It's a trite one but it is true. "I want" doesn't get. How about "we want"?
A small selection of Assassin's Creed fans are debating Ubisoft's decision to set the next game in Baghdad in the Islamic Golden Age. Mirage is ticking a lot of boxes for players - starting as a street orphan and learning the lessons of the Creed, sticking to stealth over action, and sharing freerunning similarities with Unity. It's even ditched the much-maligned modern-day scenes that are interspersed between the stuff that you actually bought the game for. I did like the non-descript vending machine "food" and "coffee" you could find in the Abstergo offices in Black Flag, though.
Check out this cosplayer who embodies every tenet of the Raven Clan from Valhalla, we're not totally convinced they aren't a viking who stumbled out of the Animus:
"Why do you think Ubisoft is not doing a AC1 remaster/remake if the demand is so overwhelming for it?" asked Reddit user i-d-even-k on the series' subreddit. "There is no doubt that it would be well-received, because look at how Mirage is hyping everyone up. It seems like Ubisoft will do anything and everything else, up to placing a whole new game in the Middle East in vaguely the same era to 'bring back the original vibes' ... literally anything except remaking [Assassin's] Creed 1."
Advert
There are a scattering of theories in the comments, from the money to be made in open-world games over linear games, the risk of ruining the feel of the original with a remaster, and the actualities of the first game.
It's often forgotten but Assassin's Creed was criticised for its repetitive gameplay, odd pacing, and there's no getting past this - actor Philip Shahbaz absolutely phoned it in as Altaïr. Perhaps it's best the game is left to its own devices in its rose-tinted case.
Topics: Assassins Creed, Ubisoft