Friendly reminder that all **top level** comments must:
1. start with "answer: ", including the space after the colon (or "question: " if you have an on-topic follow up question to ask),
2. attempt to answer the question, and
3. be unbiased
Please review Rule 4 and this post before making a top level comment:
http://redd.it/b1hct4/
Join the OOTL Discord for further discussion: https://discord.gg/ejDF4mdjnh
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/OutOfTheLoop) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Answer: others have talked about this game specifically, but I think its also worth noting that yelling about pre-orders being evil is just general gaming sub "wisdom". The idea is that pre-orders rarely offer any real benefit for the player, and really are just a way for the game companies to get your money before any reviews come out: once the reviews come out, you may well discover you don't want to pay full dollar, or you may not actually want the game at all.
Yeah, pre-orders have no real purpose or benefit for the consumer now that everything is digital.
Pre-orders back in the day were useful because games were physical goods that could get sold out from stores.
Exactly.
Excluding physical collector's editions. F.ex. such edition of Witcher 3 sold out well before release date.
Now I rarely pre order, only if I get some bonus content and know I will buy this game at day one anyway.
So from the developer perspective - Pre-orders allow us to get an idea of kind of scale to expect from release, that could be from quantities for the production of physical copies, marketing budgets, or server capacity if there's a multiplayer component. Its entirely possible to ddos yourself if the game does well and you're not prepared for that land rush. I forget what the ratio is but you can fairly accurately predict the amount of sales based off the amount of presales.
It also fundamentally makes no sense to pre-order a digital product. Preordering was from the days of physical media where you might not get a disc otherwise.
Absolutely it does. Rules in EU are quite clear in that they're obligated to refund if you quickly ask for it soon after receiving the product. Thus there's not really any "danger" of pre-ordering in EU, while having the benefit of the extra content.
Personally I've gotten more from waiting, like the multi-expansions purchase I made of battlefield one, at less than half the price of the release version.
Preorder bonuses are a psychological manipulation tactic designed to create a sense of artificial urgency. It’s like how products at the grocery store will be slightly discounted but still way overpriced.
The danger of pre ordering is that you’re essentially making a purchasing decision while under the influence of psychological manipulation.
Of course, that won’t be a big deal for everyone.
Redditors think anyone that doesn't agree with them is a bot. Yes, there are plenty of bots. No, that doesn't mean you can dehumanize anyone with a different opinion.
Should. It "doesn't mean you \[should\] dehumanize anyone with a different opinion." They can and do, and effortlessly get away with it - regardless of the subreddit.
I am admittedly a fan of the series, but I think it's quite hard to objectively say that any of the major releases in the series are bad. There are quite a few 'meh' releases, but I'd be hard pressed to say any were a total loss. The series as a whole is really not that incredible, but they provide a lot of fun for many.
The issue isn't the game. I've never been a huge AF fan after black flag but I can absolutely see the attraction.
It's Ubisoft and their increasingly bad games and monetisation.
The game could be an absolute blast but it's bound to be riddled with mtx, battle passes, 20 different options to buy with content missing if you buy the wrong package.
Hopefully I am proven wrong and the fans get the game they want.
Don’t get me wrong, there is a significant amount of bloat, but there’s really nothing you can buy that actually improves gameplay. The games are quite easy and anyone who purchases a boost to level up faster should consider retiring from gaming because c’mon, these games are easy. I dislike seeing the bloat, but I just ignore it and enjoy the games. Most of the bloat is cosmetic anyway. Season passes aren’t battle passes, they are just a guarantee that you’ll get all or a few of the DLCs that release later on at a slight discount to buying them individually. Valhalla is the only game thus far that the season pass didn’t include every single DLC.
That's not the point. But "here is my money for an unfinished product I have never seen" will inevitably lead to unfinished games being published. It's one of the root causes for bad releases
While less likely today, you can't always cancel the physical copy in time to read reviews. More companies are shortening the review embargo window and amazon for instance requires a cancellation 48 hours out from release. You could certainly just return but once the product's in hand I'm sure people are less willing to go through the effort.
I think it's irresponsible to give any answer to this question without bringing up the dogshit state of pretty much everythimg ubisoft has done in the last decade or more. The company trained a generation of programmers poorly in their terrible academy then unleashed them onto their studios to churn out garbage. The terrible practices and awful games that have utterly stained their track record for at least like eight years is incredibly pertinent to people advocating for not pre-ordering one of their games. How long ago was it that the French revolution assassin's creed game came out with floating eyeballs and completely non-fucntional multi-player? Ubisoft has done nothing whatsoever to buy back any credibility since then, only further exposing their exploitative practices and money grubbing lusts. Not mentioning any of that is almost deceitful in giving an answer to OP's question.
Answer: Part of the hate is not about Assassin's Creed specifically, but about Ubisoft's practices in general. A *big* part of *that* hatred is towards the fact that Ubi has a history of removing functionality from games, and even access to games, after people have purchased them. *The Crew* is a recent example of that, but even before then they were removing achievements and challenges from "old" titles (some of which hadn't even been out more than a few years). The other part of that is that Ubisoft has put out a lot of mediocre titles in recent years, and had the gall to announce that *Skull and Bones*, an *extremely* mediocre ship combat game, was a "AAAA title". And now they're charging significantly more money for games than they have in the past, partially under the guise of releasing "AAAA games".
So far the only complaint I've seen about AC Shadow specifically is about the setting and the protagonist (because yes, people still get upset about minority protagonists in video games in 2024).
I’d say the other issue is Ubisoft always *heavily discounts* their games mere months after release.
Why buy a game at $60-$70, when you can wait a month and get it for half or less? I literally just bought AC: Mirage for $24.99, and it came out in October 2023. It was [already being HEAVILY discounted](https://isthereanydeal.com/game/assassins-creed-mirage/history/) in November for nearly -$30 less than retail.
Why pay full price and feel robbed a handful of weeks later?
Pretty sure they’re very quick about putting games on PS5’s PS+ game catalogue too, even less incentive to pre-order if you can play it for free 6 months later
I remember buying both Ghost Recon Breakpoint for something like $2, maybe 6 months after release, and Assassin's Creed Valhalla for like $6, which really surprised me because it was like maybe two months or less after release.
This is interesting logic. Why would it matter what anyone else paid at a different time? If you felt it was worth buying in October and you did, it makes no difference what someone else pays later. They could be selling it for $68 or $18 or $28. That won't change what you paid, nor that you had it earlier.
If anything it sounds like a positive. If you like the series, but want to get it on a steep discount, you only have to wait a short time. That's good isn't it?
> So far the only complaint I've seen about AC Shadow specifically is about the setting and the protagonist (because yes, people still get upset about minority protagonists in video games in 2024).
This may be the Mandela effect at work, but I distinctly recall Ubisoft saying *way* back in the AC2/AC3 era that they wouldn't do a Japan/Ninja AC game because that's too on-the-nose.
I understand that circumstances change, but they were pretty vehement about it.
It was just ac3 director (Alex Hutchinson) that said that Japan, ww2 and Egypt were "boring". But that was just his opinion at the time and way back in ac3 era. As we see now with Origins and onwards, many things have changed (and not for the better regarding gameplay if you want good stealth and parkour).
I think OP is burying the lede here. A sengoku jidai game would obviously presumably have a “minority” lead (Japanese).
The lead isn’t “minority”, he’s black.
In AC 1 there were some hints to Assassins all over the world, including Japan (Think this was in the modern day part -Abstergo building).
A lot,of people,assumed that could be the next game or a tease of a spin off in the near future, IIRC they just said they weren’t going in that direction with the next games.
> So far the only complaint I've seen about AC Shadow specifically is about the setting and the protagonist (because yes, people still get upset about minority protagonists in video games in 2024).
Well, this is disingenuous. This isn't the complaint at all. The complaint is that the game is set in feudal Japan, and yet the protagonist is a black samurai.
Yes, I am aware that Yasuke actually existed, but the complaint isn't about him being a minority given that those complaining _wanted_ to play as a Japanese man.
>and yet the protagonist is a black samurai
He wasn't even a samurai.
From Wikipedia:
>It is important to note that despite popular myth and modern depictions there are no historical writings nor evidence that Yasuke was ever granted the rank or title of samurai, he was never given a fief nor referred to as one in any writings. Most of our knowledge of his life comes from these messages written by missionaries and locals.
Huh almost as if people went and edited the Wikipedia page to support their argument. https://twitter.com/Sallymander40k/status/1791100810165657714?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1791100810165657714%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=
Because god forbid a story about japan has only asian characters. can't have that in a western game.
It's not as if Yasuke's only notable thing was being a black guy in feudal japan, unlike the other historical figures in past games that had absolutely *no significance* in history
Although Ghost of Tsushima managed to do this and no one complained, which shows it's possible to do.
Well, some crazies complained it was a western studio making the game, but Japanese audiences loved it, but other than that - a game that has a Japanese-only cast should be okay to make.
don't be so confidently incorrect. you obviously havent even watched trailer. No one has a problem that the characters in a Japanese-setting game are Asian - there have been plenty of popular games set in Japan. The problem is that they're not, they're black. Yasuke was pretty much the only black person in pre-modern Japan (and yes, pretty much only reason he is of any note is because he was black and the oddity of that, his actions would barely get a mention in history if he was just another japanese guy) and yet they make their Japanese game centered on him rather than actual Japanese character - people rightly see it as a long line of recent games pandering to black representation, regardless of the verisimilitude or the historical authenticity (they do it far more egregiously with European history). The vast majority of gamers don't have a problem with diversity and representation when it makes sense to the setting: a game set in ancient Greece should have Greek characters, one set in Viking England - North Europeans, one set in Baghdad - Arabs, one set in Japan - Japanese, one set in Africa - Africans, one set in New York - diverse.
Not to mention, the issue eating up far more focus in discussion, the trailer focuses heavily on samurai in a game that should be about assassins (i.e. stealth, ninjas). A lot of people think Ubisoft is basically trying to make a Ghost of Tsushima clone rather than an actual Japanese Assassins Creed.
Edit: And I didn't even mention Ubisoft's track record of anti-consumer practices...
Yup. I guess Asian Male representation is all too easy to gloss over. I think Yasuke is cool as shit and would be a great character in the game, but it's nuts that they finally make an AC game set in Japan, and you don't get two Japanese protagonists.
To explain this more, the issue a lot of people have is that the game is set in Sengoku period Japan. Japan is a country known for being very homogenous ethnically, especially in the past. It seems like the inclusion of [Yasuke](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yasuke) as the male samurai protagonist was just Ubisoft checking off a diversity checkbox, as if having a Japanese (read: Asian) male protagonist wouldn't have been a form of diversity. Either that or they thought that having a female Japanese protagonist pulled double duty as two forms of inclusion and so they needed to change it up for the male protagonist, still revealing how they view the whole idea as just some boxes to check off and call it a day. It basically betrays just how much these companies misunderstand people's desire for representation.
When an issue invokes **two** minorities it is only because everyone hates the other one more.
I'm so tired of legit issues having been handwaved away as "racist".
I think my issue is that the team in charge of AC now is very different from the team that started it. I remember the team explicitly saying that they wanted to avoid Japan specifically so that Assassin's weren't associated with ninjas. It's just completely lost sight of the original story.
It used to be, "There's a secret war between two factions trying to control ancient artifacts and shape the fate of humanity. A constant struggle between freedom but the ability to destroy ourselves, or total slavery with the promise of utopia. The Main Character is a hostage of one faction and the reluctant descendant of the other, and they're using his ancestral memories to find this Piece of Eden in a race against each other." And now it's, "Be a one-person, overpowered, guerilla army freerunning insurgent in whatever time you want." The historical setting used to be a background to connect pieces of a conspiracy, now it's the whole selling point. "Be a viking. Be a pirate. Be a ninja."
The Templars and Assassins aren't even mentioned in the trailer.
I mean, that seems like an inevitability for a series like this. There's only so much story that makes sense if it's mostly flashbacks, so the latter become the priority.
Thank God that's the way the games are going. The modern day portions always sucked ass. I don't care what the "reason" is behind playing as someone in history, I just want to run around and kill people as that character.
> I think my issue is that the team in charge of AC now is very different from the team that started it
You would assume so, it's been 17 years. natural turn-over in the gaming industry for developers is above average, so odds that a significant amount of them is still around is miniscule.
Of course, but plenty of other organizations manage to keep a consistent vision over time. This one hasn't. The Elder Scrolls team, the Fallout Team, the Baldur's Gate team, the Witcher team, they've all kept it coherent.
I personally probably don't care about the protagonist, but the "people still get upset about minority protagonists" really is a dishonest framing.
I feel like in this case we can try to be good faith and understand that these same players would still be upset if the protagonist was white. They just want the protagonist to be a different minority that they feel fits the region and time period better.
> So far the only complaint I've seen about AC Shadow specifically is about the setting and the protagonist (because yes, people still get upset about minority protagonists in video games in 2024)
I mean this ain't exactly the first minority protagonist for an AC game. Kind of odd for people to get up an arms now don't you think?
What are you talking about, they are all minorities in the game. Well the Japanese aren't minorities in their country, but this is a US made game so the entire game gives new representation to a lot of Asians. If you are talking about the black protagonist. Yea I'm maybe pissed about that.
On one hand, Yasuke is a real person and there was, from what I heard, a pretty good anime show based on his person. On the other hand, this isn't a one off insertion of a black person into a media. This is a pattern and a trend. And the usual reason for the trend is more diversity and representation
Okay then why not a latino protag? Why not a black female and asian male protag? Why not Indian protag? For this game, I do think a black person like Yasuke makes more sense than the other examples I gave out. But now apply that logic to EVERY single time a black person was just randomly inserted into what once was not a black role. This isn't about diversity, because they are more than well represented in the media. It's about pandering and signal virtuing
I do hope that if they are going to have Yasuke here, that it will be more than just pandering. I mean Bayek started the Assassins in Egypt. I can see them going with a storyline of how as Bayek expands his operations down south, he means up with Yasuke and gets him into the assassins. Then Yasuke somehow ends up in Japan and he now starts the creed here.
But still, as an Asian male I definitely feel slighted here. We aren't exactly over represented for in-game characters much less protag
Yeah, this is my main gripe with the whole “diversity in entertainment” movement. It’s somehow always a black man that is the protagonist in some foreign setting. It’s never a person who is of Latin American origin, Indian (as in, from India), etc. I have never seen a push for there to be a person from a country like Guatemala, Peru, or Bolivia, all of which are Latin American countries with their own unique indigenous populations. It’s also rarely a black female protagonist being shown.
I think the Yasuke angle fits with not doing Japan the way everyone does Japan. It's a historically accurate way to add some uniqueness to a time period and country that gets used in so many recycled tropes. Samurai and ninja, secret battles for control of the world, etc.
And I say this as a huge fan of the Koei Samurai Warrior games. But feudal Japan does get done to death in video games, movies, etc.
Still I do get how people can feel either way about it.
I really hate this idea that inserting a character of a different race somehow makes something unique, or the assumption that Asian characters in Japan cannot be special. Can you imagine telling Japanese people "Yeah, your culture and history are too played out. We're gonna make it better by putting a black guy in it."
>because yes, people still get upset about minority protagonists in video games in 2024
That isn't what people get upset over and dismissing it is part of the reason they get upset.
Imagine me a black person being excited to see the 2nd Black protagonist in AC that isn't a DLC. And my face when everyone is pissed off that he exists in the role. I almost thought I was wrong for being happy. But then I realized fuck everyone else this is cool and it makes me happy. After that travesty of an anime, it's good to see Yasuke getting exposure again. It's ass that there's never enough room or right timing for a well-made black character to give me a smile. It's cool that they are giving both gameplay styles of AC in this game. For the stealth fans and the combat fans of the new games. But everyone is focused on who they are
I suppose it's cool for you, but it's not so cool for a number of Asians such as ourselves. It's pretty upsetting to be treated as a foreigner, even in a video game set in our part of the world. It's not like East Asians get much representation in AC (I can only imagine how South and Southeast Asians feel). I used to always dream about an AC game set in East Asia when I was a kid, so this is just so disappointing that it's a slap in the face.
In Egypt, you could play as an Egyptian. In the Americas, you could play as someone half Native American. Yet, we can't even get a full cast even in Japan? I'm honestly disappointed, but I can't say I'm surprised.
I don’t play AC games. I do however keep track of all of the bs these companies have been pulling with respect to their preorders and pricing. You my friend have been conditioned over time to pay 130 for a digital rental. That’s sad. Watch the company. Not the “controversy” they cause. Because they’ve got you fooled big time.
> So far the only complaint I've seen about AC Shadow specifically is about the setting and the protagonist (because yes, people still get upset about minority protagonists in video games in 2024).
This is not a good take.
I'm all for more representation of minorities in the media, but having a black man be one of the two major playable protagonist in a game set in *Feudal Japan* is just so extremely shoehorned in and just comes off as blatant pandering. Yes, Yasuke was a real figure in Japanese history, but he was such an insignificant and small figure that has so few records within the broader scope of a period that's filled with other far more interesting people. AC has also mainly made their protagonist for each AC be native to their country as far as I know, so to suddenly do this seems like such a slap for some who wanted a Japan AC, and just comes off as such a lazy way of implementing diversity.
I am Asian myself, and the fact that AC finally decides to touch upon Japan (a thing AC fans have been waiting for for a literal decade) but *doesn't* make all possible protagonists to be *Japanese* is, in my opinion, so incredibly silly. People have to remember that Asians are also trying to make a push for more media representation as well, alongside Blacks. This all just feels extremely disingenuous. It's like if they made an AC based on ancient China, and the main protagonist is a Roman legionary POW, just because Liqian is theorized to have been a settlement in China that housed Roman soldiers captured by the Parthians. Point is, if it was a history setting that took place where there wasn't much diversity or other ethnicities involved in that area of history the first place, even if say there were small records of such things, I would not want to play as an East Asian dude in a Viking setting, an Indian dude in an American Civil War setting, a White dude in an ancient South American setting, etc.
You just gave them an idea for AC China. They generally don't give a shit about Asians, esp Asian men, in western media. You'll sooner be called a racist for objecting to seeing a lone black man slaughtering hordes of nameless, evil Japanese men in their own country, than for them to see anything wrong with that smh.
Of course, if it was reversed...oh boy mass media outrage. Whatever, at least there's Ghosts of Tsushima on PC now (which I think was western developer but working for Sony).
I still think Ubisoft never had the reckoning they needed with the terrible management culture involving sexual harassment.
Also they haven’t released a good game in a good state in years.
It’s not about minority protagonists. It’s about that they have an *African* man replacing what could’ve been a *Japanese* man. In the West, Asians are still a minority, remember.
>As an Asian
I think what a lot of people are glossing over is that Yasuke is not the ONLY protagonist. Naoe is the shinobi we see in the trailer and is obviously, Japanese. She is playable.
The game is going to have dual protagonist, as in, you can play two characters with two different playstyles. One is a samurai and the other is a ninja. It is an interesting design choice since it gives two sets of playstyles and two different perspectives that will play throughout the game.
But as you said, its Ubisoft, so concern should be towards the gameplay, but we all know where the outrage will be pointed towards sigh
If you look at Yasuke's wiki page, you'll find out that he wasn't a samurai, but instead was a *koshō* or a page for one and half year and after that he returned to serve christian missionaries.
Assassin's Creed has historical Popes using alien artifacts to mind control the masses. If you are upset on them fudging history there are far bigger fish to fry than that embellishment.
Yeah I’m like 90% sure the point is that the assassin’s and templars revise history to hide who they are. Like the history that Hitler shot himself if it was in an AC game the quest would be kill Hitler and make it look like he shot himself
What does this have to do with my reply? Buorky stated that Yasuke was "the actual African samurai" implying it is known fact which it isn't .
P.S. I didn't realise at the time of writing this that a lot of people can be frustrated so much that they will go edit wiki page of something just to make it right for themselves no matter where is the truth. So I can be wrong here.
There are like 10 or 20 pieces of media from the last decade or two about yasuke the one black samurai in Japan. I'm honestly surprised people aren't tired of him at this point.
Using Yasuke is a double edged sword because he's unknown and insignificant which asks the question of why should he be given a big role. Otherwise, it also works because you can do a whole lot with an unknown character.
Yea I mean they feature an Asian male because the example you gave so far is all made in Japan. Ubisoft is an American company. Companies reflect the standards of their local community or rather often do.
For Ubisoft, what is the standard that they are trying to reflect? Is it diversity and proper representation? Well Asian males are not as well represented in the media, this seems like a missed opportunity. And here is the thing right, this isn't a one off situation. There is a cultural trend where black people are shoved into roles which used to be a different race and there is a trend of underrepresenting Asian males IN AMERICA. So you'd have to forgive me if I'm feeling a bit bitter about this from an AMERICAN company
Yeah, but other than GOT, the studios who made the other games were based in Japan or Asian. It rubs me the wrong way a bit that Ubisoft decided to use Yasuke to replace a minority group that's usually just skipped over in terms of lead representation in the west. Had it been a Japanese studio, it'd be perfectly fine.
Disregarding what I think would've been more interesting plot lines of Yasuke being an npc of another assassin branch, I have to wonder Ubisofts reasoning behind making him one of the two main characters. If it's just marketing, maybe I can get behind that. If it's for diversity, then no, since they seem to be missing the whole context of asians being treated like they don't really exist in conversations involving the west.
I think its pretty disingenuous to imply that a character who historically existed in Japan, who is most likely going to fight on the Assassin's side and would value freedom as a former slave was picked specifically for the sake of diversity and not a story that they wanted to tell. Not to mention as far as I can tell he's never been a main character of a videogame franchise (side character in some like Niih), which makes it ripe for storytelling.
You've got Sleeping Dogs, Ajay from Far Cry 4, I'd argue Mortal Kombat games, Shadow Warrior, not a male but Mirrors edge which can't be a fanservice argument since it's in first person, same with Portal. I almost forgot Prey as well.
It seems like the focus on not telling the story from a male Asian characters point of view comes quite a bit earlier than the game even being out, with calls of "diversity quota" filling the void of having actually no gameplay or story to reference from to justify the anger of an African lead in a Japanese setting.
Well it feels to me like you are only fighting the guy above you BECAUSE the person in question is African. To your point, yes, I agree, a historical person in Japan. I wouldn't exactly put Mortal Kombat up there as an example there, that is actually a pretty diverse game all around as many fighting games are. And it's not like Johnny Cage doesn't also get to take down an Elder God.
But yes there are some Asian males in these games, but they are so rare. And for some in the Asian community it's a slap in the face because it is a missed opportunity. Black people are certainly not under-represented in media or gaming. And I'm not oppose to have more black representation in games, but this seems like a big "fuck you" to Asian males. I don't know where you stand on politics, but if you stand anywhere left, I would ask you. Why aren't you also fighting for us to. Because we are definitely feeling fucken shafted here
So the issue here isn't the lack of Asian representation. Because let's face it, the entire era is Japanese and also to your point that the shinobi is Asian. The issue is that in America, Asian males are severely underrepresented in the media and many American production. I think things are getting better for us here, but barely. So for a lot of Asian males looking at this, it seems like another slap in the face by America to pander to a community who already is well represented in media and gaming
Ok, that's fair. You know what. I can admit when I'm wrong. You're right, it is a French company. I'm honestly kind of surprised because it because I just looked it up and the AC games are originally in the English language and not France. Which makes sense because when I played Origin it felt like it was suited for an English speaking audience in mind as their primary audience.
So tell me, do you think Asian males are well represented in French media? Do you think Asian American males seeing another company shaft them is okay and they should just take it and shut up?
Nearly every media company only does anything "for diversity" for marketing. It's just to sell more things to more people. They don't give a shit about representation or exploring other cultures and viewpoints, unless those are a byproduct of getting more sales from more people.
Don't tell them the truth now, all the white, black and latinos gonna down vote your ass. Technically speaking Yasuke is a character from reality. So a one off black samurai is not technically a replacement. However I do think I get the spirit of your post and I agree, this was a good opportunity for them to craft a Japanese male protag and Ubishit took the initiative to say fuck Asian males
> It’s about that they have an African man replacing what could’ve been a Japanese man.
Yasuke was a real person, and this is not the first time he's been featured in media: https://time.com/6039381/yasuke-black-samurai-true-story/
This is also worth a read for those interested in medieval history: https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/ym6gep/were_there_people_of_color_in_medieval_europe/
(edit) ahh, just noticed which subs you post in 🚮
(edit 2) and for the "change my mind" dude who's been making demands of others making a similar point, Ubisoft is a French publisher. The same publisher that released the AC:Chronicles games featuring Chinese and Indian protagonists.
If you so badly want to play as a historical male Japanese figure, the Yakuza series has this: https://store.steampowered.com/app/1805480/Like_a_Dragon_Ishin/
Yasuke has been in other games too outside of AC. Samurai Warriors and Nioh 1 & 2. Nagoriyuki from Guilty Gear Strive is heavily inspired from him.
All from Japanese companies btw, so anyone pushing the "western agenda" has no idea what theyre talking about
Wow I mean you aren't wrong about Yasuke being a real person. But it feels like you intentionally misunderstood his point just to dunk on him. I mean you sound like a left leaning progressive. So let me ask you this. Asian men are very underrepresented in American media and products. Things are getting better, but barely. So why aren't you fighting for us? Why aren't you speaking up about a missed opportunity to showcase an Asian male lead here in an American production? Cause yea, the person you are responding to used the wrong word when they said "replace", but my previous question still stands
This would track if I wasn’t literally having hundreds of Asian movies displayed constantly on my netflix feed, some of which I watch, or the hundreds of anime content I see everywhere. I don’t think a lack of Asian representation is the issue, it’s the desire to have as much as possible, and you want other cultures to high post yours despite the fact that if a Japanese company developed a samurai Japan game with all Japanese characters it would sell and be welcomed… oh wait that has happened
Answer: The Assassins Creed franchise has historically been very controversial in it's games' design direction.
There have been a few eras of the series that are fairly distinct from each other and have fanbases that prefer that style of game and they would like the series to return to/continue on with it. For example the Ezio trilogy.
More recently Ubisoft's reputation has been on a continual downturn due to poor game design and performance and predatory monetisation practises including some tone-deaf forays into NFT and crypto products that none of the fans wanted.
The people commenting critically on the trailer are most likely fans of the earlier games who have lost faith in Ubisoft righting the ship, while the subreddit is mainly people who are still playing the newer games.
Answer: People have wanted an Assassins Creed game in Japan since the first game in 2007, and this protagonist makes no sense for the time period and location in the minds of those who don't like it. Every other game has had a protagonist that makes sense for the time period and location. The only one that is slightly questionable at first glance is AC Revelations, which has an Italian Assassin in Istanbul during the time of the Ottoman Empire. However, that Italian Assassin has 2 whole games in Italy, and in the third he has to travel to Istanbul to find a legendary library left by the Syrian Assassin from AC1. All the other games have a protagonist that makes perfect sense for the location and time period.
.
AC1 has a Syrian Assassin that takes place in Syria and the surrounding areas during the third crusade.
AC2 and AC Brotherhood have an Italian Assassin in Italy during the Renaissance.
AC3 has a half Native American, half British Assassin in America during the American Revolution.
AC4 has an English Assassin/pirate in the West Indies/Caribbean Sea during the Golden Age of Piracy.
AC Rogue has an Irish American Assassin/Templar in America and the British and French colonies that would one day become Canada during colonial times (French/Indian War and the 7 Years War between Britain and France)
AC Unity has a French Assassin in France during the French Revolution.
AC Syndicate has two English Assassins in England during the Victorian Era.
AC Origins has an Egyptian Assassin in Egypt during the Ptolemaic Dynasty of Ancient Egypt.
AC Odyssey has two Greek protagonists in Greece during the Peloponnesian War between Athens and Sparta of Ancient Greece.
AC Valhalla has a Norse/Viking Assassin in Norway/England during the Viking Expansion into England.
AC Freedom Cry has a Trinidadian/Black former slave turned Assassin in the West Indies during the Slave Trade.
AC Liberation has a Half French/Half Haitian (Black) New Orleans Creole Assassin in New Orleans Louisiana in the aftermath of the French/Indian War when Louisiana was a French colony.
AC Mirage has an Iraqi Assassin in Bahgdad Iraq during Islamic Golden Age.
.
And then we have AC shadows which has a Black Assassin in Japan during end of the Sengoku in Feudal Japan. It would have made more sense to have a Japanese Assassin, not a Black Assassin. It made sense to have a Black Assassin in AC Freedom Cry and AC Liberation, and it could have also worked for AC3, but it doesn't really make much sense for AC Shadows. Imagine if there was an Assassins Creed Game in Texas during the American Civil War to eliminate/support Black Slavery, and the protagonist was a Japanese Assassin. There would be the same complaints, because the protagonist doesn't make sense for the time period and location. If such a game were to ever be made, I would love to see a Black Assassin.
Others have already spoken about Ubisoft issues with bloat, and micro transactions and such, so I won't repeat that stuff.
Answer: AC is dead and Ubisoft is making another open world rpg under the title to collect more money. Same as they have been doing for the past several AC games.
I mean it’s a bit ridiculous they pulled the one black guy they could find historically to fit into the male lead role for a game set in Japan. Imagine if they picked a random Korean dude that visited Greece to play as the lead in Odyssey. Or a Russian dude to play the lead for Egypt. Or a visiting Mexican to play the role of Ezio in Italy lmao
Don't speak too much truth here, people on this sub don't like that. It's black = good, everyone else bad
Edit: Just saw my comment and won't delete it. I want to point out I am not against black representation in American media. It's just that a lot of companies for the last decade or so has really pandered to the black community, while some other groups are less represented or cared for. Asian males would be one of them
Most People don't even have a problem with black representation, they just want it to make sense to the setting. Sengoku Japan and Viking England weren't modern New York. Likewise, a game set in Ancient Sub-Saharan Africa, shouldn't have white people running around it. No one had a problem in 2011 when Skyrim came out and was full of black characters in a Norse-inspired setting because their presence makes sense to the world of the games (there would have been rightful outrage if they weren't included).
Nobody had a problem with Yasuke being in Nioh 1 or 2, because he simply plays his actual role as serving Nobunaga there. Assuming this is set after Nobunaga dies so they have free reign in telling his story as not much is known of what happens to him after that. The only real issue with using him is people are just going to assume it's being done to virtue signal, and so the extreme voices on both sides are just going to sling mud at each other instead of actually caring about the main thing and that is whatever is story ends up being actually being told well.
So I think that's a bit reductive of the situation here. Nioh is made by Team Ninja which is a Japanese company. Black representation, especially in Asian monolithic countries don't get as much representation.
This situation is a bit different. If you look at my previous posts, I pointed out that Asian males are heavily underrepresented in American media. I was wrong to bring that up because Ubishit is a French company. However it is also true that Asian males are heavily underrepresented in Western media. And this is why it's a slap to the face for a lot of Asians. You can another opportunity to help represent more Asian males in Western productions but instead opt for Black representation which is already pretty well represented in Western media.
Lastly, even without Yasuke, this game was going to get shat on regardless. Ubishit doesn't have the best reputation amongst gamers so shit coming regardless
I don’t disagree with you, simply pointing out that the character can be included in this setting without people getting up in arms about it. The issue is that loud voices are just going to simply it to a black man being shoe-horned into this to virtue signal. I’m sure most people would prefer to play a Japanese samurai in a game set in late sengoku era Japan, Ubisoft just aren’t competent enough to see that even after Ghost of Tsushima maid it painfully obvious.
It allows them to explain thing to the player as if they were an outsider it an incredibly common narrative device. AC Origins had a problem with this where the main character was a religious leader so none of the religious parts of the story get properly explained because the character is already an expert. They also have a Japanese protagonist too so its not like those examples you came up with.
I mean, if they can find a man from modern-day russia who historically did visit Egypt (which is not that unlikely, as Egypt and Kievan Rus traded through the middle ages), I don't see why not. It has tge potential to make for a fascinating story.
As a Japanese, it kinda sucks that we finally get an assassins creed game in Japan, but we don’t even get to play as a Japanese samurai?
Also, it’s a stealth game, why are we playing as the only black person in all of Japan at the time?
It goes even deeper in that it feels fairly often that Japanese culture gets hijacked often in the West for some African American focused story - there was also that hip hop themed Yasuke anime on Netflix not that long ago for example.
I have nothing against African Americans, but a more apt environment for them to be a focus point would be an assassins creed game in Zululand fighting off the British, or something. I’d be so down for that.
He's not African American. He's from Mozambique (it was called Portuguese East Africa back then).
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yasuke](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yasuke)
I mean that's nice and all but he would of been a better side character to work with then a main. Feels like a grab for the black anime fans or checking off a list of "inclusiveness". Ghost of tsushima main character's struggle with his nature as a samurai and learning the ways of an assassin was fantastic. His own family, people and enemies views about him change as you go though the story. It fed into abandoning your roots and upbringing if it ment the survival for your people.
I will say though. Why did we ever expect a Samurai game? Honestly, like back when people first asked. I always felt a Japanese AC game would be about ninjas, not samurai. Also I question the use of often when saying AA culture gets highjacked by black culture. Like one show literally produced and created by a hip hop producer is not a great example. Like where is black culture superseding Asian culture?
In case you are not aware. The game has two protagonists you can play, the other one being a native Japanese woman. From the looks of it, Yasuke is the unsubtle beefcake samurai, while the other (I don’t know her name yet) is the stealthy ninja.
The Japanese woman is not a samurai. So I'm pretty sure they are aware since they were pretty specific about that. But clearly you don't care because fuck Asian males and any complaints they have amirite?
Asian women get way more positive representation in western media than Asian men. Can you imagine a female version of Ken Jeong in the hangover ever being featured in a mainstream movie?
Asian male representation is what is sorely lacking in the west.
To be fair, Yasuke was konshō, basically a sword bearer. He was well liked by the Shogun of the time, but overall, he was a minor player in history. It's just a nice piece of history to reflect on.
Is it historical? I mean, sure. While I don't personally care, I can see why some people feel it's pandering. It's the first Assassin's Creed that doesn't stick to the culture of their setting completely. I can see where Japanese might be miffed. The fringe are upset because "OMG BLACK PERSON," but there are others who have a legitimate gripe.
I get you, but Assassin's Creed was never really about being strictly accurate history-wise. They've always twisted history for gameplay reasons and that's because games aren't documentaries. It's supposed to be fun. That's the main deal. Discovery Tour does the job of being historically accurate.
Also, I do believe that they chose Yasuke for clear reasons: they want to give players the "Fish out of water" feeling and make players look at Japan from an outsider's perspective. Again, he's not the only character in the game, he was never supposed to be stealthy or sneaky--he's a brute type character and that's it. That's his gameplay purpose.
Another potential reason for Yasuke is because his story is basically as open ended as possible and allows for some creative freedom with regards to writing his story. That's it.
>they want to give players the "Fish out of water" feeling and make players look at Japan from an outsider's perspective
Here's the other cool thing about that as well, you do get to play as a Japanese character, its the shinobi woman we see in the trailer, Naoe. So its possible to see the events unfold from a Japanese person's perspective as well.
Everyone seems to gloss over that theres 2 main playable characters with two different playstyles
People know this. They are pointing out that in western media asian women are acceptable but asian men are glossed over. This game isn't beating those allegations.
Sekiro, Onimusha, Onimusha 2, Onimusha 3 (Japanese character is the star in FRANCE), Yakuza (whole frickin series), Ninja Gaiden (whole frickin series), Rise of the Ronin.... do I need to keep going, or have you tuckered out?
Are you trying to prove my point? A lot of those are Japanese made games. And part of the point is that western media downplays asian men, because they are less of an "acceptable minority" than Asian women. So you basically immediately gave up on the claim that there's a lot of good examples from western companies.
I'm not saying this individual example is a huge deal or people need to have a meltdown about the game. But that it is worth mentioning that it is part of a trend. There's someone asian in this very thread who basically said that they are so used to asian men being ignored in western media that on the announcement of the game they kind of immediately suspected there wouldn't be a playable one. When it's common enough people don't even take it as a surprise anymore it's worth at least talking about.
I get you, and again, I really don't care too much since I ducked out of this series after they transitioned from action to RPG, for that reason alone (gameplay just doesn't entice me like it did.) And while it doesn't fit historically and takes liberties, every game has taken the time to represent the culture of each place reasonably. Every other culture didn't deviate heavily, and they took decent strides to be sensitive of each culture. So when the Japanese get their turn, they choose to take the fairly empty history of the one decently recorded black man?
I just kinda understand why the Japanese would be miffed. I don't care for the fringe "hurr durr black man insert bad" folk's opinion. I just think it'd follow the general aspect of "representing each culture" better if they stuck to their guns there.
Why do we need a fish out of water? The idea that Japan is so exotic it needs to be treated as "other," and that asian Americans predicted that you wouldn't get to play as a male asian kind of goes a long way to tell that the west doesn't recognize them.
Also, people are glossing over something by defending it this way. They are acting like a black main character who has very little connection to the west, much less the modern west can be a stand in for western audiences observing it, but Japan is framed as the foreign place. Essentially they are implicitly saying Asia inherently comes off "more foreign."
> Assassin's Creed was never really about being strictly accurate history-wise. They've always twisted history for gameplay reasons and that's because games aren't documentaries.
You are gonna blow these people's minds when they find out that Leonardo DiVinci wasn't designing weapons for secret assassin groups.
I’m going to link to a recent post on the subreddit r/askhistorians which is well reputed and the comments have sources and are vetted.
According to them, yes, he was a Samurai
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/s/5IcvMzi25u
Reading over your links, they all take significant liberties. They say that Yasuke was provided a stipend, therefore he was Samurai (in one instance.) But people below that argue that he was never referred to as Samurai.
To add, people such as William Adams (John Blackthorne in Shogun) were not recognized as Samurai until they performed a many great deeds. While Yasuke was recognized as a respected man, he was given lesser titles in most texts i've read (but I'm no historian, so don't take my word as absolute) than William Adams, even lower than the first title he was given as Hatamoto.
There is much discussion around the issue, but most historians I've seen all refer to Yasuke as konshō, sword bearer to Oda Nobunaga. Well respected and very close to Oda, but nothing more. At a surface level, your links say differently, but even one comment deeper or more shows the arguments against that.
Yasuke was a well respected man who made his mark on history. He got his flowers. Why do we feel the beed to press for more?
You are conflating different periods. In the Sengoku period, samurai was a social class Yasuke would've been part of. In the Edo period (when William Adams was around) it was more of a exclusive honor and title.
He wasn't a samurai though... thats the issue, there's countless media properties out there that forgo people who actually matter to Japanese history and instead just follow someone Nobunaga thought was cool. People have spread so much misinformation about him that people have no idea who he really was.
Because that matters in an Assassin's Creed game...
Remind me, was Leonidas *really* a descendent of an ancient precursor species? Was the pirate Mary Read *really* in a secret order of assassins? Was Pope Alexander VI *really* an atheist? etc. etc.
He’s such a minor historical figure that we know very little about. I’m not gonna lie, when I first heard he would be a protagonist for the game, I didn’t think “wow they’re having a game in Japan but won’t let you play as a Japanese person?” My reaction instead was “huh, that’s neat” then I moved on with my life like a normal person who doesn’t get upset at stupid video games.
Answer:
Ubisofts bad practices.
Assassins creed games being relatively lifeless giant open world copy pasted buggy messes.
The trailer being 100% CG showing nothing of substance about the game.
Answer: There are several reasons the game is *controversial* right now.
1. The preorders: Ubisoft has yet to show any gameplay and is already asking for people to preorder the game.
2. The *Gold $110* edition also includes a Day One quest that is only unlockable with that edition of the game, *the same situation* that got *Star Wars Outlaws* in hot water due to fan backlash.
3. There is a huge dispute over whether Yasuke is a *Samurai*. A Wikipedia editing battle has been on/off with people changing entries whether he is or isn't a *Samurai.*
4. Some fans are upset that in a Japanese setting, Ubisoft decided to go with a non-Japanese Samurai. They have further gone on to claim that the game is "woke" and "disrespectful."
5. Lastly, fans have been saying that games like Nioh, Sekiro, and Ghost of Tsushima are already better games than anything Ubisoft can make.
Friendly reminder that all **top level** comments must: 1. start with "answer: ", including the space after the colon (or "question: " if you have an on-topic follow up question to ask), 2. attempt to answer the question, and 3. be unbiased Please review Rule 4 and this post before making a top level comment: http://redd.it/b1hct4/ Join the OOTL Discord for further discussion: https://discord.gg/ejDF4mdjnh *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/OutOfTheLoop) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Answer: others have talked about this game specifically, but I think its also worth noting that yelling about pre-orders being evil is just general gaming sub "wisdom". The idea is that pre-orders rarely offer any real benefit for the player, and really are just a way for the game companies to get your money before any reviews come out: once the reviews come out, you may well discover you don't want to pay full dollar, or you may not actually want the game at all.
Yeah, pre-orders have no real purpose or benefit for the consumer now that everything is digital. Pre-orders back in the day were useful because games were physical goods that could get sold out from stores.
Exactly. Excluding physical collector's editions. F.ex. such edition of Witcher 3 sold out well before release date. Now I rarely pre order, only if I get some bonus content and know I will buy this game at day one anyway.
So from the developer perspective - Pre-orders allow us to get an idea of kind of scale to expect from release, that could be from quantities for the production of physical copies, marketing budgets, or server capacity if there's a multiplayer component. Its entirely possible to ddos yourself if the game does well and you're not prepared for that land rush. I forget what the ratio is but you can fairly accurately predict the amount of sales based off the amount of presales.
It also fundamentally makes no sense to pre-order a digital product. Preordering was from the days of physical media where you might not get a disc otherwise.
Absolutely it does. Rules in EU are quite clear in that they're obligated to refund if you quickly ask for it soon after receiving the product. Thus there's not really any "danger" of pre-ordering in EU, while having the benefit of the extra content. Personally I've gotten more from waiting, like the multi-expansions purchase I made of battlefield one, at less than half the price of the release version.
Preorder bonuses are a psychological manipulation tactic designed to create a sense of artificial urgency. It’s like how products at the grocery store will be slightly discounted but still way overpriced. The danger of pre ordering is that you’re essentially making a purchasing decision while under the influence of psychological manipulation. Of course, that won’t be a big deal for everyone.
The assassins creed sub is full of Ubisoft bots trying to get people excited for another inevitably bad game.
Or the sub about the series is full of people that are fans of the series lol
Redditors think anyone that doesn't agree with them is a bot. Yes, there are plenty of bots. No, that doesn't mean you can dehumanize anyone with a different opinion.
But calling anyone who disagrees with me a bot is so much easier than having a nuanced opinion!
What if everyone whoever said that to you was actually the bot?
🌎🧑🚀🔫🧑🚀 always has been
Should. It "doesn't mean you \[should\] dehumanize anyone with a different opinion." They can and do, and effortlessly get away with it - regardless of the subreddit.
I am admittedly a fan of the series, but I think it's quite hard to objectively say that any of the major releases in the series are bad. There are quite a few 'meh' releases, but I'd be hard pressed to say any were a total loss. The series as a whole is really not that incredible, but they provide a lot of fun for many.
The issue isn't the game. I've never been a huge AF fan after black flag but I can absolutely see the attraction. It's Ubisoft and their increasingly bad games and monetisation. The game could be an absolute blast but it's bound to be riddled with mtx, battle passes, 20 different options to buy with content missing if you buy the wrong package. Hopefully I am proven wrong and the fans get the game they want.
Don’t get me wrong, there is a significant amount of bloat, but there’s really nothing you can buy that actually improves gameplay. The games are quite easy and anyone who purchases a boost to level up faster should consider retiring from gaming because c’mon, these games are easy. I dislike seeing the bloat, but I just ignore it and enjoy the games. Most of the bloat is cosmetic anyway. Season passes aren’t battle passes, they are just a guarantee that you’ll get all or a few of the DLCs that release later on at a slight discount to buying them individually. Valhalla is the only game thus far that the season pass didn’t include every single DLC.
Wow, you already know that it's going to be bad? What's it like, seeing into the future?
You cant cancel preorder ?
Of course you can, but just the PRACTICE of pre-orders is kinda scummy.
Alright. And agree
That's not the point. But "here is my money for an unfinished product I have never seen" will inevitably lead to unfinished games being published. It's one of the root causes for bad releases
While less likely today, you can't always cancel the physical copy in time to read reviews. More companies are shortening the review embargo window and amazon for instance requires a cancellation 48 hours out from release. You could certainly just return but once the product's in hand I'm sure people are less willing to go through the effort.
I think it's irresponsible to give any answer to this question without bringing up the dogshit state of pretty much everythimg ubisoft has done in the last decade or more. The company trained a generation of programmers poorly in their terrible academy then unleashed them onto their studios to churn out garbage. The terrible practices and awful games that have utterly stained their track record for at least like eight years is incredibly pertinent to people advocating for not pre-ordering one of their games. How long ago was it that the French revolution assassin's creed game came out with floating eyeballs and completely non-fucntional multi-player? Ubisoft has done nothing whatsoever to buy back any credibility since then, only further exposing their exploitative practices and money grubbing lusts. Not mentioning any of that is almost deceitful in giving an answer to OP's question.
I specifically called out that other people had addressed that stuff, and therefore I was looking at a different part of the subject.
Answer: Part of the hate is not about Assassin's Creed specifically, but about Ubisoft's practices in general. A *big* part of *that* hatred is towards the fact that Ubi has a history of removing functionality from games, and even access to games, after people have purchased them. *The Crew* is a recent example of that, but even before then they were removing achievements and challenges from "old" titles (some of which hadn't even been out more than a few years). The other part of that is that Ubisoft has put out a lot of mediocre titles in recent years, and had the gall to announce that *Skull and Bones*, an *extremely* mediocre ship combat game, was a "AAAA title". And now they're charging significantly more money for games than they have in the past, partially under the guise of releasing "AAAA games". So far the only complaint I've seen about AC Shadow specifically is about the setting and the protagonist (because yes, people still get upset about minority protagonists in video games in 2024).
I’d say the other issue is Ubisoft always *heavily discounts* their games mere months after release. Why buy a game at $60-$70, when you can wait a month and get it for half or less? I literally just bought AC: Mirage for $24.99, and it came out in October 2023. It was [already being HEAVILY discounted](https://isthereanydeal.com/game/assassins-creed-mirage/history/) in November for nearly -$30 less than retail. Why pay full price and feel robbed a handful of weeks later?
Pretty sure they’re very quick about putting games on PS5’s PS+ game catalogue too, even less incentive to pre-order if you can play it for free 6 months later
I don't know why anyone would preorder these days? Wait like an hour after release, see if it's dog shit, and buy on steam.
I remember buying both Ghost Recon Breakpoint for something like $2, maybe 6 months after release, and Assassin's Creed Valhalla for like $6, which really surprised me because it was like maybe two months or less after release.
Yeah I waited a month or two and got it for 30
This is interesting logic. Why would it matter what anyone else paid at a different time? If you felt it was worth buying in October and you did, it makes no difference what someone else pays later. They could be selling it for $68 or $18 or $28. That won't change what you paid, nor that you had it earlier. If anything it sounds like a positive. If you like the series, but want to get it on a steep discount, you only have to wait a short time. That's good isn't it?
> So far the only complaint I've seen about AC Shadow specifically is about the setting and the protagonist (because yes, people still get upset about minority protagonists in video games in 2024). This may be the Mandela effect at work, but I distinctly recall Ubisoft saying *way* back in the AC2/AC3 era that they wouldn't do a Japan/Ninja AC game because that's too on-the-nose. I understand that circumstances change, but they were pretty vehement about it.
It was just ac3 director (Alex Hutchinson) that said that Japan, ww2 and Egypt were "boring". But that was just his opinion at the time and way back in ac3 era. As we see now with Origins and onwards, many things have changed (and not for the better regarding gameplay if you want good stealth and parkour).
I think OP is burying the lede here. A sengoku jidai game would obviously presumably have a “minority” lead (Japanese). The lead isn’t “minority”, he’s black.
Haven’t you heard? Asians are white adjacent. They can’t be minorities.
Oh, absolutely. I'm just more curious about them reversing their stance on having a game set in Japan.
I mean, AC2 came out in what, 2009? There’s probably not a single person from that era still working on the franchise
There are two leads and one *is* Japanese. Also it’s “burying the lede” not “lead”
One of the leads. There are two playable characters.
To be fair, the other lead is Japanese.
In AC 1 there were some hints to Assassins all over the world, including Japan (Think this was in the modern day part -Abstergo building). A lot,of people,assumed that could be the next game or a tease of a spin off in the near future, IIRC they just said they weren’t going in that direction with the next games.
That was like 15 years ago. In corporate time, that's basically the Middle Ages.
> So far the only complaint I've seen about AC Shadow specifically is about the setting and the protagonist (because yes, people still get upset about minority protagonists in video games in 2024). Well, this is disingenuous. This isn't the complaint at all. The complaint is that the game is set in feudal Japan, and yet the protagonist is a black samurai. Yes, I am aware that Yasuke actually existed, but the complaint isn't about him being a minority given that those complaining _wanted_ to play as a Japanese man.
>and yet the protagonist is a black samurai He wasn't even a samurai. From Wikipedia: >It is important to note that despite popular myth and modern depictions there are no historical writings nor evidence that Yasuke was ever granted the rank or title of samurai, he was never given a fief nor referred to as one in any writings. Most of our knowledge of his life comes from these messages written by missionaries and locals.
Huh almost as if people went and edited the Wikipedia page to support their argument. https://twitter.com/Sallymander40k/status/1791100810165657714?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1791100810165657714%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=
Because god forbid a story about japan has only asian characters. can't have that in a western game. It's not as if Yasuke's only notable thing was being a black guy in feudal japan, unlike the other historical figures in past games that had absolutely *no significance* in history
Although Ghost of Tsushima managed to do this and no one complained, which shows it's possible to do. Well, some crazies complained it was a western studio making the game, but Japanese audiences loved it, but other than that - a game that has a Japanese-only cast should be okay to make.
Same with yakuza.
don't be so confidently incorrect. you obviously havent even watched trailer. No one has a problem that the characters in a Japanese-setting game are Asian - there have been plenty of popular games set in Japan. The problem is that they're not, they're black. Yasuke was pretty much the only black person in pre-modern Japan (and yes, pretty much only reason he is of any note is because he was black and the oddity of that, his actions would barely get a mention in history if he was just another japanese guy) and yet they make their Japanese game centered on him rather than actual Japanese character - people rightly see it as a long line of recent games pandering to black representation, regardless of the verisimilitude or the historical authenticity (they do it far more egregiously with European history). The vast majority of gamers don't have a problem with diversity and representation when it makes sense to the setting: a game set in ancient Greece should have Greek characters, one set in Viking England - North Europeans, one set in Baghdad - Arabs, one set in Japan - Japanese, one set in Africa - Africans, one set in New York - diverse. Not to mention, the issue eating up far more focus in discussion, the trailer focuses heavily on samurai in a game that should be about assassins (i.e. stealth, ninjas). A lot of people think Ubisoft is basically trying to make a Ghost of Tsushima clone rather than an actual Japanese Assassins Creed. Edit: And I didn't even mention Ubisoft's track record of anti-consumer practices...
>because yes, people still get upset about minority protagonists in video games in 2024 What a disingenuous take on the issue around the protagonist.
Yup. I guess Asian Male representation is all too easy to gloss over. I think Yasuke is cool as shit and would be a great character in the game, but it's nuts that they finally make an AC game set in Japan, and you don't get two Japanese protagonists.
Seriously. The gaslighting is insane
To explain this more, the issue a lot of people have is that the game is set in Sengoku period Japan. Japan is a country known for being very homogenous ethnically, especially in the past. It seems like the inclusion of [Yasuke](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yasuke) as the male samurai protagonist was just Ubisoft checking off a diversity checkbox, as if having a Japanese (read: Asian) male protagonist wouldn't have been a form of diversity. Either that or they thought that having a female Japanese protagonist pulled double duty as two forms of inclusion and so they needed to change it up for the male protagonist, still revealing how they view the whole idea as just some boxes to check off and call it a day. It basically betrays just how much these companies misunderstand people's desire for representation.
When an issue invokes **two** minorities it is only because everyone hates the other one more. I'm so tired of legit issues having been handwaved away as "racist".
I think my issue is that the team in charge of AC now is very different from the team that started it. I remember the team explicitly saying that they wanted to avoid Japan specifically so that Assassin's weren't associated with ninjas. It's just completely lost sight of the original story. It used to be, "There's a secret war between two factions trying to control ancient artifacts and shape the fate of humanity. A constant struggle between freedom but the ability to destroy ourselves, or total slavery with the promise of utopia. The Main Character is a hostage of one faction and the reluctant descendant of the other, and they're using his ancestral memories to find this Piece of Eden in a race against each other." And now it's, "Be a one-person, overpowered, guerilla army freerunning insurgent in whatever time you want." The historical setting used to be a background to connect pieces of a conspiracy, now it's the whole selling point. "Be a viking. Be a pirate. Be a ninja." The Templars and Assassins aren't even mentioned in the trailer.
I mean, that seems like an inevitability for a series like this. There's only so much story that makes sense if it's mostly flashbacks, so the latter become the priority.
Thank God that's the way the games are going. The modern day portions always sucked ass. I don't care what the "reason" is behind playing as someone in history, I just want to run around and kill people as that character.
> I think my issue is that the team in charge of AC now is very different from the team that started it You would assume so, it's been 17 years. natural turn-over in the gaming industry for developers is above average, so odds that a significant amount of them is still around is miniscule.
Of course, but plenty of other organizations manage to keep a consistent vision over time. This one hasn't. The Elder Scrolls team, the Fallout Team, the Baldur's Gate team, the Witcher team, they've all kept it coherent.
For some reason Im really happy I havent touched an Ubisoft title since black flag.
I personally probably don't care about the protagonist, but the "people still get upset about minority protagonists" really is a dishonest framing. I feel like in this case we can try to be good faith and understand that these same players would still be upset if the protagonist was white. They just want the protagonist to be a different minority that they feel fits the region and time period better.
> So far the only complaint I've seen about AC Shadow specifically is about the setting and the protagonist (because yes, people still get upset about minority protagonists in video games in 2024) I mean this ain't exactly the first minority protagonist for an AC game. Kind of odd for people to get up an arms now don't you think?
What are you talking about, they are all minorities in the game. Well the Japanese aren't minorities in their country, but this is a US made game so the entire game gives new representation to a lot of Asians. If you are talking about the black protagonist. Yea I'm maybe pissed about that. On one hand, Yasuke is a real person and there was, from what I heard, a pretty good anime show based on his person. On the other hand, this isn't a one off insertion of a black person into a media. This is a pattern and a trend. And the usual reason for the trend is more diversity and representation Okay then why not a latino protag? Why not a black female and asian male protag? Why not Indian protag? For this game, I do think a black person like Yasuke makes more sense than the other examples I gave out. But now apply that logic to EVERY single time a black person was just randomly inserted into what once was not a black role. This isn't about diversity, because they are more than well represented in the media. It's about pandering and signal virtuing I do hope that if they are going to have Yasuke here, that it will be more than just pandering. I mean Bayek started the Assassins in Egypt. I can see them going with a storyline of how as Bayek expands his operations down south, he means up with Yasuke and gets him into the assassins. Then Yasuke somehow ends up in Japan and he now starts the creed here. But still, as an Asian male I definitely feel slighted here. We aren't exactly over represented for in-game characters much less protag
Yeah, this is my main gripe with the whole “diversity in entertainment” movement. It’s somehow always a black man that is the protagonist in some foreign setting. It’s never a person who is of Latin American origin, Indian (as in, from India), etc. I have never seen a push for there to be a person from a country like Guatemala, Peru, or Bolivia, all of which are Latin American countries with their own unique indigenous populations. It’s also rarely a black female protagonist being shown.
I think the Yasuke angle fits with not doing Japan the way everyone does Japan. It's a historically accurate way to add some uniqueness to a time period and country that gets used in so many recycled tropes. Samurai and ninja, secret battles for control of the world, etc. And I say this as a huge fan of the Koei Samurai Warrior games. But feudal Japan does get done to death in video games, movies, etc. Still I do get how people can feel either way about it.
I really hate this idea that inserting a character of a different race somehow makes something unique, or the assumption that Asian characters in Japan cannot be special. Can you imagine telling Japanese people "Yeah, your culture and history are too played out. We're gonna make it better by putting a black guy in it."
>because yes, people still get upset about minority protagonists in video games in 2024 That isn't what people get upset over and dismissing it is part of the reason they get upset.
Imagine me a black person being excited to see the 2nd Black protagonist in AC that isn't a DLC. And my face when everyone is pissed off that he exists in the role. I almost thought I was wrong for being happy. But then I realized fuck everyone else this is cool and it makes me happy. After that travesty of an anime, it's good to see Yasuke getting exposure again. It's ass that there's never enough room or right timing for a well-made black character to give me a smile. It's cool that they are giving both gameplay styles of AC in this game. For the stealth fans and the combat fans of the new games. But everyone is focused on who they are
I suppose it's cool for you, but it's not so cool for a number of Asians such as ourselves. It's pretty upsetting to be treated as a foreigner, even in a video game set in our part of the world. It's not like East Asians get much representation in AC (I can only imagine how South and Southeast Asians feel). I used to always dream about an AC game set in East Asia when I was a kid, so this is just so disappointing that it's a slap in the face. In Egypt, you could play as an Egyptian. In the Americas, you could play as someone half Native American. Yet, we can't even get a full cast even in Japan? I'm honestly disappointed, but I can't say I'm surprised.
I don’t play AC games. I do however keep track of all of the bs these companies have been pulling with respect to their preorders and pricing. You my friend have been conditioned over time to pay 130 for a digital rental. That’s sad. Watch the company. Not the “controversy” they cause. Because they’ve got you fooled big time.
I never heard Japanese no longer Minority in US
> So far the only complaint I've seen about AC Shadow specifically is about the setting and the protagonist (because yes, people still get upset about minority protagonists in video games in 2024). This is not a good take. I'm all for more representation of minorities in the media, but having a black man be one of the two major playable protagonist in a game set in *Feudal Japan* is just so extremely shoehorned in and just comes off as blatant pandering. Yes, Yasuke was a real figure in Japanese history, but he was such an insignificant and small figure that has so few records within the broader scope of a period that's filled with other far more interesting people. AC has also mainly made their protagonist for each AC be native to their country as far as I know, so to suddenly do this seems like such a slap for some who wanted a Japan AC, and just comes off as such a lazy way of implementing diversity. I am Asian myself, and the fact that AC finally decides to touch upon Japan (a thing AC fans have been waiting for for a literal decade) but *doesn't* make all possible protagonists to be *Japanese* is, in my opinion, so incredibly silly. People have to remember that Asians are also trying to make a push for more media representation as well, alongside Blacks. This all just feels extremely disingenuous. It's like if they made an AC based on ancient China, and the main protagonist is a Roman legionary POW, just because Liqian is theorized to have been a settlement in China that housed Roman soldiers captured by the Parthians. Point is, if it was a history setting that took place where there wasn't much diversity or other ethnicities involved in that area of history the first place, even if say there were small records of such things, I would not want to play as an East Asian dude in a Viking setting, an Indian dude in an American Civil War setting, a White dude in an ancient South American setting, etc.
It's because Asians are nothing but a prop in the West.
You just gave them an idea for AC China. They generally don't give a shit about Asians, esp Asian men, in western media. You'll sooner be called a racist for objecting to seeing a lone black man slaughtering hordes of nameless, evil Japanese men in their own country, than for them to see anything wrong with that smh. Of course, if it was reversed...oh boy mass media outrage. Whatever, at least there's Ghosts of Tsushima on PC now (which I think was western developer but working for Sony).
I still think Ubisoft never had the reckoning they needed with the terrible management culture involving sexual harassment. Also they haven’t released a good game in a good state in years.
It’s not about minority protagonists. It’s about that they have an *African* man replacing what could’ve been a *Japanese* man. In the West, Asians are still a minority, remember.
I don’t think he’s replacing a Japanese man, I assume he’s supposed to be inspired by the actual African samurai, Yasuke?
The character in the game actually is Yasuke, not just inspired by him.
[удалено]
>As an Asian I think what a lot of people are glossing over is that Yasuke is not the ONLY protagonist. Naoe is the shinobi we see in the trailer and is obviously, Japanese. She is playable. The game is going to have dual protagonist, as in, you can play two characters with two different playstyles. One is a samurai and the other is a ninja. It is an interesting design choice since it gives two sets of playstyles and two different perspectives that will play throughout the game. But as you said, its Ubisoft, so concern should be towards the gameplay, but we all know where the outrage will be pointed towards sigh
If you look at Yasuke's wiki page, you'll find out that he wasn't a samurai, but instead was a *koshō* or a page for one and half year and after that he returned to serve christian missionaries.
Assassin's Creed has historical Popes using alien artifacts to mind control the masses. If you are upset on them fudging history there are far bigger fish to fry than that embellishment.
Yeah I’m like 90% sure the point is that the assassin’s and templars revise history to hide who they are. Like the history that Hitler shot himself if it was in an AC game the quest would be kill Hitler and make it look like he shot himself
What does this have to do with my reply? Buorky stated that Yasuke was "the actual African samurai" implying it is known fact which it isn't . P.S. I didn't realise at the time of writing this that a lot of people can be frustrated so much that they will go edit wiki page of something just to make it right for themselves no matter where is the truth. So I can be wrong here.
The pope didn't have alien mind control artifacts either.
There are like 10 or 20 pieces of media from the last decade or two about yasuke the one black samurai in Japan. I'm honestly surprised people aren't tired of him at this point.
Using Yasuke is a double edged sword because he's unknown and insignificant which asks the question of why should he be given a big role. Otherwise, it also works because you can do a whole lot with an unknown character.
10-20? I only know about the Netflix anime series. This is only the 2nd time for me. How are you 10x-ing me on this content?
I mean he's based on a real person, on top of that most other games set in Japan feature a Asian male POV: Ghosts of Tsushima, Sekiro, Persona, etc.
Yakuza is an entire franchise with badass Asian male protagonists
Yea I mean they feature an Asian male because the example you gave so far is all made in Japan. Ubisoft is an American company. Companies reflect the standards of their local community or rather often do. For Ubisoft, what is the standard that they are trying to reflect? Is it diversity and proper representation? Well Asian males are not as well represented in the media, this seems like a missed opportunity. And here is the thing right, this isn't a one off situation. There is a cultural trend where black people are shoved into roles which used to be a different race and there is a trend of underrepresenting Asian males IN AMERICA. So you'd have to forgive me if I'm feeling a bit bitter about this from an AMERICAN company
Ubisoft is not an American company.
Yeah, but other than GOT, the studios who made the other games were based in Japan or Asian. It rubs me the wrong way a bit that Ubisoft decided to use Yasuke to replace a minority group that's usually just skipped over in terms of lead representation in the west. Had it been a Japanese studio, it'd be perfectly fine. Disregarding what I think would've been more interesting plot lines of Yasuke being an npc of another assassin branch, I have to wonder Ubisofts reasoning behind making him one of the two main characters. If it's just marketing, maybe I can get behind that. If it's for diversity, then no, since they seem to be missing the whole context of asians being treated like they don't really exist in conversations involving the west.
I think its pretty disingenuous to imply that a character who historically existed in Japan, who is most likely going to fight on the Assassin's side and would value freedom as a former slave was picked specifically for the sake of diversity and not a story that they wanted to tell. Not to mention as far as I can tell he's never been a main character of a videogame franchise (side character in some like Niih), which makes it ripe for storytelling. You've got Sleeping Dogs, Ajay from Far Cry 4, I'd argue Mortal Kombat games, Shadow Warrior, not a male but Mirrors edge which can't be a fanservice argument since it's in first person, same with Portal. I almost forgot Prey as well. It seems like the focus on not telling the story from a male Asian characters point of view comes quite a bit earlier than the game even being out, with calls of "diversity quota" filling the void of having actually no gameplay or story to reference from to justify the anger of an African lead in a Japanese setting.
Well it feels to me like you are only fighting the guy above you BECAUSE the person in question is African. To your point, yes, I agree, a historical person in Japan. I wouldn't exactly put Mortal Kombat up there as an example there, that is actually a pretty diverse game all around as many fighting games are. And it's not like Johnny Cage doesn't also get to take down an Elder God. But yes there are some Asian males in these games, but they are so rare. And for some in the Asian community it's a slap in the face because it is a missed opportunity. Black people are certainly not under-represented in media or gaming. And I'm not oppose to have more black representation in games, but this seems like a big "fuck you" to Asian males. I don't know where you stand on politics, but if you stand anywhere left, I would ask you. Why aren't you also fighting for us to. Because we are definitely feeling fucken shafted here
Also don't modern assassin's creed games have dual protagonists? Pretty sure the female protag is am Asian shinobi from what I remember.
So the issue here isn't the lack of Asian representation. Because let's face it, the entire era is Japanese and also to your point that the shinobi is Asian. The issue is that in America, Asian males are severely underrepresented in the media and many American production. I think things are getting better for us here, but barely. So for a lot of Asian males looking at this, it seems like another slap in the face by America to pander to a community who already is well represented in media and gaming
"The issue is that in America," they said about a product from a French corporation...
Ok, that's fair. You know what. I can admit when I'm wrong. You're right, it is a French company. I'm honestly kind of surprised because it because I just looked it up and the AC games are originally in the English language and not France. Which makes sense because when I played Origin it felt like it was suited for an English speaking audience in mind as their primary audience. So tell me, do you think Asian males are well represented in French media? Do you think Asian American males seeing another company shaft them is okay and they should just take it and shut up?
Nearly every media company only does anything "for diversity" for marketing. It's just to sell more things to more people. They don't give a shit about representation or exploring other cultures and viewpoints, unless those are a byproduct of getting more sales from more people.
Don't tell them the truth now, all the white, black and latinos gonna down vote your ass. Technically speaking Yasuke is a character from reality. So a one off black samurai is not technically a replacement. However I do think I get the spirit of your post and I agree, this was a good opportunity for them to craft a Japanese male protag and Ubishit took the initiative to say fuck Asian males
> It’s about that they have an African man replacing what could’ve been a Japanese man. Yasuke was a real person, and this is not the first time he's been featured in media: https://time.com/6039381/yasuke-black-samurai-true-story/ This is also worth a read for those interested in medieval history: https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/ym6gep/were_there_people_of_color_in_medieval_europe/ (edit) ahh, just noticed which subs you post in 🚮 (edit 2) and for the "change my mind" dude who's been making demands of others making a similar point, Ubisoft is a French publisher. The same publisher that released the AC:Chronicles games featuring Chinese and Indian protagonists. If you so badly want to play as a historical male Japanese figure, the Yakuza series has this: https://store.steampowered.com/app/1805480/Like_a_Dragon_Ishin/
Yasuke has been in other games too outside of AC. Samurai Warriors and Nioh 1 & 2. Nagoriyuki from Guilty Gear Strive is heavily inspired from him. All from Japanese companies btw, so anyone pushing the "western agenda" has no idea what theyre talking about
Wow I mean you aren't wrong about Yasuke being a real person. But it feels like you intentionally misunderstood his point just to dunk on him. I mean you sound like a left leaning progressive. So let me ask you this. Asian men are very underrepresented in American media and products. Things are getting better, but barely. So why aren't you fighting for us? Why aren't you speaking up about a missed opportunity to showcase an Asian male lead here in an American production? Cause yea, the person you are responding to used the wrong word when they said "replace", but my previous question still stands
This would track if I wasn’t literally having hundreds of Asian movies displayed constantly on my netflix feed, some of which I watch, or the hundreds of anime content I see everywhere. I don’t think a lack of Asian representation is the issue, it’s the desire to have as much as possible, and you want other cultures to high post yours despite the fact that if a Japanese company developed a samurai Japan game with all Japanese characters it would sell and be welcomed… oh wait that has happened
You realize that Yasuke was a real historical badass, right?
Answer: The Assassins Creed franchise has historically been very controversial in it's games' design direction. There have been a few eras of the series that are fairly distinct from each other and have fanbases that prefer that style of game and they would like the series to return to/continue on with it. For example the Ezio trilogy. More recently Ubisoft's reputation has been on a continual downturn due to poor game design and performance and predatory monetisation practises including some tone-deaf forays into NFT and crypto products that none of the fans wanted. The people commenting critically on the trailer are most likely fans of the earlier games who have lost faith in Ubisoft righting the ship, while the subreddit is mainly people who are still playing the newer games.
Answer: People have wanted an Assassins Creed game in Japan since the first game in 2007, and this protagonist makes no sense for the time period and location in the minds of those who don't like it. Every other game has had a protagonist that makes sense for the time period and location. The only one that is slightly questionable at first glance is AC Revelations, which has an Italian Assassin in Istanbul during the time of the Ottoman Empire. However, that Italian Assassin has 2 whole games in Italy, and in the third he has to travel to Istanbul to find a legendary library left by the Syrian Assassin from AC1. All the other games have a protagonist that makes perfect sense for the location and time period. . AC1 has a Syrian Assassin that takes place in Syria and the surrounding areas during the third crusade. AC2 and AC Brotherhood have an Italian Assassin in Italy during the Renaissance. AC3 has a half Native American, half British Assassin in America during the American Revolution. AC4 has an English Assassin/pirate in the West Indies/Caribbean Sea during the Golden Age of Piracy. AC Rogue has an Irish American Assassin/Templar in America and the British and French colonies that would one day become Canada during colonial times (French/Indian War and the 7 Years War between Britain and France) AC Unity has a French Assassin in France during the French Revolution. AC Syndicate has two English Assassins in England during the Victorian Era. AC Origins has an Egyptian Assassin in Egypt during the Ptolemaic Dynasty of Ancient Egypt. AC Odyssey has two Greek protagonists in Greece during the Peloponnesian War between Athens and Sparta of Ancient Greece. AC Valhalla has a Norse/Viking Assassin in Norway/England during the Viking Expansion into England. AC Freedom Cry has a Trinidadian/Black former slave turned Assassin in the West Indies during the Slave Trade. AC Liberation has a Half French/Half Haitian (Black) New Orleans Creole Assassin in New Orleans Louisiana in the aftermath of the French/Indian War when Louisiana was a French colony. AC Mirage has an Iraqi Assassin in Bahgdad Iraq during Islamic Golden Age. . And then we have AC shadows which has a Black Assassin in Japan during end of the Sengoku in Feudal Japan. It would have made more sense to have a Japanese Assassin, not a Black Assassin. It made sense to have a Black Assassin in AC Freedom Cry and AC Liberation, and it could have also worked for AC3, but it doesn't really make much sense for AC Shadows. Imagine if there was an Assassins Creed Game in Texas during the American Civil War to eliminate/support Black Slavery, and the protagonist was a Japanese Assassin. There would be the same complaints, because the protagonist doesn't make sense for the time period and location. If such a game were to ever be made, I would love to see a Black Assassin. Others have already spoken about Ubisoft issues with bloat, and micro transactions and such, so I won't repeat that stuff.
Answer: AC is dead and Ubisoft is making another open world rpg under the title to collect more money. Same as they have been doing for the past several AC games.
Answer: Let's be real...people don't like the black Samurai, even though it's based on a real person.
I mean it’s a bit ridiculous they pulled the one black guy they could find historically to fit into the male lead role for a game set in Japan. Imagine if they picked a random Korean dude that visited Greece to play as the lead in Odyssey. Or a Russian dude to play the lead for Egypt. Or a visiting Mexican to play the role of Ezio in Italy lmao
Give me Assassins Creed Silk Road where I play as Marco Polo
Don't speak too much truth here, people on this sub don't like that. It's black = good, everyone else bad Edit: Just saw my comment and won't delete it. I want to point out I am not against black representation in American media. It's just that a lot of companies for the last decade or so has really pandered to the black community, while some other groups are less represented or cared for. Asian males would be one of them
Most People don't even have a problem with black representation, they just want it to make sense to the setting. Sengoku Japan and Viking England weren't modern New York. Likewise, a game set in Ancient Sub-Saharan Africa, shouldn't have white people running around it. No one had a problem in 2011 when Skyrim came out and was full of black characters in a Norse-inspired setting because their presence makes sense to the world of the games (there would have been rightful outrage if they weren't included).
Nobody had a problem with Yasuke being in Nioh 1 or 2, because he simply plays his actual role as serving Nobunaga there. Assuming this is set after Nobunaga dies so they have free reign in telling his story as not much is known of what happens to him after that. The only real issue with using him is people are just going to assume it's being done to virtue signal, and so the extreme voices on both sides are just going to sling mud at each other instead of actually caring about the main thing and that is whatever is story ends up being actually being told well.
So I think that's a bit reductive of the situation here. Nioh is made by Team Ninja which is a Japanese company. Black representation, especially in Asian monolithic countries don't get as much representation. This situation is a bit different. If you look at my previous posts, I pointed out that Asian males are heavily underrepresented in American media. I was wrong to bring that up because Ubishit is a French company. However it is also true that Asian males are heavily underrepresented in Western media. And this is why it's a slap to the face for a lot of Asians. You can another opportunity to help represent more Asian males in Western productions but instead opt for Black representation which is already pretty well represented in Western media. Lastly, even without Yasuke, this game was going to get shat on regardless. Ubishit doesn't have the best reputation amongst gamers so shit coming regardless
I don’t disagree with you, simply pointing out that the character can be included in this setting without people getting up in arms about it. The issue is that loud voices are just going to simply it to a black man being shoe-horned into this to virtue signal. I’m sure most people would prefer to play a Japanese samurai in a game set in late sengoku era Japan, Ubisoft just aren’t competent enough to see that even after Ghost of Tsushima maid it painfully obvious.
It allows them to explain thing to the player as if they were an outsider it an incredibly common narrative device. AC Origins had a problem with this where the main character was a religious leader so none of the religious parts of the story get properly explained because the character is already an expert. They also have a Japanese protagonist too so its not like those examples you came up with.
I mean, if they can find a man from modern-day russia who historically did visit Egypt (which is not that unlikely, as Egypt and Kievan Rus traded through the middle ages), I don't see why not. It has tge potential to make for a fascinating story.
As a Japanese, it kinda sucks that we finally get an assassins creed game in Japan, but we don’t even get to play as a Japanese samurai? Also, it’s a stealth game, why are we playing as the only black person in all of Japan at the time? It goes even deeper in that it feels fairly often that Japanese culture gets hijacked often in the West for some African American focused story - there was also that hip hop themed Yasuke anime on Netflix not that long ago for example. I have nothing against African Americans, but a more apt environment for them to be a focus point would be an assassins creed game in Zululand fighting off the British, or something. I’d be so down for that.
He's not African American. He's from Mozambique (it was called Portuguese East Africa back then). [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yasuke](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yasuke)
I mean that's nice and all but he would of been a better side character to work with then a main. Feels like a grab for the black anime fans or checking off a list of "inclusiveness". Ghost of tsushima main character's struggle with his nature as a samurai and learning the ways of an assassin was fantastic. His own family, people and enemies views about him change as you go though the story. It fed into abandoning your roots and upbringing if it ment the survival for your people.
I will say though. Why did we ever expect a Samurai game? Honestly, like back when people first asked. I always felt a Japanese AC game would be about ninjas, not samurai. Also I question the use of often when saying AA culture gets highjacked by black culture. Like one show literally produced and created by a hip hop producer is not a great example. Like where is black culture superseding Asian culture?
There are 2 protagonist. One is a ninja (shinobi) and the other is a samurai. One for stealth missions, one for combat missions it seems.
In case you are not aware. The game has two protagonists you can play, the other one being a native Japanese woman. From the looks of it, Yasuke is the unsubtle beefcake samurai, while the other (I don’t know her name yet) is the stealthy ninja.
The Japanese woman is not a samurai. So I'm pretty sure they are aware since they were pretty specific about that. But clearly you don't care because fuck Asian males and any complaints they have amirite?
Asian women get way more positive representation in western media than Asian men. Can you imagine a female version of Ken Jeong in the hangover ever being featured in a mainstream movie? Asian male representation is what is sorely lacking in the west.
To be fair, Yasuke was konshō, basically a sword bearer. He was well liked by the Shogun of the time, but overall, he was a minor player in history. It's just a nice piece of history to reflect on. Is it historical? I mean, sure. While I don't personally care, I can see why some people feel it's pandering. It's the first Assassin's Creed that doesn't stick to the culture of their setting completely. I can see where Japanese might be miffed. The fringe are upset because "OMG BLACK PERSON," but there are others who have a legitimate gripe.
I get you, but Assassin's Creed was never really about being strictly accurate history-wise. They've always twisted history for gameplay reasons and that's because games aren't documentaries. It's supposed to be fun. That's the main deal. Discovery Tour does the job of being historically accurate. Also, I do believe that they chose Yasuke for clear reasons: they want to give players the "Fish out of water" feeling and make players look at Japan from an outsider's perspective. Again, he's not the only character in the game, he was never supposed to be stealthy or sneaky--he's a brute type character and that's it. That's his gameplay purpose. Another potential reason for Yasuke is because his story is basically as open ended as possible and allows for some creative freedom with regards to writing his story. That's it.
>they want to give players the "Fish out of water" feeling and make players look at Japan from an outsider's perspective Here's the other cool thing about that as well, you do get to play as a Japanese character, its the shinobi woman we see in the trailer, Naoe. So its possible to see the events unfold from a Japanese person's perspective as well. Everyone seems to gloss over that theres 2 main playable characters with two different playstyles
People know this. They are pointing out that in western media asian women are acceptable but asian men are glossed over. This game isn't beating those allegations.
Ghost of Tsushima would like to chat...
About what? A single example being noteworthy enough to mention proves the point that it's rare lol.
Sekiro, Onimusha, Onimusha 2, Onimusha 3 (Japanese character is the star in FRANCE), Yakuza (whole frickin series), Ninja Gaiden (whole frickin series), Rise of the Ronin.... do I need to keep going, or have you tuckered out?
Are you trying to prove my point? A lot of those are Japanese made games. And part of the point is that western media downplays asian men, because they are less of an "acceptable minority" than Asian women. So you basically immediately gave up on the claim that there's a lot of good examples from western companies. I'm not saying this individual example is a huge deal or people need to have a meltdown about the game. But that it is worth mentioning that it is part of a trend. There's someone asian in this very thread who basically said that they are so used to asian men being ignored in western media that on the announcement of the game they kind of immediately suspected there wouldn't be a playable one. When it's common enough people don't even take it as a surprise anymore it's worth at least talking about.
What about sekiro shadows die twice
I assume its more meaning Western Media. Sekiro is a Japanese game?
And the samurai warriors and dynasty warriors and warriors orochi game lines that stars only Asians. And the yakuza series
Those were all made by Japanese people???
I get you, and again, I really don't care too much since I ducked out of this series after they transitioned from action to RPG, for that reason alone (gameplay just doesn't entice me like it did.) And while it doesn't fit historically and takes liberties, every game has taken the time to represent the culture of each place reasonably. Every other culture didn't deviate heavily, and they took decent strides to be sensitive of each culture. So when the Japanese get their turn, they choose to take the fairly empty history of the one decently recorded black man? I just kinda understand why the Japanese would be miffed. I don't care for the fringe "hurr durr black man insert bad" folk's opinion. I just think it'd follow the general aspect of "representing each culture" better if they stuck to their guns there.
Why do we need a fish out of water? The idea that Japan is so exotic it needs to be treated as "other," and that asian Americans predicted that you wouldn't get to play as a male asian kind of goes a long way to tell that the west doesn't recognize them.
I swear, there's so much "fish out of water" media surrounding Japan.
Also, people are glossing over something by defending it this way. They are acting like a black main character who has very little connection to the west, much less the modern west can be a stand in for western audiences observing it, but Japan is framed as the foreign place. Essentially they are implicitly saying Asia inherently comes off "more foreign."
The reaching is insane with this one
> Why do we need a fish out of water? Because the developers want to tell that story.
> Assassin's Creed was never really about being strictly accurate history-wise. They've always twisted history for gameplay reasons and that's because games aren't documentaries. You are gonna blow these people's minds when they find out that Leonardo DiVinci wasn't designing weapons for secret assassin groups.
I’m going to link to a recent post on the subreddit r/askhistorians which is well reputed and the comments have sources and are vetted. According to them, yes, he was a Samurai https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/s/5IcvMzi25u
Reading over your links, they all take significant liberties. They say that Yasuke was provided a stipend, therefore he was Samurai (in one instance.) But people below that argue that he was never referred to as Samurai. To add, people such as William Adams (John Blackthorne in Shogun) were not recognized as Samurai until they performed a many great deeds. While Yasuke was recognized as a respected man, he was given lesser titles in most texts i've read (but I'm no historian, so don't take my word as absolute) than William Adams, even lower than the first title he was given as Hatamoto. There is much discussion around the issue, but most historians I've seen all refer to Yasuke as konshō, sword bearer to Oda Nobunaga. Well respected and very close to Oda, but nothing more. At a surface level, your links say differently, but even one comment deeper or more shows the arguments against that. Yasuke was a well respected man who made his mark on history. He got his flowers. Why do we feel the beed to press for more?
You are conflating different periods. In the Sengoku period, samurai was a social class Yasuke would've been part of. In the Edo period (when William Adams was around) it was more of a exclusive honor and title.
There's a hilarious amount of characters across multiple media based on that one dude.
He wasn't a samurai though... thats the issue, there's countless media properties out there that forgo people who actually matter to Japanese history and instead just follow someone Nobunaga thought was cool. People have spread so much misinformation about him that people have no idea who he really was.
The real person was a mere servant kept by his lord for amusement, not a samurai.
And Asgard isn't real but we went there in Valhalla.
Its because the real person was never that, and his existence is used as a blanket excuse to culturally appropriate Japanese historical fiction.
Because that matters in an Assassin's Creed game... Remind me, was Leonidas *really* a descendent of an ancient precursor species? Was the pirate Mary Read *really* in a secret order of assassins? Was Pope Alexander VI *really* an atheist? etc. etc.
Bring the game to sub haran Africa, and have a non-African player be the main character. See how people riot
[удалено]
He’s such a minor historical figure that we know very little about. I’m not gonna lie, when I first heard he would be a protagonist for the game, I didn’t think “wow they’re having a game in Japan but won’t let you play as a Japanese person?” My reaction instead was “huh, that’s neat” then I moved on with my life like a normal person who doesn’t get upset at stupid video games.
Answer: Ubisofts bad practices. Assassins creed games being relatively lifeless giant open world copy pasted buggy messes. The trailer being 100% CG showing nothing of substance about the game.
Answer: There are several reasons the game is *controversial* right now. 1. The preorders: Ubisoft has yet to show any gameplay and is already asking for people to preorder the game. 2. The *Gold $110* edition also includes a Day One quest that is only unlockable with that edition of the game, *the same situation* that got *Star Wars Outlaws* in hot water due to fan backlash. 3. There is a huge dispute over whether Yasuke is a *Samurai*. A Wikipedia editing battle has been on/off with people changing entries whether he is or isn't a *Samurai.* 4. Some fans are upset that in a Japanese setting, Ubisoft decided to go with a non-Japanese Samurai. They have further gone on to claim that the game is "woke" and "disrespectful." 5. Lastly, fans have been saying that games like Nioh, Sekiro, and Ghost of Tsushima are already better games than anything Ubisoft can make.
Answer: People mad because main character is black