Exactly! Right when I saw that bit in the interview that was the first thing I thought of. Did this ignoramus even play the game her company decided to rip off in Origins and Odyssey?
Tell it, Looms. Ubisoft used to get this right. Hell, they even used racism and sexism as a fairly interesting mechanic in Liberation. AC3 didn't shy away from the racism going on at the time.
@@NichtNameee Racism:prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior. It may have been more socially acceptable but it was still racism
Saying this as a woman, I think it's frankly a cop out for Ubi to do this because of "equality." And I think it's a way to excuse bad storytelling. Certainly it would take more effort to retell a story, accurately, from a woman's perspective living in Ancient Greece, but they chose to basically ignore this and give them roughly the same storyline. They made the effort to at least be somewhat historically accurate with Connor in AC3 and didn't shy away from racism - but then Unity came along and clearly from that game they didn't care much about historical accuracy anymore. It hasn't improved. Ubi keeps on doing things such as inserting "representation" here and there without putting any though about how it would impact the person's life and storyline (like Jacob being bisexual), and I don't know why, for a pat on the back because they're being more inclusive? And frankly it's irritating, considering other games have been able to do this just fine and it only adds to how compelling the story is.
Agreed. Making the game 100% accurate would make it difficult for Kassandra as outside of Sparta, 5th century woman were very much treated like property, but ignoring the inequality altogether does an injustice to the difficulties woman had to face through history.
What's interesting is that Origins didn't shy away from racism or sexism. You saw how the Egyptians were mistreated and marginalized by the Greeks, which was an accurate indication of what Ptolemaic Egypt turned into. I mean Egyptian revolts against their Greek overlords are very well documented. On top of that, Aya often suffers mysoginistic assumptions and stereotypes by her Greek and Roman peers, Caesar even chastises Bayek about letting her do a "man's job". Which I enjoyed because it showcases how patriarchal Greco-Roman society was. Overall, when you see powerful women in Origins, they are usually powerful nobility or clergy, like Cleopatra, or the Wife of Amun in Curse of the Pharoahs or the wives of powerful officials. It still takes liberties no doubt, like the Nomarch of Faiyum but overall, acknowledges that Ancient Egypt was not an era of equality. But yes, to tell history, you need all of the history. The shitty parts of it as well.
Lol stronk women Is power only about wealth, political influence and phisical strength? Is it wjat western women want? Wealth and influence, oh and more priviledges obviously hiding it behind the terms like equality As a gender women have their own power and men have their own Stop trying to fight against the nature retards
Bogdan 96 AC has been built upon historical circumstances, conditions and events. It is part of what makes it what it has always been. The stories are woven with the unfair situations throughout time in different societies. So if history is sexist, that itself should be tackled within the story.
The whole point of the video was that women are boring in video games unless they are portrayed as underdogs who have to prove themselves against sexism. I'm not a subscriber, but I have watched a lot of your videos and I had thought you had more complex opinions than that. I guess not. I do agree Ubisoft is lazy in their storytelling and it would be great to have different interactions, but I don't understand this obsession with wanting women to be underdogs every single time. Can they never be anything else? It's also just stupid because Kassandra is the cannon character in this game, not Alexios with his subpar voice actor. By this logic, people should be questioning why Alexios doesn't behave and interact with people differently than Kassandra and not the other way around.
Female fan here. AC shouldn’t be afraid to show how the different genders were treated back then. Sure, creative license, but it wouldn’t be exactly historical... One of the charms of AC is its almost simulation-like depictions of history. Take Aveline for example. She was a great character despite all the challenges she had to face as both a person of color and a woman, and all that is integrated into her story to mold her character. Kassandra’s character completely disregards her setting, unlike Aveline, and she is treated exactly how others would Alexios. Everyone knows that this is a major inaccuracy, and would interrupt immersion especially for female fans.
Aveline was a great character, who we got to see in multiple games, precisely because they didn't shy away from the realities of the setting, but rather found an interesting story in it to tell with her. Great post. We'll never get another Aveline (that quality) so long as they stick to this gender interchangeability mindset. It's extremely limiting and shallow.
I'm 10 hours in at the moment (Playing as Alexios) And two major historical inaccuracies that really stood out to me was first Leonidas throwing his shield at an enemy right away, a Spartan wouldn't have done that at all. And then the previolounce of female mercenaries. Sure there was probably a few back in the day in Greece. It's not out of the question since we know the Scythians had female warriors and were neighbors of the Greek world (They might be where we get the myth of the Amazonian warriors some historians think) But not nearly the amount that Odyssey is showing.
I totally agree. As a Greek guy, I'll enjoy playing as Alexios, but as far as story goes, I'd rather play the more underdog story of Kassandra if they made the game as you wish they did.
Seeing Kassandra rise through the top despite everyone's sexist views on her during that time period would feel so damn satisfying, to be honest. It would be a great underdog story.
I’m unsure if I want this game to be honest, which is odd because I own pretty much *ever* other AC game and *every* bit of addon content for them. The only one I don’t have is Liberation. But I might not get this one either. All I really see is a shallow Witcher 3 wanna-be and not an Assassin’s Creed game. I legit got confused when I saw my friend playing as Alexios in the beginning because of the basically copy-pasted dialogue system. Plus... Alexios just really kinda looks like a more normal Geralt. He’s even got a similar scar on his arm to one Geralt has.
6 лет назад+1
TheJakson212 put it on insane difficulty and you’ll have to sneak just like other AC games. That’s what I did for Origins
This precisely puts my thoughts on the subject into words. Assassin's Creed should not shy away from the worse aspects of history; it is a historical fiction series with scifi elements, not a fantasy. Commitment to accuracy is a vital component in suspending people's disbelief about the more out-there elements of the lore, and experiencing the realities of the time is vital to grounding the character within the setting they inhabit. In Ancient Greece especially, ignoring sexism is a BIG inaccuracy. If they omit it entirely, a massive element of Athenian history will be missing; you can't talk about Aspasia without acknowledging the sexism that shaped attitudes toward her, you can't talk about Athenian democracy without acknowledging how it didn't include women, and you can't fully contrast Sparta and Athens without acknowledging their different gender relations.
kagsgirl Alright then, if you don't like seeing racism represented in games, you can always sit out games set in periods of pronounced racial tension in favor of playing games with settings that actually appeal to you... Like, a game being historically accurate doesn't necessitate representing racism. A game set in 14th century Mali, or 16th century Ethiopia, for example, would have plenty of black people, but nobody running around yelling the n-word. You could even put a black protagonist in parts of Ancient or Medieval Europe, and still avoid any familiar racism (not counting possible exotification), while being fully accurate. The fact that you don't like seeing racism in video games doesn't mean a video game set during, say, the US Civil War, should have a black protagonist whose race has no impact on them. If you have a problem with a setting, that doesn't mean the setting should be misrepresented to avoid making you uncomfortable, it means that you should avoid that specific setting, simple as that, and if historical accuracy makes things boring for you, maybe historical fiction just isn't your style.
*+kagsgirl "Video games are meant for fun and imagination."* False, games are generally for entertainment but NOT all are made for imagination. As crazy as it can get, *AC* is still first & foremost rooted in historical fiction. Historical fiction doesn't have the same creative freedom as pure fantasy, as it is by definition a genre built on immersing players in another time. While gameplay was always essentially fundamentally a power/stealth fantasy, its core structure has always been historical representation. That's its foundation. That's what helps it sell, that's what many keep buying different iterations of similar gameplay formulas for, immersion in the setting. Without a healthy level of accuracy to its respective periods, *AC's* worlds would be little more than standard open-world playgrounds, "historical" only in aesthetic. They may still look pretty but wouldn't make as many gamers feel as if they're exploring in another period. Like it or not, history sucks sometimes. Not everything for any culture or ethnicity (Caucasians included) is positive. While changes are inevitable, that adversity for any relevant group shouldn't be omitted. I sympathize with such games hitting home for discrimination you've experienced irl. But, being brutally honest, that's not Ubisoft's responsibility. No game developer, however hard they try, can realistically accommodate every individual's sensitivities over anecdotal experience, nor should they. To do so, especially in this series, would not only be gradually detrimental to what made *AC* engrossing to begin with but a disservice to historical progress. Ignoring parts of history for our own comfort, pretending all were treated equally because "it's a game" disrespects the long road to reach that progress. Portraying sexism in historical fiction does NOT inherently advocate, promote, glorify, or normalize it. It's only acknowledging the reality back then. This in turn resonates with many fans, making the world building and character arc more compelling as the protagonist faces & overcomes it (i.e. quality storytelling). By treating Kassandra no differently from a man in a setting when such behavior wasn't common, this consequently robs her of that potential development. *Having faced prejudice myself, I find this actually more disrespectful to women of the period, especially the lead who now stands out for unintended reasons.*
@kagsgirl Why th do you get that feeling with your white colleagues at work in the first place though? Have you been addressed like that? Have you heard people talking racist crap behind your back? 90% or more of the time, they're not racist. It is extremely hazardous to people's livelihood to be called a racist, however, so some people might walk on eggshells a little bit, or a lot, especially if they think you think they might be racist. Because the result is they get fired, they get overlooked for positions, they get downsized. And then depending on the job, they might not be able to get work again. That's a whole lot more common, and when you're living paycheck to paycheck, a thin line to homeless like most people are, that's a major concern.
I am black. I certainly wouldn't mind seeing slave owners using the n-word to refer to their slaves in a setting like Black Flag. As you have correctly stated, Assassin's Creed is a historical fiction series first and foremost, and commitment to historical accuracy is often paramount in these cases. And I really hope that Odyssey doesn't shy away from portraying the sexism and slavery that were commonplace during ancient Greece. Good historical fiction works are the ones who don't shy away from showing the worst aspects of the era and the place the are portraying. Portraying a certain period in history without showing the issues that affected it is detrimental to the suspension of disbelief. Wanting these issues to be shown doesn't mean that I (or everyone who agrees with me) condone things like racism, sexism or slavery.
This is why I call shenaningans on the whole "Kassandra is the canonical protagonist" thing. Yeah, she might be just because you said so, but the game is clearly made with Alexios in mind, from the marketing to the dialog to the story, Kassandra is clearly a skin for Aleksios, while "She's the canonical protagonist" was just to appease the progressive crowd. And this is why I was against "Kassandra should be the only protagonist" thing - Ubisoft just doesn't have the balls to make it interesting, they would neuter it to oblivion while claiming that they don't want to promote sexism (depicting is not promoting, sweethearts, that bit with egyptian schools in Origins Historical Tour was horrid).
Master Oak Well, y'see... when they do have differences, even minute, they get accused of sexism. Like in Oblivion - male and female player characters actually have different starting stats (the same goes for different races). So the game got accused of racism and sexism.
As far as I'm concerned, Alexios is the canonical protagonist. I say this because, as far as I know, only boys and men were raised and trained to become Spartan warriors, and also this game was clearly made, as you have already said, with him in mind to be the "true" protagonist. Alexios has been used in all of the marketing for the game, including the TV spots and the launch trailer. I am finding it extremely difficult to take Kassandra seriously as a protagonist when all of her dialogue and interactions are written to be exactly the same as Alexios'. Kassandra's character could have been written to be more thoughtful and compassionate than, for example, Alexios' more reckless and impulsive nature to better portray their personalities and the differences in how each would respond to the same situation. If Kassandra were in fact the canonical protagonist, then some sexism would have been not only necessary in a supposedly "historically accurate" setting, but also welcome, as it would have given her an interesting struggle to overcome in the game's story.
What's the point of a male protagonist if it's just the same as the female. I prefer playing as females. Escapism. She isn't so much a Spartan, she comes from Sparta but never a part of the elite warriors called Spartans. She is a mercenary and can be paid to fight for either side.
To be honest? As a POC I thought AC3’s racism was less harsh than it could’ve been. AC3 is my absolute favorite entry in the series but I’ll never get over how bizarre it was that Connor, a native, was allowed to attend the Continental Congresses and lead the Patriot army without anyone batting an eye. That’s why the prison segment and the clip you showed were some of my favorite parts of the game, because it was a raw and real depiction of racism. That being said, this is why I’m really not interested in playing Odyssey BECAUSE they’re essentially pretending sexism doesn’t exist. As a woman, I would MUCH rather see Kassandra overcoming sexism rather than paint a fictional world where she’s treated the exact same as a man. The former would be a far more compelling story and more “progressive” (if that’s what they’re going for) than just erasing sexism altogether. You’ve perfectly summed up my sentiments about Kassandra in this video. Your AC critiques are also in-depth but fair, and you don’t trash the series because it’s done something you disagree with. Thank you for the awesome videos :D
Master Oak “or POC too - if that’s what’s being used nowadays.” SAME. I honestly hate calling myself a “POC woman” because I’m not defined by my non-whiteness nor my gender, but apparently that’s all people care about nowadays.
I agree entirely, I was feeling it'd be so much better if Kassandra was shown being denied or not believed because she was a woman, then going out and proving those people wrong. And slowly but surely, that tale spreading. Like *a random situation in my head* Being denied entry into the merc group because she's a woman. So she goes out and kills a bear/beast that was terrorizing the group and brings it back, proving that she is just as, if not more capable then the men in the company. I felt the game missed a wonderful chance to show an area of history often shown poorly or completely false, with the Spartans and Greece. Instead (seeing the game released) we see Spartans flinging shields aside, fighting out of formation, female warriors openly accepted and treated as normal... and the ability to climb a statue's penis. I just looked at that information, and went "You literally modeled nude statues that players can interact with and climb but you hated the idea of some people being mean to the female character?" I've also read the romance is literally "Wanna have sex?" repeated until the person just gives up and says yes.
Portraying her like a sort of warrior is stupid and inaccurate of course, it was not the role of women in Sparta. But talking about our modern definiton of 'sexism' in the context of that era & place is also wrong. Just research about how ancient Sparta women lived and you'll know what I mean, they were not 'opressed'
@Yuwan I thought about that too and that's definitely the most probable explanation. But still, he wore feathers & beads in his hair, and had beaded armbands which made him clearly appear native. And plus, in the prison sequence and the scene with his dad, he was called racial slurs left and right (in fact, he was called a half-breed in prison, which kinda contradicts the idea that he's able to pass as a non-native). In those scenes, why wasn't he also assumed to be Italian or Spaniard?
There was a falling out with Patrice Désilets and Ubisoft fired his ass. After acquiring the studio he sought employment in, they fired him again. AC was always Patrice and Corey’s baby. What this series has become under Aymar is an embarrassment.
And now that they've also mentioned that they probably won't go back to only having a single-protagonist in the upcoming games, we will probably never get a real female lead with her own story. Like you said; Kassandra is essentially just a skin. And every female protagonist from now on will probably be as well. And i totally agree on how inconsistent Ubisoft has become (or always was, some might say) when it comes to the importance of historical accuracy. Its only important when its easy to implement and they can calmly brag about it afterwards. But if it might cause challenges or limitations, (in reality it just takes a little extra thought put into it), then they just say fuck it. And we get the "doesn't matter, its just a video game" treatment.
Not only that if theyre gonna do that they can seriously bog down any character individuality. Itd be terrible of they went with 2 characters for each game.
Honestly what they're doing is more sexist that actually showing the sexism, the just re-skin the dude and get a woman to read all his lines... yeah so progressive ubisoft. Where the fuck is my real Assassins Creed game with Amunet as the protagonist!!!
This is the worst part. You remember altair. He was unique. You remember Ezio. A unique character, maybe you even remember Connor. But they're losing this sense of uniqueness. Especially now, when the characters are interchangable. What the hell is this?
Totally agree with everything, perfectly articulated, and superbly edited as always Loomer Really enjoyed the essay, these are literally the only assassin’s creed videos I can watch these days and you always deliver insightful commentary and well put together content.
I completely agree with you. As you said, look at AC3 and AC:BF, they had characters that weren't white and the game did not consist being yelled at the whole game. Personally, I wouldn't want story's that are night and day. If I knew the stories even had subtle differences, it would not only give that first decision more weight but give the player a reason to play through it again.
The thing is that I want it too be different and I can understand it not mattering because they aren't even trying to be historically accurate anymore with mythical creatures being a thing now. But their reasoning for it is fucking stupid, all people are equal.. why you trying to change history thats more racist and more sexist, the reason we learn about history is to learn from peoples mistakes hiding mistakes in history is i feel more wrong cause your claiming to never be wrong.
@@ghost5377 Too bad they kind of butchered some of his character development. Connor is not the most approachable person in the world, but he is a layered character. Ezio at times comes across as a typical Hollywood stereotype.
This is probabaly the most articulate explanation as to why people have a problem with how Ubisoft is using "diversity". I dont think many people would have a problem with critics if the criticisms were all this eloquently put. Good job.
I could not decide for a long time who to choose - Cassandra or Alexios? Cassandra is the canonical character, and Alexios is more suited to good sense. In the end, I decided not to buy it
I got the game and i play as Kassandra still even though i agree with the points in this video. She just has better dialouge and voice actress then the male counterpart. The game is really good still even if it could be better if they did have some sexism in the game for more story impact.
This isn't appealing, it never was, and this just comes across as an outright mockery of the series and of history. I know you can have stories that aren't historically accurate, but this is a series that IS based on historical detail and accuracy. But who am I kidding right? This game is made by the same team who made AC Syndicate.
assassin's creed is just pathetic by this point. While syndicate isn't really based on things that actually happened in the victorian era, they at least got the tone of the era right. Odyssey in the other hand just gives you a gender-less character designed to appeal to social agendas
To Briturk and Zorex. Really? Historical accuracy in AC? Dude, the world/life was created by aliens, while people are running around with godly artifacts. Yeaah. Accuracy I guess....
it's never been a series based on historical accuracy, if you ever seriously played an AC game. Plenty of historical inaccuracy since the beginning. People just don't get it, it's supposed to be a fun ride with historical elements in it. Is it just forbidden ?
@@timytimeerased People really just wanna call ubisoft SJW pleasers. I see tons of comments about it. It's like they don't want the issue to go away. I'm really enjoying the game and none of these issues come to mind during it.
What annoys me is that ubisoft are bringing out a novel of odyssey set before this game takes place, and the character will be kassandra. What was the point of us choosing our character if their own lore that they've created throws it out the window? I'd have no problems if the game only has you play as kassandra
@HolyMolyOllyPolly well yeah that's true, the main difference lies in that Dragon Age is complete made up fantasy. Whereas Kassandra was the historically accurate character, and is acc based in history, so it just feels kinda pointless, if they had redone the story slightly and kept it as female only, we could have a bad ass female character with a main game all to her self, not like Syndicate where they had to share
Why do keep pulling out the "historical accuracy" thing? It's still a fictional universe that blends Sci-fi, fantasy, and sprinkles real world people and events into it. It's not SUPPOSED to be a recreation of history. In the AC universe, humans were created by a more advanced civilization that made 'pieces of eden' so they could control them. If you think Kassandra is 'historically accurate' give us a link pointing to a historical figure in history that had a magical broken spear..
Well said. Totally ignoring it does no one a service. Keeping it historically accurate would have presented game play challenges as a 5th Century woman would not be allowed to walk around freely on the streets of Athens. Woman were rarely allowed to leave the home and certainly were not allowed to have any sort of education. While this would make missions in Athens difficult to complete, keeping it accurate would present the harsh reality of sexism and maybe open some eyes.
It would also open the game up to some great stealth missions, getting from A - B in certain sections of the city where a woman alone would be strange enough to notice. They could have given Kassandra the added weapon of 'traditional feminine' disguise, dressing in silks and pretending to be a meek and gentle greek woman to join/overhear woman gossiping or gain access to a certain woman only areas like serving areas, baths, whore houses or temples etc. There are ways to balance the reality of the oppressive and restrictive sexism of the time with interesting game mechanics and a clever, badass protagonist that would keep players invested.
DHF F open their eyes to what?! How awesome and amazing it was? People seeing how women were treated in history would do nothing to improve things. If anything it makes them worse because men see those depictions and get rock hard because that shite turns them on and then they just long for a "return to the old ways" where they can freely treat women like objects without reprisal.
@Mórrigana O'Dwyer: open people's eyes to the fact that is sucked. Half of the problem of sexism is that people turn a blind eye to it. much like racism, they try to convince themselves that its not an issue, that people are over reacting when they complain about it. Hiding it and rewriting history to pretend that there was no issue at all does no good at all.
@Maya of Lesbos: you will notice I didnt say the game was historically accurate, I simply said IF it were accurate, and within the context of societal roles for woman, then it would be a far greater challenge. I am under no illusion that any AC game is a substitute for a history text book.
Maya of Lesbos that’s what I’m saying ac was never historically accurate there’s a whole bunch of si fi shit in the series so I don’t know why people are complaining now
Ubisoft WANTS to appeal to the general media and the social justice crowd in particular, by virtue signaling. But it's a company, who primarily wants to make money. By changing absolutely nothing whether you play as a man or a woman character, it enables them to play the "equality card" while requiring the very strict minimum amount of extra work, as they do not have to create additional scenes, lines of dialog or branching story arcs. Yes, Ubisoft is hypocritical: when they say that "they're doing this because they care", what they really mean is "they're doing this because they care ABOUT YOUR MONEY".
Virtue Signaling never worked. It didn't work with Marvel Comics (Marvel killing off Wolverine and replace him with X-23, Riri Williams as Iron Man/Tony Stark Replacement, and Captain Marvel/Ms. Marvel and now they making a movie with her in MCU), Doctor who, Star Wars.
That's exactly what I think. Ubi just lost an amazing opportunity of showing two sides of the same historical setting, you know what I mean? People would love to play as either Alexios or Kassandra, then create a new file and see what the other character's run looked like. So much potential to show that women might not be as strong and well accepted as men in the society, but could strive and achieve as much and/or even more than men could by just being themselves. Just... wasted potential.
Duft Pard I agreed with you until you mentioned how men could succeed anything back then just by being men. Which isn't true. Did you know: In ancient Greece, men who raped other men were shown to be the most masculine/dominant.
I get what you mean. What I really had in mind was that example that only dudes with lands and stuff were able to vote, like in Georgian times. It doesn't have anything to do with Greece (I think?) but it's my primary example when it comes to female representation or... the lack of it :) What really matters is that I'm playing Alexios on a first run and Kassandra on a second, maybe... or just go back to Liberation all over again
I've just loved your recent videos. You're calm and polite, whilst not shying away from saying precisely what you think. And I have to say I agree wholeheartedly; minorities and people of lower statuses are often the best characters to depict history and the Assassin's Creed, but they're not minorities if they're not treated as such in the story. Good stories are about the struggles we go through in life, and if the only struggle in Odyssey is fighting bad guys, well, then it's a rather boring and unrelatable one.
As my boyfriend placed it, "No, you're not making a documentary, but you are talking about something that has happened, and will happen again by cycle. Intentional or no, you are sharing a real story within human history. You don't get a stance if all you say is, "I'm a writer, so I'm free of charges." That's an excuse and disregarding history is a man's greatest transgression, even its accidental."
Social agendas should be kept out of story telling, including games. But even if you are supporting this agenda, ignoring sexism in history is contradictory to all claims of feminism, in which case it undermines itself. I'm honestly quite surprised this video isn't the opposite (e.g. The game is full of men spouting sexist comments, actions and jokes 24/7 to exaggerate sexism in the past) You presented the issue very well in all its other aspects, including how playing a character that is oppressed could be compelling, and absolutely breathe more life into the era the game is trying to present. But unfortunately I think it's too late for Ubisoft to back out of this, even if they wanted to.
TDCANDHP if social agendas were kept out of games then we'd all be playing pinball. Social relates to the interaction of human society as a whole. Any game with humans or even anthropomorphic beings interacting in any way is therefore subject to social agenda.
Mórrigana O'Dwyer that is true. But what I am coming from is that the standpoints of a character or a universe needs to make sense in the setting and buildup untill that moment. I am getting a bit sick of characters acting very differently or in a way that clearly doesn’t suit them in order to push an idea that is obviously not related to the story. A character can be whatever the author wants it to be if he gives it the proper setup. But throwing good story telling out the window to push a certain idea that doesn’t make sense in the context of the story is a big let down for me. And I see it too often recently. In this case the behavior of side characters (the universe) doesn’t fit the setting.
why are people thinking the AC Odyssey story is crap ? Because it's not centered around feminism ? Sexism ? Or can we just enjoy a story that is about family ?
Well said. :) I thought your decision to put Edward and Adewale together on a menu hit the nail right on its head. Wouldn’t it have been mind blowing to see something like that offered in a video game! It’s a shame that isn’t the case with Odyssey.
You make a good point - which is that Assassin's Creed has dealt with racism and sexism before, including Aveline du Grandpre having to deal with both. And throughout history women have fought and been extremely deadly - they can always write a game around such a character.
I would just like to point out that in origins they where screaming about how historically accurate their game was but now they are "just making a video game"
Perfect video essay. I totally agree with everything you've said, exactly my thoughts. I think the reason why they decided to do Kassandra's story the same as Alexios is less because of what Melissa MacCoubrey said, and more because of really lazy writing: they wanted to put both male and female characters to loos "inclusive”, but they don't actually care about accurately portraying sexism. If only they would've written different stories for the different characters, it would have been amazing: like having two games in one. But, on the contrary, we get these two impersonal protagonists who are exactly the same but with a different "skin". As you said, even if being a spartan mercenary was almost impossible for a woman, it was definitely impossible to be treated the same way as a man, as if that was just normal. Accurately portraying Kassandra's story would have given the chance to make a more complex and interesting character and story. I can't believe the same person who wrote this videogame literally said, "We don't need historical accuracy, it's just a videogame." Of course, not everything needs to be historically accurate since it's made for entertaining (same as tv shows or movies), but it should be good quality entertainment, as some previous ac games have been! I guess ac it's not what it was anymore and has completely changed their target costumers and so people who actually care about the game quality are tossed aside, and instead they look for gamers who wants to play a fun game and that's it. Sorry for my long comment!
And not just that "...not everything needs to be historically accurate since it's made for entertaining, but it needs to be quality entertainment...", but the entire AC series is popular because it's based on real history. So historical accuracy should be big priority. But I agree with everything else you said. :)
true, and that is what I used to love about this franchise. Anyways, it’s impossible to make everything 100% historically accurate, none of the previous games were, but one thing is to take some liberties, and another is to change the essence of the historical period completely and portray it as some kind of “utopian Ancient Greek fantasy” that is what this game looks like to me...
You totally right. This was one of my major issues with Syndicate too. The whole reason why we search history is this: We can learn and understand our mistakes (and almost everything) through the past. However I really looking forward to play this game. I'm glad they include dialog options. All story and side misson could be much more interesting.
@ Yeah. Should had been. But the sexism is integral part of our history and sadly our present too. If this type of games addres this issue and makes good points against sexism (for example: player can punish sexist characters) that would be really usefull (and entertaining too).
@ "Those Who Do Not Learn History Are Doomed To Repeat It." - George Santayana Showcasing a bad part of history and telling the players that it was bad is best way we can fix the mistake we made in the past.
@ I just explained how it makes a difference in my last comment! You show it > tell people it's bad > they learn it's bad. Simple. And it's essential for a franchise that takes pride in it's historical accuracy. And if you don't want to see it again, that's fine! Just don't play the game. Nobody is forcing you to. But don't ruin human history (a very precious thing) just because you don't like it.
Another aspect I couldn't get my head around was that instead of it being a lineal historical event within game lore, you the player are suddenly allowed to choose how the story progresses. So, not even continuity matters in this series anymore and is basically a pick-your-own-adventure title with an AC heading.
And this is why I chose to play Alexios. Though Kassandra VA does a better job, the immersion factor seemed it wouldn't be there for me. I love the stories of ancient greece, and the history; and running around as a female mercenary and those times would have gotten laughs. I love what Ubisoft is doing with the assassin's creed games, but I wish they would stick to being a bit more historically accurate to add conflict. Companies these days stir away from conflict, like racism or sexism, because society is too sensitive and hate talking about differences. Conflict helps drive stories. And if there were a bit of conflict in assassin's creed because of Kass gender it would have made her story a lot more interesting. Instead she is just Alexios, with a female appearance.
The reason for their choice is actually quite simple. They want to appeal to the female audience, but they don't want to spend money in order to change the game to have it make sense. It's always about money
Agree with you wholeheartedly. They could have handled the whole thing a lot better. Unfortunately Far Cry 5 suffered from the same problem. I hope Ubisoft comes to realise that they need to handle their protagonists better. Also I feel this whole 'choice' aspect is diluting the characters. Going through the gameplay videos, neither Alexios nor Kassandra sound as compelling as any of the previous protagonists. Those guys all had something they believed in, something they stood for. They had their defined flaws which sometimes cost them dearly. With Odyssey it feels so wobbly because nothing is set in stone.
I came here ready to be annoyed, but hell, you and your argument are absolutely right. How much richer, and more powerful would Kassandra's story have been had she not only had to overcome the obstacles of her enemies in the game but also the obstacle of everyone doubting that she could because of her sex? I think it would have made for a more enjoyable experience for everyone. However, I think Ubisoft not doing so was purely an economical decision masked with whatever the excuse was given about "equality". They would have had to do a completely different script for everything had they followed through on making Kassandra's experience different. Gosh, I would have loved it though.
Thank you for this video. I didn't like what I heard about how Ubisoft decided to handle Kassandra's experience but I have been struggling to define *why* exactly; your summary matches my own opinion almost perfectly and it helps to be able to put it into words.
What? "Not a historical documentary"...??? That was one of the appealing things of this game to me!The exposure of history! Accuracy! What bullshit! Come ON Ubisoft!
I am so glad someone as high profile as you is saying all this stuff. Everything is a valid point. I really can't see how old fans of the series are fine with the new direction in storytelling/gameplay mechanics. A lot of the stuff is seemingly going the way of retcon and the Animus is now an excuse for random stuff like invisibility/controlling arrows mid flight/teleporting with a spear.
I've been a fan ever since the Ezio Trilogy. And this is the first time I am not interested in an upcoming AC game. But I do want to know what happens in the modern day storyline. But not gonna buy the game just for that.
Johan Joseph I am also uninterested, but following closely, as always. Modern Day is not what it used to be. Ubisoft think the majority dislike the Modern Day, hence why it was removed. But whose fault is that? It's Ubisofts. If they want us to care about Modern Day then put effort into it. It's been bought back for seemingly no reason? I mean a question I still have from 2012 is where the fuck is Juno? Or more specifically what MASSIVE threat is she supposed to be posing? I don't even think having Layla in AC Origins was a good thing, you could have removed her story and it would not detract from the game. THAT is where the problem lies with Modern Day now. If it can be removed whilst having no impact on the story, story being a combination of MD and the Historical parts, then it has frankly been written poorly. The Desmond Saga was fantastic for AC as it showed consequence and connections between history and the present day. We aren't getting that anymore. "We bought back Modern Day" is nothing but empty hype to get those of us who loved it back in the day to think "hmm, will it be good?" only to buy the game and be disappointed by the lack of effort put into it.
@@ArunSG1910 Sorry to disappoint you. Don't read further if your don't like spoilers. They killed off Juno in the comics. In the FUCKKKKKING comics. On another point I think we'll be getting a Bayek sequel after this game and this game is just a cash grab for the UbiCunts.
@@ArunSG1910 I'm really not sure of the reason. Just check it out on RUclips. But knowing Ubisoft I'm pretty sure you will be left dissatisfied with the death.
You are completely right. Kassandras story would be so much better if those little things would be in the game. It would make such a big impact on the way you would see her story.
No wonder they changed the Animus so that it can support their choice based decisions, it's not about the actual characters anymore but it's about splitting things in fear of "inequality", despite the fact that people will always play for what is chosen for them whether male or female, if they made a female protagonist in Odyssey without an option for the opposite gender people will still buy it because it still a part of Assassins Creed game.
Wow. I am so glad I happened upon your channel today. That was an amazing video. It is sad that this Ubisoft team chose not to deal with this subject. You are correct in stating that it could've been easily handled. Origins did it with Bayek. How many Romans said disparaging remarks to him? Could have been the same with Kassandra. And she could beat the crap out of them as Bayek did. Bad move to just ignore it. Anyway, I subbed and can't wait to see your other videos.
Origins completely sanitized Egypt though. You never saw their racism, their sexism, or things like human sacrifice inherent in their religion. You only saw enemy worshippers of Set engaging in it, while others were treated as humane and modern. Not so. Not at all.
It’s actually sad because in origins they regularly discuss racism and hierarchy. You’ve got greeks living in Egypt and slavery and the whole bit. Hell cleopatra is a character in that game dedicated to making a better society for her people because of Greek oppression in Egypt. Yet we just figured we’d ignore the woman protagonist for equality. That one really hurts.
I think it's important to address historical struggles of racism and women. Sexuality too, at least since Christianity came into play, as it was acceptable in Ancient Greece for same sex relationships to be a thing, so it makes sense to be present in this game. In the Syndicate podcast you did, they spoke about how they didn't want women to be treated hugely different, and to make Victorian London a less horrible experience to be in. This was when they were talking about Ned's gender, and why it's never brought up, because it didn't need to be. In Detroit Become Human however, as popular as the game is (and amazing in my opinion), it's been said to be very controversial, because of racist elements. I for one never saw it, maybe because it was impossible for me to (being white), but it upset some people. The way I saw it, androids, black or white, were treated the same... because people saw them as just robots. They didn't see colour, because androids weren't considered even people, which is why it got a bit confusing me on where the controversy comes from. Don't get me wrong, the game has it's fucked up moments and it's very real, but I didn't feel like it was in the wrong.
@@coreymckee4844 True, if not for them pushing this ideology the last couple entries. But have you seen Ubi's internal "diversity" instruction videos? Ideologues run the company now, and they're pushing propaganda in order to influence players.
Book fans, have you ever felt pissed off by a film that didn’t remain faithful to the book it’s adapting? That’s what us history buffs feel like when the line “we’re making a game/movie/show not a historical documentary” is used as an excuse to ignore historical authenticity.
I think while she may say that the reason is to provide a game that is equal, it's really just an excuse given their development time. I mean, they have to crank these games out, and Odyssey being an RPG, has a lot of story branches. It was a huge deal for the story department and they were probably super busy. Making one script that plays as a middle ground and applicable to both would be the most convenient time-wise as they wouldn't essentially be writing two games worth of dialouge. I do think it would've been nice if they made it more female oriented, and cut out Alexios, but that would mean cutting out Alexios- which in an RPG, is hard, because the authentic rpg experience they were going for meant having more control over who you are. It's the RPG agenda vs the great story telling agenda, and because they're already adding all the story branches, adding another character would be minimal work and make it appear as that much more of a true RPG. I think they actually did have a bit of a bias when writing the dialouge, as I initially chose Alexios- but had to restart when I heard his lines. Not only was his voice acting difficult to understand and arguably lousy, but WHAT he said was being phrased in a more feminine fashion. It's hard to explain but the sentence structure and the mannarisms just did not fit this ripped ultra masculine guy, it wasn't believable at all. Switching to Kassandra completely remedied this issue and everything sounds nicer. Perhaps this was done as the writers may have consisted of more females or simply because Kassandra is the canonical hero. Either way, I don't think equality is the real reason behind this, but rather it would be too much work to have separate experiences for each character in an already dialouge vast game.
This is a great post, and I agree that the additional work needed (both time and complexity-wise) was also probably a big factor in their decision to do things the way they did.
What's interesting is even in AC4 Black Flag, the story involved Mary Read who was the woman posing as a male pirate just to be more respected in the pirate community. They didn't shy from that historical accuracy. I think in odyssey it came down to the development team focusing on the rpg elements and choice. It would have also been inefficient or too time consuming to write a significantly different experience for Kassandra.
No matter how much "historical sexism" you try to implement to be closer to historic accuracy, it is impossible to do this in a game with total historical accuracy without completely sacrificing the female character itself. It would be absolutely impossible to have Kassandra as a playable option if it was. In Athens, a woman would not leave the house to an extent that was even considered extreme in Ancient Rome. Reading just the first few pages of Herodotus' "The Histories" gives a story of women being kidnapped, and explained away as not a large issue to get upset about since they were not accompanied by men, and thus must have wanted to be stolen away by the men. If you look at Olympias and Cynnane, respectively the mother and sister of Alexander (who was Macedonian and not even considered "Greek", and in a different time period), yes, they were recorded to have fought, but they were doing this in the interest of protecting the throne in his absence and also in a place of privilege as royalty. Another example could be the women of Tegea who fought off invaders in a war and were granted the favor of Ares - but even this is something shrouded in religious overtones and myth. In so much of the Ancient Greek world, women were regarded as lesser in nearly every way, were considered incomplete men, people would write directly about women as being poison to men and a man's virtue, that the best thing women could say was nothing at all, that they had innate evils within them that their myths confirmed (Pandora's Box), and so on. In this context where Kassandra is from Sparta, of course there was a cultural difference of even women being allowed to compete in games, and having more freedoms when being a free Spartan women under the context of being the caretakers of house, city and state when men were at war. But even here, when a Spartan woman leaves Sparta, she is no longer enclosed in that culture. So if they were to make the game histoically accurate, HOW accurate would they have to make it? I do agree with the point brought up where initial distrust of Kassandra's ability might be something interesting to explore when given quests and so on. But there is truly no way to make everyone happy since the degree to which historical sexism is relative to what the player is ccomfortable with until it truly isn't fun (which would be the level where it is actually accurate). Having it not be an element whatsoever surely has upset people, but there is no pleasing everybody in this due to how there is no possible to make it completely accurate in the first place. Best simply allow the player to enjoy the game for what it is - a fictional /fantasy/ within a historical backdrop - which is what their intent seemed to be. With all this said, thumbs up to the video still it was indeed well thought out and this is something that is truly dependant on what a single individual wants to experience and is looking for in a game. And I respect that.
These are good points, and I agree that 100% historical accuracy would impede on fun too much. I don't know what the exact balance is (and as you mention, it's subjective anyway), I just know that for me it's somewhere between "100% historical accuracy" and "Female and male protagonists are treated exactly the same".
Alexander was considered Greek. His ancestor, Alexander I(He was Alexander III) literally competed in the Olympic Games. Athenians literally called everyone "barbarians", even Greeks they considered to be inferior to them, like Macedonians and Epirotans.
Why doesn't Ubisoft just make a poll before they make the next game. Would you guys prefer us to be more historically accurate, or equal? Maybe that would open their eyes..
Damn it Looms.. what a great essay.. It sucks that we get to choose between Alexios and Kassandra in this game, but I'm gonna choose Kassandra for sure and just forget Alexios ever exists.. Also, the ending of this video with "In this World or the One Below" really put me to goosebumps as I saw Kassandra.. Well done Brother!
Yeah I agree too but I want to point that women weren't like that in Ancient Greece. There were exceptions of women with reputation and with skills. In the Olympics there was a woman posing as a man and believe it or not, prostitutes in Ancient Greece were educated and skillful citizens in Athens. They were almost the last resort when it came to War. In Sparta there were exceptions of women that were trained almost at the same manner as men did. So it isn't a sexist world we are seeing here athough it surely is one that had no Assassins. I think the real problem with Odyssey is that it has no identity in terms of lore and story. It falls flat cuz it's something completely different than what the title suggests. There are no Assassins here and no Creed. This is just a story away from what Assassin's Creed is.
Sorry if I'm misreading this....and I probably am...but are you saying 5th cent Greece was not a society that basically marginalised women....bar the very small exception in sparta? ..and prostitutes being well versed in order to increase their value....as...well courtesans ?...I think I may be misreading this....but a female character walking around outside the home or brothel ....dealing with other males as an equal was not in any way common. Nearly more fantastical then that whole animus crap that I can't stand.... (I know loads of people like that ....just my opinion) ..but hey....it's only a game...and if it allows a young girl to feel more included in a gaming experience I'm all for it ....they could have handled it better though.
@@daithimac5785 as for what you say at the end of the comment I agree. Yes I am saying it as you do. But what I try to point on my previews comment is that sexism is not a thing in ancient Greece. Women and men had different roles and no one was oppressed. Sure there were no women meetings with men and there were no women actually fighting in wars. But there were educated women and there were women trained to fight. Sexism wasn't a thing as it was and is in other cultures. That's what I am saying. Not that women were treated the same. But nor did men. The roles were just different. Evenly good and bad.
I think you would have to play the game to actually know if the story fits into the AC lore. Though a lot of things related to the brotherhood and the templars did not turn out to be how I imagined, you will get in touch with an Isu whose ideologies don't fall in line with the Jupiter Minerva Juno trinity, predecessors of the Templar Order, and Darius, the first "assassin" who used the hidden blade.
Mount and blade warband did this well. A female made the game harder because characters treated you dofferently and it felt boss when you wrecked them.
This is the reason I chose to play as Alexios and not Kassandra - if I chose Kassandra I would spend the entire time thinking "but that would never happen!" and it would ruin the game for me.
And now time for the truth. Making a game like that with optional female main character would be very expensive. characters would fight in a different way, entire style of the game would be different, quests would be different. Those were times when woman and a man lived in two different worlds. And this shit costs money so lets make one female model voice over this shit and call it quits. And if people call us lazy we will just call them sexist
There was a bit of sexism in Horizon Zero Dawn and I found it a really immersive experience. I also thought it would be a good learning experience for male gamers.
I just found this channel and feel those essays are very well made and bring forth arguments that are well thought out and articulated. I would suggest you make a video about the meta story of the future, or present day, storyline that has gone down the drain after AC3. Rersonally, the present day narrative was what drew me in and kept me immersed ever since AC1 and it is a vital part of the world of AC. For many people apparently the AC games have always been nice sandbox worlds where you get to run around historical settings. For me though, and i have a feeling you would agree, the reason why the historical settings are so enticing is exactly because they are supposed to be actual memories, real portrayal of history from a lore standpoint. Following the story in the games in that way makes them all the more immersive and significant. Every youtuber i've heard always rants about the Desmond parts for example, whereas i always looked forward to the next one, because that was when the very intriguing story would actually progress. Anyway, would love to hear your take on this. Keep up the good work
Ironically, AC1's commercial success was also the series' downfall. It sold TOO well. It didn't hit that sweet spot where it wouldn't get cancelled but also wouldn't be turned into a yearly money-making machine. Wish AC remained a trilogy and AC2&3 were handled like the Witcher sequels. AC2 being a smaller but an ambitious improvement and AC3 being an all-out project. AC2 could've featured only one city but in both the past and the present. I'd say Venice would fit nicely. It's not all that different in the present. Imagine half of the game with Desmond completing missions in modern Venice. Plus you going back to Abstergo at the end and Vidic getting much more screentime.
I bet all they say about it is just an excuse for the real reason: it would have been too much work to write for two truly different protagonists. Which of course they could have easily avoided, were they not so fixated on the stupid choice thing and had the balls to market a game with a woman on the cover.
"It would’ve been terrible if we made a game where people were constantly berating you for being different". I guess Ubi staff has never heard about Morrowind.
Great video Loomer! AC is having some really big issues with lore and struggling to find a balance point when the subject is inclusivity. Sad to see such a beloved franchise in this situation.
It's really nice to see Loomer addressing Ubisoft's AC problems like this. From what I've seen in some other media, if a hardcore fan of a particular movie, book, game or TV series speak out against it, the company then realises that it's majorly fucked up, and tries to fix it's mistakes. Of course this is a rare scenario but I really feel it's a step in the right direction. I hope there are more videos i this series planned and I support you wholeheartedly for the fact that you stuck around for the hardcore fans of this series for so long when so many other people gave up on it a long time ago!
“You can make someone feel bad about making a certain choice” Yea. I haven’t watched past that point but god damn. Are we going to baby people? You should want to have your players be affected in both positive and negative ways to make for a compelling story. If you just baby them and make every choice they make feel like a good one then what’s the point of making a decision in a game?
Great video as always, I can't be happier that there are still influential members of the community that don't want to put up with Ubisoft's shit anymore. For some reason Quebec took everything core to the franchise and flipped it on its head. The branching narrative, the historical inaccuracies and all these other things that they'll probably blame Layla's Animus for (if they haven't already) is utterly pointless. Considering how distant the years Odyssey takes place in and all these hip RPG elements they put in on top of the ones they alreadt had in Origins, with the only difference being that the ones there actually made sense for AC, what it seems like they're doing is testing new grounds. Though if they have the balls to put out an Assassin's Creed title with all those new things in it, they could have easily made it a new IP. Of course they'd earn less, but if the story and gameplay were actually good for a standalone experience and not held back by the burden of being an AC story, it could've been a great game. And it would most definitely not cost their flagship franchise to lose it identity. They clearly do not care about Assassin's Creed anymore. And by "them" I mean the people in charge of the whole franchise, because clearly the Montréal 3 team put a lot of love into Origins so that it is the masterpiece that it it. As for Odyssey, from what I've seen the creative team all just care to put in what matters to them the most in terms of games, be it gender equality, gameplay over narrative or a particular part of lore that is not one of the ones that the franchise really needs exploring at the state that it is now, and just dumped it in. I don't think we as a community should be supporting this but what voice do I have. Keep it up dude, I love your videos
I really expected some sexist video, but I agree with everything you said. you make a convincing argument and state it in a calm manner unlike many youtubers I get reccomended to me.
It seems that they’re not trying to reconstruct a historical Ancient Greece, but a mythological Ancient Greece. You’re meant to feel like you are in a myth, not in real history that actually happened.
I have the same problem with Fallout. That game series takes place in a world where the US didn’t advance culturally beyond the 1950s, a time defined by sexism and racism, and not only that, but it also takes place after the collapse of that civilization. But, despite this, there is almost no trace of this characteristics in that world beyond some ads that display the gender roles of the time. There are women, african americans, and Latinos dispersed throughout ranks in various organizations, even those that are supposed to mimic white supremacists, all this, without mention for the most part, and even more egregiously, in a world obliterated by a war between the US and China, Asians for the most part, are treated equally as if nothing had happened at all, unless it’s in a specific quest (That DLC in F3, and the Chinese ghoul in F4). These are not only games that are based around social interactions, but also, employ satire and criticize capitalism, consumerism and other social ills of the time. I do not know why this is the way it is, but, I have a theory about it. Assassins Creed, Battlefield and a bunch of other games, constantly try to pander with how inclusive they are, but, as you said in the video, they also like to brag about how “accurate” their guns and locations are, they are having their cake and eating it too. They want to have it both ways: pretend they are making something important, but also, trying to appeal to everyone. You can see this also in gameplay, that’s why a lot of this games are filled to the brim with crap that has nothing to do with the core gamplay and is trendy at the moment. If you wanna have a game that actually says something and is challenging, do that, even if it’s risky. If you don’t, then don’t pretend that you are doing something grandiose thats socially relevant, you can just be escapist fantasy, that’s perfectly fine. But if you don’t have the balls to admit that you wanna be one or the other, you just muddy the water and, in the long run, don’t allow the medium to grow or advance.
You are making very valid points here looms. I do agree with you on most of it. I do think that it should be different between male and female. Personally, it doesnt always have to be people yelling at the female protagonist but it should include the hardships and being able to prove themselves fo others and themselves that they can handle any task thrown ag them. With difficulty and trials along the way. Historical perspective with a secret war between Templars and Assassins is what the Assassin's Creed franchise is about. That is what we were promised when these series were started. Modern society needs to figure out how the world worked back then and that includes discrimination by your race and gender, how you looked or sounded like, and many other factors. This was the world back hundreds of years ago. And because it may "offend" or "anger" players or writers, should be a reason to play the character and prove to those in the in-game world that change should and will come and that a woman can do it just as well as a man. THAT is how it should be made a played. Nowadays. We are focusing too much on if it offends someone. Fuck it. The world needs to gather this information and see it for themselves and grasp an understanding that this is how humans lived back in the day. How animals were treated back in the day. Offending someone nowadays is just unavoidable. With the several "genders" that are going around and identifying as something else or not is just unavoidable. (Which I'm not hating on just stating. Scientifically only w genders. Not hating just stating) Looking at someone the wrong way could cause a fight or cause someone to be offended. It's life. So incorporating the side of a woman's POV in a "historically accurate game" should be a form or inspiration or guidance for the future for younger and older audiences playing this game. So I agree with you looms. And btw, those options, that last one you put as an example cracked me up bad lol. Lily was on the mic when I busted out laughing "just fuck them up". XD byw I'd love to hear your response to my comment btw looms.
So... Ubisoft takes a lot of inspiration from the success of The Witcher 3 for their latest games and still think that having a protagonist who is viewed as a lesser human being by society is a bad idea that gamers wouldn't enjoy? Something doesn't add up here...
Why do people always think about sexism when you can choose between man and woman. Here is an example: In Fallout New Vegas you can choose to sleep with Benny (a guy who shot you) and then kill him while sleeping. This is an option only for female player characters. Having those option does not always mean sexism it can can be another way to play the game and increase replayability.
This is exactly how i feel about it. You can't have read the Odyssey, or know anything about ancient Greek culture, and think there's a chance in hell that a women would've been treated the same as a man or even close to the same. They would've needed to prove themselves for a long time before people had a chance at seeing a women and trusting her to solve their problems. It wouldn't have to be a "fuck you woman i wont talk to you or ever respect you" but seriously this is a gigantic flaw in their game.
Ya know as a sound designer I really appreciated how the AC movie, when they went back to Spain they kept the Spanish language and not some English accent. Found it to be a really great side story to the franchise. I would not mind for the games to pick up Fastbender’s Modern day assassin brotherhood and apply it.
As a woman and a Greek I am happy to see a female protagonist in a story (because I usually play female characters when I can, it makes me feel more immersed). So I will play with Kassandra. It is true that Spartan women had military training and, theoritically, it wouldn't be impossible for one to be a great warrior. There are a lot of things about ancient Greece we will never know but they have been erased by European male historians and Christians. That being said, women would possibly be treated differently in other parts of Greece because the societies were built differently there. An ancient Athenian might consider it impossible for a woman to be a warrior in the first place because that role was taken by men. However, from what I hear, Ubisoft didn't do justice for Kassandra, nor for the series. Sexism would be even more intense back then and, as a woman, Kassandra should have encountered situations of bigotry - and prove herself above them. But her storyline and interractions are exactly the same with Alexios, making her just a skin for his character (as the video said). I don't believe Ubisoft did that because they were sexist. That shows lazy writing and rushing to release and it makes the story feel less realistic. I wouldn't have a problem if the series was fantasy, but here we are talking about a series that has historical accuracy as its selling point and pride. EDIT: They also put some monsters in it, so they kinda made it fantasy. That's another whole conversation.
The irony here is that s lot of the people lauding this move seem to be the same ones who complain when people "whitewash" movies. Aside from immersion, isn't it a disservice to ignore the sexism and racism that existed in the past? To pretend it never existed so you can feel comfortable? I mean, they wrote Connor poorly, but at least they didn't shy away from the darker aspects of history. With proper writing, and some effort, they could make a female character work. But NOT as an interchangeable character model with a male. Where they'll just write what they would for a man in this time, change a few pronouns, and call it a day. It's just a fucking lazy attempt to appeal to a tiny demographic, many of which aren't that into games. I wouldn't be surprised if women who see past this nonsense were annoyed or pissed off.
This is exactly why after the cutscene where they show Nikolaus training Kassandra in combat I immediately started all over and changed to Alexios. I’m a guy and was interested in playing as a female protagonist for the first time, guess I’ll have to wait.
I TOTALLY AGREE! I hope Ubisoft put differencies between Alexioand Kassandra. Maybe, they did it. I don't have the game yet. But what you said is rly true. I think it's all about PC, unfortunately. People trying to avoid racism and sexicm end up with racist and sexist stuff. I think I am going to play Alexio
I play RPG's as an evil non-human. I live for the hatred and fear of those insignificant citizens who I could crush for fun. I would have loved it if playing as a woman resulting in plenty of excuses to make a point and show them what an ass kicking is like.
I hope you're not saying this game should be "historic accuracy" because not all games somewhat connecting our history is meant to be connected to it at all times. Some games just want to create fiction in "historic times" and I would rather have that for Assassin's Creed Odyssey.
![Assassin's Creed Odyssey: Meet the Actors Behind Alexios and Kassandra | Ubisoft [NA]](/img/1.gif)
"It would've been terrible if we made a game where people constantly berating you for being different..."
Geralt of Rivia: The story of my life...
Exactly! Right when I saw that bit in the interview that was the first thing I thought of. Did this ignoramus even play the game her company decided to rip off in Origins and Odyssey?
Arthur Morgan, Kratos, Ghost of Tsushima: SAME
You forgot leon s kennedy@@SirToaster9330
Nah bro your dumbs
Tell it, Looms. Ubisoft used to get this right. Hell, they even used racism and sexism as a fairly interesting mechanic in Liberation. AC3 didn't shy away from the racism going on at the time.
It wasn't racism. It was considered as normal back then
and so is degrading women back then, and yet ubisoft choose to ignore this in odyssey, is it not?
@@NichtNameee Then why did people speak out against it back then? If it was normal?
@@NichtNameee Racism:prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior. It may have been more socially acceptable but it was still racism
Saying this as a woman, I think it's frankly a cop out for Ubi to do this because of "equality." And I think it's a way to excuse bad storytelling. Certainly it would take more effort to retell a story, accurately, from a woman's perspective living in Ancient Greece, but they chose to basically ignore this and give them roughly the same storyline. They made the effort to at least be somewhat historically accurate with Connor in AC3 and didn't shy away from racism - but then Unity came along and clearly from that game they didn't care much about historical accuracy anymore. It hasn't improved.
Ubi keeps on doing things such as inserting "representation" here and there without putting any though about how it would impact the person's life and storyline (like Jacob being bisexual), and I don't know why, for a pat on the back because they're being more inclusive? And frankly it's irritating, considering other games have been able to do this just fine and it only adds to how compelling the story is.
Minsooky I agree 100%!
Same.
Agreed. Making the game 100% accurate would make it difficult for Kassandra as outside of Sparta, 5th century woman were very much treated like property, but ignoring the inequality altogether does an injustice to the difficulties woman had to face through history.
Minsooky How was Jacob BI?.
@@bookonlegsbookonlegs8991 He just is. We never see anything of meaning as far as I'm aware
What's interesting is that Origins didn't shy away from racism or sexism. You saw how the Egyptians were mistreated and marginalized by the Greeks, which was an accurate indication of what Ptolemaic Egypt turned into. I mean Egyptian revolts against their Greek overlords are very well documented. On top of that, Aya often suffers mysoginistic assumptions and stereotypes by her Greek and Roman peers, Caesar even chastises Bayek about letting her do a "man's job". Which I enjoyed because it showcases how patriarchal Greco-Roman society was. Overall, when you see powerful women in Origins, they are usually powerful nobility or clergy, like Cleopatra, or the Wife of Amun in Curse of the Pharoahs or the wives of powerful officials. It still takes liberties no doubt, like the Nomarch of Faiyum but overall, acknowledges that Ancient Egypt was not an era of equality.
But yes, to tell history, you need all of the history. The shitty parts of it as well.
Spot on
Yes its "historical" game after all. Why they put real life politics/agendas in games man? It sucks
which is funnier cause Ubisoft hates women
Lol stronk women
Is power only about wealth, political influence and phisical strength? Is it wjat western women want? Wealth and influence, oh and more priviledges obviously hiding it behind the terms like equality
As a gender women have their own power and men have their own
Stop trying to fight against the nature retards
Hello, I am Ubisoft - we chose to throw historical immersion out the window so everyone can feel 'equal'.
Bogdan 96 AC has been built upon historical circumstances, conditions and events. It is part of what makes it what it has always been. The stories are woven with the unfair situations throughout time in different societies. So if history is sexist, that itself should be tackled within the story.
That was thrown out long ago.
Ew, seriously Fizhy? I thought you weren't boring like this.
You what now?
The whole point of the video was that women are boring in video games unless they are portrayed as underdogs who have to prove themselves against sexism. I'm not a subscriber, but I have watched a lot of your videos and I had thought you had more complex opinions than that. I guess not.
I do agree Ubisoft is lazy in their storytelling and it would be great to have different interactions, but I don't understand this obsession with wanting women to be underdogs every single time. Can they never be anything else? It's also just stupid because Kassandra is the cannon character in this game, not Alexios with his subpar voice actor. By this logic, people should be questioning why Alexios doesn't behave and interact with people differently than Kassandra and not the other way around.
Female fan here. AC shouldn’t be afraid to show how the different genders were treated back then. Sure, creative license, but it wouldn’t be exactly historical... One of the charms of AC is its almost simulation-like depictions of history. Take Aveline for example. She was a great character despite all the challenges she had to face as both a person of color and a woman, and all that is integrated into her story to mold her character.
Kassandra’s character completely disregards her setting, unlike Aveline, and she is treated exactly how others would Alexios. Everyone knows that this is a major inaccuracy, and would interrupt immersion especially for female fans.
I Agree with you
Aveline was a great character, who we got to see in multiple games, precisely because they didn't shy away from the realities of the setting, but rather found an interesting story in it to tell with her. Great post.
We'll never get another Aveline (that quality) so long as they stick to this gender interchangeability mindset. It's extremely limiting and shallow.
@Drinker_Of_Milk Exactly. That is the real reason
I'm 10 hours in at the moment (Playing as Alexios) And two major historical inaccuracies that really stood out to me was first Leonidas throwing his shield at an enemy right away, a Spartan wouldn't have done that at all. And then the previolounce of female mercenaries. Sure there was probably a few back in the day in Greece. It's not out of the question since we know the Scythians had female warriors and were neighbors of the Greek world (They might be where we get the myth of the Amazonian warriors some historians think) But not nearly the amount that Odyssey is showing.
@Arusiek90 historicly i think leonidas was almost 70
>the assassins creed series is well known for historical accuracy
>”we are not creating a historical documentary”
>?????
Underrated comment
I totally agree. As a Greek guy, I'll enjoy playing as Alexios, but as far as story goes, I'd rather play the more underdog story of Kassandra if they made the game as you wish they did.
Seeing Kassandra rise through the top despite everyone's sexist views on her during that time period would feel so damn satisfying, to be honest. It would be a great underdog story.
I’m unsure if I want this game to be honest, which is odd because I own pretty much *ever* other AC game and *every* bit of addon content for them. The only one I don’t have is Liberation. But I might not get this one either.
All I really see is a shallow Witcher 3 wanna-be and not an Assassin’s Creed game. I legit got confused when I saw my friend playing as Alexios in the beginning because of the basically copy-pasted dialogue system. Plus... Alexios just really kinda looks like a more normal Geralt. He’s even got a similar scar on his arm to one Geralt has.
TheJakson212 put it on insane difficulty and you’ll have to sneak just like other AC games. That’s what I did for Origins
TheJakson212 It’s watered down Witcher 3 with a weirdly Morrowind like quest system.
You're right. If they wrote the story this way then Kasandra might have ended up as the more popular character actually
This precisely puts my thoughts on the subject into words. Assassin's Creed should not shy away from the worse aspects of history; it is a historical fiction series with scifi elements, not a fantasy. Commitment to accuracy is a vital component in suspending people's disbelief about the more out-there elements of the lore, and experiencing the realities of the time is vital to grounding the character within the setting they inhabit. In Ancient Greece especially, ignoring sexism is a BIG inaccuracy. If they omit it entirely, a massive element of Athenian history will be missing; you can't talk about Aspasia without acknowledging the sexism that shaped attitudes toward her, you can't talk about Athenian democracy without acknowledging how it didn't include women, and you can't fully contrast Sparta and Athens without acknowledging their different gender relations.
kagsgirl Alright then, if you don't like seeing racism represented in games, you can always sit out games set in periods of pronounced racial tension in favor of playing games with settings that actually appeal to you... Like, a game being historically accurate doesn't necessitate representing racism. A game set in 14th century Mali, or 16th century Ethiopia, for example, would have plenty of black people, but nobody running around yelling the n-word. You could even put a black protagonist in parts of Ancient or Medieval Europe, and still avoid any familiar racism (not counting possible exotification), while being fully accurate. The fact that you don't like seeing racism in video games doesn't mean a video game set during, say, the US Civil War, should have a black protagonist whose race has no impact on them. If you have a problem with a setting, that doesn't mean the setting should be misrepresented to avoid making you uncomfortable, it means that you should avoid that specific setting, simple as that, and if historical accuracy makes things boring for you, maybe historical fiction just isn't your style.
*+kagsgirl "Video games are meant for fun and imagination."*
False, games are generally for entertainment but NOT all are made for imagination. As crazy as it can get, *AC* is still first & foremost rooted in historical fiction.
Historical fiction doesn't have the same creative freedom as pure fantasy, as it is by definition a genre built on immersing players in another time.
While gameplay was always essentially fundamentally a power/stealth fantasy, its core structure has always been historical representation.
That's its foundation. That's what helps it sell, that's what many keep buying different iterations of similar gameplay formulas for, immersion in the setting.
Without a healthy level of accuracy to its respective periods, *AC's* worlds would be little more than standard open-world playgrounds, "historical" only in aesthetic.
They may still look pretty but wouldn't make as many gamers feel as if they're exploring in another period. Like it or not, history sucks sometimes.
Not everything for any culture or ethnicity (Caucasians included) is positive. While changes are inevitable, that adversity for any relevant group shouldn't be omitted.
I sympathize with such games hitting home for discrimination you've experienced irl. But, being brutally honest, that's not Ubisoft's responsibility.
No game developer, however hard they try, can realistically accommodate every individual's sensitivities over anecdotal experience, nor should they.
To do so, especially in this series, would not only be gradually detrimental to what made *AC* engrossing to begin with but a disservice to historical progress.
Ignoring parts of history for our own comfort, pretending all were treated equally because "it's a game" disrespects the long road to reach that progress.
Portraying sexism in historical fiction does NOT inherently advocate, promote, glorify, or normalize it. It's only acknowledging the reality back then.
This in turn resonates with many fans, making the world building and character arc more compelling as the protagonist faces & overcomes it (i.e. quality storytelling).
By treating Kassandra no differently from a man in a setting when such behavior wasn't common, this consequently robs her of that potential development.
*Having faced prejudice myself, I find this actually more disrespectful to women of the period, especially the lead who now stands out for unintended reasons.*
@kagsgirl Why th do you get that feeling with your white colleagues at work in the first place though? Have you been addressed like that? Have you heard people talking racist crap behind your back? 90% or more of the time, they're not racist. It is extremely hazardous to people's livelihood to be called a racist, however, so some people might walk on eggshells a little bit, or a lot, especially if they think you think they might be racist. Because the result is they get fired, they get overlooked for positions, they get downsized. And then depending on the job, they might not be able to get work again. That's a whole lot more common, and when you're living paycheck to paycheck, a thin line to homeless like most people are, that's a major concern.
I am black. I certainly wouldn't mind seeing slave owners using the n-word to refer to their slaves in a setting like Black Flag. As you have correctly stated, Assassin's Creed is a historical fiction series first and foremost, and commitment to historical accuracy is often paramount in these cases.
And I really hope that Odyssey doesn't shy away from portraying the sexism and slavery that were commonplace during ancient Greece.
Good historical fiction works are the ones who don't shy away from showing the worst aspects of the era and the place the are portraying.
Portraying a certain period in history without showing the issues that affected it is detrimental to the suspension of disbelief. Wanting these issues to be shown doesn't mean that I (or everyone who agrees with me) condone things like racism, sexism or slavery.
Say it louder for the people in the back: AC SHOULD NOT SHY AWAY FROM THE WORST ASPECTS OF HISTORY
also why is 99% of ac odyssey promotional content featuring Alexios if Kassandra is the main canon character? lmao
Is she? Is she the canon character?
yep
Source?
@@Commander_Shepard. There is book on Kassandra which tells the canon story.
@@Commander_Shepard. And also a credible leak, leaked the plot of the game.
This is why I call shenaningans on the whole "Kassandra is the canonical protagonist" thing. Yeah, she might be just because you said so, but the game is clearly made with Alexios in mind, from the marketing to the dialog to the story, Kassandra is clearly a skin for Aleksios, while "She's the canonical protagonist" was just to appease the progressive crowd. And this is why I was against "Kassandra should be the only protagonist" thing - Ubisoft just doesn't have the balls to make it interesting, they would neuter it to oblivion while claiming that they don't want to promote sexism (depicting is not promoting, sweethearts, that bit with egyptian schools in Origins Historical Tour was horrid).
Master Oak Well, y'see... when they do have differences, even minute, they get accused of sexism. Like in Oblivion - male and female player characters actually have different starting stats (the same goes for different races). So the game got accused of racism and sexism.
As far as I'm concerned, Alexios is the canonical protagonist. I say this because, as far as I know, only boys and men were raised and trained to become Spartan warriors, and also this game was clearly made, as you have already said, with him in mind to be the "true" protagonist. Alexios has been used in all of the marketing for the game, including the TV spots and the launch trailer. I am finding it extremely difficult to take Kassandra seriously as a protagonist when all of her dialogue and interactions are written to be exactly the same as Alexios'. Kassandra's character could have been written to be more thoughtful and compassionate than, for example, Alexios' more reckless and impulsive nature to better portray their personalities and the differences in how each would respond to the same situation. If Kassandra were in fact the canonical protagonist, then some sexism would have been not only necessary in a supposedly "historically accurate" setting, but also welcome, as it would have given her an interesting struggle to overcome in the game's story.
What's the point of a male protagonist if it's just the same as the female.
I prefer playing as females.
Escapism.
She isn't so much a Spartan, she comes from Sparta but never a part of the elite warriors called Spartans. She is a mercenary and can be paid to fight for either side.
actually Alexios is a skin for Kassandra
@Smartassdroid what if history has been rewritten and Sparta was actually known for its women rather than its warriors?
I just remembered how amazing the Black flag's soundtrack was
I just remembered how amazing black flag was.
Amazing game
To be honest? As a POC I thought AC3’s racism was less harsh than it could’ve been. AC3 is my absolute favorite entry in the series but I’ll never get over how bizarre it was that Connor, a native, was allowed to attend the Continental Congresses and lead the Patriot army without anyone batting an eye. That’s why the prison segment and the clip you showed were some of my favorite parts of the game, because it was a raw and real depiction of racism.
That being said, this is why I’m really not interested in playing Odyssey BECAUSE they’re essentially pretending sexism doesn’t exist. As a woman, I would MUCH rather see Kassandra overcoming sexism rather than paint a fictional world where she’s treated the exact same as a man. The former would be a far more compelling story and more “progressive” (if that’s what they’re going for) than just erasing sexism altogether.
You’ve perfectly summed up my sentiments about Kassandra in this video. Your AC critiques are also in-depth but fair, and you don’t trash the series because it’s done something you disagree with. Thank you for the awesome videos :D
Master Oak “or POC too - if that’s what’s being used nowadays.” SAME. I honestly hate calling myself a “POC woman” because I’m not defined by my non-whiteness nor my gender, but apparently that’s all people care about nowadays.
I agree entirely, I was feeling it'd be so much better if Kassandra was shown being denied or not believed because she was a woman, then going out and proving those people wrong. And slowly but surely, that tale spreading.
Like *a random situation in my head* Being denied entry into the merc group because she's a woman. So she goes out and kills a bear/beast that was terrorizing the group and brings it back, proving that she is just as, if not more capable then the men in the company.
I felt the game missed a wonderful chance to show an area of history often shown poorly or completely false, with the Spartans and Greece. Instead (seeing the game released) we see Spartans flinging shields aside, fighting out of formation, female warriors openly accepted and treated as normal... and the ability to climb a statue's penis.
I just looked at that information, and went "You literally modeled nude statues that players can interact with and climb but you hated the idea of some people being mean to the female character?"
I've also read the romance is literally "Wanna have sex?" repeated until the person just gives up and says yes.
Portraying her like a sort of warrior is stupid and inaccurate of course, it was not the role of women in Sparta. But talking about our modern definiton of 'sexism' in the context of that era & place is also wrong. Just research about how ancient Sparta women lived and you'll know what I mean, they were not 'opressed'
Well didn't Achilles told him to pose as an Italian or a Spaniard to not be caught?
@Yuwan I thought about that too and that's definitely the most probable explanation. But still, he wore feathers & beads in his hair, and had beaded armbands which made him clearly appear native. And plus, in the prison sequence and the scene with his dad, he was called racial slurs left and right (in fact, he was called a half-breed in prison, which kinda contradicts the idea that he's able to pass as a non-native). In those scenes, why wasn't he also assumed to be Italian or Spaniard?
There was no more assassins creed when coray may and black flag writer left series
Agreed.
Umar Majeed Wrong.
@@AttakusZakus How? They've completely abandoned the series' core tenets.
Fuck Black Flag. Weakest game in the series, along with the first one and Unity
There was a falling out with Patrice Désilets and Ubisoft fired his ass. After acquiring the studio he sought employment in, they fired him again. AC was always Patrice and Corey’s baby. What this series has become under Aymar is an embarrassment.
And now that they've also mentioned that they probably won't go back to only having a single-protagonist in the upcoming games, we will probably never get a real female lead with her own story. Like you said; Kassandra is essentially just a skin. And every female protagonist from now on will probably be as well.
And i totally agree on how inconsistent Ubisoft has become (or always was, some might say) when it comes to the importance of historical accuracy. Its only important when its easy to implement and they can calmly brag about it afterwards.
But if it might cause challenges or limitations, (in reality it just takes a little extra thought put into it), then they just say fuck it. And we get the "doesn't matter, its just a video game" treatment.
Not only that if theyre gonna do that they can seriously bog down any character individuality. Itd be terrible of they went with 2 characters for each game.
@@whydidihaveto2180 Exactly. Everything has to be generic with their mindset. Everything has to be sanitized.
Honestly what they're doing is more sexist that actually showing the sexism, the just re-skin the dude and get a woman to read all his lines... yeah so progressive ubisoft.
Where the fuck is my real Assassins Creed game with Amunet as the protagonist!!!
DigitalHeliumJumper it’s almost like it’s about money and they use politics as an excuse for laziness
This is the worst part. You remember altair. He was unique.
You remember Ezio. A unique character, maybe you even remember Connor.
But they're losing this sense of uniqueness. Especially now, when the characters are interchangable. What the hell is this?
Totally agree with everything, perfectly articulated, and superbly edited as always Loomer
Really enjoyed the essay, these are literally the only assassin’s creed videos I can watch these days and you always deliver insightful commentary and well put together content.
No response :(
I completely agree with you. As you said, look at AC3 and AC:BF, they had characters that weren't white and the game did not consist being yelled at the whole game.
Personally, I wouldn't want story's that are night and day. If I knew the stories even had subtle differences, it would not only give that first decision more weight but give the player a reason to play through it again.
The thing is that I want it too be different and I can understand it not mattering because they aren't even trying to be historically accurate anymore with mythical creatures being a thing now. But their reasoning for it is fucking stupid, all people are equal.. why you trying to change history thats more racist and more sexist, the reason we learn about history is to learn from peoples mistakes hiding mistakes in history is i feel more wrong cause your claiming to never be wrong.
connor better than ezio
@@ghost5377 Too bad they kind of butchered some of his character development. Connor is not the most approachable person in the world, but he is a layered character. Ezio at times comes across as a typical Hollywood stereotype.
This is probabaly the most articulate explanation as to why people have a problem with how Ubisoft is using "diversity". I dont think many people would have a problem with critics if the criticisms were all this eloquently put. Good job.
We have a problem with ``diversity`` in the game because Greece of that time had a problem too with what we call diversity
I could not decide for a long time who to choose - Cassandra or Alexios? Cassandra is the canonical character, and Alexios is more suited to good sense. In the end, I decided not to buy it
100% playing as the girl of I ever get this game because her butt is sexy
I got the game and i play as Kassandra still even though i agree with the points in this video. She just has better dialouge and voice actress then the male counterpart. The game is really good still even if it could be better if they did have some sexism in the game for more story impact.
@@MeldinX2k
@@MeldinX2 do you know you can see her pants if you set the camera angle right under water?
I do know that! ;)
This isn't appealing, it never was, and this just comes across as an outright mockery of the series and of history. I know you can have stories that aren't historically accurate, but this is a series that IS based on historical detail and accuracy. But who am I kidding right? This game is made by the same team who made AC Syndicate.
assassin's creed is just pathetic by this point. While syndicate isn't really based on things that actually happened in the victorian era, they at least got the tone of the era right. Odyssey in the other hand just gives you a gender-less character designed to appeal to social agendas
To Briturk and Zorex. Really? Historical accuracy in AC? Dude, the world/life was created by aliens, while people are running around with godly artifacts. Yeaah. Accuracy I guess....
@@wowimatard i meant tone
it's never been a series based on historical accuracy, if you ever seriously played an AC game. Plenty of historical inaccuracy since the beginning.
People just don't get it, it's supposed to be a fun ride with historical elements in it. Is it just forbidden ?
@@timytimeerased People really just wanna call ubisoft SJW pleasers. I see tons of comments about it. It's like they don't want the issue to go away. I'm really enjoying the game and none of these issues come to mind during it.
What annoys me is that ubisoft are bringing out a novel of odyssey set before this game takes place, and the character will be kassandra. What was the point of us choosing our character if their own lore that they've created throws it out the window? I'd have no problems if the game only has you play as kassandra
@HolyMolyOllyPolly Aren't they different characters and set in different places compared to the game?
@HolyMolyOllyPolly my bad and yeah you've got a point there
players of KOTOR, and a million other games somehow survived that, you will too
@HolyMolyOllyPolly well yeah that's true, the main difference lies in that Dragon Age is complete made up fantasy. Whereas Kassandra was the historically accurate character, and is acc based in history, so it just feels kinda pointless, if they had redone the story slightly and kept it as female only, we could have a bad ass female character with a main game all to her self, not like Syndicate where they had to share
Why do keep pulling out the "historical accuracy" thing? It's still a fictional universe that blends Sci-fi, fantasy, and sprinkles real world people and events into it. It's not SUPPOSED to be a recreation of history. In the AC universe, humans were created by a more advanced civilization that made 'pieces of eden' so they could control them. If you think Kassandra is 'historically accurate' give us a link pointing to a historical figure in history that had a magical broken spear..
Well said. Totally ignoring it does no one a service. Keeping it historically accurate would have presented game play challenges as a 5th Century woman would not be allowed to walk around freely on the streets of Athens. Woman were rarely allowed to leave the home and certainly were not allowed to have any sort of education. While this would make missions in Athens difficult to complete, keeping it accurate would present the harsh reality of sexism and maybe open some eyes.
It would also open the game up to some great stealth missions, getting from A - B in certain sections of the city where a woman alone would be strange enough to notice. They could have given Kassandra the added weapon of 'traditional feminine' disguise, dressing in silks and pretending to be a meek and gentle greek woman to join/overhear woman gossiping or gain access to a certain woman only areas like serving areas, baths, whore houses or temples etc. There are ways to balance the reality of the oppressive and restrictive sexism of the time with interesting game mechanics and a clever, badass protagonist that would keep players invested.
DHF F open their eyes to what?! How awesome and amazing it was? People seeing how women were treated in history would do nothing to improve things. If anything it makes them worse because men see those depictions and get rock hard because that shite turns them on and then they just long for a "return to the old ways" where they can freely treat women like objects without reprisal.
@Mórrigana O'Dwyer: open people's eyes to the fact that is sucked. Half of the problem of sexism is that people turn a blind eye to it. much like racism, they try to convince themselves that its not an issue, that people are over reacting when they complain about it. Hiding it and rewriting history to pretend that there was no issue at all does no good at all.
@Maya of Lesbos: you will notice I didnt say the game was historically accurate, I simply said IF it were accurate, and within the context of societal roles for woman, then it would be a far greater challenge. I am under no illusion that any AC game is a substitute for a history text book.
Maya of Lesbos that’s what I’m saying ac was never historically accurate there’s a whole bunch of si fi shit in the series so I don’t know why people are complaining now
Ubisoft WANTS to appeal to the general media and the social justice crowd in particular, by virtue signaling. But it's a company, who primarily wants to make money.
By changing absolutely nothing whether you play as a man or a woman character, it enables them to play the "equality card" while requiring the very strict minimum amount of extra work, as they do not have to create additional scenes, lines of dialog or branching story arcs.
Yes, Ubisoft is hypocritical: when they say that "they're doing this because they care", what they really mean is "they're doing this because they care ABOUT YOUR MONEY".
Agreed and it's for that reason that I won't be buying the game. It's weak.
Virtue Signaling never worked. It didn't work with Marvel Comics (Marvel killing off Wolverine and replace him with X-23, Riri Williams as Iron Man/Tony Stark Replacement, and Captain Marvel/Ms. Marvel and now they making a movie with her in MCU), Doctor who, Star Wars.
That's exactly what I think. Ubi just lost an amazing opportunity of showing two sides of the same historical setting, you know what I mean? People would love to play as either Alexios or Kassandra, then create a new file and see what the other character's run looked like. So much potential to show that women might not be as strong and well accepted as men in the society, but could strive and achieve as much and/or even more than men could by just being themselves.
Just... wasted potential.
Duft Pard
I agreed with you until you mentioned how men could succeed anything back then just by being men. Which isn't true.
Did you know: In ancient Greece, men who raped other men were shown to be the most masculine/dominant.
I get what you mean. What I really had in mind was that example that only dudes with lands and stuff were able to vote, like in Georgian times. It doesn't have anything to do with Greece (I think?) but it's my primary example when it comes to female representation or... the lack of it :)
What really matters is that I'm playing Alexios on a first run and Kassandra on a second, maybe... or just go back to Liberation all over again
I've just loved your recent videos. You're calm and polite, whilst not shying away from saying precisely what you think. And I have to say I agree wholeheartedly; minorities and people of lower statuses are often the best characters to depict history and the Assassin's Creed, but they're not minorities if they're not treated as such in the story. Good stories are about the struggles we go through in life, and if the only struggle in Odyssey is fighting bad guys, well, then it's a rather boring and unrelatable one.
As my boyfriend placed it, "No, you're not making a documentary, but you are talking about something that has happened, and will happen again by cycle. Intentional or no, you are sharing a real story within human history. You don't get a stance if all you say is, "I'm a writer, so I'm free of charges." That's an excuse and disregarding history is a man's greatest transgression, even its accidental."
Social agendas should be kept out of story telling, including games.
But even if you are supporting this agenda, ignoring sexism in history is contradictory to all claims of feminism, in which case it undermines itself.
I'm honestly quite surprised this video isn't the opposite (e.g. The game is full of men spouting sexist comments, actions and jokes 24/7 to exaggerate sexism in the past)
You presented the issue very well in all its other aspects, including how playing a character that is oppressed could be compelling, and absolutely breathe more life into the era the game is trying to present. But unfortunately I think it's too late for Ubisoft to back out of this, even if they wanted to.
TDCANDHP if social agendas were kept out of games then we'd all be playing pinball. Social relates to the interaction of human society as a whole. Any game with humans or even anthropomorphic beings interacting in any way is therefore subject to social agenda.
Mórrigana O'Dwyer that is true.
But what I am coming from is that the standpoints of a character or a universe needs to make sense in the setting and buildup untill that moment.
I am getting a bit sick of characters acting very differently or in a way that clearly doesn’t suit them in order to push an idea that is obviously not related to the story.
A character can be whatever the author wants it to be if he gives it the proper setup. But throwing good story telling out the window to push a certain idea that doesn’t make sense in the context of the story is a big let down for me. And I see it too often recently.
In this case the behavior of side characters (the universe) doesn’t fit the setting.
why are people thinking the AC Odyssey story is crap ? Because it's not centered around feminism ? Sexism ? Or can we just enjoy a story that is about family ?
Nothing wrong with social agendas on media.
Well said. :)
I thought your decision to put Edward and Adewale together on a menu hit the nail right on its head. Wouldn’t it have been mind blowing to see something like that offered in a video game! It’s a shame that isn’t the case with Odyssey.
You make a good point - which is that Assassin's Creed has dealt with racism and sexism before, including Aveline du Grandpre having to deal with both. And throughout history women have fought and been extremely deadly - they can always write a game around such a character.
It’s fucking ironic how this studio cared this much about not showing sexism in their game, meanwhile their entire studio rampant with it.
I wish I could disagree.
I would just like to point out that in origins they where screaming about how historically accurate their game was but now they are "just making a video game"
Perfect video essay. I totally agree with everything you've said, exactly my thoughts. I think the reason why they decided to do Kassandra's story the same as Alexios is less because of what Melissa MacCoubrey said, and more because of really lazy writing: they wanted to put both male and female characters to loos "inclusive”, but they don't actually care about accurately portraying sexism. If only they would've written different stories for the different characters, it would have been amazing: like having two games in one. But, on the contrary, we get these two impersonal protagonists who are exactly the same but with a different "skin". As you said, even if being a spartan mercenary was almost impossible for a woman, it was definitely impossible to be treated the same way as a man, as if that was just normal. Accurately portraying Kassandra's story would have given the chance to make a more complex and interesting character and story.
I can't believe the same person who wrote this videogame literally said, "We don't need historical accuracy, it's just a videogame." Of course, not everything needs to be historically accurate since it's made for entertaining (same as tv shows or movies), but it should be good quality entertainment, as some previous ac games have been! I guess ac it's not what it was anymore and has completely changed their target costumers and so people who actually care about the game quality are tossed aside, and instead they look for gamers who wants to play a fun game and that's it.
Sorry for my long comment!
And not just that "...not everything needs to be historically accurate since it's made for entertaining, but it needs to be quality entertainment...", but the entire AC series is popular because it's based on real history. So historical accuracy should be big priority. But I agree with everything else you said. :)
true, and that is what I used to love about this franchise. Anyways, it’s impossible to make everything 100% historically accurate, none of the previous games were, but one thing is to take some liberties, and another is to change the essence of the historical period completely and portray it as some kind of “utopian Ancient Greek fantasy” that is what this game looks like to me...
@@alexiapissi Yeah, that's the sad reality unfortunately... :/
it’s ironic how a game that’s focused more on historical accuracy then BFV is less accurate then any of the previous Assassin’s Creed games
You totally right. This was one of my major issues with Syndicate too. The whole reason why we search history is this: We can learn and understand our mistakes (and almost everything) through the past.
However I really looking forward to play this game. I'm glad they include dialog options. All story and side misson could be much more interesting.
@ Yeah. Should had been. But the sexism is integral part of our history and sadly our present too. If this type of games addres this issue and makes good points against sexism (for example: player can punish sexist characters) that would be really usefull (and entertaining too).
@ "Those Who Do Not Learn History Are Doomed To Repeat It." - George Santayana
Showcasing a bad part of history and telling the players that it was bad is best way we can fix the mistake we made in the past.
@ That's literally what I said. And by showing (instead of hiding) that it was bad we prevent it from happening again.
@ I just explained how it makes a difference in my last comment! You show it > tell people it's bad > they learn it's bad. Simple. And it's essential for a franchise that takes pride in it's historical accuracy.
And if you don't want to see it again, that's fine! Just don't play the game. Nobody is forcing you to. But don't ruin human history (a very precious thing) just because you don't like it.
@ And if games are so "perfect" and shallow, they're not worth playing nearly as much, so why bother? Why not just play something better then?
Another aspect I couldn't get my head around was that instead of it being a lineal historical event within game lore, you the player are suddenly allowed to choose how the story progresses. So, not even continuity matters in this series anymore and is basically a pick-your-own-adventure title with an AC heading.
And this is why I chose to play Alexios. Though Kassandra VA does a better job, the immersion factor seemed it wouldn't be there for me. I love the stories of ancient greece, and the history; and running around as a female mercenary and those times would have gotten laughs. I love what Ubisoft is doing with the assassin's creed games, but I wish they would stick to being a bit more historically accurate to add conflict. Companies these days stir away from conflict, like racism or sexism, because society is too sensitive and hate talking about differences. Conflict helps drive stories. And if there were a bit of conflict in assassin's creed because of Kass gender it would have made her story a lot more interesting. Instead she is just Alexios, with a female appearance.
The reason for their choice is actually quite simple. They want to appeal to the female audience, but they don't want to spend money in order to change the game to have it make sense. It's always about money
And it is said by a fucking german aristocrat !
Agree with you wholeheartedly. They could have handled the whole thing a lot better. Unfortunately Far Cry 5 suffered from the same problem. I hope Ubisoft comes to realise that they need to handle their protagonists better.
Also I feel this whole 'choice' aspect is diluting the characters. Going through the gameplay videos, neither Alexios nor Kassandra sound as compelling as any of the previous protagonists. Those guys all had something they believed in, something they stood for. They had their defined flaws which sometimes cost them dearly. With Odyssey it feels so wobbly because nothing is set in stone.
I came here ready to be annoyed, but hell, you and your argument are absolutely right. How much richer, and more powerful would Kassandra's story have been had she not only had to overcome the obstacles of her enemies in the game but also the obstacle of everyone doubting that she could because of her sex? I think it would have made for a more enjoyable experience for everyone. However, I think Ubisoft not doing so was purely an economical decision masked with whatever the excuse was given about "equality". They would have had to do a completely different script for everything had they followed through on making Kassandra's experience different. Gosh, I would have loved it though.
LILIGIMUSIC they literally missed a chance to have NPC’s make sexist comments to Kassandra.
@jonny s Why does it matter? Because accurate or accurate-leaning depictions matters to some people. Who cares? Plenty of people, apparently.
@jonny s Well, thank goodness your personal opinions about what matters and what people should care about aren't universal, infallible law, ey?
Thank you for this video. I didn't like what I heard about how Ubisoft decided to handle Kassandra's experience but I have been struggling to define *why* exactly; your summary matches my own opinion almost perfectly and it helps to be able to put it into words.
What? "Not a historical documentary"...??? That was one of the appealing things of this game to me!The exposure of history! Accuracy! What bullshit! Come ON Ubisoft!
I am so glad someone as high profile as you is saying all this stuff. Everything is a valid point. I really can't see how old fans of the series are fine with the new direction in storytelling/gameplay mechanics. A lot of the stuff is seemingly going the way of retcon and the Animus is now an excuse for random stuff like invisibility/controlling arrows mid flight/teleporting with a spear.
I've been a fan ever since the Ezio Trilogy. And this is the first time I am not interested in an upcoming AC game. But I do want to know what happens in the modern day storyline. But not gonna buy the game just for that.
Johan Joseph I am also uninterested, but following closely, as always. Modern Day is not what it used to be. Ubisoft think the majority dislike the Modern Day, hence why it was removed. But whose fault is that? It's Ubisofts. If they want us to care about Modern Day then put effort into it. It's been bought back for seemingly no reason? I mean a question I still have from 2012 is where the fuck is Juno? Or more specifically what MASSIVE threat is she supposed to be posing? I don't even think having Layla in AC Origins was a good thing, you could have removed her story and it would not detract from the game. THAT is where the problem lies with Modern Day now. If it can be removed whilst having no impact on the story, story being a combination of MD and the Historical parts, then it has frankly been written poorly. The Desmond Saga was fantastic for AC as it showed consequence and connections between history and the present day. We aren't getting that anymore. "We bought back Modern Day" is nothing but empty hype to get those of us who loved it back in the day to think "hmm, will it be good?" only to buy the game and be disappointed by the lack of effort put into it.
@@ArunSG1910 Sorry to disappoint you. Don't read further if your don't like spoilers. They killed off Juno in the comics. In the FUCKKKKKING comics. On another point I think we'll be getting a Bayek sequel after this game and this game is just a cash grab for the UbiCunts.
Johan Joseph Wait... what? How did they kill her off? What was the story reason?
@@ArunSG1910 I'm really not sure of the reason. Just check it out on RUclips. But knowing Ubisoft I'm pretty sure you will be left dissatisfied with the death.
You are completely right.
Kassandras story would be so much better if those little things would be in the game.
It would make such a big impact on the way you would see her story.
This video was well constructed and conveyed to the viewer. Good job, you just got a sub.
No wonder they changed the Animus so that it can support their choice based decisions, it's not about the actual characters anymore but it's about splitting things in fear of "inequality", despite the fact that people will always play for what is chosen for them whether male or female, if they made a female protagonist in Odyssey without an option for the opposite gender people will still buy it because it still a part of Assassins Creed game.
remember me why you aren't the creative director in AC?? brilliant video
@ Ignore him, Bogdan is a massive sexist prick.
Couldn’t have said it better myself. I’m curious as to what the response would be from the writers over at Ubisoft.
Wow. I am so glad I happened upon your channel today. That was an amazing video. It is sad that this Ubisoft team chose not to deal with this subject. You are correct in stating that it could've been easily handled. Origins did it with Bayek. How many Romans said disparaging remarks to him? Could have been the same with Kassandra. And she could beat the crap out of them as Bayek did. Bad move to just ignore it. Anyway, I subbed and can't wait to see your other videos.
Origins completely sanitized Egypt though. You never saw their racism, their sexism, or things like human sacrifice inherent in their religion. You only saw enemy worshippers of Set engaging in it, while others were treated as humane and modern. Not so. Not at all.
It’s actually sad because in origins they regularly discuss racism and hierarchy. You’ve got greeks living in Egypt and slavery and the whole bit. Hell cleopatra is a character in that game dedicated to making a better society for her people because of Greek oppression in Egypt. Yet we just figured we’d ignore the woman protagonist for equality. That one really hurts.
I think it's important to address historical struggles of racism and women. Sexuality too, at least since Christianity came into play, as it was acceptable in Ancient Greece for same sex relationships to be a thing, so it makes sense to be present in this game. In the Syndicate podcast you did, they spoke about how they didn't want women to be treated hugely different, and to make Victorian London a less horrible experience to be in. This was when they were talking about Ned's gender, and why it's never brought up, because it didn't need to be.
In Detroit Become Human however, as popular as the game is (and amazing in my opinion), it's been said to be very controversial, because of racist elements. I for one never saw it, maybe because it was impossible for me to (being white), but it upset some people. The way I saw it, androids, black or white, were treated the same... because people saw them as just robots. They didn't see colour, because androids weren't considered even people, which is why it got a bit confusing me on where the controversy comes from. Don't get me wrong, the game has it's fucked up moments and it's very real, but I didn't feel like it was in the wrong.
That’s crazy because I restarted because playing as kassandra felt weird to me but I liked play as evie more than Jacob in syndicate.
ubisoft quebec are ruining ac
Delivering AC into the hands of the Quebec team was one of the worst decisions that Ubisoft has ever taken with the franchise.
Exactly! They want to pander to the SJWs and the folks that condemned AC in the first place.
@@Vault96 the black flag team are the best to date since ezios trilogy. Just my opinion though
@@coreymckee4844 True, if not for them pushing this ideology the last couple entries. But have you seen Ubi's internal "diversity" instruction videos? Ideologues run the company now, and they're pushing propaganda in order to influence players.
@@cindercatz well that cancerous shit aint gonna work on me!
Book fans, have you ever felt pissed off by a film that didn’t remain faithful to the book it’s adapting? That’s what us history buffs feel like when the line “we’re making a game/movie/show not a historical documentary” is used as an excuse to ignore historical authenticity.
I think while she may say that the reason is to provide a game that is equal, it's really just an excuse given their development time. I mean, they have to crank these games out, and Odyssey being an RPG, has a lot of story branches. It was a huge deal for the story department and they were probably super busy. Making one script that plays as a middle ground and applicable to both would be the most convenient time-wise as they wouldn't essentially be writing two games worth of dialouge. I do think it would've been nice if they made it more female oriented, and cut out Alexios, but that would mean cutting out Alexios- which in an RPG, is hard, because the authentic rpg experience they were going for meant having more control over who you are. It's the RPG agenda vs the great story telling agenda, and because they're already adding all the story branches, adding another character would be minimal work and make it appear as that much more of a true RPG.
I think they actually did have a bit of a bias when writing the dialouge, as I initially chose Alexios- but had to restart when I heard his lines. Not only was his voice acting difficult to understand and arguably lousy, but WHAT he said was being phrased in a more feminine fashion. It's hard to explain but the sentence structure and the mannarisms just did not fit this ripped ultra masculine guy, it wasn't believable at all. Switching to Kassandra completely remedied this issue and everything sounds nicer. Perhaps this was done as the writers may have consisted of more females or simply because Kassandra is the canonical hero.
Either way, I don't think equality is the real reason behind this, but rather it would be too much work to have separate experiences for each character in an already dialouge vast game.
This is a great post, and I agree that the additional work needed (both time and complexity-wise) was also probably a big factor in their decision to do things the way they did.
What's interesting is even in AC4 Black Flag, the story involved Mary Read who was the woman posing as a male pirate just to be more respected in the pirate community. They didn't shy from that historical accuracy. I think in odyssey it came down to the development team focusing on the rpg elements and choice. It would have also been inefficient or too time consuming to write a significantly different experience for Kassandra.
No matter how much "historical sexism" you try to implement to be closer to historic accuracy, it is impossible to do this in a game with total historical accuracy without completely sacrificing the female character itself. It would be absolutely impossible to have Kassandra as a playable option if it was. In Athens, a woman would not leave the house to an extent that was even considered extreme in Ancient Rome. Reading just the first few pages of Herodotus' "The Histories" gives a story of women being kidnapped, and explained away as not a large issue to get upset about since they were not accompanied by men, and thus must have wanted to be stolen away by the men. If you look at Olympias and Cynnane, respectively the mother and sister of Alexander (who was Macedonian and not even considered "Greek", and in a different time period), yes, they were recorded to have fought, but they were doing this in the interest of protecting the throne in his absence and also in a place of privilege as royalty. Another example could be the women of Tegea who fought off invaders in a war and were granted the favor of Ares - but even this is something shrouded in religious overtones and myth.
In so much of the Ancient Greek world, women were regarded as lesser in nearly every way, were considered incomplete men, people would write directly about women as being poison to men and a man's virtue, that the best thing women could say was nothing at all, that they had innate evils within them that their myths confirmed (Pandora's Box), and so on. In this context where Kassandra is from Sparta, of course there was a cultural difference of even women being allowed to compete in games, and having more freedoms when being a free Spartan women under the context of being the caretakers of house, city and state when men were at war. But even here, when a Spartan woman leaves Sparta, she is no longer enclosed in that culture.
So if they were to make the game histoically accurate, HOW accurate would they have to make it? I do agree with the point brought up where initial distrust of Kassandra's ability might be something interesting to explore when given quests and so on. But there is truly no way to make everyone happy since the degree to which historical sexism is relative to what the player is ccomfortable with until it truly isn't fun (which would be the level where it is actually accurate). Having it not be an element whatsoever surely has upset people, but there is no pleasing everybody in this due to how there is no possible to make it completely accurate in the first place. Best simply allow the player to enjoy the game for what it is - a fictional /fantasy/ within a historical backdrop - which is what their intent seemed to be.
With all this said, thumbs up to the video still it was indeed well thought out and this is something that is truly dependant on what a single individual wants to experience and is looking for in a game. And I respect that.
These are good points, and I agree that 100% historical accuracy would impede on fun too much. I don't know what the exact balance is (and as you mention, it's subjective anyway), I just know that for me it's somewhere between "100% historical accuracy" and "Female and male protagonists are treated exactly the same".
Alexander was considered Greek. His ancestor, Alexander I(He was Alexander III) literally competed in the Olympic Games. Athenians literally called everyone "barbarians", even Greeks they considered to be inferior to them, like Macedonians and Epirotans.
Why doesn't Ubisoft just make a poll before they make the next game. Would you guys prefer us to be more historically accurate, or equal? Maybe that would open their eyes..
Damn it Looms.. what a great essay.. It sucks that we get to choose between Alexios and Kassandra in this game, but I'm gonna choose Kassandra for sure and just forget Alexios ever exists.. Also, the ending of this video with "In this World or the One Below" really put me to goosebumps as I saw Kassandra.. Well done Brother!
I'm choosing Kassandra too but who said Alexios doesn't exist?..
Alexios does exist dude
I am a male, but I actually like the woman in Assassins Creed. It's just a game, and at least Kassandra does not have a robot arm.
Yeah I agree too but I want to point that women weren't like that in Ancient Greece. There were exceptions of women with reputation and with skills. In the Olympics there was a woman posing as a man and believe it or not, prostitutes in Ancient Greece were educated and skillful citizens in Athens. They were almost the last resort when it came to War. In Sparta there were exceptions of women that were trained almost at the same manner as men did. So it isn't a sexist world we are seeing here athough it surely is one that had no Assassins. I think the real problem with Odyssey is that it has no identity in terms of lore and story. It falls flat cuz it's something completely different than what the title suggests. There are no Assassins here and no Creed. This is just a story away from what Assassin's Creed is.
Sorry if I'm misreading this....and I probably am...but are you saying 5th cent Greece was not a society that basically marginalised women....bar the very small exception in sparta? ..and prostitutes being well versed in order to increase their value....as...well courtesans ?...I think I may be misreading this....but a female character walking around outside the home or brothel ....dealing with other males as an equal was not in any way common. Nearly more fantastical then that whole animus crap that I can't stand.... (I know loads of people like that ....just my opinion) ..but hey....it's only a game...and if it allows a young girl to feel more included in a gaming experience I'm all for it ....they could have handled it better though.
@@daithimac5785 as for what you say at the end of the comment I agree. Yes I am saying it as you do. But what I try to point on my previews comment is that sexism is not a thing in ancient Greece. Women and men had different roles and no one was oppressed. Sure there were no women meetings with men and there were no women actually fighting in wars. But there were educated women and there were women trained to fight. Sexism wasn't a thing as it was and is in other cultures. That's what I am saying. Not that women were treated the same. But nor did men. The roles were just different. Evenly good and bad.
I think you would have to play the game to actually know if the story fits into the AC lore. Though a lot of things related to the brotherhood and the templars did not turn out to be how I imagined, you will get in touch with an Isu whose ideologies don't fall in line with the Jupiter Minerva Juno trinity, predecessors of the Templar Order, and Darius, the first "assassin" who used the hidden blade.
The difference was that Connor was 1 character and you didn't have a choice
I find myself agreeing with literally everything you said here! Great video!
freedom cry was one of the best DLC's for assassins creed that i have ever played
Mount and blade warband did this well. A female made the game harder because characters treated you dofferently and it felt boss when you wrecked them.
This is the reason I chose to play as Alexios and not Kassandra - if I chose Kassandra I would spend the entire time thinking "but that would never happen!" and it would ruin the game for me.
And now time for the truth.
Making a game like that with optional female main character would be very expensive. characters would fight in a different way, entire style of the game would be different, quests would be different. Those were times when woman and a man lived in two different worlds.
And this shit costs money so lets make one female model voice over this shit and call it quits. And if people call us lazy we will just call them sexist
I somehow missed this video, but I'm glad I rediscovered it. Love you and your work Looms!
There was a bit of sexism in Horizon Zero Dawn and I found it a really immersive experience. I also thought it would be a good learning experience for male gamers.
Either way, promoting gender equality is dangerous...for women in general.
I just found this channel and feel those essays are very well made and bring forth arguments that are well thought out and articulated. I would suggest you make a video about the meta story of the future, or present day, storyline that has gone down the drain after AC3. Rersonally, the present day narrative was what drew me in and kept me immersed ever since AC1 and it is a vital part of the world of AC.
For many people apparently the AC games have always been nice sandbox worlds where you get to run around historical settings. For me though, and i have a feeling you would agree, the reason why the historical settings are so enticing is exactly because they are supposed to be actual memories, real portrayal of history from a lore standpoint. Following the story in the games in that way makes them all the more immersive and significant. Every youtuber i've heard always rants about the Desmond parts for example, whereas i always looked forward to the next one, because that was when the very intriguing story would actually progress.
Anyway, would love to hear your take on this. Keep up the good work
Ironically, AC1's commercial success was also the series' downfall. It sold TOO well. It didn't hit that sweet spot where it wouldn't get cancelled but also wouldn't be turned into a yearly money-making machine.
Wish AC remained a trilogy and AC2&3 were handled like the Witcher sequels. AC2 being a smaller but an ambitious improvement and AC3 being an all-out project. AC2 could've featured only one city but in both the past and the present. I'd say Venice would fit nicely. It's not all that different in the present. Imagine half of the game with Desmond completing missions in modern Venice. Plus you going back to Abstergo at the end and Vidic getting much more screentime.
I bet all they say about it is just an excuse for the real reason: it would have been too much work to write for two truly different protagonists. Which of course they could have easily avoided, were they not so fixated on the stupid choice thing and had the balls to market a game with a woman on the cover.
"It would’ve been terrible if we made a game where people were constantly berating you for being different".
I guess Ubi staff has never heard about Morrowind.
Great video Loomer! AC is having some really big issues with lore and struggling to find a balance point when the subject is inclusivity. Sad to see such a beloved franchise in this situation.
Finally, Someone who sees through the Illusion.
Finally, someone that actually understands the core of the issues, and isn't simply against it becausd women make them uncomfortable.
It's really nice to see Loomer addressing Ubisoft's AC problems like this. From what I've seen in some other media, if a hardcore fan of a particular movie, book, game or TV series speak out against it, the company then realises that it's majorly fucked up, and tries to fix it's mistakes. Of course this is a rare scenario but I really feel it's a step in the right direction. I hope there are more videos i this series planned and I support you wholeheartedly for the fact that you stuck around for the hardcore fans of this series for so long when so many other people gave up on it a long time ago!
"Kassandra should not be in the game, for the sake of historical accuracy"
"Oh ,cool, i will get to fight medusa in this game"
historical accuracy =/= realism.
Welcome back, Looms!
Fantastic video Loomer. Keep your head up
Doesn't Prey (2017) do this exact thing and to a lesser extent, Dishonored 2?
“You can make someone feel bad about making a certain choice”
Yea. I haven’t watched past that point but god damn. Are we going to baby people? You should want to have your players be affected in both positive and negative ways to make for a compelling story. If you just baby them and make every choice they make feel like a good one then what’s the point of making a decision in a game?
I’m sorry, that look Connor gives haytham after he says “he is my son” will never not be funny
Great video as always, I can't be happier that there are still influential members of the community that don't want to put up with Ubisoft's shit anymore. For some reason Quebec took everything core to the franchise and flipped it on its head. The branching narrative, the historical inaccuracies and all these other things that they'll probably blame Layla's Animus for (if they haven't already) is utterly pointless. Considering how distant the years Odyssey takes place in and all these hip RPG elements they put in on top of the ones they alreadt had in Origins, with the only difference being that the ones there actually made sense for AC, what it seems like they're doing is testing new grounds. Though if they have the balls to put out an Assassin's Creed title with all those new things in it, they could have easily made it a new IP. Of course they'd earn less, but if the story and gameplay were actually good for a standalone experience and not held back by the burden of being an AC story, it could've been a great game. And it would most definitely not cost their flagship franchise to lose it identity. They clearly do not care about Assassin's Creed anymore. And by "them" I mean the people in charge of the whole franchise, because clearly the Montréal 3 team put a lot of love into Origins so that it is the masterpiece that it it. As for Odyssey, from what I've seen the creative team all just care to put in what matters to them the most in terms of games, be it gender equality, gameplay over narrative or a particular part of lore that is not one of the ones that the franchise really needs exploring at the state that it is now, and just dumped it in. I don't think we as a community should be supporting this but what voice do I have.
Keep it up dude, I love your videos
Preach!!!
Kassandra dealing with inequalities due to her sex and over coming them would make me want to root for her more
That would make it cringe and more woke according to the antiwokes and thus would be worse i think
I really expected some sexist video, but I agree with everything you said. you make a convincing argument and state it in a calm manner unlike many youtubers I get reccomended to me.
It seems that they’re not trying to reconstruct a historical Ancient Greece, but a mythological Ancient Greece. You’re meant to feel like you are in a myth, not in real history that actually happened.
Its dangerous to forget history.
I have the same problem with Fallout. That game series takes place in a world where the US didn’t advance culturally beyond the 1950s, a time defined by sexism and racism, and not only that, but it also takes place after the collapse of that civilization. But, despite this, there is almost no trace of this characteristics in that world beyond some ads that display the gender roles of the time. There are women, african americans, and Latinos dispersed throughout ranks in various organizations, even those that are supposed to mimic white supremacists, all this, without mention for the most part, and even more egregiously, in a world obliterated by a war between the US and China, Asians for the most part, are treated equally as if nothing had happened at all, unless it’s in a specific quest (That DLC in F3, and the Chinese ghoul in F4). These are not only games that are based around social interactions, but also, employ satire and criticize capitalism, consumerism and other social ills of the time. I do not know why this is the way it is, but, I have a theory about it. Assassins Creed, Battlefield and a bunch of other games, constantly try to pander with how inclusive they are, but, as you said in the video, they also like to brag about how “accurate” their guns and locations are, they are having their cake and eating it too. They want to have it both ways: pretend they are making something important, but also, trying to appeal to everyone. You can see this also in gameplay, that’s why a lot of this games are filled to the brim with crap that has nothing to do with the core gamplay and is trendy at the moment. If you wanna have a game that actually says something and is challenging, do that, even if it’s risky. If you don’t, then don’t pretend that you are doing something grandiose thats socially relevant, you can just be escapist fantasy, that’s perfectly fine. But if you don’t have the balls to admit that you wanna be one or the other, you just muddy the water and, in the long run, don’t allow the medium to grow or advance.
You are making very valid points here looms. I do agree with you on most of it. I do think that it should be different between male and female. Personally, it doesnt always have to be people yelling at the female protagonist but it should include the hardships and being able to prove themselves fo others and themselves that they can handle any task thrown ag them. With difficulty and trials along the way. Historical perspective with a secret war between Templars and Assassins is what the Assassin's Creed franchise is about. That is what we were promised when these series were started. Modern society needs to figure out how the world worked back then and that includes discrimination by your race and gender, how you looked or sounded like, and many other factors. This was the world back hundreds of years ago. And because it may "offend" or "anger" players or writers, should be a reason to play the character and prove to those in the in-game world that change should and will come and that a woman can do it just as well as a man. THAT is how it should be made a played. Nowadays. We are focusing too much on if it offends someone. Fuck it. The world needs to gather this information and see it for themselves and grasp an understanding that this is how humans lived back in the day. How animals were treated back in the day. Offending someone nowadays is just unavoidable. With the several "genders" that are going around and identifying as something else or not is just unavoidable. (Which I'm not hating on just stating. Scientifically only w genders. Not hating just stating) Looking at someone the wrong way could cause a fight or cause someone to be offended. It's life. So incorporating the side of a woman's POV in a "historically accurate game" should be a form or inspiration or guidance for the future for younger and older audiences playing this game. So I agree with you looms. And btw, those options, that last one you put as an example cracked me up bad lol. Lily was on the mic when I busted out laughing "just fuck them up". XD byw I'd love to hear your response to my comment btw looms.
So... Ubisoft takes a lot of inspiration from the success of The Witcher 3 for their latest games and still think that having a protagonist who is viewed as a lesser human being by society is a bad idea that gamers wouldn't enjoy? Something doesn't add up here...
Why do people always think about sexism when you can choose between man and woman. Here is an example: In Fallout New Vegas you can choose to sleep with Benny (a guy who shot you) and then kill him while sleeping. This is an option only for female player characters. Having those option does not always mean sexism it can can be another way to play the game and increase replayability.
Isn't there a saying?
Something about when a person ignores history, that person is doomed to repeat it?
This is exactly how i feel about it. You can't have read the Odyssey, or know anything about ancient Greek culture, and think there's a chance in hell that a women would've been treated the same as a man or even close to the same. They would've needed to prove themselves for a long time before people had a chance at seeing a women and trusting her to solve their problems. It wouldn't have to be a "fuck you woman i wont talk to you or ever respect you" but seriously this is a gigantic flaw in their game.
Ya know as a sound designer I really appreciated how the AC movie, when they went back to Spain they kept the Spanish language and not some English accent. Found it to be a really great side story to the franchise. I would not mind for the games to pick up Fastbender’s Modern day assassin brotherhood and apply it.
tl;dr: Facts are not important if we dont agree with them.
As a woman and a Greek I am happy to see a female protagonist in a story (because I usually play female characters when I can, it makes me feel more immersed). So I will play with Kassandra. It is true that Spartan women had military training and, theoritically, it wouldn't be impossible for one to be a great warrior. There are a lot of things about ancient Greece we will never know but they have been erased by European male historians and Christians. That being said, women would possibly be treated differently in other parts of Greece because the societies were built differently there. An ancient Athenian might consider it impossible for a woman to be a warrior in the first place because that role was taken by men. However, from what I hear, Ubisoft didn't do justice for Kassandra, nor for the series. Sexism would be even more intense back then and, as a woman, Kassandra should have encountered situations of bigotry - and prove herself above them. But her storyline and interractions are exactly the same with Alexios, making her just a skin for his character (as the video said). I don't believe Ubisoft did that because they were sexist. That shows lazy writing and rushing to release and it makes the story feel less realistic. I wouldn't have a problem if the series was fantasy, but here we are talking about a series that has historical accuracy as its selling point and pride.
EDIT: They also put some monsters in it, so they kinda made it fantasy. That's another whole conversation.
The irony here is that s lot of the people lauding this move seem to be the same ones who complain when people "whitewash" movies. Aside from immersion, isn't it a disservice to ignore the sexism and racism that existed in the past? To pretend it never existed so you can feel comfortable?
I mean, they wrote Connor poorly, but at least they didn't shy away from the darker aspects of history. With proper writing, and some effort, they could make a female character work. But NOT as an interchangeable character model with a male. Where they'll just write what they would for a man in this time, change a few pronouns, and call it a day.
It's just a fucking lazy attempt to appeal to a tiny demographic, many of which aren't that into games. I wouldn't be surprised if women who see past this nonsense were annoyed or pissed off.
This is exactly why after the cutscene where they show Nikolaus training Kassandra in combat I immediately started all over and changed to Alexios. I’m a guy and was interested in playing as a female protagonist for the first time, guess I’ll have to wait.
P.S. otherwise, still an amazing game
I TOTALLY AGREE! I hope Ubisoft put differencies between Alexioand Kassandra. Maybe, they did it. I don't have the game yet. But what you said is rly true.
I think it's all about PC, unfortunately. People trying to avoid racism and sexicm end up with racist and sexist stuff. I think I am going to play Alexio
What a good piece man. So on point.
I play RPG's as an evil non-human. I live for the hatred and fear of those insignificant citizens who I could crush for fun. I would have loved it if playing as a woman resulting in plenty of excuses to make a point and show them what an ass kicking is like.
I hope you're not saying this game should be "historic accuracy" because not all games somewhat connecting our history is meant to be connected to it at all times. Some games just want to create fiction in "historic times" and I would rather have that for Assassin's Creed Odyssey.