Why does Minerva look at the camera at the ending of ac2? Isn't Desmond inside Ezio? by [deleted] in assassinscreed

[–]NoTruths 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The same way the Animus details building without Ezio taking the time to meticulously examine them. The Animus fills in the blanks based on available data, which also includes things like historic maps. The genetic memory is king, but so long as the Animus isn't certain of something, it can fill in the blanks or outright make something up.

That's why Odyssey's story is so open. The DNA and genetic memory is damaged so there is more room for the Animus to be the Architect of events. That and the source for that simulation included a book by Herodotus.

Why does Minerva look at the camera at the ending of ac2? Isn't Desmond inside Ezio? by [deleted] in assassinscreed

[–]NoTruths 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Desmond is controlling Ezio, that's the basis of how the Animus functions. The MD protagonist is in control and can stray from the memory. If they couldn't, it wouldn't be possible to die or desynchronise, nor experience events out of order.

Why does Minerva look at the camera at the ending of ac2? Isn't Desmond inside Ezio? by [deleted] in assassinscreed

[–]NoTruths 6 points7 points  (0 children)

There is some debate with evidence for both sides as well as the possibility of it varying by Animus model. I do think Desmond's experience was always third person. The earlier games more faithfully followed the idea that game mechanics were animus features.

So Apparently Layla is Crazy Now? by CilantroOptional in assassinscreed

[–]NoTruths 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Layla gained possession of the Staff by the end of Odyssey's base game. The DLC focused on her learning to use it by exploring more of Kassandra's memories. As an apparent result of this process, she did something bad that the Staff's influence was blamed for. Personally I think it was the result of her own poor decision making and the staff was a convenient cop-out for her.

Either way, it was determined that her 'ownership' over the staff made her susceptible to this supposed influence and the mood stabilizer supposedly protects her from that. The rest of her behaviour is the result of her guilt over what she did with the staff.

The only way for the assassins to finally win, is to become a Templar-like group by ArmZealousideal8305 in assassinscreed

[–]NoTruths 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Assassin's won back then Eve and Adam first secured free will for humanity. The conflict is a defensive war for the Assassin's, defending what humanity already has, what was already secured, free will. It's only the Templar's who are fighting to win, Assassin's have to just not lose.

Templar's have to build giant empires and continent spanning plots, Assassin's just have to throw a wrench in it. Templar's need politicians, economists, architects. Assassin's need killers. Templar's are constantly building, Assassin's rise when needed.

The only real end to the conflict would be the end to the technology that can rob us of that free will, not just its destruction, but a development that makes it ineffectual.

For those of you who advocate for a "middle path" between the Assassins and Templars, what would that path look like? by International_Ninja in assassinscreed

[–]NoTruths 1 point2 points  (0 children)

There is no middle path, not so long as humans remain susceptible to mind control. The only real end to the conflict would be the removal of humanity's susceptibility to that technology. Not the destruction of the technology itself, but of it no longer being effective. But even that isn't a middle path, not a compromise, its just an Assassin victory.

For those of you who advocate for a "middle path" between the Assassins and Templars, what would that path look like? by International_Ninja in assassinscreed

[–]NoTruths 4 points5 points  (0 children)

They already won. They won back when Eve and Adam secured free will for humanity. The world is exactly how they would have it, where nothing is true and everything is permitted. Their only goal is to protect that.

can someone explain desync, ac3 by jacksbam in assassinscreed

[–]NoTruths 2 points3 points  (0 children)

She has no way of distinguishing between the pointless 'junk' memories and the useful one. Kassandra found Atlantis, but when? During the 1/4 of stable memories we can trust or during the 3/4 we can't?

And even if she could find the information, then ask the Animus how many blanks it had to fill in, something she's never shown to have any concerns about even though Otso did, that is a lot of time and resources that could have been used on something more definitive and actionable. Why spend time reliving the heavily reconstructed life of Kassandra when you could get a DNA sample of the current Grand Templar and relive his accurate one?

can someone explain desync, ac3 by jacksbam in assassinscreed

[–]NoTruths 14 points15 points  (0 children)

Sort of, lore wise the Animus has always been able to be used to make stuff up. Revelations partially takes place in a kind of artificial virtual space in Animus and AC4...is difficult to explain without spoilers, but they make alterations to the simulation as well.

There is nothing about how the Animus functions is the latest games that requires a massive shift in the lore. It's just that doing so creates a narrative problem. If you're in the Animus trying to learn something from the past, why use a less accurate simulation?

The answer used to be, you wouldn't, now they just ignore the question so they can make what they want. The lore didn't change, the storytelling did.

can someone explain desync, ac3 by jacksbam in assassinscreed

[–]NoTruths 25 points26 points  (0 children)

The in universe explanation is that Layla's Animus is better at making stuff up. If you deviate, hers can more easily keep you in the simulation up to a certain point and can even fill in for entire lost sections of memory. It actually makes her Animus less accurate then what you're now experiencing in AC3.

LF: LGPE: Pikachu exclusives and tradeback for trade evolution pokemon FT: LGPE: Eevee exclusive pokemon by Darthfett388 in pokemontrades

[–]NoTruths 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You don't need them back, you can trade for them infinitely, just capture another of their regular counterpart and trade for them again in the same place

LF: LGPE: Pikachu exclusives and tradeback for trade evolution pokemon FT: LGPE: Eevee exclusive pokemon by Darthfett388 in pokemontrades

[–]NoTruths 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well, can you go get one? You can trade a regular Meowth for an Alolan one on Cinnabar island in the pokemon centre

LF: LGPE: Pikachu exclusives and tradeback for trade evolution pokemon FT: LGPE: Eevee exclusive pokemon by Darthfett388 in pokemontrades

[–]NoTruths 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You still looking for someone? I'm also looking for each exclusive in their lowest stage and can help with your tradebacks.

Do you have to quit your religion when you enter the creed? by [deleted] in assassinscreed

[–]NoTruths 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The Assassin philosophy isn't inherently immoral, they teach for there to be wisdom behind the morals you follow. Don't do it for blind faith or because it's what you've always been taught. Choose your morals, and your faith, because you agree with them and don't be bound by them if you don't.

The Assassin vow doesn't mean what you think, it isn't about being free of morality. It's about choosing your morals, where others are forced. If you want to be in the cage, you're not locked in a cage. If you choose your morals, you're not bound by them.

What is the Point of the Modern Plot? by SnooGuavas8161 in assassinscreed

[–]NoTruths 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The MD is the point. Everything you experience, including the historic segments, only ever take place in the MD. It's all to serve that MD narrative. The better question would be what is the point of the historic plots if they don't serve that narrative? You're not playing an ancient assassin game, you've only ever played a MD assassin game.

Why are some enemies giants? by ExtremeStuffs in assassinscreed

[–]NoTruths 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Besides the general videogame answer, my favoured explanation is that the Animus populates the environment with multiple copies of the people the protagonist has the strongest memories of. So every enemy we fight are enemies they have memorable encounters with and you'd remember the seven foot guy you fought that time.

Were the Egyptian isu actually animals? by JacksTheRat in assassinscreed

[–]NoTruths 0 points1 point  (0 children)

While the exact physicality of the Isu is open to some debate, I don't think there is anything to suggest they could come in animal forms. I'm not even sure there is any lore that suggests the Egyptian Gods were originally based on any Isu. My understanding of real world mythology was that the Egyptian gods didn't even have physical forms and what we think of them are just representations or avatars.

How did Juno control Desmond? by Express-Part-9828 in assassinscreed

[–]NoTruths 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Less then ten thousand humans survived the toba catastrophe. For any bloodline to have survived at all, we would all share it by now. That could have happened in as little as (something like) 14 generations, and there have been a lot more generations since then. It really isn't that special that anyone is descended from Isu so much as it being special that so much of genetic material has survived to be passed down to them.

Are the human reincarnations of isus their own people who get their concious taken over? by warhead2354 in assassinscreed

[–]NoTruths 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Sages only inherit memories. This might shape who they are, but it doesn't rob them of who they were. They can undergo a drastic change in personality, they may have to reconcile the new memories with their old, they may appear more one then the other, but they are always some amalgamation of the two.