Rise for This Live Action Assassin's Creed III Trailer

mammothbroncho

New member
Jun 29, 2012
24
0
0
I can see why the british are throwing a fit about this. But seriously guys get a grip and stop whining, of course it was gonna be one sided its about the American Revolutionary War, who do you think Ubisoft's largest adiunce is? besides you can probaly still go into a town and kill some Americans if you want to.
 

cahtush

New member
Jul 7, 2010
391
0
0
Unsilenced said:
Amnestic said:
Unsilenced said:
Also: British troops burned down Conner's village. He kind of has beef with them.
Really? 'cos the Assassin's Creed wikia says it was a "Colonial force" [http://assassinscreed.wikia.com/wiki/Connor_Kenway#Biography] who did that.

But hey, Colonists, British troops, no difference, right?
If it happened before the war, "colonial force" would mean British.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=mMkLzOflc08#t=68s Also, this.


EDIT: Ok, actually look at that thing you linked me. Read it. I don't think you did.

It says that the attack on his village occurred 5 years before the revolution even started.

Unless time-traveling wizardly minutemen were involved, that mean it was the British.
Colonials would refer to the colonists, even before the war.
It wouldnt make any sense for the british to attack them, as the british wanted peace with the indians (unlike the colonists that wanted to expand into indian territory). The indians even fought on for the british.
 

VeryOddGamer

New member
Feb 26, 2012
676
0
0
Well, I'm hoping that in the advertising and the beginning of the game the Americans are shown as righteous freedom fighters and the British as oppressive douchebags, as to show what the Americans thought at that time, but then when Connor really gets involved in the Assassin-Templar War, both sides are shown as a lot more gray, as they really were.
Okay, we all know that's not going to happen. I'm probably waaaayyy too idealistic for my own good.
 

annoyinglizardvoice

New member
Apr 29, 2009
1,024
0
0
scotth266 said:
The kid's line is retarded. You honestly couldn't come up with anything better?
I agree. The line really pissed me off as it just sums up the ignorance that a lot of people have of the world outside of themselves.
 

Rahuzero

New member
Jul 22, 2011
10
0
0
VeryOddGamer said:
Well, I'm hoping that in the advertising and the beginning of the game the Americans are shown as righteous freedom fighters and the British as oppressive douchebags, as to show what the Americans thought at that time, but then when Connor really gets involved in the Assassin-Templar War, both sides are shown as a lot more gray, as they really were.
Okay, we all know that's not going to happen. I'm probably waaaayyy too idealistic for my own good.
Thats what they ARE going for. They have said this in many interviews.
 

Reaper195

New member
Jul 5, 2009
2,055
0
0
DalekJaas said:
When I refuse to learn the history of a country I will never see?

What a ridiculous, American attitude. I'm rooting for the British.
Hehehe, all kinds of agree. I laughed and shook my head when I saw that part.

Personally, I don't have a problem with the trailer. Yeah, it's all "Pro-Mur'ka!" and whatnot, but on the other hand, it's a trailer released in the States on the 4th of July (Which, granted, means fuck all to the rest of the world). The only thing that annoyed me in that trailer were the American accents. During the revolution, British people were still coming to the States. So not one person would have been speaking with any of the American accents. They'd all be speaking with either British accents, or english with whatever country's accent they came from.
 

VeryOddGamer

New member
Feb 26, 2012
676
0
0
Rahuzero said:
VeryOddGamer said:
Well, I'm hoping that in the advertising and the beginning of the game the Americans are shown as righteous freedom fighters and the British as oppressive douchebags, as to show what the Americans thought at that time, but then when Connor really gets involved in the Assassin-Templar War, both sides are shown as a lot more gray, as they really were.
Okay, we all know that's not going to happen. I'm probably waaaayyy too idealistic for my own good.
Thats what they ARE going for. They have said this in many interviews.
I am well aware of that. But then again, Bioware said you wouldn't have to play ME3:s multiplayer in order to get the best ending. But what I'm really hoping for is that almost propaganda-style portrayal of both Brits and Americans in the beginning of the game.
 

Calvar Draveir

New member
Feb 10, 2010
126
0
0
Karma168 said:
Nice to see they're going for a nice even balance between the two sides...

Seriously though wtf happened to the 'everyone is a shade of grey' that previous AC games used? All I got from that was "The British are c***s, lets kill them"

I knew ubisoft would buckle and make America the good guys, cant risk offending weak sensibilities in their biggest market, never mind creative integrity.
Yeah, you're right. They should have shown footage of how the civillians in britain were affected. Oh wait. They weren't.

This is not the assassin perspective, this is the New English perspective. They were all still British people, and most of them hadn't even considered making a new country. They just wanted freedom from unfair sanctions and such imposed on them by the larger British empire. Honestly, there's not a lot to root for from the British perspective. They were the giant imperialistic entity that america became, at that time. The same kind of country that causes you to balk at any mention of american patriotism. This is about opression, plain and simple. Who gives a fuck about the bad things the country that was formed out of this went on to do? They were fighting because of very real threats to themselves.

I think a lot of people are pissed because the history doesn't match the way they want to see America: as a big bullying, obnoxious cesspool. It pisses me off, on the other hand, when people trip over themselves to be what they consider to be cynical and well informed. Lambasting Ubisoft for being only on one side of the issue and then spewing hatred for america in the next sentence. Do you see the irony in that?
 

Unsilenced

New member
Oct 19, 2009
438
0
0
cahtush said:
Unsilenced said:
Amnestic said:
Unsilenced said:
Also: British troops burned down Conner's village. He kind of has beef with them.
Really? 'cos the Assassin's Creed wikia says it was a "Colonial force" [http://assassinscreed.wikia.com/wiki/Connor_Kenway#Biography] who did that.

But hey, Colonists, British troops, no difference, right?
If it happened before the war, "colonial force" would mean British.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=mMkLzOflc08#t=68s Also, this.


EDIT: Ok, actually look at that thing you linked me. Read it. I don't think you did.

It says that the attack on his village occurred 5 years before the revolution even started.

Unless time-traveling wizardly minutemen were involved, that mean it was the British.
Colonials would refer to the colonists, even before the war.
It wouldnt make any sense for the british to attack them, as the british wanted peace with the indians (unlike the colonists that wanted to expand into indian territory). The indians even fought on for the british.
The British weren't exactly super pro-indian, what with the whole French and Indian war where the British fought... well... the French and Indians. Even the tribes that allied with the British weren't exactly buddy-buddy.

Plus, there was the guy in that link that said it was the British.

So between "implied in the wiki" and "actual statement from someone working on the game," I'm going to say it was the British.
 

mb16

make cupcakes not bombs
Sep 14, 2008
692
0
0
irmasterlol said:
Oh dear God a trailer released on American Independence Day that's clearly advertising a game made in Canada by a French company to Americans is pandering to a romantic American view of the American Revolution. How unexpected!
Its not the fact that its British soldiers dying. Its how its how they portray them. This game is based on real events. Now imagine if someone went back through your country's history and then change it so that your nation was pure evil, and the other side was pure good. Would you enjoy that game especially as you know that some people will take it for the truth?
 

irmasterlol

New member
Apr 11, 2012
178
0
0
mb16 said:
irmasterlol said:
Oh dear God a trailer released on American Independence Day that's clearly advertising a game made in Canada by a French company to Americans is pandering to a romantic American view of the American Revolution. How unexpected!
Its not the fact that its British soldiers dying. Its how its how they portray them. This game is based on real events. Now imagine if someone went back through your country's history and then change it so that your nation was pure evil, and the other side was pure good. Would you enjoy that game especially as you know that some people will take it for the truth?
You really think this is going to have anything to do with the themes of the actual game? This was dreamed up by some marketer who understands how patriotic we yankees feel on the fourth. It's pretty firmly established the Conner doesn't give a toss about the colonists and their revolution. "They say they fight for freedom, but freedom for who?" is the line that comes to mind, and in the frontier gameplay trailer he says "let the patriot's fight their own war, I just want the Templar," or something to that effect. I know it's fun to hate America, but you have enough actual reasons to hate us that this feels like digging elbow deep into delicious pudding just to scratch the bottom of the barrel.
 

duchaked

New member
Dec 25, 2008
4,451
0
0
Vkmies said:
Well, there is that one trailer, where Mr. Mohawk walks trhough the army of the colonies, runs towards the red-coats and slaughters a good few dozen of them. Not sure if there is one where the blood comes from the blues. Really, the marketing division of Ubi is dropping the ball here. If I was them, after telling people how neutral the game would've been, I would be very careful with the trailers. One killing blues, another killing reds. I think they could save it best, if they would release this same kind of trailer from POV of the blues.
mhmm totally. didn't even realize it was an issue until people brought it up (me just like trees and arrows). then again, at this point Ubisoft is just basking in the publicity =.=