AC: Revelations "no rush job"

By Tom Phillips Published 12 May, 2011

"We always aim for a 90-plus game."

Assassin's Creed Revelations is no rush job, creative director Alexandre Amancio has insisted.

"Production itself takes about a year, but keep in mind we've planned it far in advance," he told GameInformer.

"It's not like a hundred people crunching it for a year. It's a huge team across many studios with different types of expertise and we fit them all together.

"We always aim for a 90-plus game."

Amancio co-ordinates the six Ubisoft studios currently working on the project. Development is headed by most of Ubisoft Montreal's 2000-strong workforce, with backup from Ubisoft Québec, Annecy and Bucharest. Singapore and Massive complete the brotherhood.

Why the name Revelations? Amancio says answers are on the way. Spoilers may be ahead. You have been warned.

Twice.

"We decided to give players a lot of the answers they've been waiting for since AC II," Amancio said. "Things with Minerva, Juno, a lot of details of the end of the world plotline in 2012. As we get closer and closer to the actual 2012 marker, the franchise is concluding its major opus."

Minerva and Juno are members of a non-human race that previously called the Earth home and are heavily involved in the series' current cliffhanger.

"We're going to reveal a lot of stuff about the first civilisation storyline, the Ezio and Altair storylines and explain why Ezio is so important to the franchise... What role Altair plays in that destiny, and how Desmond fits in," Amancio concluded.

In Revelations, players see Ezio ascend from master assassin to mentor. It sets the scene for a new character in Assassin's Creed III.

New gameplay elements such as Templar Dens, a hookshot and bomb-creation also feature.

Picture of Tom.

About Tom Phillips

Tom joined Eurogamer in 2010 and has quickly made his mark writing news and columns and coming up with puntastic straplines. Questionable beard. @TomPhillips151 on Twitter.

Read more articles from Tom by visiting the Tom Phillips archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (21) Latest comment 1 year ago

Comments for this article are now closed, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • StolenGlory #1 1 year ago

    "No rush job".

    Indeed, but the same engine and the majority of the same assets help though eh?

  • PixelPirate #2 1 year ago

    it might not be a rush job, but i guarantee i'll have to do the same mission 20 times to buy more stuff for the town, that ultimately I don't need.

    //is bored of game mechanics that go no where.

  • richarddavies #3 1 year ago

    To be fair I was really impressed how good a game Brotherhood was considering the time it took them to make it. Really expanded on quite a few areas from 2 when I was expecting a cheap cash in. I'll be looking forward to this one.

  • arcam #4 1 year ago

    @EddieMink

    What would you suggest instead as an objective measure of the quality of a game?
    Edited by arcam at 12/05/11 @ 09:44

  • Eraysor #5 1 year ago

    They did a very good job with Brotherhood in only one year, and unlike Call of Duty the universe and gameplay isn't completely generic, so they can actually get away with releasing one a year.

    I'd still prefer AC3 though.

  • sarcasmoidosis #6 1 year ago

    "Find me ten 90+ games that sold well, and I'll find you ten that didn't. "

    Find ten that are shit instead?

  • Ninja_Tino #7 1 year ago

    Yeah, but in all fairness collective review sites like Metacritic do give you a general opinion of the game's quality. Amancio hasn't said 'we're going to make a game that sells loads just like all high rated metacritic games', he simply said 'we want a high metacritic score', so arguing that a high or low metacritic score doesn't relate to its sales is a bit irrelevant in this particular discussion.

  • arcam #8 1 year ago

    I'm sure there are sales targets too, but I'm actually pleased that devs/pubs try to aim for quality as well.

    Yes, a high Metacritic score is not a guarantee of awesomeness, and yes there are some shitty publications included, but it's the closest thing anyone has to measuring the quality of a game. And aiming to make a game that critics like is a good thing IMO.

  • Ryze #9 1 year ago

    Sounds like he just wants a game that PEOPLE LIKE.

    Can't argue with that.

  • MENTAL1ST Verified Senior Software Engineer, Picsel UK Ltd. #10 1 year ago

    2000 developers? Christ almighty.

  • linea #11 1 year ago

    A low metacritic score doesn't mean that a game is objectively bad, but I think it's reasonable to assume that anyone who e.g enjoys 3D platformers is pretty much guaranteed to enjoy a 90+ metacritic 3D platformer.

  • brod #12 1 year ago

    You're on the right track Eddie but you're missing the fact that the opinions of EDGE and Eurogamer employees aren't worth a damn either when it comes to trying to aggregate reviews.

    Metacritic is pointless because it's just a collection of opinions with completely arbitrary scores attached to them. Noone has the same standards for assigning a score to a game.

    I much prefer the Rotten Tomatoes system - it's either thumbs up or thumbs down, and the ratio determines the percentage.
    Edited by brod at 12/05/11 @ 11:49

  • RevanNL #13 1 year ago

    I really liked Brotherhood, but I was done with Ezio when I finished the game. Was hoping for a proper third installment, but I guess that the franchise has become Ubisofts Call of Duty. This is what happens when the value of your shares are more important then creating new and interesting experiences

  • Syrette #14 1 year ago

    There's a somewhat worrying - yet intriguing - line in that article. It is as follows...

    "n Revelations, players see Ezio ascend from master assassin to mentor. It sets the scene for a new character in Assassin's Creed III."

    This means that the new protagonist (finally!) will feature in the same sort of era as Ezio does. They've done renaissance Italy and now they're doing Turkey. What other countries could they take the series to, at around that sort of historical time?

  • Syrette #15 1 year ago

    @RevanNL

    Another needless comment that implies we should presume that if there is a short break between titles in a franchise, it means the publisher are only in it for the money and that the titles are lacking and rushed out.

    You're doing a massive disservice to the people that work on this franchise, and you're also ignoring the fact that the creative director has just told you via this article that work has been ongoing on this during as well as after Brotherhood's release. When a game is so full of detail, content, passion and overall quality to the make a comment that the publisher is only in it for the money is beyond belief.

    To be honest; when games are as good as the AC games are, the shorter the wait for new installments, the better.

    Honestly, why can't some people just play games for fun and not worry about external things such as how long ago the previous installment was?

    The reason people dislike Activision and CoD so much is because it is seemingly all Activision - with all their wealth and talent at their disposal - really care about, aside from the odd Spiderman game and other licensed titles. Ubisoft do not rely on Assassin's Creed.
    Edited by Syrette at 12/05/11 @ 13:09

  • ISmoke #16 1 year ago

    Ancient Greece would've been fun

  • glaeken #17 1 year ago

    I think really they should have moved on with this one to a new era and setting. Istanbul is going to end up looking very similar to the locations we have already played. You can already see that in the screen shot. In AC2 the wonder of moving onto a new city quickly dimmed when you realised you could not really tell it from the last one. Even Venice barely changed things from the roof top perspective.

    Something like Victorian London would have been superb. Still I guess something like that might make it in the next game.

  • DAN.E.B #18 1 year ago

    Its true they seem to be milking this a bit but I guess as long they keep improving things we will keep on buying it
    at least for now.

  • arcam #19 1 year ago

    @foreverafternothing

    Your comment would be easier to believe if it weren't for this story not long ago:

    [link url=http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/no-assassins-creed-in-2011
    ]http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/no-ass...[/link]

    "Honestly, I think for the benefit of everybody – and business can come back and override everything I say because at the end of the day it's about selling games – I believe that this license needs a breather. You can't plough a field every year.

    "I really don't know," Boivin replied when pushed on the duration of Assassin's breather. "Bottom line, it's not for me to say. We have some business people that will eventually put a date and say, 'This needs to come out'. We have our creative people, who are also pushing on their end, saying, 'We need this much time to do something new and refreshing, just scope wise'

    "I don't think there's going to be an Assassin's Creed in 2011. I think we're going to let it breathe a bit and really focus on bringing something new and exciting for the next time around. This [Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood] is the end of Ezio's story. This is it."

  • Feanor #20 1 year ago

    I will get this once it goes on sale, just like I did with AC2 and ACB, but I really hope the proper AC3 (which must be scheduled for a late 2012 release) stars a new character in a new time period.

  • adamantium #21 1 year ago

    @Eddiemink

    Do you understand how metacritic works? Its a weighted average of reviews. The less reputable sites do not affect the average anywhere near as much as a site like Eurogamer or IGN.