bit-gamer.net

Ubisoft confirms Assassin's Creed 2

Ubisoft confirms Assassin's Creed 2

Ubisoft has confirmed that Assassin's Creed 2 is currently in development, with no release date yet announced.

Ubisoft has confirmed what we all knew anyway, namely that there is a sequel to last year's smash hit, Assassin's Creed, in the works.

After the massive success of the original game, which shot developer Jade Raymond to internet notoriety/fame, it was always a no-brainer that Ubisoft would continue with the franchise - especially as it was originally envisioned as a trilogy and finished with an open ending.

Ubisoft confirmed that the game was in development during the first-half fiscal 2008-09 conference calls in America, according to Joystiq.

Annoyingly though, while Ubisoft did confirm that there was a team hard at work on the game, there was no mention of a release date and a company spokesperson refused to say whether or not the game would see a release in fiscal 2010 (which would be Christmas 2009).

Whether or not Jade Raymond is attached to the project or not is uncertain too as she's currently linked most closely to Ubisoft's post-earthquake survival game, Alive.

You can check out our full review of Assassin's Creed, as well as the Directors Cut version for PC for more information on the game, and be sure to let us know what you think in the forums.

17 Comments

Discuss in the forums Reply
liratheal 27th November 2008, 12:28 Quote
If anyone was shocked by this, they need a head check.

Side note. Jade Raymond pics please.
p3n 27th November 2008, 12:35 Quote
If theres a lot more 'present day' content then i'll get this - if not 'trilogy, what trilogy?'
cjoyce1980 27th November 2008, 12:39 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by p3n
If theres a lot more 'present day' content then i'll get this - if not 'trilogy, what trilogy?'

If its following the story of the first one expect to go back to the time of the cusades.... but maybe more modern with the final game if its a trilogy :)
CardJoe 27th November 2008, 12:46 Quote
Rumour is that it's set a few hundred years after the last one, probably moving from the 12th century through to the 15th or 16th.
Jordan Wise 27th November 2008, 13:22 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by CardJoe
Rumour is that it's set a few hundred years after the last one, probably moving from the 12th century through to the 15th or 16th.

oh great, another mideval game
WildThing 27th November 2008, 14:36 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by CardJoe
Rumour is that it's set a few hundred years after the last one, probably moving from the 12th century through to the 15th or 16th.

Assassin's Creed was set in the 12th century??!! Funny I thought it was set in the future.
mmorgue 27th November 2008, 14:40 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jordan Wise
oh great, another mideval game

Not really such a bad thing, is it? I thought they did quite well capturing the look and feel in the original AC of 11th Century so I figure they do an equal if not better job on the 13/14th Centuries.. if said rumour were true.

I only hope the game *isnt* based completely in modern day, otherwise it'll just be another GTA/Saints Row clone.

EDIT : oops, I meant 12th century, not 11th..
Flibblebot 27th November 2008, 15:17 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by WildThing
Assassin's Creed was set in the 12th century??!! Funny I thought it was set in the future.
Really? What game were you playing? While part of AC is set in the future, the bulk of the game is set in the twelfth century in the time of the Crusades.

I think I said in my original review that it was fairly obvious that the whole Abstergo/DNA memory storyline was so that they could set sequels in other historical settings.

The problem with setting a game in the 15th or 16th centuries is that comparisons to the world of the Thief games is inevitable. Don't see how you'd ever get round that, though.

It would be good to base a game around the period of Queen Elizabeth, and all the intrigue and assassination that went on in her court.
[USRF]Obiwan 27th November 2008, 16:45 Quote
Jade should be a star in a porn movie, I'm 100% convinced that it will sell more copy's then AC
Redbeaver 27th November 2008, 17:32 Quote
porn star??? well, im not sayin i wont like it; but i would say Jade has the nice-but-naught-girl-next-door look that i wouldnt mind having a serious relationship with..... not the bang-her-on-go-on look like some actresses in RedAlert3 game...... :p


hmm........ Jade............


oh wait, whats the thread about again?
Haramzadeh 27th November 2008, 17:55 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by [USRF]Obiwan
Jade should be a star in a porn movie, I'm 100% convinced that it will sell more copy's then AC


I'm going to go ahead and second this.
Bionic-Blob 27th November 2008, 20:46 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flibblebot
Really? What game were you playing? While part of AC is set in the future, the bulk of the game is set in the twelfth century in the time of the Crusades.

I think I said in my original review that it was fairly obvious that the whole Abstergo/DNA memory storyline was so that they could set sequels in other historical settings.

The problem with setting a game in the 15th or 16th centuries is that comparisons to the world of the Thief games is inevitable. Don't see how you'd ever get round that, though.

It would be good to base a game around the period of Queen Elizabeth, and all the intrigue and assassination that went on in her court.

No, he's right. It's all in the future.
Gunblade 28th November 2008, 03:31 Quote
To bad this game was really just below average - I wonder what the stats are for people turning in the game for store credit or something. I know plenty who won't care for a sequel.

Though enough people probably liked the game enough to buy the sequel.
PhenomRed 28th November 2008, 06:48 Quote
I liked the first one, I welcome a sequel

And more pics of Miss Raymond please, she is rather beautiful
Sheiken 28th November 2008, 10:17 Quote
Why repeat an overly repetitive game? Does'nt make sense to me...
CardJoe 28th November 2008, 11:00 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheiken
Why repeat an overly repetitive game? Does'nt make sense to me...

You can say that again. ;)
Tris 28th November 2008, 16:25 Quote
one would hope they can avoid the repetetive aspects of the original, while keeping the stuff they did right. I defy anyone to honestly tell me that they weren't amazed the first time they climbed a tower (omg he is actually grabbing outcroppings!) and saw the vista, before plummeting off (weeeeeee!).
Likewise with anyone who tries to to tell me they didn't giggle like a schoolgirl the first time they crept up behind a guard and stealth-killed them :D
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.



Discuss in the forums