It's gonna suck

Well your baseless Ad Hominem game is on point, I'll give you that much.

Let's think about Assassin's Creed, shall we? Historical fiction in settings untouched by pop culture? That's cool. The parallel dystopian conspiracy, on the other hand, has never built to a substantial climax and remains the least interesting aspect of a series that revolves around those concepts exclusively. It's extraneous and unnecessary.

Let's think about the narrative? We have a nice story revolving around Ezio Auditore, and then endless amounts of extraneous sequels with Ezio until the developers have exhausted the amount of recognizable historical settings they could portray him in. They couldn't write new stories in those places - not it was a story centered on Ezio and the accompanied, unwelcome Desmond. Afterwards this poor attempt at a trilogy the series loses its footing entirely as the conflict between Assassins and Templars devolves into pointless meandering in different time periods with the excuse of releasing another game set in a shiny new historical era. First its grim predictability in the American Revolution, then a completely unrelated side story of West Indies Pirates (the least Assassin's Creed-like of series and one of the best received, go figure) pointless in-fighting in the French Revolution and Assassins being a nuisance for the hell of it in Victorian London. The story isn't going anywhere and doesn't intend to. It's perpetuating its own, unnecessary existence.

What about gameplay? Yes, I, to, enjoy watching my character preform dazzling feats of anachronistic parkour whilst portraying a frustratingly fickle regard for the conventional laws of physics. (So staying any more than twelve feet behind these diplomats loudly speaking about their evil plans in a public area means that they've grown suspicious of my presence and I've lost element of surprise, but I can fall off the spire of a Gothic Cathedral and the huge supply of Newtons of force the Earth intends to exert on me is negated by...hay?) When I say watching, I do mean watching. Ezio or Altair or Kenway or the extended interchangeable catalog of brooding hoodlums all gayly throw their bodies across the screen, madly clambering up 90 degree surfaces and making trapeze artists blush - but do so with negligent player input. Left trigger + Right stick forward = Mad glorious variables the game has assigned to your character, player optional. Clambering across history isn't just maddeningly easy, its mechanically superfluous, irresponsibly taking an innovative concept and sucking any tactility or weight from it. The games are challenging only in trying the player's patience with irrelevant additions and deep as their wells of immaterial collectibles. It's not something one plays, it's something one half-watches while checking their phone - surprising it took so long for a film adaption, actually.

Assassin's Creed is a yearly appeal to the lowest common denominator of player dexterity and investment and requires similar levels of both to create, at this point. They're inexpensive side projects with sweatshops full of "multinational teams of various beliefs and ethnicities" all following the machine's orders and creating the newest iteration in whatever requires the least amount of effort to secure Ubisoft's consistent bottom line. It's been so successful its attracted a big time movie publisher to do just that, capitalizing on the good will left over from Ezio's trilogy worth of material to set a in period roughly similar enough for a Western audience - they even got a bearded white chap to LOOK like him.

So yeah. Having Assassin's Creed across the title, Kanye West playing over the trailer and call backs to a bleached gray version of Panem does not incite much hope that innovation is on anyone's mind here.