Hey everyone! Just want to say that while you're definitely free to disagree respectfully in these comments, personal attacks on me, the devs, or other fans is only going to get you banned here. Don't be a dick.
Having played Origins I think that Ubisoft missed an opportunity. If they knew they were going to go the route of heavier RPG elements and in-game choices, they should have switched focus on the present day component of the games to be set in the precursor times. It's fairly established that the precursor society can delve into the future, and that they would need some ability to influence it. Which can be explained by the presence of hidden sages if needed. And since the "modern day" portion would then be in the precursor era that would make most of the content of the game set in the future of the present day. So whether the main character of Odyssey is male or female could be explained away because in order to get to the timeline where Desmond exists the gender typically doesn't matter (near the end it could/would but before that there is a lot more room for flexibility). Similarly choices inside the game would represent non-essential parts of the timeline. For that matter the games themselves could be explained as precursors examining points in time where they've predicted a sage would exist and be able to influence the world as needed.
I dont have a promblem with kasandra but for a creece setting alexios is the best choise. You see at the time the game takes place all women could was do choirs at home and look after their children and i know that because i am from creece and ancient culture was part of our history lesson .Also all of our myths are talking about men so alexios is a percrect fit
Not so much. I don't know enough to say whether that is fact or not but because of the games premise of using the animus to view the true history, it could be implied that Kassandra is out of the norm.
I always thought that before you start playing any next title, if it has any connection to the previous one, that they should ask you before new game to briefly give some information about how you played it. Like: ''welcome to Assassin's Creed Valhalla, have you played Assassin's Creed Odyssey? If so what character did you play as?'' so that every player can have his personal lore and that the game can adjust to it when those small little details pop up during gameplay.
For me this argument boils down to "you need to choose kassandra because diversity and strong female protagonist" My counter argument is "if it ain't broke dont fix it"
These new activist groups are pushing for too much “representation” in a game series where it prides itself on being historically accurate. Being frank there is little to no room for representation
@@birdy4112 assassins creed has never been historically accurate. Even down to the first game. It’s historical fiction. It uses historical and mythological characters and throws some sci fi on top. If you think AC is historically accurate bc they have characters of real historical people then you’re actually a moron.
Saying that Jacob is bisexual after the fact is super annoying. They tried to play it both ways by allowing you to think that he’s straight while at the same time they half-assedly state that he’s bisexual. I’m not giving them credit for that. You don’t have to sit up there and guess about any other characters’ sexuality. Evie is the other protagonist in the game, and her sexuality is front and center. Jacob is the only one in the series that you can kinda maybe sorta say he’s bisexual based off of how you interpret one relationship, and different people will have different takeaways on said relationship. That’s lame. If it ain’t in the game, it didn’t happen, so you can take the half-assed inclusion somewhere else. It’s bullshit of the highest order to make Kassandra canon, yet put Alexios all over the marketing. Aloy is the only playable character in Horizon: Zero Dawn and that game was very successful, so we can stop with the “‘men will only play male characters” argument. People will play good games. End of story. I would have more respect for them if they stopped coming up with nonsensical lore reasons, and just said that they believed in player choice and wanted to implement that feature, and went with Alexios in the marketing because they thought that it would sell more. At least that’s being honest.
yea whats dumb is Cassandra isn't cannon in the novels its alexios but after the game came out and Cassandra was more popular (for reasons I dont understand) she's cannon but when you play the game you see that it doesn't fit very well once you get to first blade. also this whole shit with sexuality is annoying. yes the Athens and the romans were gay but the thebes, Persians and especially the Spartans were not. for one for the Spartans they look at same sex stuff as shameful and it was outlawed 2nd spartan woman were look at in very high order because they created spartan men and they aslo had laws saying you had to be married by a certain time and death penalty for adultery and if you forgot you character is a spartan. another thing pointing to the fact that alexios was supposed to be the main character is first blade, neema male counter part was hired after the fact neemas character had already finished her lines which is why the dialog with nemmas male counter part is off. but remember people whined and cried that evil ubisoft made you have a heterosexual relationship so they had to patch the dlc so your character could say things like "i only did this for the blood line" which is why the dlc is so glitchy
@@WADEPH33R3 i really don't know why the sexuality part is such a big problem to people. You can literally not fuck anyone the whole game if you don't want to. And also, Kassandra / Alexios mainly grew up in Kephallonia and not Sparta. So I don't think that their morals would be of big importance to them. I also think it's disappointing that they didn't commit to one character. They should just make one quality character instead of two half-assed ones.
Here's my theory pitch. Alexios and Kassandra are twins. When you choose one as the protagonist, the other becomes the antagonist. Somewhere near the story, they battle, and they bleed. Their blood is mixed, so not only are they twins, but their events have been mixed. As such, Layla's animus is working with this unstable and confusing DNA sample, in which the Animus fills the memory gaps with constructed simulations, as done in the Last Descendants trilogy novel series. What do you think? EDIT: For those who haven’t noticed, this theory prediction of mine was posted BEFORE the game launched.
Once again the common folk that are truly passionate about the project always have better explanations and story ideas than the actual creators. What a shame.
Swifty Unknown that doesn’t change the fact that developers are breaking their own fucking rules that they made for the sake of a gameplay mechanic 🤦♂️
🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️ Return to fortnite to have "fun" then.... There's actually of lot of fans who cares about the story...
Short Answer: Alexios was meant to Be canon, but diversity and women quota made Cassandra Canon. Proof : Kassandra should not have been able to replace Tektikles in the Olympics as it;'s only a Male event.
Agree with all of your arguments that are rooted in lore. However I don't think that Kassandra should be the only protagonist because she is a woman, but because she is the canon character. To me doesn't really matter whether I play as a man or a woman. But it matters to me that the gender and ethnicity of the character has a reason beyond diversity for the sake of diversity. It has be a narrative reason why this story makes most sense to tell through the eyes of a woman or a man of what ever ethnicity is selected. Love your videos man. Cheers!!
agreed, more or less. I do think AC lore is kind of a joke though, so the only thing I really care about is how good the game play/story is. I'm a little annoyed at the video for how it minimizes Aveline as a character, when I really enjoyed that game and her story. Sorry to necro your old post.
Still, I vote for Alexios because he at least is more historically accurate and, nah a female lead in a sexist country without highlighting sexism is a nasty tasting idea. I want female leads, but not of that type that is made for specific reasons, specific message and we all know what it is. I want a genuine character that doesn't serve certain ideas, because from the head on start, it seems that the character is made to show "SJW" ideas, and that's a really sad thing, because once a character serves an idea it gets stripped of its speciality and it's personality revolves around that idea only. Characters like Ezio and Edward didn't come to me as males, they came to me as people with dazzling personalities and views, people who changed my views in life and made an effect in me beyond being men, real people. I'd prefer a series full of men with personalities than a series with females that serve an idea rather than do justice to their personalities. And trust me, I'm a female. When a protagonist is respected because it is a "female" and not a "person", there is something wrong here. That's my opinion.
@Violet Rose You're hitting on some points that I definitely agree with, and I think I know what you're getting at. I think back to Aya. She, in reality, was not a pleasant character. She had a chip on her shoulder (sexism), but that chip was a pretty realistic one imo. I know Ancient Egypt gave women a lot of freedom in its height, but it still had a lot of its own issues - and this is Ptolmey's Egypt as well, where I'm sure Greek culture has seeped into Egypt around Aya's time. And ancient Greece at large was not kind to women. Aya did her best to overcome it. Her successes were admirable, but her lust for revenge still wrecked her as emotionally as it did to Bayek. Like you, I appreciate a character regardless of gender *when there's a personality and a character arc from start to finish.* This "blank slate" formula doesn't offer that at all. I find Ezio to be too generic for my personal taste (just the star prototype of his sort of character), but I very much enjoyed Altair's personality post AC1, Edward's entire character arc, and what made Connor and Bayek different from most male protagonists in games and to me, more like real characters. Evie had potential and I do adore her, but she was overshadowed by the fact that Ubisoft wanted market Jacob more heavily and by the fact that they ignored that Evie would *absolutely* have dealt with a host of sexism that Jacob would have never had to face. It wouldn't have been quite as hostile as what Ancient Greece had, but Evie would have been seen as very alien in Victorian London. For me to go into details would involve an essay, (I've studied this a bit in my own writing research), so I'll stop there XD A sidenote: If they marketed Aveline differently and paid more attention to her game, I think she would have done really well. Aveline is a wonderfully unique character on her own, and they did tackle her facing sexism in mid 18th Century Louisiana. You could argue her gameplay mechanic is her trying to use those struggles to her advantage and get through them. I regard both Kassandra and Alexios as generic, which is why Ubisoft trying to pass them off as unique and dynamic is so heavily insulting to me. Alexios is every other grizzly manly man that makes attempts to be charming, and I know of a fantasy version of Kassandra that exists in video games: Femme Hawke. Blank slate characters are literally regulated to just "female," and "male," which is why I hate them so much. There's no unique personality in there at all that makes them act and feel human, because the player inserts those qualities themselves. I hate that. Every time I tried to play a game like that I had zero fun at all. So I've given up on those types of games.
Becky Weiss First, hats off for this awesome commentary. I totally agree. (Especially the Evie part, I'd like to see your research about that, and I mean it)
@Violet Rose, this article is an example of what I was hinting at: www.smithsonianmag.com/history/hatpin-peril-terrorized-men-who-couldnt-handle-20th-century-woman-180951219/ And keep in mind this "hatpin" scandal happened when Lydia Frye would have been a pre-teen. The article speaks of the fact that women were just starting to vocally voice the need to defend themselves and were facing ridicule from the press, but the voices were growing louder by the month. Logically, this sort of thing would be bubbling underneath the surface during Evie's younger years - women that sought a need to defend themselves but got ridiculed for it at every turn. Here's a theory based off of something based out of this article alone: Evie, going through the streets of London, faces the constant question from strangers of why is an "appropriate" male companion or relative not with her. Like Aveline, she gets noticed when she's out on her own carrying weapons. Like Aveline, you must err on the side of caution as Evie, *especially* when walking in the richer parts of London. A upperclass women defending herself would be seen as less common than say, a female factory worker. That difference should be shown as you hop from district to district while playing as Evie. She'd face a mixture of ridicule from men and women with a touch of admiration and perhaps envy - but the admiration only from women, and a scant few men in the game who know what's up. Evie then also gets questioned about her intelligence and her ability to protect herself wherever she goes, yet it's *her* that has to clean up all of Jacob's messes, as seen in the game. When Evie displays intelligence that surprises her male peers, let that be shown by those men who don't know any better and let us see Evie get irked over it (but likely resigned, unfortunately).. Perhaps this could be part of why she falls for Henry/Jayadeep - he's a non violent man that respects and admires Evie and what she does. In those times, men like that would be incredibly rare for Evie to meet, even though there were likely a small handful of female assassins she trained with while growing up. (Thus the male assassins would be used to the concept of a female one). Even then, it's very clear that Evie was a perfectionist. I doubt in a society like that, the male assassins in training would have taken kindly to Evie besting them at every turn. The only male who truly would be cool with it would have been her twin brother, and that's because he sees it as sibling rivalry, not a matter of a girl beating a boy. And as far as Evie and Henry/Jayadeep...wasn't that actually part of the reason why Evie falls for him in the novel? And why not let Jacob see some of the issues that Evie deals with as a part of him "waking up" and not being reckless? During the time of Syndicate, the women's suffrage movement in Britain was just being born and slowly taking root. I would think that for Evie, someone that is very aware of how actions have consequences, would have a few things to say when this was brought to her attention. This was a period in history that was moving into the modern era as we know it at a fast clip. I would think that, at the very least, there would have been a sidequest in reference to this. But to my memory, there was absolutely nothing. It's just as puzzling as the fact that there are no npc characters of color shown in Victorian London when it would have been *very* historically accurate to show them beyond Henry/Jayadeep and Duleep Singh. The Hulu TV show Harlots takes the time and the care to show plenty of PoC, and it's a genuinely historically accurate tv series set a hundred years before the events of Syndicate - also in London. PoC in London goes back even further. Elizabeth I blamed a famine that hit London in the 1590s on the black community that resided in London at the time. If you're curious, here's an article speaking about some of it: www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/pathways/blackhistory/early_times/elizabeth.htm For a series that prides itself on historical accuracy, the sort of populations that existed during each time, and what they were affected by (since the Brotherhood prides itself on protecting the downtrodden), they've been doing a junk job at showing it since AC Unity dropped. I can forgive a tiny thing here and there, but Unity was when they truly began to not care. AC Origins was a bright spot that I thought symbolized the series trying to recover, but it's clear that Origins had the historical accuracy and representation that it did thanks to Arshaf alone.
I agree with you on your first point, Odyssey should only have one protagonist. However, I would prefer Alexios because he fits the image of a Spartan warrior better and it’s more historically accurate. Assassin’s Creed has always had a tinge of science fiction, but they stay grounded where they can and I think the very identity of the protagonist should definitely be held to a historical standard.
@Masticatious yes. Game setting: ISU civilization, and you don't actually meet zeus as it is part of the animus. A mercenary woman at that time? Very hard to believe
@@athalonARC You're right about that. The Greek Gods were in fact an all-male race that came from the stars. The depictions of the female gods were made up by humans as they had no idea there could be species that can be entirely male.
@@based_misogynist1424 there is no source for that. the original myths featured both male and female entities, and Gaia, the entity that supposedly appeared as the earth, is female. Through her then came the elements, such as the sky, the mountains etc and then came the pantheon. Even before the Greek gods and entities were thought of, (or better say "documented" ) the entities that were first worshipped at the first civilizations were female
I dont agree with the character selection argument you made as its just a choice that its given to the player, I dont think it should go further than that. The other part however, I strongly agree. Ubisoft puts those diversity disclaimers as if to keep people from criticizing them, when really, they dont have much to show for it
Honestly, I would argue a few points here... I'll only briefly touch on 2 of them. 1: Yes, the idea that you have 2 strands of DNA makes things feel convoluted and contrived, but I would say that you could look at it as whichever you choose is who the memories belong to. Simple, I know, but not unreasonable to ask of the player seeing as we already have to suspend our disbelief of the world every time a kill animation doesn't synch up. It does add technical challenges as you have pointed out though. 2: Your argument as to why the main character should be Kassandra is weak. No offense. You pretty much say "she is cannon" and "we already have enough white men." Cool, whatever. I don't care about politics here. I'm open to Kassandra being the one they choose, but I would rather hear about how the world makes sense for her, how her story of survival is more suiting of a strong woman, that there is evidence of prominent female combatants in Ancient Greece, how she might be easier for our Animus pilot to work with and relate to due to being the same gender. Saying "we need more wamen" is noble and understanding, but not a talking point. It's a shallow desire without deep contextual relevance. Have you considered reevaluating your talking points now that the game is released?
Argument of "there should only be one" kinda gets thrown out of the window when you realize that Desmond Miles exist. You know, the guy, who's the descendant of Altair, Ezio, Edward, Connor, *and* Haytham.
It made me really sad when you showed that clip from AC1, because it reminded me of how cool this series used to be and how much direction it used to have, while now it just seems like an unorganised mess. The AC series had been a huge part of my life, but I honestly believe Origins was the last AC game I'll ever buy.
I played as Alexios it made more sense and she made a better Deimos as Alexios as Deimos is so generic. People say kassandra has better voice acting but I can’t notice and playing as a female Spartan is un immersive.
But didn’t Kassandra try to not speak? And when she did she tried to imitate a masculine tone if I remember correctly. Ahhh idk ill have to see some gameplay again and see.
@@Ma1q444 “ermmm ackshually ☝️🤓” it turned out to be the other way around. You can look up the novel or just ask “is Kassandra originally the mc?”. Lmk if that’s not the case.
You know as a huge fan of the AC games since the first one (I've built a brand new pc for it in 2008) and I ve played through all of them. I'm gonna play through the game as Both Alexios and Cassandra, by deviating from the traditions of one main character in the past they basically created this weird situation when fans talk about gender, Ubisoft needs to have the balls to create a good and well written interesting female hero, because until they do it and they do the gender selection thing it will always feel that they just added the option to be politically correct. For me the core of Assassin's Creed is about exploring interesting time periods with interesting characters with a good story both in the past and in the present and doing cool looking shit and climbing any building that I see. Until they decide that they create a story with a female hero without the gender selection screen the female hero will always feel tacked on and secondary. Ultimatly I will play Odyssey because the time period is very interesting and it looks fun and I wish every fan of AC to have fun playing it as well. :)
Actually ubisoft wanted the last 3 games to be just female. But the heads of the company for some reason like to think. that if you put a female on the cover it won't sell as well. So the forced Them to add male options so they could put the male on the cover.
The whole player character choice is just lazy tbh...if they had their own unique abilities, personality/beliefs, and dialogue unique storylines & missions, that would've been so much better and there would be a great reason for replayability. at its core its a reskin. ..with no depth, like if they made alexios & kassandra brother and sister instead of what they're doing...it would be a lot easier on the lore & building a great narrative
Understandable,and,under different circumstances,I'd agree with you,the only problem is,Ubi had one year to get this game up and running,the mocap,VO and casting was all done in a year, honestly,give these people some.credit,and try looking at the masterpiece they've accomplished given their circumstances
I don't agree with your reasoning, that there should be a female protagonist just because there hasn't been one. Mostly because it's obviously this game was meant for Alexius to be the main character and they only made Cassandra the main character because of angry feminist.
I just always play as Alexios, since it would be more historically accurate for the Olympics, and the Agoge. In ancient Sparta, the agoge was a school for boys, and there was another for girls, I forget what it’s called. Anyway, also in the Olympics, there is a big difference between Ancient Greece and now: women were not allowed to compete. Though I am still miffed that they got rid of the ability to use a shield in this game. Seriously, Ubisoft!! Why!?!? Why couldn’t we just use Darius’ hidden blade from the start and have Leonidas’ spear as a complete weapon, or his sword for that matter!? Also…why did the Persians in this game wear Ottoman style shishak helmets?? Did anyone else notice that?
This game REALLY should have had its own IP. If it did, it would have been far less of an outrage and would have just been seen as Dragon Age, Ancient Greek style.
@@senseishu937 If you mean telling the story and making it clear that no one is seeing it through the animus, then yes that could work. But that's the only way. Because the idea of gender choice and seeing things through the animus cannot co-exist. The "sketchy DNA" is a flimsy excuse.
The Layla parts are important for the story, but everytime i play Odyssey/Origins/Valhalla and the game takes you back to Layla, i always think "oh no, not a Layla part again... i'm going back to the animus asap"
Odyssey and Valhalla have failed the lore in an attempt to seem diverse and equitable. Saying that two sets of DNA are on a weapon, yet exactly the same game is played, saying that the gender of Eivor could be determined by how strong memory synchronization is...both are pathetic attempts to seem diverse in gameplay while spitting on the lore and fanbase at the same time. If your feminine protaganist is optional, they aren't going to be accepted. If your feminine protaganist is in a side game, they are not going to be accepted. If your feminine protaganist is overshadowed by a masculine counterpart, they are not going to be accepted. Ubisoft has tried for several years to appear diverse while keeping their cishet male fans on for the ride. They so desperately believe that Assassin's Creed would fail if cishet boys and men are turned away, but also know that teasing diversity can string others along with hope. It's absolutely pathetic. Give us a main game feminine protaganist of color. One who looks, speaks, and acts accordingly, and who hsa the world treat them as they would have been treated in history. Make the character mandatory, just like Altair or Ezio. Enough of this nonsense with split or broken DNA just to give us a choice. Enough putting feminine characters into side games that can be completely ignored and leave nothing unchanged. Enough overshadowing. Enough convuluted lore breaking excuses. Just give us a main game feminine character, and do so unashamedly, and without the expectation of praise. This is long overdue.
2:20 That's just wrong because whoever you pick you SEE in the future so how can the story be historically Kassandra if whoever picked Alexios literally talked to him in the 21st century.
Thanks for the Video Loomer:) I personally wouldn't mind if they only made Alexios a protagonist of the Game, but to make it like this? I liked the way they did it in Syndicate except for the promotion of the game maybe... but why make them the same person? Equal representation is important so I agree with you. As a female myself I normally don't care if it's a male or female protagonist as long as it serves the story, but what Ubisoft has done this time is just wierd frankly.
It doesn’t matter. There’s canon, and then there’s your play through, all rpg games have this, there’s the canon of oblivion, and then there’s the choices you make on your play through, there’s the canon of Fallout New Vegas, and then there’s what you choose to do.
@kangarooyo yeah thats what I got from it cause that's what was said. And if that's not what you heard than you're choosing to legitimately IGNORE what he said straight up.
Just like to point out that when Desmond tried to go really far back the animus rejected him... so in reality Ancient Greece shouldn’t be accessible by the animus...
7:31 you cannot claim she's historically canon without providing your evidence that she is, you have provided no evidence just how the Animus works and that only one can be canon, no evidence to support which one, though In game, and at the time used in game Males were Dominant Also in game the entire arena part of the story is definitely meant to be Alexios that whole part of the story is kicked off by a woman not being allowed into the arena to even watch her son participate, and as such Kassandra would not be able to even Participate just because she's female, and that's not even sexism in the sense of the time it's what was normal at the time Claiming something and proving something are two vastly different things all you did was claim Kassandra is canon(which just an FYI, you spelt the name wrong on your timestamp), the only evidence you provided was how the Animus is supposed to work and that due to how the Animus works only one can be canon. You don't provide evidence to support that that one person is Kassandra you just claim it is Kassandra As such you've proven nothing
Women in most of Ancient Greece couldn't even live the house without male company let alone fight. In Sparta they had more rights, but weren't fighters. As such Kassandras as the main character actually makes no historical sense at all. In fact this whole game feels like a huge divergence from the AC of old that tried to provide a plausible but alternate recreation of the past
I honestly liked having a choice and although I admire more people loving a female character finally starting to outshine her male counterpart, I do like having the choice. As a woman who plays this game, I still found myself wanting to play a male protagonist as that's what I was used to and have come to associate with the series kind of like how Lara Croft is always the Tomb Raider. I also found it more compelling to want to "save" my sister from her "alter ego" so to speak. I played through as Alexios and liked him just fine and in some cases even more.
FantasyEve87 So I just got assassins creed odyssey, yes I know I’m late to the party but I’m having a really bad time trying to pick either alexios or Kassandra and I want your opinion
I think with Alexios and Kassandra being the same person you can just think about it like the Lutece twins frim bioshock infinite. Alternet realities where they were born different genders
Alexios should be the canonical character because the story was clearly written with a male protagonist in mind. For example, women could not even attend-let alone compete in-the Olympic Games. Have a feeling that they decided to make her the canon character late in development and just ran with what they had… as though Ancient Greece would’ve been the same experience for Alexios and Kassandra. And the “diversity rules” argument for Kassandra is just weak. The market is what it is and prefers what it prefers, and a female protag isn’t some inherent benefit or good. If it is substantive for the story, so be it, but “meta” arguments about sociopolitical daydreaming will never hold water.
Your theory that they switched Kassandra to the canon character late in development makes sense when you look at all the merchandise and marketing for the game that ALL features Alexios
Their should of been only one choice and that should have been Alexios, making kassandra cannon is just a weak attempt at “diversity”. But either way Deimos is a horrible hot head villain that has no personality, Kassandra would not be raised to be a warrior that simply is historically wrong it makes no sense. Ubisoft is basically just spitting in the face of History and realism but the game is already a joke a shame they ruined Odyssey and Valhalla doing this.
I mean it makes sense in ancient greek to have a warrior woman. Spartan women were trained till their childhood. Amazonians and Daughters of Artimis were all women warrior groups who more or less held themself against the rest of the greek world. It makes sense in Odessy for a Spartan woman to be a mercenary
I don’t get why people are making such a big deal out of this, it’s literally just because they said we have a choice in gender. If the game had came out with just a male character literally no one would be crying about this but BECAUSE they’ve finally given the choice of a female character they are apparently all sexist now and need more woman as the protagonists. I literally got to this video from a forum where it was posted and read a comment about having a romantic choice saying “it’s about time we had an openly gay male character as LGBT have been starving for attention from the series” and it’s pure bs. I’m part of the “lgbt community” and I couldn’t give a sh*t what sexuality the characters are OR gender. I don’t care who is banging who or if it’s a male or female, all I care about is a game with a good story. People are getting FAR too into having absolutely everything represented in games and TV now to the point where it’s absolutely ridiculous. If that’s the case then Ancient Greece sure wouldn’t be the best time to be an exclusive female if you know anything about Greek history. Everyone needs to calm down and just enjoy the game for what it is and not try and add every single sexuality, sexual identity, skin colour and gender into it. They gave the game a gender choice, deal with it.
Sure I love a little argument as much as the next guy,but holy hell...this is a game,it's supposed to be fun,not some strictly accurate representation of history as it was
@@smoofffff flaming horses and gods were mythology so in this game they combined mythology and history. Now neither in mythology nor history they said that women were allowed to fight. but they were allowed to compete in olympic games
Diversity and representation......WHO CARES? I liked Edward because he was a cool pirate in a fun plot, i loved bayek because he had a wonderful personality and a sad motive, i went with Ezio to go through the renaissance and explore italy. Not because of their race or gender. I care about fun playable characters and canon more than i care for their gender or race. Because gender and race dont matter. Kassandra sounds like my pick since you stated that shes the canonical hero, if Alexios would have been canonical instead i would choose him. If kassandra has a goid story and a likeable character she will be my favorite out of the two. The gender and race dont matter. You can make it a feature and part of the story in a way thats enjoyable ill love it, but if not its just a drag to go through it for the sake of "diversity" and "representation".
It’s because you’re a white guy who sees himself in almost every single video game he picks up. You don’t need to care about representation if you’re already represented everywhere. Besides, it’s boring playing as the same gruff bearded white guy in every single game, having characters that look different to each other is just good character design.
I agree 100%. If you can choose characters, dialogue options and the ending of the game then you're not reliving history, you're making it. You won't be playing AC but Fallout Greece instead. And a female protagonist is long overdue. Gamers don't mind female protagonists at all but welcome them. Tomb raider, anyone?
Rafael Santos Personally I think there are a lot of people who are like me, I want play a male protagonist because I like to pretend that I AM the character, I just don't have as much fun playing a female protagonist because I can't imagine that I am the character then. I put myself in the shoes of the character and pretend that I am them. I couldn't give a shit about what works in AC lore, gender choice MUST be in the game...and I think it should've been there a long time ago as I'm sure there are plenty of ladies who do the same thing as me and pretend that they are Lara Croft or Alloy.
gender choices should absolutly not be in this type of game tell me you pick up a movie or a book anything like that would you like a pop up at the begging asking you if you want the main character to be a man or woman? assassins creed has always been a narrative driven game and above all the whole premise is that you re reliving the memories of someone by chaging the gender of a chracter you change their lifes completly so you re not reliving their memories anymore i agree with you that certain games are fun to have these types of mechanics like skyrim or fallout but that has no place in assassins creed
rui figueiredo I think you are wrong. The movie or book argument that you just made is very invalid to the point that I am making, with a movie or a book I do not imagine that I am the protagonist, with a game I do...I enjoy pretending that I AM that character and NOT having a gender choice takes that immersion away and I would have to settle with playing someone that I don't want to. I don't want to play as Kassandra or Alexios, I want to be a massive nerd and play as me, put myself in that world and that's why I mainly play male. Also Assassin's Creed has always been a POORLY written "narrative driven" game. I, and so many other people would absolutely accept the trade off of having a few retcons and lore breaks for more freedom to roleplay what we want. The game's narrative and lore just isn't good enough to not have the gender choice at this point. This game is no longer the bland game that AC used to be, it has changed for the better in every sense when it comes to gameplay, the story may even be far deeper than past games despite all of these die hard AC fans complaining about how it's not friendly to the lore. Seriously just forget about the lore and original story, it was never that good. To sum it all up: AC narrative wasn't great to begin with. Most people will happily accept more freedom and not care if it "works" in a game that no one plays for it's story. This RPG route is a far better path to take than sticking to their dead roots, and we need more RPG's with consequences to our decisions as Fallout and Skyrim fail in that department. I'm a sad fuck that wants to pretend that I am Alexios because I can't do that with Kassandra. Have a good day pal.
well i do understand where you re comming from but assassins creed games the early ones 1 ezio trilogy and black flag have all had great story lines so good that they could make comics books and a movie with it the ezio trilogy was praised for having a great plot good dialogue and characters so you re saying that they ve been poorly written games thats sounds more like your opinion all i want from an assassins creed game is a good story about a good character an assassin fighting against the templars while impacting the modern story line i want more treasure hunts throught time this game might be set in teh same world but its not an assassins creed game ubisoft should have named it something else and called it a spin off again you cant be relieving memories if you re the one choosing the route to take decisions dont matter if its someone elses memories you re watching just that alone breaks immersions because it makes no sense and if they keep going like this assassins creed origins will be the last AC game il buy but i hope you enjoy yourself if you decide to buy it
You want to play as a male because you're a male? Then play every other game in the franchise, play every other video game on the whole goddamn market. Women have to constantly deal with playing as men in video games. It should not have to kill a guy to play a singular female protagonist in a main console game with good marketing. And if you don't like it? Don't drop 60 dollars on the game. Simple as that. I loathe what they're doing in Odyssey and I'm not giving this game any of my money. I want to play as an assassin female in a game that doesn't have the availability of gender choice because that SNAPS the lore in two. That shouldn't be a choice I have to make. But here we fucking are. You want your games with gender choices, go play mass effect and dragon age. Bioware excels at blank slate characters.
I know I’m late but having a female protagonist just to have one is ridiculous simply because there is no point to have something just to make people feel better. And when I played syndicate and got to the end just to find out that I couldn’t play Jacob anymore I was upset because I had been playing him and only stopping when I couldn’t. P.S. I could care less if the main character was a male or female but the object of a choice but only making one canon is kinda ridiculous too, however, they were going for a more RPG type of game this time around
Could care less about all the previous Animus lore. I bought the game for the odyssey story and I was satisfied with it. A character being cannon or not cannon had no impact on me and I'm sure other people could care less too. Alexios is the better hero.
Dude, I understand that you want a female protagonist, but with how many people wanted two characters, It just doesn't add up. Plus, I think that Kassandra's memories would be impossible to see at the same time as Alexios. While looking at the laws of Sparta, it is said that all children will go to school the first 7 years of their lives. The men will be sent to the military in order to train for their career, while the woman goes to train as a housewife, while preparing themselves for a husband. It also says that in order for a woman two serve the military, her husband would have had to die in battle, or a slot had to be open. But obviously I've also looked at the fact that they are mercenaries and work for whoever they like or pays better. But in order for Kassandra to get the amount of money necessary for her to hire her crew, buy a ship, buy armor and clothes for her and her crew, plus their weapons would take YEARS of hard work or thievery. But because of the fact that Alexios is a male, he earns double the amount of money that Kassandra earns. That means for Kassandra, it might take years, but for Alexios, It might only take 1. Trust me when I say that here and then I love a female protagonist, but not only would that be historically inaccurate, but it would be asking to much of Ubisoft. Kassandra and Alexios are both badasses, but it would be IMPOSSIBLE for that to happen for this game to have only 1 protagonist. But hey, look for future a.c. games in future with female characters. Don't worry, it's coming.
The game also misses great opportunities for storytelling that way. Since the devs were so desperate on making it look as men and women are equal physically, they basically cut out what would have been a great story element. Having Alexios go through the mandatory Spartan training, required for boys only.
Having played the game, this is my interpretation (spoilers for a MAJOR reveal relatively early in the game below): The DNA they get is from the spear of leonidas, and its specifically said there are two people's strands of DNA on the spear, Alexios and Kassandra. Regardless of whoever you pick, both characters will appear in game as fully fledged adults, however whoever you pick to be the hero, the other one will become the villain. Here's how I see it: whoever you pick in game becomes the historical canon for that playthrough. If you pick Kassandra as the hero then 'canonically' if you picked Alexios then you would have followed his villain storyline, but no matter who you pick, your choice becomes the hero. In game its said you can pick between two strands of dna to pursue, not that you can pick who the hero is and who the villain is. basically all the choices you make regardless of how large or small they are purely exist as game mechanics, and become the historical canon for YOUR game.
I agree completely. On a another note, Ubisoft really should have given us a full game with Shao Jun. Not only would I have LOVED to play as her because she was already established in lore but she would have continued the story directly on from Ezio. They would have sorted out the issue of there being few female protagonists much sooner. A crying shame they wasted Shao Jun potential on a spin off game. Ubi seem to have shakey ideas when it comes to gender. They treat it as a selling point instead of an idea to fit the story.
I'm still disappointed about that. China was one of the settings I absolutely wanted to see in a main game, and Shao Jun was so cool in Embers. But nope, all it got was a side scroller spin off...
I think something that prides itself on being history accurate should be and just being honest there is little room for representation. That’s not to say that there shouldn’t be a strong female protagonist but maybe in different civ or era time where women were given more rights. I’d would totally love to see some strong demon in the series in the appropriate setting.
Simple fix. If you chose one of the characters, then they'd experience the games story, while the other character would be Demos (or whoever, I've never played the game, and just watched part of a lets play, so IDK). So if you picked Alexios, then within that universe, Kassandra would be controlled by the cult, and you'd experience that if you picked her.
Alexios should be canon because an exiled Spartan woman, and child of some sort of prophecy should just settle down, get married, and make babies for the rest of her life. Instead of training, say, independantly of the Spartans and becoming, say, a mercenary unbeholden to Spartan culture. All joking aside, I agree with what you're saying. I play Assassin's Creed to be told a set story with all the lore elements that I've come to love, not to ""Write my own Odyssey"" whatever that means. I do get the feeling that these explanations will make a lot more sense when the game comes out (even if it's still not totally acceptable).
My opinion is that Alexios should be cannon. It would be more historically accurate since the spartan women(like Kassandra if you play as her) were not trained to be soldiers. Only the men. And also at some point at the story you go to the Olympics. But the participation was forbidden for women. So there would be no way for Kassandra to participate in them. That's MY opinion, I don't say other people's oppinions are wrong!
I agree with everything you said, and I also think this isn't the first time the games industry's irrational fear of letting a woman star in a AAA action game has harmed the AC franchise. Evie getting sidelined was pretty bad, and it definitely also screwed up the story because she felt like a weird unnecessary addition to the story because they didn't dare give her any of the actual important missions, but I think Unity and Origins are even more interesting, because in both cases what we have are stories that, in every way that matters, are about female protagonists - Elise and Aya. They are the ones who have personal connections with the main antagonists of both games, they are the ones with more interesting personal character arcs, and they are the ones who get the big hero moment at the end of the game - Elise sacrificing her life, and Aya killing one of the most famous people in all of human history and personally founding the Hidden Ones, which would one day become the brotherhood. Both of them SHOULD have been the protagonists of their own games, and were clearly intended to be because all the side content (novelization of Unity, Origins comics) is from their point of view. In Origins' case, I don't mind as much because Bayek is a very compelling character and probably my favorite AC protagonist, so while I think Aya's story would have been more interesting, I also think the decision to focus on Bayek wasn't terrible. But Unity would have been so much better with Elise in the starring role, and so much of it would have been emotionally stronger, not to mention that she's just a more developed, more interesting character than Arno. Arno just feels like a blank slate, an audience surrogate invented at the last minute to give us a perspective through which to experience Elise's story, and that's just sad.
I wrote this comment halfway through watching, and then pricked my ears up towards the end because your explanation on why Kassandra should be the only protagonist is fantastic and thoughtful; good stuff, you've earned a sub.
Breaking their own lore rules is definitely what bothered me the most. I was a pretty confused when they showed Alexios and Kassandra acting out the same scenes with the same lines. Not because they're interchangeable player characters, but instead what odd explanation there would be. And it's like you said, it pokes holes into how the animus is supposed to project Alexios or Kassandra's memories.
As a female, I personally don’t give a shit whether the protagonist is male or female. Obviously there are many people who care about that but it’s just my opinion. As long as the protagonist has a good story line I’m okay with that. I think I’m going to play Alexios because he personally appeals to me the most, even more than Kassandra. I’m sure she’s going to be badass but I personally think I’m going to go with Alexios. But, my opinion may change in the future.
I think the issue is just that assassin's creed didnt start as a rpg series, so a lot of long term players dont treat the modern games as rpgs despite them being intended that way. The "true canon" does not matter in a rpg. The whole point of a rpg is that the canon is whatever you decide it should be. That's the point. If you decide to play as Kassandra, then your canon is her, and thats that. If you play as Alexios, then he is your canon. Most other rpg series (ie Mass Effect) have your imput data of major choices from previous games. This solves the issue of references in later games or statues of characters. Just allow a quick choice to be made and that issue is gone
I played as alexios because i found his line delivery better. also i found Kassandra her voice a little annoying. But that is just my preference. Anyway in my head Alexios is canon because i played as him. And there is no problem because we make our own story. If you like Kassandra better than Alexios that is ok as well. It doesnt really matter.
To those complaining about Kassandra not being “historically accurate”, I would like to point out that this is a series about people using science-fiction technology to witness a millennia long shadow war over a series of magical artifacts that determine the fate of humanity. Where most historical events were orchestrated by the two factions in that shadow war. Where Jack the Ripper didn’t just kill five prostitutes, but dozens of London police and others. Where Ben Franklin developed a grenade launcher. Where a firearm mounted under one’s arm and lethal at a respectable distance was created by the time Constantinople fell. Is the idea that a woman good enough at killing people managed to convince a bunch of mercenaries to work for her really your deal breaker on that front? I’ve come to notice female protagonists are virtually the only thing people seem to get all upset about in regards to “historical accuracy”. And Ubisoft doesn’t get credit for telling us Jacob was bi after the fact. If you don’t have the courage to just show us, you don’t get to pat yourself on the back for being “inclusive”.
GAS-504 I’m just saying it seems unreasonable to deem a female protagonist as the breaking point when their are plenty of other things that are much more anachronistic in regards to historical accuracy. Women may not have been respected throughout most of history, but there are plenty of examples of women becoming highly regarded leaders in patriarchal societies. If the complaint is historical accuracy, then Kassandra as a leader seems, to me at least, to be far less of an issue than plenty other things that should otherwise “break the illusion” as it were.
GAS-504 I understand some say that a female protagonist breaks immersion, but I’m trying to make people understand that it’s not entirely far fetched. Setting aside all the other things that should be far more immersion breaking, there shouldn’t really be a reason to find Kassandra as out of place. As I’ve stated, there were exceptions throughout history to the rigid gender rules that governed daily life. And considering Kassandra is a professional mercenary/possible member of an ancient warrior cult, I don’t think it’s so hard to believe she is able to deal with the types of enemies you will face in this game. There have been, and continue to be, plenty of female warriors who are just as competent and capable as their male counterparts. My intention was never to condescend, but to have people put this situation in perspective, and realize there isn’t as much to get upset about as they initially thought.
Noah Masi But the things you claim that would make more sense to break immersion dont because they are so interconnected within the story, its accepted and almost normal at this point. Little 110 lb lady beating 300 lb men isnt. Hell, even seeing Bayek take down the 300 lb men was kinda a stretch. So having Kassandra do it, I'm just like ya nope. Its like Atomic Blonde but with games. I think Ubi are doing it right by not shoving SJW politics down peoples throats and just giving players the option to do what they want.
il explain to you why its more believable the sci fi stuff in the game than a spartan woman figting in the war for starters assassins creed has always been grounded in reality it dint bend real history to fit the sci fi themes it just added them on the same can be said for the assassins a perfect example of this is in assassins creed 2 when the medici are attacked by the pazzi at the church if you read a book you know that some of them made it out but in the assassins creed lore they made it out because ezio was there now kassadra doing what she is doing just doesnt make sense if she was seen in an army during that time period god know what would have happened to her and about the grenade launcher thats just there for gameplay reasons it doesnt affect the narrative and thats what players have a problem with you cant say plenty of female warriors are just as competent and capable as males when thats just not true even today reports from the military say women set back groups of soldiers because they cant keep up
Matt Damon I don’t think it’s that much of a stretch to believe Kassandra could defeat grown men. Your argument seems to be that Kassandra would be lighter and not as strong compared to her male opponents. That isn’t really the deciding factor in combat. Strength helps, but ultimately the goal, in this time period, is to shove bits of sharp metal into parts of your enemy that bleed a lot. Some people were born strong, some were born weak, but metal made them all equal. She doesn’t need to punch her enemies into submission, just stab/cut them enough that they die. The Brotherhood (or whatever they’re called at this point) have always been combat pragmatists, I don’t think they would let something as easily surmountable as lack of physical strength hold them back for long. It certainly didn’t stop any of the other female assassins we’ve seen.
I loled, i thought ur reasoning gonna be a good one with historical prepective and other logical things, that might change my mind, turn out just some forced diversity bullshit, look, im ok with female mc, i like "the last of us","tomb rider", etc, but when its said it takes on a historical time, even if its fiction, i want it to be immersive as possible. Im open to discuss
Honestly the perfect time to feature a female protagonist in the main game series came and went with Shao Jun. I thought for sure we'd be getting a game set in china with her after Embers but it never happaned. It can still happen, if not with her, then a different character in an appropriate setting. I don't think a spartan warrior in ancient greece is all that appropriate for a female protagonist though imo.
Great essay, Loomer - I agree with you on all of your points. I was a bit underwhelmed with the marketing for Odyssey. It initially struck me as "Hey, you know 300? Now you can play it! We even have the (TM)Spartan Kick!" Honestly, all I want is a cohesive story-line that's worth all of the money I will be putting out for each game now and in the future. (Don't even get me started on how the Season Pass doesn't get you -everything- anymore.) Regardless, I will be playing as Kassandra as she is canon and i will happily be humming "She's Got Medals" in the meanwhile. lol Also, I really like your Illoominations graphic - nice work!
I kind of get a feeling that Ubisoft don't dare to have a full triple A game with a female protagonist only. Tomb Raider seem to be doing well why couldn't AC with a Female protagonist do that? I liked that Syndicate had Evie and Jacob but i always feelt like Evie was the main protagonist but she got the least time towards the end of the game. At least she was on the box cover i guess but a person outside the AC community seeing that box art couldn't tell that the game had a male and female playable character i think :P i will play Odyssey like i play Bioware games which means i will do a playthrough as male and than as female
The setting allowing players to choose the protagonist in different gender is really good and it gives choices in diversity. I don't support the idea to fix the protagonist as female. Ever since the ancient time until last century, battlefield or combats are dominated by male. Why Hollywood and some people are so keen to push the equality in such history related action games or movie. Especially I believe there are more male fans of Assassin Creed than female. I prefer playing as a male Spartan or Viking than a female.
While I agree with your conclusion that Kassandra should be the main character, the "more diversity" argument is not the best reason. I think Kassandra works better from a narrative perspective, as Alexios being the unhinged Deimos seems the more natural fit to me. Also from a historical perspective, at the age of the playable character during the flashback sequences a male Spartan youth would already be in training, and I find it less likely they would be present on the mountain to recklessly charge the priest. Oh, and the voice acting for Kassandra is probably my favorite performance since Jennifer Hale as FemShep. Just my two cents.
I am kind of in the middle of this whole thing. Ubisoft and AC do a lot of representation of all types of people, sometimes good and sometimes not very good. Liberation and China has a female but were side games. There was Syndicate with a duo but the female was marketed very poorly and wasn't utilised very well in the game. I think Ubisoft wants to appeal to as many types of people by having options but sacrifices continuity to do so. I feel like Odyssey was supposed to have only the female protagonist but Ubisoft are scared of pushing away, which I assume the male majority fanbase, some of which may self insert or care about physical and historical realism (even though the historical events in AC are quite unrealistic to begin with). So I think options were the way to go even if it breaks lore and I think Ubisoft stopped caring about the lore too.
Completely agree Loomer, great to see you uploading. Hope Ubisoft see this, but let’s be honest nothing will change. I think how great this series could have been, it’s a great shame.
Whichever you choose is the one in your game universe the DNA represents basically you choose who the DNA belongs to amd the other just fills in the opposite role, it doesnt belong to both and its not undecided whos memories they actually are. This guy is making it a bigger deal than it needs to be really.
@@AmrothPalantir the only troll is truly you. The fact that you call me a simp for choosing the canon character THAT WAS CHOSEN IN THE LORE BY THE CREATORS OF THE GAMES AND STORY and so by your logic since she is a woman it is not canon and I am a simp. That is just pathetically immature of you ngl
@@senseishu937 The creators of the game are SIMP's and agenda pushers, only affecting the weakest of minds. enjoy the SIMP life, you will enjoy the new Bond movie, I'm sure...
Having two characters is great, the problem is they focused too much on Kassandra and that led to Alexios's voice acting, animations, and overall feel quite lacklustre. Hell, I would even prefer 2 characters over 1. I just love playing male characters much more because I can relate to it better.
I'm fine with female protagonists as long as they make sense. Being a female in ancient Greece would not allow you to do things men could, or at least without prejudice. If the protagonist was Kassandra and she did have to struggle with sexism that would be fine. But seeing strangers treat a woman as they would a man in ancient Greece is just dumb.
Not entirely true. For Athens, yes that'd be accurate, but, while women weren't fully equals, they had nearly all the same rights as men in Sparta. To which, Kassandra is in fact Spartan. Also, as a mercenary, political barriers dont mean much.
@@drak1559 See, that doesn't really apply to an orphaned mercenary though. Women in Sparta also had their own Olympics program. For writing purposes, (not that the story is much good anyway) it could be said that Spartans at least, wouldn't be so opposed to a female mercenary. Though that may be a slight bending of history, it works a bit. Though in Athens, it would be awful. Which, IMO, they should've just gone with one protagonist. All the games are connected through history, and as such, character choice has to be far more strict. Seems side handed tbh. If they wanted to do a female character, they should've just done a female character, and wrote a story to work for her. Alexios is just dumb imo.
![I.N "HALLUCINATION" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/n5B5q1Hwt_U/mqdefault.jpg)
![BLACK BAG - Official Trailer [HD] - Only in Theaters March 14](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Du0Xp8WX_7I/mqdefault.jpg)
Hey everyone! Just want to say that while you're definitely free to disagree respectfully in these comments, personal attacks on me, the devs, or other fans is only going to get you banned here. Don't be a dick.
Having played Origins I think that Ubisoft missed an opportunity. If they knew they were going to go the route of heavier RPG elements and in-game choices, they should have switched focus on the present day component of the games to be set in the precursor times. It's fairly established that the precursor society can delve into the future, and that they would need some ability to influence it. Which can be explained by the presence of hidden sages if needed. And since the "modern day" portion would then be in the precursor era that would make most of the content of the game set in the future of the present day. So whether the main character of Odyssey is male or female could be explained away because in order to get to the timeline where Desmond exists the gender typically doesn't matter (near the end it could/would but before that there is a lot more room for flexibility). Similarly choices inside the game would represent non-essential parts of the timeline. For that matter the games themselves could be explained as precursors examining points in time where they've predicted a sage would exist and be able to influence the world as needed.
is just a game man, ubisoft don't care bout little details as long as we get more choices and fun
I dont have a promblem with kasandra but for a creece setting alexios is the best choise. You see at the time the game takes place all women could was do choirs at home and look after their children and i know that because i am from creece and ancient culture was part of our history lesson .Also all of our myths are talking about men so alexios is a percrect fit
Not so much. I don't know enough to say whether that is fact or not but because of the games premise of using the animus to view the true history, it could be implied that Kassandra is out of the norm.
Sorry, just made a HUGE paragraph about it.
Alexios is as close as i'll get to Leonidas soooooo, yea, THIS IS SPARTA
BadUploadScheduleツ I agree 💯 percent
#THISISSPARTA
#TeamAlexios
Agreed
#THISISSPARTA
#TeamAlexios
I always thought that before you start playing any next title, if it has any connection to the previous one, that they should ask you before new game to briefly give some information about how you played it.
Like: ''welcome to Assassin's Creed Valhalla, have you played Assassin's Creed Odyssey? If so what character did you play as?'' so that every player can have his personal lore and that the game can adjust to it when those small little details pop up during gameplay.
That's how they should've done it because Odyssey's whole thing was player's choice
This should have been the explanation: “we did it to give you choice, have fun.”
Agree
For me this argument boils down to "you need to choose kassandra because diversity and strong female protagonist"
My counter argument is "if it ain't broke dont fix it"
@@mrpsyco5884 and then they make her the canon,why needs then two characters to play in the game?
@@cssbr3191
Because the higher ups at Ubisoft felt a female protagonist wouldnt sell, which btw is not always true.
@@athalonARCit would have been true here. A female Spartan protagonist is just dumb
I’m just gonna say (for my headcannon) that which ever one you choose becomes cannon, thus, you choose the past.
I like that
Is it okay if I choose to have odyssey as non canon in my head canon?
This would be okay if I didn't play Valhalla and in the new DLC it's Cassandra
Looks like they are getting an “Eivor” problem in AC: Valhalla
These new activist groups are pushing for too much “representation” in a game series where it prides itself on being historically accurate. Being frank there is little to no room for representation
@@birdy4112 assassins creed has never been historically accurate. Even down to the first game. It’s historical fiction. It uses historical and mythological characters and throws some sci fi on top.
If you think AC is historically accurate bc they have characters of real historical people then you’re actually a moron.
@@10tailedbijuu "I can stomach meeting gods in this sci-fantasy game, but female protagonists are just too ahistorical for me."
@@10tailedbijuu Sheild Maidens most likely existed, but they were very few and were probably in battle only when there was no other choice
@@10tailedbijuu cry about it
Why couldn’t they do a Jacob and Evie Frye thing and allow you to switch them simultaneously as the focused protagonist?
Well bc the other one is an antagonist
@@colgantyskwicz7239 true
@@colgantyskwicz7239 playing as an antagonist would be cool as well. Remember when we played as Haytham for a while?
Or like a Valhalla thing where it swaps based on the animus
@@arthurmorgan8765 but you can be a bad guy you can lie,steal,kill
Saying that Jacob is bisexual after the fact is super annoying. They tried to play it both ways by allowing you to think that he’s straight while at the same time they half-assedly state that he’s bisexual. I’m not giving them credit for that. You don’t have to sit up there and guess about any other characters’ sexuality. Evie is the other protagonist in the game, and her sexuality is front and center. Jacob is the only one in the series that you can kinda maybe sorta say he’s bisexual based off of how you interpret one relationship, and different people will have different takeaways on said relationship. That’s lame. If it ain’t in the game, it didn’t happen, so you can take the half-assed inclusion somewhere else.
It’s bullshit of the highest order to make Kassandra canon, yet put Alexios all over the marketing. Aloy is the only playable character in Horizon: Zero Dawn and that game was very successful, so we can stop with the “‘men will only play male characters” argument. People will play good games. End of story. I would have more respect for them if they stopped coming up with nonsensical lore reasons, and just said that they believed in player choice and wanted to implement that feature, and went with Alexios in the marketing because they thought that it would sell more. At least that’s being honest.
yea whats dumb is Cassandra isn't cannon in the novels its alexios but after the game came out and Cassandra was more popular (for reasons I dont understand) she's cannon but when you play the game you see that it doesn't fit very well once you get to first blade. also this whole shit with sexuality is annoying. yes the Athens and the romans were gay but the thebes, Persians and especially the Spartans were not. for one for the Spartans they look at same sex stuff as shameful and it was outlawed 2nd spartan woman were look at in very high order because they created spartan men and they aslo had laws saying you had to be married by a certain time and death penalty for adultery and if you forgot you character is a spartan. another thing pointing to the fact that alexios was supposed to be the main character is first blade, neema male counter part was hired after the fact neemas character had already finished her lines which is why the dialog with nemmas male counter part is off. but remember people whined and cried that evil ubisoft made you have a heterosexual relationship so they had to patch the dlc so your character could say things like "i only did this for the blood line" which is why the dlc is so glitchy
@@WADEPH33R3 i really don't know why the sexuality part is such a big problem to people. You can literally not fuck anyone the whole game if you don't want to. And also, Kassandra / Alexios mainly grew up in Kephallonia and not Sparta. So I don't think that their morals would be of big importance to them.
I also think it's disappointing that they didn't commit to one character. They should just make one quality character instead of two half-assed ones.
Exactly
@@WADEPH33R3 I didn't read all of your comment, but the first part, Kassandra is the protagonist in the novel (I read it lol)
Same with male Evior. Every piece of marketing, he’s male. But all of a sudden, it’s female?
Here's my theory pitch. Alexios and Kassandra are twins. When you choose one as the protagonist, the other becomes the antagonist. Somewhere near the story, they battle, and they bleed. Their blood is mixed, so not only are they twins, but their events have been mixed. As such, Layla's animus is working with this unstable and confusing DNA sample, in which the Animus fills the memory gaps with constructed simulations, as done in the Last Descendants trilogy novel series. What do you think?
EDIT: For those who haven’t noticed, this theory prediction of mine was posted BEFORE the game launched.
SH3RIFFO I like that
brooo that’s actually really good
Once again the common folk that are truly passionate about the project always have better explanations and story ideas than the actual creators. What a shame.
In Andromeda the Ryder you don't choose is your sibling but here they're both the same person so the other one doesn';t exist.
Well you're right, one becomes the protagonist and the other becomes the antagonist
I think people are taking this video game too seriously.
I'm sure the game will be fun, and that's what games are for, fun.
Swifty Unknown that doesn’t change the fact that developers are breaking their own fucking rules that they made for the sake of a gameplay mechanic 🤦♂️
You don't seem to realize just how serious AC has become for longtime fans.
I will stop taking video game seriously when all of them cost $10 at max.
🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️ Return to fortnite to have "fun" then.... There's actually of lot of fans who cares about the story...
Swifty Unknown fucking up the overarching story doesn’t seem like fun to me........
Short Answer: Alexios was meant to Be canon, but diversity and women quota made Cassandra Canon. Proof : Kassandra should not have been able to replace Tektikles in the Olympics as it;'s only a Male event.
Agree with all of your arguments that are rooted in lore. However I don't think that Kassandra should be the only protagonist because she is a woman, but because she is the canon character. To me doesn't really matter whether I play as a man or a woman. But it matters to me that the gender and ethnicity of the character has a reason beyond diversity for the sake of diversity. It has be a narrative reason why this story makes most sense to tell through the eyes of a woman or a man of what ever ethnicity is selected. Love your videos man. Cheers!!
We can agree on number 3. As for the others weeeeelllll. Thats just your fucking opinion and i don't really care. Your probably just a fucking troll.
agreed, more or less. I do think AC lore is kind of a joke though, so the only thing I really care about is how good the game play/story is. I'm a little annoyed at the video for how it minimizes Aveline as a character, when I really enjoyed that game and her story. Sorry to necro your old post.
But is white man necessarily the default?
In AC or in general?
This is the only comment I’ve seen that has tried to make a point without seeming as if your talking down at someone. Thank you.
Still, I vote for Alexios because he at least is more historically accurate and, nah a female lead in a sexist country without highlighting sexism is a nasty tasting idea.
I want female leads, but not of that type that is made for specific reasons, specific message and we all know what it is. I want a genuine character that doesn't serve certain ideas, because from the head on start, it seems that the character is made to show "SJW" ideas, and that's a really sad thing, because once a character serves an idea it gets stripped of its speciality and it's personality revolves around that idea only.
Characters like Ezio and Edward didn't come to me as males, they came to me as people with dazzling personalities and views, people who changed my views in life and made an effect in me beyond being men, real people.
I'd prefer a series full of men with personalities than a series with females that serve an idea rather than do justice to their personalities. And trust me, I'm a female.
When a protagonist is respected because it is a "female" and not a "person", there is something wrong here. That's my opinion.
"A female lead in a sexist country without highlighting sexism is a nasty tasting idea." Agreed, stay tuned for the next video essay I make. ;)
I will, as always 😎🖒🖒🖒
@Violet Rose You're hitting on some points that I definitely agree with, and I think I know what you're getting at. I think back to Aya. She, in reality, was not a pleasant character. She had a chip on her shoulder (sexism), but that chip was a pretty realistic one imo. I know Ancient Egypt gave women a lot of freedom in its height, but it still had a lot of its own issues - and this is Ptolmey's Egypt as well, where I'm sure Greek culture has seeped into Egypt around Aya's time. And ancient Greece at large was not kind to women. Aya did her best to overcome it. Her successes were admirable, but her lust for revenge still wrecked her as emotionally as it did to Bayek.
Like you, I appreciate a character regardless of gender *when there's a personality and a character arc from start to finish.* This "blank slate" formula doesn't offer that at all. I find Ezio to be too generic for my personal taste (just the star prototype of his sort of character), but I very much enjoyed Altair's personality post AC1, Edward's entire character arc, and what made Connor and Bayek different from most male protagonists in games and to me, more like real characters. Evie had potential and I do adore her, but she was overshadowed by the fact that Ubisoft wanted market Jacob more heavily and by the fact that they ignored that Evie would *absolutely* have dealt with a host of sexism that Jacob would have never had to face. It wouldn't have been quite as hostile as what Ancient Greece had, but Evie would have been seen as very alien in Victorian London. For me to go into details would involve an essay, (I've studied this a bit in my own writing research), so I'll stop there XD A sidenote: If they marketed Aveline differently and paid more attention to her game, I think she would have done really well. Aveline is a wonderfully unique character on her own, and they did tackle her facing sexism in mid 18th Century Louisiana. You could argue her gameplay mechanic is her trying to use those struggles to her advantage and get through them.
I regard both Kassandra and Alexios as generic, which is why Ubisoft trying to pass them off as unique and dynamic is so heavily insulting to me. Alexios is every other grizzly manly man that makes attempts to be charming, and I know of a fantasy version of Kassandra that exists in video games: Femme Hawke. Blank slate characters are literally regulated to just "female," and "male," which is why I hate them so much. There's no unique personality in there at all that makes them act and feel human, because the player inserts those qualities themselves. I hate that. Every time I tried to play a game like that I had zero fun at all. So I've given up on those types of games.
Becky Weiss
First, hats off for this awesome commentary. I totally agree.
(Especially the Evie part, I'd like to see your research about that, and I mean it)
@Violet Rose, this article is an example of what I was hinting at:
www.smithsonianmag.com/history/hatpin-peril-terrorized-men-who-couldnt-handle-20th-century-woman-180951219/
And keep in mind this "hatpin" scandal happened when Lydia Frye would have been a pre-teen. The article speaks of the fact that women were just starting to vocally voice the need to defend themselves and were facing ridicule from the press, but the voices were growing louder by the month. Logically, this sort of thing would be bubbling underneath the surface during Evie's younger years - women that sought a need to defend themselves but got ridiculed for it at every turn.
Here's a theory based off of something based out of this article alone: Evie, going through the streets of London, faces the constant question from strangers of why is an "appropriate" male companion or relative not with her. Like Aveline, she gets noticed when she's out on her own carrying weapons. Like Aveline, you must err on the side of caution as Evie, *especially* when walking in the richer parts of London. A upperclass women defending herself would be seen as less common than say, a female factory worker. That difference should be shown as you hop from district to district while playing as Evie. She'd face a mixture of ridicule from men and women with a touch of admiration and perhaps envy - but the admiration only from women, and a scant few men in the game who know what's up.
Evie then also gets questioned about her intelligence and her ability to protect herself wherever she goes, yet it's *her* that has to clean up all of Jacob's messes, as seen in the game. When Evie displays intelligence that surprises her male peers, let that be shown by those men who don't know any better and let us see Evie get irked over it (but likely resigned, unfortunately).. Perhaps this could be part of why she falls for Henry/Jayadeep - he's a non violent man that respects and admires Evie and what she does. In those times, men like that would be incredibly rare for Evie to meet, even though there were likely a small handful of female assassins she trained with while growing up. (Thus the male assassins would be used to the concept of a female one). Even then, it's very clear that Evie was a perfectionist. I doubt in a society like that, the male assassins in training would have taken kindly to Evie besting them at every turn. The only male who truly would be cool with it would have been her twin brother, and that's because he sees it as sibling rivalry, not a matter of a girl beating a boy. And as far as Evie and Henry/Jayadeep...wasn't that actually part of the reason why Evie falls for him in the novel?
And why not let Jacob see some of the issues that Evie deals with as a part of him "waking up" and not being reckless?
During the time of Syndicate, the women's suffrage movement in Britain was just being born and slowly taking root. I would think that for Evie, someone that is very aware of how actions have consequences, would have a few things to say when this was brought to her attention. This was a period in history that was moving into the modern era as we know it at a fast clip. I would think that, at the very least, there would have been a sidequest in reference to this. But to my memory, there was absolutely nothing.
It's just as puzzling as the fact that there are no npc characters of color shown in Victorian London when it would have been *very* historically accurate to show them beyond Henry/Jayadeep and Duleep Singh. The Hulu TV show Harlots takes the time and the care to show plenty of PoC, and it's a genuinely historically accurate tv series set a hundred years before the events of Syndicate - also in London. PoC in London goes back even further. Elizabeth I blamed a famine that hit London in the 1590s on the black community that resided in London at the time. If you're curious, here's an article speaking about some of it: www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/pathways/blackhistory/early_times/elizabeth.htm
For a series that prides itself on historical accuracy, the sort of populations that existed during each time, and what they were affected by (since the Brotherhood prides itself on protecting the downtrodden), they've been doing a junk job at showing it since AC Unity dropped. I can forgive a tiny thing here and there, but Unity was when they truly began to not care. AC Origins was a bright spot that I thought symbolized the series trying to recover, but it's clear that Origins had the historical accuracy and representation that it did thanks to Arshaf alone.
I'll definitely agree that the marketing is all over the place. Alexios is front and center, but Kassandra is canon
I agree with you on your first point, Odyssey should only have one protagonist. However, I would prefer Alexios because he fits the image of a Spartan warrior better and it’s more historically accurate. Assassin’s Creed has always had a tinge of science fiction, but they stay grounded where they can and I think the very identity of the protagonist should definitely be held to a historical standard.
@Masticatious yes.
Game setting: ISU civilization, and you don't actually meet zeus as it is part of the animus.
A mercenary woman at that time? Very hard to believe
Kassandra as the main protagonist messes up my understanding of Greek mythology, and the expectations of women in Classical Greek Timeline.
Greek mythology has always been tweaked over the years in stories. Heck, the greek myths you know are likely not even the originals.
@@athalonARC You're right about that. The Greek Gods were in fact an all-male race that came from the stars. The depictions of the female gods were made up by humans as they had no idea there could be species that can be entirely male.
@@fenrisvermundr2516 Wait really? Can u provide source for that?
@@based_misogynist1424 there is no source for that. the original myths featured both male and female entities, and Gaia, the entity that supposedly appeared as the earth, is female. Through her then came the elements, such as the sky, the mountains etc and then came the pantheon. Even before the Greek gods and entities were thought of, (or better say "documented" ) the entities that were first worshipped at the first civilizations were female
@@arxohalk335 Source:Trust me bro
I dont agree with the character selection argument you made as its just a choice that its given to the player, I dont think it should go further than that. The other part however, I strongly agree. Ubisoft puts those diversity disclaimers as if to keep people from criticizing them, when really, they dont have much to show for it
Honestly, I would argue a few points here... I'll only briefly touch on 2 of them.
1: Yes, the idea that you have 2 strands of DNA makes things feel convoluted and contrived, but I would say that you could look at it as whichever you choose is who the memories belong to. Simple, I know, but not unreasonable to ask of the player seeing as we already have to suspend our disbelief of the world every time a kill animation doesn't synch up. It does add technical challenges as you have pointed out though.
2: Your argument as to why the main character should be Kassandra is weak. No offense. You pretty much say "she is cannon" and "we already have enough white men." Cool, whatever. I don't care about politics here. I'm open to Kassandra being the one they choose, but I would rather hear about how the world makes sense for her, how her story of survival is more suiting of a strong woman, that there is evidence of prominent female combatants in Ancient Greece, how she might be easier for our Animus pilot to work with and relate to due to being the same gender. Saying "we need more wamen" is noble and understanding, but not a talking point. It's a shallow desire without deep contextual relevance. Have you considered reevaluating your talking points now that the game is released?
Alexios is not a "white" man
There is no evidence of prominent female combatants in Ancient Greece
I’m not arguing I just prefer using boy characters so I love having 2 characters in this
“Old and imprecise” if that were true we never would have gotten Connor or Ezio especially Altair
Alexios is like 3000 years before so there DNA would be more precise than Kassandra's so that's wrong
I spit out my drink when you jumped from the really deep "anyone can leave their mark on history" to "To paraphrase a quote from Ratatouille"
I was about to agree with your argument until I found out that you were just pushing an agenda.
Argument of "there should only be one" kinda gets thrown out of the window when you realize that Desmond Miles exist. You know, the guy, who's the descendant of Altair, Ezio, Edward, Connor, *and* Haytham.
He means there shouldn’t be a gender selection as it messes with the history.
right but they’re not experiencing the same story
It made me really sad when you showed that clip from AC1, because it reminded me of how cool this series used to be and how much direction it used to have, while now it just seems like an unorganised mess. The AC series had been a huge part of my life, but I honestly believe Origins was the last AC game I'll ever buy.
MC Cooper "probably the objectively" lol
@MC Cooper not ever near to best neither good, delusional fanboy bitch
Did you like Origins?
@@LKLyrics470 I'm not sure you are so angry about it. I genuinly love Greek history, and loved this game almost as much as I loved 2 and brotherhood.
Abby tell me did you have fun playing AC Odyssey I bet you did and that’s all that matter having fun playing the game
I made a big mistake picking Kassandra, she was totally un-immersive I regretted playing as her I wish had picked Alexios.
@@10tailedbijuu yeah me too
I played as Alexios it made more sense and she made a better Deimos as Alexios as Deimos is so generic.
People say kassandra has better voice acting but I can’t notice and playing as a female Spartan is un immersive.
It should make sense to play Alexios because if you wear a male cult mask with a female voice you should be caught instantly
And why would a woman be trained to be a Spartan?
So Yeah, It Makes More Sense For Alexios To Be The Protagonist
Facts you can tell they made the game for Alexios and then changed it.
But didn’t Kassandra try to not speak? And when she did she tried to imitate a masculine tone if I remember correctly. Ahhh idk ill have to see some gameplay again and see.
@@Ma1q444 “ermmm ackshually ☝️🤓” it turned out to be the other way around. You can look up the novel or just ask “is Kassandra originally the mc?”. Lmk if that’s not the case.
You know as a huge fan of the AC games since the first one (I've built a brand new pc for it in 2008) and I ve played through all of them.
I'm gonna play through the game as Both Alexios and Cassandra, by deviating from the traditions of one main character in the past they basically created this weird situation when fans talk about gender, Ubisoft needs to have the balls to create a good and well written interesting female hero, because until they do it and they do the gender selection thing it will always feel that they just added the option to be politically correct.
For me the core of Assassin's Creed is about exploring interesting time periods with interesting characters with a good story both in the past and in the present and doing cool looking shit and climbing any building that I see.
Until they decide that they create a story with a female hero without the gender selection screen the female hero will always feel tacked on and secondary.
Ultimatly I will play Odyssey because the time period is very interesting and it looks fun and I wish every fan of AC to have fun playing it as well. :)
Actually ubisoft wanted the last 3 games to be just female. But the heads of the company for some reason like to think. that if you put a female on the cover it won't sell as well. So the forced Them to add male options so they could put the male on the cover.
It was going to be a female only game. You can even see that Alexios is a better Deimos, and being a woman fighter in Old Greece adds a certain charm.
The whole player character choice is just lazy tbh...if they had their own unique abilities, personality/beliefs, and dialogue unique storylines & missions, that would've been so much better and there would be a great reason for replayability.
at its core its a reskin. ..with no depth, like if they made alexios & kassandra brother and sister instead of what they're doing...it would be a lot easier on the lore & building a great narrative
sean k it’s to pander to the SJWs
Understandable,and,under different circumstances,I'd agree with you,the only problem is,Ubi had one year to get this game up and running,the mocap,VO and casting was all done in a year, honestly,give these people some.credit,and try looking at the masterpiece they've accomplished given their circumstances
I don't agree with your reasoning, that there should be a female protagonist just because there hasn't been one. Mostly because it's obviously this game was meant for Alexius to be the main character and they only made Cassandra the main character because of angry feminist.
What
I don't understand why everyone says Kassandra is the "Cannon", She is not, Alexios is on the FRONT cover of the game.
I just always play as Alexios, since it would be more historically accurate for the Olympics, and the Agoge. In ancient Sparta, the agoge was a school for boys, and there was another for girls, I forget what it’s called. Anyway, also in the Olympics, there is a big difference between Ancient Greece and now: women were not allowed to compete.
Though I am still miffed that they got rid of the ability to use a shield in this game. Seriously, Ubisoft!! Why!?!? Why couldn’t we just use Darius’ hidden blade from the start and have Leonidas’ spear as a complete weapon, or his sword for that matter!? Also…why did the Persians in this game wear Ottoman style shishak helmets?? Did anyone else notice that?
Assassins Creed has become Creedless Mercenary.
6:48 but most big leaps in technology, politics, culture, and philosophy were
Or they could just give a new name of this game instead of making it a sequel of ac
This game REALLY should have had its own IP. If it did, it would have been far less of an outrage and would have just been seen as Dragon Age, Ancient Greek style.
@@beckyweiss6072 Actually I disagree. Could've been an AC spinoff however, like an Assassin's Creed Story
@@senseishu937 If you mean telling the story and making it clear that no one is seeing it through the animus, then yes that could work. But that's the only way. Because the idea of gender choice and seeing things through the animus cannot co-exist. The "sketchy DNA" is a flimsy excuse.
Agreed. I love the game, but it isn't an assassin game.
“Odyssey: an assassins creed story”. Is that better?
The Layla parts are important for the story, but everytime i play Odyssey/Origins/Valhalla and the game takes you back to Layla, i always think "oh no, not a Layla part again... i'm going back to the animus asap"
Odyssey and Valhalla have failed the lore in an attempt to seem diverse and equitable. Saying that two sets of DNA are on a weapon, yet exactly the same game is played, saying that the gender of Eivor could be determined by how strong memory synchronization is...both are pathetic attempts to seem diverse in gameplay while spitting on the lore and fanbase at the same time.
If your feminine protaganist is optional, they aren't going to be accepted. If your feminine protaganist is in a side game, they are not going to be accepted. If your feminine protaganist is overshadowed by a masculine counterpart, they are not going to be accepted. Ubisoft has tried for several years to appear diverse while keeping their cishet male fans on for the ride. They so desperately believe that Assassin's Creed would fail if cishet boys and men are turned away, but also know that teasing diversity can string others along with hope. It's absolutely pathetic.
Give us a main game feminine protaganist of color. One who looks, speaks, and acts accordingly, and who hsa the world treat them as they would have been treated in history. Make the character mandatory, just like Altair or Ezio. Enough of this nonsense with split or broken DNA just to give us a choice. Enough putting feminine characters into side games that can be completely ignored and leave nothing unchanged. Enough overshadowing. Enough convuluted lore breaking excuses. Just give us a main game feminine character, and do so unashamedly, and without the expectation of praise.
This is long overdue.
2:20 That's just wrong because whoever you pick you SEE in the future so how can the story be historically Kassandra if whoever picked Alexios literally talked to him in the 21st century.
Exactly i was thinking the same thing
Big brain u r smarter than this youtuber like this 😂😂😂😂😂😂😄😄😄😄😄😄🤗🤗🤗🤗🤗🤗😌😌😌😌
You do know that this video was made before the game came out right?
I wouldnt have played it man honestly without alexios
Thanks for the Video Loomer:)
I personally wouldn't mind if they only made Alexios a protagonist of the Game, but to make it like this? I liked the way they did it in Syndicate except for the promotion of the game maybe... but why make them the same person? Equal representation is important so I agree with you. As a female myself I normally don't care if it's a male or female protagonist as long as it serves the story, but what Ubisoft has done this time is just wierd frankly.
8:36 you haven't proven anythingball you did was ckaim Kassandra is canon without proving it at all
It doesn’t matter. There’s canon, and then there’s your play through, all rpg games have this, there’s the canon of oblivion, and then there’s the choices you make on your play through, there’s the canon of Fallout New Vegas, and then there’s what you choose to do.
So your argument is... it should be kassandra because you're tired of playing men... that's such a shit argument.
@kangarooyo yeah thats what I got from it cause that's what was said. And if that's not what you heard than you're choosing to legitimately IGNORE what he said straight up.
Just like to point out that when Desmond tried to go really far back the animus rejected him... so in reality Ancient Greece shouldn’t be accessible by the animus...
yeah, still gonna pic Alexios, because I wanna Identify myself more with the hero.
but great video, the points make sense
7:31 you cannot claim she's historically canon without providing your evidence that she is, you have provided no evidence just how the Animus works and that only one can be canon, no evidence to support which one, though
In game, and at the time used in game Males were Dominant
Also in game the entire arena part of the story is definitely meant to be Alexios that whole part of the story is kicked off by a woman not being allowed into the arena to even watch her son participate, and as such Kassandra would not be able to even Participate just because she's female, and that's not even sexism in the sense of the time it's what was normal at the time
Claiming something and proving something are two vastly different things all you did was claim Kassandra is canon(which just an FYI, you spelt the name wrong on your timestamp), the only evidence you provided was how the Animus is supposed to work and that due to how the Animus works only one can be canon.
You don't provide evidence to support that that one person is Kassandra you just claim it is Kassandra
As such you've proven nothing
Women in most of Ancient Greece couldn't even live the house without male company let alone fight. In Sparta they had more rights, but weren't fighters. As such Kassandras as the main character actually makes no historical sense at all. In fact this whole game feels like a huge divergence from the AC of old that tried to provide a plausible but alternate recreation of the past
I honestly liked having a choice and although I admire more people loving a female character finally starting to outshine her male counterpart, I do like having the choice. As a woman who plays this game, I still found myself wanting to play a male protagonist as that's what I was used to and have come to associate with the series kind of like how Lara Croft is always the Tomb Raider. I also found it more compelling to want to "save" my sister from her "alter ego" so to speak. I played through as Alexios and liked him just fine and in some cases even more.
FantasyEve87 So I just got assassins creed odyssey, yes I know I’m late to the party but I’m having a really bad time trying to pick either alexios or Kassandra and I want your opinion
Or the fact that it’s going against all previously established lore.
PS I’m pretty sure one of the things we can easily get from dna is gender
Yeah gender was never a problem for any animus. Layla’s id probably just badly glitched.
I think with Alexios and Kassandra being the same person you can just think about it like the Lutece twins frim bioshock infinite. Alternet realities where they were born different genders
Alexios should be the canonical character because the story was clearly written with a male protagonist in mind. For example, women could not even attend-let alone compete in-the Olympic Games.
Have a feeling that they decided to make her the canon character late in development and just ran with what they had… as though Ancient Greece would’ve been the same experience for Alexios and Kassandra.
And the “diversity rules” argument for Kassandra is just weak. The market is what it is and prefers what it prefers, and a female protag isn’t some inherent benefit or good. If it is substantive for the story, so be it, but “meta” arguments about sociopolitical daydreaming will never hold water.
Your theory that they switched Kassandra to the canon character late in development makes sense when you look at all the merchandise and marketing for the game that ALL features Alexios
5:00 love how this guy can push kick a probably over 1000lbs bear
Phenominal explanation. This is one of the best explanations i’ve heard without hurting the game or bashing but giving a educated suggestion.
Their should of been only one choice and that should have been Alexios, making kassandra cannon is just a weak attempt at “diversity”.
But either way Deimos is a horrible hot head villain that has no personality, Kassandra would not be raised to be a warrior that simply is historically wrong it makes no sense.
Ubisoft is basically just spitting in the face of History and realism but the game is already a joke a shame they ruined Odyssey and Valhalla doing this.
I mean it makes sense in ancient greek to have a warrior woman. Spartan women were trained till their childhood. Amazonians and Daughters of Artimis were all women warrior groups who more or less held themself against the rest of the greek world.
It makes sense in Odessy for a Spartan woman to be a mercenary
When bro gets rebutted he just doesn’t reply 😂😂😂😂😂
I understand you. I think it was done the wrong way, I hope it’ll not be the case with the next AC game.
Bogdan 96 I agree
RIP
I don’t get why people are making such a big deal out of this, it’s literally just because they said we have a choice in gender. If the game had came out with just a male character literally no one would be crying about this but BECAUSE they’ve finally given the choice of a female character they are apparently all sexist now and need more woman as the protagonists. I literally got to this video from a forum where it was posted and read a comment about having a romantic choice saying “it’s about time we had an openly gay male character as LGBT have been starving for attention from the series” and it’s pure bs. I’m part of the “lgbt community” and I couldn’t give a sh*t what sexuality the characters are OR gender. I don’t care who is banging who or if it’s a male or female, all I care about is a game with a good story. People are getting FAR too into having absolutely everything represented in games and TV now to the point where it’s absolutely ridiculous. If that’s the case then Ancient Greece sure wouldn’t be the best time to be an exclusive female if you know anything about Greek history. Everyone needs to calm down and just enjoy the game for what it is and not try and add every single sexuality, sexual identity, skin colour and gender into it. They gave the game a gender choice, deal with it.
Sure I love a little argument as much as the next guy,but holy hell...this is a game,it's supposed to be fun,not some strictly accurate representation of history as it was
women in ancient Greece were not allowed to fight and they didn't let them train they just stayed at home so Kassandra shouldn't even exist
Flaming horses and fighting gods didnt exist either
She's Spartan women! She was allowed to fight, and become warrior. What you talking about now is Athenian girls... :v
@@clawclamzz5136 hell yeah
@@clawclamzz5136 are you greek?
@@smoofffff flaming horses and gods were mythology so in this game they combined mythology and history. Now neither in mythology nor history they said that women were allowed to fight. but they were allowed to compete in olympic games
Diversity and representation......WHO CARES? I liked Edward because he was a cool pirate in a fun plot, i loved bayek because he had a wonderful personality and a sad motive, i went with Ezio to go through the renaissance and explore italy. Not because of their race or gender. I care about fun playable characters and canon more than i care for their gender or race. Because gender and race dont matter. Kassandra sounds like my pick since you stated that shes the canonical hero, if Alexios would have been canonical instead i would choose him. If kassandra has a goid story and a likeable character she will be my favorite out of the two. The gender and race dont matter. You can make it a feature and part of the story in a way thats enjoyable ill love it, but if not its just a drag to go through it for the sake of "diversity" and "representation".
Joseph Poston
I wouldn't pick her, she's trying to hard to speak in a Greek accent and it is just too cringey
The_Drop Bear at least she gives effort, the fuck even is Alexios’ accent?
Plus female characters are rare and unique
Diversity for the sake to be diverse is worthless, it probably doesn’t help that Ubisoft hires that feminazi looking lady
It’s because you’re a white guy who sees himself in almost every single video game he picks up. You don’t need to care about representation if you’re already represented everywhere. Besides, it’s boring playing as the same gruff bearded white guy in every single game, having characters that look different to each other is just good character design.
I agree 100%. If you can choose characters, dialogue options and the ending of the game then you're not reliving history, you're making it. You won't be playing AC but Fallout Greece instead.
And a female protagonist is long overdue. Gamers don't mind female protagonists at all but welcome them. Tomb raider, anyone?
Rafael Santos Personally I think there are a lot of people who are like me, I want play a male protagonist because I like to pretend that I AM the character, I just don't have as much fun playing a female protagonist because I can't imagine that I am the character then. I put myself in the shoes of the character and pretend that I am them.
I couldn't give a shit about what works in AC lore, gender choice MUST be in the game...and I think it should've been there a long time ago as I'm sure there are plenty of ladies who do the same thing as me and pretend that they are Lara Croft or Alloy.
gender choices should absolutly not be in this type of game tell me you pick up a movie or a book anything like that would you like a pop up at the begging asking you if you want the main character to be a man or woman? assassins creed has always been a narrative driven game and above all the whole premise is that you re reliving the memories of someone by chaging the gender of a chracter you change their lifes completly so you re not reliving their memories anymore i agree with you that certain games are fun to have these types of mechanics like skyrim or fallout but that has no place in assassins creed
rui figueiredo I think you are wrong. The movie or book argument that you just made is very invalid to the point that I am making, with a movie or a book I do not imagine that I am the protagonist, with a game I do...I enjoy pretending that I AM that character and NOT having a gender choice takes that immersion away and I would have to settle with playing someone that I don't want to. I don't want to play as Kassandra or Alexios, I want to be a massive nerd and play as me, put myself in that world and that's why I mainly play male. Also Assassin's Creed has always been a POORLY written "narrative driven" game. I, and so many other people would absolutely accept the trade off of having a few retcons and lore breaks for more freedom to roleplay what we want. The game's narrative and lore just isn't good enough to not have the gender choice at this point. This game is no longer the bland game that AC used to be, it has changed for the better in every sense when it comes to gameplay, the story may even be far deeper than past games despite all of these die hard AC fans complaining about how it's not friendly to the lore. Seriously just forget about the lore and original story, it was never that good.
To sum it all up:
AC narrative wasn't great to begin with.
Most people will happily accept more freedom and not care if it "works" in a game that no one plays for it's story.
This RPG route is a far better path to take than sticking to their dead roots, and we need more RPG's with consequences to our decisions as Fallout and Skyrim fail in that department.
I'm a sad fuck that wants to pretend that I am Alexios because I can't do that with Kassandra.
Have a good day pal.
well i do understand where you re comming from but assassins creed games the early ones 1 ezio trilogy and black flag have all had great story lines so good that they could make comics books and a movie with it
the ezio trilogy was praised for having a great plot good dialogue and characters so you re saying that they ve been poorly written games thats sounds more like your opinion all i want from an assassins creed game is a good story about a good character an assassin fighting against the templars while impacting the modern story line i want more treasure hunts throught time this game might be set in teh same world but its not an assassins creed game ubisoft should have named it something else and called it a spin off again you cant be relieving memories if you re the one choosing the route to take decisions dont matter if its someone elses memories you re watching just that alone breaks immersions because it makes no sense and if they keep going like this assassins creed origins will be the last AC game il buy but i hope you enjoy yourself if you decide to buy it
You want to play as a male because you're a male? Then play every other game in the franchise, play every other video game on the whole goddamn market. Women have to constantly deal with playing as men in video games. It should not have to kill a guy to play a singular female protagonist in a main console game with good marketing. And if you don't like it? Don't drop 60 dollars on the game. Simple as that. I loathe what they're doing in Odyssey and I'm not giving this game any of my money.
I want to play as an assassin female in a game that doesn't have the availability of gender choice because that SNAPS the lore in two. That shouldn't be a choice I have to make. But here we fucking are. You want your games with gender choices, go play mass effect and dragon age. Bioware excels at blank slate characters.
Alexios is more historically accurate, because all spartan warriors were male while the females were only used for breeding these warriors.
I know I’m late but having a female protagonist just to have one is ridiculous simply because there is no point to have something just to make people feel better. And when I played syndicate and got to the end just to find out that I couldn’t play Jacob anymore I was upset because I had been playing him and only stopping when I couldn’t.
P.S. I could care less if the main character was a male or female but the object of a choice but only making one canon is kinda ridiculous too, however, they were going for a more RPG type of game this time around
2:41 this is where the issue started
i never look that much into it, i just like alexios and have fun playing as'em
Oh come on Alexios is far funner to play in my opinion.
Could care less about all the previous Animus lore. I bought the game for the odyssey story and I was satisfied with it. A character being cannon or not cannon had no impact on me and I'm sure other people could care less too. Alexios is the better hero.
Dude, I understand that you want a female protagonist, but with how many people wanted two characters, It just doesn't add up. Plus, I think that Kassandra's memories would be impossible to see at the same time as Alexios. While looking at the laws of Sparta, it is said that all children will go to school the first 7 years of their lives. The men will be sent to the military in order to train for their career, while the woman goes to train as a housewife, while preparing themselves for a husband. It also says that in order for a woman two serve the military, her husband would have had to die in battle, or a slot had to be open. But obviously I've also looked at the fact that they are mercenaries and work for whoever they like or pays better. But in order for Kassandra to get the amount of money necessary for her to hire her crew, buy a ship, buy armor and clothes for her and her crew, plus their weapons would take YEARS of hard work or thievery. But because of the fact that Alexios is a male, he earns double the amount of money that Kassandra earns. That means for Kassandra, it might take years, but for Alexios, It might only take 1. Trust me when I say that here and then I love a female protagonist, but not only would that be historically inaccurate, but it would be asking to much of Ubisoft. Kassandra and Alexios are both badasses, but it would be IMPOSSIBLE for that to happen for this game to have only 1 protagonist. But hey, look for future a.c. games in future with female characters. Don't worry, it's coming.
This also means that by the time Alexios story ended, Kassandra will still be working or thieving for money.
The game also misses great opportunities for storytelling that way. Since the devs were so desperate on making it look as men and women are equal physically, they basically cut out what would have been a great story element. Having Alexios go through the mandatory Spartan training, required for boys only.
Having played the game, this is my interpretation (spoilers for a MAJOR reveal relatively early in the game below):
The DNA they get is from the spear of leonidas, and its specifically said there are two people's strands of DNA on the spear, Alexios and Kassandra. Regardless of whoever you pick, both characters will appear in game as fully fledged adults, however whoever you pick to be the hero, the other one will become the villain. Here's how I see it: whoever you pick in game becomes the historical canon for that playthrough. If you pick Kassandra as the hero then 'canonically' if you picked Alexios then you would have followed his villain storyline, but no matter who you pick, your choice becomes the hero. In game its said you can pick between two strands of dna to pursue, not that you can pick who the hero is and who the villain is.
basically all the choices you make regardless of how large or small they are purely exist as game mechanics, and become the historical canon for YOUR game.
I agree completely.
On a another note, Ubisoft really should have given us a full game with Shao Jun. Not only would I have LOVED to play as her because she was already established in lore but she would have continued the story directly on from Ezio. They would have sorted out the issue of there being few female protagonists much sooner. A crying shame they wasted Shao Jun potential on a spin off game.
Ubi seem to have shakey ideas when it comes to gender. They treat it as a selling point instead of an idea to fit the story.
I'm still disappointed about that. China was one of the settings I absolutely wanted to see in a main game, and Shao Jun was so cool in Embers. But nope, all it got was a side scroller spin off...
TotallyToonsTV but doesn't Desmond do that good enough
Red Dead 2 in the same month has honestly completely killed my hype for this game.
I think something that prides itself on being history accurate should be and just being honest there is little room for representation. That’s not to say that there shouldn’t be a strong female protagonist but maybe in different civ or era time where women were given more rights. I’d would totally love to see some strong demon in the series in the appropriate setting.
Simple fix. If you chose one of the characters, then they'd experience the games story, while the other character would be Demos (or whoever, I've never played the game, and just watched part of a lets play, so IDK). So if you picked Alexios, then within that universe, Kassandra would be controlled by the cult, and you'd experience that if you picked her.
Thats exactly how the game plays out. If you're Alexios then Kassandra is Deimos and vice versa.
First intelligent critic for lore breaking in Odyssey I've seen. Congratulations.
Robson Waterkemper ACs lore is a jumbled fucking mess that's been broken many times before.
Alexios should be canon because an exiled Spartan woman, and child of some sort of prophecy should just settle down, get married, and make babies for the rest of her life. Instead of training, say, independantly of the Spartans and becoming, say, a mercenary unbeholden to Spartan culture.
All joking aside, I agree with what you're saying. I play Assassin's Creed to be told a set story with all the lore elements that I've come to love, not to ""Write my own Odyssey"" whatever that means. I do get the feeling that these explanations will make a lot more sense when the game comes out (even if it's still not totally acceptable).
5:24 that is what happened I noticed in Valhalla on the computers emails that it is referring to the staff own by Kassandra no mention of Alexios.
My opinion is that Alexios should be cannon. It would be more historically accurate since the spartan women(like Kassandra if you play as her) were not trained to be soldiers. Only the men. And also at some point at the story you go to the Olympics. But the participation was forbidden for women. So there would be no way for Kassandra to participate in them.
That's MY opinion, I don't say other people's oppinions are wrong!
I agree with everything you said, and I also think this isn't the first time the games industry's irrational fear of letting a woman star in a AAA action game has harmed the AC franchise. Evie getting sidelined was pretty bad, and it definitely also screwed up the story because she felt like a weird unnecessary addition to the story because they didn't dare give her any of the actual important missions, but I think Unity and Origins are even more interesting, because in both cases what we have are stories that, in every way that matters, are about female protagonists - Elise and Aya. They are the ones who have personal connections with the main antagonists of both games, they are the ones with more interesting personal character arcs, and they are the ones who get the big hero moment at the end of the game - Elise sacrificing her life, and Aya killing one of the most famous people in all of human history and personally founding the Hidden Ones, which would one day become the brotherhood. Both of them SHOULD have been the protagonists of their own games, and were clearly intended to be because all the side content (novelization of Unity, Origins comics) is from their point of view. In Origins' case, I don't mind as much because Bayek is a very compelling character and probably my favorite AC protagonist, so while I think Aya's story would have been more interesting, I also think the decision to focus on Bayek wasn't terrible. But Unity would have been so much better with Elise in the starring role, and so much of it would have been emotionally stronger, not to mention that she's just a more developed, more interesting character than Arno. Arno just feels like a blank slate, an audience surrogate invented at the last minute to give us a perspective through which to experience Elise's story, and that's just sad.
Did you just pull all this shit out of your ass
Eh, I'm not really that fussed on how canonically accurate it will be, but yes I will be choosing Kassandra; like you said, it's well overdue.
I wrote this comment halfway through watching, and then pricked my ears up towards the end because your explanation on why Kassandra should be the only protagonist is fantastic and thoughtful; good stuff, you've earned a sub.
Breaking their own lore rules is definitely what bothered me the most. I was a pretty confused when they showed Alexios and Kassandra acting out the same scenes with the same lines. Not because they're interchangeable player characters, but instead what odd explanation there would be. And it's like you said, it pokes holes into how the animus is supposed to project Alexios or Kassandra's memories.
As a female, I personally don’t give a shit whether the protagonist is male or female. Obviously there are many people who care about that but it’s just my opinion. As long as the protagonist has a good story line I’m okay with that. I think I’m going to play Alexios because he personally appeals to me the most, even more than Kassandra. I’m sure she’s going to be badass but I personally think I’m going to go with Alexios. But, my opinion may change in the future.
I think the issue is just that assassin's creed didnt start as a rpg series, so a lot of long term players dont treat the modern games as rpgs despite them being intended that way.
The "true canon" does not matter in a rpg. The whole point of a rpg is that the canon is whatever you decide it should be. That's the point. If you decide to play as Kassandra, then your canon is her, and thats that. If you play as Alexios, then he is your canon.
Most other rpg series (ie Mass Effect) have your imput data of major choices from previous games. This solves the issue of references in later games or statues of characters. Just allow a quick choice to be made and that issue is gone
I played as alexios because i found his line delivery better. also i found Kassandra her voice a little annoying. But that is just my preference. Anyway in my head Alexios is canon because i played as him. And there is no problem because we make our own story. If you like Kassandra better than Alexios that is ok as well. It doesnt really matter.
To those complaining about Kassandra not being “historically accurate”, I would like to point out that this is a series about people using science-fiction technology to witness a millennia long shadow war over a series of magical artifacts that determine the fate of humanity. Where most historical events were orchestrated by the two factions in that shadow war. Where Jack the Ripper didn’t just kill five prostitutes, but dozens of London police and others. Where Ben Franklin developed a grenade launcher. Where a firearm mounted under one’s arm and lethal at a respectable distance was created by the time Constantinople fell. Is the idea that a woman good enough at killing people managed to convince a bunch of mercenaries to work for her really your deal breaker on that front? I’ve come to notice female protagonists are virtually the only thing people seem to get all upset about in regards to “historical accuracy”. And Ubisoft doesn’t get credit for telling us Jacob was bi after the fact. If you don’t have the courage to just show us, you don’t get to pat yourself on the back for being “inclusive”.
GAS-504 I’m just saying it seems unreasonable to deem a female protagonist as the breaking point when their are plenty of other things that are much more anachronistic in regards to historical accuracy. Women may not have been respected throughout most of history, but there are plenty of examples of women becoming highly regarded leaders in patriarchal societies. If the complaint is historical accuracy, then Kassandra as a leader seems, to me at least, to be far less of an issue than plenty other things that should otherwise “break the illusion” as it were.
GAS-504 I understand some say that a female protagonist breaks immersion, but I’m trying to make people understand that it’s not entirely far fetched. Setting aside all the other things that should be far more immersion breaking, there shouldn’t really be a reason to find Kassandra as out of place. As I’ve stated, there were exceptions throughout history to the rigid gender rules that governed daily life. And considering Kassandra is a professional mercenary/possible member of an ancient warrior cult, I don’t think it’s so hard to believe she is able to deal with the types of enemies you will face in this game. There have been, and continue to be, plenty of female warriors who are just as competent and capable as their male counterparts. My intention was never to condescend, but to have people put this situation in perspective, and realize there isn’t as much to get upset about as they initially thought.
Noah Masi But the things you claim that would make more sense to break immersion dont because they are so interconnected within the story, its accepted and almost normal at this point. Little 110 lb lady beating 300 lb men isnt. Hell, even seeing Bayek take down the 300 lb men was kinda a stretch. So having Kassandra do it, I'm just like ya nope. Its like Atomic Blonde but with games. I think Ubi are doing it right by not shoving SJW politics down peoples throats and just giving players the option to do what they want.
il explain to you why its more believable the sci fi stuff in the game than a spartan woman figting in the war for starters assassins creed has always been grounded in reality it dint bend real history to fit the sci fi themes it just added them on the same can be said for the assassins a perfect example of this is in assassins creed 2 when the medici are attacked by the pazzi at the church if you read a book you know that some of them made it out but in the assassins creed lore they made it out because ezio was there now kassadra doing what she is doing just doesnt make sense if she was seen in an army during that time period god know what would have happened to her and about the grenade launcher thats just there for gameplay reasons it doesnt affect the narrative and thats what players have a problem with you cant say plenty of female warriors are just as competent and capable as males when thats just not true even today reports from the military say women set back groups of soldiers because they cant keep up
Matt Damon I don’t think it’s that much of a stretch to believe Kassandra could defeat grown men. Your argument seems to be that Kassandra would be lighter and not as strong compared to her male opponents. That isn’t really the deciding factor in combat. Strength helps, but ultimately the goal, in this time period, is to shove bits of sharp metal into parts of your enemy that bleed a lot. Some people were born strong, some were born weak, but metal made them all equal. She doesn’t need to punch her enemies into submission, just stab/cut them enough that they die. The Brotherhood (or whatever they’re called at this point) have always been combat pragmatists, I don’t think they would let something as easily surmountable as lack of physical strength hold them back for long. It certainly didn’t stop any of the other female assassins we’ve seen.
I loled, i thought ur reasoning gonna be a good one with historical prepective and other logical things, that might change my mind, turn out just some forced diversity bullshit, look, im ok with female mc, i like "the last of us","tomb rider", etc, but when its said it takes on a historical time, even if its fiction, i want it to be immersive as possible. Im open to discuss
Honestly the perfect time to feature a female protagonist in the main game series came and went with Shao Jun.
I thought for sure we'd be getting a game set in china with her after Embers but it never happaned.
It can still happen, if not with her, then a different character in an appropriate setting.
I don't think a spartan warrior in ancient greece is all that appropriate for a female protagonist though imo.
While in the story Kassandra fits the role, historically, a woman is far less likely to be a Spartan.
Great essay, Loomer - I agree with you on all of your points. I was a bit underwhelmed with the marketing for Odyssey. It initially struck me as "Hey, you know 300? Now you can play it! We even have the (TM)Spartan Kick!" Honestly, all I want is a cohesive story-line that's worth all of the money I will be putting out for each game now and in the future. (Don't even get me started on how the Season Pass doesn't get you -everything- anymore.) Regardless, I will be playing as Kassandra as she is canon and i will happily be humming "She's Got Medals" in the meanwhile. lol Also, I really like your Illoominations graphic - nice work!
“We need diversity and representation in assassins creed”
Mmhmm suuure
Couldn't agree more. Keep political correctness out of our games and movies.
I kind of get a feeling that Ubisoft don't dare to have a full triple A game with a female protagonist only. Tomb Raider seem to be doing well why couldn't AC with a Female protagonist do that? I liked that Syndicate had Evie and Jacob but i always feelt like Evie was the main protagonist but she got the least time towards the end of the game. At least she was on the box cover i guess but a person outside the AC community seeing that box art couldn't tell that the game had a male and female playable character i think :P i will play Odyssey like i play Bioware games which means i will do a playthrough as male and than as female
The setting allowing players to choose the protagonist in different gender is really good and it gives choices in diversity. I don't support the idea to fix the protagonist as female. Ever since the ancient time until last century, battlefield or combats are dominated by male. Why Hollywood and some people are so keen to push the equality in such history related action games or movie. Especially I believe there are more male fans of Assassin Creed than female. I prefer playing as a male Spartan or Viking than a female.
While I agree with your conclusion that Kassandra should be the main character, the "more diversity" argument is not the best reason. I think Kassandra works better from a narrative perspective, as Alexios being the unhinged Deimos seems the more natural fit to me. Also from a historical perspective, at the age of the playable character during the flashback sequences a male Spartan youth would already be in training, and I find it less likely they would be present on the mountain to recklessly charge the priest. Oh, and the voice acting for Kassandra is probably my favorite performance since Jennifer Hale as FemShep. Just my two cents.
I am kind of in the middle of this whole thing. Ubisoft and AC do a lot of representation of all types of people, sometimes good and sometimes not very good. Liberation and China has a female but were side games. There was Syndicate with a duo but the female was marketed very poorly and wasn't utilised very well in the game.
I think Ubisoft wants to appeal to as many types of people by having options but sacrifices continuity to do so. I feel like Odyssey was supposed to have only the female protagonist but Ubisoft are scared of pushing away, which I assume the male majority fanbase, some of which may self insert or care about physical and historical realism (even though the historical events in AC are quite unrealistic to begin with). So I think options were the way to go even if it breaks lore and I think Ubisoft stopped caring about the lore too.
Completely agree Loomer, great to see you uploading. Hope Ubisoft see this, but let’s be honest nothing will change. I think how great this series could have been, it’s a great shame.
Loved this video Loomer. Great job. Ubisoft should hear this video.
They shouldve made it that when you choose alexios you will play as deimos
Whichever you choose is the one in your game universe the DNA represents basically you choose who the DNA belongs to amd the other just fills in the opposite role, it doesnt belong to both and its not undecided whos memories they actually are. This guy is making it a bigger deal than it needs to be really.
Exactly...its just a gameplay mechanic.
Ubisoft were afraid of having a female only protagonist game so they made a choose your character deal RPG. Great.
wel since two thirds of the players chose alexios he should be the only character then.
we know there some SIMP's out there that can't control their weak feelings.. 😂😂
@@AmrothPalantir I chose Kassandra because she is canon not because I am a simp. You don't even know the definition of a simp you 9 year old
@@senseishu937 only a SIMP call her cannon... lady worshipping troll blinded by ignorance. It's ok, it's normal today.
@@AmrothPalantir the only troll is truly you. The fact that you call me a simp for choosing the canon character THAT WAS CHOSEN IN THE LORE BY THE CREATORS OF THE GAMES AND STORY and so by your logic since she is a woman it is not canon and I am a simp. That is just pathetically immature of you ngl
@@senseishu937 The creators of the game are SIMP's and agenda pushers, only affecting the weakest of minds. enjoy the SIMP life, you will enjoy the new Bond movie, I'm sure...
Having two characters is great, the problem is they focused too much on Kassandra and that led to Alexios's voice acting, animations, and overall feel quite lacklustre. Hell, I would even prefer 2 characters over 1. I just love playing male characters much more because I can relate to it better.
I'm fine with female protagonists as long as they make sense. Being a female in ancient Greece would not allow you to do things men could, or at least without prejudice. If the protagonist was Kassandra and she did have to struggle with sexism that would be fine. But seeing strangers treat a woman as they would a man in ancient Greece is just dumb.
Not entirely true. For Athens, yes that'd be accurate, but, while women weren't fully equals, they had nearly all the same rights as men in Sparta. To which, Kassandra is in fact Spartan. Also, as a mercenary, political barriers dont mean much.
@@jonahanderson9210 even in sparta while yes they could recieve education and so on, their purpose was as mothers
@@drak1559 See, that doesn't really apply to an orphaned mercenary though. Women in Sparta also had their own Olympics program. For writing purposes, (not that the story is much good anyway) it could be said that Spartans at least, wouldn't be so opposed to a female mercenary.
Though that may be a slight bending of history, it works a bit. Though in Athens, it would be awful.
Which, IMO, they should've just gone with one protagonist. All the games are connected through history, and as such, character choice has to be far more strict. Seems side handed tbh. If they wanted to do a female character, they should've just done a female character, and wrote a story to work for her. Alexios is just dumb imo.
It's a game it doesn't matter. Just have fun and play it as the character you want