Poll: The Latest AC controversy

[Stew Coard]

So there were a lot of snarky comments about the live action AC3 trailer. They were really deserved to be honest. After Ubisoft said they weren't going to make it a one sided glorification of the revolutionaries, that trailer did look pretty hilarious. I don't think the bias will actually be that bad in the game, it's probably just that bad in the trailer because it's released on july 4th. But I would like to point out that AC has been biased in it's games before this. For example in the first one the assassins were good, templars bad. Now I know people are going to say that the two organizations are much older than the crusades, but that doesn't change the historical sides they took. Furthermore in that game the assassins were a distinctly muslim organization, they were comprised of muslims, spoke Arabic and were based in muslim territory (yeah there are assassin's all over but the focus was still on the muslim assassin society). Yeah, you kill muslims as well but you're still primarily fighting the crusaders. Then Ezio takes on the catholic church, and the conquered Byzantines are vilified. So yeah, AC usually does take sides, sometimes very unreasonably. But is there anything wrong with that? Seriously, most good historical fiction takes sides (case in point:Bernard Cornwell) and that the Assassin's should use not so secret societies to fight a proxy war with the templars kind of makes sense. So I really don't mind that there is a bias here, it makes sense, and probably won't be too bad. I imagine we'll still see nice Brits and get to kill evil colonial slave holders or something. But do you think this bias is going to be worse than that? Is it ok? Are you British and concerned for your life?

(worth mentioning I am half-American, but still rather like the British and in all the history before America existed, I tend to take Britain's side)

 

[TheCommanders]

I doesn't matter if there will be bias or not. This is the gaming community we're talking about. If there's something to complain about, valid or not, someone will complain. This is annoying because often valid complaints then get lost in the menagerie of otherwise pointless bitching. Yes, I'm aware of the irony of complaining about complaining thank you.

OT:
Yeah, the Assassin's Creed series usually takes sides, but it's fiction, and they make it pretty clear that it's fiction, so I don't really care as long as the opposite side is portrayed as humans rather than Disney Villains. The only "Disney Villain" they've really had was Cesare from Brotherhood; most of the rest they try to at least show what the villain was trying to accomplish, or why he/she thought they were doing what was right.

 

[DJjaffacake]

In AC1 though, the Templars and Assassins were fictional creations based very loosely on their real life counterparts, so its not the same, and I'm pretty sure they were both secular.
In AC2 you're taking on the corrupt Borgia family who have

Spoiler

used the Piece of Eden to take control of the Catholic Church.

Same in Brotherhood.
In Revelations, they Byzantines were being manipulated by the Templars rather than being proper bad guys, if I'm remembering it correctly.

As for 3? I'm still holding out hope that the devs are people who understand how to portray both sides fairly, and it's just marketing who are retards/pandering to 'mericuns.

Spoiler: Taking up your Bernard Cornwell point

I'm pretty sure Cornwell doesn't take sides. I know the protagonists of Sharpe are English, but there are more British bad guys than French in that. An even better example is The Fort. Both the British and the Colonists are depicted as generally alright with valid arguments and a few dickheads making them look bad (other than the Captain Racist bit).

 

[Stew Coard]

True, true, but even if they are a cat's paw that is still puttting one side on the bad guy side and others on the good guy side (I expect marketing is involved there, and note the disclaimer before every game, you know they were worried people would see the bias).

 

[Daystar Clarion]

It's not so much that I dislike the British being painted in bad light, more like I dislike just how 'America fuck yeah!' the trailers have been so far.

 

[Nielas]

My issue with the trailer is that it is Hollywood History. It tries to reduce fairly complex issues that caused the Revolution to a few snappy, patriotic soundbites.

Some of them made sense but the one with the schoolboy was extremely stupid. He does not want to learn British history so he feels that he is being oppressed and supports a bloody revolution. School children all over the world learn history of countries far away.

 

[GiglameshSoulEater]

Of course they will vilify the British. To be honest, it annoys me how the Americans describe British rule as something that was 'Slavery and tyranny'. I certainly expect an American developer to be making an American-centric game. Hell, they'll probably have the rebels as saints while the Redcoats burn children in churches, etc.

Edit: Its a french developer? Ye gods. I did not know that. I acknowledge my mistake, then, but as the primary market is American I still think vilification of the British is doubtlessly going to happen

 

[Nero18]

My issue with the trailer is that it is Hollywood History. It tries to reduce fairly complex issues that caused the Revolution to a few snappy, patriotic soundbites.

Some of them made sense but the one with the schoolboy was extremely stupid. He does not want to learn British history so he feels that he is being oppressed and supports a bloody revolution. School children all over the world learn history of countries far away.

Agree with you completly, I was pretty stoked to see a neutral view on the conflict because i thought that connor would be somewhat neutral. But i really dislike the trailers, if this game is just a big and long "America Fuck yeah" i will be very dissappointed. I would expect Ubisoft as french dev to give us something better.

 

[The Artificially Prolonged]

Concerned but remaining optimistic about both sides being portrayed in their truest light possible. It would not make sense for a half native/half british protagonist to side solely with the revolutionaries in my mind.

I still stand by my theory that in the Assissins Creed universe both the British and Colonists are controlled by the the Templars and that the war is an internal power struggle for the ultimate control of the Templar organisation. I'm calling it now that the big twist will be that Connor has been manipulated into inadvertently helping one side gain an advantage over the other.

Though if I'm wrong and it is just America fuck yeah, I'll just see how far through the game I can get killing as many bluecoats as I can as manner of protest

captcha: tea leaf. Nice to see which side you're on captcha.

 

[DustyDrB]

American developer

Eh? [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ubisoft_Montreal]

OT: I'd rather it not be American = good guys and British = bad guys. If not for historical accuracy, then for better storytelling. It's more interesting if you have enemies and allies on both sides of the conflict.

 

[Erttheking]

Between Tomb Raider, Mass Effect and this, I really don't care anymore. I got behind the Mass Effect movement, but I am just so sick of controversy in every single game. "Oh this game is xenophobic." "Oh, this game is racist." "Oh this game is sexist" I JUST WANT TO PLAY MY FREAKING VIDEO GAME! God, I am just sick of all the fucking drama.

 

[Jynthor]

I don't care but do find it funny how every single trailer and gameplay video released to far involves killing the Brits and shows Connor helping the 'Murrican Patriots. And yet the devs try to tell you will also totally kill Americans and this game is totally not rooting for one side.

 

[baddude1337]

To be honest, it has gotten a bit out of hand the whole anti-British thing in their trailers. I mean they said both sides were enemies to the assassin, but all we've seen is FUCK YEAH AMERICA and overly evil British people burning houses down.As I've sad before, It's The Patriot all over again.

Also, the latest live action trailer was just dumb. Half of what they said was idiotic, like the kid and the farmer.

 

[Goofguy]

My question to you is... so what?

So what if it is about making one side to be good guys and the other as bad guys?

The AC3 story is going to be told from Conor's perspective (just like Altair and Ezio before him). His experiences will determine his views of both sides. We're following his story against the backdrop of the Revolutionary War not the Revolutionary War itself. If this was a RTS game where you could play as either side but the Americans are clearly stronger and the British are vilified throughout then yes, I agree with you.

Ideally, we'll see this:

It's more interesting if you have enemies and allies on both sides of the conflict.

However, Ubisoft will be giving us a fictional story played from the perspective of one person. I have no qualms with the embellishments in said story.

 

[Esotera]

Who cares? This is going to be the first AAA video game that is actually making trees that don't behave like a solid concrete block. It has a bigger map than Revelations, lets you hunt animals, and you can kill enemies with a goddamn tomahawk. Even if the British do end up being vilified to a certain extent, the game is told from a point of view of someone who is fighting them and hates a lot of things that their soldiers are doing, so it fits.

 

[RN7]

I feel it's only necessary to do what I did in the other Assassin's Creed games to show that the assassins are a fair and just organization- beat the crap out of seemingly innocent supporters, in this case the patriots, and dump into the water. They'll technically die because they're unconscious and can't swim, but you won't get desychronized for it, meaning that it actually happened ( as far as I'm concerned). It shows that the Assassins don't take sides and will do what's necessary to kill the Templars. At least that's how I justified my endless beatings of peasants, bards and homeless women. It also explains why there was no good drinking water in Florence.

 

[Kyber]

I was hoping this AC would require more stealth, less combat, but it seems you can take on armies alone.
OT: I would like it to be not-so-biased, because i like the british.

 

[Kungfu_Teddybear]

The problem I've had with the trailers is how they've all been, as Daystar said, "AMERICA, FUCK YEAH" while the British are painted as the equivalent of Mordors orcs.

But, even though I'm British, I have no problems tomahawking the British in the game. I just hope the game portrays the two factions fairly.

 

[johnnnny guitar]

Well so far all I've been doing so far is rolling my eyes every time I see an assassins creed 3 trailer.
I haven't even played a full game in the series since the 2nd one but the trailers have only been focusing on america as the heroic underdogs and the British as a faceless evil army out to get all the Americans for NO REASON(I know it's the american revolution my next point is what I'm talking about).
Hell they had a whole trailer recently which focused on why Americans wanted to fight back why not do one of those for the British and all the american flag waving so fucking annoying in the boxart, collectors edition, trailers etc.

So basically what I'm trying to say is to much pandering to the fuck yeah america did nothing wrong ever crowed at least in the trailers but who knows maybe the game is less fuck yeah america and more morally grey.

P.S. I'm an Aussie