Well, it depends on what you mean by "Furry". If your talking about setting the game in an entirely world of anthromorphs and claiming it's part of the main series, there would be an outcry over that, and it would be justified. Of course they might be able to mitigate that a little bit by making it a "false record", sort of like how "Liberation" arguably never happened, or at least not like the game shows, because it was presented as a piece of Templar propaganda. As they launched an entertainment company in "Black Flag" they could use a similar justification claiming they are building a Disney-esque fantasy around historical events to "teach children about history while using anthromorphs to avoid outcry from parents over the more extreme elements". Either that or do memory regression with a hero who is a kid, with everything filtered into a cartoony environment in order to disturb him less.hydrolythe said:
As far as the character being a furry, as in an a sexual deviant or cosplayer, a lot would depend on how I was done. I can't see someone parkouring around in a fur suit, and I can't think of many historical time frames where that would work, unless they go totally modern, since if anyone found that one out we'd probably see the guy in question burned at the stake. Today people might talk crap to you for not being normal, in previous generations they would kill you (horribly) and to be fair through most of the world they probably still won't tolerate it (people tend not to realize how tolerant the first world is compared to the rest of it). On the other hand if they decided to make the 20th/21st century character hooked up to the machine, having him be a Furry might not even be noticed if it was done right, as the general environment of these things (labs, offices, etc...) aren't cases where you can really justify the guy wandering around in a crotchless mascot costume or whatever. The dude might have some pictures on his desk or whatever showing himself in costume, or make a couple of comments, but for the most part it's not likely to come up in the fore front. It's sort of like having an S&M fiend, it's not like the dude is going to come to work (or be captured and held in a lab) where he's running around with a suitcase full of pervy toys or whatever.,,, and really if the guy is just a cosplayer, again it's a situation where it's just not likely to come up, as the dude isn't likely going to say "Okay, well I'm going to work, or trying to elude these dudes killing me, to fit in I'm going to go change into my Badger costume".
That said, I wouldn't be surprised if Ubisoft's new game has S&M elements as it's apparently dealing with a place and time period where the Marquis De Sade and his writings and such were at a peak. If Ubisoft isn't afraid of the ratings I could easily see them exaggerating like they usually do and having the hero get involved/infiltrate a party based heavily around the one from "101 Days Of Sodom". Though I'd imagine to avoid things getting too risqué they would do it by having the PC not be into that stuff, and mostly use it as a backdrop, thus they don't have to show him (or anyone else) participating, maybe just some people in bondage, a few corpses hanging around (let's just say the story involved lethality, indeed there is a whole appendix section at the back about lethal pleasures), or something disturbing being interrupted or about to happen when our friendly assassin intervenes. That said it wouldn't be the same as having the hero be part of an "alternative life style".
If I had to guess as to the next trigger Ubisoft will pull, it will probably be having a gay character. I could see them getting a lot of positive attention if they say had a straight modern character projecting into the mind of a (mostly) gay historical figure (can't be 100% gay because the genetics were passed on from an earlier time frame) and having to reconcile this for sync purposes. Either that or the could have a gay guy in the modern age dealing with the pressures, and say talking about it with a corporate shrink in between missions and plot relevant sections. The old game "Phantasmagoria 2: A puzzle of the flesh" already did that and got away with it at a much earlier time, so I'd imagine Ubisoft might do that in a gesture towards being progressive.
All told though, my basic point is getting in Ubisoft's face for not having a female leading option in one of their games is kind of ridiculous, especially when directed at this company which has been among the more open minded. As I said, by all means, attack their business practices, but if your a progressive you shouldn't be attacking them for social reasons, this is one of the companies that is firmly on your side, and all that's being done here is damage.
