I really liked Bret’s blog, I was about to share it too. I think the slavery point is especially important. The last two AC’s also failed to engage with the slavery that would have been rampant in their settings. Which is weird, because previous AC’s haven’t shied away from it. Though like the developer says in the thread @Jimbot posted, slavery is not an easy subject to work with. Same is true for historical sexism, which is largely ignored too. As Bret points out, all these cultures were patriarchal and sexist, Greece was considered sexist even by other sexist contemporary societies, yet only the “bad guys” are shown as being sexist in the recent AC games. It’s understandable why they do this, of course.
I think this is what he was kind of saying? They are using some pretty shitty modern colonial era tropes in this game that don’t really apply to the period, and which are just bad in general. The example he gives is your settlement, which is empty but is somehow this bountiful land with no Saxon’s or Britons living in it until you show up. And how the lives of the “natives” improves because of your project of conquest.
I still haven’t gotten the game, I’m waiting until I build a new PC over Christmas, but I’ve watched the opening few hours on Youtube. What he said does match up with what I’ve seen and how I’ve felt playing the more recent AC games.
He also puts something to words that I think about a lot when it comes to popular depictions of history:
Does all of that matter? Yes, I think it does . As I have argued here many times , fiction is often how the public conceptualizes the past and that concept of the past shapes the decisions we make in the present . Is one video game going to lead to a return to colonialist thinking? Of course not. But a culture in which such sanitized narratives are common is a culture far more willing to make those decisions; these stories matter in the aggregate . And so it is incumbent on designers and developers to construct their stories and their worlds with care, especially when they are set in the very real past .
So I finished the game and the ending was so bad i’m not going to go back to finish up the last region I have do to, or find the secrets and collect items and stuff. I’ve already uninstalled it and I may never play an Assassins Creed again if this is what they choose to do with their modern day bullshit going forward.
So yeah now the modern day stuff has gotten so bad for me that it’s turned me off the franchise’s story entirely. Why should I care about the events of the past if they are just being used for these new ends? Good job Ubisoft.
Wow, that sounds bad Ugh, I might still end up getting it though since there are so few action-rpg games in historical time periods. Man, not been a good batch of AAA games at the end of this year. It’s interesting how little people are talking about this game, even compared to Odyssey. Had a feeling that wasn’t a good sign.
It often isn’t highlighted in the games how you’re someone else watching this person’s memories. Like, it’s the main conceit of the series so of course it’s present, but it’s always framed as being benevolent or passive.
The stuff that happens at the end in the modern day part changes it to feel like a violation. Where if I were to continue observing Eivor’s memories this would be a betrayal of her trust and be going against everything she stands and fights for.
It definitely makes the fact that there’s obviously going to be DLC feel… weird. (The super ableist Beowulf DLC doesn’t help me feel good about that, either…)
I just haven’t clicked with this at all which isn’t necessarily a bad thing as it took me two years to click with Origins but there’s just something missing. It also feels like an incredibly messy game and England feels boring to run around in.
Considering the gross work environment at Ubisoft, guess we can’t be too surprised at the gross result of the story in this game. I wonder how many of the writers who worked on Origin and Odyssey are still there? I got the impression a lot of the ones who had been pushing to make Aya and Kassandra the leads left.
Not that the Ubisoft team are fascists per se, but if you replace fascism with “gross views” and this is how I’m kind of feeling about this game right now based on how you all are describing it.
I feel like there are almost certainly still folks there who pushed for Aya and Kassandra to be leads just based on what appears to be the ‘cannon’ Eivor.
To be more explicit, you’re given the choice between playing as male or female Eivor, or ‘letting the Animus choose’, which it notes is the default option. When selecting that default option, you play as female Eivor for more or less the whole game (at least so far, based on my progress…I’m around halfway or more through the game, I think). The only time it switches to male Eivor is when you go into a dream state and go to the mythological realms of Asgard and Jotunheim, where you basically play as Odin.
Honestly, the fact that the male Eivor has clearly been marketed more, and is on the cover art for the game, is really frustrating, and clearly the result of same-old Ubisoft being on their sexist bullshit.
I’ve had some discussions on Twitter with folks on the dev team (more than a few Waypoint fans on the Valhalla team) and it’s exactly as you said: the people in charge (and the marketing team) made very different choices from the core development team.
I just got to the end, and I have thoughts too!
Spoilers! So, yeah, @LavenderGooms, you’re absolutely right that the modern day protagonist change is deeply upsetting and a complete violation! But, I think that the devs know it’s fucked up, and it seems like that will be a driver for the story going forward. The whole ending sequence is heartbreaking and disturbing. It hit me like a punch in the gut, and I feel like that’s what they were going for. I’m not saying they’ll stick the landing with this, but I’m at least curious to see where they take it in the DLCs.
Anyways, I overall like the game! I don’t think Eivor’s personal story was as good as Bayek’s or Kassandra’s, but all the region arcs were compelling and cohesive thematically. I liked how the modern day metastory was both way farther in the background, and actually related to and well integrated with the main story. (AC Odyssey spoilers I still laugh at how ridiculous and out of left field that Pythagoras reveal was. I actually liked running around England TBH. To me it feels much more like a real place than AC Odyssey’s Greece. It’s also less of a chore to navigate imho.
I guess I don’t have that kind of faith it was intended that way. And even if it was it’s completely incongruous with them expecting me to go back and have fun doing more in their open world afterwards.
Kinda big spoilers if you haven’t played this game: If you go up to Eivor’s grave, Basim talks about how even though he was bested in the past he ultimately won, and that he will now use the animus to study her and use her skills towards his ends. To me that reads as the devs clearly stating that this guy sucks, and what he’s doing sucks. But, yeah, I guess we’ll find out in the DLCs, because there’s no way they could take the story forward without addressing (or not addressing, which would be an answer in and of itself) the implications of this in some way.
I dipped in to Origins after playing some Odyssey and it struck me how much more like a real place it felt. I think it’s the little things, like all the small boats, the carts, a lot of the custom animations of people doing things. That’s at least one bit of good news for me. A big part of gaming for me is virtual tourism, getting to see interesting places and spaces.
I think it’s clear that it was the Origins team that did Valhalla for this reason. It’s not quite to the degree that Origin is, but England felt like a very real place to me, particularly in comparison to the more scattered and disjointed feel of the islands of Odyssey. Origins is still the highwater mark in that regard, though.
I find it really odd that Basim does the whole take me to your leader bit and Shawn and Rebecca respond with yes we should absolutely take the reincarnation of fucking Loki to our leader. What could possibly go wrong? The last time we introduced a regular stranger to the Mentor it went really well. Maybe it will go better if the person is a thousand year old person who is also THE FUCKING REINCARNATION OF LOKI.
Ugh, I might still end up getting it though since there are so few action-rpg games in historical time periods. Man, not been a good batch of AAA games at the end of this year. It’s interesting how little people are talking about this game, even compared to Odyssey. Had a feeling that wasn’t a good sign.
