PDA

View Full Version : The French Revolution



AngelDiMaria08
05-19-2015, 10:03 AM
At the end of Rogue when Shay kills Charles and Charles say Connor and his assassins the American revolution undid your Templar business the Shay said then perhaps we will start one of our own. Does this mean the Templars side with the extreme revolutionaries and the Assassins with the Royalists? If yes it is not logic because the trailer of Unity talks about the inequality and poverty in France for centuries in the Royalist era

Charles_Phipps
05-19-2015, 10:12 AM
The Assassins in France suck.

Albeit, so do the Templars.

They're both for a constitutional monarchy and make a truce to support it.

**MILD SPOILERS**

Pro-Revolution Templars assassinate their Grandmaster to oppose it with Robespierre as one of them. They're basically the middle-class and poor Templars who are sick of the aristocratic Templars and their pompousness. They're helped by the writings of Jacques de Morlay which, apparently, said banking was the way of the future (and--to be fair, that's not entirely unrealistic given the Templars had stopped being Crusaders by then).

It's one of the biggest confusing things about the game.

Its even more confusing given Mentor Mirabeau IS a revolutionary (albeit a moderate one) and the Co-Op missions have many Pro-Revolution missions which are absent in the main game.

***END MILD SPOILERS***

Basically, neither side is Pro-Royalist.

Arno is also completely apolitical, which is another strike against him since a Frenchman being neutral about the Revolution is kind of like a New Yorker being apolitical about 9/11.

AngelDiMaria08
05-19-2015, 10:20 AM
So why did Shay say then perhaps we will start a revolution of our own.

Charles_Phipps
05-19-2015, 10:34 AM
So why did Shay say then perhaps we will start a revolution of our own.

I think Shay is meant to be a Pro-Revolutionary Templar.

Which fits given he's a poor birth, middle-class to riches by his own deed, Templar.

Also, one who isn't afraid of using violence to achieve political ends.

It is kind of funny, too, as it means the French Revolution's excesses were partially inspired by the Assassins.

Just an EX-Assassin.

As for why Shay is going to support the Revolution, it will provide the Templars all of the benefits the Assassins usually get in revolutions. The support of the people and tremendous influence amongst the lower classes. It also weakens the Assassins who have had traditionally a very strong relationship with the Establishment since they allied with King Henry to destroy the historical Knights Templar.

The French Assassins are still for the people but are kind of rich elitists with their own giant underground cathedral and massive political influence. Which kind of makes you wonder if they've lost their way.

guest-5oAghHvD
05-19-2015, 02:09 PM
Does this mean the Templars side with the extreme revolutionaries and the Assassins with the Royalists?

Yes. This is the story of the game. The Assassins in UNITY are royalists.


If yes it is not logic because the trailer of Unity talks about the inequality and poverty in France for centuries in the Royalist era

The trailers told a different game than what we got. Not always a bad thing. AC3 promised a more pro-American game than what it turned out to be. Black Flag promised a meathead white pirate male fantasy and the game turned out to be much more complex, interesting and Edward proved to be a real character. UNITY's promotion and early promos looked vastly superior to the final product, and promised a more ambiguous, darker and interesting story.


I think Shay is meant to be a Pro-Revolutionary Templar.

Which fits given he's a poor birth, middle-class to riches by his own deed, Templar.

My feeling was that Shay had wanted to find Charles Dorian for a while but Francois de la Serre refused to help him, likewise seeing him as an Irish lowlife because Francois is a class snob (Haytham is one too but like many English aristocrats, he's not as obvious about it as French aristos were). Then Germain and others reached out to him and Shay found Franklin to piggy back on to Versailles. As per ROGUE War Letters and UNITY database, Gabriel Sivert was a supporter of Haytham Kenway in the New World, so its likely he interacted with Shay. He also sponsored that expedition to the observatory in the 1780s that ended up destroying it (which I am sure is where Shay died).


It also weakens the Assassins who have had traditionally a very strong relationship with the Establishment since they allied with King Henry to destroy the historical Knights Templar.

That's King Philip le Bel. Also the Assassins supporting King Philip sort-of makes sense because he did more than any King to weaken Church authority (he famously sent one of his henchmen to march to Rome and these guys physically assaulted the Pope and beat him up, not making it up!!).

As for Jacques de Molay, the historical dude was a total mediocrity and political moron. I despise UNITY for many reasons but chiefly for its fallacious thinking that someone so pathetic and weak could prophesize the French Revolution, while the man who did prophesize the event, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, goes unmentioned and doesn't get a database entry. It's kind of like doing a Russian Revolution story without mentioning Marx but talking a great deal about the False Dimitri.

VestigialLlama4
05-19-2015, 02:28 PM
Pro-Revolution Templars assassinate their Grandmaster to oppose it with Robespierre as one of them. They're basically the middle-class and poor Templars who are sick of the aristocratic Templars and their pompousness. They're helped by the writings of Jacques de Morlay which, apparently, said banking was the way of the future (and--to be fair, that's not entirely unrealistic given the Templars had stopped being Crusaders by then).

Well the portrayal of the Templars in the series is really sickening. Its the royalist fantasy of these resentment filled lemmings filled to head with fancy ideas and fanaticism brought out the Revolution, framed Good King Louis and destroyed the glory of the old world.


It's one of the biggest confusing things about the game.

That's because nobody thought one bit about the story they are telling.


Its even more confusing given Mentor Mirabeau IS a revolutionary (albeit a moderate one) and the Co-Op missions have many Pro-Revolution missions which are absent in the main game.

In Royalist Propaganda, Mirabeau gets co-opted as an acceptable figure. The fact that he was corrupt and gave advice to the King to address the Assembly and even told him to move the capital is seen by Royalists as useful advice mistaken. And even centrist Revolutionaries or Girondin-sympathizers see Mirabeau as the guy who could have prevented the Terror. The fact that the Terror could have been prevented by the war the Girondins declared and Robespierre and Marat opposed, not happening never enters this story.


Basically, neither side is Pro-Royalist.

That is wishful misreading. The game is super-royalist and Arno is a right-wing psychopath.

Arno and Elise talk several times about how nice the old world was and how the Revolution is ruining everything. Like that Baloon ride they say that they can look down and forget that France is tearing itself apart and enjoy the sky. The fact is that the people down below were fighting for their very lives for freedom, for real meaningful achievements, and by simply looking at them as rabble and party spoilers of a romantic moment, its going straight into royalist fantasy.

The game's consultant historian pointed out that the game's story was royalist propaganda (after the game was released, he shrugged his shoulders and said its a childish toy and not worth getting hung over), and that's why I think Ubisoft changed the script later, so the Co-Op missions have the Women's March to Versailles and then that final speech has Arno mocking religion because then it can be not-Catholic (since royalists were hung on the whole Divine Right of Kings thing) and basically do cover-their-a-- stunts that are so pallid and disgusting that its beneath contempt. The main royalist moment is the Assassination of Le Peletier. Le Peletier was a real-life figure and he was assassinated in the same location in the game by a royalist fanatic. In the game its Arno so he's a phantom Royalist by association.

rprkjj
05-19-2015, 08:32 PM
Well the portrayal of the Templars in the series is really sickening. Its the royalist fantasy of these resentment filled lemmings filled to head with fancy ideas and fanaticism brought out the Revolution, framed Good King Louis and destroyed the glory of the old world.



That's because nobody thought one bit about the story they are telling.



In Royalist Propaganda, Mirabeau gets co-opted as an acceptable figure. The fact that he was corrupt and gave advice to the King to address the Assembly and even told him to move the capital is seen by Royalists as useful advice mistaken. And even centrist Revolutionaries or Girondin-sympathizers see Mirabeau as the guy who could have prevented the Terror. The fact that the Terror could have been prevented by the war the Girondins declared and Robespierre and Marat opposed, not happening never enters this story.



That is wishful misreading. The game is super-royalist and Arno is a right-wing psychopath.

Arno and Elise talk several times about how nice the old world was and how the Revolution is ruining everything. Like that Baloon ride they say that they can look down and forget that France is tearing itself apart and enjoy the sky. The fact is that the people down below were fighting for their very lives for freedom, for real meaningful achievements, and by simply looking at them as rabble and party spoilers of a romantic moment, its going straight into royalist fantasy.

The game's consultant historian pointed out that the game's story was royalist propaganda (after the game was released, he shrugged his shoulders and said its a childish toy and not worth getting hung over), and that's why I think Ubisoft changed the script later, so the Co-Op missions have the Women's March to Versailles and then that final speech has Arno mocking religion because then it can be not-Catholic (since royalists were hung on the whole Divine Right of Kings thing) and basically do cover-their-a-- stunts that are so pallid and disgusting that its beneath contempt. The main royalist moment is the Assassination of Le Peletier. Le Peletier was a real-life figure and he was assassinated in the same location in the game by a royalist fanatic. In the game its Arno so he's a phantom Royalist by association.

I think you're misinterpreting Elise's quote there. France was tearing itself apart, that's a fact. There wasn't a mention of whether it was for the better or not, you added that connotation yourself. Also, how does it make sense that Arno adopts the political leanings of whatever rl assassin he takes the place of? The assassin's of all the games would have wildly different political leanings then presented if that were the case.

"Phantom royalist by association," made me laugh though.

VestigialLlama4
05-20-2015, 03:50 AM
I think you're misinterpreting Elise's quote there. France was tearing itself apart, that's a fact. There wasn't a mention of whether it was for the better or not, you added that connotation yourself.

What is clearly implied is that both of them want things to be like the way it was. When they were both pampered rich kids without care and all the privileges of being aristocrats (no responsibilities and no taxes). For them the Revolution gets in the way of that. That's what makes it royalist. It's like everything would be nice if this didn't happen and you can only accept that point of view by throwing away the many good things that came with the Revolution.



Also, how does it make sense that Arno adopts the political leanings of whatever rl assassin he takes the place of?

There is such a thing as subtext especially in visual arts where the execution and presentation of a scene often gives a meaning and association that the story and people did not intend. In great works of art, this subtext is often deliberate and skilful, in bad works of art, it comes from lack of clarity and confusion. That's the case in UNITY, they made the game about the French Revolution far late in the day and spent little time on the story and simply relied on long discredited memes rather than actual research.The end result is that they made a deeply noxious right-wing story that only makes sense if you are totally ignorant of the work in question.

Charles_Phipps
05-20-2015, 04:26 AM
Given Louis' execution is portrayed as the result of Templar manipulation versus something which flows organically from a war which is barely mentioned, I think I'm comfortable saying the game is Royalist apologetia, if nothing else.

I-Like-Pie45
05-20-2015, 05:15 AM
Ubi be change!

Ubi be insulted the German Revolution!

I protest to the Ubi! :mad:

VestigialLlama4
05-20-2015, 05:31 AM
Ubi be change!

Ubi be insulted the German Revolution!

I protest to the Ubi! :mad:

Never change, Pie...never change.

jeffies04
05-20-2015, 07:57 PM
Mild spoilering if you haven't played...

Unless I missed it I'm not sure if I saw it mentioned in my read-through of the thread, so apologies if I'm repeating.

At the start of the game Mirabeau and de la Serre are using a truce to help plan a reformation of the government. We see de la Serre say, "who or what will take its place? Another King? A council of capable men?" "That is the question, isn't it," Mirabeau responds, and that is when de la Serre proposes, "a truce then?"

Their plan is to work together to help bring about the changes that were the hot topic of the 1789 Estates General. With de la Serre dead, and the Assassins having their own coup of sorts with what happens to Mirabeau, this all falls apart and the new Templars manipulate events into motion that are much worse than what I think they had intended.

While it does seem that there's a lot of pro-royalist sentiment on the side of the Assassins, they were still in full support of reforming the monarchy and balancing its power with the people's.

VestigialLlama4
05-20-2015, 08:26 PM
At the start of the game Mirabeau and de la Serre are using a truce to help plan a reformation of the government. We see de la Serre say, "who or what will take its place? Another King? A council of capable men?" "That is the question, isn't it," Mirabeau responds, and that is when de la Serre proposes, "a truce then?"

Their plan is to work together to help bring about the changes that were the hot topic of the 1789 Estates General.

In real life, that was what everyone wanted, even the future extremists. The Estates General meeting promised that it could proceed reasonably, but eventually the Tennis Court Oath happened. We see Mirabeau's legendary speech in Rouille's Flashback, "We shall yield to nothing but bayonets" but its not presented with any context at all. What this does is provide a subtext where the 1789 Estates General is the "Good revolution" (so Assassin-Friendly Templars backed) while the "Bastille" or Popular participated events is the Bad revolution (so backed by Evil Baby-Eating Psycho-Templars). This is a right-wing fantasy pillared on the view of the mob as bloodthirsty evil resentful rabble ungratefuly asking for more from benevolent nobles. Its also repeated in the UNITY novelization, where Elise states, on seeing the Storming of the Bastille:



"There and then I knew it was the end for us all. For every nobleman and -woman in France it was the end. Whatever our sympathies, even if we’d talked of the need for change, even if we’d agreed that Marie Antoinette’s excesses were disgusting and the king both greedy and inadequate, and even if we’d supported the Third Estate and backed the Assembly, it didn’t matter, because from this moment on none of us were safe; we were all collaborators or oppressors in the eyes of the mob and they were in charge now."
--Oliver Bowden, Assassin's Creed UNITY


Now I like Elise as a character but her arguments are false. She's equating her own father, Francois de la Serre, likely a tiny minority of a minority, with every noble. And everything is grounded on fears of a bloodthirsty mob attacking her property.


With de la Serre dead, and the Assassins having their own coup of sorts with what happens to Mirabeau, this all falls apart and the new Templars manipulate events into motion that are much worse than what I think they had intended.

Well that's what the game says. What it does not show is the major event that destroyed the Constitutional Monarchy...the Flight to Varennes (its mentioned in easily buried and inaccurate database entries). When the King and Queen absconded from Paris to the Frontiers in the hope of turning an invading army against his own subjects. That destroyed everything because the King had sworn to uphold the Constitution and proved to be a liar.


While it does seem that there's a lot of pro-royalist sentiment on the side of the Assassins, they were still in full support of reforming the monarchy and balancing its power with the people's.

Reforming the monarchy is something which later became a royalist sentiment (actual royalists opposed all reforms when it was put forth). They all said the Revolution could have been avoided if people were moderate and the like, the actual reality is that the people reacted because they were shrewd and resentful at blatant betrayals of public trust and they turned to terror when they saw the likes of the King, Mirabeau, Lafayette (who fired on protestors at Champs de Mars which I wish they put in the game) and several others repeatedly prove traitors.

VestigialLlama4
05-20-2015, 08:41 PM
With de la Serre dead, and the Assassins having their own coup of sorts with what happens to Mirabeau, this all falls apart and the new Templars manipulate events into motion that are much worse than what I think they had intended.

You know the main reason why the game is Royalist, is the choice of bad guys in the game. The game's bad guys are all these resentful, grubby, leeches who are driven by envy. That's again filtered by right-wing myths. In the 19th Century, in England and in France, the idea was that the Nobles were good and benevolent but the people of France, were, in Edmund Burke's phrase, part of the "swinish multitude" who wanted equal rights they did not deserve.

You have LaTouche who was this honest bureaucrat who lost his job because he reported on noble corruption. Then he's this underworld accountant who gets drunk and complains before becoming psycho-Templar and personally presiding over a guillotine. Then you have Frederic Rouille, a nice soldier dude who Mirabeau refused to shake his hands and so he becomes Psycho-Templar where he tortures dudes while singing La Marseillaise Alex deLarge style. Pierre Bellec is also a more working-class Assassin than the other Assassin members and Arno and Mirabeau and he's kind of resentful too.

In Dead Kings you have the main bad guy this Philippe Rose who gives this speech: "You ever meet a noble, Léon? You ever heard a noble talk? Descended from God, they were. Threads of gold arced from between their blessed legs into holy chamber pots. And then, Léon?...Fountains of rubies spilled from their necks and rained down upon all of France. Now, a man born deep within the lowest circle of hell can rise to the very top of Olympus itself."

Again its presenting the image of the revolution coming from jealousy and resentment. Even Charles D-ckens' A TALE OF TWO CITIES was better, it looks like Jacobin Propaganda compared to this game.

Charles_Phipps
05-20-2015, 11:47 PM
This wouldn't leave a sour taste in my mouth if not for the fact that the French Revolution being the secret agenda of a cabal out to destroy Democracy is, LITERALLY, the first wingnut conspiracy theory. The whole Illuminati myth? The idea there was a secret cabal out to destroy Christianity and install a global New World Order? That was created by people who were afraid of the French Revolution.

The problem is that when Ubisoft co-opts these sorts of things, they need to be aware of the ugliness underneath. Because any game about the French Revolution which portrays Louis as an innocent victim is....just no.

I don't think it's very GOOD royalist propaganda, too, because we see the grinding poverty of France as well as a lot of the REASONS why people hate the nobility.

TexasCaesar
05-21-2015, 04:42 AM
Unity is a half-brained attempt to pander to the Anglo take on history rather than keep any kind of consistency in the faction's motivations.

The main problem I have with it is just that it portrays Robespierre as being, well, corrupted, when he was literally called "the Incorruptible."

Really, it would have been better if the Revolution had featured an extremist sect of the Assassins wrecking everything and having to be taken down by both moderate Templars and Assassins. THAT would have been good.

I would like to point out, though, that the game has ALWAYS demonized certain figures and lionized others. Nobody was complaining when it was the Borgias who were being portrayed as moustache-twirling villains. Nah, it's only when it's your pet, your hero, that you care. ;)

rprkjj
05-21-2015, 05:01 AM
What is clearly implied is that both of them want things to be like the way it was. When they were both pampered rich kids without care and all the privileges of being aristocrats (no responsibilities and no taxes). For them the Revolution gets in the way of that. That's what makes it royalist. It's like everything would be nice if this didn't happen and you can only accept that point of view by throwing away the many good things that came with the Revolution.




There is such a thing as subtext especially in visual arts where the execution and presentation of a scene often gives a meaning and association that the story and people did not intend. In great works of art, this subtext is often deliberate and skilful, in bad works of art, it comes from lack of clarity and confusion. That's the case in UNITY, they made the game about the French Revolution far late in the day and spent little time on the story and simply relied on long discredited memes rather than actual research.The end result is that they made a deeply noxious right-wing story that only makes sense if you are totally ignorant of the work in question.

"Many good things that came with the Revolution." This is quite debatable from the standpoint of someone from their perspective. Beheadings, vigilante justice, widespread crime ranging from petty theft to murder, etc. Things that can't really be justified even by greedy, lavish, and useless monarchs who abandon their country, being bankrupt, price inflation and unfair taxes. The Revolution was't a cut and dry black and white thing. Innocents died and guilty prospered. This is beside the immense good it did, but it's certainly there and probably the most observable thing from their perspective. Add on that the plot point that the templars are largely manipulating the Revolution and their viewpoint is quite reasonable within the context.

If you're referring to your own interpretation of what Ubi was meaning when they made the decision to make the Assassination of Le Peletier a playable mission when he was historically killed by Royalist, then say so. Phantom royalist by association doesn't make a lick of sense. That's essentially the same as saying Arno is a royalist in your headcanon.

VestigialLlama4
05-21-2015, 06:06 AM
"Many good things that came with the Revolution." This is quite debatable from the standpoint of someone from their perspective.

Okay how about universal male suffrage. The world's first election by universal suffrage (where every adult male, regardless of property qualification, race or religion can vote) was in 1792, after the storming of the Tuilleries. How about equal rights to Jews and Protestants and men of colour, i.e. African-Frenchman. The game briefly shows Thomas-Alexandre Dumas in the Co-Op mission The Tournament. Do you know until this very day, Thomas-Alexandre Dumas (father of the author Alexandre Dumas) is the highest ranked non-white general in any European army? That means that Europe became less progressive over time, rather than more. Democracy as the world knows and lives it today was first put into law and action during the French Revolution.

Then you have the opening of the Louvre Museum in 1793. And then in 1794, the total abolition of slavery without compensation to slaveowners. And how about the fact that 1793 and 1794 was the first time a modern national army successfully repelled invaders on all sides, with absolutely zero help from anyone, using their own patriotic fervor and mobilizing the nation to total war. All this happened in 1793 and 1794, the year of the Terror, at the same time you had the beheadings. There's a reason why "It's the best of the times. It's the worst of times" applies to that event. And there was no "pure revolutionary" who argued for these things and "Bad revolutionary" who opposed it. Quite the opposite in fact. The fact is the Terror wasn't some blind ideological screed. It was a reaction to actual war that threatened France's existence. That war was started by the moderates (the Girondins and some of the royalists, and supported by the King and Queen). The people who opposed the war, consistently and almost entirely alone, were Robespierre and Marat, the so-called extremists.


Beheadings, vigilante justice, widespread crime ranging from petty theft to murder, etc.

Huh...really inaccurate there. "Widespread crime ranging from petty theft" was actually in decine thanks to greater bureaucracy and astute self-policing by the population. And the Terror actually cut down to "vigilante justice". Don't compare UNITY to anything in France at the time, its pretty false.


The Revolution was't a cut and dry black and white thing.

In UNITY, that is EXACTLY what it is.


I would like to point out, though, that the game has ALWAYS demonized certain figures and lionized others. Nobody was complaining when it was the Borgias who were being portrayed as moustache-twirling villains. Nah, it's only when it's your pet, your hero, that you care. ;)

People did complained about the Borgia being Emperor Palatine and Cesare being that psycho-king from Game of Thrones and Lucrezia being this gangster's moll. The real Rodrigo Borgia was a cut-throat power hungry old lecher and the most religiously tolerant Pope of the Renaissance. The game portrays the "cut-throat power hungry old lecher" in favor of the other side, so its not inaccurate just one-dimensional. Whereas the game's depiction of history in UNITY gets everything wrong.

The point is that after AC2-Brotherhood, developers and writers drifted to a grayer and fairer look at history. AC3 had a complicated story that doesn't overly demonize the Ameircans or the English. John Pitcairn, the English commander at Lexington-Concord is a sympathetic figure. Black Flag, showed the hated Blackbeard and other pirates as down to earth types, and made it a pro-Pirate game by pointing out that they were outlaws proto-Union sailors building a democracy via criminal enterprise and piracy. Their opponents were representatives of law, commerce and government and all of them serve and represent slave-owning empires.

Before UNITY came out, Amancio said in an interview with TIME magazine: "What we actually try to do, and I think this is just a personal belief that we have, is to avoid reducing history. You can’t start taking sides, because that makes it biased, and what we’re really trying to do is expose every slice of history in the most unbiased way possible.It’s obviously incredibly difficult. History is always subjective, because it’s written by people, and no matter how objective you try to be, human nature makes it subjective. We try very hard to portray things as factually as possible."
http://time.com/3471390/assassins-creed-unity/

This is Time Magazine, not some gamer website mind you. I am going to give Amancio the benefit of the doubt and presume that he didn't know the history and he was more focused on gameplay and the technical side but the writers and staff historians told him everything was on the level. Either way, this statement is a bold-faced lie.

Charles_Phipps
05-21-2015, 06:50 AM
"Many good things that came with the Revolution." This is quite debatable from the standpoint of someone from their perspective. Beheadings, vigilante justice, widespread crime ranging from petty theft to murder, etc. Things that can't really be justified even by greedy, lavish, and useless monarchs who abandon their country, being bankrupt, price inflation and unfair taxes. The Revolution was't a cut and dry black and white thing. Innocents died and guilty prospered. This is beside the immense good it did, but it's certainly there and probably the most observable thing from their perspective. Add on that the plot point that the templars are largely manipulating the Revolution and their viewpoint is quite reasonable within the context.

If you're referring to your own interpretation of what Ubi was meaning when they made the decision to make the Assassination of Le Peletier a playable mission when he was historically killed by Royalist, then say so. Phantom royalist by association doesn't make a lick of sense. That's essentially the same as saying Arno is a royalist in your headcanon.

No one is really saying the Revolution should be portrayed as a positive but the idea of reducing it to a Templar conspiracy which is irrelevant to the protagonist is probably the worst way they could have gone about it, IMHO.

It's interesting, though, that I think almost EVERY GAMER I've talked to assumed the French Revolution would be Assassin-led.

Why DID the developers do it this way?

VestigialLlama4
05-21-2015, 07:19 AM
It's interesting, though, that I think almost EVERY GAMER I've talked to assumed the French Revolution would be Assassin-led.

Why DID the developers do it this way?

That is actually a very interesting question. I think one thing is that they were vary of politics, the French Revolution continues to be controversial. The other is that they were afraid of making the hero really gray and morally complicated, like being involved in actual revolutionary activities like storming the bastille and tuilleries. They also said that AC3 suffered from gump factor in the eyes of critics and decided to avoid it, by not dealing with history at all. I mean Black Flag and AC2 had gump factor too but they had good writing and the historical aspect was not well integrated into AC3's story because of weak writing.

But I think the main reason is that Ubisoft is a French corporation and company and currently located in Montreal, Canada (French-Canadians see themselves descending from the traditions of Royalist France who founded their colonies rather than Republican France). I think the higher-ups in Ubisoft had some emotions or the other towards the French Revolution which prevented them from being as fair to it as they were to the Renaissance, Pirate Era or American Revolution. Its easier for people to be objective about other people's stories than something close to home and I think that bias filtered through UNITY since its so specifically contrary to every other AC title in terms of logic, philosophy, bias and consistency.

There's also the fact that several ubisoft games in the past have secretly whitewashed French history, in some subtle ways. The YouTube channel History Respawned (where historians discuss how games tackle history) deals with it. There's Valiant Hearts which mentions British Imperialism and German crimes, but avoids mentioning French imperialism altogether (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OzYQ8uAqAg0). Likewise Black Flag's carribean specifically covers the Spanish and English sides, while avoid the French colonies (they called it the Antilles), all of which were built by France and all of them slave run to ridiculous degrees. Freedom Cry and Liberation are the main exceptions but you know they are side games and under the radar, not heavily promoted. This video deals with Ubisoft's portrayal of the French Revolution and David Andress (one of the key French Revolutionary historians) discusses the hilarious inaccuracies in the game:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r47yZIYBUzc

Charles_Phipps
05-22-2015, 06:28 AM
That makes sense.

Hell, YAHTZEE on Zero Punctuation said the French Revolution should have been Assassin led and he doesn't even notice video game plots most of the time.

It's a shame, really, because I LIKE Edu-Tainment and AC's interaction with history.