Ubisoft Cancelled a Post-Civil War Assassin's Creed Last Year (gamefile.news) 118
Stephen Totilo, reporting at Game File: In July of last year, word began to trickle through Ubisoft that an ambitious new installment of the company's top franchise, Assassin's Creed, had been cancelled.
The new game would have brought the history-spanning series to one of its most modern settings: The American Civil War and, moreso, the Reconstruction period that followed in the 1860s and 1870s.
In this Reconstruction-era Assassin's Creed, gamers would play as a Black man who had been formerly enslaved in the South and moved west to start a new life. Recruited by the series' Assassins, he would return to the South to fight for justice in a conflict that would, among other things, see him confront the emergence of the Ku Klux Klan.
That's according to interviews with five current and former Ubisoft employees who spoke to Game File on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak about the project. The people were enthusiastic about the game but were also frustrated by its cancellation, which they perceived as Ubisoft bowing to controversy.
The new game would have brought the history-spanning series to one of its most modern settings: The American Civil War and, moreso, the Reconstruction period that followed in the 1860s and 1870s.
In this Reconstruction-era Assassin's Creed, gamers would play as a Black man who had been formerly enslaved in the South and moved west to start a new life. Recruited by the series' Assassins, he would return to the South to fight for justice in a conflict that would, among other things, see him confront the emergence of the Ku Klux Klan.
That's according to interviews with five current and former Ubisoft employees who spoke to Game File on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak about the project. The people were enthusiastic about the game but were also frustrated by its cancellation, which they perceived as Ubisoft bowing to controversy.
That phrase was wrong (Score:1)
It is, instead, this:
The most fragile shall inherit the earth.
Mario-kart-ification again (Score:2)
A lot of games have become a yearly release, just because it's a new year, with the same gameplay and maybe a different back-story.
A 4.3% difference in gameplay with each new game is not compelling.
Merely delayed (Score:1, Troll)
It's probably just been delayed for about 5 years, for political reasons.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1, Troll)
It's probably just been delayed for about 5 years, for political reasons.
It will probably take longer than that to get the fragile minded who are picking up rifles under control. It might be prudent to not feed their vivid imaginations given their inability to tell political metaphors from reality. They, and the politicians gratuitously inflaming them, are the reason we can't have nice things like this game.
Re: (Score:2)
Hear, hear!
Re: Merely delayed (Score:2)
You COWARD, don't you DARE blame video games for deranged psychopaths attacking election officials, judges, congressmen, governors, mayors, the Capitol, pizza parlors, or Republican leaders openly threatening to imprison or execute their opponents because they disagree with them.
https://www.theguardian.com/us... [theguardian.com]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
https://apnews.com/article/cou... [apnews.com]
https://www.theguardian.com/us... [theguardian.com]
https://www.theguardian.com/us... [theguardian.com]
You know god damned well video gam
Calm down Captain Video Games (Score:2)
You COWARD, don't you DARE blame video games for deranged psychopaths ...
Calm down Captain Video Games, your lifelong love is not being threatened or defamed. Deranged people can be triggered by anything. And if you had bothered to read what I wrote, I specifically referred to gratuitous political metaphors, exaggerated and inaccurate, being the primary cause. Starting from such a volatile state of mind, anything can set off the weak minded, even a video game. Its not video games themselves.
Re: Merely delayed (Score:1)
The people running things aren't the people who adopted Communist and or socialist ideals, so it's hard to figure out what you think you're getting at there.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The people running things aren't the people who adopted Communist and or socialist ideals, so it's hard to figure out what you think you're getting at there.
You lying asshole. The activist wing of the Democrat party is riddled with these people
You're a stupid fucking clown. There's maybe a double handful of Democrats who believe in those things. Look at the way the rest of them vote, they are sellouts every day and twice on Fridays. Also, maybe you didn't notice because you have your head so far up your own asshole you're a human klein bottle, but the Democrats are currently leading Jack and Shit.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Exactly my thoughts. With major media companies cowering before this administration it doesn't surprise me Ubisoft would pull a game that doesn't adhere to the historic revisionisms Southern conservatives like to imagine (and often teach in their schools) in regards to slavery and the civil war period.
To be fair It could be other reasons instead but pulling the game to avoid hurting sensitive conservative feelings definitely fits with the times.
Its not the conservatives ... (Score:3, Insightful)
Exactly my thoughts. With major media companies cowering before this administration it doesn't surprise me Ubisoft would pull a game that doesn't adhere to the historic revisionisms Southern conservatives like to imagine (and often teach in their schools) in regards to slavery and the civil war period. To be fair It could be other reasons instead but pulling the game to avoid hurting sensitive conservative feelings definitely fits with the times.
It's not southern conservatives. The entire creation of the revisionist lost cause myth, the creation of the KKK, hell the civil war itself is a creation of the democrats. As recently as the 1960s the democrats were against, civil rights, it's the republicans that got that through Congress. Plus the whole ending slavery thing a century earlier. Hell, the democrat's current we are free to ignore federal law mindset is a pretty spot on echo of that confederate mindset of state law is supreme. Face it, the dem
Re: (Score:2)
If schools and military bases have to be renamed due to connections to the confederacy, why doesn't the Democratic Party have to be renamed?
Maybe because the modern party is composed of all of the states that fought to end slavery while all of the successionists states who fought to preserve it are Republican now.
The Democratic party brand is no longer that of the slave holding South, today they are defined by things like the civil rights movement and the like.
Re: (Score:2)
If schools and military bases have to be renamed due to connections to the confederacy, why doesn't the Democratic Party have to be renamed?
Maybe because the modern party is composed of all of the states that fought to end slavery while all of the successionists states who fought to preserve it are Republican now.
You offer nonsense.
(1) It was not the state's that succeeded, it was the people of those states. Well, more accurately it leadership, which was also the Democratic Party leadership of the states. The same Democratic Party leadership that created the klan. That opposed civil rights into the 1960s. Joe Biden's mentor in the Senate was LITERALLY A RECRUITER FOR THE KLAN. The segregationists who blocked black children from entering schools in the south were democrats. In the 1950s Democratic Governor Faubus
Re: (Score:2)
(1) It was not the state's that succeeded, it was the people of those states. Well, more accurately it leadership, which was also the Democratic Party leadership of the states.
Your whole post is predicated on this distinction without meaning actually having meaning. "State"?, "People"? Just do me a favor and if I use the wrong one just insert that other.
Furthermore, as I've already gotten at, there was a massive party realignment in the 60's and 70's during the civil rights movement. This is well known history. All those historic negative deeds you want to hang on the necks of modern democrats were all done by the parts of the party that left for the Republicans during the realig
Re: (Score:2)
(1) It was not the state's that succeeded, it was the people of those states. Well, more accurately it leadership, which was also the Democratic Party leadership of the states.
Your whole post is predicated on this distinction without meaning actually having meaning. "State"?, "People"?
No, you are simply missing the important point. The people who decide to go to war, and the people who fight the war, are usually not the same people. Often the people who decide on war do so for one reason, but they have to sell the war to the population using a different reason. The former is the state, the latter are the people. In particular, the people that decided to go to war were the state legislators. Basically the leadership of the Democratic political party.
there was a massive party realignment in the 60's and 70's during the civil rights movement.
A realignments based on law and order,
Re: (Score:2)
It's not southern conservatives. The entire creation of the revisionist lost cause myth, the creation of the KKK, hell the civil war itself is a creation of the democrats. As recently as the 1960s the democrats were against, civil rights, it's the republicans that got that through Congress. Plus the whole ending slavery thing a century earlier. Hell, the democrat's current we are free to ignore federal law mindset is a pretty spot on echo of that confederate mindset of state law is supreme. Face it, the democrats may say they are now against slavery, but they've merely replaced the reconstruction plantation system with the welfare state. Where they imagine their wise leadership is necessary to guide the lives of people who cannot guide their own lives. What would these people do without Democrats to manage them? Conservatives believe that all people are more than capable of managing their own lives. That problems have to do with people's economic status, not their racial or cultural background.
Nice how you gloss over this bit of history. https://simple.wikipedia.org/w... [wikipedia.org]
If I'm more than capable of managing my own life then why is cannabis not legalized on a federal level and why are states restricting abortion access?
Re: (Score:2)
It's not southern conservatives. The entire creation of the revisionist lost cause myth, the creation of the KKK, hell the civil war itself is a creation of the democrats. As recently as the 1960s the democrats were against, civil rights, it's the republicans that got that through Congress. Plus the whole ending slavery thing a century earlier. Hell, the democrat's current we are free to ignore federal law mindset is a pretty spot on echo of that confederate mindset of state law is supreme. Face it, the democrats may say they are now against slavery, but they've merely replaced the reconstruction plantation system with the welfare state. Where they imagine their wise leadership is necessary to guide the lives of people who cannot guide their own lives. What would these people do without Democrats to manage them? Conservatives believe that all people are more than capable of managing their own lives. That problems have to do with people's economic status, not their racial or cultural background.
Nice how you gloss over this bit of history. https://simple.wikipedia.org/w... [wikipedia.org]
/quote> Actually you are misrepresenting history, more accurately you are buying BS democratic spin.
(1) From the 1920 on the klan was not a southern thing. It was immensely popular nationwide within the democratic party, in the north and the south. Democrat and future President Harry Truman, personally against klan ideology, found it necessary to briefly join for political purposes, renouncing immediately after the election.
(2) The Republican pitch to southerners was not based on klan ideology, it was based on law and order. A big issue amongst voters in radical era of the 1960s and 70s.
Re: (Score:2)
Trump has been trying to undo the 14th Amendment. You know, one of the ones form Reconstruction.
Going back to the 19th century to use as partisan attack today is bush league shit sir and it's a game nobody will end up winning.
Re: (Score:2)
Not the whole 14th amendment, just the interpretation of Birthright Citizenship.
Its important to be clear and concise.
Re: (Score:2)
Trump has been trying to undo the 14th Amendment. You know, one of the ones form Reconstruction.
Uh, no. He is in full support of the 14th, his argument is that it only applies to the freed slaves. That all former slaves are citizens of the United States.
His argument is only that it does not apply to those in the US today who are not citizens or legal residents.
Re: (Score:3)
If they meant that they would have written it that way.
But that doesn't matter because the admin is doing it in bad faith.
But basically your "Democrats racist because 1860s" is just deeply deeply unserious and should be ignored.
Re: (Score:2)
If they meant that they would have written it that way.
They did. Today some folks are trying to interpret the language differently than originally intended.
But that doesn't matter because the admin is doing it in bad faith.
What bad faith? That interpreting "subject to the jurisdiction of the US" (or whatever the actual language is, didn't look it up) is not referring to those in the US legally? That's not bad faith, that's an honest interpretation to be decided by the Supreme Court. It is arguably what the original authors meant, and how it was read in those days.
But basically your "Democrats racist because 1860s" is just deeply deeply unserious and should be ignored.
Wrong. 1860s. 1880s. 1900s. 1920s. 1940s. 1960s. And starting in
Re: (Score:2)
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
I have yet to read anything compelling to tha
Re: (Score:2)
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside....
I have yet to read anything compelling to that argument. That's odd, you quoted the concept under debate.
There is a legit argument as to what the language "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" means. Slave were subject to the jurisdiction of their States and the Federal government. Foreigners are subject to the jurisdiction of their home country. "Jurisdiction" not referring to where one is standing today, but to whether their loyalties and obligations lie. 1860s phrasing vs modern phrasing. Something for the Supreme Court to decide.
On your last point I am actually glad we agree on that, The Southern Strategy is a real thing.
The Southern Strategy was based on law and order, not racism. The two are often falsely conflated.
Re: (Score:2)
...his argument is that it only applies to the freed slaves.
Never mind that his "argument" isn't supported by the text of the amendment.
If he wants to change the way birthright citizenship works then he needs a constitutional amendment. Anything else is just him trying to circumvent the constitution.
Re: (Score:2)
...his argument is that it only applies to the freed slaves.
Never mind that his "argument" isn't supported by the text of the amendment. If he wants to change the way birthright citizenship works then he needs a constitutional amendment. Anything else is just him trying to circumvent the constitution.
There is a legit argument as to what the language "subject to the jurisdiction of" means. Slave were subject to the jurisdiction of their States and the Federal government. Foreigners are subject to the jurisdiction of their home country. "Jurisdiction" not referring to where one is standing today, but to whether their loyalties and obligations lie. 1860s phrasing vs modern phrasing. Something for the Supreme Court to decide.
Re: (Score:2)
anon because already modded. As was pointed out by other folks upthread, they clearly discussed and understood the implications of the amendment as written. I saw an article referencing some of the discussion in congress and it went something like (highly paraphrased): "Does this mean a Chinaman born in the US is a citizen" "Yes, it does."
So it's pretty clear they understood the amendment to apply to folks other than former slaves, as upheld by court rulings as well.
People used to think Steve Jobs' RDF is strong, but the right-wing cult seems to have something an order of magnitude more powerful. If only it were used for Good.
No, your example does NOT demonstrate what you think. The "Chinaman" is presumed to be born to legal immigrants. "Chinaman" is just racist slang for ethnicity, it has nothing to do with citizenship or legal residency.
There is a legit argument as to what the language "subject to the jurisdiction of" means. Slave were subject to the jurisdiction of their States and the Federal government. Foreigners are subject to the jurisdiction of their home country. "Jurisdiction" not referring to where one is standing
Re: (Score:2)
"he's in full support, he just wants to change the entire meaning" Do you ever listen to how stupid you sound...
Wrong, your ignorance is on display. He wants the meaning of the authors of the amendment. Not the reimagined meaning of the modern far left.
Re: (Score:2)
It was about states rights! They cry. The one right they all had in common was wanting to own humans as property.
Fuck the south.Those states are still bottom of the barrel in regards to education, lifespan, income, etc etc.
Re: (Score:3)
Every Confederate state's constitution at the time openly says that the war was mostly about slavery.
Karl Marx had an interesting outlook on the South, both before and during the war which Lincoln apparently followed closely (it's been claimed that they corresponded, but if they did it's been lost). He showed that the economy of the upper classes in the South relied on breeding more slaves and, since the local market was saturated, exporting them to other states and territories (since Canada, every state i
The one Assassins Creed (Score:4, Insightful)
where they could plausibly and meaningfully add a black protagonist and they let it pass?
Re: (Score:2)
Zulu Africa would seem a good spot to me...
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
where they could plausibly and meaningfully add a black protagonist and they let it pass?
Was there an absence of black people in ancient Egypt, Islamic bagdad, the holy lands during the crusades, or colonial America? I think not. And they included many soldiers and warriors.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
At least for part of history, Africans from Nubia conquered and were the rulers of Egypt:
And in other eras, IIRC, served as excellent cavalry for Ptolemaic Egypt and the Romans. And probably indigenous Pharos as well. And probably Islamic cavalry later on too.
Re: (Score:2)
When is the Black race going to apologize to God's true people for this monstrous atrocity and make reparations?
By God's true people are you referring to the brown? Because the folks native to the Middle East in biblical times weren't white.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Why are people so upset about the possibility that a black person may have lived in Japan centuries ago?
Re: (Score:2)
Do you mean Yasuke?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Never played the game, just remember the controversy at the time.
Personally I think an assassin should probably be able to very easily blend into the general population. Japan, centuries ago, witnesses describe a man with black skin? Alright, let's go grab the dozen or so people fitting that description in the entire country. That does not make for a good assassin story unless you go to extra lengths to explain how he's disappearing from view.
Re: The one Assassins Creed (Score:2)
An assassin can be someone who can hide, or someone who wouldn't be suspected, same as any other secret agent.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
No one is swapping race. The game was based on a real person. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
No one is swapping race.
Except for black samurai. Samurai is a cultural icon of Japanese culture. Japanese are not black. Finding one dubious and likely fictitious instance of a black samurai and exemplifying it still offensive, even if based on an historically accurate figure.
Re: (Score:1)
how heavy were those goalposts
Re: (Score:2)
So let me get this straight. You’re not black, not Japanese, and not a samurai? Yet somehow this game has offended you.
Re: (Score:2)
Youâ(TM)re not black, not Japanese, and not a samurai?
Nobody alive today was a slave in US, by your logic slavery is not offensive.
Yet somehow this game has offended you.
Yes, it is offensive because of race swapping. This is done to establish a false narrative that black people were major contributors and participants in Western, Asian, etc. cultures. They were not. They are now. This is obvious attempt to rewrite history to better align with modern viewpoints, to establish false continuity.
Re: (Score:1)
Re:The one Assassins Creed (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
Are we really at the point where killing historic racists who would otherwise kill you is controversial?
Re: The one Assassins Creed (Score:2)
You play a white guy that kills white guys all the time in most games. Because it's a black guy killing white guys that's racist? You sound racist.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That sounds great until you realize the setting of the story means he will be killing white guys.
So what? They are not being killed because they are white, they are being killed because they do bad things to people. I fail to see a problem other than some white people who feel a sense of 'belonging' with other white people might get their feelings hurt acknowledging that racism runs rampant within their circles.
That's a shame, it sounds great (Score:1)
It sounds like it would have been the first Assassin's Creed game since the Ezio trilogy that I would have been interested in playing.
Re: (Score:2)
A very good call (Score:3)
There is literally no way to handle those topics in any commercial entertainment product right now that isn't going to enrage 15% of the audience. Those 15% will certainly use social media to make the normal people who understand it is just a fictional game, to uncomfortable to want to deal with it.
I would have canceled it too. There is no winning marketing something like that right now.
Re: (Score:2)
A video game based on "violence solves problems" is going to avoid mentioning:
1) Southern blacks moving north for better wages and living conditions ("Thanks Mr. Assassin, but we're moving north anyways")
2) Exposing the "secrets" of the KKK did more to damage the KKK, than reciprocal violence.
Re: A very good call (Score:2)
Violence begetting violence is an ongoing theme of the series.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: A very good call (Score:2, Interesting)
DarkOx on self censoring to not to enrage a minority group's feelings. When he is in that group.
Yah I know your post history bud, fuck your feelings.
Re: (Score:2)
Why is this subject any different than a game based on WW2?
Re: (Score:1)
On the off chance you're not trolling, the major difference is this: modern Germans, except for a very very small minority that is rightly reviled by the rest of them, all denounce what the Nazis did. In the US however, there are still non-negligible fractions of people that still refer to the civil war as "the war of northern ag
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
On the off chance you're not trolling, the major difference is this: modern Germans, except for a very very small minority that is rightly reviled by the rest of them, all denounce what the Nazis did. In the US however, there are still non-negligible fractions of people that still refer to the civil war as "the war of northern aggression".
I found this incredibly refreshing on my couple trips into Germany and went to a museums that featured WW2 stuff as well as when it came up a couple of times in conversation, they really own the fact that their country was the "bad guys" in that war. Such a nice change from here in the US where a sizable portion of our country seems quite happy to engage in historic revisionism so they can pretend the US has never done wrong.
German's get a big thumbs up from me for owning their country's past.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh No! (Score:2)
Anyway...
Re: (Score:2)
Pretty much.
[Gritting Teeth Emoji] (Score:2)
Here we are (Score:1)
When you're angry about the Klan being portrayed as the bad guys...
What am I missing? (Score:2)
Why is a game that was cancelled well over a year ago suddenly a new item?
Re: (Score:2)
News. News item.
Re: (Score:2)
Why is a game that was cancelled well over a year ago suddenly a new item?
Did you hear about it a year ago? News is news when you hear about it.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
It's coming to light due to the private equity buyout lead by esteemed real estate criminal Jared Kushner. This is likely anti-woke washing to entice a class of customers who have already moved along due to EA sucking for lots of other reasons which won't be addressed.
Why solve real problems intentionally created due to mismanagement when you can just play the culture war card and get a bunch of knee-jerk reactions?
Re: (Score:2)
Hmmmm........I know I'm kinda slow today because I didn't get much sleep last night and I'm pretty sleepy...but I still feel like I'm missing something.
Is news of this cancelled game supposed to be important because the main character in this cancelled game was a black man? Is it because the U.S. Civil War is some sensitive topic that shouldn't be made into a video game? Was the Confederate Flag depicted favorably in some way?
Re: What am I missing? (Score:2)
Under this administration, depicting the Confederate flag as negative is problematic. Not because of Cheeto Benito himself, he no doubt thinks most of them are gap toothed losers. Even though his grandfather and probably his father were in the KKK he doesn't seem like the kind of guy who would spend his time burning crosses, he'd rather fuck over all black people than terrorize or murder just a few.
Re: (Score:2)
So, a game cancelled in Summer of 2024, long before Trump became president (this time around), or even before it became clear he was probably going to win, is somehow now news because Trump is now President?
Shit. No wonder I missed it.
Don't worry - Ubisoft pivoted politically (Score:4, Funny)
"We're excited to share today that the game will be launched, just in time for the holiday season! The original game action is still there, in all its glory, with only a minor tweak.
"This time, it's a alt-universe post-Civil-War setting where Lincoln survived the Boothe assassination attempt. Your job? Kill Lincoln..."
Recent ACs (Score:2)
The recent AC's have been crap anyways, so I think it has more to do with the economy than the main character. Black Flag was the last AC I enjoyed playing.
Re: (Score:2)
Thought you meant Anonymous Cowards, and was going to second the opinion. The current crop of ACs can't hold a candle to those from just a few years ago.
Cancelled? No.. (Score:1, Troll)
There's no way the deep state is giving up yet on their "let's start a civil war so we can take away everyone's guns" plan.
After they got their wholly manufactured "Barack Hussein Obama" candidate (even the name alone tells you it was a psyop) elected they immediately started pushing the racial division and white-hate campaign in 2008. Then during Obama term 3 (Biden) they turned up the heat going from rhetoric to action and started building up the NGOs and Antifa type organizations (with public money mind
Cancassination Creels HD Redux is the documentary (Score:1)
Good call UBI (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Try saying that into a mirror.
new rules I guess (Score:3)
"...gamers would play as a Black man..."
Ah, so NOW authenticity is important Ubisoft?
Changing their tune? (Score:1)
They could have set it in the Old West. (Score:2)