Assassin's Creed/Headscratchers

Note: The Headscratchers-page for Assassin's Creed II is up. New ACII-specific JBM's can go there. Thank you.

Cartography Fail

 * When Ezio collects all of the Codex pages and brings them back to Monteriggioni and then solves the puzzle, he concludes (correctly) that it's a map of Earth. This makes absolutely no sense. How would he KNOW that, given the time period? There is no corroborating evidence to support his theory, making it an illogical conclusion, and beyond that... He just deciphered a map of the entire world! Why is no one astonished or excited? I--I don't even... ARRRRRRRGH!
 * You forget that Ezio solves the Codex in 1499, seven years after Columbus set sail. By that time, Europe's intelligensia was already fully aware of the existence of the Americas. Ezio, an educated gentleman, (whose hobbies include running around on rooftops and murdering people) would already know this.
 * Because the Assassins already know what the world looks like. Y'know, that whole giant global map that Altaïr discovered inside the POE in the first game? How the hell do you think Altaïr knew how to draw such a map in the first place? Altaïr knew what the world looked like, drew a map, and that information was passed down through the years to the other Assassins.
 * I'm personally confused as to how anyone missed this. I mean, wasn't the fact that Altaïr was shown a map of the entire planet kind of the entire point of the first game?
 * If the Troper hadn't played the first game, they wouldn't have known. Also, we're never shown in-game that Ezio would have knowledge of the map, so...
 * It's a sequel in a plot-heavy series. If you haven't played the first game, then you should be confused. Its like reading The Two Towers before reading Fellowship of the Ring.
 * You're all missing the point, Ezio has never seen a full map, he himself said that there were undiscovered lands on the map. However Asia and Northern Africa were discovered well before his time, he just guessed that the Americas were undiscovered lands.
 * Exactly. Ezio has never seen a full map of the world, but he has probably seen Europe and most of Asia and Northern Africa. Another landmass to the West was discovered six years before this point in the story by Columbus, so it's likely the gathered Assassins simply put two and two together.
 * Also, in Assassin's Creed II: Discovery, Ezio has contact with an Atlas that depicts new lands.
 * Why in AC I does the map at the end have modern borders?
 * The Pieces of Eden are not restricted by silly things like "time." Ezio and Altaïr both used them to see the future, and Those Who Came Before explicitly possessed the ability to see into the future.
 * Before I played AC II, I wondered about this detail myself. After I finished AC II, I realized that the map was intended for Desmond to see through the Animus.

White Robed Men Can't Jump

 * Am I the only one confused by the fact everybody from Masyaf is just as freaked out by Altaïr jumping all over the place as the rest of the cities in the game? Honestly Jerusalem, Damascus, and Acre make sense as they've never met him before and probably assume he's just some madman in white, but the whole jumping off buildings and running all over the place should seem pretty common in a small city almost made up exclusively of Assassins.
 * The entire city isn't made up of assassins, and I don't see hordes of white suited men flipping and jumping off walls regularly when I'm passing through it. Besides, there's no reason for an Assassin to be free-running through the city when there's that wondrous invention known as a "road" for them to use. I highly doubt that every Assassin leaving Masyaf leaves the same way the player usually does by cutting a straight line over the rooftops.
 * Also, most Assassins can't necessarily do things like Altaïr. They are novices, and he is Grand Master, after all.

Holy Land Lacks Judaism

 * This will seem awfully selfish thinking, but how come there's not a single Jew in the entire Holy Land during this game? Did Altaïr really just never interact with enough Jew to have a memory of their existence?
 * Well, there is a synagogue in Jerusalem.
 * There most likely were plenty of Jews -- as said above, there's synagogues in Jerusalem. It's just the story is focused on Crusaders vs. Saracens, so the Jewish population isn't really important to this story. They're mentioned from time to time, and a good chunk of the people you meet in the streets are likely Jewish, but they don't stand out and aren't major players in the Crusades or the conflict between the Templars and Assassins at that point.
 * This troper assumed the "scholars" in Damascus and Jerusalem were Jews. It would explain why they're always getting hassled by the guards.
 * Despite the good explanations above, This Troper thinks there's another explanation. Consider: Jerusalem, the Jewish holy city, is marked by a cross when Acre already claims the cross in-game and Damascus has an Islamic crescent, and a piece of the Ark of the Covenant, an Israelite artifact if there ever was one, has a cross on it. They just Did Not Do the Research.
 * Jerusalem is claimed by Muslims and Christians as well. The cross most likely marked which "faction" was controlling the city and item.
 * That cross is the symbol of the Kingdom of Jerusalem, a Christian nation which was established at the end of the First Crusade. By the time of the game, Saladin had only recently taken the city, so it makes sense that that cross would still be associated with it.
 * Or, as some historians pointed out, by that time the actual Jews of Biblical times have been driven out, multiple times in fact. It's probable the game plays during one such exodus.
 * The second game features a Codex Page that shows the Pieces of Eden creating various religions and the religious symbols therein. No Jewish symbol is provided. Either this is a story element or Ubisoft feels it too politically incorrect to insult Judaism.
 * Actually, a Piece of Eden is included in Judaism, and has been since the beginning of the series: the Staff of Aaron, identified as the "Staff" in a glyph and in the short movie that was shown before the first game came out (which I cannot remember). There's also the Apple, obviously the Apple of Eden. Beyond that, this troper assumes (possibly erroneously) that the Star of David is more of a racial/cultural symbol than a religious one.
 * The Star of David is a relatively new addition as a symbol of the Judaist faith, though it has had uses in the culture for quite some time. It's a symbol of the religion in the modern days, but its uses were a lot more limited back then.

Super Guards

 * How do the guards instantly know you're up to no good? "He's running! Get him, he's obviously an assassin!"
 * Because of a strictly enforced pedestrian speed limit.
 * Probably the long sword, sharp dagger, plethora of knives, white robe, the missing ring finger with a strange device attached to the stub, and the fact that you're not a guard or Templar, so you probably shouldn't have weapons in the first place, gave the guards enough evidence to deduce who and what you are.
 * Yet walking in this gear is perfectly permissible?
 * If someone walks past you on a crowded sidewalk, you're probably not going to notice. The guards (at least, early on) have no reason to be paranoid. Running through a crowd is a pretty damn noticeable thing to do, and that's when their attention is drawn to you.
 * Guards don't attack you if you run past them, unless you've just carried out an assassination and put the city on alert, or they have some other reason to suspect you, i.e. you just killed someone. If you run by them, they'll comment that you must be running from somebody and are suspicious, but if they don't have any other reason to suspect you, they'll let Altaïr go.
 * I'm more bothered of why a galloping horse immediately gets identified as Assassin, but walking horse is not, even though that way the soldiers get a far better view of the rider.
 * The guards have horse sense?
 * Actually, that one makes sense. When traveling between cities in such a hot environment, you'd probably go easier on your mount than the game allows. Therefore, anyone galloping at top speed in the middle of nowhere is probably up to no good and likely running from someone, which makes sense for the guards to intervene.
 * Except that people galloping at top speed in those environments was a very common sight at the time; they were called messengers, and their job was to get bits of parchment from a general to another as quickly as possible.
 * Surely the old guy in the castle(and whoever is on the message's receiving end) isn't the only one smart enough to use a carrier pigeon.
 * If he's a messenger, he would be wearing a uniform and carry identification, and would slow down to identify himself to a guarded checkpoint, not blast straight through it at full gallop.
 * In that case, the 'running on foot' thing above is justified, too. Pedestrians even say, "He must be running from someone!"
 * Well, Assassins have a very distinct mode of dress, with bright red sashes and white robes. Plus, you know, two swords, fifteen knives, shiny metal gauntlet, fingerless gloves, combat boots....its less a question of how they know you're an Assassin and more a question of how they don't notice you're one.
 * Well, there are many kinds of knights in the Middle East at that time, and red and white are a very popular color-combination (*cough* Templars *cough*). It wouldn't be unlikely that Altaïr gets mistaken for a knight who isn't wearing his armor at the moment. Unfortunately the dialogue implies that he gets mistaken for a monk, instead. Now there were many monks in the Crusades who weren't averse of bashing some unbeliever skulls, but due to the canon law, they were only allowed to use blunt weapons, so the collection of sharp blades should really have made it obvious that Altaïr ain't no clergy.
 * The blunt weapons thing is a myth. The Templars were all monks, and they used swords and spears as well as flails, maces, and morning stars.
 * Plus, its the sash that should really give it away that he's an Assassin. Everyone from Masyaf wears one, it seems. White robes, lots of weapons, sash from a very specific town with its giant Doom Fortress full of Assassins...
 * Obviously, the developers were too lazy to implement a disguise mechanic.
 * Or any reasonable methods of stealth or guard AI. If you're the only person standing around in a pile of a dozen dead guards and crusaders they'll just keep asking themselves who must have done this. Walk away slowly and they won't care. You can even stab a man in public, quickly turn around and run away at top speed and they often won't show up until you're down the block and no longer looking for you. But if a crazy person pushes you into them you're obviously an Assassin.
 * I think the idea is that a crowd offers a far better disguise than any article of clothing, or lack of such. Therefore, for the guards to recognize Altaïr, they'd first need to actually spot him in the mass of variously dressed people. This makes those times when he's not noticed without having a crowd to surround him seem a bit nonsensical.
 * I always figured it was because the guards were, well, guards. Presumably they aren't going to notice someone unless they're acting out of the ordinary, and most of their time is spent wandering around with nothing to do, standing guard through hour upon hour of dull, boring tedium. It's been shown time and again in real life that security guards can be bypassed by anyone who looks vaguely like they belong, unless the guards have very specific orders to not let people pass without clearance.
 * The answer seems clear enough to me. When you're walking you blend in with the crowd. When you run you draw attention to yourself. (If you were walking down the street and all of a sudden a guy appears out of nowhere running at full speed, wouldn't you turn to watch him?) And when the guards start paying attention to you they can instantly see you're an assassin, hence they begin to chase you.
 * The literal answer here is that the Animus is essentially a video game. A hyper-advanced video game based on Altaïr's memories, but still a video game, and thus has characters acting in odd, illogical manners. In effect, the Animus is one giant lampshade of all video game tropes. You take an action within the context of the Animus' simulation that would alert guards, and they're onto you.
 * As an added point, the instruction manual, largely written as Vidic and Lucy's research notes, specifically states that they designed the Animus to provide the user with a video-game-like interface based on the assumption that their subjects would have a much easier time learning it. Vidic's notes say the assumption was correct.
 * I would chalk it up it being, yes, a Show Within a Show, but possibly the Animus replaced what Altaïr would have actually worn with an identifiable "Assassin's" outfit, as well as the other guys. Altaïr would have the ability to recognize his assassin friends by face and posture and what not, but since you don't, the Animus helps you out by giving everyone obvious outfits.
 * Guards probably have a lousy track record against Assassins. If you were a guard, and you thought someone just walking by, not doing anything wrong, was an assassin, would you really want to provoke him if you didn't really have to?
 * The one that pissed me off even more in Ass Creed is when the guards are alerted by you being pushed by a leper. "He let that leper push him, the punishment for that is death!" Seriously, WTF?, Animus?
 * Getting pushed by a leper draws attention. It makes the guards notice you, and then they notice the other odd things about you.

Hidden Blade

 * Just how does one use a Hidden Blade, exactly? In-game, the user sort of flicks their wrist to extend it, and flicks it back to retract it. But aren't there thousands of situations where an Assassin could do so accidentally? Like, when climbing up a structure, or trapped in combat, or even reaching for an apple?
 * If you're assuming that the blade freely slides in and out, it doesn't. There's some kind of switch or pressure-activated trigger within the glove itself that shoots the blade out at great force and locks it in place until it's retracted (that's part of what makes it so deadly).
 * But Ezio (and Altair) don't wear gloves with their blades. I think we see a few Assassins that do, but they don't.
 * Well, mainly it looks cool. But yes, in the novelizations, they're said to use some type of deploy mechanism attached to their finger.
 * If I remember correctly, when Game Informer did a cover story on the game, someone explained how the hidden blade works. Basically, removing the ring finger is symbolic in that not only can the assassin no longer marry (excluding Ezio in ACII), he is in effect married to the Brotherhood (with the hidden blade being the ring) but it also shows their commitment to the Brotherhood. Once they put the hidden blade on, there is a ring that is attached to the stump with a wire that activates the mechanism that draws the blade whenever the wearer flicks their wrist or so. I'd imagine there's also a safety wire of sorts attached to one of their other fingers to prevent the blade from deploying accidently, can't really remember what they said exactly.

Acrobat Guards

 * To be honest, I'd be more interested in knowing how ordinary guards (who probably don't deal with such agile adversaries on a daily basis) are capable of duplicating nearly all of Altaïr's acrobatic feats. Jumping from rooftop to rooftop while in pursuit, climbing ledges... those guys sure are fast.
 * In full armor no less. The Crusaders are awfully fit.
 * This Troper had a hilarious encounter where he saw a guard who had been chasing him jump up ten feet and grab a ledge I had been spending some time climbing.
 * Ditto. Seeing a guard who had lost track of Altaïr fling himself off a three story building, dust himself off, and continue his patrol was particularly memorable.
 * Even more hilarious is spooked drunks who have trouble standing jump from pole to pole when spooked in Acre's port.
 * Since the Animus levels are all being built out of Altaïr's memories, it's possible these super-guards aren't really accurate to what he really faced, but are rather Altaïr's impression of what it's like to be chased through a city. Altaïr must have felt constantly threatened and hounded everywhere he went, so the Animus translates this paranoia to Desmond by creating guards that can always be one step behind him. This would explain why all the beggars, drunks, and mentally ill people only follow or attack Altaïr -- he believed the whole world was out to get him, so the Animus made it so. Remember that any place you can die in the game isn't really where the real Altaïr died -- it's just Desmond letting his mind wander.
 * That was... brilliant.
 * They can grab a ledge directly overhead and jump between rooftops, but not any of the tricky stuff (climb up windows, grab ledges from jumps, jump from walls, etc.). A bit more than you'd expect from the average flatfoot, but not totally outlandish; desperation and rage are pretty powerful motivators.

Timeline (Battle of Arsuf)
Something that bugs me is why the writers chose to have the game take place in 1191 with the penultimate level being the Battle of Arsuf (which took place in early September of that year) and not in 1192, the year of the Third Crusade's final battle (the Battle of Jaffa). This would have allowed the writers to use Conrad of Monferrat as they had originally planned (instead of his father William), and matched up the death dates of the other historical characters with the death year of their historical counterparts -- Garnier de Naplouse, Sibrand, Robert de Sablé, and even Al Mualim (based on Rashid ad-Din Sinan). Why, Ubisoft? WHY?
 * Because that was when it "actually" happened. The fact that everything takes place at an ahistorical date is probably a relatively subtle nod by the developers that the Templars are quietly rewriting history.


 * Anyone else feel a loss of suspense upon finding out how the Animus works in the first cutscene? After all, genes, and thus, 'Genetic Memory', are passed on in the moment of conception. The logical conclusion is that the Medieval Altaïr will ultimately survive whatever disasters the future titles will throw at him, since his descendant shouldn't have any memory of what Altaïr did after fathering him.
 * Well even without that, the player character was hardly likely to suffer Plotline Death mid-game so I wouldn't see that as a particularly large source of tension anyway.
 * That was also how it worked in the Prince of Persia series, but that didn't exactly strip it of all the suspense, as there is a large gaping hole from where the story starts and the story ends and the ways to get through them.
 * But the same can be said of nearly every video game. If the main character dies, it's usually game over, can't really play without the playable character. Besides, I don't think Genetic Memory is exactly scientifically accurate, so thusly the Animus may be able to see things past his conception. Though while we're talking about character death, isn't it kinda interesting that no matter what Altaïr does, he will have been long dead by the actual events of the game?
 * Actually, since the next game is supposedly going to be set a few centuries later, it doesn't particularly matter anyway.
 * I just interpreted it as Desmond being the one in danger. Damned if he doesn't get the memory fast enough, damned if he does. They try and press this angle in the game during the chapter interludes, repeatedly saying his life is at stake to show the danger he's in, but you're right, this game has no Game Over condition. Maybe the sequel might do "lives", with a set number of synchronizations possible before the memories are completely locked/the genes damaged/etc?
 * Not sure what you're getting at here. The whole point of the Animus is that you need to "synchronize" with the ancestor, i.e. do what he did (which also means no harming of innocents, no matter how aggravating or intrusive they get...DAMN, that was a whopper of a rookie mistake by Ubisoft). If Altaïr dies or lets a target get away, the program shuts down because that didn't happen. The suspense doesn't come from whether Altaïr succeeds or fails, it's what the results of his successes ultimately were (and by extension, how much they differ from the history books). It's exactly the same for Ezio Auditore, BTW (and there are no life or synchronization limits of any kind).
 * Why do the games even need lives or a game over setting? Most games these days just reload the previous checkpoint when you fail...exactly like these ones do. Die in Halo? Checkpoint. Die in Oblivion or Fallout? Load the most recent save. Die in Arkham Asylum? Checkpoint. Die or fail in Assassin's Creed...checkpoint.
 * I don't understand why they made the animus/modern day storyline in the first place. Even by the end of the second game, it still hasn't justified itself to this troper. Assassin's Creed would have worked just fine as a series of games, each with their own story.
 * Because it's cool.
 * It also allows the skipping of boring time, a justification for the side-missions respawning, etc. Basically it's a framing device, and it looks like they're building up to a third in the modern day.
 * Looks like? They set the release date in the first game! December 21, 2012 is repeatedly stated as the Templar's deadline and was on the right schedule for when the game was initially released to provide development time to put out the third game then (maybe a little earlier to make more than last-minute holiday sales unless they're really dedicated to the solstice).
 * While a series of self-contained games could work, the metaplot ties the whole history of the two groups together.
 * 1. Desmond Miles is the man here (like it or not). 2. Having a computerized simulation gave Ubisoft a lot of leeway in how things could be presented (which, as you may guess from most of the entries here, they needed big time). 3. Knowing that the Assassins and Templars have been fighting, constantly, for hundreds thousands of years, as opposed to three remote, unrelated flareups, really drives home the sheer scope of the conflict.
 * Also it basically justifies anything wrong in the game. Why can't Altaïr swim? The animus has a bug.
 * This. It's a lazy way to handwave any obvious gamey-ness or problems... aside from how astoundingly repetitive it is. The developers seem to think we need a crutch to our suspension of disbelief and that (nearly) all game conventions need to be explained... by making you play a game about playing a game.
 * This was a bit of realism. It was extremely uncommon for people to know how to swim back then. Its actually kind of weird that Ezio knows how to swim in the sequel for that matter.
 * Actually, I figured that was because he had no reason to know how to swim. They don't live in an area with a large number of bodies of water, and he seems to operate mainly in that area. Sure, there are seas sort of nearby, but I don't really see him learning to swim. It would be like learning to move through a forest quietly; kind of a moot point in the area. What makes less sense is Ezio being able to swim with all of that gear and the heavy clothes on him.
 * Actually, I just remembered something. Lorenzo di Medici, AKA Giovanni Auditore's friend, almost died by drowning. Giovanni saved him with swimming. So, perhaps, when Ezio was a boy, Giovanni said, "Alright, it's a hot day in Firenze. EZIO! We're going to the river. You're going to learn to swim! You'll never know when you need it. . ."
 * Actually, it's justified at the end of the second game.
 * Okay, so you run into random Templars, in full Templar gear, right? Now, their emblem is a big red cross on the front of their smock. Obviously Christian imagery, right? So why the heck are they in Jerusalem and Damascus, both of which are under Saracean control? Why doesn't the guards attack them, but instead protect and aid them? Somebody explain this to me!
 * The game explains that all your targets are actually Templars themselves, so presumably the Saracen soldiers have been instructed to treat the Templar foot soldiers as allies.
 * Considering both of the rulers of Damascus and Jerusalem are Templars...
 * Also, remember that Assassin's Creed is an abstraction of Altaïr's memories. It could simply be that the Animus makes the Templars into what is an obviously Templar-esque guise to help make them distinctive in its simulation.
 * Ay, wait a sec! This troper had a fight with a Templar in Jerusalem, some guards come, and guess what? They attack the Templar! Not me! (But I killed all of them, including the Templar.)
 * Am I the only one that found it weird that everyone in Acre had English accents? It's not like being taken over by a foreign force makes everyone change ethnicity and linguistic background at the drop of a hat! (It may not have been Acre, but I remember that one of the cities was like this.)
 * If you're speaking about a city seen in the Animus, surely you realize you're talking about a city which wouldn't be speaking in Modern English in the first place.
 * If you bothered talking with Lucy, Desmond asks about this right off the bat. Lucy explains that the Animus translates everything into understandable English for ease of understanding, and that she could make it sound more "authentic" but that would be like reading Chaucer.
 * The point was that the regular civilians in Acre are pale-skinned European types speaking with English accents, while the other cities are populated by swarthy Middle-Eastern types with Arab or similar accents. It does not make sense that Acre would be inhabited entirely by Europeans that have not even adapted their manner of dress to the local climate.
 * Animus. Animus. ANIMUS.  Every single aspect of what happens inside the Animus cannot be considered "real" because the Animus is, for all intents and purposes, a video game.
 * This is their all-purpose explanation for Did Not Do the Research (but inexplicably hired a pair of historians they must not have listened to all the time) and any other element of laziness or convention. Why, for example, does Acre resemble a European city with a gothic cathedral that would have been cutting-edge for the time period (and thus, not in a war zone thousands of miles away from France without access to the skilled craftsmen and decades needed to build it)?
 * Not to mention that with the exception of the previous four years, Acre had been under Crusader control for the better part of a century and in 1191 would have been teeming with newly-arrived (and therefore improperly-dressed) Europeans thanks to the Third Crusade -- presumably the designers wanted to reflect that. Even so, making them all European, let alone British, is still overkill.
 * Abstergo already bothered hiring multiple voice actors for the "video game" only one guy ever plays. I guess a little bit of cost cutting.
 * They aren't all English. There are French and German people in Acre too. Any soldier who's wearing a helmet will jabber at you in French or German. Also keep in mind that the Animus is an abstraction of Altaïr's memories and impressions. He likely noticed the Englishmen standing out more than the French and Germans and the Animus translates that into "Everyone in Acre is English."
 * And speaking of accents, why is it that Robert de Sable has a French accent, while Richard does not? The historical Richard spoke hardly any English, spent very little time in England and his native language was certainly French. It is at the very least an inconsistency in the Translation Convention, and I believe it happened because giving him a French accent would lead to a Reality Is Unrealistic situation caused by people believing that an English king should sound English too.
 * The Animus did it. That is literally the explanation here; accents exist because the Animus artificially introduced them.
 * Richard's accent does sound French though, doesn't it? It certainly didn't sound English to this troper.
 * IIRC, England was ruled at the time by the descendants of the Normans, who came from France.
 * That leads to another problem -- some of the guards are speaking German (I think). Why doesn't this translate? Is it because Altaïr didn't speak German, and if so, why would an Assassin know English and French in the first place?
 * That's not German, that's Old English.
 * Old English and German really don't sound anything alike. It's recognizably German.
 * ....for the same reason everyone learns foreign languages? He's an assassin. Knowing a foreign language would be useful.
 * Why on Earth would an Assassin based in the Middle East learn German?
 * I dunno, maybe the fact that every so often they get hit by a Crusade that includes Germans, perhaps?
 * It also makes the game more interesting if you can speak those languages. Hearing some French Templar shout that his wrath will be terrible in his native tongue certainly adds to the atmosphere.
 * Since Desmond understands English, and his ancestor understands Arabic, then both of them will sound like English. Neither Desmond nor Altaïr knew French or German; therefore, they remain untranslated, since Altaïr would have not been able to understand them, and because Desmond doesn't either.
 * One would think that the Animus itself could make up for that, though. Lucy was talking about the Animus translating for everyone (see the post above that includes the word "Chaucer"). I didn't get the sense that it was because Altaïr knew Arabic that it was translated for Desmond; if that was true, he'd more likely hear Arabic, but be able to understand it.
 * AC: Brotherhood addresses this. Rebecca and Desmond talk about understanding things, and Rebecca says that the Anumus 2.0's translation software is still imperfect, leaving some expressions in Italian untranslated. She then says that it works well enough in its present form, but if Ezio encounters any French or German, he's out of luck. Lo and behold, any French or German soldiers in AC:B are still untranslated. TL;DR - The Animus translates Old English, Arabic, and Italian, but not French or German.
 * This seems to be consistent in Revelations, where Altair seems to have gained an accent during his playable missions, seen here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hiARH6kHMMw
 * So near the end of the game, you talk to Lucy and there's one of those "glitch" moments which shows you close up of her hand and you see she's missing a finger, letting you know she's an Assassin...so how come throughout the rest of the game, you can look at her and she has all ten fingers in tact? More importantly, why would a modern day Assassin still do the finger removal thing anyway? I thought it was done to make access to the hidden blade easier, they haven't found a way to improve this method after hundreds of years? (made even worse by the fact that the finger removal is apparently no longer used by the time of Assassin's Creed II.)
 * Or she could have just pulled her finger back against her palm.
 * Your right that they don't need to remove their finger, nor in fact that they do. It's just symbolism, like a secret handshake.
 * I'm gonna say it's either this or that she has some kind of false-finger she wears to keep her bosses from seeing that she's an Assassin.
 * I always thought it was like above said, a gesture. I'm pretty sure The Other Wiki says the same thing
 * Wait...It's a Gesture...Missing the ring finger....Holy shit, I'm never looking at someone throwing up "The Shocker" the same way again.
 * It's pretty clear she's just pulling the finger back. Like how if you equip the Altaïr armor in MGS4 Snake pulls that finger back into his palm, but if you look it's still there.
 * It should be obvious she's pulling her finger back. Look at her hands at any point in either game. She's got ten fingers, all full length. This is something that could have been verified by a single glimpse in first-person.
 * OK, small point, but where in the hell did this missing finger stuff come from? When were we told or shown that he's missing a finger to access his blade? I just always assumed that it came out from under his wrist... y'know, like we've seen in every other work to use a similar device. I didn't even notice her missing finger/gesture and wondered why Desmond is suddenly checking out her rack and only then figures out what she's been hinting pretty strongly the entire time.
 * It should have been obvious if you were paying attention to Altair's character model. He's missing his ring finger; if you look closely, you can actually see the blade pass through the space where his ring finger should be. It's also especially visible during pickpocket sequences, where Altair is reaching out toward his target with fingers extended. In ACII Leonardo even says that they have to lop off the ring finger as a "sacrifice" to use the blade.
 * A small point in the meta-plot: Lucy claims that though she finished her Ph.D. no university or company wanted anything to do with her since they considered her research pseudoscience. But if that was the case, how could she have been allowed to finish her research at all, much less pass the disputation? If she couldn't back up her hypothesis with data acquired through experiments and/or direct observation, she wouldn't be allowed to complete her doctorate. If she could back it up, then they would be forced to acknowledge that her research has merit and is, in fact, real science.
 * Because not a few moments after she tells you that, she points out that the Templars were manipulating everything to keep her from finding a job.
 * IIRC, she said she was working on her Ph.D., not finished with it.
 * It just bugs me that there are no children anywhere, and no missions take place at night. I can buy Altaïr going for the "blend in the crowds" route, which would be much harder at night, but night recon and assassinations shouldn't be summarily ruled out.
 * Hide Your Children, and its all taking place inside the simulation provided by the Animus. Most of the assassinations are taking place during the day, too, though dialogue does indicate that the assassination of Abun Nakood is supposed the be at night.
 * I would say it's because the developers wanted to avoid potential controversy by allowing you to kill children, but also avoiding Infant Immortality.
 * Like the above tropers said, Hide Your Children and avoiding Infant Immortality. But I have something to add: no matter how innovative and realistic a game is, it's not going to avoid every unrealistic trope in existence. Game designers can only do so much.
 * Like justify it with the animus AKA a video game within a video game. A lot more clever than just saying 'deal with it'.
 * For the record, there are a total of three children in AC 2, but they're strictly plot elements and you can't do anything to them.
 * If the parting of the red sea was an illusion created by the Piece of Eden, how did they cross it?
 * This troper has a sneaking suspicion that Al Mualim was ever so slightly full of it when he claimed that all the Biblical miracles were nothing but illusions cast by the Pieces of Eden. After all, how exactly does he know that all the Biblical miracles were illusions? Because he found one of the Pieces of Eden? Nonsense. That's like some future archaeologist stumbling across an old copy of Adobe Photoshop and concluding that Elvis never really existed, he was just some guy they photoshopped into a bunch of pictures. I suspect that at the end of the series we'll discover that there's more truth to religious belief than the Templars ever suspected.
 * In the sequel we're told by one of Those Who Came Before that they and their technology were what inspired human religions, so Jossed. As for how Al Mualim got his information, the Apple isn't just a hypnotism device it's also a repository of knowledge.
 * Not Jossed at all. The Truth video reveals that the Book of Genesis is actually a fairly accurate (if poetic and non-literal) account of the creation of the human race.
 * Except for the bit where humans were not created by a god but by the race who made the artifacts.
 * Hence the phrase "poetic and non-literal". And as always, remember Clarke's Third Law: Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. Those Who Came Before are advanced enough that they may as well be gods.
 * I think we basically agree here but are arguing about two different things. Al Mualim claimed that the Apple and artifacts like it were responsible for all the miracles of various religions, the second post in this block argued that he was wrong and it would turn out that there was more to religions than the Templars thought. That's the point I said was Jossed a few posts back - Assassin's Creed II makes it quite clear that Those Who Came Before really are ultimately responsible for various apparent miracles (including what is pretty much the big one, as shown in The Truth).
 * Create the illusion of parting the Red Sea, and then an illusion of you crossing it. Meanwhile, you move the rest of your people away while everyone chasing you is brainwashed. Or hell, just brainwash the people chasing you and tell them to walk into the ocean until they die from it, then send a few mind-raped survivors back to tell everyone you parted the Red Sea and drowned everybody.
 * This also makes sense in that it explains the period of wandering detailed in the Bible. Since Moses was taking the Jews the long way around, he had to give them some sort of excuse for it taking so long. So he made them think they were wandering in the desert even though he was just making up the extra distance.
 * Even though Al Mualim states that all the Apple ever does is perform illusions, he demonstrates that the Apple is actually capable of more than that every time he restrains Altaïr. Another thing to think about is that in the second game, we are introduced to the Staff, which can have the Apple installed on it to increase its power. Since the original Biblical story makes many reference to Moses' staff, it is possible that he had both the Staff and the Apple and with their combined power was able to create both the illusion of the parting of the Red Sea and facilitate a means of getting across it without having to part it.
 * Al Mualim is not fully informed. We know as of ACII that humans have a dormant neurotransmitter int hem that is triggered by the Pieces, particularly the Apple. This is what he was using to restrain Altair, albeit to a very limited degree thanks to his innate Assassin genes that made him resistant.
 * They seemingly can't decide whether atheists are right or the villains. Chalk it up to that "multicultural team" they want to PC you with.
 * Just because some villains are atheists doesn't mean they're not right about that specific conviction. Ezio's an atheist, or close to; Altair seems not to subscribe to Islam, Judaism or Christianity and later in his life writes his theories about why anyone does, going so far to think of pantheism as a more logical (though still wrong) method of explaining the world. On that note, there are villainous and heroic theists as well. It's not inconsistent so much as, well, realistic. Your faith or lack thereof is part of who you are and may inform your ethics, but it doesn't actually make you a good or bad person. Fanaticism, on the other hand... My point being, TWGB are god-figures, and several humans or human-hybrids throughout history used the power of their artifacts, the Pieces of Eden, to seem like prophets or avatars. The Pieces have varying abilities, from mental domination to healing to boosting combat skills to possibly manipulating time itself. Maybe parting the Red Sea was one of them. Or Al-Mualim may have just been using poetic license. Nothing is true.
 * Just started Assassin's Creed II last night and already something bugs me. When Ezio picks up a discarded weapon or disarms a guard, why does he drop it whenever he sprints but not when he runs? We're talking about a man who scales the highest buildings in all of Italy with grace and ease. Why does he suffer an acute case of butterfingers if he breaks into a sprint?
 * It's probably because you enter into "free-run" mode, so he's leaving his hands open to grab onto ledges or posts.
 * When Ezio breaks into a sprint he sheathes his main weapon, because running flat-out while hold a large, sharp piece of killing in your hands is a Bad Idea. With guard weapons, he doesn't have a sheath to put them in, so he has to drop the weapon.
 * I beat Assassin's Creed II last night, and while I really enjoyed the ending, one thing bothered me: the justification for having Desmond keep playing around in the Animus. Apparently Rebecca set up the Animus to function inside their getaway vehicle once Vidic and his Abstergo cronies crashed the warehouse. So, why didn't the Hashashin put the Animus 2.0 in a Winnebago or something and drive around the country, making a moving headquarters where the Templars are less likely to locate them? I mean if the Animus 2.0 works on a car battery, there's no reason why this wouldn't be a more viable option than making an abandoned warehouse your headquatres.
 * I think the warehouse was for all their other stuff. Their files, their supplies, their computers for analyzing the Animus data, that sort of thing. All the stuff they couldn't take with them when they made their getaway.
 * Well, the game starts with Desmond still staring at his wall so any post-credits snooping/replaying events that the player does in the first game probably isn't canon. I'd guess that reviewing the memories on the road won't have much of an impact.
 * When Abstergo stormed the warehouse at the end of Assassin's Creed II, it's clear the Hashashin were in a hurry. I didn't see Shaun put away his files, which, as he explained near the beginning of the game, were essential for keeping every Hashashin around the world informed. So what happened to them? Did the Templars get them?
 * Probably not. Shaun probably destroyed the files he couldn't take with him. If he's even halfway competent he'll have backup copies hidden at some other location.
 * Given how important the information is, any half-way competent person would send a copy to each of their other divisions, just in case something happens to one of them. Besides, we know the Assassins have divisions in other countries, so having a backup there would make sense, so their allies can also benefit from what they discover.
 * If you steal from people, nobody calls you for it directly (they only lament "my purse! It's gone!"), and it raises your notoriety. However, if you loot bodies, bystanders yell at you for it to your face, but it doesn't make you more notorious.
 * The first part is untrue; you can hear your victims calling for the guards if you run for it (though you're usually fast enough to escape without trouble), but if you stick around for too long the person you stole from will forget the guards and start punching you him/herself. As for the point about looting corpses, that's a natural reaction for typical crowd behavior, as crowds usually observe and fail to act. The only reason cutpurse victims fight you is because the atrocity directly affected them.
 * Notoriety deals with how the guards perceive you, not the unwashed masses (who are pretty much always the same regardless of your recent history). As for the grossly disproportionate outrage over looting corpses...what, putting them in that state is perfectly fine?...I chalk it up to irrational stick-up-the-butt prejudice. Annoying but ultimately harmless.
 * Why doesn't Ezio have a scabbard for his sword? It's just flopping around uncovered on his belt. Isn't that bad for the blade? Not to mention really dangerous?
 * It's cool.
 * Maybe to you, but to this troper (a collector of replica swords and frequent Ren Fair participant) it seems pretty darn stupid. Scabbards exist for a reason. They protect the blade from wear and rust, and they prevent you from cutting your own leg by accident. Ezio is one awkward fall away from slicing open his femoral artery and bleeding to death.
 * It's because that's the style. Ezio keeps his weapons in a ring sheathe, which were often employed in lieu of a large scabbard. Yes, with some ring mounts you can secure a scabbard as well, but it's certainly not unheard of to carry a sword in the way the game portrays. Granted, it still doesn't make much sense, given his overt movements, but still. It also becomes silly with the larger weapons, and the daggers seem to be secured by assassin velcro, but the naked blade premise itself is not something to call out
 * Then he's just that skilled, and takes exceedingly good care of his blade otherwise. Alternatively, that's why they implemented the inventory system -- Ezio keeps having to buy new swords because he doesn't take good care of his old ones! Genius!
 * Ezio can be disarmed by brutes. An empty sheath would be pointless to animate. Ezio can also disarm guards and take their weapons and use them when he has free hands. If you get your Sword of Altaïr knocked away by a brute, that scimitar you could steal afterwords sure as hell ain't gonna fill the same sheath. So it's much easier if Ezio carries no sheath to begin with.
 * Altaïr has the same scar over his mouth as Desmond. Fine. The Animus is inserting Desmond's look into Altaïr's memories. In Assassin's Creed 2, Ezio has the same scar. Same explanation, except we see when Ezio GETS the scar. So either the Animus inserted that scene to rationalize Desmond's scar on Ezio, or men in Desmond's family just always get that scar. And neither of those make any sense.
 * Trying to justify Identical Grandson, maybe?
 * Maybe Ezio got a scar in that fight and hence constantly has "I have a visible facial scar" in his memories from that point on. It doesn't need to be exactly the same scar, just evoke the same feelings so that the Animus picks up on it and replaces it with Desmond's own "I have a visible facial scar".
 * This is supported by the novelization, which drops the meta-plot and mentions Ezio receiving a scar on his forehead in this scene.
 * Perhaps the point is that it's an example of Identical Grandson, and the rock scene in AC2 was added to make it clearer.
 * It's possible that in Reality, Ezio never got a scar from that rock in the first place, but a glitch in the Animus associates any injury to the mouth with Desmond's scar. Besides, I doubt getting hit by a rock would generally leave such a straight scar like that. It looked more like the kind of cut one would get from a knife.
 * If you look at the wound in the cutscene it's messier than the scar shown later would suggest. The rock may have only struck hard enough to scar in that particular spot. Plus a rock with an edge can still cut -- how do you think people cut things before they learned how to work metal? I wouldn't put it past Vieri to sharpen a rock just to throw at Ezio.
 * In the tie-in novel, Assassin's Creed: Renaissance, the rock Vieri throws hits Ezio on the forehead rather than the mouth. So that could be supporting the theory that the Animus just associates any facial scar with Desmond's scar on his mouth.
 * Maybe it cut him so deep that he felt it in his testicles, and it was born as a birthmark ever since...
 * By the end of Assassin's Creed II, Desmond has retained Ezio's abilities and can not only free-run places, but hold his own in battle and use a hidden blade and stuff. Okay, but...why did he have to wait until he ran around as Ezio for a couple of days? Why didn't he already have all those abilities, not just eagle vision, after running around as Altaïr for weeks?
 * Assassin's Creed took place over a course of weeks from Altaïr's point of view. From Desmond's it was only a few days (as you can see from the dates on the emails in Vidic and Lucy's inboxes). Assassin's Creed II took place over a course of 23 years of Ezio's life compressed into seemingly two days for Desmond. With Ezio going from a normal guy to an Assassin during that time, Desmond was learning the skills as Ezio was, while Altaïr had the skill of a master assassin from the start. There are countless Fanon theories as well, but Lucy said that after getting Eagle Vision, Desmond is more receptive to the Bleeding Effect.
 * Lucy outright states "You're more receptive to the Animus now. With luck, you'll learn everything Ezio learns in his memories." Desmond achieved full synchronization with Altaïr and thus gained the ability to learn skills from his ancestors, but only got this in time to learn Eagle Vision.
 * Or alternatively, the effects of the Animus are cumulative. If Desmond had decided to stall Vidic for a few more days he would've started learning Altaïr's skills instead of Ezio's.
 * Personally, I thought it was a combination of upgrades to the Animus 2.0 and Desmond being more cooperative. During his time as Altaïr he knew that he was working for the bad guys and was slightly reluctant to go deeper into his memories. In the Animus 2.0 he's actually trying to help rather than only save his own skin.
 * The Beat-Up Events seem awfully formulaic. Every single one is a woman who wants you to beat the crap out of her philandering husband. I refuse to believe these are the only people in all of Italy who deserve a good thrashing. Why not "Beat up the price-gouging merchant"? Or "Beat up the delinquent tax cheat"? Or even just "Beat up that creepy weirdo who keeps peeking in our window with a looking glass while my wife and I are having sex"? (Or for extra fun "Beat up ten minstrels in 2 minutes". That would've been awesome.)
 * I guess it's to show that Ezio's a lady's man. He's willing to do things to make them happy. Note how you never get hired by a man who's been cheated on.
 * It's because Ezio's Italian. The stereotypical Italian will beat up their female relative's unfaithful boyfriends. It's a thing.
 * I know, but still, are we seriously to believe that these are the only people in all of Italy that deserve to have the snot beaten out of them? Where are the corrupt landlords, the political rabble-rousers, or the teenage-punks-who-keep-wrecking-my-fruit-stand?
 * Again, Ezio's a ladies' man. The corrupt landlords, the political rabble-rousers, and the teenage-punks-who-keep-wrecking-fruit-stands all exist -- but Ezio doesn't give two shits about them, he only ever went out of his way for the cheated-upon damsels. And since the Animus only allows you to experience what Ezio remembers...
 * Alternatively, the real answer is probably time constraints, as boring as that answer is. What with everything else that has to be programmed for the game, "variety in beat up missions" probably wasn't high on the priority list, unfortunately.
 * I know we can't really ever know the answer, but I'm curious as to whether Minerva actually said the words she said during the events as they actually occurred in Ezio's life, or if she was just speaking through the Animus to give Desmond her message. Basically, when Ezio entered the Vault, did he actually get horribly confused by Minerva speaking to a Desmond who wasn't there, or did something else entirely different happen that we weren't privy to?
 * The Animus, by definition, can only show things that Desmond's ancestors actually remember. And the only way they can remember it is if it happened to them. So yes, Ezio actually did get horribly confused by Minerva speaking to Desmond.
 * I'm just assuming that the Animus and/or Minerva can cross the Timey-Wimey Ball. What. The. Fuck indeed, Desmond.
 * Or, alternatively, Minerva and the others were already aware in their time that Desmond would see them through the animus, meaning they're aware of all the events from that point on in the game, and aware of everything that happened up to that time.
 * Remember that the Pieces of Eden can apparently allow you to see the future (as written by Altaïr in the Codex); given that they were created by (or for) Those Who Came Before, Minerva may have seen Desmond's adventures in 2012 (after all, she apparently knows about the upcoming world-ending catastrophe), and therefore knew about the link between Ezio and Desmond. And yes, Minerva really did talk to Desmond "through" Ezio.
 * In the novelization, which doesn't take place in the Animus, she doesn't mention Desmond at all...
 * No, she doesn't, but the novelization isn't really canon.
 * Not really a plot hole, per se, but how exactly did Altaïr and Maria end up together?
 * Bloodlines for the PSP explains it. Altaïr goes to Cyprus because there are Templars there. Maria goes there too for the same reason. Much Hijinks Ensue and Maria undergoes a Heel Face Turn. The two of them get together and go east to study the Piece of Eden. It also helps that Adha (the love interest from Altaïr's Chronicles) dies 'offscreen'.
 * When Ezio (and Mario, whom he learned it from) tells his victims to "requiescat in pace", it bugs the hell out of me. If someone did that to me, then my last words would be "Who's 'he'?" or "Why are you talking about me in the third person when I'm right here, you uneducated idiot???".
 * For those who don't know Latin, "Requiescat in pace" is literally "May he/she/it rest in peace". If you were directly addressing the dying/deceased person, you would say "Requiescas in pace", "May you rest in peace".
 * You know, even though the subtitles always say "Requiescat in pace" this troper swears that sometimes it sounds like Ezio is saying "Requiescas in pace". Transcription error, perhaps?
 * The obvious explanation would be that he isn't talking to them. Could it just be a prayer on their behalf?
 * Which actually makes perfect sense. You don't typically tell someone to "Rest in Peace" as they're usually, y'know, dead.
 * And he does tend to say it after they've died. Not while they're still groaning.
 * So Ezio spends 23 years hunting down Rodrigo Borgia for murdering his family, learns over and over again that Rodrigo is a Complete Monster who is abusing his power as Pope to do all manner of vile evilness. And at the end of the game he... doesn't kill Borgia once he has him at his mercy? I wouldn't object to this so much if it weren't for the fact that Borgia is a monster who Ezio should have killed to end his reign of terror. Admittedly, beating the hell out of him with Ezio's bare hands is still pretty cool, but still.
 * I'm right there with you -- while a point could be made about Ezio choosing not to kill the man who murdered his family, understanding it won't bring them back (plus it being historically inaccurate, I guess), the fact that Borgia was a colossal psycho who had been bringing misery to so many others as explained by Shaun, and would probably continue to use his clout to make life difficult for the Assassins as well, makes Ezio's decision not to kill him selfish & short-sighted at best. Curious how other tropers interpreted the scene?
 * My interpretation: I don't think Ezio ever really believed in the Assassins' cause. I think that deep down, it was always about getting revenge for the death of his father and brothers. But by the time he finally made it to Borgia he realized his revenge wasn't really getting him anything (and was forcing him to miss out on a lot, like a potential relationship with Rosa) so he decided to stop. And since he never truly accepted his role as an Assassin (at least not yet) he didn't feel any personal obligation to kill Borgia. He'd beaten him, and that seemed like enough. I guess you could call that selfish in a certain sense, but remember that Ezio didn't choose to be an Assassin. He had it all pretty much thrust upon him. It's a bit unfair to expect him to accept a role that he never chose and may have refused had he been given a choice in the first place.
 * Just Rosa?
 * Well Rosa was the only girl I felt Ezio had any real chemistry with. The rest were just hot chicks he wanted to boink (notice he describes Caterina Sforza as "my next conquest" rather than "a beautiful lady" or something). But this troper swears he detected some serious sparks between Ezio and Rosa.
 * I'm pretty sure he was on board with the Assassins' cause around the time he was okay with them shoving a red hot ring onto his finger. That's not something someone does without dedication. Besides that, their mantra is "Nothing is true, everything is permitted." They are basically allowing enough freedom for it to be acceptable to not dispose of someone entirely if that will achieve the same goal.
 * I'd guess that he thought it a more appropriate revenge to let Rodrigo live with his total failure. Everything Rodrigo did was for the purpose of gaining access to the Vault in the belief that he was the Prophet; revealing that he wasn't and never would could be seen as more of a revenge than just killing the guy. Plus, there's that he's not due to die historically for another four years (and leaving a really nasty corpse when he does).
 * The most irritating thing about the "it's not historically accurate" defense is that Ubisoft chose which year to skip forwards to for the final mission. They could've skipped to the year he died if they had wanted to, so it's not really a good defense at all.
 * Not to mention Robert de Sable was said to have lived into old age and die of natural causes, despite Altaïr killing him in front of a crowd of Templars.
 * According to the novelization, it depresses Rodrigo so much that he immediately kills himself as Ezio exits the Vault. Which... yeah, maybe that's what actually happened - he died, but knowing that this would damage the status of the Templars and likely result in one of their enemies becoming the new Pope, his son Cesare uses another Piece of Eden to make people believe that Rodrigo is still alive. A few years later, Cesare falls ill and is unable to maintain the charade; this is why Rodrigo's body looks so foul at this point - he's actually been dead for several years, but somewhat preserved by weird technology!... Okay, yeah, I wonder why they didn't just set in the year he died too.
 * Hrm, yeah, both of those actually make sense to me. Ta!
 * OP here, and I agree. It does make sense that Ezio is not a true Assassin like the others, and would focus more on revenge than simply killing a dangerous man.
 * Rodrigo Borgia may not be the most famous historical figure, but there are a few who actually knew who he was before playing the game, and may have cried foul. Especially since Borgia's (allegedly quite horrific) real death from sickness and the ensuing funeral fiasco is a great example of karma.
 * Rodrigo Borgia may be evil, but he's also The Pope. Killing him without first eroding his support (as Ezio does in Brotherhood) would make him a martyr and the remaining Templars would quickly turn pretty much all of Europe against the Assassins. By leaving him alive Ezio doesn't give the Templars such an opportunity, and so hopefully this would make them more cautious -- note that it was Cesare who launched the attack on Monterigionni, and his father criticized him for this.
 * It is also worth noting that after Cesare kills Rodrigo, he gets arrested by order of the new Pope. Nasty bit of karma on both ends. If Ezio had killed Rodrigo he would be the villain and not Cesare.
 * Personally, I was wondering why Rodrigo Borgia never bothered attacking Monterigionni with his army. He knows where the Auditores are based, and he knows who Ezio is and that he's after him and his conspirators. Why doesn't he just attack and take the villa?
 * The best explanation I can think of is that by the time Rodrigo realized that Ezio was as big a threat as he was, Ezio had already secured his alliance with Lorenzo de' Medici and secured the Medicis' power in Florence, and attacking Monterigionni would incite the wrath of Florence as a result. Prior to that, Rodrigo seemed to consider the Auditoris to be little more than an annoyance, especially after Giovanni was killed. Once Ezio brought Florence onto his side, Rodrigo realized that the Auditores were still a serious threat, but by then the Auditores had control over Monterigionni as well, and the strength of that city's walls and the alliance with Florence would mean that they couldn't directly strike at the villa itself.
 * Venice was also on Ezio's side, being ruled by a friend of the Assassins.
 * Well, judging from the new demo shown at E3 for AC: Brotherhood, the next game, it looks like the Borgias do get smarter and decide to go on the offensive against Monterigionni.
 * And much later, you see why Rodrigo had held back. Pretty simple, actually, when you think about it...
 * If Ezio didn't kill Rodrigo Borgia, then why is his picture amongst those that he did? What, did Mario send him back to finish the job?
 * Ezio may not have killed him, but he did defeat him. As far as Ezio is concerned, that works just fine.
 * No, Ezio never finished the job, and Rodrigo is still very much alive at the start of Brotherhood. Most likely, Ezio felt that "neutralized as a threat" was just as good (and with the two Pieces of Eden out of his hands, it really was).
 * The main storyline of ACII takes place over 23 years -- yet, in that time, none of the characters age. What the hell?! Are we supposed to believe that Claudia looked the same at 38 as she did at 15? That Maria didn't go grey? That none of the Assassins died?
 * Because the Animus paints everything in Broad Strokes. Do you really think Rodrigo Borgia wore the exact same outfit with the exact same set of accessories for 23 years, too?
 * Ezio did start to grow a beard so he definitely aged. His hair also seems to gray a bit, but that might just be lighting or something.
 * I've never seen any game pull off the multiple-stages-in-a-person's-life thing seamlessly. I remember Mortal Kombat Deception having some really glaring examples, such as someone telling Shujinko to deliver a message that he'd delivered decades ago. Most likely Ubisoft decided it wasn't even worth attempting; just too many years, characters, and old wounds. (I'm actually more interested in what Claudia did for fun all this time...I can't even imagine how boring that desk job must have been!)
 * Well what about Ezio's mother? Taking a vow of silence and praying 24/7 for 23 years? That woman was a saint!
 * More like a severely traumatized victim who needed a long, long time (and a big show of compassion from Ezio) to recover.
 * In Assassin's Creed II, why is Altaïr's armor black? He wore white armor in the first, and in the flashback sequence in was still white.
 * Because the armor was designed afterwards. That and he didn't necessarily use the armor; he said he crafted it, but not that he needed to employ it. Also, even if he did employ it, he could have dyed the clothes and painted the armor (like, y'know Ezio can do in the very same game).
 * Also, as seen in the first game, the head of the Assassin Order wears black to distinguish himself from the white-robed mooks. At least, Al Mualim did. It's pretty strongly implied that Altaïr held this rank prior to his death -- hence the black armor.
 * Just what is eagle vision supposed to be? At first I figured it was the Animus's best approximation of Altaïr's skilled eye to relate to Desmond. But now Desmond has the power in the real world. Ezio also seemed to be able to pick a man out instantly with the eagle vision, where other Assassins had failed. Is Ezio just that good, or is eagle vision an actual power? As in, it's not Broad Strokes or artistic license or anything, and people in the Altaïr/Ezio/Desmond bloodline just had the power to see things as gold/red/blue false color?
 * It's not supposed to be video-game targeting. It's supposed to be ultra-perception, that basically constructs "the truth from the lies" (wait what am i doing dammit too much nasuverse magibabbly has cooked my brain) LET'S START AGAIN. It lets people with it identify the not-that-obvious signs that show things like "hidden door here", "that guy is evil", "distinguish feather from information-rich rooftop", "minor painted over traces that can be reconstructed into coherent image", that sort of thing. In-game, it shows up as highlights. Basically, it gives you Batman's eyes. It's kinda absurd, but this is a game series about hereditary Assassins who are actually closer to Batman than the Hashashin.
 * The Assassins are Not Quite Human, as Subject 16 implies. Eagle Vision is simply a sixth sense they possess, probably as a result of descent from Those Who Came Before.
 * I thought the ending sequence of ACII made it pretty clear that eagle vision was a sixth sense passed down from Those Who Came Bedfore, based on what Juno said while Desmonds trying to hit all the power switches underneath the Colleseum.
 * It's very, very strongly implied in Subject 16's glyph puzzles that the Assassins (or at least, Desmond's bloodline) are descended from a half-human, half-Those Who Came Before coupling. As TWCB were essentially Gods, this means that Desmond's ancestors possess several unique abilities, including Eagle Vision. It's possible that their extreme durability (ability to survive falling from great heights) and unlimited stamina could also come under this, if they're not simply effects of the Animus.
 * Eagle Vision is not the sixth sense that Those Who Came Before kept from us. If it was, there wouldn't be any reason for Juno to tell Desmond to "Awaken the Sixth". Eagle Vision is just a more basic version of the Sixth Sense. This also justifies the sudden renaming and upgrade it gets in Revelations, where it's named Eagle Sense, and allows you to do the same as with Eagle Vision, as well as predict where a target will go, and where he has already gone. In other words, Desmond, Ezio and possibly Altaïr as well, awaken the sixth sense in Revelations.
 * It bugs the hell out of me that Ezio never cleans his sword before he sheathes it.
 * Why should he do that in the Animus? Being a simulation designed to mimic his memories in Broad Strokes, the Animus isn't going to show Ezio doing irrelevant stuff. You might as well ask why he isn't shown donning his new armor every time he he buys a new piece, or why he doesn't sit around for an hour waiting for the blacksmiths to repair his armor, or why it doesn't show him picking his nose or stopping to take a wee. The Animus just doesn't show irrelevant animations.
 * We see Ezio pull his cape back over his shoulder when he stands still long enough. I don't see why that animation is any less irrelevant.
 * Ezio refuses to walk around like some sort of fucking heathen, cape all askew, and shit. It is important that he look like a gentleman whilst he's strutting about town. That is the purpose of the cape animation.
 * While I'm sure Ezio loves looking like a pimp, the constant rearranging of the cape is to keep him in low profile and to cover his vast array of sheathed weapons on his hip, since simply standing around and/or walking at a normal pace (versus running, which causes his cape to fly back) is considered a low profile action.
 * Rule of Cool aside, why was Machiavelli an Assassin!? With his political views, wouldn't he be more likely to be a Templar?
 * Machiavelli was not a proponent of strong-man government. He personally was more of a republican in beliefs and had served in Savonarola's attempt at republican government; he wrote The Prince more as an "Ok, if we must have a Prince, let's make him a strong, ruthless prince. This isn't the way I like it; it's just the way that it works." Besides, he also wrote it in an attempt to get work after being blacklisted -- and tortured -- after Savonarola fell.
 * Yes, but given that he admired Rodrigo Borgia and considered mercenaries costly and useless, he just seems like a strange choice.
 * Are you forgetting that the Templars have rewritten history to suit their own ends? The Prince is likely a fabrication created by the Templars to discredit Machiavelli and the Assassins, like every other piece of history.
 * You should remember that The Prince did not reflect Machiavelli's own personal beliefs. It was a collection of observations of how people and rulers function. At no point he says that this is a good thing, just that this is how things are. He himself was a proponent of the republics. The Prince hints at this at one point, mentioning how republics are difficult for an autocratic Prince to conquer and rule effectively, so it's best to leave them alone.
 * We're also forgetting that this is a series whose tagline includes the words "nothing is true." And this is also a series where some of the biggest heroic historical figures were actually Templars. Considering that the majority of history in Assassin's Creed is a flat-out lie, why are we going by the historical version of Machiavelli?
 * It's worth noting that some modern scholars have reinterpreted ''The Prince" as a political satire designed to expose and undo tyrannies.
 * What bothers me more is that he pops up in the last few minutes of the story and says he's an Assassin, with absolutely no foreshadowing or even an introduction. Not counting the DLC here.
 * Why did Dante Moro need to die? He was obviously not an evil man and had little to do with the Templars directly other than being one of their bodyguards. The letter from his former wife seemed to hint that she was attempting to get him to remember her.
 * Aside from the fact that he was still loyal to the Templars, Ezio really had no way of actually knowing the truth about Dante's condition.
 * Er...because he tried to kill Bartolomeo, someone rather important to Ezio's cause, and he would do the same to Ezio given half a chance. With a big ax. So this was not going to end nicely. An unfortunate necessity, nothing more. Also, there's a big difference between "attempting" and "having success at".
 * It was also something of a mercy kill, too. At that point poor Dante was basically a mindless slave of the Templars.
 * Ezio is inducted into the Assassins organization now? Now?! He's only been cutting a path through Italian nobility for the past decade like a plague. You should be crawling on your hands and knees, begging for him to allow you to join him.
 * Ahem. Prophet. Prophecized capture of the Piece of Eden which was the indicator that he was who they believed him to be? Also, inducting him into the Assassins completely is kind of a moot and unnecessary point.
 * And in the entire time Ezio has been carving through the nobility, he's been on a murderous rampage intent on avenging his family. That kind of mentality is not one the Assassins want to foster. They only reveal themselves to Ezio and offer to let him truly become an Assassin once he's matured. And yes, Ezio has been carving through the nobility of Italy, but he never would have gotten anywhere without Assassin support - covert or otherwise. Every step of the way he's had an Assassin backing him up in one way or another.
 * Every event between the first Lineage movie and Ezio's arrival at Monteriggioni happens in 1476. The problem with this is that the main event of the first Lineage movie is the assassination of Duke Sforza, which occurred, both in the movie and in the real world, on Christmas Day. How does every single event between that happen in one week? Especially considering how much time some of the other events take...
 * I don't see why that's a problem - the events of the first chapter of ACII only seem to cover about three days, and with Lineage, there's nothing to suggest it took Giovanni any longer than a few days to track down Borgia. It might be a bit of a squeeze and not allow much time for Giovanni traveling between Florence/Venice/Rome, but it's not too much of a stretch to assume it all took place within a week.
 * Except that in addition to suggesting the climate is warm, the Ezio we see at the Auditore dinner table is much younger than he appears in the game. He's supposedly 17 years old in 1476, but looks more prepubescent.
 * Why are crates so weak? One shove and they shatter into a million pieces.
 * ...you really haven't read the rest of this page, have you? The answer:
 * That doesn't make sense even if it was the Animus. There is no reason for he Animus to make all crates weak.
 * It's an artificially generated world created by a program compiled by humans. Are you seriously implying that a man-made computer program won't have bugs or errors?
 * Because the Animus has only one object class for breakable objects, and thus they're all equally easy to break.
 * Why is "being in the Animus" a legitimate excuse for every illogical feature of the Animus?
 * Because the Animus is basically a Game Within A Game. It's explicitly shown to be not fully realistic, to tell the story in Broad Strokes and to glitch at times.
 * Yes, I know. This is more of a thing that Bugs Me than an actual Fridge Logic situation. Any nonsensical situation occurring within the Animus can be hand waved in this manner. It's just such a lame excuse.
 * Oh, baw. To you, it's lame. To me, personally, it's brilliant, clever, simple, and highly effective.
 * Indeed; the Animus isn't so much "viewing the past" as it is creating a video game based on Desmond's genetic memories in his DNA. Even in-universe, the playable Altaïr and Ezio sections are basically a video game that Desmond is playing via virtual reality.
 * So what will the excuse be when it's time to fight in Desmond's shoes? I think less emphasis should be on the nature of the Animus and instead remember the MST3K Mantra.
 * ACII is consistent about this -- Desmond's fight scenes happen without a user interface.
 * I don't quite get how upgrading the Thieves' Guild at your villa helps bring in tourists. Wouldn't they stay away through fear of getting robbed?
 * A thieves guild WOULDN'T attract tourists. It would attract THIEVES. Who then train at the guild and spend their money at your villa.
 * Just my own theory, and a warning that I haven't gotten that far (just got the game yesterday), but the inner conspirator in me suggests this: Due to upgrading the Thieves' Guild, they in turn have more thieves. Thieves steal stuff, right? But with the current tourist amount, there would always be a limit. So what better way than to have the others of the villa conspire with them to attract more tourists to steal from. I will point out again that I have not gotten to that part in the game yet, so I may be completely wrong.
 * It could be a protection racket. You pay the thieves not to commit quite as many crimes as they would normally, in exchange for looking the other way every now and then in regards to their activities.
 * Thieves' guilds, back in the day, were not just places for thieves to do their thing; they also served as security training and consulting. Essentially, they taught people not only how to bypass security and locks, but also how to strengthen their security as well. It's essentially the equivalent of having a security company working in the town. Also, the thieves' guild would let the Auditores get a better cut off the local black market, too.
 * Most likely, Ezio simply decided that thieves made better friends than enemies (and his experiences with Antonio quashed any doubts he may have had). Renaissance Italy didn't have highway patrols. The malcontents were coming to Monteriggionni; there was absolutely no avoiding this. The only question was whether they'd be allowed to do their dirty work unchecked or have a stable base of operations where Mario could keep an eye on them. Easy choice. And of course, they're good to have on hand to deal with any freelance dirtbag rogues who try to muscle in on Ezio's turf.
 * There's also the fact that The Fox and Antonio are Assassins, and we see thieves working for Giovanni before he gets killed. They provide information for the Assassins, and might even act as a recruitment centre of sorts. Thieves can actually do the whole free running/parkour thing, unlike any of the other groups (okay, guards can, but that's the Animus).
 * Consider the following facts: One; The whole goal of the upgrading Monteriggioni game is to make the city a place where people would like to visit and spend money. Two; the thieves are probably smart enough not to crap in their own back yard. Three; they've been granted a little clubhouse/training centre by a very scary guy with lots of blades who makes a living out of killing people before they know he's there. By granting the thieves a guild in Monteriggioni, it's unlikely that they're actually going to do their actual work there. How does this in turn make Monteriggioni a richer place? Firstly, there's probably some rent involved - "Hey, we've got a little place for you to kick back where you won't get hassled by the guards and we can give you alibis for anything you may have done. All it costs is a little rent per month and you don't cause trouble." The database entry for thieves does explicitly state that punishments for caught thieves were unduly harsh, so the more organized bands of thieves would probably appreciate and pay for a place that gives them some refuge. Third, if they're not stealing in Monteriggioni, that means the city has a low crime rate. If they're not stealing in Monteriggioni, they're stealing from other cities and raising the crime rate. This goes back to the first goal of Monteriggioni - A nice little vacation spot. "Hey, Guiseppi; I know we were going to Roma, but my sister said that she and her family were pickpocketed every day there. Let's go to Monteriggioni, there's apparently no crime there at all." Centralizing the thieves in Monteriggioni makes sense - You make money of the thieves when they're there not stealing, and you make money off the tourists who are all flocking to your nice little city because the thieves are busy stealing elsewhere. It's a perfect scam.
 * Alright, so after Ezio's family is executed, why doesn't he just go back to Florence and plead his case to Lorenzo Medici, saying, "Hey, my dad was your right hand man, and he would never ever betray you! Why can't I get a pardon already and go back to my old life?" Fine, I can see that Ezio would need evidence of his family's innocence (which he did turn over to that Fat Bastard Uberto). But couldn't he at least get a pardon for everything after saving Lorenzo's ass from the Pazzi Conspiracy? Are pardons really that hard to get in Renaissance Italy? Or is it simply that Lorenzo doesn't have the power to do that, despite being called "Il Magnifico"?
 * Once Ezio's taken out the Pazzis, I think it's become more than a matter of his father and brothers being executed for a crime they didn't commit. And what worth would his old life have without his family?
 * Prior to saving Lorenzo's life, Ezio didn't really have the capability to meet Lorenzo and plead his case anyway. Being a wanted man has that effect. After saving Lorenzo's life, he probably is granted a pardon.
 * I always assumed that the Medici cape was the pardon. It stops your notoriety from going up, so I figured that was the equivalent of a pardon.
 * I'm pretty sure he was pardoned once he got rid of the Pazzis, as I do not recall the Florentine government mounting a massive manhunt to take Ezio down at any point (aside from when I got carried away with the gun, of course). Prior to eliminating the Pazzis, a pardon probably wasn't high on Ezio's "Things I Need" list.
 * In the final mission, Borgia stabs Ezio in the stomach. Blood pools on the ground, Ezio collapses and passes out, Borgia walks away triumphant. Fade to black. We're lead to believe that we have failed. Yet, moments later (as the priests are regaining consciousness), Ezio recovers. What the hell is going on?! It can't have been an illusion, because there's clearly blood around the wound. Was it some kind of trick on Ezio's part, then? Or did Borgia not stab deep enough - which can't be right, as the blade went in all the way to hilt. So, has Ezio somehow recovered, or is he dying and using what's left to kill Borgia, or was healed afterwards? What is this I don't even
 * It takes days if not weeks for a gut wound to kill you, unless he was completely disemboweled. The only part that doesn't make sense is that he passed out so quickly (or at all) from such a minor wound.
 * He is Badass and shrugged it off?
 * The issue is that, at first, he appears to die from the wound, but then gets up as if nothing had happened. Ezio is badass incarnate, but he's not fucking immortal.
 * He just got stabbed. He's not going to get up from that immediately! It took him a while to get up the adrenaline to shake it off, that's all.
 * As much as I love Ezio and dig how badass he is, "adrenaline" alone is not going to allow you "shake off" a hardcore knife wound through the gut. If anything, I more readily buy that Borgia was creating an illusion with the Piece of Eden, and that Ezio had built up a tolerance to it, hence he was able to shake off the "illusion" versus a real stab wound. Especially considering he remained unaffected enough to competently commence "Operation: Beat the Pope's Ass" without even flinching.
 * Supported by the original Assassin's Creed, where Al Mualim appears to run Altaïr through with a dagger near the beginning of the game, and yet he survives as it's simply an illusion. Still if this is the case, why Borgia would cast an illusion rather than you know, actually stabbing Ezio, is beyond me.
 * Guys. Ezio is an Assassin. Remember, the Assassins are Not Quite Human.
 * This. Considering what we know about the Assassins - and the fact that they seem to actually be able to do most of what they do in the Animus, judging by how Desmond can move and fight - they are significantly more than vanilla humans. This can potentially extend to being able to shrug off injuries that would be fatal to vanilla humans.
 * In Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood, at the beginning of the game mentioned right after the end of the AC 2, Ezio explained that his armor (of Altaïr since he was wearing it) blunted Rodrigo's knife attack, so it is now canon that Ezio wore the Armor of Altaïr in the mission to Rome at the end of AC 2.
 * I have problems too with the above scene but from another point of view: What is the purpose of this scene? Ezio gets stabbed so that Borgia can open the vault and then Ezio wakes up while Borgia still has to open the vault. It feels like a Big Lipped Alligator Moment.
 * Not really, Borgia just has trouble finding/opening the vault (since he's not the "prophet" and all), and hadn't managed to get it open by the time Ezio catches back up to him, because when you find him he's all like "How do I do this?!".
 * Surprised nobody's mentioned this yet. So it's the last fight in the game, Vidic is hell-bent on capturing you and Lucy and finding those world-controlling Pieces of Eden. Abstergo essentially controls the world at this point, with basically limitless resources, technology, and manpower at their disposal. They have the political leeway to do whatever they want with no repercussions whatsoever from the public. So, when choosing the loadout for your elite squad of men to capture highly-trained killers, they decide to give them... metal sticks. I know they can't use lethal weapons, since they're trying to capture them alive, but metal sticks? You'd think the world's most powerful organization would have some tasers, rubber bullets, or even some airsoft guns or rubber bullets on hand. Just bugs me...
 * Depending on where they are in the world, the security guards carrying guns might have caused complications. If they were in Europe, especially, the guards packing firearms would have resulted in many, many stern glares from local law-enforcement. The Templars are powerful, but not so powerful they can openly flaunt the law.
 * You can hardly say that carrying a gun in the secret hideout of the Assassins is openly flaunting the law. All that law-enforcement would see is a truck driving up to a warehouse. They could take whatever weaponry they wanted in the truck without seeming even slightly suspicious.
 * And if law enforcement stops them? If they encounter a checkpoint that requires an inspection, someone is going to raise a few eyebrows.
 * Tasers also aren't guaranteed to stop someone -- especially people with Assassin pedigree; as we've already seen, Ezio was stabbed through the chest and it didn't do much more than slow him down for a bit. Rubber bullets can still kill, too.
 * I'll buy that, but what about a tranq gun?
 * See the bit on tasers. To tell the truth, too, tranquilizer guns are a big case of Hollywood Style; they're nowhere near as effective in real life as they are in movies and video games. If they were, they'd be used regularly as LTL weapons. Not to mention the issues involving dosage; if they use too much, they potentially kill Desmond. If they use too little, they don't even slow him down.
 * I heard of cases where people were hit with softair "toy" guns at the forehead and got nasty scars. I bet even somebody like Desmond would then be off guard and three or four of the guards could have knocked him out completely. Additionally, Abstergo could have at least gave their men some kind of protective armour. They probably know that Assassins are bone-breaking soldiers, sending some lousy security guards with metal-sticks (that´s how the Templar guys seem to me) will probably result in utter failure. Even when they weren't expecting Desmond getting superpowers, it´s not like they have to look on their money.
 * On another note, why didn't Desmond jump on the truck and beat Vidic's ass/kill him at the end? Especially with his newly acquired Le Parkour skills, it would've been easy for him to do it, if only to slow down the Templars and force them to regroup for a bit while the modern Assassins make their escape.
 * Pulling a Leeroy Jenkins on Vidic might not be too bright of an idea. What if Vidic had a hidden weapon on him, or had more goons waiting in ambush? Hell, the way he was standing there, taunting Desmond, I wouldn't be surprised if he was trying to bait Desmond into a trap.
 * It's also a fan theory that Lucy and the two other "Assassins" aren't really Assassins. I wouldn't put it past the Templars to sacrifice a few guards to see if Desmond is combat ready.
 * In The Truth: Why does Eve suddenly have the Apple in her hand? She had two hands free before. Did she just telekinetically steal it from Minerva below through her superpowers?
 * I assumed that was a slight skip in the video since the video isn't of the highest quality and there are a lot of cuts previous to that that.
 * As far as Cain being the first Templar, who's the first Assassin? Considering Cain killed Able, who avenged Able? Did that person therefore become the first Assassin?
 * In the Bible, I think Adam and Eve have a third son, named Seth, after Cain kills Abel. Perhaps Seth grows up and kills his older brother Cain in revenge for killing Able, making Seth the first Assassin?
 * According to the more dramatic interpretations of the Bible, Cain was cursed by God to wander the Earth forever without the ability to die (i.e. never being able to enter heaven). If the next sequel deals with Cain then, in keeping with the Rule of Drama, it'll probably have him as some sort of immortal Big Bad (supreme leader of the Templars, perhaps?).
 * I doubt it, just because it would draw comparisons with another Kane.
 * Is it just me, or does it seem like you're more likely to increase your notoriety for quick, quiet takedowns than you are for long swordfights? If I take a guy out with the hidden blade, even from behind as a stealth kill on a quiet rooftop with no one around, it somehow results in wanted posters being put up, yet a swordfight with multiple guards in the middle of a crowded street apparently leaves no witnesses. It just seems odd considering most games with stealth elements tend to reward players who choose stealth over action.
 * Your Notoriety only goes up in street fights if a guard escapes to report what happened. Otherwise, they've got unreliable eyewitness testimony from civilians, and remember, this is Renaissance Italy; without guards to actually verify who you are, civilian witnesses' reports are likely going to be chaotic and confused, and the murders would easily be attributed to rival groups of mercenaries, thieves, or other people with swords and murderous intentions. Couple this with the fact that the civilian populace apparently supports Ezio (just listen to their commentary during the swordfights) and many of them may even be falsifying their reports. Also, if you use a high-profile assassination, your Notoriety always go up. This is probably a reflection of the fact that no one else is running around on rooftops brazenly killing guards like you are.
 * If you take out an enemy stealthily (i.e. a low profile assassination), your notoriety doesn't increase. If you openly brandish your hidden blade, or, worse, pounce on the guy, that ain't stealthy, Hanzo. On the other hand, if you allow him to draw his sword, fight him, and win, you're not dinged. You get off scott-free if he falls off a roof, too. The upshot seems to be is that if you manage to keep your dirty deeds hidden (either by stealth or making it look like an accident), or not be dirty in the first place, your reputation remains intact. This is definitely an improvement over the first game, where defeating a guard in a completely fair fight would have the bystanders screaming "Murderer! He's a murderer!"
 * Still, it is confusing when you walk around rooftops and stealth kill guards there, they know it's you, but when you run up to them, so that he knows your presence and you quickly high profile hidden blade kill him it get´s ticked off as some mercenary? The corpse looks the same either way but the stealth approach is the only registered one.
 * It actually does make sense if you consider that the Animus is registering your actions and comparing them to your ancestor's. If Ezio is performing a high-profile kill, the Animus notes it and Rebecca's programming that tracks your notoriety registers it, automatically raising it. If Ezio is performing high-profile actions, the Animus responds by adjusting the notoriety level to match the level of suspicion Ezio suffered under while doing so. It appears to be a way to improve synchronization, which is the goal here, and not matching up Ezio's notoriety to his actions may result in a loss of synch. If Desmond has Ezio performing high-profile actions, the Animus adjusts the simulation to match Ezio's memories of his experiences on the streets while being high-profile and notorious.
 * The way Rosa kept on shouting "I'd be better off on my own!" in that Escort Mission in ACII -- immediately after I take out all four guards in the area with my double hidden blades. Yeah, like you could kill the guards that efficiently.
 * It actually does make sense; wounded or not, she might have been able to sneak away if the Amazing Technicolored Ezio hadn't been following her.
 * Except that if you don't follow her, the guards just kill her.
 * She doesn't know that. From her perspective, having a hooded, fruity-looking guy with a shiny, colorful cape and shiny reflective armor following her around is just going to make things harder.
 * Some people are just reeeeeally bad at dealing with crisis situations and are colossal ingrates when receiving help. This bug you? Congratulations, it's supposed to. Please also note her dialogue with Antonio after you bring her to safety. I half-expected him to say "Someone shoot her again!"
 * Also...Italians can be like that.
 * Also also, she's in a lot of pain. Determined or no, it's probably affecting her judgement.
 * What was going in the ending? What was the whole thing with the poles and stuff? It bugs me that I don't get that. Also why is Altaïr's sword for sale at the blacksmith's? It would make far more sense to just include it with his armour after you get the seals.
 * The poles are nightsticks, like those used by the police. They wanted to bring Desmond in alive so they needed non-lethal weapons. As for how Altaïr's sword ended up at a blacksmith's, I guess it was just passed down through time. The developer's probably figured it'd be too easy if the player could unlock the sword and armour at the same time. Besides, the sword you acquire is Altaïr's first sword. By the end of the first game, he had swapped it for a better sword, so it wouldn't make sense why he would have still had it and left it with his armor.
 * By the end of the first game, he had swapped it with a sword that historically speaking wasn't made yet. The sword Altaïr gets in the end of the first game is actually one from the 17th century, despite the game taking place in the end of the 12th century... (This is probably yet another case of The Animus Did It)
 * Or the sword is just a replica.
 * Oh sorry, I meant the whole pole shifting/earth's magnetic field thing that was dropped at the end of the game, I didn't really understand what was happening and it all felt so rushed.
 * Hi there, welcome to the concept of the Sequel Hook. Also, Lucy was foreshadowing the thing with the sun and the magnetic fields at the beginning of the game, when she mentioned that they needed to find something hidden in Ezio's memories that was more important than the war with the Templars.
 * Apparently, the developers of this series like throwing a Mind Screw of a plot twist at the player and then immediately cutting to the credits (at least the second game handles the cut better). The Codex and Subject 16's puzzles also provide some foreshadowing to the ending. Fully understanding the meta-plot requires more work than the casual player will realize but the coming apocalypse will probably be clarified in the sequels.
 * About the magnetic pole reversal bit: Basically, every once in a long-ass while, the Earth's magnetic poles...well, reverse. Magnetic north and south switch places. This is normally heralded by a weakening of the magnetic field that protects us squishy beings from solar winds. As of right now, we're apparently due for another switch, which I guess makes as good a plot point as any, because it is sort of a Big Fucking Deal.
 * So, why do the Templars spend so much time with Desmond to get the map from the Pieces of Eden at the end of the first game if there are something like 20 of these things floating around, and apparently the Templars already have most of them anyway? Did the Assassins steal them all (doubtful) or are they all locked up somewhere?
 * ...because they needed the map to find them because they didn't have any Apples. It doesn't matter how many there are, if you don't know where they are, you're SOL. From the records gathered thus far, the Templars only had a couple of the Pieces of Eden, and all of the available Pieces have been destroyed, i.e. the Staff being used to destroy one of the Apples at Tunguska, or the Apple being used in the airport at Denver being destroyed by accident.
 * Where is everybody getting this Ambiguously Gay vibe from Abdul Nuqoud? Maybe it's just me but I don't see it at all.
 * 1. Caressing that muscular black soldier's arm. 2. Saying that he can't worship a God that considers him an "abomination". There's probably more that I can't think of on the spot.
 * This troper interpreted it always as that Abdul is unsatisfied with his looks (he is fat and, from what I remember, his face is even deformed) and touching the guard could be to show an example of what he considers beauty. I don´t know if the last part is consistent with the dialogue.
 * See, this troper (OP) thought it was because Abdul was either not Muslim or not Arabic (or both).
 * This troper thought it was because he was a leper (they weren't well thought of throughout history), and brushing the soldier's arm was an indication that blacks were not tolerated either, something he hoped to correct.
 * In the first game Altaïr actually looks fairly different from Desmond, their eyes and face are fairly different and the only thing they seem to have in common is the scar (at least that's how it looked to me). In the second game when Desmond has his dream sequence, instead of recycling the Altaïr model, they seem to use a new one that basically looks just like Desmond wearing Altaïr's clothes. Is there any specific reason for this stylistically? I mean it's not like they needed to redo the model, the old one worked fine, what was with that? Is it supposed to represent Desmond getting even more in sync with his genetic memory (although that point was already brought across by the fact that he was reliving the memory without the animus). I can't see how it's laziness seeing as it means they had to update a model rather than just reuse it, so...yeah, there has to be some meaning behind that right?
 * Increased synchronization, plus the Animus 2.0 is infinitely more badass than the glitchy Animus 1.0 that the Templars had, coupled together with the memory bleeding effect, probably resulted in the similarity.
 * Actually, since he wasn't in the Animus 2.0 at the time, it's probably just his mind projecting his face onto a deep, genetic memory that was never meant to be brought to the surface. His mind is also not as cool or in control as the Animus 2.0 is. It's projecting Desmond's mental image onto Altaïr because he's dreaming.
 * Ezio grows a beard between Sequence 11 and Sequence 14. Fine. We all like to change our look from time to time (which is why I don't like to wear Altaïr's armor - Venetian Azure FTW!). But the DLC makes things weird. End of Sequence 12: Ezio gets stabbed in the stomach by one of the Orsi Bros. and passes out. When he comes to, he suddenly has a beard. What?? Was he in a coma? Did he suddenly age five years? Were they planning to give the beard-growing some thematic relevance and then lost interest? He looks hot either way, so it's fine, but the pointless randomness of it bothers me.
 * I think he passed out for at least a couple of days. Not really enough time to grow a full beard I know, but I guess that's the Animus handwave popping up again. At that point Ezio probably only had a stubble or a thin, patchy beard.
 * ...and apparently decides to go with the look for the rest of his life, so far. He's also rocking the beard in the "Brotherhood" demo and trailers.
 * Also, he does get a bit more stubbly as the game progress, though it's subtle. He has a bit of five o'clock shadow going on in the sequence where he meets up with Rosa inside the Palazzo Seta and she flirts and kisses him on the cheek. He also looks slightly aged up there as well (deeper voice, slightly thinner, a bit more serious with his "Yeah, I didn't come here to play, I have see Antonio" spiel).
 * When you get hit, you lose synchronization. When you fall, you lose synchronization. Attracting and fighting guards does not make you lose synchronization. Hence, in all of the many, many, many sword fights you get in...Altaïr was never hit. Not once. And he never fell, either. Never got frustrated and shoved one of those bastard lepers into a wall, face first. Naturally, we've picked up on this.
 * Especially interesting is that, in combat, the are represented by dropping the synchronization bar to deadly levels. Which means that Altaïr either finished the fight a lot quicker, or was completely immune to the power of the.
 * Check Fridge Brilliance right up above. Not only is Altaïr immune to it,
 * Actually, you can defeat him without getting to the "losing sync" phase. Just switch to your hidden blade in the last fighting segment  and counter-kill him.
 * I always assumed that being under the effects of the disrupted Altaïr's attempt's to remember it. Naturally, syncing up with poor memories is more difficult than syncing up with good ones.
 * Of course he never got hit. You know what happens when you get hit by a sword? You die, or at least get a very deep cut that's going to make a bloody mess and be generally inconvenient. As for falling, if somebody falls from the heights Altaïr and Ezio mess with, they're going to get broken bones, which means no more assassination fun time. In real life, you don't just dust yourself off and continue on when you get sliced up by a sword or fall forty feet.
 * As noted above, the Assassins appear to be Not Quite Human; Desmond, for example, is able to do everything Ezio and Altaïr do in terms of acrobatics and strength in the real world, and Ezio is shown getting stabbed in the gut by a knife and recovering a few minutes later with no ill effects.
 * That's pretty much confirmed in one of Subject 16's puzzles. After choosing five pictures showing ancient Greek and Roman myths of gods gettin' it on with mortal women, Subject 16 declares in all his crazy glory, "The seeds were planted as two worlds became one. Behold, the Assassins, the children of two worlds!"
 * You can throw the derelicts without dinging your synchronization (provided they don't fall into water and drown), but anything that does damage, even one little punch, will cost you. Likewise, you can beat up the thugs without harm, but not use any of your weapons. Beggars, even a harmless throw will desync, but you can draw your sword and scare 'em off (though this isn't always advisable if there are guards watching). Altaïr did show remarkable restraint, but no more than one would expect from a dedicated master Assassin.
 * So, what happens if you download the extra levels first and then play through the game?
 * Do it yourself and find out.
 * You mean the DLC stuff in Assassin's Creed II? After getting the apple back there's a minor scene where Desmond wakes up and then says something along the lines of "nah, it's ok" and then goes back into the animus and the DLC sequence starts with Rebecca telling Desmond that she's fixed the broken sequences.
 * Thanks. I was curious if it made the narrative flow better.
 * That is exactly what this Troper did, and now he's wondering what happens if you don't. Is there an extra Desmond scene about how he can't remember what happened next?
 * In Brotherhood, Desmond can try and achieve Full Synchronization with Ezio by being particularly badass in missions (don't get caught, don't get hit).
 * Exactly what race is Desmond? Apparently Altaïr was Arab, and Ezio was just Italian with a tan, so what's Desmond? If they are both Altaïr's descendants, does that mean that Ezio has Arab blood too?
 * Actually Altaïr is half-Arab. His mother was a Christian, meaning she was probably white. Desmond is the direct descendant of both Ezio and Altaïr, therefore Desmond has some amount of Arab blood in him. But it's such a small amount and it's so distant that it's reasonable to call Desmond white.
 * I've always assumed that Desmond was deliberately designed to be of mixed racial origin, so they could justify anyone being his ancestor. Especially when contrasted with Lucy, Shaun, and Vidic, Desmond clearly has some recent non-European ancestry, most likely Hispanic or Arab.
 * And, of course, Maria (Altaïr's wife and Desmond's ancestor) was white and probably English.
 * Another question: I probably need to study the Italian Renaissance more, but what is the deal with Uncle Mario? He seems to be the ruler of that town you always go to (can't spell it) and is apparently in charge of repairing and maintaining it. He also has mercenaries, but the mercenaries live there and are more loyal than other mercenaries. So... is the town independent? Is he a governor like figure? Can someone explain, please?
 * Hard to say since the game doesn't really go into specifics here. He probably serves in a similar capacity as the Medici family does in Florence. Maybe the city has some sort of formal government but the Auditore family are really the ones in charge. He's also apparently the commander of a mercenary group and the mercenaries serve the dual role of city guard when they're not fighting elsewhere. Maybe.
 * Back in the day, Italian City States like Florence, Milan, Venice and so on were ruled as either Principalities and/or Republics, with powerful families like the Medici, Sforza, and Borgia at the top of the heap. In a thirst for power, the larger city states tended to swallow up any smaller surrounding towns into their political fold, via either outright force, diplomacy/alliances against other competing city states, or shared culture. So a city state like Florence would try to exert control over a smaller but profitable town like Monteriggioni. As Mario says while giving Ezio the tour of the villa when he first arrives, sometimes Monteriggioni is Florence's enemy, who they try to forcefully control, and sometimes it's Florence's ally, to whom they give a little more autonomy.
 * Also, Monteriggioni seems to be the Auditore seat of power. Considering that Uncle Mario inherited the villa since he is older than Giovanni, as was expected of the time, local rulers/Dukes who ran their town were actually expected to be savvy soldiers, with their own companies of soldiers, who they paid for, trained, and even fought along side with. It was not uncommon for Dukes/rulers to be soldiering condottiero, which loosely translates to "mercenary." So it makes sense that Uncle Mario has a group of condottieri or mercenaries at his beck and call, since it's established that he's a condottiero himself. While Italian city states did rely on paid troops, a lot of times, those troops were made up of second and third sons of various powerful families that were from said state/area (since second and third sons had little chance of inheritance, and being a mercenary was a pretty good way to rake in cash). So likely, the loyal mercenaries of Monteriggioni are from that town, and therefore had a vested interest in protecting it. And for all we know, they could be lower-level assassins themselves, considering that the Auditores are as well.
 * In Lineage, Ezio seems to suspect that Giovanni is hiding something ("what business does a banker having leaving in the dead of night"), which kind of makes his incredulity at the revelation that his father was an assassin in the actual game ("he was just a banker" "all this talk of Assassins and Templars, it reeks of fantasy") oddly incongruous.
 * It's one thing to know your father is sneaking out at night to do shady business -- especially considering this is freaking Renaissance Italy, where everyone and their mother is sneaking out to do shady business at night. It's another thing altogether for your father to be part of a secret global-spanning sect of assassins who've been secretly controlling history for thousands of years.
 * In one of the interludes in ACII, Lucy has Desmond activate the warehouse's defense system for when the Abstergo goons inevitably find them. She specifically says defense system, so it's got to be more than just a burglar alarm. But when the goons do show up at the end, said system does absolutely nothing.
 * Because they disabled the defense system. Which she explicitly says happened when they attack.
 * That's some defense system, then.
 * Yes, it's not like the Templars are the most technologically advanced organization on the planet with limitless resources and millennia of experience going up against a hastily-assembled base-on-a-budget in a warehouse that's been set up by three people. There's no way they could possibly bypass an alarm/security system.
 * Hate to burst your bubble, but an alarm system is a defense system. A fairly basic one, but that's what it is. The system may have had additional components like an electrical shock system, but ultimately the defense system is only going to slow the Templars down, and judging by what we see during that cutscene, the Templars just slammed a truck through the garage door and went rushing inside. Not much you can do to defend against that without setting up a defense way beyond the resources of three Assassins.
 * During one sequence in the second half of ACII, Ezio is spying on the Big Bad and the remaining members of the conspiracy. Aside from the plot/history demanding that these people get killed at a later time, what's stopping Ezio from jumping down, dropping a smoke bomb, and killing all of them right there?
 * I believe that Ezio is smart enough to know that he might not be able to take them all down on his own, as all of them are skilled fighters, and he's also investigating their conspiracy. He's not exactly aware that these men are the extent of the conspiracy, after all, and he still needs to know what they're all planning.
 * It would be a pretty sorry ending if there had been a Man Behind A Man, after all, and Ezio just destroyed his only chance of finding him. Taking that risk wouldn't have been worth it.
 * Remember also that most of the time when he's assassinating someone, Ezio is either isolating them for information, striking when they are vulnerable, or taking out a target in order to stop them from doing something.
 * Not to mention that the player could simply not have smoke bombs at the moment.
 * In "The Truth", Adam and Eve are white. I realize the game calls into question the standard interpretation of past events, but all I see in the video is white people, and supposedly that's not the color of our ancestors. I think it's kind of a trope when white skin is the de facto standard. Also, aren't they supposedly in Africa, considering that's Kilimanjaro in the background?
 * They looked Japanese to me. I originally thought The Truth was a future event.
 * Humans in this setting are a manufactured species whose history has been completely fabricated. Why are you accepting anything in history as fact when we know most of our history has been distorted and fabricated right down to our fossil records? For fuck's sake, the tagline of this series is "Nothing is true, everything is permitted."
 * Just because Adam and Eve are white doesn't mean all the humans enslaved by the Predecessors/Forerunners/Whatever are white. All it means is that those few humans we see in the Truth video are white. If I was a Sufficiently Advanced Alien who was going to construct an entire species of beings to serve as slave labor, I'd be sure to throw some genetic diversity into the mix to ensure the population stayed healthy.
 * The existence of non-Caucasians is a fabrication of the Templars. Whenever you see a black person, it's a Templar in a clever disguise.
 * How about Lucy? She's a Reverse Mole who managed to infiltrate the Templars' organization. The same Templars who have unlimited resources, and probably know at least a little bit about background checks. The Animus and Alternate History can't Hand Wave this one: somehow an Assassin, almost certainly descended from a line of Assassins, got put on an obviously high-priority project by the Knights Templar. Even if Lucy and the rest of the Assassins had faked evidence, the Templars probably have enough resources and training to spot faked evidence and find the original. You'd think that if there was even a sign of evidence-tampering anywhere near Lucy's backstory, they wouldn't have touched her, because she would have at least screwed with the Templars' version of the Animus, introduced faulty codes or something, which she likely did (the first game's Animus is surely less advanced than the second game's Animus 2.0), and what she ended up doing was certainly far, far more devastating. You'd think that before taking her and putting her on a sensitive project, they would have examined every corner of her background, making sure that her ancestors since Altaïr's time had never met anyone who knew someone who might have ever talked to the brother of anyone who ever passed an Assassin in the street, plus screened for misleading, tampered, or faked evidence. Unless Shaun Hastings is some kind of Physical God of Computers, it would have been impossible to hide her involvement with the Assassins, too much cross-referencing.
 * You're ignoring the obvious explanation, which is that Lucy was turned after she joined Abstergo, probably by one of the Subjects. I may be wrong, but I can't remember her ever mentioning she was descended from assassins.
 * Also, don't forget that the Assassins have been around just as long as the Templars -- if anyone can slip someone through their security, its them.
 * Given the ending to Brotherhood, it seems likely that Lucy was never a Reverse Mole.
 * In the Lost Archive DLC, it's revealed that
 * If the animus is programmed for Desmond to be able to access his ancestors' memories through Broad Strokes, wouldn't it make more sense if it skipped all the stuff that didn't directly relate to what they want to find out? I mean, broaden the strokes even more? Remove the guards from the streets, for example, so Desmond is free to go to places without being harassed.
 * Those guards were in Altaïr's/Ezio's memories, so they're there in the Animus. The idea of the device is that you relieve your ancestor's memory exactly; removing parts of it to save time might cause problems. The MST3K Mantra really applies here -- the Animus works like a video game, just run with it.
 * Case in point: The fact that they needed Desmond to actually dive into the memories and personally sift through them suggests that they don't know exactly what they're looking for. Abstergo knew Altaïr had found several other Pieces of Eden, but they don't know when, where, or how he found them. Even if they had the ability to omit certain memories (and they might not, the design of the Animus or the nature of the genetic memory may not allow it), they don't know which memories are relevant to their search. Suppose one of those street guards had provided Altaïr with a piece of vital intelligence that was key to the completion of his mission. If they remove all the guards, Altaïr can't get that intelligence, can't complete his mission, and Abstergo can't find the Pieces of Eden.
 * Right at the start of the first game they try to skip right to when Altaïr found the Apple, but end up with an incomprehensible glitchy mess. They had to replay a bunch of previous memories to give Desmond enough context to watch the important scene.
 * Plus, with Altaïr, Abstergo wanted a specific memory but in order to reach it, they needed Desmond to synchronize with Altaïr as much as possible, which meant replaying things as Altaïr remembered them. With Ezio on the other hand, the Assassins wanted to train Desmond, so the guards made a suitable training obstacle.
 * To a degree, there is a lot of fast-forwarding going on; the Animus makes it explicitly clear that it is "fast-forwarding to a more recent memory."
 * I don't get the assassinate-from-ledge in 2. The one where Ezio stabs the guard, then pulls him down so he falls to the ground is considered Low Profile, whereas the one where Ezio jumps onto the roof and kills the guard there is considered High Profile? What's so Low Profile about a body falling from above to the ground? Any moderately sensible person would be led to look up and thus would spot Ezio. On the other hand, the so-called High Profile kill would not leave any immediate reason for passers-by to notice unless they were somehow on the roof as well.
 * I think the game defines high- and low-profile kills differently from how you or I would define them. It seems to be less about whether people are watching and more about how much of a spectacle the kill was. Leaping 20 feet to stab a dude in the esophagus is very showy and dramatic. Reaching up from a ledge and shanking a dude in the gut is not as showy or dramatic. And IIRC, a ledge-kill WILL get you noticed if you don't quickly move to where the crowd on the street can't see you.
 * It's also worth noting that by the time the crowd looks up, Ezio is already on the roof and out of view. It would be easy to dismiss it as the guard losing his balance or something.
 * Why is it that, during the "Chase That Fucking Templar!" sequences in those goddamn tombs, they straight-up disable your throwing knives, and later, your gun? There's not even a pretense towards explaining it ("Oh, uh, Ezio forgot to load up on knives! And bullets. And common fucking sense."), you're just left with absolutely no option but chasing those irritating bastards. I get that they didn't want you to Combat Pragmatist your way out of a no-doubt painstakingly designed sequence, but it still reeks of bullshit. The worst part being that, if you fail and can't catch them (likely on your first try), you have to fight an entire room of those jackasses and you still don't get your stuff back. What happened to striking from stealth? A hailstorm of knives is a pretty damn efficient way to take down a room full of guards, last time I checked.
 * Because of Gameplay and Story Segregation. It's a scripted sequence, killing him as soon as you see him would ruin it. That's exactly why he's just out of your reach the entire time, until the end. More than half the time, the guard isn't even out in the open enough so that Ezio could even hit him with a throwing knife, let alone his gun. Also, think about it this way: There's only one way for the Templar to go, and that's deeper into the tomb, where his friends are having a meeting...exactly where Ezio wants to be led. Now, you could either be chasing this Templar, or pulling some lever and hoping you don't make a mistake so that you can get to the other side of a chasm before the gate closes. I'd take a Templar sequence over a time trial any day. Now go wash your mouth out.
 * Simple. Learn how to catch the guard before he gets away. It's not impossible, just tricky. Near the end of every chase you enter a long straight room with an elevated section on one side. If you free-run up on top of that elevated section you can gain enough height to do a high-profile assassination. Then you can calmly sneak past the rest of the guards.
 * Most likely Ezio just didn't do that, so you can't. I haven't played the 2nd game, but maybe he was too caught up in the action or emotion to think of using them. He isn't as professional as Altair.
 * Ezio has Improbable Fencing Powers, is Not Quite Human, and comes from a city historically famous for inventing a swordfighting style where you use two weapons at once - why can't you use your sword and dagger at the same time? Maybe they're saving that for the third game?
 * Maybe he needs his left hand free to use the hidden blade?
 * Why does Minerva address the camera? Even if she's not really talking to Ezio, surely Desmond is seeing things from his viewpoint. The only person watching from that angle is the player, and as much of a mind screw as that whole sequence may be, it makes no sense in-universe.
 * Desmond isn't seeing things from Ezio or Altaïr's perspective. The player perspective is his perspective.
 * I've had dreams in the third-person many times. A second in-game example that nods at Desmond sharing his perspective with the player is in his dream where the camera angle stays on Maria, zooming towards her abdomen while Desmond questions why the camera is no longer following Altaïr.
 * Are we told explicitly at any point how long Lucy, Rebecca or Shaun have been with the Assassins?
 * No.
 * Shaun and Rebecca were both recruited into the organization after trying out other careers - they both look to be in their mid-thirties at the latest, so it's probably safe to assume that at the longest, they've been with the Assassins for about twelve years. Lucy's origins with the Assassins are still unclear so it's hard to tell, but in ACII she mentions that it's been seven years since she's seen Rebecca, so she's been with the Assassins for at least that long.
 * If Cesare Borgia attacked the Villa, what happened to all of the famous paintings the player bought? They must have survived somehow, but it seems kinda unlikely.
 * As noted on the information listing in AC2, most professional painters of the time specialized in making copies of existing famous works. You weren't buying the originals in the first game, you were buying duplicates.
 * And even then, the Borgia were hardly above stealing the paintings for themselves.
 * The villa itself is largely intact, aside from a couple of cannonball holes in the front. There's no reason to believe the cannons destroyed the paintings, and the Borgia likely looted them.
 * ^Confirmed in the Da Vinci Disappearance DLC in brotherhood; two of the paintings were destroyed, but the Borgia took the rest.
 * Who was that woman who gave Ezio shelter after he escaped Monteriggioni? She says Machiavelli sent for Ezio, implying she works for him, but then Machiavelli says he didn't send for Ezio because he thought Ezio was dead, implying she's working for someone else. Also she watches Ezio put on his Assassin gear and play around with his hidden blade without any sign of surprise, implying she knows of the Assassin Order. I went through the whole game expecting this woman to come up again but she never did. What gives? Who was she working for? What agenda does she have?
 * Machiavelli later states that he was the one who took him to Rome. The woman could possibly be one of his associates.
 * I don't remember that. When does he say that? And if he did bring Ezio to Rome, why would he lie earlier when he said he thought Ezio was killed in Cesare's attack?
 * I can't remember exactly when he said it, but it was around the time Ezio became Grand Master. I'll do some searching to find it.
 * Why exactly was Machiavelli so damn cryptic about the whole thing? Yeah, being a puppetmaster is fun., but this is war, you jackass. Play it straight with us and we can make sure we don't run rimshot into one of your schemes and get a whole bunch of people killed.
 * Machiavelli felt that he didn't have to. He explicitly asked how Ezio's trip was as if he already knew and acted like nothing was wrong. Plus, he and Ezio were at odds with each other because they were vying for the title "Grand Master of the Assassins."
 * Whatever happened to the other members of the Assassin Order, like Antonio and Paula and Sister Teodora?
 * They still have important jobs to see to, overseeing the Venetian Thieves Guild and the brothels in Venice and Florence. Machiavelli, La Volpe and Bartolomeo have no ties to any specific location so they are free to assist Ezio in Rome. While the Templar agents throughout most of Italy had been wiped out, the Borgia still controlled the Church and it would have been foolish to not have agents still placed in Venice and Florence, where the Templars could re-emerge if they were pushed out of Rome.
 * Yeah, but...not even a mention of how they're doing? No question from Ezio about whether his friends in Florence and Venice are safe from the Borgia?
 * They're likely fairly safe anyway. Florence and Venice are controlled by Assassin allies, and are not tiny towns like Monterigionni, which still took a massive Borgia army to destroy. They're fairly safe from overt Templar attacks, and, being Assassin-controlled, they're generally safe from subversive Templar efforts once Ezio has deslt with the Pazzi and Barbarigo forces. The majority of Ezio's friends and all of his surviving family are in Rome, and Antonio, Theodora, and Paola can take care of themselves when they've got the armies of Venice and Florence at their backs.
 * That's what your Brotherhood is for. Ensuring peace for those guilds. Don't you read the contracts? Defend the Courtisans in Florence?
 * In Brotherhood, why did they get rid of the voice-overs for the character descriptions? Those were awesome!
 * Because it was annoying. The average age of gamers is 30; this troper is 20. I can read faster than the voice-over. They were a complete waste of time. It's like the narrated Codex entries in Mass Effect; I just mute the sound and read it.
 * Those "Templar Lair" dungeons bug me. Specifically, the reward you get at the end. Not only is it a huge anticlimax to get all the way to the end of a long-ass dungeon and get rewarded merely with a sack of gold (come on Ubisoft, my renovation income is higher than that!), am I expected to believe that when Ezio is confronted with a massive treasure chest half-filled with gold, jewels, and assorted other treasures, all he does is scoop some coins into a bag and leave?
 * Since the Templar Lairs were originally released as store-exclusive pre-order bonuses, they couldn't have put anything too desirable or necessary in there. At least the Palazzo Medici have a few more cutscenes with Lorenzo. What Just Bugs Me is that the Auditore Crypt - which is accessible to anyone with the game and an Internet connection - has no bonus for completing it beyond the bit of lore about Domenico Auditore.
 * A unique weapon would have been nice at least. Mass Effect 2 had exclusive weapons for players who bought from certain retailers. I don't see how this should be any different.
 * Well the one in Florence never bugged me, because it was Lorenzo's secret treasury. Ezio isn't a big enough jackass to just take all of his stuff, so he just grabbed a handful instead. Can't say a really concrete reason for anything about the Lairs in Venice, but I'd like to think that Ezio either didn't want the Templars to realize that Ezio found any of their hideaways (Since they can be entered stealthily, if I remember correctly), or he just went back and told Antonio for the Thieves' Guild to steal later on.
 * If Ezio put the Apple in the vault under the Colosseum, where did Napoleon get his one? Cause it's quite clearly there when the modern day Gang go fetch it and AC2's truth puzzles show that Napoleon had an apple in his possession. Who would have replaced it?
 * There are at least three Apples. Napoleon probably got a different one.
 * According to Subject 16's puzzles in ACII, there are at least five Apples. The controversy comes from the fact that in the first game, Lucy tells Desmond that Altaïr's Apple was destroyed in the Denver incident in 2012; in ACII, the implication is that Ezio's Apple is the same one. Of course, as we see in Brotherhood, Ezio's Apple is still around in the present day and has been in a Vault beneath Rome for over 500 years. Presumably then, Ezio's Apple is a different one from Altaïr's.
 * Revelations confirms this in the end;
 * Is it ever stated how or where Ezio learned about the Vault beneath the Colosseum, in order to hide the Apple there in 1507? I know there's a four year gap between Sequences 8 and 9, so he may have learned about it during that time, but some confirmation would've been nice.
 * He could have learned about it from the Apple itself.
 * Read the Scrolls of Romulus. Brutus found the temple first. He even drew sketches of it. And showed where it was. Ezio must have thought after reading the Scrolls that this was a good hiding place. He was right since it remained untouched for 500 years.
 * Why is it that in Brotherhood, you have to wait until you meet Leonardo before you can use the two hidden blades again? Ezio still had his father's one during the battle of Monteriggioni and Machiavelli made another one for him. That's two. Even if the first was stolen after he passed out on the way to Rome, you begin recruiting new Assassins before you meet Leonardo and they all have hidden blades, so either Ezio or someone else operating in Rome's Assassin guild has the ability to make hidden blades. Why didn't Ezio get one from that person?
 * IIRC, the design for the second hidden blade was distinctly different than the design for the first. It was hidden in a Codex page, after all, and no one else has a second blade, probably for this exact reason.
 * That's another thing. What makes the second blade so special? It doesn't seem to be any different from the first blade and it doesn't have any of the extra accouterments (i.e. the gun or the poison blade/darts).
 * According to Page 13 of the Codex, constructing a Hidden Blade is very difficult, both because of the mechanisms and because the metals they use in the blades are very difficult to obtain. Even when Altaïr was around, he stated that the Hidden Blades were a fairly scarce resource and they would have to be very careful in picking who would carry a second one for that exact reason. From this, we can reasonably conclude that the Hidden Blade is a precious resource among the Assassins. If Ezio is rebuilding the order, it would make sense that he would choose to not expend the limited resources of whoever is constructing the Assassins' primary weapon when he's already got a Hidden Blade of his own. He can afford to wait until he's found Leonardo to rebuild his second one. Its the classic example of the leader putting the equipping and arming of the men first ahead of his own.
 * That explains why the second blade is rare, but not why it's so unique that you need a whole other set of schematics for Leonardo to build it.
 * Well, all Assassins have the hidden blade on their right arms, right? So in order to make one that works, you just need to copy the same mechanism with only minor adjustments for size. But obviously your left hand has a different layout, so to speak, of bones, muscles, that sort of thing. Obviously the left hidden blade is just a reversed model, but you'd need someone who was quite knowledgeable about the human body to be able to get it to the precision the blade needs to be. So in short you'd need someone who was knowledgeable in both medicine and craftsmanship to do it.
 * Obviously they needed someone as skilled as Leonardo da Vinci to build it. What I asked was why they needed a whole separate set of schematics to build it. Why couldn't Leonardo have just puzzled it all out himself? It can't possibly be that hard to take the standard hidden blade model and build a mirror-image of that same design. Certainly not for someone like Leonardo da Vinci, a man whose engineering skill is generally regarded as unmatched by anyone else in his lifetime.
 * In that case, I was under the impression that Leonardo building the second hidden blade the first time in Florence was less "we can't build it without the schematics" and more of "here are schematics for a reversed blade...hey, that's a cool idea, let's make one!"
 * Take a look at the hidden blade the recruits are carrying before they achieve Master Assassin. Their hidden blade looks crude and not as well designed as Ezio's. Also, at that point of the game, you can only recruit few people so I assume that the Assassins not engaged in field work (Machiavelli) just lended theirs.
 * Why does it take so long to load the start menu and map? I know this sounds petty, but thanks to the inclusion of 100% synch tasks, any mission where you can fail that task in the first few seconds (such as not taking any damage when the start of the mission has you fighting dozens of enemies at once), odds are you're going to be restarting the level several times over. The start menu may only take a few seconds, but when you're doing over and over and over, it gets really annoying really fast.
 * The city map is really big. It takes a while to load.
 * Doesn't explain why the map screen and start menu take so long to load.
 * Are you kidding? The bigger the map the longer it'll take to load. Without actually being able to see the game under the hood I wouldn't be able to give you a straight answer, but my guess is that when you open either the game has to perfectly keep everything in memory; considering the amount of NPCs in any given area it might be that the game has to keep notes on what to do when the game is unpaused.
 * Is it just me or do the characters not seem to care much about Mario's death? I think he's mentioned maybe once or twice after being killed off. Considering that the death of Giovanni, Federico and Pertruccio was the catalyst that kicked off the entirety of the previous game, this just feels weird.
 * If the second game is anything to go by, Ezio and Claudia barely knew Mario before the events of ACII. They didn't even recognize him when he rescued them from Vieri's goons.
 * Yeah, but by the start of Brotherhood, Ezio and Claudia have been living with him for over twenty years. That's longer than they lived with their father and brothers.
 * True, but that doesn't necessarily mean they were close. Ezio was busy doing assassin stuff so much during those 20 years that his relationship with Claudia became a total wreck. Maybe Mario was so busy doing mercenary stuff that Ezio and Claudia never had a chance to get all that attached to him.
 * From what I saw in my playthrough, Ezio and Caludia did seem distressed and affected by his death. The difference between the deaths of Ezio's father and brothers and the death of Mario is that both Ezio and Claudia are older and have become accustomed to violence and death by the time of Brotherhood. They have such an intense reaction to their father and brothers' death because it came out of seemingly nowhere, they were unaccustomed to death and danger, and they were teenagers. By the time Mario dies, they're aware of the Assassin order, and are aware of the dangers of being associated with it, and are quite simply much older and more mature and able to handle it better. Even then, they do speak of Mario fairly often, from my observation.
 * Perhaps they both know that worrying about Mario will only leave them vulnerable to the Borgia, as they intended it to do. Besides, they may very well have had some intense mourning time off camera...methinks a repressed memory?
 * Did Altaïr and Maria ever actually get married, or was it just a relationship that also involved children?
 * I'm not sure if the Assassins of his time even practiced marriage. Altaïr talks about his parents in very distant terms, but beyond that we don't really know anything about marriage for his order.
 * In the Secret Crusade novelization, it states that Altair and Maria were wed in Cyprus. So yes, they were married.
 * The whole concept of the multiplayer and the Templar use of the bleeding effect. How is this supposed to work? I was under the impression that the bleeding effect can only happen when the tested subject is related to the person he is following. Vidic stated that the recorded Assassin abilitiies through tested subjects like Desmond just changed their appearances. In other words, the Abstergo employees are just re-using Assassin data and changing the avatar. So it isn't like the actual Templars could do the things an assassin could with the exception of Fiora(The Courtasan), Lia da Russo(The Smuggler), Lanz(The Footpad), and Il Lupo(The Prowler). So how can Vidic hope that the employess gain these abilities when they have no connection in the lineage of the Assassins, or even the avatars themselves (Most of those Templar agents were either killed by other Assassins or Ezio, or the Courtasan)?
 * There's probably plenty of people out there who have at least some genetic connection to the Assassins at some point. A significant number of the people who currently live in Asia, for example, can claim direct genetic connection to Genghis Khan's bloodline (admittedly, he and his sons were quite a, ahem, prolific set of breeders....). The Templars also have a group referred to as the "Lineage Team" whose entire purpose seems to be to keep track of genetic bloodlines precisely for the use of the Animus. More likely than not, the Templars are running employees through the Animus who have some genetic connection to the Assassins, probably tangentially. People like Desmond, Subject 16, and others probably get the special treatment because they are more closely connected to the Assassin bloodline than others. Considering the kind of man Ezio was, his genesprobably got around.
 * OP here. Genetic Connection is one thing, but lineage is a completely different matter all together. One might be related to Ezio at one time, but there was no way they could have known if they were related to him by being a distant nephew or niece or a friend of a friend. Direct lineage means that one's genology is directly linked to him/her. It's a lot tougher to locate one specific person's history to just one guy. And yes, Ezio was not celibate in the slightest--or at least not the period Cristina died in his arms--but you can't compare him to Genghis Khan and his sons who were notorious for their breeding. We are talking about one man here in a period where people don't live long and anything can happen. We are unsure if Ezio ever spawned a child, but judging by Desmond's genetic memory, Ezio wasn't shagging at the level of, say, the Borgias. Sure, Abstergo/Templars can use a Lineage team to track people's genectic history down. However, they don't exactly know who was an Assassin and who wasn't or, better yet, who is an Assassin and who isn't.
 * "We are unsure if Ezio ever spawned a child" - he certainly had at least one after the events of his games, the whole point of the Animus is that it's letting Desmond relive the lives of his ancestors.
 * Exactly the idea. We don't know if he spawned a child before Desmond's obvious ancestor. So it is kind of odd to say that Ezio had multiple children before the point of concieving Desmond's ancestor.
 * While I may just be remembering something incorrectly, did Abstergo not rig the Animuses to work just like a videogame, ignoring the whole problem of bloodlines and relations by making, essentially, a videogame in the Animus? Just use uploaded memories of the Renissance templars like templates without worrying about the subjects being related.
 * The problem is syncing up with the memories. As noted in AC 1 you can't take a new user and drop them straight into a stressful memory, because their mind rejects what is happening and fights the process. So while you could view some memories without being a descendent (ala the DDOS from Project Legacy) it limits what you can see without your mind rejecting it and desyncing you. Plus the DDOS only shows you events as they occured and offer no control, which is another problem with the technology. The only use of the animus in a context where it is not showing your ancestor's memory is the Multiplayer section of Brotherhood, and in that case it's not showing you memories but rather putting you in a fabricated environment, and whenever you perform the actions that your persona did, the bleeding effect transmits those instances of muscle memory into the bleeding effect.
 * Couple ofthings in the modern portion of the game bugs me. In Monterrigionni: first of all, why is there no one outside at night? You'd think someone, anyone, would be awake and about during the night. And why does everyone bother to send e-mails to each other when they're right next to each other in the Sanctuary? Where are these meetings Lucy keeps mentioning? And finally, Desmond can go outside and see red footprints leading into the Vila entrance later in the game...and he doesn't tell anyone about it. Why would he not mention that the Templars are right there?!
 * 1. I was always under the impression that Desmond was running around Monterrigionni just before sunrise. I have no idea if it is different in Italy, but the crack of dawn is pretty early for people to be around a random Tourist attraction. 2. The team watched Desmond sneak around and pick up bits and pieces of information by being nosy at Abstergo. Honestly, they don't want to tell him everything so I guess this is their way of being as discreet as possible around him. It doesn't work, but that's the best theory that I can think of and it kind of bugged me to. As for the location of the meetings, I assume that when Desmond calls it a day, they rest at the inns within the walls of the Monterrigioni. If you look around, there are restuarants and locales and all kinds of stuff. 3. No idea why the player wasn't able to mention that. Then again, who says that the threat wasn't already taken care of. They were in the area for weeks. Those footprints appeared after the first few days.
 * Okay, I have one question that confuses me about the Assassin's Creed games. What are the Templars after? At the end of ACII you hear Minerva's warning and learn that there is a threat to the entire planet approaching. So, what do the Templars do in all this? Each Templar leader or prominent member have wildly differing goals, from Robert and Al-Mualim, to Rodrigo and then Cesare Borgia. Do they have any other goals other than obtaining the POE for personal gain? We have enough information to suggest otherwise, but am I missing something or do the Templars' overall goals seem to be more and more aimed at destroying the world (which they happen to live on)?
 * The Templars all want to control the world, through the Pieces of Eden. Abstergo plans on launching a satellite containing a Piece of Eden, presumably the apple, to orbit around the world, allowing them to control the minds of most, if not all, of the people on the planet. The threat of the Earth's destruction is a second matter entirely, in which the Earth's poles reverse, and the sun will destroy the entire planet. The Templars/Abstergo have nothing to do with that threat, and likely don't even know about it.
 * Not exactly a JBM, but something I'm curious about. In Brotherhood, the Subject 16 puzzles have you getting hints from Shaun, and when you get The Truth there is a conversation involving the three modern Assassins. Does anything change if you leave it until after completing the main story before doing this?
 * No, not a single change. Notably, Lucy even talks at the end of the puzzles despite being, well, probably dead.
 * About the capes in Brotherhood. Why do the Auditore cape and the Borgia cape do exactly the same thing? Both reduce your notoriety to 0% and keep it there. For some reason, (apparently because after the Villa attack, the Auditore cape was in possession of the Borgias) guards will ignore your actions while wearing the Auditore cape. That's right -- Being in a white, hooded Assassin cloak, with the Auditore cape on and shoving a hidden blade into someone's neck won't raise your notoriety meter. WTF? Wouldn't it make more sense to have the Borgia cape keep you at 0%, and the Auditore cape keep you at 100%, just like in AC II? There isn't even a cape that makes your notoriety meter stuck at 100%. It's almost like the developers made a big mistake and accidentally gave the Auditore cape the wrong function.
 * Or, y'know, the function of the Auditore Cape on the guard's behavior is an abstraction of how it realistically would have worked, like everything else in the Animus. If you were walking around in Rome during the Borgia rule, wearing the Auditore Cape, it was an obvious sign that that you were in the Borgia favor and the guards were going to be more lenient. The Animus translates that into not affecting your noteriety.
 * So if I was walking around with the cape bearing the coat of arms of a well-known Assassin family, that wouldn't make the Borgia guards (aka guards who work for Templars) suspicious?
 * Did you bother reading the description of the Auditore cape? The cape was owned by the Borgia at the time. Anyone walking around while wearing that cape is clearly in the favor of the Borgia if they were given said cape. The only other reason they'd be wearing the cape would be if they were an Assassin, and we all know that's just ridiculous!
 * The Borgia Cape is gained by gathering all 101 Borgia Flags. The Auditore Cape, on the other hand, is gained when you have 100% completely renovated Rome. In other words, you have destroyed all the Borgia towers and own every building in the city. You control the city's mercenaries, courtesans and thieves. Vigilantes are at every street corner ready and willing to aid you. In other words, the entire city is united behind you and against the Borgia. Your notoriety doesn't rise because no one dares report your activities -- including the guards, they're terrified of you! The Borgia Cape, on the other hand, identifies you as a servant of the Pope. Even if you do something to get noticed, no one is going to report you. And even if they do, no one is going to go after you. Surely only Captain-General or Alexander VI gifted that Cape to you? It would be suicide to put the word out against you. Make sense?
 * Wouldn't it have made more sense to release the Christina missions as DLC for Assassin's Creed 2 and work them into the main story like the previous DLC? It would have flowed much better as part of the main story and it would have shown a more vulnerable side to Ezio, particularly later in the story, where I felt he had become a little flat. I know they wanted to promote Brotherhood and all, but would anyone have not bought Brotherhood if it didn't have the Christina missions?
 * The Christina missions were added very late in development by a very reluctant dev team under pressure from fans for more development of the Christina character. It was probably so far into development of Brotherhood that releasing it as DLC would have just been silly.
 * Plus, they're not exactly long or engaging enough to warrant DLC.
 * What the hell was the dev team smoking? In the mission where you get to drive a tank in Brotherhood they put in a NO DAMGE TO THE TANK EVER apart from bullets? And then put in a Battle royal with THREE Tanks AND explosive barrels? In the end I had to resort to cheat-esque manuveurs. JUST WHY!!!!!!
 * I don't know, I only got hit once in that mission, I figured I could probably do it if I tried maybe a few more times. Surely it can't be that hard...right?
 * I finally got it, so yeah. My point about impossible 100% synch requirements still stand.
 * You know, I actually went to try this mission, and it wouldn't be half as bad if you didn't have to do the whole damn mission over again, which means you have to spend at least 5-8 minutes trudging through a tailing part, a combat part, and a free-running part just to get to the tank section. Another extremely frustrating mission is getting 100% synch on the mission "Calling All Stand-Ins". The requirement for 100% is that you have to let your assassin recruits kill your target for you. Sounds simple, right? Not when the game won't count your kills if the recruits kill them with the hidden gun or throwing knives, which they love to use because they spawn on top of structures. Did I mention the entire mission consists of just following an NPC for a good 8 minutes?
 * I never had problems when calling the recruits for the kill. Even an Arrow Storm was registered as a recruit kill, IIRC (I recall thinking "easiest 100% ever" for that very reason). You sure it wasn't bugged?
 * The trick with the tank is to try and kill the cannons ASAP (aim for the explosives and you'll probably kill them before they even get to aim), preferably with the tank equivalent of cover-based shooting. For the enemy tanks, constant circle-strafing worked wonders for me.
 * My personal theory is that the really difficult 100% synch conditions aren't really there as a challenge to the player, even though they're possible. The really difficult ones (like the tank mission, or not taking any damage when getting ambushed by a baker's dozen Romulans) are there to drive home the point of how much of a badass Ezio is. They're supposed to be hard, even nearly impossible. That's just how good Ezio is.
 * Maybe in theory, but things like this, 8 minutes to get through a sprawling labyrinth, getting past an army of guards with only the Apple of Eden and taking no damage, etc. went WAY over the line. Just a massive rookie mistake on the part of Ubisoft (much like those shoving bastards and every loudmouth in the city giving the same 4 speeches over and over and over). Revelations' conditions are much more reasonable.
 * I don't really get King Richard's logic: If you kill 10 knights and Robert De Sable, you are right; if you die, you are wrong. Eh?
 * Possibly the idea was that if he could overcome such odds he must be divinely favoured or something, and therefore it pays to listen to him.
 * Trial by Combat was a real thing used at the time. As the previous troper says, the idea is that god will make sure the righteous person wins a fight to the death, and so you can use the fight itself to determine who is right.
 * Pretty much. Some things are made of Richard's reliance on "the insubstantial" and he is a devout Catholic, so he would naturally believe that God favors the one whose cause is most just, and thus whoever wins the struggle would be in the right. His beliefs are perfectly in line with those of the day.
 * One of those unfortunate cases where the programmers had to settle for the least bad option. As someone on The Straight Dope boards pointed, out, duels calling for the judgment of God were duels. Eleven against one is a lynching (or, when someone like Altair is involved, a slaughter). Unfortunately, for anyone who's made it this far, a one-on-one fight is nothing...heck, you gotta plow through about forty guys in this stage alone! Since there are only so many fighting moves, the only way to make a duel against Robert any kind of challenge would be to make him amazingly durable (nonsensical and boring as hell) or give him some kind of power or advantage (also nonsensical and really detracts from the climactic showdown against Al-Mualim). Giving Robert help wasn't honorable, but it was pretty much all he had.
 * Altair fucks over the Templars royally. He kills off several of their major leaders, and then hunts down a lot of the others for a long time. He's very good at straight up murdering people in the face, so we can assume that a *lot* of templars got facemurdered. He reorganises the assassins into a more effective force, one that can change and modify itself as necessary. And then we get to Ezio's time and find out that the Templars are once again highly organised and generally in control of stuff (able to install one of their leaders as pope apparently quite easily) and the assassins are a weak and distributed force that can't quite stand up to the templars. And then Ezio joins, royally fucks up the templars again, killing their main leader of the time, steals two pieces of eden from the vatican after punching the pope in the face a few times, pumps a lot of money into the assassin organisation, single handedly rediscovers all the stuff that Altair already discovered, and starts rebuilding the assassin's order into something that can stand on equal grounds with the templars. And then we get to Desmond's time and find out that the templars rule the world and the assassins are on the run, in hiding, and losing badly whenever they go into open conflict against the templars. They're so desperate that they're willing to devote a *lot* of time and resources into Desmond to get him on the team. So what's the deal here? Is it just that the assassins, as a whole, just plain suck? That Altair, Ezio and Desmond are the ultimate badasses who can single handedly turn the war in their favour whenever they bother to join? Frankly at this point in the series, the templars *deserve* to win. They have some serious organisation acumen and determination.
 * It's a war. The conflict between the Assassins and the Templars is a back-and-forth struggle involving secretive actions across entire civilizations. Keep in mind that even at the height of Ezio's power, he was focusing the majority of his efforts at fighting one Templar leader in one city in one part of Europe, while the Templars in this timeframe controlled entire armies. The Templars have always been more powerful than the Assassins, which is why the Assassins have always been forced to operate covertly. Ezio's actions were little more than a moderate setback for them, because the width and breadth of their control spread across the entire globe. And, to be honest, Ezio's elimination of the Borgias may have, ultimately, helped the Templars out quite a bit, as the Borgias were power-mad loonies with no real interest in the Templars' overarching goal of establishing a New World. By the time Cesare took over, it was less about idealism and more about Cesare stabbing the Borgia flag into as many skulls as he could.
 * The whole business about buying businesses and landmarks in Rome leaves a pretty important question open: did the Borgias never think to question about this anonymous moneyman buying off massive influence in their city under their very noses? Shouldn't it have been rather obvious for them who was burning down their towers and buying out their businesses? It would have been nice if there'd be one optional mission where you try to buy a major landmark, only to discover that the entire business deal was a trap.
 * Cesare's a pretty poor leader. When Ezio first starts re-opening shops and destroying towers, Cesare either isn't taking notice or thinks his guards will be enough. After a while he leaves Rome altogether, entrusting it to his followers who are probably even worse leaders. By the time he gets back, the Assassin influence in Rome has increased so much that there's little he could do. Even so, it is worth noting that tougher guards start spawning throughout the city as the game progresses.
 * Cesare, for the most part, is simply out of Rome and not able to maintain a close eye on his minions. The guys he leaves in charge are not the most terribly loyal or brilliant of men, consisting of a banker who spends most of his time getting baked and throwing revelries and a French nobleman who is planning to betray him and take over Rome. Between Cesare's focus on his campaigns throughout Italy and the fact that all of his secret weapons are getting destroyed, he's fairly distracted from the sabotage occuring in his base of operations. Couple this with the fact that Cesare isnt terribly mentally stable to begin with, and you've got a guy who'd likely miss what's going on in Rome.
 * Given the disrepair all these landmarks have fallen into, it seems to me the Borgia don't particularly care about them and wouldn't be bothered enough to pay attention to who's buying them up or why.
 * Why did the development team feel the need to state that the game was made by people of varying faiths and beliefs (something along those lines)? Diversity is good, but it kinda feels like a dubious disclaimer considering how they attribute things such as the parting of the Red Sea to something other than the power of God, as well as unnecessary.
 * Well, it probably has something to do with the fact that sometimes you're doing things like killing the Pope. They wouldn't want to be seen as anti-Catholic or supporting anything in particular. That's probably why they had Rodrigo Borgia and others explain that they don't even believe in their religion. The game has also showed (mostly) good examples of clergy.
 * Because the game is being played by humans. Humans, as you may have noted, have a tendency to get easily offended, especially over things that play around with historical fact. When humans are offended, lawyers ensue.
 * Also, this game is essentially made for Americans and the first game came out during the Iraq War. Assassin's Creed is about a middle-eastern culture killing The Templars(pre-dominantly white/Europeans). It's so that any real-world allusions aren't made.
 * That lingerie Caterina wears for Ezio at the beginning of the game bugs me. Not that it wasn't nice to look at, but did skimpy lingerie like that really exist during that time period?
 * Yep. It most certainly did. Renaissance and Victorian-era lingerie was actually quite complex and well-designed. Those tailors didn't just make pimped out dresses.
 * Why is the series called Assassin's Creed? It's not just Altair's or Ezio's. All assassins have the same creed. Shouldn't it be Assassins' Creed?
 * It's just a matter of perspective. We are only following one Assassin in the game, and the creed belongs to him. "Meet Ezio Auditore. He is an Assassin. This is the Assassin's Creed."
 * So, if the Animus 2.0 can run on a truck battery, why does Rebecca make Desmond hook it up to Monteriggioni's power supply at the start of Brotherhood?
 * The Animus probably drains the battery pretty quickly, at least to the point where it's probably better to run it off a relatively plentiful power supply like a city power grid instead of a finite resource like a battery, saving battery power for when they need it. They also need more than just power to operate the Animus. You don't think all those additional servers, floodlights, computers and the (implied) refrigerator run off pixie dust, do you?
 * Somebody at Ubisoft decided it would be a good idea to put "grab ledge" and "drop right off the fucking ledge" on the same button. Yes, Ubi, they both involve ledges, but in a game where there is often a lag (even a slight one) between controller input and game output, this leads to players grabbing a ledge, not realizing they've grabbed it yet and pressing the button again, and ending up on the ground.
 * You can actually hold down "grab ledge" to avoid this. It's really the only way to get into the Castello the first time -- though, like me, it might take you a half-dozen desyncs to figure it out.
 * I've never had this issue when grabbing ledges.
 * The lepers in the first game- everyone calls them lepers, but they don't actually appear to have leprosy. Insanity isn't a symptom, and they aren't covered in sores and seem to have all their limbs.
 * "Lepers" is actually a Fan Nickname. I forgot what the official name for them was - it was something along the lines of "Madmen", I think. If you had a serious mental illness in those days, to the point where it affected your functioning like that, there was fuck-all anyone could do to explain or mitigate it (except what Garnier was doing), so they just got dumped into the streets. Note they turn up much, much more frequently after Altair assassinates Garnier. That's what became of Garnier's "children". Altair must have been proud.
 * If I understand correctly, the Templar/Assassin breakdown works like this: All Designated Historical Villains are Templars, and all Designated Historical Good Guys are Assassins (or sympathizers). But it's stated in the games that the Templars altered history books to smear the Assassins - shouldn't the breakdown be opposite then? Shouldn't the Borgias actually be Assassins, considering their modern connotations (especially Lucrezia, with her reputation as a poisoner)? Shouldn't Richard the Lionheart be a Templar? Of course, I understand that the games are narrated from the Assassins' point of view, so "the eeeeevil Templars changed all the history books to make us appear bad, but we never engage in such underhanded tactics, no sir!" would fit, but it still bothers me.
 * ....did you actually pay attention? Lots of people who are considered heroes were actually Templars. Winston Churchill and FDR were Templars!
 * How did the Templars get the genetic memory of the Multiplayer characters? Did they get their descendants? Since they were using Ezio memory for the movements and parkour, did they just take Ezio memories of seeing the targets to use as skins for their training programs?
 * Probably searched for some people present in Ezio's memories and that had Templars/Abstergo workerd as descendants. They ARE a world-wide company, it's probably not that hard to find these guys.
 * Is it ever revealed why did Cain wanted the Apple and/or why did he founded the Templars?
 * No but my guess is power.
 * Why do the Assassins call themselves assassins? I mean I know they assassinate people but that isn't all they do. Clearly they are a mercenary group that travels all around the world fighting in wars where the Templars have political interest and have helped rescue people in need around the local communities. I mean the Templars engage in assassinations too and yet they aren't called assassins as a result. I guess the name "traveling mercenaries who fight against a global conspiracy spanning thousands of years who sometimes assassinate members of said conspiracy" doesn't roll off the tongue quite as well?
 * Because we only associate the word "assassin" with murderers because of the Templars editing history.
 * Did Frederich Nietzche really say "Nothing is true, everything is permitted"? I've seen it at TOW's article on Assassins and removed it assuming it was vandalism but they put it right back in.