During my absence of about a week from IGN which appears strange for many of you, I have decided to rethink my approach of a blog I wrote a while ago concerning Assassin's Creed: Revelations in which I mostly explained the problems and potential solutions to the most negatively rated game in the entire franchise... well by most of the community. However whilst many people see Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood as being the final true Assassin's Creed game for them, there are many people who see Brotherhood as being one of the downfalls. Brotherhood to me was a great game and aside from the wacky glitches of falling through the floor and in the realm of nothingness, I had a great time but like Revelations, I do see where the game might have gone wrong and just like Revelations, that could potentially be... the setting. So if you enjoyed my previous blog about where Revelations should have taken place or you weren't at least distraught by the fact that I decided to write a blog representing a different location, then enjoy! 
So the role of Brotherhood was to extend the story of Ezio Auditore da Firenze who was the character that we spent the entire time of Assassin's Creed 2 riding horses, swimming and running away from enemies with equally impressive parkour skills. This allowed the developers to bring the character's future more to light and return the situation of the Borgias as a main focus and key antagonistic force. Set in Rome during the beginning of the 1500s, it Ezio is sent out to rebuild the brotherhood within the city fighting his new foe Cesare Borgia. Although now that I revisit the game, I do think that despite the game being great at the time for the basis of introducing a single city, I believe that there were many other areas which may have been interesting or could have even have become more interesting for the story of not just Ezio but the many characters accompanying him at the time.
So first, we head off to...
Venetian Republic
The world was a very different place when we look back at the geopolitical regions on the Earth, even just about a hundred years ago. States have merged and become independent from one another. Sometimes they would last just a few years whereas others would live on for many centuries and the Venetian Republic is certainly no exception. Beginning within the the late 600 and lasting until about the 1700s, there was still the potential for a game based during this particular setting involving Ezio and his allies.
I think the most prominent reason as to why this could have out competed the setting of Rome in Brotherhood is because i was something we knew very much about in AC2. To me, Rome was more closely affiliated with the setting of Arsuf in the very original Assassin's Creed game. A single area of a linear environment that could never be revisited. Possibly to hide away any evidence that would make it seem like a linear like game. The same thing stands by the Borgia. By the end of AC2, I felt like the story had finished and in some respects, it did for head of the family, Rodrigo Borgia and with the involvement of the Borgia family with Cesare and Lucrezia, it seemed like they would be the main villains of Ezio's life even until his final game which could have possibly have involved a minor Borgia member represented or a cliffhanger from the Brotherhood game we got... not that cliffhangers are uncommon within the series.
Then again if the Borgia story did end with AC2, where could the series have gone next? Well, I personally think that the Venetian Republic could have been a great choice with the ties and allies remaining in the specific location and what could have made it more different is that it wouldn't have been set in just a single region like Brotherhood's Rome or could have at least adopted the form of single missions or open world areas as shown in War Machine missions or the Christina objectives. The reason being is that the role of the Venetian Republic just like most states and countries at the time, were willing to expand.
In particular, the involvement of the Venetian Republic had a significant influence on many territories within the Mediterranean sea with areas such as Crete and even some areas as far as Cyprus becoming under their control. Hopefully if the game Brotherhood or a sequel of AC2 did head down this path, it would have provided a variety of locations to explore with an increased lore and emphasis on the fact that Venice did seem like a mini empire to some. With the amount of wealth, other countries within the vicinity of the time were becoming well... jealous and keen to launch their attacks.
Venice to me was one of my favourite locations especially since it was the center of attention for Leonardo's Flying Machine and I think that considering my interest in discovering that Venice had substantial powers throughout Europe and the sea as well of course that it was like a completely new country from Italy, it could have become the basis of conflicts with other regions with the conspiracy enhancing and of course, brand new naval battles, maybe 2 years before the original release with AC3.
So if we considered Venice as at least part of the game, what could it have to offer? The thieves guild is already based in that sphere of influence and they appeared to be increasingly absent from the Bortherhood game as well as the place of residence for a majority of the characters. Although when considering a new villain, I think that Leonardo Loredan would have been perfect for the role. As we've seen from the leaders of Venice, many such as Marco Barbarigo were cut short in terms of their reigns. Obviously Ezio had this influence but there were other leaders (or Doges) who maintained their power authority for about 20 years and if the developers would have wanted to head down a game just a few years after the events of the historical timeline of AC2, this seems to have been the way to go. Especially since I believe this villain could have had potential. The main antagonist of Brotherhood, Cesare Borgia appeared more of a power hungry individual yet not really very strong and featuring humorous scenes.
On the other hand, I believe that Ubisoft were trying to flesh out more of an arrogant villain which is why I think the villains seemed to deteriorate as the series progressed. However it would have been interesting if Leonardo was not a Templar and may have even maintained less of a corrupt structure compared to his predecessors. However the influence and knowledge of the Assassin and Templar War may encourage him to make use of his power and set out expeditions of soldiers to find the Pieces of Eden across the Mediterranean. Thus, he could have targeted the areas including the Thieves Guild and may have become a more intelligent character for the franchise. Therefore, Ezio would have to raise an army of Assassins and this could have encouraged him to organise a bunch of hooded killing machines in the first place. Just instead, across a wider range and within areas that would later become very popular sites for tourists.
Plus it's quite possible that Giovanni Auditore (Ezio's father) may have been involved and could have become a basis of new side missions like the Christina missions as shown in Brotherhood or even could have become something more significant like the use of Masyaf Keys to see his previous life or just the use of the Animus to understand the story of Giovanni's side more with playable Giovanni missions especially if he became a key figure of the game.
Although just like when I talked about Revelations, there is also another reason as to why this would have made for an interesting setting and for fans of my blogs, I think many of you may have seen this coming...
Altair
Due to the vastness of scale reaching some areas of the Middle East during the Venetian Republic's might, this could have also involved Altair's story as well especially since Cyprus was the premise of Assassin's Creed: Bloodlines and the close proximity of the Middle East at the time as a means of trade and potential conquest. Then again, maybe it could have even become more separate from the Venetian Republic or even Ezio's life altogether.
Altair just like the most recent Assassins such as the members of the Kenway family have only maintained a single game within the series and have still yet to progress towards Ezio's 3 full games and numerous other forms of media. Although if Brotherhood did take place surrounding Altair's like, what could it have involved and would it even have been given the title Brotherhood?
When AC1 ended, there was still much mystery involving Altair's life and this is only reinforced in AC2's mission with even more questions. At the time of Altair's journeys however, the Assassins were becoming increasingly under threat and I think that much of this could have been the starting point of a very different game than what we saw with brotherhood and at the same time, there's many things we could explore. The development of the Codex, the arrival of the foreign forces including Saladin's and the Mongol forces, raising up the Assassin forces who survive, teaching new members of the Brotherhood, hunting down the last of Templars (well at the time), hunting down the Teutonic forces that have sprung throughout Europe...
Many of these things would have been interesting and could have explained much more to Altair's mysterious life and what I think the problem was with involving Ezio as the main protagonist of Brotherhood, was that it hyped up responses of revelations. Especially me at the time since I was assuming that at least half of the game would be based on Altair as well as many twists along the way but this never came to be. So in this instance, with Altair as one of the main characters or even the main lead, maybe he could have become more recognised with greater story development.
I say this because despite Ezio being based on having connections to many characters throughout the Italian Renaissance with a greater Assassin infrastructure but Altair's days were more mysterious and uncertain. In a time where maybe, the Assassins and Templars were something very small and maybe secluded within the Middle East. Then again, the forces from areas like England and France as shown from Richard III could have allowed for a the story to progress even further maybe all the way to what would be known as the British Isles. Then again, I do think that Ezio should have been featured within an Altair game since I always thought there was a connection between them and due to Altair's mystery, I think there was more of a reason to feature Ezio for him to uncover his secrets... although in this case, just with a little less screentime.
So overall, maybe a game based on Altair with a single city wouldn't have been so bad either especially when deciding where to go since there would be a lot of choices available. Just featuring the cities that are already in existence within the franchise would be interesting since they could open up a new range of possibilities. Say for example with Jerusalem, it could have featured more Assassin based missions as well as more exploration as compared with the original game. I mean, the series improved significantly since AC2 so many issues with repetition probably well... won't be an issue... hopefully.
Overall in terms of Brotherhood, I didn't mind Altair's story not being based within the game but I was hoping for much more in Revelations so in the case that Brotherhood was the one to conclude the storyline, I believe that I might have been slightly happier... but I probably would have written my own fan ending anyway.
Tudors
As one of my favourite historical settings when growing up, the Tudors stand in the way of the religious symbol as a sign of eventual change that would be later be known as the Religious Reformation. At least after Martin Luther makes his mark as the front page on the "Blasphemy" newspaper.
When playing AC2, I did start to believe that the next AC game could potentially take place during the era of the Tudors and it wouldn't really be that hard since there still weren't many guns unless you traveled to a Chinese firework or Assassin corner shop so there would be no need to add any new engines or make any drastic changes. Of course, any changes would be welcome but at the same time, they could just start with the gameplay they already have from AC2 and build up from there. Even Altair's armour seemed to look like a Tudor outfit.
Plus it would be very intriguing to see the variation of the European land with new traditions, new environments, a new dynasty, new languages (English!) and new deadly games including Jousting and of course... Tennis! Especially since Henry VII was featured as one of the Assassin recruiting missions.
However for an AC game featuring Ezio, I think that might have presented a few problems. Mainly due to the fact that the main influence at the time and what's the lead of all the scholarly books is Henry VIII and if the game went with Ezio's character, we'd probably only see part of the story since he would probably only survive towards the annulment with Catherine of Aragon. Whilst that would tie in with a story connected to the Pope, that's all that we would probably see unless Ezio became immortal... and I don't think we'll see historical Avengers anytime soon.
Then again, there's no reason why the game couldn't take place during the transition between Henry VII's and Henry VIII's reign especially since they could have just have easily introduced a new character like an Assassin apprentice or a new ally Ezio meets which could lead on towards a brand new story or even a new set of paths for future games.
The Tudors already had many references towards their era including the puzzles within AC2 featuring Elizabeth I and even Henry VII in the Brotherhood game as an Assassin recruiting system. So it's clear that Ubisoft have recognised the setting which is a start although it just might not have been a great setting for Ezio unless the developers were determined to develop the setting within future games. As shown in Assassin's Creed: Revelations, the setting of Constantinople was the key location for the game but it seemed more like they were trying to make use of the settings at the time and when considering what would later become Istanbul, it seems like the early life of Suleiman wasn't really needed. Everything has potential but the main issue with featuring the character as this point in time means that we are unlikely to see another AC game featuring this particular setting. If his early life is just one of many stories of the AC storyline within Constantinople, then great but if it would prevent further games from including this setting like a small ticklist, then I would have preferred a brand new character during a more significant set of events and the same goes with the Tudors. If having a game set with Ezio and Henry VIII's early life, the developers may have had less incentive to progress this on to more substantial eras like the Elizabethan England.
Sure they could provide a greater depth in to Henry VIII's life with people such as Cardinal Wolsey and rebellions having an influence but at the same time, that's what they did with Constantinople and Suleiman and so it's unlikely we would have any more insight in to the era than that. So it's best this is left to a new character who can provide a basis for a new series set in the Tudor era similar to the Ezio sub-series and hopefully a few other places as well like Scotland and mikeerik's home country.
In terms of Northern Europe, there is also possibly another setting that could really apply to many to many regions. Not just secluded towards the area of what would soon to be called the United Kingdom but also the rest of the European Continent as well.
Holy Roman Empire
With the fall of the Roman Empire a few hundred years after they developed the Roman calender, many regions in Western Europe split in to many states that we probably wouldn't really recognise today. Although in terms of regions such as Germany and Northern Italy, they became under the influence of the Holy Roman Empire in order to maintain the structure of the Roman Empire prior to it's formation.
This could be an interesting setting since it would be almost be the opposite of what we saw with a Brotherhood single like city and instead introduce many areas and regions including Holland and Bavaria, possibly even making links between the regions so that players could run around freely between them especially involving how the Assassins may have adapted in those parts of the globe (maybe with a new fur coat!) and how the Assassin Order itself really became so interconnected in Europe. A continent that looks like a piece of artwork on the geopolitical scale.
Thus with a wider range of locations, there could potentially be more freedom involved with new characters, new storylines and even feature some significant events such as the role of Martin Luther introducing Protestantism and how religion may be somehow influenced or even against the basis of Assassins and Templars. Considering at the time that there were many kingdoms and power struggles, it's no doubt that the Assassins could have been easily involved and this could also create an evolution of Ezio's character. Rather than the conflict with one main villain on a personal level within his country, it could explode in to many villains throughout the land mass and how Ezio could build up an Assassin army that he could send to many locations during the time, maybe even playable missions. This way, it would be more emphasised on Ezio's role with the Brotherhod Recruits on a more international basis and therefore Ezio may not be able to cope with the transition too quickly.
As well as a greater lore in terms of the backround of all the conflicts and who knows? Maybe there could easily be sequels based on the Assassin Recruits. I mean, it's a huge region so I couldn't see how Ubisoft would only make a single game.
Then again, it could be argued that an international scale wouldn't be required and maybe it could have been set more closer to home.
Based on the existing characters
The main difference between AC1 and AC2 is that there were many new characters featured within the Italian Renaissance of various backrounds. So much so that the purpose of the Animus Database allowed us to acknowledge these characters more efficiently as well as even featuring missions and even the the story based on these characters within Brotherhood. Not to mention all the small vids including Lineage to represent much of the characters backrounds which appeared to me and perhaps many of you as being pretty intriguing.
The development of the Brotherhood game was given the name Assassin's Creed: Episodes and I was following the game even though I had barely even started playing the franchise but the fact that it was called Episodes makes me think that it could have involved the already existing story. I mean with the Rodrigo Borgia story finished, maybe Desmond and the pre-apocalyptic assassins could have focused on searching more through Ezio's and maybe even Giovanni's life? Maybe with the use of Abstergo's Animus and the ancestral memories they could show at the time of the Italian Renaissance... aside from the multiplayer.
With the main villain in Ezio's life defeated in AC2, maybe this could have been the time to feature most of the characters and their lives with remnants of Ezio's past we never saw before in AC2. I mean the 2 of the sequences were distorted in AC2 and aside from being the turning point of a DLC releasing mania, this could have been similar towards earlier parts of Ezio's journey.
In particular, the involvement of a majority of the characters could allow a wide range of possibilities in terms of many aspects including story, gameplay, locations, what weapons we can buy and I say this because I don't feel like the story really felt concluded and I would have at least preferred a few epilogues. When playing Revelations, I thought the game fell short since Brotherhood got my hopes up of finally ending the Ezio storyline with everyone else's stories concluded. So if there was no Revelations game, then I would have been more interested in seeing the stories being tied up so that it could leave a golden opportunity for Assassin's Creed 3 with many players feeling that the story finally ended. To many it didn't seem that way. Maybe there wouldn't have been a main villain in this fashion unless it was a more mysterious villain than a historical one affecting the lives of Ezio's allies throughout their journeys. Although it could tie up a story with Leonardo in France with his fellow weapons of mass intelligence and Giovanni's secrets with more incentive to expand the cities we've visited such as Forli which didn't really seem to have much offering in AC2 with pretty much 2 main missions but a new game could have provided a new insight of the secret passageways, the architecture and new expanses of the open forest.
Plus it could still feature the story of the Borgias but maybe with a new side. I mean at the time, they were within new conflicts with the French so it would have been interesting to see new weapons, locations and of course, how Leonardo da Vinci fits in to all of this. 
Maybe it could have been more like additional missions and cutscenes within Brotherhood. A goodbye to the characters we knew would have been nice.
Last but not least is one of the potential possibilities that may not have counted Brotherhood as a game at all.
No Brotherhood
After Assassin's Creed 2, the potential settings and speculation spread like wildfire. The fact that a new numbered title would introduce a brand new era with a collection of new stories and gameplay seemed the big interest among many fans especially since all the references and puzzles representing events such as the birth of the firework all the way to the Space Age.
However it could be argued that this might have been the way to go and I can see that this is the path Ubisoft seems to be taking currently with the story of Connor and Edward Kenway. It's possible that their stories maybe standalone in order to gain the popularity of the gaming community with brand new settings all the time or they may just be leading up to a game or set of games that feature many locations and possibly even characters within a single era similar to something like we saw within the Ezio trilogy.
Then again, there are some other reasons why there shouldn't have been a Brotherhood like game, at least not this early. In some respects, Ezio's story ended more like Altair's did in AC1 and the next ancestor could provide the answers to the questions that just keep piling up like paperwork. Maybe a new character that could have uncovered both Altair and Ezio's stories completely. Although this might have brought up a few issues with an even more complicated storyline so why not feature Desmond as the main figure of AC3 rather than any new character? I mean, if they didn't say a new numbered title would feature a new character or at least said that only as an April fools joke.
It makes me whether a Brotherhood like game where in the means of extending the characters storyline should have been after the release of AC3. I mean if you think about it, most people didn't enjoy AC3 much for wide number of reasons but to me, the main problems would be that there was a lack of depth in to the side missions and connection to the environment. However, Brotherhood proved to be substantial in this aspect with so many missions, some people are still trying to complete it... well more missions than AC3 so it's clear that if Brotherhood was replaced by AC3 for a 2012 or earlier release, then it could have introduced so many things like the multiplayer, new recruiting systems. There were more people that gave Brotherhood a 10/10 than AC3. Plus AC3 was bound to be rushed considering that they wanted to release it before the proposed end of the world in 2012 so if Altair's and Ezio's storylines or even just a new character's role, could have been more focused if the developers more set on a single major game and then if they still need to finish off the story for the existing characters, they could do that after without their stories being vulnerable to being rushed. Plus at the same time, the annualised releases were beginning to put people off since it was depleting the state of innovation the series potentially had.
Overall, I loved Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood but now that I look back on the timing of the setting, I still think there may have been much more potential with the involvement of Kingdoms like Sardinia to create new themes of political struggles and seafaring expeditions to cover the aspect of islands which were vulnerable to control. In many ways, I don't see the path of Rome a bad thing. I mean it brought back many of the characters we loved and hated as well as a setting closer to home but I can't help but think that maybe it should have been the final Ezio and possibly also Altair game in order to cover the story and make way for AC3 or continue the storyline in AC3. That way I guess, it might have been called Brotherlations?
Please don't get the wrong idea that I hated the game but there were a few aspects that I didn't think went so well including the main villain and the absence of Altair completely. So in conclusion, those are a few of my ideas on where I would have set a potential Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood game. Do you agree or do you think the game was perfect as it is?
Thanks for reading my blog especially since it probably took a long while to read it but also I would like to finish off this blog by saying that I won't be online as much for about a month. Just like my most recent absences from this awesome site, I have been busy with exams on the way. However after that, you can be sure that I'll be online writing blogs that may take a few odd hours to read. No biggee and if you want me to read some of your blogs, please don't hesitate to send a bunch of links on my wall.
Now that I realise it, this is also my second year anniversary since I made an IGN account. So... Surprise!
However it seems that Mikeerik: Origins and the next line of Assassin's Creed blogs will have to wait a bit.
So once again, thanks for reading and hope you enjoyed!