2

I remember playing Assassins Creed III with only one thing in mind: what could possibly save the Earth from the solar flare.

In the ending:

We see, well, yeah - the world is indeed saved (apparently) from the solar flare thanks to Desmond's decision. But we don't really see how.

Is the mechanism behind what happened ever explained during the game or any DLC?

1
  • I'd have to replay it for sure but isn't the thing that happens one of the things that are explained that the forerunner type people worked on?
    – Chris
    Commented Jan 1, 2013 at 15:01

3 Answers 3

1

AC3 is a game where well.... some things have to be left unexplained.

There are a lot of other unexplained questions like:

- How do we play as Connor when Desmond is dead?

  • There is a lot of unexplained stuff when you are doing the "plugging the power sources" part.
    ......and lots of other stuff.

In the first place, video games don't have to be real.
The solar flare "theory" was just an internet hoax.

The ending does not have an explanation in the game or any DLC.

1
  • I understand that video games don't have to be real. But the problem is that they really didn't explain in any way (real or not, logical or not) how did the end transpire. I would have been satisfied with whatever unrealistic explanation XD
    – Saturn
    Commented Dec 30, 2012 at 20:21
1

It isn't explained in the game itself.

You must remember that the AC franchise is ripe with fictional "technology" that isn't explained.

  • How does the Animus tap into the memories of our ancestors that are stored in our D.N.A?
  • How does the Apple control human minds?
  • How can subject 16's consciousness live inside the Animus?

Even the way that a really big solar flare suppose to kill all humans and gods on Earth but leave other life forms alive, which is the premise for the whole plot isn't explained.

And many other examples. The AC franchise doesn't stop to explain the mechanics working behind the scenes, and we are left with a simple explanation of "It just works, stop asking so many questions and go kill some Templar scumbags".

In fact, the end of the world is simply a MacGuffin used to move the plot forward, and as with many other MacGuffins, it isn't fully explained. (What is inside the briefcases in Pulp Fiction and Ronin?)

4
  • AC = video game equivalent of Angels and Demons.
    – kotekzot
    Commented Dec 30, 2012 at 12:08
  • A soul... at least in Pulp Fiction, anyway.
    – user4139
    Commented Dec 30, 2012 at 13:34
  • @sarge_smith, It's 2 lights and butteries, and a perfect MacGuffin: In an April 1995 Playboy interview, Samuel L Jackson, offered his perspective: John (Travolta) did ask Quentin exactly what was supposed to be inside and Quentin said, "Whatever you want it to be." "So I assumed it was something that, when people looked at it, seemed like the most beautiful thing they had ever seen or their greatest desire. When I looked inside, between scenes, I saw two lights and some batteries. What I would have wanted to see are the next ten films I'm going to do and hope they're all as good as"
    – SIMEL
    Commented Dec 30, 2012 at 14:02
  • @ilya I was unaware they had ever laid that particular discussion to rest.
    – user4139
    Commented Dec 30, 2012 at 15:08
1

Spoilers...!

The ending was quite descriptive (I felt so at least).

Juno explained to Desmond that (in their time on Earth) they tried to build a device to save the whole planet, then half, quarter, eighth, and so on but failed continuously until their demise.

When Desmond releases Juno, the (presumed completed and working) device is activated. The video shows an apparent forcefield surrounding the Earth. With that in mind, it seems an obvious assumption that the forcefield will protect life on Earth from destruction from an external source (solar flare or otherwise).

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .