Rise for This Live Action Assassin's Creed III Trailer

[duchaked]

lol Ubisoft is a French company and the game's made by French Canadians...
the French sure didn't have any love for the British during that time period, but they're sure doing a good job getting the Brits pissed off at Americans right now hahaha

I do wonder if the ads were headed by Americans though, cuz that would be less amusing and more...heh embarrassing tbh

(I mean no offense to anyone though really. just in case, cuz ppl are getting rather touchy)

 

[duchaked]

I agree with the many other commentors. This game seems to take an awful amount of sides. Yes, they have said how neutral the game will be, but so far all the trailers have been awfully littered with Red-Coat bodies. I am not taking sides myself, being scandinavian, but this doesn't look very 'neutral' to me.

Now to hope there's an alternate ending in which the British win. Realism? History? Screw that.

DUDE! That would be the best ending ever. All this "Let's kill the Brits"-bullshit. All this rage. All the boners of overly patriotic Americans. Then, you spend the game killing the British, being all "THis is not racist 'cause I'm an indian, but USA WOOO", then the last scene, where suddenly, the Brits start fucking shit up.

Blam, Americans dead. Blam, Assasins done. End credits. Good night everybody!

The twist of a lifetime. I would send Ubisoft all my money, just as a thank-you.

LOL for the unexpected and daringly creative twist, right? or the less-than-neutral killing Americans part?
(and no, my ancestors were no where near the Revolutionary War... doing much less interesting things I presume sighhhh)

ANYwayy, I'm still hoping to see more ads focusing on Mister Mohawk. hope that does mean he's a more neutral character because that would explain why the ads haven't toted him as highly (less controversy means less people raging thus less publicity)

 

[charge52]

I don't understand why people are complaining about killing the British, since unless i had the worst history teacher ever, i am pretty sure the American Colonists, are still British. Until the "Americans" win the war, everyone in the colonies are still British colonists. It is impossible to kill Americans until they win the war.

 

[Daveman]

.
Dude.
It was a trailer. Just one. There will be more. It was specifically out for the fourth of July. OF COURSE IT WAS FOR THE AMERICANS. I can expect to see a trailer for the British.

Dude.
You realise there's been 2 other trailers of the new protagonist killing redcoats and none with him killing colonists?

I don't understand why people are complaining about killing the British, since unless i had the worst history teacher ever, i am pretty sure the American Colonists, are still British. Until the "Americans" win the war, everyone in the colonies are still British colonists. It is impossible to kill Americans until they win the war.

Well done for your use of semantics. I think you know what everyone means though...

 

[Dramatic Flare]

Clearly we're getting a lot of snark over this game, and I can't argue against it.
Anyone up for a counteradvertising campaign, "Assassin's Creed: Stars and Stripes edition?" Though if we did that, they get free advertising...

 

[superdelux]

United States-
Population: 312 million
Percentage of population that plays video games: 72%

United Kingdom:
Population: 62 million
Percentage of population that plays video games: 73%

Its Marketing people not Anti-Brit hate.

And besides the British were the bad guys, after you increased the taxes on a bunch of stuff what were we supposed to do pay them. No, a revolution was the most obvious choice.

 

[superdelux]

pffftttt hahahaha ubisoft your really taking this whole the "British aren't the enemy the templars are" thing really seriously I mean for god sakes this game is getting more and more into american masturbation material with every announcement.

Actually us Americans masturbate to pornography, not saluting our flag with one hand and doing you-know-what with the other.

 

[Badassassin]

I wonder how they will handle "The Boston Massacre" in the game. If they do it the way it is shown in Paul Revere's picture my blood will boil. That should be one of the shades-of-grey moments in the game but from the vibes I get from the trailers i doubt it will.

From what I remember in history class colonists were throwing rocks and one of the British soldier's guns went off by accident and then the rest started shooting.

So the person whose gun "went off" was a Templar. No way they'll skip that chance for a conspiracy.

What I meant was how the founding fathers took advantage of this and made propaganda out of it by calling it a massacre, that the British attacked for no reason when in reality the colonists started it.

Aha, yes, but that implies they weren't in control of it from the beginning.


On a more on topic note, it's a perfectly valid concern that your country is being portrayed falsely and in a negative light, and I can understand how it can be unnerving to some British people. It's another thing entirely to be utterly butt-devastated over a live action trailer, which I'm seeing a lot of.
Probably my favorite from this thread:

Well I won't be buying this blatant piece of anti-British propaganda..... Its not even subtle anymore, no matter what Ubisoft say....

Yeah, no, blatant propaganda, that's totally what's going on here. I'm not even sure if you're being serious right now.

 

[CaptainMarvelous]

Haha, the comments in this thread are among the funniest I have seen. They released that trailer yesterday because it was Independence Day in America. People on the internet can be really really thick headed when it comes to Anti-American sentiment.

I don't know why people are having such a hard time dealing with this trailer. It's a game trailer. Last time I checked, this doesn't mimic real life in any form, nor does it advertise itself as a history lesson.

The Ass Creed games have always been pretty even handed in how they portray their characters and factions; those loosely based on real world counterparts anyway. This is why all the publicity for this game comes over badly, because even handed it is not.

I'm not overly bothered, I don't buy new Ubisoft games for my PC, but when I do eventually pick up my used console copy I'd like it to have a decent story; not be some American Patriot's fantasy wank off material.

My main problem with this assessment is that it's not uneven as far as we know. We don't know much of anything about how the game plays out, only that it's from the perspective of the colonists. We have not seen anything that depicts it unevenly. This ad was the closest, but it was clearly aimed at American audiences who were celebrating Independence Day. People are freaking out about this and using it as an excuse for wide spectrum anti-american sentiment, and it's just kind of pathetic that people are freaking over a game we don't know anything about. All the pictures of ingame footage have been mostly battlefields, and last time I checked, they didn't benefit anyone in particular. Also, to point out the obvious, this game is created by a French company. American's don't have any say at all the advertising routes the company takes.

Or to put it another way, in every released example of footage be it in game or cinematic has had the protagonist killing Redcoats and helping colonists. If we're basing our opinion on what we've seen, it's very f*cking uneven and it's getting harder and harder to take Ubisoft's word for it that it won't be.

You're just finding excuses to be argumentative. The character is a patriot. In the first game Altaire was a Muslim and the major villains were Christians, but no one found fault with that. There are two sides to every conflict, I just don't understand why you folks are so upset about this. Would you rather have the main character be a British Loyalist and trying to overthrow the creation of the American Republic? I wouldn't have a problem like that, but the game is meant to very loosely follow history. And I mean very loosely. If there was no conflict, there would be no game. If they had done a game based around the Japanese occupation of China in 1931, and all the scenes were of an Assassin character killing Japanese, we wouldn't even be having this conversation. Or even if we reversed it where it were a Japanese Assassin killing Chinese, you would still be fine with it. You wouldn't be insulted because it was not even handed.

Right, a few major problems here. First of all, he's a patriot who is described as often as they can as "Half British/Half Cherokee", The Cherokee weren't on the side of the American revolution they were on the British side as were the British, he's given a cool ethnic backstory which is thrown out so he can kill Redcoats (inaccuracy the first). Altair killed both Christians and Muslims, perhaps most importantly, the marketting didn't have him running around killing Christians claiming it was a justified Muslim crusade to stamp out the oppressive Christian regime. Or, in short, they did SHOW both sides. This shows one side. It is very one-sided in all released footage, and if you want to argue that you are just not watching them.

I also take issue with "I'd be fine if it was reversed" because I doubt you would. It never happens that a game shows the Americans as the bad guys, and if there was one where, say, you play as a Vietcong soldier fighting Americans and all the demos/footage for it showed the Americans as child-murdering, rapists and the Vietnamese side as finding for freedom and liberation from the evil American Empire, I suspect you'd be annoyed by it. Finally, if they had a game set in 1931 about the Chinese-Japanese occupation, I would still prefer they do it even-handedly by showing both sides! I'm not greatly informed about the time period but from what I imagine, that one enormous massacre which is still a giant issue between the two countries would be interesting if thrown in a Templar/Assassin light.

People don't care (well, most people) that it's an american war of independence game where you play as an American. We care that Ubisoft has taken every opportunity to lie about it and say things like "Oh, he's British"/Fights only Redcoats "We're not picking sides"/Fights only Redcoats "You'll kill Americans too"/FIGHTS ONLY REDCOATS. It's because they keep saying it'll be even-handed the THIS stuff comes out where it's "Rise up and cast off the oppresive regime!" In short, not even handed. Which is only annoying because AC1-2 at least made an effort. The game might well show both sides, but it's getting f*cking hard to believe that from the marketing.

 

[Vkmies]

I agree with the many other commentors. This game seems to take an awful amount of sides. Yes, they have said how neutral the game will be, but so far all the trailers have been awfully littered with Red-Coat bodies. I am not taking sides myself, being scandinavian, but this doesn't look very 'neutral' to me.

Now to hope there's an alternate ending in which the British win. Realism? History? Screw that.

DUDE! That would be the best ending ever. All this "Let's kill the Brits"-bullshit. All this rage. All the boners of overly patriotic Americans. Then, you spend the game killing the British, being all "THis is not racist 'cause I'm an indian, but USA WOOO", then the last scene, where suddenly, the Brits start fucking shit up.

Blam, Americans dead. Blam, Assasins done. End credits. Good night everybody!

The twist of a lifetime. I would send Ubisoft all my money, just as a thank-you.

LOL for the unexpected and daringly creative twist, right? or the less-than-neutral killing Americans part?
(and no, my ancestors were no where near the Revolutionary War... doing much less interesting things I presume sighhhh)

ANYwayy, I'm still hoping to see more ads focusing on Mister Mohawk. hope that does mean he's a more neutral character because that would explain why the ads haven't toted him as highly (less controversy means less people raging thus less publicity)

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.

 

[Ducce]

AC is looking more and more like the TV series Lost for me, first three games (seasons) where great, and somewhere in the middle of game/season three I started wondering to myself when the writers where going to produce even the slightest of answers to all their plot holes and branches. And then I slowly realised that no one has even the slimmest idea where they are going with the story. Like a child that ensnares itself in their own lies.
-- Just produce more to make sure people watch or buy it.

And I bet you a fotjilllion banana dollars that it will all end with a lack luster and droopy ending. If AC will ever end at all that is...

 

[TheIronRuler]

.
Dude.
It was a trailer. Just one. There will be more. It was specifically out for the fourth of July. OF COURSE IT WAS FOR THE AMERICANS. I can expect to see a trailer for the British.

Dude.
You realise there's been 2 other trailers of the new protagonist killing redcoats and none with him killing colonists?

I don't understand why people are complaining about killing the British, since unless i had the worst history teacher ever, i am pretty sure the American Colonists, are still British. Until the "Americans" win the war, everyone in the colonies are still British colonists. It is impossible to kill Americans until they win the war.

Well done for your use of semantics. I think you know what everyone means though...

I won't condemn Ubisoft till I see all of the trailers they get out. You shouldn't either.

 

[CaptainMarvelous]

"I will fight the enemy, regardless of their allegiance" [http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=EiVJG_mrtFo#t=38s]

Yeah, that sounds one-sided.

Great, got some footage of Connor doing that or are we still watching him kill Redcoats over and over?

I want you to be right, dude, I want the game to not take this stupid 'America f*ck yeah" stance but whenever they release a trailer or an advert it's this stuff, having Connor pay lip-service doesn't diminish what actions they show him taking :-/

 

[Scrythe]

I'm going to sidestep the arguments above for something a little different:

I'm calling it right now, this one will probably have the best soundtrack out of the whole series.

Yes, better than Brotherhood.

You heard it here first.

 

[TheAmokz]

This is not so bad as in Revelations where rebels against ottoman rule were the "bad guys".

 

[Diplian]

Well technically the only americans you can kill are the natives.
Technically all the 'americans' are still british.

 

[Baresark]

snip

snip

snip

snip

snip

Right, a few major problems here. First of all, he's a patriot who is described as often as they can as "Half British/Half Cherokee", The Cherokee weren't on the side of the American revolution they were on the British side as were the British, he's given a cool ethnic backstory which is thrown out so he can kill Redcoats (inaccuracy the first). Altair killed both Christians and Muslims, perhaps most importantly, the marketting didn't have him running around killing Christians claiming it was a justified Muslim crusade to stamp out the oppressive Christian regime. Or, in short, they did SHOW both sides. This shows one side. It is very one-sided in all released footage, and if you want to argue that you are just not watching them.

I also take issue with "I'd be fine if it was reversed" because I doubt you would. It never happens that a game shows the Americans as the bad guys, and if there was one where, say, you play as a Vietcong soldier fighting Americans and all the demos/footage for it showed the Americans as child-murdering, rapists and the Vietnamese side as finding for freedom and liberation from the evil American Empire, I suspect you'd be annoyed by it. Finally, if they had a game set in 1931 about the Chinese-Japanese occupation, I would still prefer they do it even-handedly by showing both sides! I'm not greatly informed about the time period but from what I imagine, that one enormous massacre which is still a giant issue between the two countries would be interesting if thrown in a Templar/Assassin light.

snip

I can see that. You have definitely made some very valid points. But, that being said. I absolutely would not have a problem with a game that involved killing Americans. Or that depicted Americans as the evil invading empire because I would not consider a work of fiction a slight against myself or my country. First, as a game, it's inherently fictitious and is not representative of an entire conflict, or entire people. Second, the way you described American soldiers is not untrue in regards to some soldiers. But the main reason I would be fine with it would be because it's only a little snippet of a game. If they aren't showing just enough to get me interested but showing the entire story in a demo or a few pictures, they are doing it wrong.

Also, the annoying part of this whole conversation is that people ignore the part that negatively depicts US soldiers. The judge looks at the camera and says, "when I ask God to look the other way". In the background there are minutemen mistreating a prisoner.

We can also further uselessly analyze the known background story of the protagonist. Have Cherokee and half British. First, the Cherokee were on the side of the British in the Revolution, that is undeniable. But he is obviously not meant to be representative of the entire people. And as far as him being half British, there were plenty of folks who fought against Britain that were full British. The only thing that really annoys me about this whole thread is that people are using the historical inaccuracies in the game as a reason to be upset about this. We should all be better than to compare this game to actual history.

All of this is pure speculation. Every bit of it. From both sides of the argument. I'm simply saying that maybe people should wait for the game before they get upset about it being unevenly handed.

 

[The Cheezy One]

Calm your shit, brit.

...Is going to be my new catch phrase!

As a Brit, I'm trying to maintain an even-handed approach. If they were Americans being slaughtered, I would probably already be praising it as my game of the decade, so, because hypocrisy is my number one hatred, I need to cool my jets, and accept what appears to be going on. Anyway, being surrounded by Brits, I hate them as much as the anyone.

My biggest issue is that for the first time, this assassin seems to have chosen a side. In AC1, he manipulated both sides indescriminately so he could get to the people that mattered, the templars. In AC2, he fought the people who were the templars for revenge more that anything, regardless of position. In AC2:B, he fights the Pope, not because he hates the Pope, but because the man the Pope is. In AC2:R, he can do whatever, I missed that one, I'm afraid. In AC04 [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AC04], he will take to a fighter jet, and it will be the best flight/fighter sim ever.

For the first time, it appears we are being made to favour a side. I don't mind the fact that Brits are being portrayed as arseholes, because we can be - even though I'm pretty sure we wouldn't actually burn houses with young families in, but what would I know, I'm no historian - but before, the conflict between Ass and Temp just happened to be taking part in, say, the crusades, or the Papalcy. But now, the game is being portrayed as more about the war, as well as whatever Connor is doing, who cares - OOH LOOK, GEORGE WASHINGTON! MARQUIS DE LAFAYETTE! Massive historical battles, ho!

Note the italics - I still don't know what's going on, all we can do is infer.

 

[SpectacularWebHead]

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.

Thats true...Actually. All points in the film were accurate aside from that one, that was just stupid.

This entire game reeks of alienation. Not racism, But there is most certainly a Stay away from those people dear, They're english" attitude to it.

 

[jmarquiso]

I can see that. You have definitely made some very valid points. But, that being said. I absolutely would not have a problem with a game that involved killing Americans. Or that depicted Americans as the evil invading empire because I would not consider a work of fiction a slight against myself or my country. First, as a game, it's inherently fictitious and is not representative of an entire conflict, or entire people. Second, the way you described American soldiers is not untrue in regards to some soldiers. But the main reason I would be fine with it would be because it's only a little snippet of a game. If they aren't showing just enough to get me interested but showing the entire story in a demo or a few pictures, they are doing it wrong.

Spec ops: The Line has you against the 33rd, another division of the American military. Apparently.

We should all be better than to compare this game to actual history.

I agree with this - if Assassin's Creed didn't bill itself as historical action or drama. It's always been about as accurate as a Dan Brown novel, but it pretends to be. And people take it as it is.

I still hear game reviewers talk about Assassin's Creed, and even being offended at killing a Pope. Besides the point that Pope Alexander has always been a point of contention in Catholic history. They didn't actually use it as a jumping on point to learn more, when the opportunity was there.

I hope that they do, because these people are much more interesting than how they tend to be painted.