The Assassin Podcast 1: Assassins were never called Hashashins

In this podcast we get started on the Assassins, why they were never Hashashins and how a young Shia student went on to found an ancient order of killers.

Nietzsche was an Assassin

"When the Christian crusaders in the Orient came across that unconquered Order of Assassins, that free-spirited order par excellence, whose lowest ranks lived a life of obedience of the sort no order of monks attained, then they received by some means or other a hint about that symbol and motto, which only the highest ranks kept as their secret, "Nothing is true. Everything is permitted." . . . Well now, that was spiritual freedom." -Frederick Nietzche, Genealogy of Morals.

Assassin's Creed Full Unreleased OST: Masyaf Village (Jesper Kyd ft. Mel...

Somehow, I can really imagine this fitting well in a Nizari Ismaili village. Though, the Nizaris forbade music on account of asceticism, so...

Assassin's Creed 2 Unreleased OST: Leonardo's Inventions 3 (by Jesper Kyd)

A beautiful piece from the unreleased music channel on Youtube, check it out for more unreleased AC music.

Jesper Kyd did hitman before he did AC. Appropriate, I think.

ULTIMATE Assassin's creed TRIBUTE: 10 Years of Assassin's creed!

Origins is the WORST Assassin's creed and a QUESTION to the AC COMMUNITY

Origins is the worst AC and a question to the AC community

Well, here we are.

Assassin’s creed Origins is the worst Assassin’s creed.

It is the worst game in the series, EVERYTHING that is wrong with Assassin’s creed can be seen in Origins.

And so I will show this.

You may notice, by the way: that I will not be using Origins footage. That’s because I cannot bear to play it and have sworn never to give another penny to such corrupt AAA Corporate entities as Ubisoft, EA or Warner Brothers.

As a result: Enjoy some Original Assassin’s creed or whatever I’ve decided to play.

So, to start with the critique let’s take a look at the setting.

Ancient Egypt. Well, Hellenistic Egypt. Did you know Cleopatra’s time is closer to the moon landing than the actual time of the pyramids? Don’t worry, neither did Ubisoft’s writers.

While I’ve mentioned Cleopatra, I can say that her depiction in this game is fucking atrocious. Roman propaganda was used to slander Cleopatra during her relations with Julius Caesar and Marcus Antonius. It was due to the Roman fears that Egypt would feminise the rulers of Rome and hence harm Rome itself. Hollywood picked up on these accounts throughout the 20^th century to produce typically bullshit movies.

One would expect better from Assassin’s creed, given their accurate depiction of the Crusades and Renaissance, but then, the people who made those games were fired a long time ago.

No, instead we have Cleopatra the scantily clad seductress with an opium pipe in one hand and a cock in the other.

Then there’s Caesar: not bad with the misogyny, Caesar was definitely a dick to women: especially his wife but then there is the tiny little issue of him being played by a scotsman.

Now that I mention it there’s also the issue of Cleopatra being portrayed as English.

Yes, apparently there was a lot of British colonialism in Hellenistic Egypt.

The traditional white washing of such important historical figures as the Pharaohs and Roman politicians was done by the British and American film industry as a means of projecting their own cultures onto the great empires of Antiquity.

It was all done as a means of making themselves feel better when they invade poorer countries and kill all the people for oil or silk or biscuits or whatever they want there, sometimes I think it was just because they like killing.

I’m glad to see Ubisoft continue this tradition, I imagine it makes them feel better when they fuck over the fanbase.

To be honest, in all the famous scenes depicted in Origins (and of course they’re famous because god forbid we show the common man’s side of history like in Desilet’s AC) one should take a grain of salt, actually fuck the salt, one should just naturally assume bullshit.

As a microcosm of this, take Caesar’s assassination scene: an absolute cavalcade of lies. When I saw it, I assumed maybe they read Plutarch’s shitty account but it even contradicts Plutarch. I genuinely think the writers took Shakespere’s play as a historical account or just went by a fucking movie (now that I think about it its probably a hollywood movie because I genuinely can’t picture the writer of origins reading Shakespeare, if he did we’d get a far better revenge tragedy then...this.

So, to put it short.

Caesar was not assassinated in the grand senate building.

Marcus Brutus was not the ringleader.

Caesar was not trying to be king.

Caesar did not die quietly, whispering “You too?” or similar to Brutus, he was a fucking legionary general for fuck sake, think about it.

Brutus and the gang did not kill him for liberty, they did it because they were politicians, this was Rome, Caesar was gaining too much power, and Caesar fucked Brutus’ mum.

It was the people and the legionaries that called for the death of the conspirators for fuck sake, even after the second consul, Marcus Antonius, pardoned them.

Brutus was an asshole, he was bribed by Caesar to betray Pompey. Sure he would have believed in the Republic but only because he was an aristocrat and a member of senate, he would have lost out if Caesar had reformed the empire.

Also, Brutus didn’t stab him last there’s more evidence that was Decimus.

Also, the signal for killing him was the pulling on his cloak, not a weird hooded Egyptian lady walking up and sticking him.

Come to think of it, were women even allowed into the senate houses? I guess I’d need to look that one up using primary source material. See. that’s what you do when you don’t know something about history Ubisoft writer, you don’t just make something up and patronise the audience by assuming they’re dumber than you.

Then there’s the portrayal of ancient warfare. Now, I really don’t want to get into the weaponry and fighting tactics. I get that its a video game and some suspension of belief is needed but let me just say:

A scythe is not a weapon. It is a garden implement.

Moving on, we have naval combat. Ah yes, because naval combat was such a great idea in Black Flag: actually it was the only good idea in Black Flag. Actually, it was the only good idea since the firing of Desilets, perhaps Ubisoft shouldn’t be forcing its development team to remake Assassin’s creed II over and over and let them make something new and original: who knows it might be fun and lucrative – isn’t that how Assassin’s creed came about in the first place?

Anyway, ancient naval warfare was usually conducted in tight formation with ships preparing a charge with the aim of inflicting catastrophic damage with their battering rams. After this, a skirmish would take place with marines attacking with arrows and even a kind of Roman ballista before using bridges to storm the enemy ships.

What didn’t happen was that the ancients basically substituted cannons for arrows: that’s what happens in a lazy developer’s brain when he doesn’t want to reinvent Black Flag’s naval combat.

Furthermore, fire arrows do not exist. They have never existed, only an idiot would think they could exist. And only an idiot would use them if they did.

Do this experiment for me: take an arrow and a bow. Put a piece of cotton on the arrow and light it. Now, shoot the arrow.

Amazingly, the full force of the arrow flying at high speeds through the air will snuff out the flame.

Sigh. I don’t even want to get into it. Just watch Lindybeige’s video on this. Fucking Christ.

So, Origins is perfectly historically inaccurate. Big surprise. All Assassin’s creeds since II have been historically inaccurate to a ludicrous degree, merely mirroring the common ignorance of people too lazy to look past wikipedia. Origins is just as bad.

Now, moving on to the hallmark of all good stories. Character.

Assassin’s creed has suffered an issue of character since II. Well, its suffered an issue of everything but nevermind.

The one glistening bud of hope in that was Edward Kenway but (raspberry noise) he’s gone, even then I’m sure Captain Eddie the pirate wasn’t just a slightly shinier turd in a treasure chest filled with shit on shit island off the coast of a continent of shit.

But is the main character of Origins a break in this trend of boring characters?

No.

He’s probably one of the worst, right up there with the Frye twats. If not the worst.

Do this for me: describe Bayek but without mentioning what he does, who he’s friends with, his profession or his physical appearance. Just purely in terms of his personality.

Ok, now try describe Ezio in the same fashion.

Have you noticed that as soon as I mentioned Ezio, the personality quirks came to mind. Whereas with Bayek it took some thought to think of at least one or two things, even then they are quite generic and may even be attributable to most characters you can think of?

Now try this: describe one flaw or weakness and one virtue of Bayek. And both can’t be the same thing.

Now, Ezio.

Are you noticing something? You see the reason Ezio passes these tests is because he was made to be a character in his own story whereas Bayek is simply a device for a plot.

Bayek has no character. He is defined only by the fact he is a mejay, he wants to avenge his son and he is the first Assassin.

Then there’s his relationship with Aya. Another one dimensional zombie, one that’s even worse than Bayek.

Bayek and Aya tell each other how much they love each other but never explain why, they just bark some made up mystic garbage in a round about way of saying I miss you or I will miss you and then have sex.

What is their relationship based on? Why does their personality match each other? What do they have in common? What made them marry in the first place?

I’ll tell you. Nothing. They were born when a board of directors decided: Oh yeah, fans like female protagonists now, I saw it that one time on Tumblr so tell the slaves down at the dev department to give Bayek a wife or something.

This lack of any basis for a relationship between two characters becomes hilarious when the two break up for no reason. Aya says something along the lines of “The gods have made clear our love may never be.”

And then they go their separate ways, almost certainly to give a fucking excuse for them to get back together over the course of the next game.

What I’m sure the writers wanted me to think was that Bayek wanted to stay at home and not be an Assassin and Aya wanted to be an Assassin and go kill loads of people in Rome but then Bayek is an Assassin anyway in Egypt.

So, they broke up because Aya wanted to go to rome and kill Caesar? But Aya goes away for long periods of time anyway, she has her own boat for fuck sake.

I’ve already explained the reason though, its just a contrived conflict to be resolved in an equally contrived way. Its because the board of directors want another game so they told the writers to make up an excuse, and the writers being really bad writers couldn’t think of a better way or were too lazy to do so.

Then there’s Bayek’s reason for founding the hidden ones. He realises rather suddenly that he’s been killing his son’s killers for no reason other than to satisfy his rage and so decides he’s going to kill some more people but this time because it’ll help Egypt because all those guys are bad. Then he kills his son’s killer for reals but, he feels kind of bad, even though his son’s killer was a sociopathic murderer.

Oh, god. That brings me to the villains. They are REAL villains. Like Snidely Whiplash style Villains.

Like, is there a single Templar in this game who hasn’t at least committed infanticide. Holy shit. They are nuts. At one point I think the crocodile just goes and drowns a child for no reason. And they all have their special way of killing and their special names, fucking god Ubisoft, just give them some spandex and rename the Assassins the avengers and start selling the lunch boxes already.

I mean its hard for me to root for Bayek, being the blank rubix cube he is, but at least when he meets children he doesn’t immediately rape and eat them. Christ. The Templars aren’t even people. They’re just a dumb person’s imagining of what evil looks like.

No, evil people aren’t human beings being viewed from an antagonistic perspective, they’re monstrous tyrants killing old men and eating babies.

This is the sort of perspective I expect from a truly monstrous person.

When it comes to characters I always see a web. The characters are certain points on the web and the connections are the interactions that character has with other characters. Everything must be spun properly, the web must fit in all places and the connections must be real.

Inside the characters there is another web, that of their psyche. Everything needs to be balanced and connected, any illogical or nonsensical thing will destroy the web.

But with this game there is no web. There are just statements, conventions, these aren’t characters they’re just puppets being forced by the writer’s hand.

The writer decided the course of Bayek’s story rather than let Bayek’s personality shape the course. Hence, Bayek is not a character. He is just a puppet to fill a role.

Because we’re running short on time here, I’ll finish up with one last flaw; one that is the greatest place where Origins falls short.

The creed.

The theme of Assassin’s creed has always been this: nothing is true and everything is permitted.

One should open their mind and be wary that others will try to control you with their illusions for their own gain. In order to live life to the fullest whilst remaining in peace with one’s neighbours one must embrace the creed. If nothing is true, why raise a hand against your friend for believing different. And if everything is permitted then why be ashamed of standing out in the crowd?

Upon realising this creed, one will find inner peace and that shall lead to peace within all things.

Now, let me ask you.

In this Assassin’s creed game about the Origins of the Assassins, those who are defined by their creed.

How many times do they mention nothing is true, everything is permitted?

How many?

Oh, they do mention safeguarding free will. At least once. But never do they mention why the Assassins safeguard free will. Yes, the Assassin’s value man’s freedom.

But only because peace can only be embraced, never forced.

If you force peace, you would create an illusion that would never find its way into the hearts of men. It would be a lie.

True peace is obtained through one’s own free will.

And true peace is the recognition of the creed.

Therefore to say nothing is true and everything is permitted is to recognise true peace through your own free will.

Now, is Bayek the founder of this creed? How can he be if he hasn’t even mentioned it?

Bayek and Aya both, harbour hatred for their enemies and this brings them inner turmoil, it disrupts inner peace.

One who knows the creed cannot harbour hatred for anyone. Because why hate your enemy for their ideas when nothing is true and why hate them for their actions if everything is permitted.

But let’s take a break from philosophy and see to judging Bayek and Aya purely from the standpoint of Assassins in the field.

Three tenants.

Stay your blade.

Hide in plain sight.

Do not compromise the brotherhood.

Well, they don’t kill unnecessarily. Unless you count all of those guards, soldiers, sailors and gladiators that they kill because kur tunk smash the bad guys kur tunk.

They definitely don’t hide in plain sight. They constantly run up to their enemies and battle with them. Or just plain sneak around like Talion from Shadow of Mordor.

Then there’s the issue of them putting their allies in danger, leading indirectly to some of their deaths.

So, by all those accounts I suppose they’d make great Gondorian soldiers. Wait, did I forget what they were supposed to be? Oh, that’s Ok, so did Ubisoft’s writers.

I suppose there’s the argument that they hadn’t formed the brotherhood at that point. But it doesn’t matter anyway because the creed had been around for millennia before Bayek and Aya.

Oh, yeah, didn’t you already know? Remember when Aya gives Bayek a hidden blade and Ubisoft expects not to question the existence of Assassin weaponry pre-Assassins because your’re a good little boy and you’re gonna shut up now and buy a season pass now like the witless cock sucker you are.

Well, that belonged to Darius who Assassinated Xerxes the first, who died about the 5^th century BCE. That is from Assassin’s creed II. And Ubisoft had to tip toe around that one like they do with almost all the lore they want to ignore from the Desilets period.

In the original Assassin’s creed lore, the Assassins weren’t just an Order. They were a bloodline. The Assassins were born from the union between Those Who Came Before and man, to what end we don’t know.

The blood gave those apart of the dynasty the ability to see the intentions of those around them, to see the truth past illusions and demonstrate amazing physical agility.

In other words, they could use eagle vision and free run.

Now, the issue with Bayek and Aya is that they don’t have eagle vision. Yes, they are good at free running. But the real tell tale sign is eagle vision. So, technically they aren’t Assassins.

But that’s the issue isn’t it. What I’ve just done is applied the lore to Origins and realised they don’t match.

But Ubisoft don’t give a shit. They never have. Everything in Assassin’s creed has just been contradicted whenever Ubisoft’s board see a trend to chase.

And they chase that trend because they think it’ll lead them to money.

Meanwhile a fanbase desperately clings on, deluding itself that the games haven’t gotten shittier and shittier and the writing progressively worse to the point that the story is a black and white retelling of the same old parent/offspring conflict over and over and the villains devious monsters whose only purpose is to appear evil so the protagonist will seem comparatively good.

The historical setting that made this game so fresh has been reduced into a children’s history lesson taught without the slightest notion of any historical fact. Any accuracy has been tossed away for the sake of outlandish fantasy action and the misrepresentations can border on offensively racist in its depictions of other cultures.

And then there’s the entire fucking point of the game. The idea that one should open their eyes and think for themselves.

That idea was tossed overboard long ago. Any semblance of a possible theme has been cast aside for the sake of a comfort zone of familiar morals, for fear any encouragement to think for yourself would cause you to realise the damage that has been done to a once beloved title by a greed driven group of old men who pull the strings of the development teams for the sake of profit alone.

A long time ago, this title had an artist at the helm and artists worked with him. But the artists have long been dispatched for more obedient workers.

This is the truth. Assassin’s creed has become shit. And Origins is the pinnacle of that shit. No use in denying it.

So now, I come to the point where I want to ask a question.

To the entire fanbase of Assassin’s creed. For those Youtubers and bloggers and mentors and community leaders.

Where were you?

Where were you when they threw out Desilets and then tried to steal his new IP?

Where were you when they killed Lucy and hid the reason in a dlc?

Where were you when they changed the voice actors for Subject 16 and Altair and replaced them with film actors?

Where were you when they replaced Jesper Kyd, the original composer, for some hollywood composer?

Where were you when they shamelessly started using Ezio’s family as their main theme even though they had long thrown out Kyd?

Where were you when they killed Desmond and then named a fucking terrier after him?

Where were you when they got rid of all the original animations?

Where were you when they openly mocked the fanbase throughout Syndicate, rolling their eyes at how stupid Assassin’s creed is and how cool they are for not taking it seriously?

Where were you when they buckled to Tumblr lunatics over playable female characters?

Where were you when they started introducing microtransactions?

Where were you when they made the hidden blade useless in Origins?

Where were you when they tried, are trying to sell Monster energy drink by putting game codes on the can?

Where were you when they made that god awful movie with Michael Fassbender?

Where were you when they killed Assassin’s creed?

And why didn’t you speak out while they were killing it?

I guess, for the sake of the slower of us I’ll need to explain this.

What I’m basically asking is. Why did no prominent individuals in the Assassin’s creed community get up and tell Ubisoft off for what they were doing and organise some community resistance.

Frankly, I genuinely doubt I’ll raise an eyebrow with anyone in the community. They’re all too busy suckling on the corporate teat. Even, then I doubt many will listen. Mine is a small voice of reason, in an asylum of screaming idiots.

But, nevertheless, I think I already know the answer.

Nobody spoke up because they were too lazy and fat. Things were going good, they had attention and money; all from feeding the fan-base of a great game series. So what if it got a little shittier this year. Next year will be better, no need to cry out and make a fuss when all you need to do is sit back and make a video about Ezio’s new robes.

It never got bad fast, it always came slow. A great, lumbering encroachment of bullshit that engulfed the entire fanbase inch by inch until everything was submerged.

That’s how it all ends. All these great ideas; in the games industry especially. With some greedy bastards taking a big, slow shit on top of everything and everyone down below just insisting that its ice cream.

I can still enjoy 1 and 2 somewhat, while the series still had some soul. But I’ll be lying if I said, I’ll someday stop wondering what it could have been like if Patrice Desilets took the rights to Assassin’s creed when he left Ubisoft.

Now, I’m sure I’ll ruffle some feathers with this, that’s what happens when you tell someone something that puts into question the comfortable little false-reality they’ve constructed for themselves.

And so because the likeliest attack I will get will be a redirection of my accusation back at me, let me handle it.

Why didn’t I stand up when AC was being destroyed?

Well I guess I could say I didn’t know what Assassin’s creed was when all this happened and I was too busy with life to notice.

But I’m not a coward so I can calmly say I consider all of this to be my fault.

All suffering is the result of one’s own incompetence.

Were I a stronger, smarter person I could have stopped it then and I could be stopping it now. And seeing as I am the only one who is sure that I am real and have control over my own agency, I can safely say that, logically, I am solely responsible for all evil.

The only think I can do is work towards being stronger and resist evil until the day when I am so strong that all evil may be subdued.

So to answer, I didn’t stop the destruction of Assassin’s creed because I am too weak to do so and that is something I regret and am trying to rectify.

Yep.

Maybe that’s odd, because society controls what you feel not yourself, but it makes sense. If it didn’t I wouldn’t think it.

So, that’s that.