Poll: Jim Sterling Calls Out New Assassin's Creed (for racism/sexism?)

[Whitbane]

Judging characters before we even know any info on them? Wow, it's just like when people got angry at the Far Cry 4 cover before we knew anything about that!

 

[Grimh]

I think we've learned by now that when you're running a business of prominent assassin's you need a unified look to promote brand awareness, it's a tough market out there and you need be visible as an assassin to get those lucrative contracts.
You wouldn't want your customers to be confused about who they're hiring to kill people.

It's (probably) mostly just riffing on lazy design, as you said the competitive multiplayer has shown that they can do different and interesting designs. I don't think he's exactly condemning it to everlasting purgatory (exagerration) for it, just pointing it out.

I joke above but I get that a unified design could be good for players to quickly spot and differentiate your coop buddies from the masses. However the stonking big dumb arrows above all the player's heads kind of make that point moot I'd say.
Also you can still design characters around that and be creative about it.

 

[wAriot]

Substantial might be pushing it then, but I would say that there's enough reason to include it, considering it's an interesting part of history that's often overlooked and it plays right into the values of the French Revolution. Who knew for instance about that all-coloured independent legion? It's an interesting opportunity to show us sides of the French Revolution we don't know about.

Well, I suppose we still have space for a Haitian Revolution DLC. It's Ubisoft, after all, and it's a quite interesting part of the FR, hopefully interesting enough for the big guys to consider it acceptable.

(Edited for wrong formatting)

 

[Something Amyss]

However, they are all assassins with the same lean body type, all wearing hoods and coats, and -most importantly- all presumably Frenchmen in the 1790's.

Unless french men from the 18th century were cloned in a vat, that still doesn't mean they have to be uniform. It's not like Assassins have been defined as one specific thing.

The people are going to look much the same if they want to keep even a veneer of historical accuracy (at least in terms of race; AFAIK, at this time France was still supporting the slave trade and there were very few free non-white people running around Paris).

Slavery was abolished in the 1780s. Even before then, the idea that there were very free free non-whites is ridiculous. There were very few free non-whites of higher status, yes.

This rationalisation of why historically speaking we need TEH WITE GUISE is getting absurd. I cannot wait for an AC game set in Edo period Japan with people insisting "of course it makes sense the protagonist is a white guy!" because we're already pretty much pretending the rest of history was white, so why not Japan? Or howabout pre-Columbian America. Maybe we can have a white Assassin in the Kingdom of Kongo?

Because it's really not that far off. We've white-washed everything else. Except American history, where we're suddenly quick to admit that history was nuanced.

Still, I'd like to see some confirmation Jim was talking racism/sexism and not just making a stab at how these guys seem to have the AC version of Space Marine Syndrome. They do look like clones with slightly different facial hair, or....

Yeah, if I didn't know any better, I'd look at that and wonder if perhaps they were doing a game where you play as one character but in four different situations or realities, and each of these is representing the four scenarios.

OMG! Assassin's Scree: Shattered Dimensions! I wonder which one is Noir Assassin and which one is Ultimate Assassin!

But yeah, I think this is just a joke. I'm not even sure it would count as racism. It just looks like lazy cloning.

But since we're going there....

So the right end one doesn't have more of a olive skin look, while the left end one has more of a...Germanic look?

Okay, I've seen all the pictures on page 1 and I haven't seen this "olive skin" yet. As far as the "germanic" guy, all I see is different facial hair. If that's enough to make a guy germanic, then I guess that counts. But I think that's grasping at straws. Then again, I think this whole thing is/

Unless Jim's said something that's been quoted on page 2 or 3. in which case, allow me to stand corrected prematurely.

 

[CloudAtlas]

It is a joke in at least three ways. From a storytelling point of view, a more diverse cast is just more interesting

i can't quite see how altering a persons skin color (or sex) makes them somehow inherently "more interesting".

in fact tbth i find this kind of thinking deeply disturbing the more i think about it...

Gender- or race-swapping doesn't make a character inherently more interesting. However, in a literal as well as a figurative sense, it can add color to a cast.
What do you think makes for a more interesting cast in general? A uniform or a diverse group of people, both in terms of appearance as well as in character?

From a visual point of view, designing four characters who look pretty much the same is just boring.

people aren't props.

if you want to make decent, believable character groups its probably best to avoid the idea they should be as anaesthetically diverse as possible...because real social groups of people simply aren't.

real gangs don't dress like the power rangers.

Games are a visual medium (too). How characters look like convey (some) of their personality. And I don't know in what world you're living, but if I'm not mistaken most games that feature a larger cast of characters try to make them visually and otherwise distinct, and not just for inclusivity's sake. I was about to cite modern military shooters as one of the possible exceptions, but even Battlefield 4's campaign featured a black guy and a Chinese woman.

women on the other hand...were infamously amongst the most bloody thirsty participants of the revolution...but we're sure as fuck never going to see that side of woman realistically represented in "popular media"...

Yea sure. As if there are no female characters in games or movies that are in some way evil or otherwise negatively portrayed.

 

[Thunderous Cacophony]

However, they are all assassins with the same lean body type, all wearing hoods and coats, and -most importantly- all presumably Frenchmen in the 1790's.

Unless french men from the 18th century were cloned in a vat, that still doesn't mean they have to be uniform. It's not like Assassins have been defined as one specific thing.

The people are going to look much the same if they want to keep even a veneer of historical accuracy (at least in terms of race; AFAIK, at this time France was still supporting the slave trade and there were very few free non-white people running around Paris).

Slavery was abolished in the 1780s. Even before then, the idea that there were very free free non-whites is ridiculous. There were very few free non-whites of higher status, yes.

This rationalisation of why historically speaking we need TEH WITE GUISE is getting absurd. I cannot wait for an AC game set in Edo period Japan with people insisting "of course it makes sense the protagonist is a white guy!" because we're already pretty much pretending the rest of history was white, so why not Japan? Or howabout pre-Columbian America. Maybe we can have a white Assassin in the Kingdom of Kongo?

Because it's really not that far off. We've white-washed everything else. Except American history, where we're suddenly quick to admit that history was nuanced.

Where are you hearing that slavery was abolished in the 1780's? Everything I find says that 1794 was the earliest date, and it was put back into place in 1802. As far as non-whites in France, I can't find any good information about their demographics; the best I can find is that there were some representatives of the Haitian revolutionaries and the property owners at the National Assembly, but nothing on their skin colour. If you do know anything else, kindly tell me or show me a source; I actually would like to know.

The rest of your argument is exactly the opposite of what I said. Assassin's Creed is famous for NOT white-washing: They are the only franchise I can think of to have Syrians, Aboriginals, various Europeans, and black people as playable characters, which is part of the crux of my original post (that Jim's tweet, if serious, was an overreaction to a perceived slight). There is absolutely no reason to suspect that a game in the Congo would star someone not from the Congo, or that one one in Japan would not have a Japanese lead. That is the argument that is being made here: That having a native French protagonist in Revolutionary France makes more sense than having a non-French protagonist, at least without proper explanation as to why they are there.

Saying that AC supports changing the race of people for whatever reason, or that I do, was absurdly incorrect and frankly offensive.

 

[Jedamethis]

Well, Ubisoft clearly haven't been twiddling their moustaches and trying to force the view that all important things in history were done by white people or anything like that, so I wouldn't say it's racist. I would say that it would be cool to show more diversity, and it's a shame they haven't, so far at least.

To people arguing that it should not be diverse, and yes all the characters should be white men, or at least yes all the main characters should be white men, because you really can't get enough of playing as a white man, I would ask why on earth that is.
It can't be for the sake of realism, because the point of games is that they're fantasies, where things can happen that would not ordinarily happen. Otherwise CoD would be five minutes long and involve you getting shot and dying, Mass Effect about coping with psychological trauma and probably being assassinated for trying to unite the galaxy, and Dragon Age would have no dragons in it.

 

[norashepard]

While they may have been slaves at the time, People of Color DID exist during that time. And, as has been established already in the creed series, the Assassins are not opposed to freeing slaves. I see NO reason that a freed slave wouldn't want to join with his rescuers, and thus, no reason at least one of the four dudes could be black. Furthermore, one of the things the revolutionaries fought for WAS emancipation of slaves, so again, it's not too implausible to have a black character.

You could even have a non-black PoC. France was not cut off from the rest of the world at this time, and one could reasonable expect there might be foreign merchants and their families living in the country.

History was never ever all white, regardless of what many believe.

 

[Thunderous Cacophony]

To people arguing that it should not be diverse, and yes all the characters should be white men, or at least yes all the main characters should be white men, because you really can't get enough of playing as a white man, I would ask why on earth that is.
It can't be for the sake of realism, because the point of games is that they're fantasies, where things can happen that would not ordinarily happen. Otherwise CoD would be five minutes long and involve you getting shot and dying, Mass Effect about coping with psychological trauma and probably being assassinated for trying to unite the galaxy, and Dragon Age would have no dragons in it.

There's a difference between realism and verisimilitude. In CoD, we don't want the realism of having to deal with realistic injuries because that is not fun. Similarly, we don't want a gun that vaporizes everything on the map with a single pull of the trigger, because that is also not fun. In Dragon Age, we accept dragons exist because that's part of the story; we wouldn't accept it if dragons suddenly began dispensing wishes and breathing cotton candy, because that's not part of dragons as they exist in that world.

On topic, you can see how realism comes into play in Assassin's Creed. People can't survive jumps from the tops of towers by landing in carts of hay. Nor in the real world is there a secret order of Assassins fighting Templars for control of magic items. However, the outside trappings of the eras are always played as realistically as possible within that framework, and part of that realism is that French people in the revolution were racist, and that there were very few black people in Paris at the time (I haven't found a single one through cursory Googling, but I'm sure they are out there). If Assassin's Creed was going to throw aside the trappings of historical accuracy, that's one thing; saying "there should be other ethnicities because dragons aren't real" is not an argument.

 

[CloudAtlas]

There's a difference between realism and verisimilitude. In CoD, we don't want the realism of having to deal with realistic injuries because that is not fun. Similarly, we don't want a gun that vaporizes everything on the map with a single pull of the trigger, because that is also not fun. In Dragon Age, we accept dragons exist because that's part of the story; we wouldn't accept it if dragons suddenly began dispensing wishes and breathing cotton candy, because that's not part of dragons as they exist in that world.

So what is the problem with people asking why none of those four Assassins is a woman? Women undoubtedly make up roughly half the population of Paris at any given time, non?

 

[Something Amyss]

Being overly PC kind of falls in line with this mode of thinking, despite Jim's usually very fair and rational statements on things.

I was unaware that saying things like "fuuuuuuuuuuuuck you" were politically correct nowadays.

Especially because it's not just for race or gender's sake; liberté, égalité, fraternité, we're in the French Revolution after all. Women and people of colour played a substantial part in the French Revolution.

Aren't the Assassins supposed to be all honey badger about race and gender anyway? I thought in the first or second game they established that anyone could be an assassin with proper commitment. They didn't go "I'm sorry, you don't get to join because you don't meet our cultural guidelines." Maybe I'm misremembering, but I could have sworn that they were all about that.

meaning if it was an accurate "demographic sample" (which btw is arguable not something that should be imposed on a contextualised fiction anyway) you'd need 9 white characters to statistically justify the inclusion of 1 black person (and 19 straight characters to statistically justify 1 gay one).

So it would be reasonable, out of 100 game protagonists, to see about 50 women (slightly more, really), 13 blacks, about 10 LGBT folks, and somewhere in the ballpark of 17 hispanic people, yes? Does that sound reasonable?

Meanwhile, if we're talking representation: slightly less than half of all Americans are male. decisively less than half of all Americans are white, non-hispanic males. I'll leave everything out for now, you you would think that based on those criteria, they could come up with one in four. Even as a token. Even as a cynical attempt to broaden their market.

I also don't buy the "historicity" argument because the AC games have been heavily anachronistic. It's sort of like arguing that a black Spartan in the movie 300 would be unrealistic. While one might loosely make that argument for something like Rome, 300 was so historically accurate that a four-armed alien robot wielding lightsabers wouldn't make it any less historically accurate/realistic. and here's a game that debuts itself with a Tears for Fears song. These are historical games in much the same sense that Dynasty/Samurai Warriors are.

Judging characters before we even know any info on them? Wow, it's just like when people got angry at the Far Cry 4 cover before we knew anything about that!

Well....

We've already seen one of these guys is the protagonist (and an Assassin, knocking the Templar theory out already), one commercial gives him a description, and one of the trailers shows them fighting together, but....Maybe one of them is secretly black?

Seriously, we already have more info than with FarCry.

 

[Thunderous Cacophony]

There's a difference between realism and verisimilitude. In CoD, we don't want the realism of having to deal with realistic injuries because that is not fun. Similarly, we don't want a gun that vaporizes everything on the map with a single pull of the trigger, because that is also not fun. In Dragon Age, we accept dragons exist because that's part of the story; we wouldn't accept it if dragons suddenly began dispensing wishes and breathing cotton candy, because that's not part of dragons as they exist in that world.

So what is the problem with people asking why none of those four Assassins is a woman? Women undoubtedly make up roughly half the population of Paris at any given time, non?

They probably were about 50%; as people have pointed out earlier in this thread, women were really important to the Revolution, and I'll be surprised if they aren't a big part of the story.

In fact, we have an image of a female Assassin in the game:

Spoiler

Saying that there is no women is jumping the gun to the extreme; just because that short trailer didn't have a female playable character, that doesn't mean there won't be women in the game.

EDIT: My bad; upon further looking, I think that's a male character from an odd angle. I still feel like the inclusion of women is inevitable given the track record of Assassin's Creed. The usual multiplayer characters are from as wide a variety of backgrounds as the game can manage; the similar models they showed in that clip are probably not going to be the only choices.

 

[Jiffex]

I wouldn't even call it criticism, just a joke. He made them all the way through every press conference. There should be 3rd option for "It was just a joke"

 

[CloudAtlas]

Saying that there is no women is jumping the gun to the extreme; just because that short trailer didn't have a female playable character, that doesn't mean there won't be women in the game.

True, but it is still strange that at least the marketing for the coop part of Unity doesn't feature a female playable character so far, suggesting that there will be none. Strange because it would make many people happy without hurting anyone.

 

[Agente L]

What you wanted? Black assassins? There only a few thousands of black people in france at the time. Asian assassins? Even less. 18th France was pretty much ALL white.

Heck, 18th france was a lot more about class than about race anyway

Sure, the WHITE assassins might've looked a bit more different from each other, or even a woman assassin would be pretty good.

But really? Complaining about racism? Whats next, they are going to complain there are black protagonists in a a game set in Ancient Rome?

 

[Something Amyss]

Where are you hearing that slavery was abolished in the 1780's? Everything I find says that 1794 was the earliest date, and it was put back into place in 1802.

Wikipedia lists 1794 as the date at which it ended in the colonies. Your link actually says THE SAME THING.

Assassin's Creed is famous for NOT white-washing:

That's good, since I didn't say otherwise. I addressed the apologists who are saying that historically, it makes sense.

that Jim's tweet, if serious, was an overreaction to a perceived slight

Which is ironic, since you haven't demonstrated it was about racism or sexism TMK. It seems you're bending over backwards to justify something in defense of an accusation you're assuming.

There is absolutely no reason to suspect that a game in the Congo would star someone not from the Congo, or that one one in Japan would not have a Japanese lead.

There is plenty of reason to suggest such a game would meet with the same apologetics.

I'm also just going to copy this:

I also don't buy the "historicity" argument because the AC games have been heavily anachronistic. It's sort of like arguing that a black Spartan in the movie 300 would be unrealistic. While one might loosely make that argument for something like Rome, 300 was so historically accurate that a four-armed alien robot wielding lightsabers wouldn't make it any less historically accurate/realistic. and here's a game that debuts itself with a Tears for Fears song. These are historical games in much the same sense that Dynasty/Samurai Warriors are.

In fact, to the Verisimilitude point, I would argue they already broke that with Connor's (Specifically, not natives in general) involvement in III. Not to mention the fact that we're talking about a fictional version of an order that would adopt strategic positions to infiltrate, of which slaves, peasants, and other groups are often ideal.

It's not like you need to have a rich black freeman in the first place. Actually, none of those are strictly necessary to be a non-white person in France.

I'm also not sure why breaking the trappings of history by having functioning daVinci machines in 2 or alien artifacts is any better. If you can accept "like our world, but..." you can accept it here. Which you probably already did with Connor.

 

[SUPA FRANKY]

I really hope this is a joke...because if he is really calling this game racist or sexist, then the words racism and sexism have become so utterly trivialized that they have lost all meaning.

 

[Sectan]

Calling out racism and sexism? I think Jim was commenting more on the uninteresting design and characters, but I can't exactly say it as fact.

 

[Something Amyss]

True, but it is still strange that at least the marketing for the coop part of Unity doesn't feature a female playable character so far, suggesting that there will be none. Strange because it would make many people happy without hurting anyone.

Actually, it's probably not strange. Remember, this is the gaming industry. They didn't want Ellie on TLOU's cover, they kept whatshername off the cover of BSI, and the biggest concession Mass Effect got was a reversible jacket.

 

[Jedamethis]

To people arguing that it should not be diverse, and yes all the characters should be white men, or at least yes all the main characters should be white men, because you really can't get enough of playing as a white man, I would ask why on earth that is.
It can't be for the sake of realism, because the point of games is that they're fantasies, where things can happen that would not ordinarily happen. Otherwise CoD would be five minutes long and involve you getting shot and dying, Mass Effect about coping with psychological trauma and probably being assassinated for trying to unite the galaxy, and Dragon Age would have no dragons in it.

There's a difference between realism and verisimilitude. In CoD, we don't want the realism of having to deal with realistic injuries because that is not fun. Similarly, we don't want a gun that vaporizes everything on the map with a single pull of the trigger, because that is also not fun. In Dragon Age, we accept dragons exist because that's part of the story; we wouldn't accept it if dragons suddenly began dispensing wishes and breathing cotton candy, because that's not part of dragons as they exist in that world.

On topic, you can see how realism comes into play in Assassin's Creed. People can't survive jumps from the tops of towers by landing in carts of hay. Nor in the real world is there a secret order of Assassins fighting Templars for control of magic items. However, the outside trappings of the eras are always played as realistically as possible within that framework, and part of that realism is that French people in the revolution were racist, and that there were very few black people in Paris at the time (I haven't found a single one through cursory Googling, but I'm sure they are out there). If Assassin's Creed was going to throw aside the trappings of historical accuracy, that's one thing; saying "there should be other ethnicities because dragons aren't real" is not an argument.

Would not a game depicting a variety of peoples working together, free, as the assassins would desire it to be, be more fun and engaging than a game which is mostly white men? Even if it was rare, there was still definitely at least one or two people of colour who could be written into the story. Pick a random slave, have the assassins free them to join their cause. Job done. Job done incredibly lazily, admittedly, but done. As if anybody's going to complain that 'there's black people in my game get them out' and be taken seriously.
And that still does not explain away the lack of women being shown. Unless you're of the unusually common opinion that before the 20th century or so only white brown-haired men existed and they reproduced asexually.