The Hidden Blade Assassin's Creed in Depth

I really dislike the idea of AC3 flipping between multiple ancestors. After how vividly and deeply Renaissance Italy was realized, would you really want to take a huge step back and have three or four half-done time periods? They wouldn't have databases, they wouldn't have huge amounts of historical cameos, and they wouldn't be as big. What we would have is more stories [and more confusing ones: why does Desmond just happen to be related to every person who found a Vault, and why did Abstergo not get half those memories from 16?], more pointless characters, as Ezio did nothing relevant to the bigger picture until the last hour of the game and I doubt a two-hour character would do much better. Having multiple ancestors [unless you play as a husband-and-wife assassin team, which would be a great justification for co-op] dilutes the story. Leave it at Desmond and one other guy.

I completely agree, i think having multiple ancestors for Desmond to keep flicking through would ruin the game for me. I like getting to know the character i'm playing and i think with 6 or 7 different people to play as i wouldn't get involved and that could subsequently ruin the whole story and game. Plus, i think that having multiple time periods and settings would mean much smaller areas to play in witch defeats what AC is about.

I like the idea of the motorcycle replacing the horse for Desmond. That would be neat if the writers foreshadowed AC3 from early in AC1.

Instead of a sword, we may see Desmond wielding a Templar stick in AC3. It's the weapon that the Templars use against Desmond during the closing credits of AC2. If you disarm one of them and hang on to the stick until the end of the fight, Desmond sheathes it in his belt and a message pops up: "New weapon acquired". LadyVe discovered this clue and called my attention to it. I don't know if it has been discussed elsewhere.

I'm surprised you didn't figure that out. That was the first thing I did at the end of the game. I know this is kind of unrelated, but a lot of people complained at the end of the game why they used sticks instead of guns. My theory is they didn't want to risk killing Desmond, so they used a near-future version of the night stick to try and subdue Desmond.

Is it even possible for Desmond to die? Someone should see if he can die in the parking lot brawl, fall to his death in the training exercise, or get clubbed to death by Abstergo. I also wonder if Desmond could climb those crates and air-assassinate the Abstergo guards at the end of the game. Someone with save backups want to look into this?

Actually I tried that FLAE, I think the Abstergo guys must have hit me around 20 times but Desmond didn't fall or anything.

Nah, I stuck with the trusty Hidden Blade. Did you mention "new weapon acquired" on the forums, FLAE?

I'm pretty sure the message is "Weapon Changed", not "New Weapon Acquired". It's the same message you get when you do the training ring task 'Pick Up Weapon'.

The only benefit I've found to equipping the Templar night stick at the end is that when you begin the post credits play, both your small and medium weapons are unequipped ("Weapon Changed"). Makes it easy to ditch the dagger.

Oh, and Desmond cannot die during any sequences in the present. I've tried. A lot.

No but that was because I thought everyone at some point did a disarm. And Asaic's right, it is actually "weapon changed." But that's when you perform a disarm. It may actually say "new weapon acquired" when you pick it up off of the ground, but I'm not entirely sure.

Ve confirms that it's "Weapon Changed".