**Spoilers Ahead**
Yesterday, after a long and eventful escape to Renaissance Italy, I exacted revenge as Ezio Auditore. Taken as a whole, my adventure this time gave me a satisfaction far beyond the first Assassin's Creed, which saw me put it down before completing the game. This time around though I clocked almost twenty five hours in the Animus with plans on returning to search through the final Assassin's tomb and the rest of the glyphs.
Personally, I did not find Ezio's story extremely interesting. In fact, I found it lacking intrigue and originality. Denis Farr discusses the evolution of Ezio, which I agree with because I did not really feel a staked interest in this evolution. Instead, I saw my progress through the game as a means to an end, exacting revenge for the death on my father and brothers. However, unlike Farr, I did feel invested in finding the truth that encompasses Desmond's life. This angle drew me in. The glyphs, the codex, and the tombs. Going in to Ezio's, or Altair's, mind, I knew that I essentially became a puppeteer controlling another puppeteer (Desmond) who controlled Ezio.Farr says,
I would like to argue that Ezio is a compelling character, full of flaws, triumphs, an arc, but it means very little in this game. Even the ending sequence when Ezio reaches Minerva, he is succinctly told to shut up after he expresses confusion--this is not meant for him. At this point I actually frowned because I felt sorry for Ezio. This could have been his story, but really, it wasn't.When I reached the end of Ezio's adventure and entered the vault, I expected an encounter with something or someone beyond the Renaissance or the present day. What I received didn't necessarily floor me, but it did peak my interest. Minerva's words served to remind me of my role in the game. I, in essence, control Desmond. The game doesn't necessarily present itself in this way totally, but the fact remains. If we go through the game taking this view, does it change the way we feel about Ezio and the other character? Right now, I cannot answer that question, but I would love to try to through discussion
The other part that grabbed me dealt with the fact that Minerva resides in the future or outside of space and time. The thought that future human incarnations (I am referencing Stapledon's Last and First Men)traversing the temporal/spatial plane to assist themselves and aid the past reminded me of Stapledon's Eighteenth Men. One of these men telepathically embodies the writer of the novel, relaying the future of mankind in all its various incarnations because the Eighteenth Men may be the last. Along with this, I feel that the messenger feels that history can be changed in order to save the final Men and continue their existence on Earth.Listening to Minerva speak with Ezio (or really to Desmond which creates another interesting twist in player mechanics), I returned again and again to this book. The "gods" fear imminent doom for civilization, granted it's ours, and they want to try and advert it. However, instead of the disaster of war that we find in Stapledon';s book, Lucy suggests geomagnetic reversal (which I do not know much about). Interestingly enough, both of these works work with the idea that history moves in cycles. I plan to explore this further in the future. As for now, I wish to return to Renaissance Italy for a few more hours of exploration.
