Assassins Creed 3 Cinematic Trailer


Another one by Digic. Though i have to admit, it’s the first time i have mixed feelings about one of their works. I can’t quite put my finger on it, but there’s something iffy about the whole thing.

Any thoughts?


Are we sure it’s Digic ?


I think overall it is very nice.

But it feels like there might be a little too much bloom/soft glow, and post motion blur.
Might be just me hard to tell…


I thought it was ingame on the first few shots… the visuals are ok but it doesn’t make no sense at all :slight_smile:

I still think the one in Venice - Digic also - was absolutely amazing!


I must admit watching this I was endlessly laughing at the idea of one buffoon dressed in white dress attacking an army and shooting an arrow while jump-stepping over some ‘cory blimey we are the villains’-style English, while an eagle flies over and some man has ‘meaningful’ dialogue in which he says ‘who’ instead of ‘whom’ (though perhaps this freedom in linguistics is what he fights for?).

For certain this is only made more absurd to me because American liberation imagery has not much of a frame of reference for me… but just how absurdly pretentious this trailer is just of endless amusement/horror to me. :eek:


Another one by Digic. Though i have to admit, it’s the first time i have mixed feelings about one of their works. I can’t quite put my finger on it, but there’s something iffy about the whole thing.

I had exactly the same reaction. Digic has been my favorite game cinematic house since the Warhammer: Mark of Chaos trailer. But this one was a bit disappointing. It was good, but not great. I think it may have been the lighting and modeling:

  • The broad day light setting didn’t leave many options for the lighting team. Everything looks flatly lit. Very different from the closed quarters and dark settings of other Digic productions. It may have been realistic, but that doesn’t mean it will look good.

  • The hero models looked great as usual (Assassin, enemy general, and Eagle), but the background models were a bit off. The soldiers were on the skinny side and George Washington’s face didn’t look detailed enough (again, could be the lighting).

  • Too much smoke/bloom everywhere. The lighting is flat as it is, but then its even more washed out with secondary effects. They lost a lot of the contrast and colors imo.

I think it was a simple case of biting off more than they could chew. To have that many assets in that kind of lighting is tough. Digic is still my fav though.


I’m quite sure that this level of quality is not from DIGIC, where have you read its DIGIC work ? Cause its really average rendering and animation …


It’s from Digic, it was posted by one of their employee on a mailing list.

It is to note that once pre-prod was finished and storyboard/animatic approved, they had only 7 weeks to finish it, while they were working on 2 other projects including this one:

Altho I agree the character/environment work might not be on par with their previous work, there is ALOT that needs to be taken into account. Maybe Ubisoft wanted an overall style/look less realistic? Maybe, hell, they didn’t have as much time as on earlier projects nor as much money?

They have a team of about 60 artists I think, splitted on 3 projects at the same time…that’s not alot of artist per project for such a short timeframe.

just my 2cent


I still think Digic’s best AC video was the one set in Carnival in Paris was it?

The one with the Masque party and the first time Ezio is shown using the make-shift flintlock wrist gun.


Geez, really? I thought it looked great. The content kind of bored me but technically I was impressed.


Same here. All around it’s technically well done, just kind of lackluster for some reason. Shot design and editing is good, and I like all the smoke (hey, it’s realistic for canons and flintlocks). I also think the bright daylight works against it, and the style of combat is just dull (line up on opposite sides of valley), even if realistic.

Upon watching it twice, I can’t help but hear the rebel general when he looks at his men after the hooded guy dashes across the lines say “What the hell are you all waiting for?! That guy did it all by himself!” But it’s weird because he looks resigned to their defeat, but in the next shot we see them swarming over to the redcoats.


I think the “Rebel General” was supposed to be George Washington, and I think Digic may have sort of hesitated in pulling out too much emotion out of him. So instead, he poses much like he does in his portraits and in the dollars.

Just a thought…


Them there’s some highly accurate exploding cannon balls, and what officer in his right mind would allow both ranks to fire at a solitary man at the same time?

But anyway, what happened to the 16th and 17th centuries? I guess Elizabethan England and the rise of the secret service under Walsingham, or the Guy Fawkes plot, or the complex religious and political issues of the 30 Years’ War were not interesting enough? At least for those with the most moolah?


Cor blimey mate Ubisoft must be on some kind of roll at the moment with British redcoats. Decapitating zombies, flying through Route Master bus windows, getting repeatedly stabbed in the face and neck, being some of the worlds worst marksman ever represented in a video game. all in two separate game trailers for two separate games. Come on more! :slight_smile:


This is EXACTLY what I was thinking of… Not only does it allow for a more gradual re-design/modernization of the Assassin Costume as we get closer to the future, but also allows for more iterations in Gameplay additions, new items, etc.

Instead, they leapt forward too fast… and now we have “Hooded Assassin from the Crusades running around in the era of the American Revolution”. Yes, they tried to make Conner look like he derives his stuff from Native American Indians… but he doesn’t look the part.

Off-Topic P.S.: The other thing I thought of was that when they finally do put up the LAST chapter of Assassin’s Creed… it starts with Desmond dying… and we learn that the whole time we’ve been DNA-Memory-Surfing-within-DNA-Memory-Surfing as a totally different character in the very distant future where the wrist daggers have become vibroblades, and there’s flying cars and everything. :stuck_out_tongue: (Off-topic, yes. But related in logic to the above suggestion of going to Victorian Era England, etc. as ways to free up the design and allow more changes.)


Well, it definitly looks good , and i agree with you nice CG, but DIGIC is in my opinion the best Game cinematic maker, and at each release they produce stunning work. You can directly recognized their style especially in the lighting cause they don’t use over saturated color like many other companies … So when i saw this one with glow at 300% and facial animation that really look poor, i think if i really speak honestly that i find this one really average for DIGIC standard. But considering that it looks they have 7 weeks to create 3 minutes of full CG with about 500 photo real character, i can definitly understand why quality is far from what they have done before ! :slight_smile:


It is to note that once pre-prod was finished and storyboard/animatic approved, they had only 7 weeks to finish it, while they were working on 2 other projects including this one:

oooh, they did that you say…
i was convinced square did it.
well, if it is confirmed, and if indeed they had 7 weeks, then it all makes sense.
actually, for 7 weeks, it’s a friggin masterpiece lol.
though i hope they don’t go the quantity over quality way…
that’s something that pretty much separated them from the rest.


I don’t see this happening. Plus set them apart from the rest? As in Blur, Blizzard, and Square? Can’t think of anyone else who consistently puts out amazing game cinematics, and they all do pretty well technically in my book.


What i was reffering to was the fact that they usually put out less work yearly than Blur for example.
Much less.
Blizzard cinematics does not count in this as they are not a commercial studio but an inhouse division. Their timeframes are in the years, and their budgeting, well…different.
Also Square does not do work outside their ip’s (both the lara croft cinematics and the deus ex ones, were done for games published by eidos…which is a square-enix owned company).
But it’s true…there isn’t much competition out there.


Speaking only from my experience at Blur, but I imagine the situation is similar at Digic, E3 time at a studio that makes game trailers is CRAZY. The three months leading up to E3 are extremely hectic, with three or four productions all sharing the same hard deadline (a day or two before E3 starts). Even if you have enough artists to spread the work out a bit, you can still run into problems with so many high quality renders all trying to get through your farm at the same time.

Given those constraints I thought the AC3 trailer looked quite nice, especially the eagle. That’s a damn fine bird.