@@juandirection3751 he did seem very committed in killing Connor, as shown in his last speech. I mean you try doing nothing and see if he lets Connor live.
@@matthewct8167 He definitely wasn't committed to killing Connor. If you read Assassin's Creed: Forsaken, Haytham is the one who cut the rope during Connor's hanging, and he literally let Connor stab him because Haytham couldn't bring himself to kill his son.
Interestingly In Haytham's journal, He was extremely torn about Connor and the Templars. Haytham regrets allowing the execution and is the one who cut Connors rope with a throwing knife. In the journal I guess Haytham wanted this end, for Connor to kill him. If you want more depth and background on Haytham, check out his journal, "Assassin's Creed: Forsaken" It also goes into Edward and Haytham's family when he was young.
I can see it. I mean, Haytham had Connor, but he willingly unpinned Connor's HB arm. He is not stupid enough just to do that without realizing the consequences.
I'm actually reading that book which makes the story of these two even sadder. :,( It was all but circumstantial I wish Haytham had a different outcome.
Haytham wanted Connor to kill him. That's why he let go of his left hand. That's why he told Connor "You will see." Keyword: "will" He did not want to kill his son.
Only enlightened despots think about the greater good. The extreme majority of the dictators do not seek the greater good, only to serve their own interests.
Of course, fully agreed, but still our citizens vote for them... The problem with modern politics is that it has became a job like any other, at the end of the 19th century in France we were ruled by people who were doing politics for the sole purpose of serving their citizens, politicians back then weren't receiving as much money as today, plus those politicians back then had already finish their working life (Ex officers, notaries etc...). Infortunately, today we are ruled by assholes who don't give a fuck about their country destiny, a politician need to understand that he is the guardian of his nation, culture etc...
Le Monarchiste there should be an age restriction AND a requirence of a previous job, where you retired from. Someone who has worked with the common people, and then elect him to even be a politician. Not like trump, who had everything he needed in life without working for it. He was a buisnessman who worked made choices true, however he came from a Rich family. He didn't need to work hard for the money required to do business. He merely fellowed instructs.
The most important thing about this series,and what keeps me coming back,really,are discussions like these. The philosophy. Because,really it's not all that black and white, I believe Lucy says so in the first game. And unfortunatly it seems to be fading with each game. I hope they don't forget about it.
I think with the upcoming Rogue and Unity, this will be a little different. Based on the description of Rogue, they will be further touching on the "grey" aspect because they're flipping the white and black with the Assassins and Templars. Naturally, this is going to undoubtedly lead into a philosophical square off, where imo, the reason why Haytham is so interesting is because he is not a true Templar: Templars have proven their motivation is the power behind control, while Haytham is actually motivated by the control aspect itself. He has noble goals, while the subordinate he supports is a true Templar: monstrous and power hungry. Haytham's downfall was in the fact that he truly was alone at the heart of their order, proven in the dialogue where the real motivation for Connor to avoid forgiving his father was the Templars' actions in burning their village and Haytham's attempt to show he did not order for their deaths. For Unity, the overall story concept thus far presents a conspiracy from within the Assassins that naturally will touch on the question of "who is right and who is wrong". Yet I think, in regards to the French Revolution, this story has potential to be the "greyest" of them all: Angry and passionate citizens who had been impoverished fighting the ignorant, yet mostly innocently naïve wealthy and executing many of these innocently naïve, yet arrogant nobles. Who is truly "white" or "black" there?
AWLZooM Great points. The next game does have some promise in that light, but I will wait until its price has dropped considerably before buying it, just in case. I just really fear Black Flag set a standard in the ideological content of the game. The game barely featured those philisophical discussions. Yes, Edward was the "grayest" protagonist so far, but they didn't talk about it very much. Pretty much all was shown was him stealing and killing and whatnot, with no justification to these actions which would normally be morally wrong. The other protagonist did those things too, but for the goof of the Brotherhood, and thus, the freedom of mankind. The result was me feeling little empathy for him. I feel they tried to make him sly, in an attempt to bring back Ezio's charisma, but ended up making him outright cruel. Continuing the discussion on the future games, this "screw the thinking" idea has already been adopted by Ubisoft, hasn't it? By making AC an annual franchise, that is. I would've been happy a couple years for an improved Assassin's Creed 3, instead of getting Brohterhood and Revelations, and would've been delighted to never have seen Black Flag existing, to see a superior quality Unity, which I'm sure will be unsatisfactory in some aspects, especially in inovation of gameplay. Before finishing: I really hope they make some bridges between AC3 and Unity. Maybe showing some characters from 3, or even giving some references. With such a close timeline, it's prefectly possible.
AWLZooM I have to disagree about the Templars being all about power behind control,take into account all of the Templars from AC1, only Robert and Al Mualim actually sought power, all the others advocated peace and died believing they were truly doing good deeds (To some degree, they all were, at least on the same level as the Assassins), the problem IMO, comes with Templars like Rodrigo Borgia, Cesare, or Warren, they are indeed dark characters meant to be antagonic, they have no grey areas which to develop, they're evil for the sake of being evil. On the other hand, you also have Templars like Ahmet or Haytham, who do honestly fight for the better of man kind, IMO, the series has for the most part (AC2 did a very poor job here) a very well constructed counter argument to the Assassins, which is the reason why I'm actually more excited about Rogue than Unity.
PaulThePuppetier Well, I think Edward's motivation was actually simple: driven by a desire to achieve personal wealth and reputation. He's basically playing the teenager within us, where we sought to do whatever we want and avoid responsibility, "not giving a tinker's curse who I hurt". The scene where he returns to the Assassins for redemption, even without joining up with them, kind of restored my faith in that game. Especially in regards to the end of the pirate golden age being directly connected to Edward's slow "growing up into a responsible individual" story. Unity has the potential with the French Revolution, I think, but we'll have to see if they can deliver. Annual releases potentially do so in ruining the games, but who knows: maybe they'll do good. We'll just have to see. And @Bite, I feel as if you prove the point: they've all be proven to show that they can not handle the responsibility and are just power hungry. Haytham really was the first character to be shown as a noble Templar, where I disagree with Ahmet because in no way was he likeable as a character. Perhaps, he may have had some good intentions, but he was easy to determine as a villain because of his blatant arrogance and overall villainous speech. While Haytham deliberately attempted to reason with Connor, even going as far as to proving Washington's deception with the letter in a bid to prove to him that Haytham's goals are for the good of the nation. His monologue in this fight aptly shows wisdom and he is, by no means, a truly evil villain. He basically makes rational arguments, the only negative aspect he is portrayed doing is one execution that was unnecessary (he makes a valid point about keeping the soldiers alive being a drain on resources). The tragedy in this is that his subordinates did not match his nobility, and thus, he had to stand in the way because of Connor's swear to avenge his village's destruction at their hands.
This is what I love about AC 1 and 3. There's no real villain. Every Templar you kill will make you question your objectives. They're not power-hungry or out for world domination. It's just that the two factions have the same goal but differing in ways and means. An anti-villain, if you will. Also fuck the Borgias.
Rodrigo pretty much tried to be careful after AC2 and wanted to leave the Assassins alone at Brotherhood but Cesare screwed up by attacking Monteriggioni. And Rodrigo hated on how Cesare corrupted the Templars' work for his personal gain, thus his attempt to poison him with an apple.
@@harbingerd.8457 Plus Rodrigo lost any will to mostly live when Ezio gave him the ugly truth. And truth be told, Ezio spared him because he can suffer living pointlessly rather than giving him a quick death.
Well in Origins some villains were sympathetic, Taharka from Origins just wanted a place where him, his family and people could live in. The cult in Odyssey were just war profiteering. As for Valhalla, well all I can make sense of from Fulke is that "Because we're controlling political influence that qualifies us to do whatever we want" way of thinking, Germain in Unity was just a prick who wanted the war between assassins and Templars to keep going despite their leader agreeing to a cease fire with the mentor of the French brotherhood because of the revolution. Bellec didn't help either, and as for Syndicate, they were just clinging to power since the British sect ruled the longest.
Yeah but at the same time he gave up on hope as connor said, and haytham wants everyone to be like hin and give up on the hope for a better world, but thats not his fault atleast not fully, he was manipulated from the start by a wicked templar
He was right on some things but not everything. He severely misjudged Charles Lee thinking he was the one to lead the Revolution and new country, when multiple character flaws show why he was a terrible choice.
@@overchato8681exactly, everyone saying Connor was wrong and haythem was right are closed minded. Connor made some decent points and so did Haythem. Yes letting everyone do whatever they want there is bound to be chaos from that but at the same time being a tyrant and killing anyone who doesn't share your ideals under the guise of "order" like who are the templar's to decide what's order and what's not, it seemed like the templars thought "order" were things that benefited them specifically. And Connor was right that people should be free but at the same time there needs to be some level of control in order for a society to work. People saying Haythem was right obviously don't remember that scene when Achilles and Connor went shopping for the house and haythem stood and watched as Charles Lee basically commanded soldiers to start shooting civilians. Haythem had no problem hurting whoever he had to in order to get what he wanted, that's not order, that's tyranny.
This is why Connor is my favorite assassin he along with all the templars further dissect the philosophy of both there orders much more than the other assassin's creed games.
a lot of people are s***ing on Connor, but he's my favorite, one of the most humble characters I've ever known. He also puts others' needs before himself despite his race being the most oppressed of all peoples. Like chief rain's fall in rdr2 said: Brutality and beauty are all around us, yet so often we're unable to see past our own grievances.
@@ralphrazon6455 The issue of that is he never actually grew out of it in most of everyone's eye. Haytham clearly exposed Washington burned his native village when he was a child along with his mother, he planned to do it again cause his tribe supported the British and still regardless fought for the Patriots initially out of need to secure his tribe's freedom, but in reality he just ended up fighting against his tribe still naively believing that the American Revolution will bring freedom to them and Washington having their best interests at heart. What would be more profound though is that instead of continuing to fight for the Revolution, Connor resolves instead to help his tribe escape to Canada for their safety, just as Charles helped Rain Falls and his tribe escaped to Canada as well and just abandons mostly the Revolution. That way, Connor will then finally realize what fighting for true freedom really means and has finally achieved it not being a mere follower of freedom but by being wise beyond that. Oh and to add, the deleted epilogue speech of his ends the game and credits roll. Boom.
That's a twisted way of saying "I love you". Haytham was really caring about Connor, he was practiclly his only weakness, his love for Connor is what ultimately made him doubt his beliefs and his methods, making him wish he could've killed him before he cared so much for him.
This is what has been missing since the first game. The bad guys are meant to be a tempting offer, a difference of opinion on the same end goal, a cloudy line separating them, not some cartoon villain. I loved the fact that the bad guys in the first one were so almost right (in my opinion), it made it much more interesting. Because the Templars are right, it probably would create a world of peace, it'd just be a world with no soul, a world not really worth being in.
Exactly... something that was sorely missed in Unity. The "villains" in that game were so underdeveloped, in fact the whole story was just so underwhelming in the end.
In Advanced Warfare, Johnathan Irons argued that people caused wars on themselves. He's tried to right things his way by taking our other competitors, so there can be no more wars. It really questions the morals I follow my character.
@@Deadmanclingingtolife the templar ideal world would be kind of worthless to live in in its own way, unless you don't mind being essentially livestock on some philosophical level. But they are absolutely right that the world as it is fucking sucks, yes.
"In time, it will lead to war." That gives me the chills man. It makes you wonder how things would have fared in this universe had Haytham been victorious.
Had he been victorious sure some things would’ve been better, but other things would’ve been worse. That’s the problem with what-if’s people like to think things could’ve been better but it’s never that simple.
The interesting thing about this extended fight is how sad it is that most players just skip through it in order to finish the boss battle. Although Assassin's creed is a fun game series, as the comments will attest to, the most interesting aspect of it is the philosophical divide it meditates on underneath the war between 2 factions. Both of them stand for something at their basis (templars seeking order and peace to reach paradise, Assassins standing for freedom and peace hoping mankind will earn paradise), and all manners of different shades of that philosophy are spun out from there. You have the pure power people like so many of the templars of the renaissance or one of the targets in AC1, but then you have the visionaries, the pragmatics and the compassionate tyrants like Garnier, or many of the people in AC3 (Kenway included). And on the assassin side, you have the dedicated freedom chasers like the guys who killed Hitler, but then you also have some of their more dubious tactics, like the obvious ones (assassination) or the indirect ones (causing riots to go for their targets. And then you have things like the arguments seen here. 2 men with two different visions of where the future will lead, and ways to make it work. And in a strange way, they were both right. The US did argue about the meaning of freedom, but it also used compromise and patience to create something better between first the 13 original states and beyond. If men were made to be followers, what gives the templars the right to lead? Even if they claimed they would bring about equality, it then falls to the same question of "what about political equality?" At the same time, as the assassins have tried to let freedom and trust rule the world, non-combatants have still disappointed them. There were some internal wars, and plenty of cruelties perpetuated afterwards as the templars were right about the greed of the colonists. It's a great big paradox about means, ends, freedom, order, peace, violence, oppression, and it's why these games...repetitive though they might be in form, are never going away for the foreseeable future.
Through all the times I replayed this game I never noticed how long the dialogue for this fight was then I played and yet it go through naturally and realized what I missed. I wish this boss was harder and longer so we could here the entire dialogue regularly because you can’t really end this fight in 3 counters lol.
I played AC3 again after many years. An unfortunate aspect about the game is that a lot insightful dialogs do end up getting a skipped. Most of the time, from my experience, it is accidental because of how the game is made.
Edward Kenway:''You(Templars),would see all of mankind corralled into a neat and furnished prison.Safe and sober,yet dull beyond all reason and sap of all spirit.'' If Edward said this to any Templar,they would surely have had nothing to say.Even Haytham,his very son.
Cedric Bien-Aime Assassin: And what happens when that order is tainted? If humans are so naturally linked to chaos and corruption what's to stop you from following that same path?" COUGH Borgia COUGh
Joshua Graham Humans aren't linked to chaos but as you can see most of humanity are lazy enough to think or busy with the needs of their life unlike others who are either satisfied for they are rice or not that person who put his life for his matrial need and look for his mind the last kind of people i mentioned will have experince enough and long study that will make them clever enough and wise to speak but that don't mean they will say everything right but mostly right and they will produce different idologies but the first kind is ignoerent enough to be stupid but actuly they are the majority unlike the 2nd kind few on earth That's why the world is kinda of chaos now But now the question is are those "wise" men to priduce a way of life and a law that apply and satisfy the real need of humsnity or not?! Is it going well with the first will or not????
"Surrender, and I will spare you" that was literally the most badass Connor moment. Reminds me of Ezio in AC II before he killed Jacopo "If you release me, I will spare your life"
That's because Connor was a soldier. He had been trained and lead his whole life to kill and survive. He really was "indoctrinated", as Achilles taught him only to follow the assassin's creed, not to believe in it. That's why he finds himself doubting all the time, why everyone calls him naive and why his father wins over him with every argument. It's also the reason why Connor is left defeated at the end of the game - which is revealed in a deleted ending scene. He realises that the order is done and Templars are gone - yet the people and ideas he believed in were wrong, and betrayed him. And that he intends to find a compromise to it. That's how I see it.
@@trueegypt6952 Very good point and I completely agree. I believe Haytham was kind of both - both quite ignorant and blind. He was able to excuse Lee's vile deeds due to his potential for the Order, which I think is just a common feature with Templars - murder and violence are necessary means to an end. That explains both the massacre and Lee. As long as it gets them closer to their goal, they're able to do and excuse anything. That's where they differ from the Assassins, or at least from Connor. Haytham trusted in Lee so much that he sacrificed himself for him, believing he was a better shepherd than him and a better fit for a Templar rule. But he was also blind, I think he didn't realise what Johnson would do to the natives - which I think was more of Johnson's failure than a plan - and in the audiobook, there's a mention of him finding out about Lee's behaviour towards Connor and his hatred towards the natives like 10 years afterwards. Haytham wasn't perfect and many of his views had holes. But he was right about discrediting Connor's beliefs. Because, at least to me, both Templars and Assassins are wrong at the core, as they're both extremists. Connor was wrong to put so much trust into people who turned on him eventually. Haytham was wrong to think that he and his comrades were the chosen ones to rule the world. And that their massacres were only little in comparison to his goal. So what I meant is that Haytham was right to discredit Connor's beliefs, not that his were right. But yes, it's a very good point.
@@trueegypt6952 Some dude in the comments in another Kenway video said, "Freedom without order is chaos, but order without freedom is tyranny." Seems relevant here.
I think Haytham gave him a chance to kill him and Connor took it. As rational and ruthless as Haytham was, he wasn't a machine, he was a man and killing his own son, even if he was his sworn enemy ideologically was a line he was unwilling to cross. I don't believe anything he says about his intentions to kill Connor. Connor couldn't beat Haytham in a fight but Haytham refused to kill Connor, somebody had to budge and in the end it was Haytham who chose to.
TheMegaUzumaki he could and the proof his discple ex asssassin turned templer said to charls dorian that another revoultion will begin refering to france
I think Haytham would have improved the Templars from what they have become over the years. Although he was a true realist who believed heavily in the Templar beliefs, I think he wouldn't have been such a tyrant like all those before and after him. Haytham wasn't like Birch, Cesare, and Rodrigo. He wasn't power hungry, he actually believed in the path. He was more so akin to Robert de Sablé who was indeed cruel in his methods but had some reliable reasoning. I slightly agree more with the Assassins, but in all aspects I believe Haytham is the best Templar there ever was. And he didn't need a Piece of Eden to prove that.
I realized he'd changed by the time of his death, but I didn't realize he'd changed that much. But what about his journal he writes? Is it ever said if Connor reads it? He seemed to have some regret after realizing the lies he believed in.
xShadow Dragonx yes Connor read it. He felt sorry for his father, but still rejected his ideals and beliefs as a Templar. Connor understood and somehow forgave his father. But he will never join and still oppose the Templar cause.
I fucking love Haytham with all my heart. This man kept it real until the moment of his death, never stranded away from what he truly believed, and yet, for loving his own son, he gave it away just so he could find peace by knowing he would live. Haytham would never kill Connor, he could've done it lots of times, but he just wouldn't, specially after knowing that Zio died and he was to blame (supposedly). He wouldn't kill his own son, but he would never back away from what he believed it was right either, so he did the only logical choice: he would let himself be killed by the only person he knows would have the real potential to put an end to all this. He needed to be killed by Connor.
True. I liked Haytham a ton and it was a real heart breaker seeing him die. He was one of the best templars we knew. Both the Assassin brotherhood and Templar order want peace but wish to achive it in a different way.
Facts tho. Haythem has to be one of the best villains ever. He's realistic, and stands a bit for both sides. He's like the perfect halfway point between an assassin and a Templar
I believe Haytham was stronger than Connor, he could kill him with his own hidden blade anytime he wanted while sitting on him. I guess it was love to his son that prevented him from doing it... Darn it, my favorite character of all series...
2012. The cracks were obvious in societies of the first world. Nothing unites America or any strong European country anymore. No culture, religion and what not. Freedom is a big promise to live up to. And its falling apart fast. The 4th turning isn't far off now. It will either write a new chapter and start over which is unlikely or destroy what is left of the western empire.
It's not only here. Everything you play and see has something they try to make you understand. They're telling you the world as it is, with examples (games, series, movies) so you can relate but the problem is too many people can't swallow the truth, thus rather stay away from their social responsibility and choose to be a sheep, controlled by a shepherd. Just as Haytham said... PS. Everybody taking the jabs was the clear win in showing that society ain't nothing more than a desperate bitch to be owned.
Haytham does have a point. America wanted freedom from the British (American Revolutionary War), they were only united for one cause and at the end of that cause they will fight amongst themselves (American Civil War).
You misunderstood my point. I was saying the exact opposite; that tyranny can't be justified and neither can anarchy. Both are venomous leeches, that suck the life out of each society. That's why Haytham and the Templars can't be justified, regardless of how smart and sophisticated he sounds here.
Edward always did tell Haytham to think for himself. So in a way he would be proud of Haytham. You're not supposed to follow in someone elses footsteps if that was the case Edward would've been a farmer like his dad and not an assassin. I think Edward would be proud of Haytham since Haytham not only thought for himself but he genuinely thought he was helping man kind
Issac Soumaoro Well then he would've been proud of his convictions like Haytham was to Connors, but disappointed that he became a Templar. Especially after Edwards's experience with them in the caribbean.
As much as people may deny it, Hayham was 100% correct. After the amercian revolution many bloody wars happend. As much as I love Assasins, Templar Hayham was correct. Who knows maybe Connor knew it all along.
Of course there is war. War will always exist as long as conflict exists, not even Templar rule would have stopped that. The flaw in Templar ideology is that they believe themselves to be uncorrupted figures better than humanity, when all points prove otherwise. Haytham was completely ruthless with his power, rarely showing mercy to his victims, and blindly put his faith on Charles Lee, who was clearly corrupt by trying to destroy the Homestead village at the end of the game. "Power corrupts absolutely" and that's why Templars will always fail in their goal.
Axl21 But Haytham protected native villages, his men wanted to stop both armies from fighting, he spared Achilles, he spared Connor and he even killed corrupt individuals of the Templar order, even if those individuals were Grand Masters. His faith in Charles also had a reason, the man was willing to put an abrupt end to the war by handing the nation to the Templars, we don't know how that would end, but Connor clearly admits to have been defeated by those who he thought would protect him by the end of the game, he got betrayed by those who his father warned him about, and his final resolution is to hope things will change in time, because things got really screwed in his time. Not all Templars are scum, Haytham and De la Serre atone for that, not all Assassins are heroes, Pierre Bellec and Ezio in Capadoccia atone for that aswell.
***** That's what I meant, Lee was a puppet, and all Haytham needed was a puppet, one that could allow him to try and arrange things to come to a more peaceful conclusion. In the end Connor allowed the expansion of the US and ensued the masacre of most native tribes in the land, so I would say that as far as Connor's interest goes, the Templars aim, most specifically Haytham's, were actually more suitable for his cause. Edit: A crippled, isolated Assassin is no threat at all, but Haytham had no way of knowing his own son would eventually convince Achilles to allow him to join the Assassins.
+Chris Atlas Jimenez Almost every Revolution throughout history has been followed by either a complete breakdown of law and order and a series of perpetual civil wars like in Libya, or the Congo or it has been followed by someone even worse taking power like in Russia with the Lenin, Stalin and the other Bolsheviks or in France with Rodespierre and his all Reign of Terror. Haytham's words don't just apply to America, they apply to every nation that has faced Revolution both before and after the American War of Independence.
This game came out when I was a sophomore or freshman in high school and I’m turning 25 next month but this speech still hits man. Probably more today than it did back in the day
He was born an assassin, but in time, the templars helped him realize the faults of the brotherhood, he's not a bad guy, but as Connor says, he gave up, it's all explained in the AC 3 Novel, which basicly explains the story from Haytham's point of view, it's quite worth the reading.
Here's a deleted scene for Shay before facing Haytham. During the Battle of Chesapeake Bay, "Need to get... inside the fort..." Connor staggered, "Where are you, Charles?" "Brace yourself!" shouted Shay, sliding on the zip line, kicking Connor to the ground. Alone with space to manoeuvre, Connor got up and kicked him in the groin area sending Shay staggering. Shay attacked immediately, but Connor blocked and countered all of his attacks and Shay kicked Connor aside. He collected himself and Shay tried again, failed to land a good hit and Connor kicked Shay to the ground. "Who are you?" asked Shay. "I was trained by Achilles. Now step aside." "Achilles? I should have known Achilles would never learn. In that case, you will make a good target." "You joined the templars. Achilles told me you were once an assassin who joined the templars. Now you became my father's puppet." "You're the one whom the poor sod I killed in Versailles mentioned. You killed Jack Weeks, Christopher Gist and James Cook." Shay recalled. "I have the foggiest idea about what you're talking about." "It doesn't matter. What matters is that I made a mistake in sparing Achilles. Die, assassin!" - - Shay vs. Connor - - Without recourse, Shay leapt at Connor. Shay's fighting style was as every bit as powerful and deadly as he was when killing the assassins. He released berserk darts from his firearm. Connor was gripped in the lash of the darts' effects. Snarling and growling, Connor chased Shay who avoided his blind rage. A misdirect hit from Connor sent Shay to the ground. Judging by the injuries, they weren't too severe as similar to Haytham and Connor, Shay can heal at swift rate. He dealt a hard blow to the possessed Connor, knocking him to the floor. As the effects wore off, unlike his victims who died, Connor went in a state of fatigue. However he couldn't afford to relax or get caught in Shay's hidden blades. "This makes me nauseus." Connor panted. From his rifle rolled a useful gift: a fragmentation grenade with a powerful blast radius. "Why? What have you got against Achilles?" Connor demanded. "Achilles was always a failed mentor who murdered his followers." Shay pointed out. "Achilles may have made mistakes, but he never murdered his followers." Connor rebuffed. "Is it not murder to send ill-prepared assassins like you to their demise?" This brought no answer. In furious sequence, Shay fired three grenades in rapid succession at Connor who tried to steer a course between the grenades. He heard rapid ticking as a grenade bounced towards him. "Take this," Shay growled. Connor dodged aside from the blast. The grenades exploded. And in so doing it inflicted damage that Connor could not long sustain, leaving his health at its lowest. Connor had at least the miracle of the swift healing with which to undo such hurt as he suffered, if more than one took its toll, but he somehow sensed he would need such miracles to better purpose. He flipped himself back on his feet and drew a wary path between the remaining grenades, nearly obscured in dazzling clouds of dust as the explosions wore off. His assassin's instinct signalled him to avoid Shay's incoming attack with his hidden blade and grabbed him by his head. Connor smashed Shay's head on the table before smashing a glass bottle on his head. "You should have joined the templar." Shay insisted. "Even if you were a templar, you had some sense of honour. Achilles told me you rendered some child an orphan. Where's that sense of honour in that?" Panting hard, with a deft thrust he plunged the berserk date onto the templar's neck. Caught in a paroxysm of madness and rage, Shay went on a destructive rampage. Connor avoided his foe's who was sweeping his sword crazily. This drew fully half his strength. The rogue assassin was stilled for a moment, and teetered on collapse. However, his recovery was swift. Connor closed in on Shay to try combat one-on-one. No crude fighter he was; the templar blocked expertly and swung his sword in swift reply. The Irish swordsman closed in from behind, and Connor was knocked heavy blows as he attempted to block. A boot kicked out. He could not afford to be caught close to Shay, and rolled aside as the sword crashed down. Agility was his surest defense. He fought back as well as he was able. Connor seemed never to gain advantage before the latter lunged fast to assault him from behind. Shay seemed inexhaustible; as fast as he struck one the other closed in, and he could not hope to hold him at bay. Shay moved nimbly as Connor launched the attack, and once more railed on the stricken assassin. Connor recalled the berserk dart and avoided them. He caught one of them. and stabbed him again. As the templar went into a maddened state, he thrust and slashed furiously in the wrong direction. Connor watched for Haytham's enforcer to rise as he kept up the assault, then moved away to set the sequence again. Connor patiently manoeuvred to execute the trap again and again, each time luring the enraged foe to his pattern of weakness. Soon enough he sensed a chance to use the tomahawk a second time. At a moment it seemed he was beaten to the point of death. With the last of his strength he struck him, then flipped, hung off the neck and stabbed fast and threw himself clear. The Native assassin sank injured and exhausted to his knees. With Shay wounded, Connor moved in for questioning. "I won't ask you again why did you betray the assassins?" "Why would I even tell you? The assassins lost sight of their beliefs. Templars have always been a family. You, an assassin, I don't even need to know. Looks like Achilles trained you well. 1755, a huge calamity befell us. People live in houses in poor conditions, children beg for money, animals look for food and refugees look for shelter. I was determined to help those in need, thanks to the British and Templars." "You act as though the templars are doing things in your favour. You play your part as if you're doing people favours, yet you gleefully use your status among the templars to bolster whatever whim that would work in your favour." Connor rebuffed. "Look around you! You think you're doing the world a favour. Do you even realise you're the cause of this mess? I think you're so busy playing the hero that you're forgetting the consequences and how it would affect the people living now and then." "Achilles warned me that I should take care of the world so that I don't destroy it." "So he did. Looks like he learnt his lessons. Inside of you running around dispensing freedom, why not think of something from me? You should take my word for it. You have to take my word for it if you're to improve living conditions for people and animals, if you're to be a hero, Connor. The templars will rule, thanks to me. I make my own luck." The Irish templar moaned his last breath and Connor performed his prayers in his Native language. "Let the spirits grant you your last luck in the spirit world."
Fun fact: when Haytham found out his son is a Assassin he wanted to unite the Assassin's and the Templar's towards a common cause but eventually realized that it would be almost impossible so decided against it. One of the main reasons he wanted to unite the two is because he often felt torn between the two sides due to his father Edward being a Assassin
This game’s story and characters are criminally underrated. Don’t mean to say it’s any better than AC2 or 4, but it is still quite good and makes some extremely good and true points about the Revolution and how unrighteous it actually was. It really put into consideration that the Assassins and the Templars butt heads far too much and that neither side is truly wrong or right, this war between them isn’t all black and white and the two sides aren’t actually that different. At the very least, the Colonial Templars all were attempting to help in some kind of way aside from Hickey and Lee.
@@beastmotoz not everyone need to be like Ezio holy shit dude the same ppl will shit on ubisoft that they can't make a different character if they create another Ezio like character Connor being young and brash is really unique
@@beastmotoz I'm not sure that's the point of being an Assassin. Yes, Ezio's charisma is his best. But when it comes to wisdom it is a regular trait The Brotherhood must inherit.
I Like Ac 3 and its story and ive never hated Connor never expected him to be next Ezio tbh, the only thing i hate about ac 3 is just the fricking optional objectives too demanding and some require luck.
The Conner and Haytham interactions are both the best and worst part of this game. By that I mean that what's there is really compelling, but there isn't enough. They really needed to spend more time developing their relationship. Instead, they just put all of Haytham and Conner's development together in one sequence and the whole thing felt rushed as a result. I hope they give us a game about Haytham. I really want to learn more about who he was and maybe what he was doing during all of this. I know there is a book about Haytham, but that's just not enough. There NEEDS to be a game about this stuff.
TheSandboxer Ac IV didn't have a focused story, it were mainly loose sets of different storylines that badly mingled to create fun gameplay. The design was more 'cold' in AC III setting a better and heavy tone, AC IV's design was a bit too colorful. Also, i couldn't care for Edward or his story. Also, the naval combat on ships wasn't as good as it was in III, surely there's more variety, but I really missed the feeling. In AC III your ship felt powerful when you stroke. AC IV's canonballs felt like feathers. Nonetheless it was a great game.
***** Who are you to say what people want? People want different things. The fact that we are having this discussion at all is proof of that. If you disagree with me about wanting to see a game about Haytham then fine. Let's just agree to disagree and be done with it.
No people say they want! Innovation something new! But they really don't Assassins creed III is one such example! It's new has a different setting, lower buildings so different scaling to climb, A heavier story, The Haythem and Conner story in a way mirrors Williams and Desmond's. AC IV hopped on the pirate bandwagon not original. Also Super Mario Galaxy is another example it's one of lowest selling Mario games but it Brought Innovation! It wasn't the same plat former, I don't even think it's even a platforming game!
"I should have killed you long ago." That's probably one of the worst things a father could ever say to their child. Hell, even Darth Vader had a better goodbye moment.
I think that's a really messed up way of saying "I love you" for Haytham, since his son was the only one who made him question his believes, something not even his sister could achieve, I think in the end he said that to Connor in an effort to show that he ended up caring more about Connor than about his order.
It's just Haytham's character. He's too proud to have a heartfelt goodbye moment - he said that himself. And he's too dedicated/stubborn to say anything that sympathizes with the Assassins.
Man I was feeling nostalgic about Assassins Creed and thought to come and watch a few videos. Particularly, I like to give Kudos to whoever wrote the brilliant dialogue in this game. So many good memories... also, forgot that one time Connor punched Haytham in the balls. xD
Unfortunately they cut out Connors Speech at the end of the game. In which he pretty much agreed with his father but with slight difference: While Connor agrees that Leaders will come and go and that true freedom will never be earned he sees the roles of Assassins as protector of the free will. That Freedom might lead to chaos but in the end its the Assassins job to ensure that the people have a chance to fight for their freedom. What they do with it: Its up to them. I didnt say word for word what Connor said but the base meaning of it.
Haytham was such an amazing character, from they way he speaks and holds himself in any situation, always level headed in my opinion and the script for him was good
Funny I was just thinking, listening to both sides from Connor and Haytham and people in the comments taking it seriously speaking about their ideologies (storyline speaking), Juno is just sitting in the back watching and waiting to enslave everyone throwing all ideologies out the window when it gets to that point (Again just speaking storyline)...
Haytham knew Connor had dual blades...But before the final blow was delt, he wanted his son to know that the Templars will be back someday. Farewell, Haytham.
In the homestead basement Connor writes messages next to the portraits of the people he kills. After he kills Haytham he writes ‘sakataterihwáhten’ which means ‘I made a mistake’. It shows that Connor eventually did come to see that killing Haytham was not the right play and working together with him would have been the best avenue. Little details like this and Haytham’s journal in the Forsaken novel of how he saved Connor from being hung, is what made this game so great! For me Haytham will always be the best example of a Templar that we will see in Assassins Creed.
Thanks mate :) I always thought Connor and Haytham's argument here was very compelling, and it is a shame to see most people just rush it, after all this is the Order vs Liberty discussion that makes the conflict between Templars and Assassins so interesting.
But you should also remember when Altair literally said this near the end of AC1: "I understand now that our Creed does not command us to be free, it commands us to be wise." And the nature of their work in AC1 has absolutely no freedom; You are to avoid love (be it to your sons or wives), and any who disobey are to be executed. Altair acknowledged it when mentioning the 3 ironies. The second irony was: "Here we seek to open the minds of men, but require obedience to a master and set of rules."
@ace9924 "More correct" is incorrect. Altair believes in a peace where all stand equal. Where, in a world of truly free, people may choose kindness. The Templars believe there to be nothing but chaos in freedom, that humans would wipe each other out if all were truly free. But power corrupts, as seen with Al Mualim and many world leaders. To believe in Altair's vision is to believe in an inate kindness within all humans. To believe in the Templars is to believe that humanity is too self-destructive on its own. I choose to believe in the hope for better days and know the inate kindness within people.
@highinquisitordarkblaw4868 the goal of the assassin's before Altair wasn't total freedom in the first place. Altair reformed it well but where he went wrong was placing total emphasis on free will without adding any order to combat the anarchism that other assassin's down the line would use such as Achillies in Rogue. Both Sides had their extremes but the goal of peace in all things before Altair was the right way.
When I was a child I was all into the assassins but after rogue I began to question a lot. But now as a adult looking back at all the games. I can see that templars are very necessary.
yeah when we get older we slowly becoming more understanding on different povs , like for example the movie , like not all templars agree on using artifacts to control mankind ,the movie has mixed reactions but it has its way to to become canon ,
Same. You root for the assassins, but as you grow up you begin to see that the templars were right all along. Yes, maybe they had insane and ruthless members who caused pain and suffering, but they don't represent the templar ideology at it's base.
@@minihalkoja590No lol. The templars were definitely not "right all along" It's easy to get caught up in ideologies and forget that, when it comes down to it, their entire goal is to utilize pieces of Eden to forcibly control the minds of everyone in the world, to ensure a "paradise". If anything, the point is that both templates and assassins are flawed and don't have a real "correct" answer. There will always be violence and chaos wherever there is free will, but there will also be no choice. You'd trade a chaotic and messy but still very much fair world for a world where everyone except a few powerful elite people who think they know better rule over your mind and actions?
So many need to wake up to understand that we already live in a templar like system but everyone is told different. Haytham explains perfectly how the world works and this is the world we are living.
If you guys think about it, part of Haythems speech is foreshadowing the American Civil War saying "but when the battle is finished they will fall fighting against themselves about how to best ensure control, in time it will lead to war" and "They will each differ in their views of what it means to be free".
The reason why I love Haythem is not only because he truly believes what he's doing is the right thing, but he also makes some great points. Points that have led us to where we are today.
2:55 I never realized the revelations theme is in this when they really start to talk about society and freedom that the templars and assassins have and will always fight about
haytham makes a lot of true points about freedom and conflict. Like how he states that they will fight over what it means to be free, this is true of even today's society. Democrats and Republicans and the population argue over what rights people should and should not have (ex: gun laws, gay marriage, abortion, etc.) And these topics have led to much disunity in the nation. Especially today with all the social justice movements about like BLM and feminism which often promote violence and have divided us more as a nation through racial and gender class boundaries. Haytham is also right about how the people only have the illusion of control. Just look to how elections are handled, votes are not equal in this country because some states provide more electoral votes than others. Meaning that some states' popular votes matter less. This leads to candidates marketing their campaigns to specific states while neglecting others. The popular vote doesn't even matter in this society only to decide the electoral vote. But again the popular vote counts for less in some states meaning that all votes are not equal. And yet the people are supposed to be in control. But they are not, they vote for electorates who then make the decision for who is elected. Another example of how the people don't have the power is what the DNC did to bernie sanders in the democratic primary election. That shit was rigged as fuck and it screwed bernie sanders over big time. Do you really think the people are in control when corruption like that goes down? Also, when have the people ever decided on what our rights are. The government created the bill of rights and they enforced those rights and what rights weren't there they denied the people. Like women's rights to vote and what not. It was only when the government made the amendments that people gained their "rights". The people never got to choose. And they aren't even rights. They're privileges. In 1941 Japanese-American citizens were thrown into internment camps simply because they were of the wrong origin. They didn't to anything wrong, they didn't get a fair trial, their "rights" were taken away and they were thrown into prison for nothing at all. The government has always been in control and always will be, the people have no power at all. HOWEVER, haytham's idea for a better future is probably worse. His idea is basically a communist dictatorship which has never worked in history. So in truth there is no perfect society. Each has its flaws and people will always disagree with one another, it's inevitable.
Golden analysis! Despite Ubisoft's effort to progressively display Haytham as corrupted in the last quarter of the game, I can't help but agree with everything he said here. Most people hold freedom as the ideal state without just for the sake of social aceptance, without ever knowing what underlies the freedom they seek. Haytham summed it up: "The freedom you so desperately seek does not exist". Like you said, freedom is efficient with a great foundation, just as control is without corruption.
Two men fighting to the death, for many reasons. Two ideals that have existed and fought for thousands of years. Two upbringings that heavily influenced them to be on the side that they are on now. Two goals that conflict with each other. But one simple fact remains above all. This is a duel between father and son, because of what they believe in, leading to the son murdering his father. I'm sure that this day haunted Connor for the rest of his life. What if he had made a different choice? What if he had known that even after killing his father and Lee, that nothing would change for him? What if he had seen the wisdom behind his fathers words before cutting open his throat? I love AC1 and AC3 for this. Even though the protagonist are not nearly as fun as AC2, the antagonists made all the difference.
"These men are united now by a common cause. But when this battle is finished they will fall to fighting amongst themselves about how best to ensure control. In time it will lead to war." Don't know if it's true, but this could be a foreshadowing of the American Civil War.
Haytham is such a compelling character with so many layers. But to be honest, I found him to be quite odd in Rogue. We didn't really see him have that much screen time with Shay to develop that dynamic between them like he did with Connor and the Colonial Templars in AC3. So every time he showed up in the game it felt unnecessary and forced to me. :/
@@kaithewolf7588 idk, but people gave their favorites, some people like assassins and some like the templars and some like both sides of the game's factions, The only templars i like are fictionals like shay,haytham,elise,lucy and berg and i like assassin's like connor,edward,adwale,ezio and altiar and aveline and evie. The templars are 50% right like the assassins on somethings,like how mankind was bult to serve like it showed on the AC2 video:The truth.
Because it's true. The patriots aren't perfect but their words aren't completely untrue. Because they offer a better future then the Templars and British. Now you are probably going to try to act superior saying that in dumb etc when in reality it's true. You can either accept that or be a Templar fanatic.
@@joshuawillis602 And the British ended up freeing up more "slaves" more than the Patriots ever did after the Revolution. It took a civil war to finally end slavery and even then it cost the life of one of the greatest men to ever lead the United States to do so.
Regardless of how you feel about it, the birth of the United States was an insane concept back then. Haytham is bringing up valid criticism how it would not work.
You can say that Haytham is right in some point. But, most of templars, just the guys with a lust for power. Like Al mualim, who literally killed his own guys. There is only few of them, who actually believes in the thing they do.
Sorry for inundating the page with essay-long comments, but I would love to thank the uploader for the effort! No other video displays the full speech. High-quality AC videos always come from true and passionate fans who make sure nothing is missed or depicted misleadingly :D
Hope they make a follow up Assassins Creed game where Connor's renewed Colonial Brotherhood hunt Shay with a cameo or help from Arno and the French Brotherhood
Damn its epic! Its like Edward is speaking to his son through his grandson. And Haytham is telling his dad he won't go into the family business. Connor inherited Edward's will.
Sorta but not really. Edward believed in freewill but he knew that it was messy and he knew that peace was a confusion between both assassins and templars. He was never radical in his view like connor was. Connor here spoke like achillies in rogue in how they believed that the creed could solve anything and that being an assassin was a role to take pride in. They both ignore the ironies of it and haytham here is telling connor the ironies of it. Haytham embodied the templar view with the old assassin view of peace.
I like how Haytham is able to tell Connor hes proud, obviously it doesnt speak much about their relationship but the meaning for him to tell his son who he genuinely cared for deep down that he was proud of the man Connor became instrad of his last words being "you will fail" or something, he simply says, Im proud of you, not as a father but as a man"
If I'd had to choose, I'd go with the Templars. Controlling and supervising people doesn't necessarily mean to oppress. If control and supervision are given to the right people, it will be millions of ways better than giving humans total freedom, because there are many evil people in this world and full freedom will give the evil full power to do their shit. There must be control.
I think it's because of his humorless and "always serious" disposition. But easily the most powerful assassin so far. I did enjoy playing Haytham more, though
I mean Haytham came from an Assassin family and even killed the Templar that killed his father. Haytham I dont think hated the Assassins but took issue with the means of how they did things. I mean his hidden blades were his father's. He still holds a piece of his assassin bloodline with him.
@@RubenMakaya no he had them the whole time. Thats what he killed him with. He took the necklace from him. If youre talking about the Opera the begining of 3.
@@OtaniNoAsagi Yeah it's just that you said that Haytham had Edward's hidden blades which isn't correct. Haytham obtained them during an encounter with Miko in the past. Edward only gave him a short sword which became lost after Miko knocked it out of his hands during the same encounter.
Living in 2022 listening to Haythem… he was right… after we won the revolutionary war we keep arguing and debating about what we think it means to be free it’s like we’re rabid dogs
![Ezio Auditore Meets Altair Ibn La Ahad [Full Scene]](/img/1.gif)
Whoever voiced Haytham did a fucking outstanding job
Jared Hoeft, Adrian Hough. He recieved BAFTA for this performance.
I understand you
Same for Connor, good god the acting in 3 was bloody amazing
@@weeble4749 The voice acting in AC games was always great.
@@Michael_De_Santa-Unofficial I'd disagree, voices in some parts are pretty meh or obnoxious when it's not meant to be.
“I am… in no condition… to fight”
*Proceeds to get into a fight with arguably the best hand to hand combatant on the continent*
tbf Haytham probably held back lol
@@juandirection3751 he did
@@juandirection3751 he did seem very committed in killing Connor, as shown in his last speech. I mean you try doing nothing and see if he lets Connor live.
@@juandirection3751 I believe in the Forsaken novel Haytham had a wound that slightly handicapped him.
@@matthewct8167 He definitely wasn't committed to killing Connor. If you read Assassin's Creed: Forsaken, Haytham is the one who cut the rope during Connor's hanging, and he literally let Connor stab him because Haytham couldn't bring himself to kill his son.
“I will not weep and wonder what might have been.” Major props to the voice actor for making that one line hit the hardest.
"They each differ in their views of what means to be free." Hits really hard in today's society.
So true in this day and age
Interestingly In Haytham's journal, He was extremely torn about Connor and the Templars. Haytham regrets allowing the execution and is the one who cut Connors rope with a throwing knife. In the journal I guess Haytham wanted this end, for Connor to kill him. If you want more depth and background on Haytham, check out his journal, "Assassin's Creed: Forsaken" It also goes into Edward and Haytham's family when he was young.
that sounds interesting thanks for the info :)
I can see it. I mean, Haytham had Connor, but he willingly unpinned Connor's HB arm. He is not stupid enough just to do that without realizing the consequences.
Half as long twice as bright my brother.
I'm actually reading that book which makes the story of these two even sadder. :,( It was all but circumstantial I wish Haytham had a different outcome.
But i think it was the outcome that he actually chose. he couldnt be with him during his life, but he was there at his death.
Haytham wanted Connor to kill him. That's why he let go of his left hand. That's why he told Connor "You will see." Keyword: "will"
He did not want to kill his son.
I don't think the line of 'I should have killed you' was about wanting to kill him. It was a dying man's lament about not being able to.
@@pgusa1279elaborate?
"The people never have the power... Only the illusion of it"... That describes modern democracy to a T
TheMegaUzumaki Also what other leaders think and act on it but don't say so people like you don't think they're dictators
Only enlightened despots think about the greater good. The extreme majority of the dictators do not seek the greater good, only to serve their own interests.
Same as what ?
Of course, fully agreed, but still our citizens vote for them... The problem with modern politics is that it has became a job like any other, at the end of the 19th century in France we were ruled by people who were doing politics for the sole purpose of serving their citizens, politicians back then weren't receiving as much money as today, plus those politicians back then had already finish their working life (Ex officers, notaries etc...). Infortunately, today we are ruled by assholes who don't give a fuck about their country destiny, a politician need to understand that he is the guardian of his nation, culture etc...
Le Monarchiste there should be an age restriction AND a requirence of a previous job, where you retired from. Someone who has worked with the common people, and then elect him to even be a politician. Not like trump, who had everything he needed in life without working for it. He was a buisnessman who worked made choices true, however he came from a Rich family. He didn't need to work hard for the money required to do business. He merely fellowed instructs.
The most important thing about this series,and what keeps me coming back,really,are discussions like these. The philosophy. Because,really it's not all that black and white, I believe Lucy says so in the first game. And unfortunatly it seems to be fading with each game. I hope they don't forget about it.
I think with the upcoming Rogue and Unity, this will be a little different. Based on the description of Rogue, they will be further touching on the "grey" aspect because they're flipping the white and black with the Assassins and Templars. Naturally, this is going to undoubtedly lead into a philosophical square off, where imo, the reason why Haytham is so interesting is because he is not a true Templar: Templars have proven their motivation is the power behind control, while Haytham is actually motivated by the control aspect itself. He has noble goals, while the subordinate he supports is a true Templar: monstrous and power hungry. Haytham's downfall was in the fact that he truly was alone at the heart of their order, proven in the dialogue where the real motivation for Connor to avoid forgiving his father was the Templars' actions in burning their village and Haytham's attempt to show he did not order for their deaths.
For Unity, the overall story concept thus far presents a conspiracy from within the Assassins that naturally will touch on the question of "who is right and who is wrong". Yet I think, in regards to the French Revolution, this story has potential to be the "greyest" of them all: Angry and passionate citizens who had been impoverished fighting the ignorant, yet mostly innocently naïve wealthy and executing many of these innocently naïve, yet arrogant nobles. Who is truly "white" or "black" there?
AWLZooM Great points. The next game does have some promise in that light, but I will wait until its price has dropped considerably before buying it, just in case.
I just really fear Black Flag set a standard in the ideological content of the game. The game barely featured those philisophical discussions. Yes, Edward was the "grayest" protagonist so far, but they didn't talk about it very much. Pretty much all was shown was him stealing and killing and whatnot, with no justification to these actions which would normally be morally wrong. The other protagonist did those things too, but for the goof of the Brotherhood, and thus, the freedom of mankind. The result was me feeling little empathy for him. I feel they tried to make him sly, in an attempt to bring back Ezio's charisma, but ended up making him outright cruel. Continuing the discussion on the future games, this "screw the thinking" idea has already been adopted by Ubisoft, hasn't it? By making AC an annual franchise, that is. I would've been happy a couple years for an improved Assassin's Creed 3, instead of getting Brohterhood and Revelations, and would've been delighted to never have seen Black Flag existing, to see a superior quality Unity, which I'm sure will be unsatisfactory in some aspects, especially in inovation of gameplay.
Before finishing: I really hope they make some bridges between AC3 and Unity. Maybe showing some characters from 3, or even giving some references. With such a close timeline, it's prefectly possible.
AWLZooM I have to disagree about the Templars being all about power behind control,take into account all of the Templars from AC1, only Robert and Al Mualim actually sought power, all the others advocated peace and died believing they were truly doing good deeds (To some degree, they all were, at least on the same level as the Assassins), the problem IMO, comes with Templars like Rodrigo Borgia, Cesare, or Warren, they are indeed dark characters meant to be antagonic, they have no grey areas which to develop, they're evil for the sake of being evil.
On the other hand, you also have Templars like Ahmet or Haytham, who do honestly fight for the better of man kind, IMO, the series has for the most part (AC2 did a very poor job here) a very well constructed counter argument to the Assassins, which is the reason why I'm actually more excited about Rogue than Unity.
PaulThePuppetier Well, I think Edward's motivation was actually simple: driven by a desire to achieve personal wealth and reputation. He's basically playing the teenager within us, where we sought to do whatever we want and avoid responsibility, "not giving a tinker's curse who I hurt". The scene where he returns to the Assassins for redemption, even without joining up with them, kind of restored my faith in that game. Especially in regards to the end of the pirate golden age being directly connected to Edward's slow "growing up into a responsible individual" story.
Unity has the potential with the French Revolution, I think, but we'll have to see if they can deliver. Annual releases potentially do so in ruining the games, but who knows: maybe they'll do good. We'll just have to see.
And @Bite, I feel as if you prove the point: they've all be proven to show that they can not handle the responsibility and are just power hungry. Haytham really was the first character to be shown as a noble Templar, where I disagree with Ahmet because in no way was he likeable as a character. Perhaps, he may have had some good intentions, but he was easy to determine as a villain because of his blatant arrogance and overall villainous speech. While Haytham deliberately attempted to reason with Connor, even going as far as to proving Washington's deception with the letter in a bid to prove to him that Haytham's goals are for the good of the nation.
His monologue in this fight aptly shows wisdom and he is, by no means, a truly evil villain. He basically makes rational arguments, the only negative aspect he is portrayed doing is one execution that was unnecessary (he makes a valid point about keeping the soldiers alive being a drain on resources). The tragedy in this is that his subordinates did not match his nobility, and thus, he had to stand in the way because of Connor's swear to avenge his village's destruction at their hands.
The real life Templars and Assassins were religious. These ones are philosophical.
"I should have killed you long ago"
After reading Forsaken, I'm not sure Haytham really meant that.
I believe it was a compliment
He didn't mean that. When he said that he meant that he should've seen how impressive his son was from the very beginning
After reading Forsaken, I've come to like his character and I feel sorry for him.
Is forsaken a good book? I know u put up this comment 3 years ago. But im thinking about buying the book atm, so just wanna know if its worth it.
@@tjbraager625 it'll make you appreciate AC3 more. But the events of AC Rogue are absent.
This is what I love about AC 1 and 3. There's no real villain. Every Templar you kill will make you question your objectives. They're not power-hungry or out for world domination. It's just that the two factions have the same goal but differing in ways and means. An anti-villain, if you will.
Also fuck the Borgias.
Rodrigo pretty much tried to be careful after AC2 and wanted to leave the Assassins alone at Brotherhood but Cesare screwed up by attacking Monteriggioni. And Rodrigo hated on how Cesare corrupted the Templars' work for his personal gain, thus his attempt to poison him with an apple.
@@harbingerd.8457 Plus Rodrigo lost any will to mostly live when Ezio gave him the ugly truth. And truth be told, Ezio spared him because he can suffer living pointlessly rather than giving him a quick death.
@@memecliparchives2254 what was the ugly truth from Ezio?
Well in Origins some villains were sympathetic, Taharka from Origins just wanted a place where him, his family and people could live in. The cult in Odyssey were just war profiteering. As for Valhalla, well all I can make sense of from Fulke is that "Because we're controlling political influence that qualifies us to do whatever we want" way of thinking, Germain in Unity was just a prick who wanted the war between assassins and Templars to keep going despite their leader agreeing to a cease fire with the mentor of the French brotherhood because of the revolution.
Bellec didn't help either, and as for Syndicate, they were just clinging to power since the British sect ruled the longest.
4 was like that too. just not enough.
The beautiful thing about villains in a historical game?
Writers can give them access to the ultimate power: hindsight.
@TheMegaUzumaki How can you consider the Templars the bad guys when _everything_ they said would happen if Connor stopped them happened?
As a kid I didn't understand any of this. As a college student, it all clicks. Haytham was a sage
Was he now?!
Yeah but at the same time he gave up on hope as connor said, and haytham wants everyone to be like hin and give up on the hope for a better world, but thats not his fault atleast not fully, he was manipulated from the start by a wicked templar
He was right on some things but not everything. He severely misjudged Charles Lee thinking he was the one to lead the Revolution and new country, when multiple character flaws show why he was a terrible choice.
@@overchato8681exactly, everyone saying Connor was wrong and haythem was right are closed minded. Connor made some decent points and so did Haythem. Yes letting everyone do whatever they want there is bound to be chaos from that but at the same time being a tyrant and killing anyone who doesn't share your ideals under the guise of "order" like who are the templar's to decide what's order and what's not, it seemed like the templars thought "order" were things that benefited them specifically. And Connor was right that people should be free but at the same time there needs to be some level of control in order for a society to work. People saying Haythem was right obviously don't remember that scene when Achilles and Connor went shopping for the house and haythem stood and watched as Charles Lee basically commanded soldiers to start shooting civilians. Haythem had no problem hurting whoever he had to in order to get what he wanted, that's not order, that's tyranny.
@@overchato8681 Doesnt sage refers to an individual with high isu DNA on them like 0.6%? Mostly they are members of juno's cult. Haytham was no sage
This is why Connor is my favorite assassin he along with all the templars further dissect the philosophy of both there orders much more than the other assassin's creed games.
Never has a truer word been spoken, brother.
I once thought the Assassins are the good guys, but Haytham opened my eyes since he had good points that too much freedom leads to war.
Freedom for the elites maybe
a lot of people are s***ing on Connor, but he's my favorite, one of the most humble characters I've ever known. He also puts others' needs before himself despite his race being the most oppressed of all peoples. Like chief rain's fall in rdr2 said: Brutality and beauty are all around us, yet so often we're unable to see past our own grievances.
@@ralphrazon6455 The issue of that is he never actually grew out of it in most of everyone's eye. Haytham clearly exposed Washington burned his native village when he was a child along with his mother, he planned to do it again cause his tribe supported the British and still regardless fought for the Patriots initially out of need to secure his tribe's freedom, but in reality he just ended up fighting against his tribe still naively believing that the American Revolution will bring freedom to them and Washington having their best interests at heart.
What would be more profound though is that instead of continuing to fight for the Revolution, Connor resolves instead to help his tribe escape to Canada for their safety, just as Charles helped Rain Falls and his tribe escaped to Canada as well and just abandons mostly the Revolution. That way, Connor will then finally realize what fighting for true freedom really means and has finally achieved it not being a mere follower of freedom but by being wise beyond that.
Oh and to add, the deleted epilogue speech of his ends the game and credits roll. Boom.
"From my point of view the Jedi are evil!" ... wait wrong fandom, my bad.
In the end Connor lived to see that his father spoke right.
TheUzumakiSpiral and got killed by shay so he got he what was coming to him
@@SpikeySenjuSSJPapa he didn't get killed by Shay dumbass
@@alexmercer5414 Hell, Shay probably lived his last days back to his old home... which I kinda tend to forget. Was it Ireland?
@@86Fallowcp no he was born in New York
2:49 knocks his hat off "jokes on you Connor I have a spare"
Oh wow I didn’t notice that at first lol 😆
Lmfao
It is not hat, look better
@@dusanlucic5820 It is a joke, look better
I noticed it and I was like how tf another one appeared then by rewatching I saw that it was something else that was on the table
That's a twisted way of saying "I love you".
Haytham was really caring about Connor, he was practiclly his only weakness, his love for Connor is what ultimately made him doubt his beliefs and his methods, making him wish he could've killed him before he cared so much for him.
This is what has been missing since the first game. The bad guys are meant to be a tempting offer, a difference of opinion on the same end goal, a cloudy line separating them, not some cartoon villain. I loved the fact that the bad guys in the first one were so almost right (in my opinion), it made it much more interesting. Because the Templars are right, it probably would create a world of peace, it'd just be a world with no soul, a world not really worth being in.
Exactly... something that was sorely missed in Unity. The "villains" in that game were so underdeveloped, in fact the whole story was just so underwhelming in the end.
Is this world worth being in? I don’t think so personally, I 100% agree with Hathem.
In Advanced Warfare, Johnathan Irons argued that people caused wars on themselves. He's tried to right things his way by taking our other competitors, so there can be no more wars. It really questions the morals I follow my character.
@@Deadmanclingingtolife the templar ideal world would be kind of worthless to live in in its own way, unless you don't mind being essentially livestock on some philosophical level. But they are absolutely right that the world as it is fucking sucks, yes.
Templars are communist
Haytham’s speech is one of the best speeches I’ve ever heard in video games, and maybe even more than just that
@@Xgcyuwait what? Who the heck are you lol???
"In time, it will lead to war."
That gives me the chills man. It makes you wonder how things would have fared in this universe had Haytham been victorious.
No freedom..
@@Kira22558 Any less free than we are now?
@@wukanimation will you sacrifice your will for peace?
Haytham have great arguments but
His methods are horrible.
Had he been victorious sure some things would’ve been better, but other things would’ve been worse. That’s the problem with what-if’s people like to think things could’ve been better but it’s never that simple.
The interesting thing about this extended fight is how sad it is that most players just skip through it in order to finish the boss battle. Although Assassin's creed is a fun game series, as the comments will attest to, the most interesting aspect of it is the philosophical divide it meditates on underneath the war between 2 factions. Both of them stand for something at their basis (templars seeking order and peace to reach paradise, Assassins standing for freedom and peace hoping mankind will earn paradise), and all manners of different shades of that philosophy are spun out from there. You have the pure power people like so many of the templars of the renaissance or one of the targets in AC1, but then you have the visionaries, the pragmatics and the compassionate tyrants like Garnier, or many of the people in AC3 (Kenway included). And on the assassin side, you have the dedicated freedom chasers like the guys who killed Hitler, but then you also have some of their more dubious tactics, like the obvious ones (assassination) or the indirect ones (causing riots to go for their targets.
And then you have things like the arguments seen here. 2 men with two different visions of where the future will lead, and ways to make it work. And in a strange way, they were both right. The US did argue about the meaning of freedom, but it also used compromise and patience to create something better between first the 13 original states and beyond. If men were made to be followers, what gives the templars the right to lead? Even if they claimed they would bring about equality, it then falls to the same question of "what about political equality?" At the same time, as the assassins have tried to let freedom and trust rule the world, non-combatants have still disappointed them. There were some internal wars, and plenty of cruelties perpetuated afterwards as the templars were right about the greed of the colonists. It's a great big paradox about means, ends, freedom, order, peace, violence, oppression, and it's why these games...repetitive though they might be in form, are never going away for the foreseeable future.
Through all the times I replayed this game I never noticed how long the dialogue for this fight was then I played and yet it go through naturally and realized what I missed. I wish this boss was harder and longer so we could here the entire dialogue regularly because you can’t really end this fight in 3 counters lol.
Well Haytham killed me three times in a row so I had to think quick
I played AC3 again after many years. An unfortunate aspect about the game is that a lot insightful dialogs do end up getting a skipped. Most of the time, from my experience, it is accidental because of how the game is made.
Amen
Edward Kenway:''You(Templars),would see all of mankind corralled into a neat and furnished prison.Safe and sober,yet dull beyond all reason and sap of all spirit.''
If Edward said this to any Templar,they would surely have had nothing to say.Even Haytham,his very son.
So true
Lol u trained to be a assassin and got killed by a ball.
Templar : Yes, but for the greater good. Order is necessary or chaos will rage upon the world
Cedric Bien-Aime Assassin: And what happens when that order is tainted? If humans are so naturally linked to chaos and corruption what's to stop you from following that same path?"
COUGH Borgia COUGh
Joshua Graham
Humans aren't linked to chaos but as you can see most of humanity are lazy enough to think or busy with the needs of their life unlike others who are either satisfied for they are rice or not that person who put his life for his matrial need and look for his mind the last kind of people i mentioned will have experince enough and long study that will make them clever enough and wise to speak but that don't mean they will say everything right but mostly right and they will produce different idologies but the first kind is ignoerent enough to be stupid but actuly they are the majority unlike the 2nd kind few on earth
That's why the world is kinda of chaos now
But now the question is are those "wise" men to priduce a way of life and a law that apply and satisfy the real need of humsnity or not?! Is it going well with the first will or not????
"Surrender, and I will spare you" that was literally the most badass Connor moment.
Reminds me of Ezio in AC II before he killed Jacopo "If you release me, I will spare your life"
Connor won the fight but Haythem won the argument.
Beautifully said.
That's because Connor was a soldier. He had been trained and lead his whole life to kill and survive. He really was "indoctrinated", as Achilles taught him only to follow the assassin's creed, not to believe in it. That's why he finds himself doubting all the time, why everyone calls him naive and why his father wins over him with every argument.
It's also the reason why Connor is left defeated at the end of the game - which is revealed in a deleted ending scene. He realises that the order is done and Templars are gone - yet the people and ideas he believed in were wrong, and betrayed him. And that he intends to find a compromise to it.
That's how I see it.
@@trueegypt6952 Very good point and I completely agree. I believe Haytham was kind of both - both quite ignorant and blind.
He was able to excuse Lee's vile deeds due to his potential for the Order, which I think is just a common feature with Templars - murder and violence are necessary means to an end. That explains both the massacre and Lee. As long as it gets them closer to their goal, they're able to do and excuse anything. That's where they differ from the Assassins, or at least from Connor.
Haytham trusted in Lee so much that he sacrificed himself for him, believing he was a better shepherd than him and a better fit for a Templar rule.
But he was also blind, I think he didn't realise what Johnson would do to the natives - which I think was more of Johnson's failure than a plan - and in the audiobook, there's a mention of him finding out about Lee's behaviour towards Connor and his hatred towards the natives like 10 years afterwards.
Haytham wasn't perfect and many of his views had holes. But he was right about discrediting Connor's beliefs. Because, at least to me, both Templars and Assassins are wrong at the core, as they're both extremists.
Connor was wrong to put so much trust into people who turned on him eventually.
Haytham was wrong to think that he and his comrades were the chosen ones to rule the world. And that their massacres were only little in comparison to his goal.
So what I meant is that Haytham was right to discredit Connor's beliefs, not that his were right. But yes, it's a very good point.
@@trueegypt6952 Some dude in the comments in another Kenway video said, "Freedom without order is chaos, but order without freedom is tyranny."
Seems relevant here.
I think Haytham gave him a chance to kill him and Connor took it.
As rational and ruthless as Haytham was, he wasn't a machine, he was a man and killing his own son, even if he was his sworn enemy ideologically was a line he was unwilling to cross. I don't believe anything he says about his intentions to kill Connor.
Connor couldn't beat Haytham in a fight but Haytham refused to kill Connor, somebody had to budge and in the end it was Haytham who chose to.
"GIVE ME LEE!"
"Impossible. He is the promise of a better future. The sheep need a shepherd".
A- plus dialogue right there! :D
Yes
Haytham was completely right. Pretty much fully predicts the democrat/republican divide as well as the American Civil War.
+TheMegaUzumaki he wasnt even trying to predict the future of the world, just of America
***** they hadn't happened yet.
***** if he didnt belive the templars why did he stay with them?
his own organitazion
not him
:)
TheMegaUzumaki he could and the proof his discple ex asssassin turned templer said to charls dorian that another revoultion will begin refering to france
I think Haytham would have improved the Templars from what they have become over the years. Although he was a true realist who believed heavily in the Templar beliefs, I think he wouldn't have been such a tyrant like all those before and after him. Haytham wasn't like Birch, Cesare, and Rodrigo. He wasn't power hungry, he actually believed in the path. He was more so akin to Robert de Sablé who was indeed cruel in his methods but had some reliable reasoning. I slightly agree more with the Assassins, but in all aspects I believe Haytham is the best Templar there ever was. And he didn't need a Piece of Eden to prove that.
I realized he'd changed by the time of his death, but I didn't realize he'd changed that much. But what about his journal he writes? Is it ever said if Connor reads it? He seemed to have some regret after realizing the lies he believed in.
xShadow Dragonx yes Connor read it. He felt sorry for his father, but still rejected his ideals and beliefs as a Templar. Connor understood and somehow forgave his father. But he will never join and still oppose the Templar cause.
@@Shadowdragon_TV Actually, Haytham by all accounts believed in Lee more than he believes himself at that point so not really.
Anyone who fancies order over freedom is a tyrant.
I fucking love Haytham with all my heart. This man kept it real until the moment of his death, never stranded away from what he truly believed, and yet, for loving his own son, he gave it away just so he could find peace by knowing he would live. Haytham would never kill Connor, he could've done it lots of times, but he just wouldn't, specially after knowing that Zio died and he was to blame (supposedly). He wouldn't kill his own son, but he would never back away from what he believed it was right either, so he did the only logical choice: he would let himself be killed by the only person he knows would have the real potential to put an end to all this. He needed to be killed by Connor.
True. I liked Haytham a ton and it was a real heart breaker seeing him die. He was one of the best templars we knew. Both the Assassin brotherhood and Templar order want peace but wish to achive it in a different way.
Facts tho. Haythem has to be one of the best villains ever. He's realistic, and stands a bit for both sides. He's like the perfect halfway point between an assassin and a Templar
I believe Haytham was stronger than Connor, he could kill him with his own hidden blade anytime he wanted while sitting on him.
I guess it was love to his son that prevented him from doing it...
Darn it, my favorite character of all series...
Noo Connor stabbed him disabling his hidden blade. But even if he didn't disable his hidden blade I doubt haytham would kill him you're right.
Yes he did disabled one of his hidden blades, but both of them had two hidden as you could have seen while gameplay...
If haytham was stronger why couldn't he climb trees like conner?
everyone has his own pros and cons. He was more noble like. He was into diplomacy, killing undercover etc.
Colby V He could climd trees, Zio taught him, we just never get to see him doing it. (According to Forsaken)
Its crazy to see how accurate Haytham's speech is to whats going on in today's society
well it's not considering the people who wrote it did in *insert release year*
Fr😭
2012. The cracks were obvious in societies of the first world. Nothing unites America or any strong European country anymore. No culture, religion and what not. Freedom is a big promise to live up to. And its falling apart fast. The 4th turning isn't far off now. It will either write a new chapter and start over which is unlikely or destroy what is left of the western empire.
At the end... Haytham was right.
It's not only here. Everything you play and see has something they try to make you understand. They're telling you the world as it is, with examples (games, series, movies) so you can relate but the problem is too many people can't swallow the truth, thus rather stay away from their social responsibility and choose to be a sheep, controlled by a shepherd. Just as Haytham said...
PS. Everybody taking the jabs was the clear win in showing that society ain't nothing more than a desperate bitch to be owned.
Haytham does have a point. America wanted freedom from the British (American Revolutionary War), they were only united for one cause and at the end of that cause they will fight amongst themselves (American Civil War).
Wow. I just realized that.
Still, that doesn't justify the Templars' tyrannical ideals. Haytham needed to die, even though he was an awesome character.
AMERICA FREEDOM
TRIMC95
What is "tyranny" and why does it need to be justified, unlike anarchy, in your opinion?
You misunderstood my point. I was saying the exact opposite; that tyranny can't be justified and neither can anarchy. Both are venomous leeches, that suck the life out of each society. That's why Haytham and the Templars can't be justified, regardless of how smart and sophisticated he sounds here.
Wonder what Edward would think of his son becoming a Templar? At least he can be proud of his grandson...
Yeah I was thinking that too :D
Edward always did tell Haytham to think for himself. So in a way he would be proud of Haytham. You're not supposed to follow in someone elses footsteps if that was the case Edward would've been a farmer like his dad and not an assassin. I think Edward would be proud of Haytham since Haytham not only thought for himself but he genuinely thought he was helping man kind
Issac Soumaoro
Well then he would've been proud of his convictions like Haytham was to Connors, but disappointed that he became a Templar. Especially after Edwards's experience with them in the caribbean.
True.
Is kinda nonsense. Because the man who train Haytham and turn him into a templar is resposible for Edward's death
3:48 when Haytham said "You will see" it was clear he didn't want to fight or kill his son
As much as people may deny it, Hayham was 100% correct. After the amercian revolution many bloody wars happend. As much as I love Assasins, Templar Hayham was correct. Who knows maybe Connor knew it all along.
Of course there is war. War will always exist as long as conflict exists, not even Templar rule would have stopped that. The flaw in Templar ideology is that they believe themselves to be uncorrupted figures better than humanity, when all points prove otherwise.
Haytham was completely ruthless with his power, rarely showing mercy to his victims, and blindly put his faith on Charles Lee, who was clearly corrupt by trying to destroy the Homestead village at the end of the game. "Power corrupts absolutely" and that's why Templars will always fail in their goal.
Axl21 But Haytham protected native villages, his men wanted to stop both armies from fighting, he spared Achilles, he spared Connor and he even killed corrupt individuals of the Templar order, even if those individuals were Grand Masters. His faith in Charles also had a reason, the man was willing to put an abrupt end to the war by handing the nation to the Templars, we don't know how that would end, but Connor clearly admits to have been defeated by those who he thought would protect him by the end of the game, he got betrayed by those who his father warned him about, and his final resolution is to hope things will change in time, because things got really screwed in his time.
Not all Templars are scum, Haytham and De la Serre atone for that, not all Assassins are heroes, Pierre Bellec and Ezio in Capadoccia atone for that aswell.
***** That's what I meant, Lee was a puppet, and all Haytham needed was a puppet, one that could allow him to try and arrange things to come to a more peaceful conclusion. In the end Connor allowed the expansion of the US and ensued the masacre of most native tribes in the land, so I would say that as far as Connor's interest goes, the Templars aim, most specifically Haytham's, were actually more suitable for his cause.
Edit: A crippled, isolated Assassin is no threat at all, but Haytham had no way of knowing his own son would eventually convince Achilles to allow him to join the Assassins.
+Chris Atlas Jimenez Almost every Revolution throughout history has been followed by either a complete breakdown of law and order and a series of perpetual civil wars like in Libya, or the Congo or it has been followed by someone even worse taking power like in Russia with the Lenin, Stalin and the other Bolsheviks or in France with Rodespierre and his all Reign of Terror. Haytham's words don't just apply to America, they apply to every nation that has faced Revolution both before and after the American War of Independence.
He predicted the Civil War perfectly
This game came out when I was a sophomore or freshman in high school and I’m turning 25 next month but this speech still hits man. Probably more today than it did back in the day
Haytham. The most charismatic and badass character in the series.
This shouldve been his game
The fact that it wasn't is why he's so compelling.
He was born an assassin, but in time, the templars helped him realize the faults of the brotherhood, he's not a bad guy, but as Connor says, he gave up, it's all explained in the AC 3 Novel, which basicly explains the story from Haytham's point of view, it's quite worth the reading.
Here's a deleted scene for Shay before facing Haytham.
During the Battle of Chesapeake Bay,
"Need to get... inside the fort..." Connor staggered, "Where are you, Charles?"
"Brace yourself!" shouted Shay, sliding on the zip line, kicking Connor to the ground.
Alone with space to manoeuvre, Connor got up and kicked him in the groin area sending Shay staggering. Shay attacked immediately, but Connor blocked and countered all of his attacks and Shay kicked Connor aside. He collected himself and Shay tried again, failed to land a good hit and Connor kicked Shay to the ground.
"Who are you?" asked Shay.
"I was trained by Achilles. Now step aside."
"Achilles? I should have known Achilles would never learn. In that case, you will make a good target."
"You joined the templars. Achilles told me you were once an assassin who joined the templars. Now you became my father's puppet."
"You're the one whom the poor sod I killed in Versailles mentioned. You killed Jack Weeks, Christopher Gist and James Cook." Shay recalled.
"I have the foggiest idea about what you're talking about."
"It doesn't matter. What matters is that I made a mistake in sparing Achilles. Die, assassin!"
- - Shay vs. Connor - -
Without recourse, Shay leapt at Connor. Shay's fighting style was as every bit as powerful and deadly as he was when killing the assassins. He released berserk darts from his firearm. Connor was gripped in the lash of the darts' effects. Snarling and growling, Connor chased Shay who avoided his blind rage. A misdirect hit from Connor sent Shay to the ground. Judging by the injuries, they weren't too severe as similar to Haytham and Connor, Shay can heal at swift rate. He dealt a hard blow to the possessed Connor, knocking him to the floor. As the effects wore off, unlike his victims who died, Connor went in a state of fatigue. However he couldn't afford to relax or get caught in Shay's hidden blades.
"This makes me nauseus." Connor panted.
From his rifle rolled a useful gift: a fragmentation grenade with a powerful blast radius.
"Why? What have you got against Achilles?" Connor demanded.
"Achilles was always a failed mentor who murdered his followers." Shay pointed out.
"Achilles may have made mistakes, but he never murdered his followers." Connor rebuffed.
"Is it not murder to send ill-prepared assassins like you to their demise?"
This brought no answer. In furious sequence, Shay fired three grenades in rapid succession at Connor who tried to steer a course between the grenades. He heard rapid ticking as a grenade bounced towards him. "Take this," Shay growled. Connor dodged aside from the blast.
The grenades exploded. And in so doing it inflicted damage that Connor could not long sustain, leaving his health at its lowest. Connor had at least the miracle of the swift healing with which to undo such hurt as he suffered, if more than one took its toll, but he somehow sensed he would need such miracles to better purpose. He flipped himself back on his feet and drew a wary path between the remaining grenades, nearly obscured in dazzling clouds of dust as the explosions wore off. His assassin's instinct signalled him to avoid Shay's incoming attack with his hidden blade and grabbed him by his head. Connor smashed Shay's head on the table before smashing a glass bottle on his head.
"You should have joined the templar." Shay insisted.
"Even if you were a templar, you had some sense of honour. Achilles told me you rendered some child an orphan. Where's that sense of honour in that?"
Panting hard, with a deft thrust he plunged the berserk date onto the templar's neck. Caught in a paroxysm of madness and rage, Shay went on a destructive rampage. Connor avoided his foe's who was sweeping his sword crazily. This drew fully half his strength. The rogue assassin was stilled for a moment, and teetered on collapse. However, his recovery was swift. Connor closed in on Shay to try combat one-on-one. No crude fighter he was; the templar blocked expertly and swung his sword in swift reply. The Irish swordsman closed in from behind, and Connor was knocked heavy blows as he attempted to block. A boot kicked out. He could not afford to be caught close to Shay, and rolled aside as the sword crashed down. Agility was his surest defense. He fought back as well as he was able. Connor seemed never to gain advantage before the latter lunged fast to assault him from behind. Shay seemed inexhaustible; as fast as he struck one the other closed in, and he could not hope to hold him at bay.
Shay moved nimbly as Connor launched the attack, and once more railed on the stricken assassin. Connor recalled the berserk dart and avoided them. He caught one of them. and stabbed him again. As the templar went into a maddened state, he thrust and slashed furiously in the wrong direction. Connor watched for Haytham's enforcer to rise as he kept up the assault, then moved away to set the sequence again. Connor patiently manoeuvred to execute the trap again and again, each time luring the enraged foe to his pattern of weakness. Soon enough he sensed a chance to use the tomahawk a second time. At a moment it seemed he was beaten to the point of death. With the last of his strength he struck him, then flipped, hung off the neck and stabbed fast and threw himself clear. The Native assassin sank injured and exhausted to his knees.
With Shay wounded, Connor moved in for questioning.
"I won't ask you again why did you betray the assassins?"
"Why would I even tell you? The assassins lost sight of their beliefs. Templars have always been a family. You, an assassin, I don't even need to know. Looks like Achilles trained you well. 1755, a huge calamity befell us. People live in houses in poor conditions, children beg for money, animals look for food and refugees look for shelter. I was determined to help those in need, thanks to the British and Templars."
"You act as though the templars are doing things in your favour. You play your part as if you're doing people favours, yet you gleefully use your status among the templars to bolster whatever whim that would work in your favour." Connor rebuffed.
"Look around you! You think you're doing the world a favour. Do you even realise you're the cause of this mess? I think you're so busy playing the hero that you're forgetting the consequences and how it would affect the people living now and then."
"Achilles warned me that I should take care of the world so that I don't destroy it."
"So he did. Looks like he learnt his lessons. Inside of you running around dispensing freedom, why not think of something from me? You should take my word for it. You have to take my word for it if you're to improve living conditions for people and animals, if you're to be a hero, Connor. The templars will rule, thanks to me. I make my own luck."
The Irish templar moaned his last breath and Connor performed his prayers in his Native language.
"Let the spirits grant you your last luck in the spirit world."
Fun fact: when Haytham found out his son is a Assassin he wanted to unite the Assassin's and the Templar's towards a common cause but eventually realized that it would be almost impossible so decided against it. One of the main reasons he wanted to unite the two is because he often felt torn between the two sides due to his father Edward being a Assassin
This game’s story and characters are criminally underrated. Don’t mean to say it’s any better than AC2 or 4, but it is still quite good and makes some extremely good and true points about the Revolution and how unrighteous it actually was.
It really put into consideration that the Assassins and the Templars butt heads far too much and that neither side is truly wrong or right, this war between them isn’t all black and white and the two sides aren’t actually that different. At the very least, the Colonial Templars all were attempting to help in some kind of way aside from Hickey and Lee.
I never liked Connor he lacks the Chrisma and Charm. In which Ezio is a master of.
@@beastmotoz not everyone need to be like Ezio holy shit dude the same ppl will shit on ubisoft that they can't make a different character if they create another Ezio like character Connor being young and brash is really unique
After replaying the games, Connor and haytham were better than ezio. Ezio's story wasn't as deep like AC 3
@@beastmotoz I'm not sure that's the point of being an Assassin. Yes, Ezio's charisma is his best. But when it comes to wisdom it is a regular trait The Brotherhood must inherit.
I Like Ac 3 and its story and ive never hated Connor never expected him to be next Ezio tbh, the only thing i hate about ac 3 is just the fricking optional objectives too demanding and some require luck.
Connor showing respect by listening to what his father has to say
The Conner and Haytham interactions are both the best and worst part of this game. By that I mean that what's there is really compelling, but there isn't enough. They really needed to spend more time developing their relationship. Instead, they just put all of Haytham and Conner's development together in one sequence and the whole thing felt rushed as a result. I hope they give us a game about Haytham. I really want to learn more about who he was and maybe what he was doing during all of this. I know there is a book about Haytham, but that's just not enough. There NEEDS to be a game about this stuff.
AC III did everything right
Tim Brinkhof and so did IV
TheSandboxer Ac IV didn't have a focused story, it were mainly loose sets of different storylines that badly mingled to create fun gameplay. The design was more 'cold' in AC III setting a better and heavy tone, AC IV's design was a bit too colorful. Also, i couldn't care for Edward or his story.
Also, the naval combat on ships wasn't as good as it was in III, surely there's more variety, but I really missed the feeling. In AC III your ship felt powerful when you stroke. AC IV's canonballs felt like feathers.
Nonetheless it was a great game.
***** Who are you to say what people want? People want different things. The fact that we are having this discussion at all is proof of that. If you disagree with me about wanting to see a game about Haytham then fine. Let's just agree to disagree and be done with it.
No people say they want! Innovation something new! But they really don't Assassins creed III is one such example! It's new has a different setting, lower buildings so different scaling to climb, A heavier story, The Haythem and Conner story in a way mirrors Williams and Desmond's. AC IV hopped on the pirate bandwagon not original. Also Super Mario Galaxy is another example it's one of lowest selling Mario games but it Brought Innovation! It wasn't the same plat former, I don't even think it's even a platforming game!
"They want to be told What to do"
That describes human nature to very deep level.
Some parts of his speech actually foreshadows the civil war.
Haytham was right about a lot of things, but he was too nihilistic.
Connor was right about some things, but he was too naive.
"I should have killed you long ago." That's probably one of the worst things a father could ever say to their child. Hell, even Darth Vader had a better goodbye moment.
I think that's a really messed up way of saying "I love you" for Haytham, since his son was the only one who made him question his believes, something not even his sister could achieve, I think in the end he said that to Connor in an effort to show that he ended up caring more about Connor than about his order.
Well.....he fooled me. Shitty way of telling someone you care.
***** Never said he did.
It's just Haytham's character. He's too proud to have a heartfelt goodbye moment - he said that himself. And he's too dedicated/stubborn to say anything that sympathizes with the Assassins.
TheHoon57 To be fair. Edward only raised Haytham until he was about 10. The rest was reginald burch
Man I was feeling nostalgic about Assassins Creed and thought to come and watch a few videos. Particularly, I like to give Kudos to whoever wrote the brilliant dialogue in this game. So many good memories... also, forgot that one time Connor punched Haytham in the balls. xD
learnt it from his grandpa xD
Edward kicked all them captains in the nuts when countering lol
Babe come over
Connor: I can't
I have Lee
Connor: I'm already at you're front door
Unfortunately they cut out Connors Speech at the end of the game. In which he pretty much agreed with his father but with slight difference: While Connor agrees that Leaders will come and go and that true freedom will never be earned he sees the roles of Assassins as protector of the free will. That Freedom might lead to chaos but in the end its the Assassins job to ensure that the people have a chance to fight for their freedom. What they do with it: Its up to them.
I didnt say word for word what Connor said but the base meaning of it.
Haytham was such an amazing character, from they way he speaks and holds himself in any situation, always level headed in my opinion and the script for him was good
Funny I was just thinking, listening to both sides from Connor and Haytham and people in the comments taking it seriously speaking about their ideologies (storyline speaking), Juno is just sitting in the back watching and waiting to enslave everyone throwing all ideologies out the window when it gets to that point (Again just speaking storyline)...
Yeah f$#k Juno and her asswipe of a boyfriend-.-
Juno dead anyway she was killed off in AC comics by Desmond son
Haytham knew Connor had dual blades...But before the final blow was delt, he wanted his son to know that the Templars will be back someday. Farewell, Haytham.
When Connor punches Haytham in the groin i can't help but giggle.
Or when Connor bodies haytham out of a burning building not knowing if there is water below or not.
In the homestead basement Connor writes messages next to the portraits of the people he kills. After he kills Haytham he writes ‘sakataterihwáhten’ which means ‘I made a mistake’. It shows that Connor eventually did come to see that killing Haytham was not the right play and working together with him would have been the best avenue. Little details like this and Haytham’s journal in the Forsaken novel of how he saved Connor from being hung, is what made this game so great! For me Haytham will always be the best example of a Templar that we will see in Assassins Creed.
Blame it on achillies. He didnt fully learn from his mistakes in rogue.
Thanks mate :) I always thought Connor and Haytham's argument here was very compelling, and it is a shame to see most people just rush it, after all this is the Order vs Liberty discussion that makes the conflict between Templars and Assassins so interesting.
may the father of understanding guide us master kenway!
Kenny you are in the wrong game
Wait Kenny go back to your game and prevent Lee everett from getting bit
I'm for what happened to your wife and Duck, may both of them rest in peace.
Jeez, I missed so much of this dialogue. After blocking Haytham only three times and smashing him into objects it triggered the cutscene for me.
i didn't even know this extra dialogue existed until today. I'm glad i got to listen to it
The gameplay of the battle ruin everything dammit
@@vincent-lm8svyeah.
Haytham: I should have killed you long ago. (Dies)
Connor: Huh. At least he didn't say "I should have pulled out"...
I think this was the absolute highest point of writing in this series. Shame it was dismissed by critics and fans.
But you should also remember when Altair literally said this near the end of AC1: "I understand now that our Creed does not command us to be free, it commands us to be wise."
And the nature of their work in AC1 has absolutely no freedom; You are to avoid love (be it to your sons or wives), and any who disobey are to be executed.
Altair acknowledged it when mentioning the 3 ironies. The second irony was: "Here we seek to open the minds of men, but require obedience to a master and set of rules."
Al mualim had Templar philosophy in the order and that's why it was more correct. Altair switching it to freedom was ridiculous.
@ace9924 "More correct" is incorrect. Altair believes in a peace where all stand equal. Where, in a world of truly free, people may choose kindness. The Templars believe there to be nothing but chaos in freedom, that humans would wipe each other out if all were truly free. But power corrupts, as seen with Al Mualim and many world leaders. To believe in Altair's vision is to believe in an inate kindness within all humans. To believe in the Templars is to believe that humanity is too self-destructive on its own.
I choose to believe in the hope for better days and know the inate kindness within people.
@highinquisitordarkblaw4868 the goal of the assassin's before Altair wasn't total freedom in the first place. Altair reformed it well but where he went wrong was placing total emphasis on free will without adding any order to combat the anarchism that other assassin's down the line would use such as Achillies in Rogue. Both Sides had their extremes but the goal of peace in all things before Altair was the right way.
When I was a child I was all into the assassins but after rogue I began to question a lot. But now as a adult looking back at all the games. I can see that templars are very necessary.
yeah when we get older we slowly becoming more understanding on different povs , like for example the movie ,
like not all templars agree on using artifacts to control mankind ,the movie has mixed reactions but it has its way to to become canon ,
Same. You root for the assassins, but as you grow up you begin to see that the templars were right all along. Yes, maybe they had insane and ruthless members who caused pain and suffering, but they don't represent the templar ideology at it's base.
@@minihalkoja590No lol. The templars were definitely not "right all along"
It's easy to get caught up in ideologies and forget that, when it comes down to it, their entire goal is to utilize pieces of Eden to forcibly control the minds of everyone in the world, to ensure a "paradise".
If anything, the point is that both templates and assassins are flawed and don't have a real "correct" answer. There will always be violence and chaos wherever there is free will, but there will also be no choice. You'd trade a chaotic and messy but still very much fair world for a world where everyone except a few powerful elite people who think they know better rule over your mind and actions?
In 2021, Haytham was never more right.
Altaïr: Tactical with single hand combat
Ezio: Defensive combat with enemies weaponry.
Connor: Brutal combat
So many need to wake up to understand that we already live in a templar like system but everyone is told different. Haytham explains perfectly how the world works and this is the world we are living.
If you guys think about it, part of Haythems speech is foreshadowing the American Civil War saying "but when the battle is finished they will fall fighting against themselves about how to best ensure control, in time it will lead to war" and "They will each differ in their views of what it means to be free".
The Templars see the world as it is, but the Assassins see the world for how it could be.
Yet...there won't be any winners
The reason why I love Haythem is not only because he truly believes what he's doing is the right thing, but he also makes some great points. Points that have led us to where we are today.
2:55 I never realized the revelations theme is in this when they really start to talk about society and freedom that the templars and assassins have and will always fight about
Thank you so much for the upload. Although, it is ironic that both Haytham and Connor are right from a curtain point of view.
Definitely the most epic scene in the whole game
Potentially the series.
The Connor/Haytham interactions are the best writing in the game. It almost feels like they had one guy writing this stuff, and nothing else.
haytham 300 years later with his son and descendants in heaven
"I've told you..."
implying he's in heaven, lol
"With great power, comes great responsibilities." - Haytham Kenway
haytham makes a lot of true points about freedom and conflict. Like how he states that they will fight over what it means to be free, this is true of even today's society. Democrats and Republicans and the population argue over what rights people should and should not have (ex: gun laws, gay marriage, abortion, etc.) And these topics have led to much disunity in the nation. Especially today with all the social justice movements about like BLM and feminism which often promote violence and have divided us more as a nation through racial and gender class boundaries. Haytham is also right about how the people only have the illusion of control. Just look to how elections are handled, votes are not equal in this country because some states provide more electoral votes than others. Meaning that some states' popular votes matter less. This leads to candidates marketing their campaigns to specific states while neglecting others. The popular vote doesn't even matter in this society only to decide the electoral vote. But again the popular vote counts for less in some states meaning that all votes are not equal. And yet the people are supposed to be in control. But they are not, they vote for electorates who then make the decision for who is elected. Another example of how the people don't have the power is what the DNC did to bernie sanders in the democratic primary election. That shit was rigged as fuck and it screwed bernie sanders over big time. Do you really think the people are in control when corruption like that goes down? Also, when have the people ever decided on what our rights are. The government created the bill of rights and they enforced those rights and what rights weren't there they denied the people. Like women's rights to vote and what not. It was only when the government made the amendments that people gained their "rights". The people never got to choose. And they aren't even rights. They're privileges. In 1941 Japanese-American citizens were thrown into internment camps simply because they were of the wrong origin. They didn't to anything wrong, they didn't get a fair trial, their "rights" were taken away and they were thrown into prison for nothing at all. The government has always been in control and always will be, the people have no power at all. HOWEVER, haytham's idea for a better future is probably worse. His idea is basically a communist dictatorship which has never worked in history. So in truth there is no perfect society. Each has its flaws and people will always disagree with one another, it's inevitable.
Honestly i was so sad i missed a lot of the dialogue, thanks for uploading it!
Golden analysis!
Despite Ubisoft's effort to progressively display Haytham as corrupted in the last quarter of the game, I can't help but agree with everything he said here. Most people hold freedom as the ideal state without just for the sake of social aceptance, without ever knowing what underlies the freedom they seek. Haytham summed it up: "The freedom you so desperately seek does not exist".
Like you said, freedom is efficient with a great foundation, just as control is without corruption.
Two men fighting to the death, for many reasons.
Two ideals that have existed and fought for thousands of years.
Two upbringings that heavily influenced them to be on the side that they are on now.
Two goals that conflict with each other.
But one simple fact remains above all.
This is a duel between father and son, because of what they believe in, leading to the son murdering his father.
I'm sure that this day haunted Connor for the rest of his life. What if he had made a different choice? What if he had known that even after killing his father and Lee, that nothing would change for him? What if he had seen the wisdom behind his fathers words before cutting open his throat?
I love AC1 and AC3 for this. Even though the protagonist are not nearly as fun as AC2, the antagonists made all the difference.
Actually assassin's creed 3 novel confirms that Connor has regret killing his dad.
Nothing says father and son bonding like a good old sword fight to the death
"These men are united now by a common cause. But when this battle is finished they will fall to fighting amongst themselves about how best to ensure control. In time it will lead to war."
Don't know if it's true, but this could be a foreshadowing of the American Civil War.
That's exactly what the writers of the game had him referring to
Haytham was the only part about AC III that I liked. Can't wait to see him again in Rogue.
Haytham is such a compelling character with so many layers. But to be honest, I found him to be quite odd in Rogue. We didn't really see him have that much screen time with Shay to develop that dynamic between them like he did with Connor and the Colonial Templars in AC3. So every time he showed up in the game it felt unnecessary and forced to me. :/
TheMegaUzumaki Yes they do wtf are you talking about.
I liked Connor because he's such a great psychopath " Where's Charles Lee !!! "
TheMegaUzumaki why are u all over Assassin
Creed 3 videos
@@kaithewolf7588 idk, but people gave their favorites, some people like assassins and some like the templars and some like both sides of the game's factions, The only templars i like are fictionals like shay,haytham,elise,lucy and berg and i like assassin's like connor,edward,adwale,ezio and altiar and aveline and evie.
The templars are 50% right like the assassins on somethings,like how mankind was bult to serve like it showed on the AC2 video:The truth.
Any other people whose eyes rolled into the back of their heads when they hear Connor retort 'They offer freedom'?
No. Only you.
Because it's true. The patriots aren't perfect but their words aren't completely untrue. Because they offer a better future then the Templars and British. Now you are probably going to try to act superior saying that in dumb etc when in reality it's true. You can either accept that or be a Templar fanatic.
+Evangelos Tse same here
Yes
@@joshuawillis602 And the British ended up freeing up more "slaves" more than the Patriots ever did after the Revolution. It took a civil war to finally end slavery and even then it cost the life of one of the greatest men to ever lead the United States to do so.
Regardless of how you feel about it, the birth of the United States was an insane concept back then. Haytham is bringing up valid criticism how it would not work.
This video deserves more views. Thanks for sharing,most people totally destroy bosses, and don't give them the chance to say anything
1:20 are you serious Connor? In the balls?
After all he came from there
@@fhdkdr lmfaoo 🤣
Notice that every single thing that Haytham says before he does is objectively correct.
You can say that Haytham is right in some point. But, most of templars, just the guys with a lust for power. Like Al mualim, who literally killed his own guys. There is only few of them, who actually believes in the thing they do.
Sorry for inundating the page with essay-long comments, but I would love to thank the uploader for the effort!
No other video displays the full speech. High-quality AC videos always come from true and passionate fans who make sure nothing is missed or depicted misleadingly :D
Haytham made III amazing. What an awesome story arch.
Hope they make a follow up Assassins Creed game where Connor's renewed Colonial Brotherhood hunt Shay with a cameo or help from Arno and the French Brotherhood
Damn its epic! Its like Edward is speaking to his son through his grandson. And Haytham is telling his dad he won't go into the family business. Connor inherited Edward's will.
Sorta but not really. Edward believed in freewill but he knew that it was messy and he knew that peace was a confusion between both assassins and templars. He was never radical in his view like connor was. Connor here spoke like achillies in rogue in how they believed that the creed could solve anything and that being an assassin was a role to take pride in. They both ignore the ironies of it and haytham here is telling connor the ironies of it. Haytham embodied the templar view with the old assassin view of peace.
Haytham is easily the best dressed templar in the series
Connor: You should’ve gone for the arm
I like how Haytham is able to tell Connor hes proud, obviously it doesnt speak much about their relationship but the meaning for him to tell his son who he genuinely cared for deep down that he was proud of the man Connor became instrad of his last words being "you will fail" or something, he simply says, Im proud of you, not as a father but as a man"
"The people never have the power - only the illusion of it!"
The electoral college.
Damn, I really didn't want to kill haytham when I played this...
If I'd had to choose, I'd go with the Templars. Controlling and supervising people doesn't necessarily mean to oppress. If control and supervision are given to the right people, it will be millions of ways better than giving humans total freedom, because there are many evil people in this world and full freedom will give the evil full power to do their shit. There must be control.
Why does everyone hate Connor? I think he's a complete badass, I enjoy playing as Connor more than Haytham
i couldn't agree more I enjoyed playing as Connor more than any other player in Assassins Creed Altair Ezio or Edward Connor was my favorite
Same
I think it's because of his humorless and "always serious" disposition. But easily the most powerful assassin so far. I did enjoy playing Haytham more, though
yeah
paradisecityX0 No even though he is my favorite i wouldn't say he's the most powerful. Ezio or Altair is probably the most powerful
It's so sad. Anyone could see just how much Haytham loved his boy. He was proud of him in spite of him being an assassin
I mean Haytham came from an Assassin family and even killed the Templar that killed his father. Haytham I dont think hated the Assassins but took issue with the means of how they did things. I mean his hidden blades were his father's. He still holds a piece of his assassin bloodline with him.
@@OtaniNoAsagi Didn't Haythem steal the Hidden Blades from Miko?, the old man at the Opera.
@@RubenMakaya no he had them the whole time. Thats what he killed him with. He took the necklace from him. If youre talking about the Opera the begining of 3.
@@OtaniNoAsagi Yeah it's just that you said that Haytham had Edward's hidden blades which isn't correct. Haytham obtained them during an encounter with Miko in the past. Edward only gave him a short sword which became lost after Miko knocked it out of his hands during the same encounter.
@@RubenMakaya ah i must have got a story crossed somewhere then.
This full speech teaches us that the templars aren't evil of course they always make them look like the evil
At least Haytham stayed strong to his belief
This one one of the reasons AC3 my top number 1 favorite game
Living in 2022 listening to Haythem… he was right… after we won the revolutionary war we keep arguing and debating about what we think it means to be free it’s like we’re rabid dogs