you talk about a spin-off to someone, you say "It's just a spin-off, don't worry about the story", which immediately dismisses it. Going back to Metal Gear for a moment with Ac!d, which is very much a spin-off and not Alternate Canon, since Snake in it is a very, very different character. Ac!d's story is then self-contained and only important to both Ac!d games, which is why it's a spin-off. They are very, very different things, even well-outside the realm of pedantry.
Another not quite perfect example would be the announced "Tyranny of King Washington" DLC for Assassin's Creed 3. From what I've been lead to believe, not only does the mini-story tell of an entirely different historic setting in which George Washington doesn't go along with the whole "President" idea and instead becomes King of America, but it takes a different approach with the actual Assassin's Creed story. While using, presumably, the same build-up, the DLC tells of a Connor who does not join the Assassin order, yet history as we know it remains more or less unchanged....until Washington crowns himself King. As a Warrior of his tribe, not an Assassin, Connor rises up with the goal of overthrowing the tyrant King of America. While I'm loathe to call it a continuation of AC3 since, apparently, AC3 just didn't happen for the events of The Tyranny of King Washington to take place, it runs along a lot of the same lines, so I'm pretty sure you're getting where I'm coming from.
While this is a bit spoiler-y, it is also the best example of just what I'm talking about, so I unfortunately have to bring it up, but in a way that will spoil as little as possible. Now, a search of this blog will turn up the fact that I really really like Drakengard. A secondary search of this blog will also turn up the fact that I really really really like Nier. Now, not only are these two games made by the same developer (Now-Defunct Cavia, RIP) with the same director, which is apparently -very- important, but Nier is actually a sequel to Drakengard. Now, notice that I said 'a sequel'. Remind yourselves, for the moment, that Drakengard 2 is a thing that exists and is, also, a sequel to Drakengard, as the 2 would suggest. How is this possible, you might wonder.
Drakengard, in a sense, has two different story-lines that are covered over five different endings. Ending A is the 'canon' ending from which the unholiness that Drakengard 2 (with a different director) spawned from, whereas Endings B-E unfold in an entirely different way that sort of build off of each other while also ending up quite different in their own rights. Essentially, the characters, the story bits that don't have anything to do with the -specifics- of Endings B, C and D, are all canon to Ending E. Where Drakengard 2 is a sequel to Ending A, Nier is a sequel to Ending E. It's not said -quite- so explicitly in the game, and requires a little dot-connecting, but it -is- intended, and it -is- 'canon'. So, in effect, Drakengard is my perfect example of "Alternate Canon" which is kind of what this whole thing was about. Being that Nier was friggin' fantastic, it sort of shows that the idea has merit of use.
While I don't think it's ever really going to become a thing that's done a lot, I -would- like to exist in a world where I can come up with more than two and a half examples of Alternate Canon as I see it. It might have a too-strict set of guidelines, and it's hard to actually support two storylines in a single franchise, but when such a thing is executed well, it's phenomenal. If you need an example of that, perhaps you really need to re-introduce yourself to Legacy of Kain. Immediately. It's an entirely different thing than what I've been talking about all night, but it does that whole 'two storylines' thing wonderfully and is similarly something that I'm bewildered hasn't become a thing in the time since. That, however, is a subject for a different night.
Labels:
3,
Alternate Canon,
Assassin's Creed,
Drakengard,
Games,
Metal Gear Rising,
Metal Gear Solid,
Nier,
Rambling,
REVENGEANCE,
The Tyranny of George Washington,
Why Won't They Make These,
Yakuza Dead Souls
Wednesday, October 3, 2012
Assassin's Creed 3 DLC Single-Handedly Interests Me in AC3
I'm gonna be honest, here, and I think I've mentioned it before, but Assassin's Creed is a kind of weird series for me. I'm attached to it because the original game was the first game I ever played on a PS3 and for that, it was an amazing thing that I'll never forget. But I suspect that if I'd never had that single moment, if my first PS3 game had been something else, I wouldn't be nearly as invested in Assassin's Creed as a series and I probably would have quit at the first one whenever I got around to playing it. Or the second one for sure since, as I've stated before, I was not really a fan of at all. But if I hadn't played the second one, I would've missed out on AssBro, which you might remember I actually kind of liked, or at least I liked it more than AC2 proper. So for all that, Assassin's Creed 3 has always been a "I'll buy it when I want to, I guess" title because that's what the three games before it has been (I only own AssRev because I happened to be in Best Buy when they were selling it for $10) and they've instilled no greater loyalty into me at all.
Even with today's news, Assassin's Creed 3 remains in that category, but I'll be damned if it didn't get that much harder to leave it there. Today's news, which explains the (rather badass-looking) header image of the post is that the first-bit of Assassin's Creed 3's DLC will be 'The Tyranny of King Washington' a sort of "what-if" scenario that details just how things might have turned out if things went weird at the end of the Revolution in AC's own framing. As in, AC3's telling is already a little skewed by virtue of it being a game with Assassins that probably didn't ever exist in it, and then they're going to top that by creating an entire "This -really- didn't happen, like not even in AC Canon, but wouldn't that be sweet if it did" scenario. I'm not going to insult your intelligence with a "taking liberties" joke, but let it be known that I really could have even though I was not at all tempted to do so. Just putting that out there.
Anyways, I am decidedly in the camp of folks saying Hell yeah that sounds awesome, because it might just end with you shanking Tyrant King Washington and that is pretty much the only way you're ever going to one-up fistfighting the goddamn Pope I should think. (It's been long enough, and I think it's already kind of widely -out there- to be able to mention it without detailing specifics) I mean, that is pretty much all we know about the DLC is that it involves George Washington going on a power trip and declaring himself King of America after, presumably the entire game or a good part of it when he and Connor have grown to be friends. This will probably put them at odds and, throughout the DLC, the ultimate goal would probably be built up to shanking the dude for it. You know it, I know it, and absolutely nothing is lost from knowing it because it'll be the build and the payoff that -really- makes it. You don't have to -not- know everything to make it awesome, after all.
The DLC itself will be three episodes unto itself, probably one of the actual event happening -aka Shit going down-, one being the aftermath where stuff gets kind of finnicky and the last one where the 'plan' to get to Washington really starts coming together and eventually happens. While I wouldn't expect it to be like three of the middle episodes-long, I'm also not figuring on them being tiny either, so it should make for a decent chunk of playtime on its own which is a good thing. The DLC is -also- pretty much what Ubisoft is pinning its hopes on to bait people into getting the 'Season Pass' for AC3's DLC since it's included in it for $30. (I assume on its own, it'll be....you know, cheaper than that) Also included in the 'Season Pass' is some MP DLC or something, but nobody really cares about that. I should hope that if they decide to have another fairly major Single-Player DLC that it's included as well, but I wouldn't put quite anything past Ubisoft on that front.
That alone, the Season Pass business, is pretty much why I'm going to be steering clear of AC3 until next year. I want to see what all comes out for it and if they'll end up doing a "Game of the Year" deal with the game and all the DLC ala Bethesda GotY editions, because I'd be happy to pick that up. Because I -will- get the George Washington DLC, you see, unless the internet tells me it's approximately five minutes long and was all a dream of a dream. I'm 97% convinced that that won't happen, you see, but you have to leave your options open for this type of thing because they will -always- surprise you when you don't suspect they will. They're tricky like that. Though now I am slightly wondering about Assassin's Creed: Liberation. Will we see any DLC announcements for that as well, or are we basically figuring that Ubisoft is throwing it out into the wild and will never say anything about it again unless it manages to sell decently which, honestly, it probably should. Since it looks like a pretty good game and such. I suppose if I don't hear wind of any DLC business, I might just buy it up when it comes out to find out for myself!
Labels:
3,
Announcement,
Assassin's Creed,
DLC,
Games,
Hmm,
PC,
PS3,
The Tyranny of George Washington,
Ubisoft,
Wii U,
XBox 360
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)

