What are the biggest criticisms with this game?

[Conan]

So I know it hasn't been released yet but I know everyone has an opinion about it. I know a lot of the criticisms make sense, a lot of them are a little silly. The historicity of Yosuke aside, what are the biggest *functional* problems people have with it? Stuff that you wouldn't be able to ignore. Any particular directions they seem to be taking people don't like? Im not trying to start like a woke vs based argument I just want to know what people think about whats been revealed about game mechanics and plot

[WELSH_GAMER_99]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από PSA:

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Shield:

Agreed.

The people up-in-arms over Yasuke's "historical inaccuracy" would have you believe they're just concerned historians, but...

False equivalence, of course. Making Yasuke a samurai isn't some guy slipping up cause he isn't aware of the history, it's a deliberate alteration of history.

It's like in Ghost of Tsushima, the swords are carried with the blade up, which isn't accurate. Swords back then were carried blade down. (I think they technically shouldn't even be katana yet in the 13th century). This is just a slip-up/oversight cause devs are not historians.

That's entirely different from incorporating Columbus in your game and pretending he was Spanish despite knowing he was Italian. Just cause a lot of people think he was Spanish doesn't mean you should reinforce that misconception.

And that doesn't mean they can't have a little fun. Nobody thinks da Vinci actually made a hidden blade for assassins. But he was still an inventor and AC2 didn't turn him into a pimp or a soldier.

So are the Assassin's in the series freedom fighters in real life?

Was Rodrigo Borgia a secret Templar along with Charles Lee?

Were the Assassin's and Templars involved in the French Revolution?

Like Yasuke being a Samurai is nothing new in this lol. The series has been altering and screwing around with history since day one. Its Historical FICTION afterall

[Shield]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από PSA:

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Shield:

Agreed.

The people up-in-arms over Yasuke's "historical inaccuracy" would have you believe they're just concerned historians, but...

False equivalence, of course. Making Yasuke a samurai isn't some guy slipping up cause he isn't aware of the history, it's a deliberate alteration of history.

It's like in Ghost of Tsushima, the swords are carried with the blade up, which isn't accurate. Swords back then were carried blade down. (I think they technically shouldn't even be katana yet in the 13th century). This is just a slip-up/oversight cause devs are not historians.

That's entirely different from incorporating Columbus in your game and pretending he was Spanish despite knowing he was Italian. Just cause a lot of people think he was Spanish doesn't mean you should reinforce that misconception.

And that doesn't mean they can't have a little fun. Nobody thinks da Vinci actually made a hidden blade for assassins. But he was still an inventor and AC2 didn't turn him into a pimp or a soldier.

There's strong evidence Yasuke was a samurai, but there's also strong evidence he was merely a retainer for Nobunaga. There is some ambiguity, but anyone serious knows those that's where Yasuke the historical figure is going to fall.

Regardless of whether he was a true samurai or retainer, him playing the role of a samurai in Shadows is so much less of a logical leap than even da Vinci making Assassin's Tools, let alone whatever you're on about with Columbus.

Let alone the even lower-hanging fruit, this is a series where you famously kill the Pope because he went evil.

It's bizarre Yasuke is where the line is drawn. His historical inaccuracies, if they indeed even are inaccurate, entirely inoffensive in the service of telling a fantasy story about a samurai and a ninja with a historical background, which is all AC games.

We can forgive Ghosts of Tsushima, a game whose core thrust is trying to make you feel like a real samurai as much as possible, for inaccurate swordsmanship but Yasuke is a step too far? For what reason, anyway?

[WELSH_GAMER_99]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από PSA:

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από WELSH_GAMER_99:

So are the Assassin's in the series freedom fighters in real life?

Was Rodrigo Borgia a secret Templar along with Charles Lee?

Were the Assassin's and Templars involved in the French Revolution?

Like Yasuke being a Samurai is nothing new in this lol. The series has been altering and screwing around with history since day one. Its Historical FICTION afterall

I already addressed what you are trying to argue. Da Vinci did not help the assassins any more than Borgia fought assassins. But Da Vinci was an inventor and Borgia was a pope.

I literally gave the da Vinci example and said it's okay to have some fun. They added a little thing "he did in secret and that's why we can't find it in the history books". You can use that as an excuse. But if you made da Vinci a soldier instead of an inventor, you can't use that excuse anymore and at that point you have to say you are just going full fantasy.

So, no, it doesn't need to be 100% accurate, it has never been. But it has always had some grounding in actual history and that would be sacrificed by making such ridiculous changes.

You're not answering the question. Was Rodrigo Borgia a Templar. Not just a Templar but the Grand Master of the Templars?

[WELSH_GAMER_99]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από PSA:

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από WELSH_GAMER_99:

You're not answering the question. Was Rodrigo Borgia a Templar. Not just a Templar but the Grand Master of the Templars?

I already answered it but apparently some people have trouble with deduction. No, he wasn't a templar, da Vinci wasn't an assassin helper and neither was Yasuke.

Was da Vinci a soldier? No
Was Borgia a bartender? No
Was Yasuke a samurai? No

So if you aren't turning da Vinci into a soldier or Borgia into a bartender, be consistent and don't turn Yasuke into a samurai.

You're still dodging the question. The issues is Rodrigo Borgia was not the grand master Templars yet he is portrayed as one in this series.

Yasuke always has been presented as a Samurai in media even if he was one or not and him being one in a series like Assassin's Creed is not that out there considering we are dealing with a series that is historical fiction.

Lets not forget this clip from the first game https://youtu.be/FhG6HNFl0Jk?si=sHXVfZjtpGTDmA0a

[AdahnGorion]

The writing and somewhat action oriented combat.
But it is pretty subjective, as simplistic does not equal "bad" infact many enjoy having a more simplistic approach.

I never really liked the combat style they have, so I am biased in my opinion obviously.
There might also be some that dislike the level design, but that is not really an issue if you ask me. The worldbuilding is another crtique, but that is because lots of the stuff included look or are Chinese rather than Japanse.. Ubisoft have corrected some of it after historicals and gamers have hinted at it, so it might not be a large problem anyone.

[RocknRolla]

This game will be like the last 3 games UBISOFT released. Shameless copy pasta, stupid NPC's, cheap Indian labour, great graphics (Valhalla aside) , and an empty soulless storyline that makes no sense with a waterfall of microtransactions.

[Raider Deci]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Conan:

So I know it hasn't been released yet but I know everyone has an opinion about it. I know a lot of the criticisms make sense, a lot of them are a little silly. The historicity of Yosuke aside, what are the biggest *functional* problems people have with it? Stuff that you wouldn't be able to ignore. Any particular directions they seem to be taking people don't like? Im not trying to start like a woke vs based argument I just want to know what people think about whats been revealed about game mechanics and plot

Im always waiting to pass complete judgement until I have actually played the game. For the most part I do like what im seeing




About the yasuke-discussion above;
I dont care if its historically accurate. AC has never been that, quite the opposite seen in the clip Welsh posted. Authentic, but thats about it.
AC has always twisted historical figures & events. There is not a single one that has not been changed. The world history itself is completly different from the get-go with the ISU, humanity itself is a creation and not an evolutionary being (est in AC2) but thing ones that make everyone flip out is that a black man in japan that doesnt follow history to the letter?

All I care about is if his journey makes sense ingame. If he comes off the boat with the portugese and immidietly start swinging katanas with samurai-armor then theres a problem, he needs an introduction/training arc.

I still think his inclusion as a main character was a bad decision and the backlash was obvious from the start, Ubi PR isnt helping, but it isnt the end of the world

[AvalonKane]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από WELSH_GAMER_99:

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από EazyMichael:

People 'forget' AC games are historical inaccurate because it's based of the time it's set in. Possible that all games have a 'disrespect' to some or most characters featured in the past games.
Example that Ezio never existed and is considered the best storyline and no one is mad about it.

Also Valhalla is arguably the most historically inaccurate in the series. It depicts stone castles despite them not existing during that century. I haven't heard anyone claim its "disrespecting british culture"

Not to get too deap in to all the reasons, but Valhalla was inaccurate to the point it was distracting.
That and the main story being the same mission over and over again was one of my main gripes with the game.

I don't care if everything is 100%, but I felt like nothing in the Valhalla world was genuine and so many things about both the british and the viking societies just jarred with me.
I still played it for almost 100 hours, but I couldn't care less what happened for the last 60.
It's definitely among my least favourite AC games.

The world building is usually what I like best about Ubisofts games; the ability to step in to a place that has long since disappeared. Some things being inaccurate is OK, but if everything feels out of place the illusion is gone.

[WELSH_GAMER_99]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από PSA:

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από WELSH_GAMER_99:

You're still dodging the question. The issues is Rodrigo Borgia was not the grand master Templars yet he is portrayed as one in this series.

Yasuke always has been presented as a Samurai in media even if he was one or not and him being one in a series like Assassin's Creed is not that out there considering we are dealing with a series that is historical fiction.

Lets not forget this clip from the first game https://youtu.be/FhG6HNFl0Jk?si=sHXVfZjtpGTDmA0a

And da Vinci wrongfully being represented in media as a soldier would also not be an excuse to represent him as a soldier in AC. AC has always represented historical figures in the role we know they had in history. That's why da Vinci wasn't a soldier, Borgia wasn't a bartender, Washington wasn't a coach driver, Teach wasn't a farmer, etc.

The clip only undermines whatever argument you are trying to make. The media you speak of are a representation of what is being said in the clip. Lockley wrote a book that claims Yasuke was a samurai. As is said in the clip, "anyone can write a book".

Do you have an actual point to make?

Despite Yasuke's size, it would actually be more legitimate to have him be a stealthy assassin than a samurai in armor. Cause then at the very least you could excuse it by saying "At night he snuck out to do some secret stuff Nobunaga didn't know about, which is why there is nothing written about it".

For all the fantastical stuff characters did in the games, they are things that could be done in secret. Even being a secret templar master. He was a SECRET templar master, being key. Yasuke running around as a samurai is not exactly "secret".

Your argument doesn't make sense though as historically we don't know much about who Yasuke was. Him being a Samurai is a popular depiction as he was in media. Him being a Samurai is on par with the things that these games pull off.

Also how did you miss the point of the clip this badly? The point is that what we know in regards to history in these games is different. Like the depiction of both the Assassin's and Templars. Assassin's Creed since day 1 has always have this new take on what these historical figures or groups were. Like the depiction of Yasuke being a Samurai taking part in said war.

Furthermore its literally the core part of this series. Representing these groups/figures in a way that is different to what we know. And in regards to Yasuke (we know very little of who he was just the mythology around him) its not out of the realm of possibility for Assassin's Creed to explore.

Yasuke was a Samurai in other forms of media so why not AC?

[sigina ✝]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από WELSH_GAMER_99:

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από EazyMichael:

People 'forget' AC games are historical inaccurate because it's based of the time it's set in. Possible that all games have a 'disrespect' to some or most characters featured in the past games.
Example that Ezio never existed and is considered the best storyline and no one is mad about it.

Also Valhalla is arguably the most historically inaccurate in the series. It depicts stone castles despite them not existing during that century. I haven't heard anyone claim its "disrespecting british culture"

True, Valhalla takes a lot of creative liberties, especially with the castles. They did not exist in England at that time, but most people do not know enough history to notice, so they just accept whatever the game shows.

As a Swede, The romanticized Viking image has been pushed so hard that a lot of inaccuracies get overlooked. Even today, many still believe Vikings were all tall, shaved the sides of their hair, were the most feared warriors, and belonged to a distinct group of people. Some even think they have Viking ancestors just because they got 2 or 3 percent Scandinavian or German DNA from MyHeritage, when in reality, being a Viking was just a job, and most of these people would not live up to their own fantasy.

Funny how nobody cared about historical accuracy before, but now people want to nitpick every detail just because they are mad about a real-life African. Some even claim there was a rule that main protagonists should not be real historical figures, while completely ignoring how AC Chronicles had Anastasia of Russia as a main character.

[WELSH_GAMER_99]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από PSA:

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από WELSH_GAMER_99:

Your argument doesn't make sense though as historically we don't know much about who Yasuke was. Him being a Samurai is a popular depiction as he was in media. Him being a Samurai is on par with the things that these games pull off.

Also how did you miss the point of the clip this badly? The point is that what we know in regards to history in these games is different. Like the depiction of both the Assassin's and Templars. Assassin's Creed since day 1 has always have this new take on what these historical figures or groups were. Like the depiction of Yasuke being a Samurai taking part in said war.

Furthermore its literally the core part of this series. Representing these groups/figures in a way that is different to what we know. And in regards to Yasuke (we know very little of who he was just the mythology around him) its not out of the realm of possibility for Assassin's Creed to explore.

Yasuke was a Samurai in other forms of media so why not AC?

It's irrelevant whether him being a samurai is a popular depiction in media. It's also a popular depiction to have vikings wearing horned helmets.

We know he wasn't. Foreigners were rare in Japan, foreigners that somehow managed to become samurai? Even more rare. That's why every foreign samurai was documented. That kind of thing is worth writing about.

I don't know how you managed to miss the most relevant part of the clip. The games have the same mainstream historical knowledge as our real world. What we know of da Vinci in the real world is also what people in the AC universe (besides the secret societies) know of da Vinci. So if our history sources say he was an inventor, so do those in the AC universe.

They just added on top that there are secret societies that do their work in secret so well, that it is not in the history books. That's why they don't have a WW3 or other major public events in AC. Cause that would be in the history books. And since our real world history books don't have it, neither can those in the AC universe. The fiction they write, they write it in a way that it still matches with the history books from the real world. A foreign samurai going on massacres across Japan doesn't match with our historical knowledge.

So, no, Yasuke being samurai is not on par with what these games do. That's why they didn't have Washington wear full plate armor as he solo'ed 500 Brits. Cause that would have been in our history books, just like Yasuke walking around as a samurai would have been.

You keep exaggerating the extent of Yasuke being a Samurai compared to George Washington wearing full armour killing 500 bits? Like that's not comparable at all.

Also you just defeated your argument. Mainstream media portrays Yasuke as a Samurai in the same way as Da Vinci is portrayed as an inventor. So again it doesn't go against the core part of AC or that clip. Regardless if he was a Samurai or not.

Furthermore Yasuke is not going on a massacre killing Japanese people. You're probably watching too much Asmongold. Yasuke is simply a Samurai in the game and the people he's fighting against are enemy NPC's.

These reasoning feel super flimsy at best. Akin to mental gymnastics. Especially with that Washington comparison. Like at the end of the day it shouldn't matter with how he's potrayed but somehow that broke everyone's brain.

[SEKTENGURU]

Embedded plot into wokeness, history revision, fantasy, animus setting.
Like in all ACs.
All ACs would be better without this !

[SEKTENGURU]

@ Conan
What is best in Life?

[ChubbiChibbai]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από PSA:

Maybe give us a character creator instead of going the opposite route and trying to force us to play people that actually lived.

Sure but conceptually the entire point of the Assassin Creed games has only ever been about using the animus to step into the body of someone very specific.

[Sero]

My lst AC is Odyssey and it was simply too much open world. There was tons of stuff to do but none of it felt meaningful.
Gathering one of the 300 legendary spartan helmets to unlock Leonidas' helmet isn't fun. I am pretty sure that wasn't actually part of the game though.

Personally I don't get how suddenly the historical inaccuracies are the main issue. Is was always fictional history. That was it's main appeal back then but they have almost dropped that. Do you even get out of the animus anymore?