The Philosophy of Assassin’s Creed Rogue Remastered: The Cure for Freedom? – Wisecrack Edition

Hey Wisecrack, Jared as always. So Ubisoft recently reached out to us about doing something for the newly remastered version of Assassin’s Creed Rogue for PS4 and Xbox One. Lucky for them, we’ve gotten a lot of AC requests over the years, and lucky for us, Rogue has a unique perspective on the eternal struggle between the Assassins and Templars, and how it relates to the complicated nature of freedom. Throughout the series the value of freedom is placed above all else. “How else will we ensure freedom for the human race?” The assassins, we’re told, are fighting the good fight against those devious Templars who are trying to rule the world with an iron fist. While freedom is nearly universally celebrated in society and media, cue the legally safe William Wallace knock-off, “FREEEEDOM!” through its protagonist Shay Cormac, Assassin’s Creed: Rogue asks an interesting and unique question: when does freedom go too far? Welcome to this Wisecrack Edition on Assassin’s Creed: Rogue Remastered. And, as always, some minor spoilers ahead. First a quick recap. Rogue takes place around the numerically challenged Seven Years’ War and somewhere between Black Flag and Assassin’s Creed 3. We follow fledgling Assassin Shay Cormac, a trouble maker who begins to question the Assassin Brotherhood’s methods. “Laurence Washington is dead” “You look disappointed”
“The sickly way that man looked. He’d have been dead in a month anyway.” He continues to struggle with defending his creed until halfway through the game, he is given an assignment to find a Piece of Eden an ancient object said to bestow God like power and wisdom. “Be careful Shay, Pieces of Eden are powerful relics.” When Shay tries to retrieve it, he triggers
the infamous Lisbon earthquake of 1755 that killed thousands. “What’s the next city you want me to smite. What happened in Haiti happened in Portugal a great earthquake! Thousands dead!” He confronts the Assassins who deny culpability for the earthquake, even though they were aware that the same thing had caused the devastating earthquake in Port-au-Prince five years earlier. Shay argues that, “Who are you to decide what city falls next,” but the Assassins say, “We have the responsibility!” So Shay flees the Brotherhood. After being injured in his escape he is nursed back to health by an elderly couple who turn out to be Templars. Shay is then recruited by the Templars, and sent to kill his former Assassin bretheren. In most Assassin’s Creed games we’re told the Templars are evil because they oppose freedom, and the Assassins are good because they fight for freedom, which is best embodied in their mantra: “Nothing is True, Everything is permitted.” But AC Rogue, by showing the inner workings of both sides, explores the paradoxical nature of freedom, and the shortcomings of the Assassin’s belief system. Sure, the Assassins seem noble; after all, you don their mantle as you fight against the corruption of the church and history’s other bad-guys. But just how benign is the saying “Nothing is true. Everything is permitted.” When you consider the events of Rogue, the Assassins’ disposition toward absolute freedom starts to look a bit questionable. We can best understand why through the concept of positive freedom. Positive freedom is the freedom to do something, and to self-determine what that something is. It’s the freedom to choose to blast weird
German techno whenever you want That’s different than negative freedom – the freedom from certain external forces, like the freedom from your roommate Brad telling you to stop blasting weird German techno at 2 AM. Or Brad commandeering your stereo. “The problem with unlimited freedom is that it often comes in conflict with the rights and freedoms of others. While you may be the master of your own fate, what if your actions limit the freedom of others? What if Brad can’t be the master of his
own destiny because he hasn’t gotten any sleep after the unceasing onslaught of Autobahn every night until 2AM? And, if you reject any limitations on the
freedom from outside interference, or negative freedom, who’s going to step in to help Brad get some sleep?” If “Everything is permitted” then people might not agree with when and how I want to listen to music. The Templars address this problem of freedom by negating it altogether. They, in essence, don’t believe in the value of positive freedom, that people can make their own decisions, or negative freedom, that they should be free from despotic control. Their philosophy is, essentially, that the freedom of one person will ultimately end up rubbing against someone else’s, and so such freedom must be restricted. Philosopher Isiah Berlin highlights one way in which the self-determination of positive freedom can have horrific results. Freedom, for Berlin, can often be defined collectively with others. Groups, tribes, or even nations can set out to define their own destiny. And that’s where things get a little tricky, since in the name of a collective freedom many have decided to repress minority groups – the German people collectively yearned for the freedom to determine their national destiny, but, well, we all know how that turned out for certain groups in Europe. Obviously the assassins and the nazis are about as similar as Motzart and Fred Durst, but the assassins are willing to sacrifice the freedom of some for the sake of freedom for everybody. If we are all free to do whatever the hell we want, and the Assassins don’t mind earthquakes killing thousands, then is absolute Freedom really the ultimate good? The Templars seem to understand this problem with positive freedom, with people being their own masters, so they actively try to suppress it in the name of a better world. “What marvelous destruction captain, I saw the smoke all the way from the Morrigan” “That should discourage those miscreants. New York is safe for now,” And, as Rogue shows, they’re not as misguided as one may think. Paradoxically, certain rights and freedoms can be enhanced with a heavy hand from say, the government or the Templars. So for instance, by limiting someone’s freedom to enslave another person, law can instate a better version of freedom not predicated on owning other humans. We see this conundrum in other AC games, such as Black Flag where the British templars crack down on the Pirates you play as in the name of safer seas, and liberty for would-be pirate victims. The Templars believe they know best and that order can be achieved through guidance and rule, but this isn’t exactly a perfect ideology either. The total control of individuals for the sake of the greater good leads to your typical Big-Brother dystopian nightmare. So while causing earthquakes, stealing fortunes and slitting throats is okay if “Nothing is True, Everything is permitted,” the polar opposite is that we should all be thanking our masters for living under a jackboot. But hey, at least they’re open about it. What makes Rogue unique is that Shay distances himself from the dogmatic belief structures that characterize the protagonists of previous games and embraces a rationally informed moral choice. But does Shay make the right choice? To figure that out, we’ll need help from one of the big dawgs of the European Enlightenment- Immanuel Kant. During the Enlightenment, Kant formulated a way to ground morality in reason instead of religion or custom known as the ‘Categorical Imperative’. So let’s see how Shay’s decision stacks up. “The first formulation: “Act only according to that maxim whereby you can… will that it should become a universal law,” sort of boils down to ‘Do Unto Others’. So, if you want to know if killing people and then searching their bodies for loot is moral, you should consider what will happen if everyone follows this rule. The second is to “Act in such a way that you treat humanity… never merely as a means to an end, but always at the same time as an end.” This essentially means, life is the highest value in and of itself, so never harm others or exploit them as a mean to achieve some “bigger” goal. The final rule says that “the will of every rational being” should be thought of “as a universally legislating will.” Which ties the first two together and suggests that there is a universal reason or logic that we can all access through our own rationality. It also offers a framework that includes a sense of freedom – since every person is capable of participating in this kind of moral reasoning – without some of the dangers of the Templars or Assassins, where people become freedomless pawns to their grand plans, even if, paradoxically, freedom is part of that grand plan. According to Kant, no action or morals are ethical if they contradict these three rules, so let’s see how Shay scores against the Assassins. Shay defects because he believes that by causing an Earthquake and justifying it as part of their ‘responsibility’, the Assassins have done a grave injustice. This act violates the first formulation because it implies killing thousands for your own ends, which could never be a universal ethical act. One point for Shay. zero for the Assassins. The Assassins are also saying those lives are acceptable sacrifices for their greater goal, a violation of the 2nd principle, because using people as a means to an end is a big no-no. Another point for Shay. And finally, through their belief in total Freedom, the Assassins are trampling on people’s legislative will by ignoring their own agency and literally destroying their homes and autonomous lives, which contradicts Kant’s third formulation. Shay wants no part of it. So 3 points for Shay. Zero for the Assassins. So what can we learn from Shay’s decision? That fighting for freedom is not so simple. By pursuing their own freedom, the assassins have destroyed the freedoms of others. But by rejecting the indoctrinated philosophy of “nothing is true. everything is permitted,” Shay could be the
few ethical heroes of the Assassin’s Creed franchise. Unfortunately for Shay, the Templars aren’t
exactly model citizens either. In the name of regulating freedom for the greater good, the Templars do plenty of deplorable things. We see them helping local people in various places, “Now let’s use some of that money for the good of the city,” and stopping the Assassins from committing what amounts to a war crime. “There is an abandoned factory nearby holding a dangerous poison.” We also see them lie, maim and kill in the name of their own creed. In the end, the same sense of moral dubiousness follows the Templars as much as the Assassins, “When I’m issued new recruits burdened with regerets, I tell them the surest way to lose them is with gunpowder,” with them both contradicting Kant’s Imperative by using people as a means to their own ends and killing those who stand in their way. AC Rogue’s more nuanced exploration of freedom, good, and evil is a welcome addition to the series. Shay’s decision to betray the Assassins brings the philosophies of both factions under scrutiny and makes the player view each in an entirely new light. Was this moral ambivalence about freedom always there? Have we been playing as the ‘Bad Guys’ all along? Here’s to hoping this complex question gets explored in future installments. But until then, be sure to check out the remastered version of Assassin’s Creed Rogue out now on Xbox One and Ps4. Be sure to check out the link in the description to learn more about the game! And you might be interested in checking out this really awesome trailer of the game. Thanks again to Ubisoft for giving us this opportunity! And as always, thanks for watching guys! Peace!

100 thoughts on “The Philosophy of Assassin’s Creed Rogue Remastered: The Cure for Freedom? – Wisecrack Edition

  • I was human before I was Frankish. I was Frankish before I was British. I was British before I was American. I was American before I was Californian.
    I’m genuinely curious how you (in the comments of a video like this) would interpret that.

  • A big part about this is that the assassins that destroyed a couple cities for the greater good are just one very small part of the assassin's creed. Those assassins may not be acting correctly with what the assassins stand for. Assassins are just people and people can be corrupted. For example, the end of the first assassins creed game. So, does the creed's actions make the entire assassin's creed as "the bad guys"? I don't think so. I think most assassins know that there must be some laws and restrictions and their tenets include not killing innocent people. The assassins are against the templars because the templars wish to enslave the world, and do so by obtaining pieces of eden to gain powers without any remorse for the innocents that get hurt by it. If the assassins didnt get the piece of eden that caused those earthquakes, the templars would have done it instead. I dont think there is much ambiguity with which side is good or bad for many reasons. Shay betrayed the brotherhood because of a few bad apples and because he hasn't seen what the templars do to people. Shay is just naive to think the templars are better people than the assassins

  • I swear, I'm going to share this video with the US government, and I'm going to start it at 3:00.

  • I've always questioned the Assassin's methods since the first game. I love the games but Rogue is my favorite because shay actually decided that the Assassin's are wrong unlike the older protagonists

  • While I really enjoyed the philosophical story of Rogue and how it ties into Arno Dorian's story in Unity, I personally felt that the game itself was some of the least fun I have had with the series. Like most of its franchise brethren, Rogue is the worst kind of kitchen sink design and I cannot help but wish that the series was more in line with its origins, i.e. the much more linear Prince of Persia games. Imagine if Ubisoft just reallocated all of those resources they are throwing away by creating repetitive side missions in order to create an extremely focused, linear, high-quality storytelling experience. To me, the best parts of Assassin's Creed are the ones set inside of catacombs, temples and the like.

  • I feel this falls apart on the assumption that Achilles knew the piece of Eden would trigger an earthquake. Most of them can serve as devastating weapons, better kept out of the hands of those who are greedy and powerhungry, and leaving them dormant is as much a risk as interacting with one that is unstable. If it is unstable, it's a ticking time bomb that will go off regardless of who gets to it first, and the Templars have far fewer scruples about abusing such artifacts. Achilles couldn't risk leaving the piece of Eden where it was, to be inevitably found, and couldn't predict what it would do. Shay's accusations were rash and emotionally laden with guilt for something neither of them wanted. And I'd say ultimately, he made the wrong choice going over to the Templars. Monro was a rare exception of someone who wanted his people to live safe, comfortable lives even as he robbed them of freedom. His successor, Haytham, was nothing like him, and went right back to shadowy manipulation, often killing for no reason and saw no value in the lives of others. Perhaps even more damning for Shay is that he is a rare case where hurting innocent civilians does not cause desynchronization; murdering them is absolutely in character for him, and this figure can range from just one to countless people.

  • Honestly I thought Rogue was one of the best titles. It gave a necessary counterpoint to the Assassins that we hadn’t gotten yet, and it challenged the whole message of the series up to that point. Also it was set in one of my favorite historical periods. A shame it didn’t get the appreciation it deserved.

  • Syndicate, in my opinion, does something similar at a much smaller scale, most of the Templars you kill do give legitimate reasons for the Templars actions, heck, the Assassins fuck a whole bunch of shit up by killing Templars like the transportation industry, medicine and the fucking Bank of England! Oh yeah, you fix it afterwards but still, maybe the Templars have a point.

  • This was kinda pointless since the earthquake was going to happen regardless as the Templars would have obtained it had the assassins not. And the Templars are scum who seek control over any and all

  • Me: Rogue easily was the best game, it was incredible on every sense of the way
    My girlfriend: voice acting sucked

  • One of the worst games in the series. Ofc, THE worst is Unity by far. Still, after playing the entire series from start to end, the way things just went fucking down the hill like a barrel roll after the Ezio saga is just…Depressing.

  • Some stupid reasons people hates this game;

    Shay killed Arno's dad
    Shay is a templar
    Black Flag 2.0

    No offense tho but people are really missing out. This game is awesome. In my opinion, better than AC2 and Black Flag.

    Don't kill me.

  • This was a better video than your last Assassin’s Creed video, but this was also bad in the sense that you mischaracterize the Assassins of this game. They didn’t cause earthquakes because they believed that the ends justified the means. They caused earthquakes because they didn’t know that those artifacts caused earthquakes, and as soon as Achilles saw that Shay was unquestionably correct he didn’t take the artifact. The problem is that the game acts as if the Assassins are operating purely from dogma, but doesn’t realize that the Assassins are operating from a misunderstanding. That kills the attempt at framing their actions in the context of the villains.

    Overall, I have to say that, despite some critical areas with the Assassins, this video was much more on point with the actual intent of the story than the last Assassin’s Creed video, thus it makes for a much more critically fulfilling watch. You did a much better job of criticizing the Assassins within the context of their actual motives and worldview as opposed to criticizing them while acting as if those things didn’t exist.

  • Given that the templers would also want the relic, and would not mind killing a city to get it, your choice is not whether to demolish a city(which the assassins were not sure would happen) but what the templers would have done with the relic. Also, had the templers known for sure it would cause an earth quake, they would not have cared anyway, point against the character for picking hitler because he enforces traffic laws.

  • love this video, been thinking about this recently, watched 2x.

    im impressed with the philosophy, i usually donate to richard wolff democracy at work which promotes worker self determination as opposed to capitalism, but if you donate have enough time but have money, then i highly recommend donating to wisecrack.

    and i think wisecrack should stop with the sponsors because that shit corrupts media.

  • You guys based your scoring on a narrative error. The assassins weren't aware and OK with their search causing their tempering causing the earth quakes, it was part misunderstanding and part disbelief of what Shay said when confronting Achilles. At the last bit of the game Achilles admits that they were wrong and Shay was right.

    It's also an exploration into how the creed the Assassins take upon themselves aren't just cultist rules, but that they're guidelines that, when broken, lead to bad shit happening. When Altair broke them he lost his rank and got many of his allies killed. When the colonial Assassins broke them they got nearly wiped out.

  • People seem to constantly misunderstand the Creed's mantra. "Nothing is true, everything is permitted" is not simply about freedom. It is also about wisdom.
    To say "Nothing is true" is to realize that society and their values are not permanent, rendering their hold on humanity finite. Assassins who follow the creed understand that know they must be disconnected from society in order to operate, so their values have little to no effect on the Creed. Therefore, "Nothing is true" means to walk free from society.
    To say "Everything is permitted" does not mean you can have absolute freedom, but the freedom to act as you see fit. Since rules do not necessarily apply an Assassin, they have the ability to do more than we can consider legal. However, the wise Assassins know that their actions will have consequences, ones that can hurt themselves or others. A true Assassin does not go around slaughtering innocent people or destroying cities needlessly because that would not only violate the tenants, but they could have drasticly negative consequences for people as a whole. Therefore, to understand that "Everything is permitted" is to know that you are free, but you must be wise.

  • The problem with this is that it ignores the… y'know, Assassin's Creed, which also states that all knowledge must be free, and all people must be equal in order to ensure a peaceful world. So, for example, in Rogue we know that the Assassins oppose slavery. They undermine the slave trade and support armed slave revolts. The Templars, on the other hand, support the slave trade and slavery as an institution because they're more worried about order than anything else, and disrupting slavery would disrupt the economy and cause conflict… so they support it. That in and of itself is basically enough to sink the idea of the Templars as being even on the same ground as the Assassins.

    Also the mantra of "Nothing is true, everything is permitted" isn't a code that the Assassins follow, it's a statement about the world that they draw their own personal philosophy from. See AC 1 and AC Black Flag for this. In Black Flag Edward initially reacts to the mantra as a positive, because he likes the idea of absolute freedom, but when he follows that path and sees it lead to the deaths of everyone he loves, he returns to the Assassins and understands that in a world where everything is permitted, each individual must find their own moral code and sense of responsibility. Altair's story defines the other aspect of this, where he discovers that in a world where nothing is true, that means you can only live by your own truth. So, it enforces a sense of individualism and personal freedom, yes, but only as defined in opposition to the idea that the state of the world is that "Nothing is true, everything is permitted".

    Also the whole "Stay thy blade from the flesh of the innocent". In any AC game where you play as an Assassin, killing civilians desyncs you and you get a message saying that "___ did not kill civilians"… but in the games where you don't, (just Rogue and Odyssey) you can kill civilians without getting a game over screen. I think that also gives the Assassins some moral high ground.

  • Maybe it would be best for both the Assassins and the Templars should be destroyed or brought to some kind of end.

  • You should do a Video about the philosophy of the lumen sages from bayonetta.

  • If Ubisoft has ideas for a new templar focused AC Game, I want one taken place during the crusades, the early 12th century where Hugh de Payens and Saint Bernard de Clairvaux founded the templar order and bring order to the medieval world. Being lawful feels good.

  • Rouge should be all about haytham kenway, he was an assassin till he was about 12
    And it would also be around the same time, shay just doesnt cut it for me

  • Assassin's Creed Rogue really does question whether or not the Templars are the worst evil there is. They still are, but Shay Patrick Cormac might be the best Templar there is.

  • Awesome video really opened my mind. However the assassins in rogue were purposefully portrayed as tyrannical rulers sacrificing thousands of lives for so called freedom. We also saw the Templars in the previous games do the same thing( the Borgia). Basically in ac rogue the assassins were really Templars and the Templars were really the assassins. Rogue did this so they could make the Templars look like the good guys. The truth is that neither side is right, and the war between the assassins and Templars will never end

  • “The Church And History’s other bad guys” You May need a history lesson, but other than that good video

  • Great video but there are things u didn't highlight and because of which in rouge the templars were correct. The creed has three rules: never kill innocents, hide in plain sight, never compromise the brotherhood. The colonial assassins forgot about this that's why in the game we could say that the templars were doing the work of the assassins and the assassins were doing the work of the templars check the video about this from the channel fizhy he has a great video that can clear this misconception.

  • And the meaning of nothing is true and everything is permitted is explained by ezio in assassin's creed revelations check that out as well

  • the thing is we can now get a clearer answer since ac origins. the ac order is in itself an order with conflicting minds branching from one branch to another. every branch sees those rules and morals differently. for example when ezio was visited by the chinese assassin and asked for guidance she got wise answers from his exp as an assassin. But then again, how she herself will implement those teachings in her branch will in the end differ no matter what. in shays place the brotherhood was way over their heads since they won more power than the templars. so the power balance shifted again back to the templars with shay. where it then again shifted to the assassins with conner and arno etc.
    In the end, one extreme cant go without the other. Only some individuals truly know what is right and what is not.
    anyways good vid 🙂

  • Nothing is true = that isn't true…
    but one might have to embrace that full extreme view first, in order (no pun intended) to 'truly choose' to be free responsibly.
    Why I made NE characters in D&D instead of CN, NE is truely no limits. One's goals are what determine the 'fastest path'.
    What I describe is the entire arc of the anime 'Black Lagoon' and is also the dominant philosophy of the 'True Men' in Book of Bantora.

  • Modern far left, islamists, feminists, anarchists = Assassins. Modern right, Christians, Conservatives = Templars. Fuck Assassins

  • Really enjoyed the content of the video. One of the most challenging things is to take a complicated subject and break it down so a layman (like me) can understand.

    Also agree that Rogue is in my top 3 AC games. It hit the right balance between offering a challenge so accomplishment is that much sweeter, but not being so challenging that I rage quit.

  • The Assassin's guild do not seek freedom, they seek anarchy and chaos, because they–like modern day communists–plan to use that chaos to gain power. The Templars on the other hand feature in a role similar to Freemasonry historically; opposing anarchy and lawlessness and supporting liberal ideologies, you know, back when liberal didn't mean deranged communist yet meant a general focus towards liberties.

  • All of this is very correct, but in this game the assassin's are villians. In the games before and after it's black and white, everything the assassins do is good and everything the templars do is bad.
    When you compare the colonial brotherhood to others you see that it sucks, a lot. Still freedom to all leads to the misery of some.

  • I think "Nothing is true…Everything is permitted" is something else and more nasty if we think about it like it's something already exist; eg. religions, governments,etc. It's like never to trust something in front of you, and everything that has happened must be someone behind them….I might think in different point of view though but it's useful if we think in this view.

  • I always thought of the Templars as a lightening rod to attract people unsuited to power. Easy to identify who to take out to protect the freedoms of the masses. Haytham Kenway is somewhat of an exception. Not killing innocent people was the first of the three tenets. I see the tenets as being the creed. Nothing is true, Everything is permitted is more of a problem solving philosophy or stating the obvious to encourage creative solutions. Overall I think the templars have a bit of a Matrix ideal and the Assassins (when doing as their supposed to, unlike the Colonials in Rogue) act as the immune system for humanity.

  • As saints creed has Walsh’s been teaching us about history, how many people knew about the seven years war before rouge?

  • I LOVED Rogue. It was awesome. The story was too short imo. It shows that not all assassins are as wise and ethical like Ezio and not all Templars are like the corrupt Borgias. The Templar Order isn't inherently evil imo. The Templar Order's main goal is peace through order. But sadly you have people who use the order for their own gains. Cesare didn't give a damn about peace. He was just in for the power. Even the templars themselves despise the Borgias. The modern Templars are less corrupt now (they still have some bad people, don't get me wrong). They have the "Black cross": a group of people who keep the Grand masters in check. They make sure they don't abuse their power. I believe that BOTH orders are right in a way. The world needs freedom and order. I hope that the templars and assassins will work together against the instruments of the first will.

  • I just realized that Unity and Rogue tell the same story just from different perspectives (When does freedom go to far)

  • Great video. Rogue is one of my favorites in the AC series because it's one of the best yet most underrated. The complexity of the narrative is amazing, it's up there with AC3 if not better.

  • Too Much Freedom, It Will Create Chaos Than Peace

    that's why the templars and assassins contrast each other
    to balance

  • Too Much Freedom, It Will Create Chaos Than Peace

    that's why the templars and assassins contrast each other
    to balance

  • Idk if it was ever Ubisofts intent, but now more than ever, the contrast between the Assassin/Templar conflict and real world politics is becoming more prevalent….

  • Rogue is by far the most underrated and oft forgotten AC game. It was an afterthought, released on the same day for PS3/360 as next gen’s Unity. All of the negative publicity for Unity, ensured that nobody really talked about Rogue.

    Glad it got a remaster. Haven’t played the remaster, but will. Just started the Ezio Collection for PS4 this week. The world looks great. The character facial and combat animations are still kind of weak, but I still really enjoy the Ezio games.

  • Rogue's story was better than blackflags. I wIsh in blackflag the cities were bigger to allow horse and that the guards looked better and used different weapons. and being able to get boarded was awesome too. Idk y they did not put it in black flag

  • I think wisecrack didn't explore the creed in the pursuit of justifying Cormac. The creed is not a permission to adhere, it's a dare not to be committed.
    Think of, why does assassin's have brotherhood and order? Why do they not kill everyone and anyone if "everything is permitted"?
    Because everything is not.
    Let's juxtaposition the creed to Altair ibn la Ahad. He followed his master, bared the brunt of breaking order and got demoted, assassinated only specific targets who gave him a piece of how they operate(philosophicaly), in the end figured out Al Mualim his master wanted the apple for his own purpose. Here the creed comes into play, by invoking everything is permitted Al Mualim wanted to wield immense power with no responsibility, he broke the creed and was assassinated. Why would a brotherhood believing in the creed "everything is permitted" not follow it to literal?
    Now the foremost part of the creed "nothing is true". Any ardent AC fan knows this. The protagonist isn't the medieval assassins, it's Desmond and in later franchises us. All of us were fed a truth in the beginning. Altair was betrayed by his master and friend, Ezio was betrayed too, Connor was betrayed by his childhood friend in the belief he was protecting the tribe, heck even Desmond was kept in dark by Juno until Minerva showed up.
    All the protagonist found out truth is not a singularity, it's always complicated. Also the Templar order lies through it's teeth, every database of any templar is over glorified and over simplified while the assassin database are over vilified. Truth in the modern world is controlled by the powerful.
    Ubisoft really let down the philosophical aspect of game a long time ago and screwed up mid way. What is the purpose of being human if we don't have choices, make mistakes and learn from it? The exact opposite of which is what Templars want, hive minded creatures without progress.

  • Guten Tag from the Berlin Chapter. I appreciate your objective examination of our millennia long struggle with the accursed Order of Assassins. May the Father of Understanding bless you for the production of this video. Gehen Sie mit Gott, Herr Bauer!

  • The tragic irony of the Assassins and Templars throughout the series is that both groups are more or less alike, and they're both too stubborn to admit it. As for "Nothing is true; everything is permitted", Arno Dorian, at the end of AC: Unity, realizes that's not a dogma or license to act how you wish, it's a warning. He said "Ideas lead to dogma, which leads to fanaticism." And he saw a lot of it through the French Revolution.

  • Good gameplay but the story was very disappointing, the npcs from the homestead back in AC3 had better character development! You kill each of the assassins and hardly give a shit. I think it might be even worse than Black Flag's story which I appreciated a little more after Rogue.

  • So in other words since everything that exists Humans try to exploit including other people we should limit freedom of individuals for the freedom of the masses. Just say that

  • There will always be people trying to exploit "freedom" in some way or another, just as how there will be others will oppose these "bad guys" in our society. It's the never ending cycle of good vs evil.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *